Valiant loss puts Zenyatta's prowess in perspective

[tector]

Seems about right to me.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...110704076.html

Valiant loss puts Zenyatta's prowess in perspective

By Andrew Beyer
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, November 8, 2010; 12:26 AM

The nationwide television audience watching "Zenyatta: A Quest for Perfection" and the 72,739 people cheering for the mare at Churchill Downs surely felt deflated when she lost to Blame in the Breeders' Cup Classic. They shouldn't have despaired. Zenyatta was more ennobled by this defeat than by almost anything she did during the 19-race winning streak she brought into Saturday's race.

Although she regularly won races with electrifying rallies in the stretch, none was so impressive as her charge from a hopeless position with a half mile to run-dead last and 15 lengths behind the leaders-that brought her into a photo finish with Blame.

Because the finish was so close, many fans have second-guessed jockey Mike Smith for letting the mare drop too far behind in the early stages of the race. Smith blamed himself, too, saying, "I feel like I let her down. I left her too much to do. I had to put the brakes on at the quarter pole. . . . I just know she was the best horse in the race."

Smith was being too hard on himself. In fact, he secured for Zenyatta a trip as smooth as a horse can reasonably expect when coming from last place in a 12-horse field. The mare saved ground around most of the turn, eased to the outside for clear running room, and never had her momentum broken. She was so far behind not because of any tactical error by Smith but because of the way the Classic developed. It underscored the fundamental differences between races on dirt and the synthetic tracks where Zenyatta had posted 17 of her victories.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by CSC

This was essentially the point I was trying to make yesterday when we exchanged replies, it was a loss in the record book but it certainly doesn't detract from her legacy. For the record I never said she was the greatest, I think there is this misconception out there by some that if you cheer, admire Zenyatta you get lumped into a group that may or may not think she is the greatest, Beyer hit the nail on this one, anyone that wants to argue that she is the greatest filly/mare ever, can so now without being summarily dismissed. Greatest horse of all time, is a moot point, she is not. (I should have typed mute)

If that is what you meant to say....okay.
I was confused because what you actually did say was: "she will get more respect out of finishing second than winning the race."

That obviously makes no sense. She quite clearly would get even more respect if she had gotten past Blame in those final strides than she gets by failing to do so.

[CSC]

Originally Posted by miraja2

If that is what you meant to say....okay.
I was confused because what you actually did say was: "she will get more respect out of finishing second than winning the race."

That obviously makes no sense. She quite clearly would get even more respect if she had gotten past Blame in those final strides than she gets by failing to do so.

Mig and Haskin just used the Seattle Slew analogy I used Saturday in defeat, have a listen on Steve's show. Coach should have a listen also.

[Dunbar]

Here's a link to Beyer's Washington Post article on Zenyatta in the Classic:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...110704076.html

As Rupert predicted in another thread, Beyer lauds Zenyatta's performance. For example, Beyer writes "...With a quarter-mile to go, it appeared impossible that the mare could gain significant ground on a strong finisher like Blame, yet she almost made up all five lengths with a phenomenal rally through the stretch. "

His final paragraph was generous, too:

"...Zenyatta's fans can make a reasonable claim that she should be considered the greatest U.S. filly or mare of all time. Any argument on the subject will be complicated by the fact that Zenyatta's one-dimensional stretch-running style would put her at a tactical disadvantage on the dirt in a hypothetical matchup against other great fillies such as Ruffian and Rachel Alexandra. But Zenyatta's historic winning streak and her two performances in the Classic constitute a formidable body of work, and nobody ought to hold her one defeat against her."

I realize that Beyer is not endorsing the 'greatest U.S. filly or mare of all time' view as his own view. But he IS saying it is a reasonable view.

--Dunbar

Edited...sorry for starting a new thread. Somehow missed the original!

[Princess Doreen]

We know -

http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=39353

[tector]

The whole SoCal plastic track experiment is indeed what complicates things here. If she'd gone 19 for 19 on dirt, then you'd just have to upgrade her. Even the arguments about her not shipping would have been more muted. I have no problems putting her up with the great F&Ms of all time--she belongs in that discussion. But greatest horses of all time? Please. In my race-watching lifetime, just sticking to classic distances on dirt, there are only two horses for sure that I can put on that list--Secretariat and Spectacular Bid. The rest are either a tier below or need a hell of an argument in their favor. And of those (Slew, Affirmed, Ghostzapper, Easy Goer, Sunday Silence, Cigar, etc.), they would routine destroy Zenyatta the way most races shape up. Even horses like Mineshaft or Best Pal would be too much. Her running style just couldn't cut against such types on dirt most of the time.

I will say this--since plastic is on the way out at SA, and HOL is not long for this world, she is likely to be--forever--the great synthetic horse of all-time, of any sex.

Originally Posted by CSC

Mig and Haskin just used the Seattle Slew analogy I used Saturday in defeat, have a listen on Steve's show. Coach should have a listen also.

Yeah it's totally the same as Seattle Slew.

You're right. Now stfu.









































Just sayin!

[CSC]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

Yeah it's totally the same as Seattle Slew.

You're right. Now stfu.








































Just sayin!

I'd much rather have opinions like guys like Haskin and Mig on my side then an expert like Coachpants. Right back at ya MOFO.

Originally Posted by CSC

I'd much rather have opinions like guys like Haskin and Mig on my side then an expert like Coachpants. Right back at ya MOFO.

Either way you're still a pissant.





































Just sayin!

[CSC]

When I need help posting pictures, I'll ask you. As for horseracing opinions you are useless. P off Bro.

[tector]

JFC, you two. Your "irony spaces" or whatever are getting frigging annoying. Get a room already.

[tector]

Yeah, I know how the replies will look....

Originally Posted by CSC

When I need help posting pictures, I'll ask you. As for horseracing opinions you are useless. P off Bro.

Well at least I'm good at something. You, on the other hand, fail at everything and depend on other men and their opinions to justify yours.





You might as well have a sex change then it won't look as weird.






























Just sayin!

[CSC]

Who said you were good at it? You are more predictable than you think you aren't. A regular 1-10 shot of classless garbage, now go P off maam.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by CSC

Mig and Haskin just used the Seattle Slew analogy I used Saturday in defeat, have a listen on Steve's show. Coach should have a listen also.

Okay, you're still not getting it.
There is absolutely no question in my mind that your statement:
"she will get more respect out of finishing second than winning the race"
is incorrect.

Let's take your Slew example. Of course he gained a great deal of respect by running such a good race against how the race set up and running a good second to a great horse. But if we apply your above statement to that race it implies that if he had done that same thing and actually managed to hold off Exceller and won the race he would get/deserve less respect than he got for running a good second.
That is completely nonsensical.

Let me break it down for you further:

Yes, both horses second-place finishes earned them more respect than they had before the race.
But, no, both horses second-place finishes did NOT earn them more respect than they would have received if they had actually won their races.....which is what you said.

Originally Posted by CSC

Who said you were good at it? You are more predictable than you think you aren't. A regular 1-10 shot of classless garbage, now go P off maam.

Keep comparing Blame-Zenyatta to Seattle Slew - Exceller.


You're wrong and just because Haskin, who falls in love with about every horse in training, and Mig, who clearly is a nice guy but never rode a great horse, say otherwise doesn't mean they're right.

You just can't be wrong. It's ok. The reality is you're wrong consistently on this forum and you have deluded yourself into thinking your opinion is better than RHT. It's not. He would beat you easily in a handicapping competition.

























































Just sayin.

[CSC]

Originally Posted by miraja2

Okay, you're still not getting it.
There is absolutely no question in my mind that your statement:
"she will get more respect out of finishing second than winning the race"
is incorrect.

Let's take your Slew example. Of course he gained a great deal of respect by running such a good race against how the race set up and running a good second to a great horse. But your statement that I highlighted reads that if he had done that same thing and actually managed to hold off Exceller and won the race he would get/deserve less respect than he got for running a good second.
That is completely nonsensical.

Let me break it down for you further:

Yes, both horses second-place finishes earned them more respect than they had before the race.
No, both horses second-place finishes did NOT earn them more respect than they would have received if they had actually won their races.....which is what you said.

Then either you misunderstood what I wrote or the context was not the way I intended it. When I say something like Zenyatta lost nothing in defeat, comparing it to Seattle Slew's defeat. I expect a person of knowledege, as I expect from you to know exactly the context I was using it as. If the wording confused you, I duelly regret this. Now that you understand the analogy do you not agree in Mig and Haskin's view?

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by CSC

Then either you misunderstood what I wrote or the context was not the way I intended it. When I say something like Zenyatta lost nothing in defeat, comparing it to Seattle Slew's defeat. I expect a person of knowledege, as I expect from you to know exactly the context I was using it as. If the wording confused you, I duelly regret this. Now that you understand the analogy do you not agree in Mig and Haskin's view?

The problem is you are about as bad as it gets in expressing yourself. You think by trying to talk smart, it'll make you sound smart. It doesn't. Your opinion is often very confusing to decipher. That's on you. No one else.

[CSC]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

The problem is you are about as bad as it gets in expressing yourself. You think by trying to talk smart, it'll make you sound smart. It doesn't. Your opinion is often very confusing to decipher. That's on you. No one else.

I've seen your multiple aliases, you on the other hand are easy to spot with your MO. No problem deciphering you.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by CSC

I've seen your multiple aliases, you on the other hand are easy to spot with your MO. No problem deciphering you.

Thanks for proving my point.