So...maybe I am simply putting off the start of my final paper that's due tomorrow...or maybe I am actually perturbed by what I found while most definitely trying to put off starting that paper...
As I was going through ESPN's site like I usually do when procrastinating, I read a few articles in response to Rachel's efforts in the La Troienne...Obviously people are disappointed...but her trainer is relatively confident that she's not done winning quite yet. The PUBLIC on the other hand seem to think differently.
I was AMAZED by some of the anti-Rachel and anti-Rachel connection comments out there. Sure I agree with some statements of she may just not be the same horse, but I also agree with Asmussen in the fact that she is just a bigger girl now. After rewatching the La Troienne again, she has grown up a bit. Perhaps she is just adjusting to her new self, we know it takes people awhile, so why not a horse?
But there were tons of comments about how her connections are over running her. Thinking they were crazy to run her in the Preakness (I thought she ran that fairly easily), and then to run her against the males three times after that was simply absurd (but she beat them too). Many other people think she began to decline once she was sold. Many feel Asmussen is also just really good at taking excellent horses, riding the fame, and then ruining them (in which cases they site Curlin). They feel Calvin is suddenly doing a horrible job as a Jockey...holding her too long, whipping her too much, driving to her to the point the commenters feel she is going to kill herself. Is he? Is he really? Is winning the Oaks, Preakness, Woodward, and three Derbies (in four years I feel obligated to ad because I am very happy for him), and the other races with Rachel won last year really because he is a bad Jockey? Maybe this is because I am fan of this hyper and happy guy, but I think he is doing his job all right. And yes, maybe he does 'pat' his horses a little too energetically when he does well...but the horses don't seem to flick an ear or blink...I don't know....
For each of these comments there were at least ten more about how Rachel is overrated and should have been retired a long time ago. Overrated? Really? I mean yea, I still think (and always will) that Zenyatta should have been Horse of the Year, but let's say she wasn't in the running for it, who would have even come CLOSE to beating Rachel for it? She had a fantastic season! But, as the commenters would say, the horses she beat were nobodies...yea...I guess Macho Again is suddenly a nobody...of course they say he's a nobody because he beat a nobody once...so Einstein is also a nobody....? I get confused by this. I thought the crop of three year olds she beat were fairly strong. I know many people scoff at Mine That Bird (we all know by now that I love him) but seriously, being able to hold off his late charge in the Preakness was still something. And she beat most of those horses again and again, not to mention adding in the crop of ol' guys with experience...But still a lot of people feel she is a nothing horses that should be sentenced to the breeding life now.
I wish we could talk to these animals. Really ask them how they are doing, if they still want to run...I think in the La Troienne Rachel showed an immense improvement of heart down the stretch. I think she really wanted it this time, but Unrivaled Belle wanted it a little more.
Rachel, I think you are still doing fine. Although I am beginning to think more and more that a Rachel v. Zenyatta showdown will never happen, I am still rooting for you Rachel.
Stay Strong, kick some ass, drop some jaws!
Found the pic on a random flickr link google led me too...it's getting harder and harder to find pictures of her I haven't used and actually like....BUT I love this one! She has her ears up, which I have problems coming across it seems. She looks so happy and pretty, keep them ears up girl!