Things To Remember
When feeling the urge to whine about not knowing Rachel Alexandra’s next start:
-
The campaign she might be having if still owned by Dolphus “Stallion Derby” Morrison
She’s a 3yo filly who might run against older males
If she remains sound she will most likely race again next year
So what if they’d like to work her one more time before deciding whether or not run against OLDER MALES? Seriously, so what?
If the bullet point format isn’t enough to convince, please check the comments at Railbird and Ed DeRosa’s blog for further thoughts on why this is a non-issue. And if all else fails I might suggest taking this approach, it’s working for me!
Posted by dana on Aug 22 2009
Filed Under: Rachel Alexandra, 2009, Racing
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
Loading ...
I wouldn’t call it whining, more an excess of enthusiasm. People are fans, big fans, of a bonafide star and they’re eager to know what she’s doing next.
That’s a fair point and one I would agree with for fans but Novak’s post struck me a whining. I think she’s making a mountain of a mole hill, especially when comparing the small (non) issue of the press not knowing her next start compared to the 3 points I’ve listed above. She has a few points and I’m sure it’s annoying to have to wait around to report on it but I think she stretches it just a bit too far. Not a sportsman? See the 3 points above.
Can’t argue with you there. Also consider that Racel A’s owner is a billionaire with a bit of an ego. Is it really that shocking that Wooley and MTB’s connections are more down to earth and open with info? JJ is what he is. Maybe we should stop making it about him and simply look forward to watching Rachel run again — wherever that might be.
I didn’t forget any of this and have stated so often enough (I believe).
But one shouldn’t always choose the worst possible alternative for comparison, and if you make as much noise about buying the filly for the sake of the sport as Jackson did, you set the bar to a higher level (again, yes, 90% of major racehorse owners would likely do worse, but then again 80% of major racehorse owners are the kind of people no sport needs).
“Maybe we should stop making it about him and simply look forward to watching Rachel run again — wherever that might be.”
Kevin - that’s definitely the approach I’m trying to take these days!
Malcer - fair enough but I guess I think of JJ’s statements more worthy of eye rolling than proclamations of non-sportsmanship.
I wouldn’t have run in her in the Preakness. I totally would’ve Dolphed out. JJ has cart blanche with me now. Bringing Curlin back, aggressive Raitchelization….I’ve become a JJ fan, he’s earned my respect, and that ain’t so hip. But it is.
“I totally would’ve Dolphed out”
One step closer to getting that phrase in the lexicon!
And hear, hear.
D, wouldn’t your (or Kevin’s) definition of Dolphing (or Dolphing out) be more specific: male chauvinist, stodgy, narrow-minded? Were the words in that Tweet yours or Kevin’s? Seems Dolph as Verb deserves some specificity. Adjective, what, Dolphysian? Dolphus? Dolphussy?
Trackback: Rachel Alexandra: What’s the Verdict?
E - Kevin’s words but you raise a good point. I think maybe it could be a combo platter of the two, more specific but not only male male chauvinist, stodgy, narrow-minded.
How about when a believe one holds (regardless of whether or not it’s stupid, chauvinistic, narrrow-minded, etc) keeps one from attempting something great? That’s pretty much what happened with Dolph, he let his believe that the Triple Crown is merely a “stallion showcase” keep him from having a Triple Crown winning filly. Perhaps it should be a given that the believe is narrow-minded? I guess we’ll have to test it out to see what sticks!
Sounds poifect