Thurs. Misc.

Trouble finding time for the computer this week, and so a more brief Preakness wrap up than planned. The mystery of Rachel's performance for me was the faster, extended stride carried all the way around the race track without injury. Reasons? Hopefully explained in detail when I get to performance. Let's for now be assured there are reasons. Talent alone will fail to explain a cruising speed that could have been maintained by any colt in the field had they only been trained. Bill Pressey has already beat me to the punch on the Borel factor:

http://horsetrainingscience.blogspot.com/2009/05/genius-of-calvin-borel.html

If there were other performance variables for Rachel besides the Borel factor, can we say the jock's contribution hardly hurt the performance. Mike Smith and Borel reversed on their horses might make an interesting race. Of late, Borel seems to be riding to win.

I still have mixed feeling's about Rachel's presence in the race, and would avoid being overalarmist regarding entry of fillies in major televised races. Yet, if they're going to enter fillies, I do believe that racing needs to get a grip on these owner/trainers and avoid letting somebody enter a horse for the reasons given in this instance. For the temporary positive jolt of Rachel's victory, horse racing assumed a tremendous risk at the whim a fellow who made his money selling alcohol, won a steroid tainted horse of the year title, as it now comes out, has a trainer fighting his lastest prevocaine violation, and "he" thinks this is good for racing. Query whether the Jess Jackson's of the world need to be making these types of enormously important decisions.