Jeremy Plonk's column about Jess Jackson's anti-synthetic surface stance is both frustrating and very insightful. Jackson offers that "dirt horses" don't like to run on the plastic, period. He seems to be saying that Curlin shouldn't have run on the surface at the Breeder's last year, and as such he doesn't want to run Rachel Alexandra there. It seems like a facile argument at best and I'll agree with Plonk that at worst, it's an excuse not to race against Zenyatta.
For an owner who made Curlin "the world's horse" and fought to enter Rachel in the Preakness, doesn't this strike you as more than a little bit disingenuous? Jackson set racing on its head when he won the Preakness with a filly. If she raced Zenyatta and lost, would her colts (sired by Curlin!) be less valuable? If you say that some horses like certain surfaces and not others, does that somehow mean that they won't still earn millions running on dirt? As a breeder, he's ALREADY admitting that Curlin's offspring stand a good chance of not taking to the polytrack. This guy may be a great sportsman who loves racing and loves horses, but this seems to me to be a little bit more like showing your hand before the bets are down. It would be more shrewd to say that Curlin was tired after a long two years.
Not getting to see these two fillies, who have proven that they're not just the best of their gender but the best horses in the country period, race one another is cheating us. I don't appreciate it. I hope he has a change of heart.
No comments:
Post a Comment