Right now, Rachel’s not in Zenyatta’s class

After last fall’s Breeders’ Cup, I went on record as saying I thought Zenyatta and Rachel Alexandra deserved to be co-Horses of the Year. Neither distaffer had done anything wrong in 2009, both were brilliantly perfect, and I didn’t think either deserved to win the nod over the other.

But, given the fact that Eclipse Award voters could not split their vote, I went with Zenyatta because she won the biggest race of the year in the Breeders’ Cup Classic in a race that included the top male horses in the country and she’d also spotted other fillies and mares weight as part of her 5-0 campaign.

I also wrote a column three weeks ago, calling Zenyatta the best horse I’d ever seen run in person. Needless to say, I received a lot of feedback from fans who took issue with my stance, asking how I could say she was better than Secretariat and Affirmed.

Simple, folks. She’s never lost. She’s 16-0. Whereas most great horses sometimes don’t feel like running or don’t give their best effort for whatever reason, Zenyatta has fired every single time, whether it be soft fractions, fast fractions or somewhere in between. She’s never had an off-day, and to me, that’s remarkable.

She receives undue criticism because she’s won 14 of her 16 races on synthetics. Well, that just shows how great she is because she much prefers dirt over artificial tracks. Get her on dirt, and she’s even better. Proof? Her two victories in the Apple Blossom at Oaklawn Park this year and in 2008 were the only times in her career she’s won by better than four lengths.

Less than an hour ago, Rachel Alexandra made her second start of 2010 and was upset again, losing to Unrivaled Belle as the 1-5 favorite in the Grade 2 La Troienne Stakes at Churchill Downs after losing to Zardana as the 1-9 favorite in the New Orleans Ladies at the Fair Grounds in her first race of the year on March 13.

Rachel Alexandra was a brilliant 3-year-old, one of the best of all-time. But so far, she’s failed to carry that 3-year-old form over to her 4-year-old campaign. She’s starting to concede weight to horses, giving four pounds to the winner today. That’s not an easy thing to do. It’s the great equalizer in horse racing.

There is much speculation going around today that majority owner Jess Jackson will now call it quits with Rachel Alexandra, that if he goes on with her and she loses again her legacy will be diminished. There’s something to that, but I also feel that if she’s sound, they need to go on with her to prove to her legion of fans that she can indeed win at 4.

Right now, if Zenyatta and Rachel Alexandra were to hook up on the race track, it would be no contest. Zenyatta would eat Rachel for lunch. I’m not so sure you could have said that last fall after Jackson’s brilliant Medaglia d’Oro filly had beaten the boys in the Woodward Stakes.

But that was then, and this is now. Until Rachel Alexandra proves she can beat older horses and spot them weight, she’ll go down as one of the greatest 3-year-olds ever but won’t deserve consideration for all-time top horses like Zenyatta.

The two super distaffers were a match made in heaven last year, but it would be the mismatch of the decade if they met on the race track anytime soon.

35 thoughts on “Right now, Rachel’s not in Zenyatta’s class

  1. I don’t think Zenyatta would have eaten Rachel for lunch last fall, but I do think she would have had her measure. That mare was then and is now, a monster that we have never seen the bottom of.

  2. Would be very sad to see Rachel continue to get beat. Compared to Zenyatta who really seems to be having a great time out there Rachel doesn’t see too interested.

    Her prior trainer was not going to run her against the boys. I can only wonder what would she be today had he been able to keep her.

  3. Your columns are farcical.
    I’ll address your specious comments about Zenyatta and Rachel Alexandra.

    Yes, Rachel has not yet displayed the extreme and UNPRECEDENTED brilliance (that Zenyatta did not and could not display at 3YO) that she showed last year.
    Only a fool would expect a filly to be primed after a 190 day layoff. The fact that Rachel is digging in and doing battle shows her competitive spirit and class.
    She is already one of the greatest fillies of ALL TIME independent of whatever she does this year. She has done what almost NO OTHER 3YO FILLY in racing history has done (Busher did as much and possibly more) and did so with great speed consistently. Her dominance in the Preakness and Haskell was brilliant and outshined any other performance last year, save for Zenyatta’s BC Classic, which was equally great, even though she was running against males that were severely handicapped by a foreign and distasteful (to them) synthetic surface.

    People who want Rachel retired because she lost by a millimeter are really hysterical and weak. She has done NOTHING to tarnish her record, nor did Secretariat do so when he lost a few times. History understands and appreciated CONTEXT, and does not expect horses to be machines/robots that cannot ever be less than perfect!

    As for Zenyatta, your crowing about a 5-0 record is patently embarrassing. That’s like somebody bragging that he pitched two no-hit innings. Zenyatta’s connections have overly pampered her throughout her career and DENIED her the ability to PROVE that she is near the true greats of all time. She MAY BE. Nobody will ever know. Just because you FEEL that she is because you were swept up by her charisma has nothing to do with her factual record of beating up on ordinary to sub-par fillies for the vast majority of her career when she COULD HAVE been given a more appropriate challenge. We all know that Pepper’s Pride was remarkable for staying sound and winning for 19 consecutive races, but we would be kidding ourselves to include her in the all-time great pantheon. By the same token, though Zenyatta faced much better horses than did Pepper’s Pride, and she did occasionally venture beyond her home base, her record would mean SIGNIFICANTLY more if she LOST, yes LOOOOSSSSTTT, a few times but endured and won even half of some truly challenging races (G1’s against the world’s or US’s best males). This obsession with undefeated streaks as an end in themselves is so boring and, ironically, unimpressive when the achievement is sullied by repeatedly bashing sub-par competition.
    Your emphasis on weight as the great equalizer is only superficially logical and is statistically false. When you consider the mass of the horse, especially a super-giant like Zenyatta, five or ten pounds of weight is irrelevant and insignificant in races from 6F to 12F. Ten pounds is less than HALF OF ONE PERCENT of the horse’s mass. This is not Olympic swimming where different swimsuits can shave thousandths of a second of of a 100 meter swimmer’s time.

    I’m positive that I have not changed your opinion in any way and probably galvanized your emotions against any change. I just have to counter your ignorant opinions.

  4. Don’t you just love the Rachel backers who beat up on a horse who is undefeated. They like to throw out the ‘will not leave her base’ excuse, but the last time I looked she was running in Southern California not some minor league cicuit. It’s o.k. to beat the boys in the slop up in New Jersey but for heaven’s sake it doesn’t mean a thing when you beat them on the synthetics. There have been plenty of horses who have had great campaigns like Rachel had last year, but to be considered one of the greats you have to do it for more than one year. I like the line ‘This obsession with undefeated streaks as an end in themselves is so boring and, ironically, unimpressive when the achievement is sullied by repeatedly bashing sub-par competition’. Yeah and the stock from last years 3 year old colts set the world on fire, Mine That Bird will go down as one of the weakest Kentucky Derby winners of all time. The Mother Goose was a walk over and one more jump and Macho Again may have gotten her. You can scream from the mountain tops but the record shows 10 GI’s 10 wins!
    But the above tirade sounds like somebody who’s a fan of a horse and propbably let everybody hear within shouting distance that Rachel was the best ever and is now having to live with the reality that she’s not. And finally, if you believe Art’s opinions are ignorant why are you reading them and spending time in responding to them? Most of the time when I hear ignorance I ignore it.

  5. History has numerous examples of how a great thoroughbred can easily lose a step over time and no longer be “great”. Rachel, for whatever reason, may (or may not) ever regain her scintillating brilliant from of age 3. Horses are not machines. It is human nature for fans to expect greatness each and every time: Tiger Woods to win every tournament, Sandy Koufax to strike out every batter, Mantle and Mays to homer each at-bat, Peyton Manning to throw the key TD, et al.
    Last year’s campaign by Rachel Alexandra was simply off the charts. Hey, it was fun to watch. That is why when true greatness comes around we all need to appreciate the moment as they are few, far between and very fleeting. To expect perfection at all times is not being realistic. Yes, we want to see it, but in actuality, we should not expect such.
    As far as Zenyatta’s place among the all-time greats, that is another issue. In this era, she is spectacular, consistent and, yes, great for sure. But to realistically think that she would outperform the all-time greats like Man ‘o War, Native Dancer, Swaps, Dr. Fager, Secretariat, Seattle Slew and the like…no way. Those all-time wonder horses could run sizzling splits under 130+ imposts and keep motoring. Swaps held FIVE WORLD marks at the time of his retirement. ‘Fager ran THREE sub-2:00 1 1/4 mile races, won in near world record time under 139 lbs; ‘Slew could be hooked while blazing unreal fractions and find another gear to win.
    For the modern era Zenyatta is great. But don’t try to compare her with the best ever. It would be incorrect as well as an injustice to the greats from another era, horses who ran week in and week out, under top weights, tracks wet or dry, and who recorded fast times despite adverse conditions.

  6. Don’t you love when people (Zenyatta zealots who lose their minds when they hear anything but sycophantic praise for her) make distorted inferences from what is plainly stated in black and white?
    How does my line “Zenyatta’s BC classic was equally great” mean “doesn’t mean a thing when you beat them on synthetics”.
    The fact is that synthetics are a third, fourth, and fifth surface type that can be as different as dirt is to turf. Zenyatta has established herself as the greatest synthetic track horse in its short history- the record shows that. I am a huge Zenyatta fan in every way; I just don’t feel the need to exaggerate her accomplishments that have been limited by a formerly (and perhaps currently) scared and overly conservative (read: un-sportsmanlike and/or obsessed with remaining undefeated) owner/trainer. I have no problem with anything Zenyatta, the mare, has ever done. I just know that, if I managed her, by now she would have been given the opportunity to definitively prove that she is one of the greatest three or five horses in history, and she might actually have (gasp!!) LOST once in a while as she established her greatness.

    As for the 3YO colts that Rachel beat, who was that Birdstone colt who won the Belmont, Travers, and Jockey Club Gold Cup? Oh, that’s right, he must have been one of those weak ones.

    I usually do/can ignore ignorance, but there is a danger when silence allows ignorance to proliferate.

  7. We can hope Rachel regains her three year old form, but even if she doesn’t her 3 yo season is one for the history books.

    Zenyatta could be one of the all time greats, but we may never know it for sure. She should run in the Foster, not the Vanity. The Foster would add much more to her reputation than the Vanity.

    The all time greats are known for the races they won, not the occasional losses. Zenyatta has the Classic and her first Apple Blossom and a winning streak of 16 against fillies (except the Classic). Kincsem was 54 for 54, after racing in Hungary, Austria, France and England. Of course she raced males. She died of colic after her 4 year old season. Beat that streak!

  8. John C. — I find it amusing every time someone who holds a differing opinion on a subject has to revert to name-calling with such words as “ignorant” and “farcical” when disagreeing. My fondest hope is that someday we can all become as wise as you.

  9. Zenyatta is Zenyatta, it’s unfair for any other horse to be compared. Taking nothing away from Rachel’s brilliant 2009, it’s worth considering that it may have taxed her to the point of no return. Zenyatta’s more conservative campaign has unleashed a six year old with two Grade 1 wins already under her belt in 2010, while Rachel is struggling in a non graded stakes and a Grade 2. Rachel was more ambitious, but Zenyatta is happy and healthy at six, so whose handlers are to be applauded?

    It’s also worth noting that the older horse division is nothing to sniff at. Rachel’s not used to spotting other horses weight, and she’s not used to being eyeballed. She was life and death to hold off Macho Again, and while I commend her effort that day, he was spotting her weight while not exactly being a top class horse himself. The times in her two races this year have been comparable to the times she posted in 2009, so it’s not as if she’s regressed, she’s just not superior to the competition she’s faced. She’s a very good horse, most owners would be pleased with two second place finishes by such short margins, but people have come to expect perfection from her. Unfortunately, the only horse that continues to deliver that is Zenyatta.

  10. John C. perhaps is based backed east and working for the Jacksons? LOL or just a Rachel zealot who can’t admit she is having a tough time regaining her 2009 form? The obvious is quite obvious.

  11. This is getting to be fun so I’m back for more.
    I’m glad that you’re amused, but there is a difference between an ad hominem attack and the use of the adjective “ignorant” to characterize an opinion. Ignorant (as in “ignoring” germane information) opinions do exist and should be labeled as such. For example, racist opinions are largely rooted in ignorance and should be called at least that.
    I guess that I could coincidentally agree with an ignorant opinion, on occasion, but I would not be proud to do so.
    I do hope that your fondest wishes are exceeded because I don’t pretend to know it all or much, but my informed opinion on the topic at hand conveys much more experience and reason than emotion and cheerleading.

    You need to learn about the effect of five pounds of weight between a 3YO filly and 4 to 5YO colts. The colts are in no way, shape, or form handicapped by such a miniscule (by percent of body mass) concession, which is only given due to outdated and traditional notions about weight handicaps. Of course, there is a limit at which weight differences become significant, but those differences would never, ever be seen today. Trainers start bawling as soon as a racing secretary considers anything near 130 lbs. on a horse.

    As for Rachel being exhausted and ill-used during her fantastic (everyone in racing should be on their hands and knees bowing before Jess Jackson, the only true sportsman in racing) campaign: the reason that she is not back to her 3YO form is mainly due to her long bout of INACTIVITY, not her mere eight (big) races last year. Of COURSE she is not in form yet after vacationing in a rainy swamp in Louisiana. She should have spent the winter in Florida or, even better, right next to her big “sister”, Zenyatta, in California.

    ING: thanks for the compliment. I wish that I worked for Jess Jackson. I would be happy to do so. I would like to work for a man who is committed to actually RACING the best horses in the country instead of immediately retiring them to the breeding shed (last I checked, nobody is tuning in to watch horses breed), a man who is not afraid to take a CHANCE with his horses (Can you say “Curlin on turf”?, Rachel in the Preakness?) We all have Jackson to thank for seeing Zenyatta in the BC Classic. There was NO CHANCE, ZERO (!!!!!!) that we would have seen her against males if it were not for Rachel’s aggressive campaign. That’s right, Zenyatta fans like you and me would have cheered and then yawned as Zenyatta beat Life is Sweet again, after which those two would have shared a few friendly pints of Guiness.
    Also, ING, you are dead wrong inferring that I am having a “tough time” admitting that Rachel is having a tough time regaining her 2009 form. OF COURSE, she has not regained her 2009 form, but I hope that she does. Do you?

  12. Art Wilson Author Profile Page said:

    John C. — I find it amusing every time someone who holds a differing opinion on a subject has to revert to name-calling with such words as “ignorant” and “farcical” when disagreeing. My fondest hope is that someday we can all become as wise as you.
    May 2, 2010 11:39 AM

    Don’t you mean “as wise as John C. thinks he is”? If we all became as wise as John C. that might not be such a good thing.

  13. John — Wow, we all have Jess Jackson to thank for Zenyatta racing in the BC Classic and thus becoming the first female to win the race? We should all get down on our hands and knees and bow down to the man for that historic day? Oh, OK. Thanks. So you now have the ability to get into somebody’s head and decipher what they would or wouldn’t have done? Amazing.
    Let me clue you in on a little something — there are no right or wrong opinions on this blog. Everyone has an opinion and is entitled to it. I’ve been covering the sport for more than 30 years and I’ve gone on record as saying I thought Rachel and Zenyatta should have been co-Horses of the Year in 2009 and that Rachel Alexandra is not the same horse so far this year as she was at 3 and would have no chance today to beat Zenyatta. That’s my opinion. If that’s cheerleading, you’d better buy yourself a new dictionary. I throw opinions out there for others, like yourself, to comment on. As stated earlier, you’re more than welcome to disagree and, in fact, I want you to disagree. But let’s lose the holier than thou attitude because your opinion is worth no more than mine or anyone else’s on here.

  14. Lisa — I think most, not only horse racing fans, but fans of both horses hope that someday they meet on the race track. But if it doesn’t happen, hey, that’s horse racing. The most important thing is the welfare of these two horses. I have a gut feeling that we’ve seen the best of Rachel and she’ll never again be as good as she was at 3. I could be wrong, but we’ll see. Does that diminsh at all what she accomplished as a 3-year-old? Not one bit. She’ll always go down as one of the best 3-year-olds ever. That’s nothing to be ashamed about.

  15. I don’t think Rachel is done by a long shot…but what I cannot figure out is why in the world would you take a mega-million dollar mare and even TRY her against anybody if she’s really only 80% and then 90%??? I’d have a hard time doing that to a $4000 claimer! Yes, most horses “need a race” coming back after a layoff and without actually saying “he or she is only about 80%” we tend to say “he’ll probably need this one”. There is no reason in the WORLD that RA needed to ever enter a race not being 100% ready…except for her big mouth owner who wants to control the world just cannot keep out of the press, out of Steve’s hair, out of our minds. Just let the man train the horse. Good lord.

    I personally think that RA just happened to peak last year at a perfect time when the boys hadn’t quite come around and she took advantage of the situation! Who wouldn’t? Now she’s a 4yo and probably as good as she’s going to get–who knows–but she’s not done, it doesn’t make her any less of a running machine, but it shows she’s a horse and not a machine. She’s still an amazing mare, no doubt about it, but she still has to come out and wow some of us if she’s going to be elevated back up to the stature she had last year. Who knows if she can do it. I still would love to see RA and Zenyatta meet, and I also can’t stand the thought of either of them getting beat. But this is horse racing. That’s why we watch. Zenyatta is still MY queen.

  16. What’s interesting is the thought that without Zardana and Unrivaled Belle in her last two races, Rachel would have won by 11 and 5 lengths respectively and her legend would have continued to orbit. No talk of long layoffs and bad winter weather, and the Beyer numbers she’d receive would be inflated by 5 – 10 points.

    Instead, she was outgamed down the lane both races by horses that combined had one G2 and one G3 on their resumes. Time to go back and review her 3yo campaign and determine exactly who she beat and what were the circumstances. My verdict: Not one of her performances stands up to Rags to Riches Belmont win over subsequent HOY Curlin where she stumbled at the break, was carried wide around both turns of the 1 1/2 mile journey, and eyeballed Curlin through the length of the stretch to prevail. Nope, on talent alone Rachel is not a better racehorse than Rags to Riches….in my opinion.

    Comparisons to Zenyatta?…….PUHLEASE!!!

  17. To John C –
    I don’t see how someone can greatly exaggerate a 16-0 record. That’s pretty amazing. However, I do understand how someone can try to exaggerate weak arguments by the overuse of capitalization.

  18. Oh Donny, I’m sorry that I hurt your tender little ears by capitalizing ten words. Just because you can’t comprehend an argument doesn’t make it weak. Any undefeated streak can potentially be exaggerated- a man can regularly finish a good ten minutes ahead of 12 year-old girls in 5K races; in fact, a man can go undefeated, 100-0, against that age group. Get it?

    No right or wrong opinions? Uh-oh, that is an open invitation to b.s.
    I guess that means that any misinformed blow-hard who likes to bait people can justifiably write whatever s/he wants to, and that drivel holds equal weight to thoughtful and evidence-based comments from others.
    Let’s try this out:
    “Zenyatta is the most over-rated and unimpressive mare in the history of horse-racing. Look at her pathetic times and her slow, arthritic starts out of the gate. She barely beat Anabaa’s creation, a filly who’s greatest hope is to be accepted as dog food by Alpo. This Zenyatta deserves no attention or respect and her record is clear evidence of collusion between Moss and the other owners as part of some pathetic publicity stunt.”
    Pretty distasteful, huh? Perhaps even “wrong”?
    I thought so.

    Finally, it doesn’t take a psychic or any stretch of the imagination to see that Zenyatta was going to face only fillies until the Jess Jackson version of Rachel came along. Even Rachel was going to face only fillies until Jess came along; it’s a good thing he did. Racing hasn’t had a more exciting year than 2009 in quite some time.

  19. John — Have you considered the possibility that maybe Rachel’s campaign last year was too difficult, that racing against males three times, the last when she was all out to hold on, maybe is a factor in her decreased form in 2010? I don’t dislike Jess. I think he’s good for the sport. My biggest gripe against the man is that he always has an excuse when he loses. When Curlin lost on turf, it was an “experiment.” When he lost in the BC, it was because he didn’t like the track. Both of Rachel’s losses this year were because she wasn’t 100 percent. How long does it take to get your horse to peak efficiency? Will she be 100 percent next time? If she loses again, what excuse will he offer up?

  20. Regarding John, go get ‘im, Art!

    John sounds like he needs a nice relaxing vacation somewhere. Either that, or he has stock in Jackson’s holdings somewhere. He’s not much of a horseman, at least as far as it goes with his mouth running.

  21. John, you need to go back to mucking out Jackson’s stalls. But thanks for providing plenty of laughable entertainment, if you can call it that.

  22. You all leave John alone. You know who he is, he’s that guy that sits too close to you at the track but nobody sits with, but will talk to the closest person to him and loud enough where everyone can and has to hear him. While you are sitting there wishing he would just shut the hell up but never does, so after about an hour of his speaches about how he had the 6-5 that won by 5 you just get up and have to move. On one of your trips to the window you notice that he is still yapping (probably about how Rachel is still the greatest horse since the creation of the breed) but all those people that were around him have moved and now there are new victims. Just let him call people names like ignorant to people he does not know, which usually shows simpleminded or childishness. He’s just mad that to all those people he screamed to last year on the virtues of Rachel and how Zen was sub-par to her, that his favorite has not come back and won, and Zen keeps on going not missing a beat, Rachel has ran well but she’s not the same filly as last year. (my opinion as ignorant as it might be, and that is coming from a person raised on a breeding farm, worked as a jockey agent a track handicapper and also worked for the Ragozin Sheets.) Is she is losing interest in racing which happens a lot during the winter months between their 3 and 4 year old term, the opposite sex becomes more interesting than racing. It’s now time for me to go and find another table.

  23. Michael, I just nominated your post for “Post of the Month.” Haven’t had a good laugh like that in awhile. Seems like you and I have met several people like that. I’m right behind you! LOL

  24. No, Art. Rachel’s campaign last year was difficult, that’s what made it so cool, and what makes Jackson the most interesting maverick in racing, but her campaign was not too difficult, nor devastating.
    Jackson and Asmussen did mess up by keeping Rachel on the shelf for too long, and for that, they should be heavily criticized, but I’m sure that they are kicking themselves for doing so anyway. Naturally, the more mature and heavier Rachel is going to require a few races to run her 110+ Beyers of last year, especially when she spent half a year doing nothing. She basically is coming out of semi-retirement, not the fake retirement that Zenyatta had. Sheriffs was very wise to keep Zenyatta in peak condition after the BC.
    How could you have a gripe with someone who has a legitimate reason for his losses?! He never said that Curlin or Rachel “stepped on a safety pin” in their stalls. What is he supposed to say after Rachel loses at 1-5 and 2-5??? “I guess she’s no good anymore- bring on the stallions”. When Curlin lost the synthetic BC Classic, it WAS because of the track. Newsflash: most dirt horses (what’s the BC synthetic record for them? 0 for 43!!!) cannot run on synthetic- they’d probably do better running on turf. Curlin was no different. The massive steroid-laden Curlin was certainly not built like a turf runner so, again, we have Jackson to thank for trying (EXPERIMENTING) something bold and different (not winning the same stakes race THREE years in a row as Zenyatta is about to do) with his champion.
    As for Rachel, her relative times and performance, not against her competitors, but against her 3YO-self will tell Jackson and everyone when she is 100%, if she ever re-gains that stature.
    Of course, if Zenyatta ever gets beat (I know, that’s physically impossible), I’ll be interested in hearing Moss and Sheriff’s excuse- and I’ll listen to what they have to say without criticizing them for explaining what happened. I understand that it’s a trainer’s and sometimes owner’s job to explain what happened to their horse- who knows better than they do most times?

  25. Rachel’s 3 year old season/campaign was nothing special.
    Macho Again and Bullsbay just kept diminishing Rachel by losing badly on grade 3 and grade 2 races. Any decent 3 year old filly of the past would have done the same thing Rachel has done if they had JJ as an owner and the VERY WEAK 3 YEAR OLD LAST YEAR plus the weak HANDICAP DIVISION. Rachel already lost 5 times to none grade 1 horses. That says it all. She was good but not great.

  26. Terrific work! This is the type of information that are supposed to be shared across the internet. Shame on Google for not positioning this publish higher! Come on over and seek advice from my website . Thanks =)

  27. It is perfect time to make a few plans for the longer term and it’s time to be happy. I’ve learn this post and if I may I want to counsel you some fascinating issues or tips. Perhaps you could write next articles relating to this article. I desire to learn even more things approximately it!

  28. It’s the best time to make a few plans for the longer term and it’s time to be happy. I’ve learn this publish and if I may I wish to counsel you few interesting issues or suggestions. Perhaps you could write subsequent articles regarding this article. I desire to read even more things about it!

  29. I beloved as much as you’ll obtain performed proper here. The cartoon is tasteful, your authored material stylish. nevertheless, you command get bought an edginess over that you would like be turning in the following. sick no doubt come further formerly again since precisely the similar just about a lot incessantly inside of case you shield this hike.

  30. Wonderful work! That is the type of info that are meant to be shared across the internet. Disgrace on the seek engines for now not positioning this post upper! Come on over and consult with my website . Thank you =)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>