Mike Smith says Songbird best 3 year old hes ever ridden...

[Kash$]

After the Oaks he told Laffit Pincay Jr Songbird was the best 3 year old hes ever ridden...Yikes

Holy Bull
Bodemeister
Mike has ridden some really good 3 year olds of course its just Mikes opinion..

Its a riders opinion so lets not get crazy

[Appy]

Seems like the horse is doing a pretty good job backing up Mike's opinion.
Reminds me of the saying the horse "has horse sense, which is what horses have that keeps them from betting on people".

[cj]

She's obviously a fabulous horse. But with jockeys, it seems like most always think the latest talented horse they are on is the best ever.

[Arapola]

He's been saying Holy Bull for 20+ years.
It's not like he changed his tune often.

[cj]

He's been saying Holy Bull for 20+ years.
It's not like he changed his tune often.

I thought he said Zenyatta was the greatest he ever rode.

[Stillriledup]

And on Jan 1 of next year, she turns into NOT the best 4yo he's ever ridden. :D

[PaceAdvantage]

I thought he said Zenyatta was the greatest he ever rode.Yes...it was always Holy Bull until Zenyatta came along...I lost some respect for Mike after he said that.... :lol:

[PhantomOnTour]

Gary Stevens has made the same claim a few times also.
Didn't he say Rock Hard Ten was the best 3yo he's ever ridden? :faint:

But Gary, what about Silver Charm? (my favorite horse ever)

[chadk66]

I sure wish they would run her in the Derby. She would have a legit chance to win it.

[Hoops McCann]

She's obviously a fabulous horse. But with jockeys, it seems like most always think the latest talented horse they are on is the best ever.

exactamundo

[Hoops McCann]

I sure wish they would run her in the Derby. She would have a legit chance to win it.

me too

[ronsmac]

And on Jan 1 of next year, she turns into NOT the best 4yo he's ever ridden. :D
When Trevor said Zenyatta winning the Breeders Cup was an unbelievable performance ," one we'll never forget". That was so true. I watch it every now and then when I'm feeling down and it brings a smile to my face every single time.

[Donttellmeshowme]

So basically he's saying Songbird is better than Zenyatta?

[chiguy]

Did he ride Zenyatta when she was 3? They all get caught up in the now, don't blame them we all do. Had the greatest steak ever the other night...

[Stillriledup]

Did he ride Zenyatta when she was 3? They all get caught up in the now, don't blame them we all do. Had the greatest steak ever the other night...

It's a technicality, he's essentially saying songbird is better.

[SAL]

Zenyatta was a late bloomer- only ran twice as a 3 yo. And Smith didn't ride her in those races

[Stillriledup]

Zenyatta was a late bloomer- only ran twice as a 3 yo. And Smith didn't ride her in those races

So if he was asked "have you ever ridden a better 3yo filly than David Flores" he's going to say yes?

[Appy]

He's probably say "I've never ridden David Flores".

[dilanesp]

Yes...it was always Holy Bull until Zenyatta came along...I lost some respect for Mike after he said that.... :lol:

Yeah, I still think you massively overrate Holy Bull, but this seems right to me. I like Songbird, a lot-- I think she's the best three year old in America and it's ridiculous that she isn't going in the Derby. But let's see her win the Metropolitan Handicap or the Travers or something equally important first before we say that she's better than Holy Bull.

[dilanesp]

When Trevor said Zenyatta winning the Breeders Cup was an unbelievable performance ," one we'll never forget". That was so true. I watch it every now and then when I'm feeling down and it brings a smile to my face every single time.

I think over time, when we go years and years and years and don't see any females win the Breeders Cup Classic (let alone almost win two of them), and don't see any Grade I mares winning 19 races in a row, the enormity of Zenyatta is going to dawn on a lot of racing fans. She's going to be recognized as the best American female racehorse ever.

[Stillriledup]

I think over time, when we go years and years and years and don't see any females win the Breeders Cup Classic (let alone almost win two of them), and don't see any Grade I mares winning 19 races in a row, the enormity of Zenyatta is going to dawn on a lot of racing fans. She's going to be recognized as the best American female racehorse ever.

She's the Queen. Good post.

Think of how completely different her legacy would be for the detractors if she nails Blame and wins that race. In the modern era of thoroughbred racing, for a large and heavy mare to not start until late 3 and her only blemish is in the actual BC Classic, to me that's mind boggling and something we aren't likely to ever see again. Anyone who Knocks Z for ANYTHING needs to give their heads a shake, what she accomplished is something that Hollywood script readers would have thrown in the trash had this story hit their desks before it happened.

[tanner12oz]

If I had a dime for every time I heard I jock says that blank is the best horse they ever rode id be a millionaire

[Arapola]

I thought he said Zenyatta was the greatest he ever rode.
The question was best 3yo.

[whodoyoulike]

I haven't been following Songbird but I recently saw a picture and she didn't look very big compared to Z. So if she competes with the males, she may have a tough go at this stage of development.

[depalma113]

Think of how completely different her legacy would be for the detractors if she nails Blame and wins that race.

It's kind of like saying imagine what her legacy would have been had she been allowed to run in races such as the Pacific Classic or Santa Anita Handicap.

[Kash$]

I think over time, when we go years and years and years and don't see any females win the Breeders Cup Classic (let alone almost win two of them), and don't see any Grade I mares winning 19 races in a row, the enormity of Zenyatta is going to dawn on a lot of racing fans. She's going to be recognized as the best American female racehorse ever.

Some think she was overrated :bang:

[classhandicapper]

It's kind of like saying imagine what her legacy would have been had she been allowed to run in races such as the Pacific Classic or Santa Anita Handicap.

Both are probably true.

1. Had she beaten Blame her record would have gone from ridiculous to sublime.

2. Had she entered some of the bigger male races besides the Classic in her final year (and won), her legacy would have been enhanced further.

The question in my mind has always been if they cranked her up enough to compete with the very best males on dirt earlier in the year would they have had her close to her best for the Classic at 6? (IMHO, she was probably at her best at 4, not at 6. At 6 she had already slipped a notch).

Songbird has a long way to go before comparisons to all time greats are made, but she sure is impressive visually and otherwise.

[Stillriledup]

It's kind of like saying imagine what her legacy would have been had she been allowed to run in races such as the Pacific Classic or Santa Anita Handicap.

It would have been different, she probably doesn't win 19 in a row.

[Fager Fan]

It would have been different, she probably doesn't win 19 in a row.

Exactly. She was a tremendous mare but she never beat males on dirt. The one time she ran against them on dirt, she lost. I'm not being critical as I think it was her best race, but it shows that the competition on dirt is tougher and they don't fold on the front, setting it up for her closing style.

As wonderful as I think she was, there's no doubt her record was aided by the synthetic surface she ran over 17 times of her 20 races.

[Kash$]

Exactly. She was a tremendous mare but she never beat males on dirt. The one time she ran against them on dirt, she lost. I'm not being critical as I think it was her best race, but it shows that the competition on dirt is tougher and they don't fold on the front, setting it up for her closing style.

As wonderful as I think she was, there's no doubt her record was aided by the synthetic surface she ran over 17 times of her 20 races.


She beat males on dirt..........only one she didnt beat Blame..

[Fager Fan]

Yeah, I still think you massively overrate Holy Bull, but this seems right to me. I like Songbird, a lot-- I think she's the best three year old in America and it's ridiculous that she isn't going in the Derby. But let's see her win the Metropolitan Handicap or the Travers or something equally important first before we say that she's better than Holy Bull.

I'd agree with this. Zen isn't in the picture because she wasn't a good 3yo (or 2yo) but the Bull was a great 3yo.

From what Smith has said, it seems that she's throwing off his mental clock and that's what is impressing him. She feels like she's going easier and therefore slower than she is. Maybe he felt exactly how fast he was going on the Bull. I won't expect her to run in this year's Met Mile so it'll be hard for her to put up a similar record but I wouldn't expect a 3yo filly to run there or in the BCC so it'll be a comparison not totally apples and apples.

[dilanesp]

She beat males on dirt..........only one she didnt beat Blame..

Yeah, I mean, behind her that day were a Preakness winner, a horse who finished second in the Belmont and the Travers, a Hollywood Gold Cup winner, and a horse who won the Donn, the Met Mile, and the Woodward. She lost to one horse, a top eastern Grade I handicap star, by a head despite getting a horrendous trip considering the surface.

To say she didn't beat males on dirt is preposterous.

[NTamm1215]

Yeah, I mean, behind her that day were a Preakness winner, a horse who finished second in the Belmont and the Travers, a Hollywood Gold Cup winner, and a horse who won the Donn, the Met Mile, and the Woodward. She lost to one horse, a top eastern Grade I handicap star, by a head despite getting a horrendous trip considering the surface.

To say she didn't beat males on dirt is preposterous.

Horrendous trip?

[the little guy]

Horrendous trip?


Please encourage him. His posts are comedy gold.

[Fager Fan]

She beat males on dirt..........only one she didnt beat Blame..

Beating means winning. We don't count finishing ahead of horses as beating them.

[cj]

Horrendous trip?

That always cracks me up.

She was an awesome horse. I think if they had actually tested her on dirt against males before she was past her prime she would have won some big races. But they didn't. Here performance that day doesn't need any excuses. It was valiant even if in defeat.

[dilanesp]

Please encourage him. His posts are comedy gold.

Horrendous trip in the sense that it's very hard to win a dirt race the way Zenyatta tried to win her second BC Classic. There's a reason why very few horses try it. Dirt surfaces are inherently speed favoring-- even ones we label as closer's tracks are usually better for horses sitting in 6th than for horses 10 lengths last.

And in a big Grade I stakes against the best horses? Unheard of. Has ANY BC Classic winner in the 30 dirt runnings come from as far back as Zenyatta was and won? How about any BC dirt race winner at all? I can think of exactly one-- Calidoscopio, and he was going 1 3/4 miles!

No, that was a tough trip, in its own way.

[cj]

Horrendous trip in the sense that it's very hard to win a dirt race the way Zenyatta tried to win her second BC Classic. There's a reason why very few horses try it. Dirt surfaces are inherently speed favoring-- even ones we label as closer's tracks are usually better for horses sitting in 6th than for horses 10 lengths last.

And in a big Grade I stakes against the best horses? Unheard of. Has ANY BC Classic winner in the 30 dirt runnings come from as far back as Zenyatta was and won? How about any BC dirt race winner at all? I can think of exactly one-- Calidoscopio, and he was going 1 3/4 miles!

No, that was a tough trip, in its own way.

Most don't call a horse showing its shortcomings, in this case any semblance of early speed, as being a tough trip. It is just the way a horse runs.

[dilanesp]

Most don't call a horse showing its shortcomings, in this case any semblance of early speed, as being a tough trip. It is just the way a horse runs.

I accept this point. It's the reason Affirmed was better than Alydar, for instance, and why Alsab beat Whirlaway. Tactical speed is an aspect of racing talent, and Zenyatta had none of it.

Nonetheless, the point I was making is that she ran a whale of a race in the BC Classic when she lost, and the running style was part of what made it so difficult to do.

[the little guy]

The 2010 BC Classic was one of the greatest meltdowns I have ever seen in any kind of race. It set up absolutely perfectly for Zenyatta. It's not even clear she ran the second best race. Lookin at Lucky, who finished fourth, may have run better.

It's entertaining reading the excuses her fans still make for her. She was a wonderful horse, that ran very well in her loss, better than in many of her wins, but she got a GREAT setup and trip that day, and met MUCH better horses than she had ever raced against. Not all time greats by any measure, but very talented horses, and she lost by a head. Why isn't that enough for her fans?

[dilanesp]

The 2010 BC Classic was one of the greatest meltdowns I have ever seen in any kind of race. It set up absolutely perfectly for Zenyatta. It's not even clear she ran the second best race. Lookin at Lucky, who finished fourth, may have run better.

It's entertaining reading the excuses her fans still make for her. She was a wonderful horse, that ran very well in her loss, better than in many of her wins, but she got a GREAT setup and trip that day, and met MUCH better horses than she had ever raced against. Not all time greats by any measure, but very talented horses, and she lost by a head. Why isn't that enough for her fans?

I don't deny this either-- it was a set-up.

But even big pace set-ups on the dirt rarely produce a winner who is 10 lengths last in the early going. Usually you have to at least not lose contact with the field. What Zenyatta was trying to do is the most difficult way to win a Grade I dirt race.

Here's a nice way of putting it. There's been something like 81 Santa Anita Handicaps. Many of them have had fast paces, which are very standard at Santa Anita. I believe that ONE, Vigors in 1978, was one by a horse who emulated Zenyatta's running style. (One other, in 1947, was won by a horse that was somewhat less far back but still last by a few lengths.) That's not an accident.

[the little guy]

How about just admitting she wasn't good enough. It happens sometimes....especially when you don't face weak five horse fields.

[clocker7]

I've built a database of great and near-great horses over the past centuries. It's very handy for a lot of reasons, including judging the relative worth of America's best. It's not a super-exclusive list, and even some 3rd and 4th tier horses populate it, under its rather flexible parameters.

Without commenting about anything, here is a summary of the compiled competition that Zenyatta beat during her career:

Ginger Punch: twice
Life is Sweet: thrice
Gio Ponti, Summer Bird, and Colonel John: once, in the same race.

She also finished ahead of Lookin At Lucky and Quality Road while losing to Blame.

Again, just to be grounded, how many of those are in anyone's Top Anything? This is not a trick question.

[Robert Fischer]

You are unintentionally making the case that Zenyatta wasn't a dirt horse.


She ran an awesome race that day. She got beat fair and square while carrying 3 less pounds.

Maybe the excuse that has more merit is the '6yo' age? Was she a little past her prime? Would the 5yo version have won that same race?

Saying that her closing style is a handicap, in a race that collapsed, is in effect saying that she was not a legitimate dirt horse. As a big fan of hers, that's not the stance I personally want to take.


I don't deny this either-- it was a set-up.

But even big pace set-ups on the dirt rarely produce a winner who is 10 lengths last in the early going. Usually you have to at least not lose contact with the field. What Zenyatta was trying to do is the most difficult way to win a Grade I dirt race.

Here's a nice way of putting it. There's been something like 81 Santa Anita Handicaps. Many of them have had fast paces, which are very standard at Santa Anita. I believe that ONE, Vigors in 1978, was one by a horse who emulated Zenyatta's running style. (One other, in 1947, was won by a horse that was somewhat less far back but still last by a few lengths.) That's not an accident.

[Kash$]

I've built a database of great and near-great horses over the past centuries. It's very handy for a lot of reasons, including judging the relative worth of America's best. It's not a super-exclusive list, and even some 3rd and 4th tier horses populate it, under its rather flexible parameters.

Without commenting about anything, here is a summary of the compiled competition that Zenyatta beat during her career:

Ginger Punch: twice
Life is Sweet: thrice
Gio Ponti, Summer Bird, and Colonel John: once, in the same race.

She also finished ahead of Lookin At Lucky and Quality Road while losing to Blame.

Again, just to be grounded, how many of those are in anyone's Top Anything? This is not a trick question.

Great stuff can you pull same info for Rachel Alexander?

[castaway01]

Great stuff can you pull same info for Rachel Alexander?

Yeah, we never had that argument before, let's do it again seven years after the fact. I'm sure we'll settle it this time. Don't you have some trainers to protest or something?

[clocker7]

Great stuff can you pull same info for Rachel Alexander?
Not a problem:

Preakness: Mine That Bird, Big Drama, Pioneer of the Nile
Haskell: Summer Bird
Woodward: Da' Tara
And Unrivalled Belle the next year at CD.

Once, I read a query about how many instances there were where Kentucky Derby winners met. It took me only minutes to answer the question. My database is very helpful.

[Fager Fan]

Horrendous trip in the sense that it's very hard to win a dirt race the way Zenyatta tried to win her second BC Classic. There's a reason why very few horses try it. Dirt surfaces are inherently speed favoring-- even ones we label as closer's tracks are usually better for horses sitting in 6th than for horses 10 lengths last.

And in a big Grade I stakes against the best horses? Unheard of. Has ANY BC Classic winner in the 30 dirt runnings come from as far back as Zenyatta was and won? How about any BC dirt race winner at all? I can think of exactly one-- Calidoscopio, and he was going 1 3/4 miles!

No, that was a tough trip, in its own way.

You're twisting. No one uses a horse's style of running as its trip. They're distinctly two different things.

And dirt surfaces aren't speed favoring. Instead, it's that the best dirt horses have speed (and the best routers have a combination of speed and endurance).

[Kash$]

Not a problem:

Preakness: Mine That Bird, Big Drama, Pioneer of the Nile
Haskell: Summer Bird
Woodward: Da' Tara
And Unrivalled Belle the next year at CD.

Once, I read a query about how many instances there were where Kentucky Derby winners met. It took me only minutes to answer the question. My database is very helpful.

Thanks interesting database.

[clocker7]

Thanks interesting database.
Thanks. Compiling it has taught me soooo much about horse racing history. I've corrected a lot of racing records. In addition, it's allowed me to identify memorabilia that no one else can, and buy museum-quality stuff at a song.

Still adding to it daily ... :)

[clocker7]

Not to belabor the fact or to hijack the thread, but here is an example of the power of my database. In this auction, there is a betting ticket connected to a Kentucky Derby winner, Whiskery. It is from his last race on May 13, 1931, just prior to being retired and sent to VA.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/35-1931-HORSE-RACE-BETTING-TICKETS-FROM-CHURCHILL-DOWNS-/381598270212?hash=item58d9078304:g:69sAAOSw-RRXCwZt

His ticket is on the third row, #5591. I won't be bidding on the item, so go for it. Last week, I bought 5 actual, unidentified Kentucky Derby tickets from this same seller, stretching from 1929 to 1940. I tend to buy only when the price is cheap, cheap, cheap.

[classhandicapper]

My notes for Zenyatta from the Classic were as follows.

Squeezed start; mild climbing in the stretch 1st time (kickback?); kept falling back; "used" by Smith to get back into the race by the first turn; saved some ground 2nd turn; swung out, all out; could not get up despite very fast last quarter.

In the stretch the first time, for a split second when she was climbing slightly I thought she was going to be eased because she hated the surface or something was amiss. In the post race coverage, Smith (while unjustifiably blaming himself for the loss even though he gave her a great ride), mentioned she did not like the kickback. I don't think he would have brought something like that up unless it happened. It verified my in race observation.

My notes for the day were that it was a "BR" (bad rail)

I thought the race fell apart more due to the fact that the inside was bad (a couple of speed horses were inside) and the quality of some of the speeds to get 10F in a race of that quality was suspect. I didn't think the pace was especially fast. Races like that are almost always tough. Zenyatta's last quarter was excellent for a 10F dirt race. So she wasn't just picking up dead horses.

I thought she was better than Blame that day (who I think was generally underrated to begin with), but she would always be at a bit of disadvantage against him because he could also settle off the pace, he'd get first run on her, and was also game as all hell.

In hindsight, IMHO they made a huge error not going to Saratoga to take on Rachel at 10F. They would have given her another race on dirt, more experience with dirt kickback, and she would have won that race in a jog.

I understand the thinking. They didn't want to crank her up 100% and ship cross country when they really wanted her to peak on BC day, but IMO it was a mistake.

One big misunderstanding about her was synthetic racing.

In those days speed figures on synthetic were very depressed. It was similar to the way turf figures were depressed (some turf/synthetic figures were ultimately changed higher). Those slow figures understated her ability and the quality of some of the competition. Because she was also a deep closer, her times were very dependent on the pace in front of her. At a certain point everyone knew the only way to beat her was to back down the pace. So they did. Smith moved her the same way every time. So her figures would fluctuate to match what happened in front of her and she'd virtually always win with plenty in reserve and go out extremely well even when the finish was tight.

[Fager Fan]

My notes for Zenyatta from the Classic were as follows.

Squeezed start; mild climbing in the stretch 1st time (kickback?); kept falling back; "used" by Smith to get back into the race by the first turn; saved some ground 2nd turn; swung out, all out; could not get up despite very fast last quarter.

In the stretch the first time, for a split second when she was climbing slightly I thought she was going to be eased because she hated the surface or something was amiss. In the post race coverage, Smith (while unjustifiably blaming himself for the loss even though he gave her a great ride), mentioned she did not like the kickback. I don't think he would have brought something like that up unless it happened. It verified my in race observation.

My notes for the day were that it was a "BR" (bad rail)

I thought the race fell apart more due to the fact that the inside was bad (a couple of speed horses were inside) and the quality of some of the speeds to get 10F in a race of that quality was suspect. I didn't think the pace was especially fast. Races like that are almost always tough. Zenyatta's last quarter was excellent for a 10F dirt race. So she wasn't just picking up dead horses.

I thought she was better than Blame that day (who I think was generally underrated to begin with), but she would always be at a bit of disadvantage against him because he could also settle off the pace, he'd get first run on her, and was also game as all hell.

In hindsight, IMHO they made a huge error not going to Saratoga to take on Rachel at 10F. They would have given her another race on dirt, more experience with dirt kickback, and she would have won that race in a jog.

I understand the thinking. They didn't want to crank her up 100% and ship cross country when they really wanted her to peak on BC day, but IMO it was a mistake.

One big misunderstanding about her was synthetic racing.

In those days speed figures on synthetic were very depressed. It was similar to the way turf figures were depressed (some turf/synthetic figures were ultimately changed higher). Those slow figures understated her ability and the quality of some of the competition. Because she was also a deep closer, her times were very dependent on the pace in front of her. At a certain point everyone knew the only way to beat her was to back down the pace. So they did. Smith moved her the same way every time. So her figures would fluctuate to match what happened in front of her and she'd virtually always win with plenty in reserve and go out extremely well even when the finish was tight.

The numbers weren't depressed. They could be the result of a slow pace, but we all know that (unless Andy pulls another jacking up of the number due to slow pace like he did with CC). Otherwise, they more than fairly represented who she was racing against. Remember that a good horse on one surface can be a bum on another. Most too dirt horses didn't really are for synthetics, so she was y racing them at their best. And they also couldn't hold on the front end even with a slow pace, which was a trait of synthetics.

She was a fabulous filly who met with what was the perfect storm for her.

[Wiley]

It's interesting that some jockeys like to make big claims about the quality of a recent mount. The Shoe, on the other hand if I remember correctly, tended to understate a horses ability, he used the term a "useful" horse when describing Cougar II.

It would be fun to see Beholder and Songbird go at it later in the year.

[classhandicapper]

The numbers weren't depressed. They could be the result of a slow pace, but we all know that (unless Andy pulls another jacking up of the number due to slow pace like he did with CC). Otherwise, they more than fairly represented who she was racing against. Remember that a good horse on one surface can be a bum on another. Most too dirt horses didn't really are for synthetics, so she was y racing them at their best. And they also couldn't hold on the front end even with a slow pace, which was a trait of synthetics.

She was a fabulous filly who met with what was the perfect storm for her.


The synthetic figures were depressed relative to dirt (just like turf), most likely due to the slower than average paces (but perhaps other factors also).

Andy eventually realized it and did make a mild adjustment up to his synthetic figures at the top of the scale (which he has since done to turf also), but those changes were not done retroactively against the figures she earned as a late 3yo and 4yo under the old system when she was probably at her best.

The changes were reflected in her 5yo and 6yo years, but by that time the opposition was backing down the paces against her to an even bigger extreme trying to beat her and because a few of the fields were weak. So she wasn't any opportunities to fire fast races unless she was against top horses like in the Classic fields where the sheer quality against males ensured an honest pace.

[v j stauffer]

My notes for Zenyatta from the Classic were as follows.

Squeezed start; mild climbing in the stretch 1st time (kickback?); kept falling back; "used" by Smith to get back into the race by the first turn; saved some ground 2nd turn; swung out, all out; could not get up despite very fast last quarter.

In the stretch the first time, for a split second when she was climbing slightly I thought she was going to be eased because she hated the surface or something was amiss. In the post race coverage, Smith (while unjustifiably blaming himself for the loss even though he gave her a great ride), mentioned she did not like the kickback. I don't think he would have brought something like that up unless it happened. It verified my in race observation.

My notes for the day were that it was a "BR" (bad rail)

I thought the race fell apart more due to the fact that the inside was bad (a couple of speed horses were inside) and the quality of some of the speeds to get 10F in a race of that quality was suspect. I didn't think the pace was especially fast. Races like that are almost always tough. Zenyatta's last quarter was excellent for a 10F dirt race. So she wasn't just picking up dead horses.

I thought she was better than Blame that day (who I think was generally underrated to begin with), but she would always be at a bit of disadvantage against him because he could also settle off the pace, he'd get first run on her, and was also game as all hell.

In hindsight, IMHO they made a huge error not going to Saratoga to take on Rachel at 10F. They would have given her another race on dirt, more experience with dirt kickback, and she would have won that race in a jog.

I understand the thinking. They didn't want to crank her up 100% and ship cross country when they really wanted her to peak on BC day, but IMO it was a mistake.

One big misunderstanding about her was synthetic racing.

In those days speed figures on synthetic were very depressed. It was similar to the way turf figures were depressed (some turf/synthetic figures were ultimately changed higher). Those slow figures understated her ability and the quality of some of the competition. Because she was also a deep closer, her times were very dependent on the pace in front of her. At a certain point everyone knew the only way to beat her was to back down the pace. So they did. Smith moved her the same way every time. So her figures would fluctuate to match what happened in front of her and she'd virtually always win with plenty in reserve and go out extremely well even when the finish was tight.

IMO it was the lights straight into her eyes immediately after the break more so than kickback.

Also, it took one of the great big money race rides in the history of our sport by Garrett Gomez. He makes just one decision that wasn't perfect and Queenie wins.

[delayjf]

I would say that both Zenyatta and Blame got the pace set up they wanted.

Whether it was the kick back or the lights, Zenyatta lost the race in the opening quarter /half - she simply left herself too much to do. What was frustrating to me was that while it was true she normally runs from the back of the pack, she had more early speed than she demonstrated in the BC. According to the charts she was 14 or 15 lengths behind a 1/2 mile time of 47.2. Which would have put her time at around 50 and change - that's almost walking. She got her nose in front one or two jumps past the finish line.

But Gary, what about Silver Charm?
Or Point Given?

[TJC]

Looks like Songbird is out of the Oaks due to fever as posted on TDN.

[classhandicapper]

I would say that both Zenyatta and Blame got the pace set up they wanted.

Whether it was the kick back or the lights, Zenyatta lost the race in the opening quarter /half - she simply left herself too much to do. What was frustrating to me was that while it was true she normally runs from the back of the pack, she had more early speed than she demonstrated in the BC. According to the charts she was 14 or 15 lengths behind a 1/2 mile time of 47.2. Which would have put her time at around 50 and change - that's almost walking. She got her nose in front one or two jumps past the finish line.


Or Point Given?

Unquestionably, the setup was good for closers. It's just my opinion that it wasn't quite as hot as it looked because there were other reasons some of the speeds backed up and most major Grade 1s are tough like that anyway.

I'm not even sure the official chart is correct about the number of lengths she was behind. It may have been between calls and before Smith tried to get her back into the race, but at one point I thought she was close to 10 lengths behind the next to last horse. She was becoming disconnected and not running smoothly.

[Robert Fischer]

It's not like Blame didn't fire. Blame fired a big race. I don't recall, but I wouldn't be surprised if some of the handicappers who looked at Blame had the performance as one his best.

[a cursory glance - Blame was a hard hitter. Looks like he may have won against the grain in the Stephen Foster and Whitney, and at least on paper, - the JCGC looks like Dominguez had a great ride on Haynesfield.]


If Blame doesn't fire a big race in the Classic, - the same people making excuses, would be hailing Zenyatta to be the Greatest of All Times...

With Zenyatta running exactly the same.

[ultracapper]

The final 1/16th was just awesome. She just layed it down and went after Blame. Almost got there. It was very cool just watching that final bit, thinking no way in hell and the margin just steadily dwindled. The whole time I'm just thinking...can she? can she? can she? WILL SHE?

DAMN!!!!!

[clocker7]

I would say that both Zenyatta and Blame got the pace set up they wanted.

Whether it was the kick back or the lights, Zenyatta lost the race in the opening quarter /half - she simply left herself too much to do. What was frustrating to me was that while it was true she normally runs from the back of the pack, she had more early speed than she demonstrated in the BC. According to the charts she was 14 or 15 lengths behind a 1/2 mile time of 47.2. Which would have put her time at around 50 and change - that's almost walking. She got her nose in front one or two jumps past the finish line.

The Classic that year featured two bunches of horses: the four leaders going crazy, but eventually finishing last. And a trailing pack of the real contenders that were fairly bunched up on the backstretch. There was a gap of about sixth lengths between the two packs.

The official chart after 6f read:

Etched - fifth, 2 lengths ahead of
Lookin At Lucky - sixth, by 1/2
Blame - seventh, by 1/2
Musket Man - eighth, by 1
Paddy OPrado - ninth, by 1
Fly Down - tenth, by 1/2
Pleasant Prince- eleventh by 2
Z - last

So, it wasn't like Z got grossly outrun by the other top finishers. After all, those guys had a lot to work to do, too. And it wasn't like she didn't have any traffic luck, either. About 25 yards into the homestretch, one runner veered sharply out of her way, opening a hole for a deep, unimpeded run. Later, at the 3/16 pole, Blame was jostled between two others, before he was able to clear out of it.

[ultracapper]

Gomez was perfect in the stretch. He separated from the company he was running with in the stretch at the very last moment, leaving just enough horse to get there.

Man, could that guy ride a horse.

[Grits]

Gomez was perfect in the stretch. He separated from the company he was running with in the stretch at the very last moment, leaving just enough horse to get there.

Man, could that guy ride a horse.

He TRULY could. So gifted!! I hope he and his family are doing well since his exit from riding.

[classhandicapper]

The Classic that year featured two bunches of horses: the four leaders going crazy, but eventually finishing last. And a trailing pack of the real contenders that were fairly bunched up on the backstretch. There was a gap of about sixth lengths between the two packs.

The official chart after 6f read:

Etched - fifth, 2 lengths ahead of
Lookin At Lucky - sixth, by 1/2
Blame - seventh, by 1/2
Musket Man - eighth, by 1
Paddy OPrado - ninth, by 1
Fly Down - tenth, by 1/2
Pleasant Prince- eleventh by 2
Z - last

So, it wasn't like Z got grossly outrun by the other top finishers. After all, those guys had a lot to work to do, too. And it wasn't like she didn't have any traffic luck, either. About 25 yards into the homestretch, one runner veered sharply out of her way, opening a hole for a deep, unimpeded run. Later, at the 3/16 pole, Blame was jostled between two others, before he was able to clear out of it.

This not to make any excuses for Zenyatta. She got a magnificent ride and if the kickback or surface were an issue, whose fault was that other than the connections that didn't give her more experience on dirt? Her style was always going to be a disadvantage unless the pace was a meltdown that took out the second tier also. She lost fair and square. But it also makes sense to try to understand what actually happened in the race.

Watch the replay of the race. In the stretch the first time she started falling progressively further behind the pack and was running with a funny stride for a brief period like something was amiss (mild climbing). It was not unusual for her to lag far behind like that, but not while looking a little uncomfortable and falling progressively further behind. She was probably around 10 lengths behind the next to last horse between calls. By the time they reached the first turn, Smith started asking her to get back into the race and she took a more normal position at the back of the pack by 6F.

These were my post race thoughts on the speed horses in that race:

The pace setter, First Dude, (no superstar) outlasted the other speeds and didn't finish much worse than most would have expected. He was a mid 90s to low 100 Beyer horse at the time and ran a 95 in the race. So the pace didn't seem to have a huge negative impact on his expected performance. If the pace was super fast, he should have collapsed in a race of that quality.

Quality Road raced on the inside part of the track. It was bad in there for two days straight. IMO, that's at least party why he ran so poorly. But his form coming in and ability to get 10F under pressure were also at least mildly suspect. Some people felt he was not as sharp at that stage of the campaign as earlier in the year. The combination of the rail, pressure, 10F, and not being as sharp was probably deadly for him otherwise he would have at least outlasted First Dude.

The Japanese horse was another speed horse. He was training horribly all week leading up to the race. I know that because I had a futures bet on him in the race and was wishing I could cancel it but could not.

Haynesfield was well known to be a little suspect under pressure and figured to be more vulnerable in that tough of a field going 10F.

So I would say the race flow clearly favored horses from off the pace, but this was a case of the pacesetters also being a somewhat flawed group or having difficult circumstances on the rail going 10F. IMO, it wasn't just a pace related meltdown.

IMO, if you were anywhere in the second tier off the rail you were probably in the perfect spot. If you were way out of it, you were chasing down fresh horses that got the jump on you.

[clocker7]

Good post, classh.

In my view, the 2010 Classic was well run, with the top two choices finishing within a whisker, and the third choice being barely beaten by an outsider. I think that the finish truly represented the relative abilities of Z and Blame (and the others) at that stage of their careers, given their style and the point in the season. I think that there should be no cause for claiming bad luck, because it was a fairly clean event. If only that could be said about every race featuring a dozen runners or so.

[classhandicapper]

People already know I think Zenyatta ranks among the top few all time great fillies and mares I have seen.

When I watched the race live I literally thought she was going to be eased the first part of the race because I could tell she was struggling in a way I had never seen before. That might have been an exaggerated perspective due to the excitement of the event (and my bet against her by the way), but there is almost no chance she was not struggling with the track, the kickback or both. Even under the remote possibility I was seeing things, there's no way Smith would also independently make that a centerpiece of his discussion of the race unless it actually happened.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPKp3NfmVcA&ebc=ANyPxKo8SKQzuaCE27XXoOMKrvZicK8W7r_oe-Vb_VwxKtu82np8oecuxhbqe0NGSHxFWS9kiHWn

[Fager Fan]

Someone actually said it was the lights in her eyes? Someone's smoking some good stuff.

She wasn't grabbing hold of the surface early on. It's easy to see that in her stride. She finally got her stride in the first turn and was racing comfortably thereafter. It's been said at a few places that she ran with smooth shoes when a horse needs turndowns to grab the Churchill surface.

[Fager Fan]

The synthetic figures were depressed relative to dirt (just like turf), most likely due to the slower than average paces (but perhaps other factors also).

Andy eventually realized it and did make a mild adjustment up to his synthetic figures at the top of the scale (which he has since done to turf also), but those changes were not done retroactively against the figures she earned as a late 3yo and 4yo under the old system when she was probably at her best.

The changes were reflected in her 5yo and 6yo years, but by that time the opposition was backing down the paces against her to an even bigger extreme trying to beat her and because a few of the fields were weak. So she wasn't any opportunities to fire fast races unless she was against top horses like in the Classic fields where the sheer quality against males ensured an honest pace.

Well, again I'll disagree. The pace is slower, hence a slower final time, hence a lower Beyer fig. That's as it should be.

[classhandicapper]

Well, again I'll disagree. The pace is slower, hence a slower final time, hence a lower Beyer fig. That's as it should be.

I understand your perspective entirely, but if you choose that path it requires that handicappers understand you cannot compare the relative merits of horses across surfaces based on speed figures or winning margins (as people were in the early synth days). You have to class them (as I do).

When it came to turf/dirt comparisons, the top horses rarely went back and forth. The fact that most dirt/turf figures were out of whack at both ends of the scale for decades wasn't a giant issue. I knew it from experience, as did many others, but you learned to adjust. Less experienced people made some bad bets based on figures that did not reflect ability until they learned.

When it came to synth/dirt comparisons, horses were moving back and forth on a regular basis and handicappers kept underrating the top synth horses when they came east to run on dirt and vice versa because they were used to dirt figures. So eventually the figures were changed to better reflect the "relative abilities of the horses" instead of how fast they were running due to pace and other surface quirks.

Now the same thing has been done with turf.

As far as I am concerned, you are still better off classing the horses.

[cj]

Well, again I'll disagree. The pace is slower, hence a slower final time, hence a lower Beyer fig. That's as it should be.

But times on turf are generally faster than times on dirt, not slower.