Giving Rachel Alexandra HOY would send wrong message to sport

[Moyers Pond]

Rachel is a worthy HOY, but we can't be giving out HOY's to healthy horses that end their season in the summer, especially if there is an undefeated horse out there.

Rachel could have raced yesterday, but I understand the not wanting to run on a synthetic. However, she could have raced in the Jockey Club Gold Cup or 10f race against top competition and they decided to not take a chance.

Jess Jackson took a risk by benching Rachel with months to go and lost. Mr Moss took a risk and won. It really is that simply.

This sport should reward the risk takers. Zenyatta's owners took the risk and took on the best in the world at a 10f distance she had never run before.

What kind of message does it send if you can win HOY by avoiding the biggest race in the year simply because you don't like the surface. If there is an undefeated synthetic older horse next year that stops at the end of the Del Mar meet can we really give him/her HOY?

The only reason there is even a discussion about who should be HOY is because of the high number of east coast based voters.

Clearly any undefeated campaign that culminates in a win in the BC Classic is a lock for HOY. Not really a discussion.

[Stevie Belmont]

There are both HOY

They both did something you probably won't see again in a very long time.

[cj]

Rachel's run began in mid February and she ran eight times without a break. She won the top 3yo filly race, a classic in the Triple Crown series beating colts, beat colts again taking the Haskell including the Belmont and Travers winner, then beat OLDER colts.

The wrong message is to basically duck competition all year and only run four times, then show up at the Breeder's Cup and hope to win horse of the year with one good race.

[Moyers Pond]

There are both HOY

They both did something you probably won't see again in a very long time.

No. They really aren't. Rachel might get it because of the huge east coast bias in horse racing, which is why Curlin won it last year, but Zenyatta won the biggest race in the world, Rachel didn't show up.

Jockey Jerry Bailey said it perfectly. Rachel could have showed up. But she didn't. It really is that simple.

This time it was I don't like the synthetic. Next horse it might be I don't like the distance. Then it will be I don't like our post position. You have to show up to win HOY. It would be terrible for the sport if a horse is undefeated on the year and shows up and wins the biggest race in the country and does not get HOY.

Zenyatta did not have to show up or even run in the Classic. But she did. She is HOY.

[Moyers Pond]

Rachel's run began in mid February and she ran eight times without a break. She won the top 3yo filly race, a classic in the Triple Crown series beating colts, beat colts again taking the Haskell including the Belmont and Travers winner, then beat OLDER colts.

The wrong message is to basically duck competition all year and only run four times, then show up at the Breeder's Cup and hope to win horse of the year with one good race.

You mean the Biggest race in the world? You mean the race where she won more money than Rachel won all year long?

All I know is Zenyatta never lost in her entire career. This year she never lost and won the biggest race in the world. Pretty much of case closed scenario.

Remember, Rachel could have run in the biggest race in the world. But she didn't.

[johnhannibalsmith]

No kidding.. all of this crap about it would "...be an insult to Rachel..." or "...an injustice to Zenyatta..." if she/she lost...

...maybe it would just simply be a testament, an honor, to whichever one did win.

*edited to point out that this was RE: a post about four posts ago... must have taken longer than I thought to type forty words and pee and hit submit.

[cj]

You mean the Biggest race in the world? You mean the race where she won more money than Rachel won all year long?

All I know is Zenyatta never lost in her entire career. This year she never lost and won the biggest race in the world. Pretty much of case closed scenario.

Remember, Rachel could have run in the biggest race in the world. But she didn't.

How long was she supposed to race, a 3 year old filly who had been going since she was 2? What Zenyatta did last year doesn't count, sorry. That is just the way it is. I think making one race be the be all and end all is a bad message, much worse than skipping the big one with a tired horse.

[Moyers Pond]

How long was she supposed to race, a 3 year old filly who had been going since she was 2? What Zenyatta did last year doesn't count, sorry. That is just the way it is. I think making one race be the be all and end all is a bad message, much worse than skipping the big one with a tired horse.

Well she should have tried the 10f Classic distance in the JCGC instead.

Let's be serious, she took the easier of the two races at Saratoga in the Woodward instead of the Travers, even Jerry Bailey mentioned that yesterday.

She is a great filly, but she never beat anything close to what Zenyatta did yesterday and Zenyatta did it at 10f.

[cj]

9f or 10f on synthetics is pretty much the same thing. You should know that already. On dirt, it is a whole different story.

I never in my wildest dreams imagined a three year old taking on older horses in September in a G1 race at Saratoga would be considered taking the easy way out. People are losing all sense of reality in this fun debate.

Oh, and for the record, she beat Summer Bird much easier than Zenyatta did.

[Moyers Pond]

9f or 10f on synthetics is pretty much the same thing. You should know that already. On dirt, it is a whole different story.

I never in my wildest dreams imagined a three year old taking on older horses in September in a G1 race at Saratoga would be considered taking the easy way out. People are losing all sense of reality in this fun debate.

Oh, and for the record, she beat Summer Bird much easier than Zenyatta did.

I think you lost your sense of reality. I am pretty sure Jerry Bailey knows a tad bit more about racing horses than you do, although I bet you think Macho Again is some world beater. :D

Rachel could have showed up yesterday and proved herself as good as Zenyatta, just like Zenyatta had do go to Oaklawn last year to take on the champion.

Champions are Champions until they lose. Challengers have to go take them on, not the other way around. Remember that Zenyatta had to travel east to take on the champion last year and there was no crying from her owner about the surface. She went and ran on the dirt and beat the champion. That is how the game works. Champions get the advantage and until someone beats them they are the champion. Nobody ever beat Zenyatta. Ever.

[cj]

I'm sure Jerry Bailey knows a lot more about riding horses than I do, but that is about it. Have you seen his DVDs? His handicapping is laughable. Somehow, I don't think being a great riders makes him an expert schedule mapper for horses.

The champion thing is funny. Ginger Punch was one of the slowest female champions in history. As for the rest, this isn't boxing.

[ghostyapper]

9f or 10f on synthetics is pretty much the same thing. You should know that already. On dirt, it is a whole different story.

I never in my wildest dreams imagined a three year old taking on older horses in September in a G1 race at Saratoga would be considered taking the easy way out. People are losing all sense of reality in this fun debate.

Oh, and for the record, she beat Summer Bird much easier than Zenyatta did.

More bias. You can keep bringing up the woodward in the historic sense but the fact remains it was a weak field. What have the runners done since then? Macho again got torched by the travers runners in his next start. It's so funny how pace breaks down each runner in the bc classic trying to diminish zenyatta but the rachel finatics still bring up the woodward without mentioning how weak the field was

Can't believe you would actually bring up how rachels margin of victory over summer bird was larger. You want to play that silly, immature game why don't you bring up the margin of victory over mtb?
Ignore the 10 furlong victory because you think 9 and 10 furlongs are the same on synthetics.

You are making a complete fool of yourself on this one.

[cj]

More bias. You can keep bringing up the woodward in the historic sense but the fact remains it was a weak field. What have the runners done since then? Macho again got torched by the travers runners in his next start. It's so funny how pace breaks down each runner in the bc classic trying to diminish zenyatta but the rachel finatics still bring up the woodward without mentioning how weak the field was

Can't believe you would actually bring up how rachels margin of victory over summer bird was larger. You want to play that silly, immature game why don't you bring up the margin of victory over mtb?
Ignore the 10 furlong victory because you think 9 and 10 furlongs are the same on synthetics.

You are making a complete fool of yourself on this one.

First off, I was being sarcastic about Summer Bird, but you were too stupid to realize this.

I never said I was ignoring the victory, I'm just saying winning at 10f doesn't give any type of special credit, especially on a surface where extra distance is a benefit for closers.

As for the Woodward, the field was hardly weak. Clearly you don't understand pace set ups. Rachel had an extremely tough one in the Woodward, and Macho again had no chance in the JCGC with the dawdling fractions and his closing style.

Zenyatta had a very favorable set up yesterday...yes, the pace was pretty quick for those horses at that distance. Hell, if Gomez ever learns how to ride Colonel John he might actually win a few of these big ones. Sure, she was impressive, but she didn't face any adversity yesterday and she performed well. It isn't like there were any superstars in the horses she defeated.

[Moyers Pond]

First off, I was being sarcastic about Summer Bird, but you were too stupid to realize this.

I never said I was ignoring the victory, I'm just saying winning at 10f doesn't give any type of special credit, especially on a surface where extra distance is a benefit for closers.

As for the Woodward, the field was hardly weak. Clearly you don't understand pace set ups. Rachel had an extremely tough one in the Woodward, and Macho again had no chance in the JCGC with the dawdling fractions and his closing style.

Zenyatta had a very favorable set up yesterday...yes, the pace was pretty quick for those horses at that distance. Hell, if Gomez ever learns how to ride Colonel John he might actually win a few of these big ones. Sure, she was impressive, but she didn't face any adversity yesterday and she performed well. It isn't like there were any superstars in the horses she defeated.

I respect that you think Rachel deserves HOY. You can make the argument and it is reasonable. However, you are crazy if you think Zenyatta had a very favorable set up. She had a terrible set up. The pace was not fast at all. She broke dead last and had minor traffic. She still won easily and had a ton of horse left.

And the Woodward was a gutsy race by Rachel, but she beat nothing. Be serious. That was an awful field. Yesterdays field had a bunch of world class horses in it and she blew right by them. She didn't barely hang on against Macho Again.

Even Baffert said it, Zenyatta is HOY.

[ghostyapper]

First off, I was being sarcastic about Summer Bird, but you were too stupid to realize this.


How could anyone know you were being sarcastic with that comment? It fits right in with all your other biased, insane views on the subject.

[cj]

I respect that you think Rachel deserves HOY. You can make the argument and it is reasonable. However, you are crazy if you think Zenyatta had a very favorable set up. She had a terrible set up. The pace was not fast at all. She broke dead last and had minor traffic. She still won easily and had a ton of horse left.

And the Woodward was a gutsy race by Rachel, but she beat nothing. Be serious. That was an awful field. Yesterdays field had a bunch of world class horses in it and she blew right by them. She didn't barely hang on against Macho Again.

Even Baffert said it, Zenyatta is HOY.

I certainly wouldn't lose sleep if Zenyatta wins.

As for the pace, I do that for a living. The pace was fast for that track and distance...there is no doubt about that. I'm not saying it was suicidal or anything, though on synthetics anything above average usually is.

Who were the world class horses in that Group? I mean really, that is what we have today, but I don't think that field was really any different from what we see all year, just a few more horses. I guess RVW was supposed to be good, but he clearly didn't show up yesterday so does that count? Who was the standout? Gio Ponti, who lost to a terrible horse last time? Colonel John? Seriously, how were these guys any better than the Woodward field? I don't care about the dirt horses that had no chance either.

[ghostyapper]

As for the Woodward, the field was hardly weak. Clearly you don't understand pace set ups. Rachel had an extremely tough one in the Woodward, and Macho again had no chance in the JCGC with the dawdling fractions and his closing style.


Post this nonsense somewhere else. Macho Again started making his move but lost ground in the stretch in the jcgc. He simply is not as good as summer bird or quality road. Face the facts

O but thats right the woodward was the more ambitious spot than the travers http://paceadvantage.com/forum/images/smilies/47.gif

[cj]

Post this nonsense somewhere else. Macho Again started making his move but lost ground in the stretch in the jcgc. He simply is not as good as summer bird or quality road. Face the facts

O but thats right the woodward was the more ambitious spot than the travers http://paceadvantage.com/forum/images/smilies/47.gif

So how do you explain Rachel drowning Summer Bird and barely beating Macho Again? Of course it isn't the only factor, but pace was a big, big part of it. Of course Macho was backing up in the stretch, the horse was well beaten and the jockey knew it...why punish him?

[ghostyapper]

So how do you explain Rachel drowning Summer Bird and barely beating Macho Again?

she caught summer bird at the right track/time/distance. Her connections then ducked his next 2 races preventing the inevitable.

[Stevie Belmont]

Uhh no

They Are!

If an owner does not think his horse will care for a surface, he does not have to run there. Why diminish what they have done or what they have not. I love how people, no matter what look for arguments on these matters. It's tiring.

Take a look at what they both did...

Their records of accomplishments this year speak for themselves...

No. They really aren't. Rachel might get it because of the huge east coast bias in horse racing, which is why Curlin won it last year, but Zenyatta won the biggest race in the world, Rachel didn't show up.

Jockey Jerry Bailey said it perfectly. Rachel could have showed up. But she didn't. It really is that simple.

This time it was I don't like the synthetic. Next horse it might be I don't like the distance. Then it will be I don't like our post position. You have to show up to win HOY. It would be terrible for the sport if a horse is undefeated on the year and shows up and wins the biggest race in the country and does not get HOY.

Zenyatta did not have to show up or even run in the Classic. But she did. She is HOY.

[Grits]

After yesterday, I don't think I'd ever mention poor Quality Road again. Bless his heart, the horse wants no part of being a racehorse. He needs to be given a wide berth . . . . . like, the state of Montana, maybe would be wide enough.

[Moyers Pond]

Uhh no

They Are!

If an owner does not think his horse will care for a surface, he does not have to run there. Why diminish what they have done or what they have not. I love how people, no matter what look for arguments on these matters. It's tiring.

Take a look at what they both did...

Their records of accomplishments this year speak for themselves...

That is right, they don't have to run. And it is also right that there is a price to pay for not running except where things are suitable to you.

Zenyatta came and ran on the dirt and did just fine beating a champion in the process. Rachel had run on the synthetic and run just fine. Her owner though opted to not run in the biggest race in the sport.

I think you people that think Jess Jackson did not run because of the surface are pretty clueless. It was the distance he wanted no part of. Remember, he ran Curlin here last year and was beaten by better horses. Sounds like Mr. Jackson is a Sportsman only when he can get an advantage.

Let's face it, Rachel would not have even been close in a 10f race on the synthetic with Zenyatta in the field.

Zenyatta may not have beaten Rachel at 9f on dirt, but considering she won EVERY race she ever raced in I don't see why she would not win that one too.

If you want to beat the best you have to show up in the biggest race of the year, and Rachel didn't show up. Pretty simply. Zenyatta is HOY. Only an East Coast bias can really make this close.

Undefeated BC Classic winners are 100% locks for HOY. Oh wait, it has never been done before so we don't really know that for sure. NOBODY has ever won the BC Classic undefeated. Nobody until Zenyatta.

[toussaud]

That is right, they don't have to run. And it is also right that there is a price to pay for not running except where things are suitable to you.

Zenyatta came and ran on the dirt and did just fine beating a champion in the process. Rachel had run on the synthetic and run just fine. Her owner though opted to not run in the biggest race in the sport.

I think you people that think Jess Jackson did not run because of the surface are pretty clueless. It was the distance he wanted no part of. Remember, he ran Curlin here last year and was beaten by better horses. Sounds like Mr. Jackson is a Sportsman only when he can get an advantage.

Let's face it, Rachel would not have even been close in a 10f race on the synthetic with Zenyatta in the field.

Zenyatta may not have beaten Rachel at 9f on dirt, but considering she won EVERY race she ever raced in I don't see why she would not win that one too.

If you want to beat the best you have to show up in the biggest race of the year, and Rachel didn't show up. Pretty simply. Zenyatta is HOY. Only an East Coast bias can really make this close.

Undefeated BC Classic winners are 100% locks for HOY. Oh wait, it has never been done before so we don't really know that for sure. NOBODY has ever won the BC Classic undefeated. Nobody until Zenyatta.


your post is clueless if you think that after running in the fair grounds, oaklawn, pimlico, belmont, saratoga that the surface of santa anita had NOTHING to do with why he didn't run there

he also owns a damn good 3YO by the anme of Kensei that would have done damage at the dirt mile... wonder why you ddin't see him there?

[FenceBored]

You mean the Biggest race in the world? You mean the race where she won more money than Rachel won all year long?

All I know is Zenyatta never lost in her entire career. This year she never lost and won the biggest race in the world. Pretty much of case closed scenario.

Remember, Rachel could have run in the biggest race in the world. But she didn't.

The biggest race in the world is the Dubai World Cup. I don't remember Zenyatta running there.

[toussaud]

zenyatta runs on what i am pretty sure is the only pro ride track in america, is based there year round, the only other horse in the race that is based there was colonel john (who is not good)


yet you watn to talk about advantages.

Paceadvantage is right, you can't have a realistic discussion until that fact is ackwledged. it's not freaking dirt. it's not created equal.

i'm not even saying she shouldnt'g et HOY. i'm saying you just can't ignore that one fact like jess jackson just decided not tos end her to another dirt track or something.

all weekend long we saw prestious preps like the champaigne, the frizette and the jockey club gold cup rendered usless, but there is no advantage.

of course she had a damn advantage. half her damn wins came over the track, she trains there half the year and has ever since they put the stuff in and a jockey that rides there year round.. but no advantage.

[MickJ26]

If you go resume vs. resume, you can make arguments for and against. For me, the biggest difference is Rachel is a 3yo filly and Zenyatta is a 5yo mare. I love them both and they both deserve HOY. Of course all horses develop differently, but, at this point in Rachel's life, Zenyatta was getting ready to make her first start. Can you imagine what Rachel would do if she was still running at 5yo? I think logically speaking, Rachel's accomplishments stand out more. Just my opinion.

[Moyers Pond]

The biggest race in the world is the Dubai World Cup. I don't remember Zenyatta running there.

No, that would be the richest race in the world. And it is by invitation. You don't even have to earn your way in.

In the pecking order of the biggest races in the world the Dubai World Cup is not even top 3.

[46zilzal]

No, that would be the richest race in the world. And it is by invitation. You don't even have to earn your way in.

In the pecking order of the biggest races in the world the Dubai World Cup is not even top 3.
Agreed, after the top four or five the rest of those fields are there just to fill the race., unlike the Arc or the Melbourne Cup, Japan Cup and a few others

[Moyers Pond]

If you go resume vs. resume, you can make arguments for and against. For me, the biggest difference is Rachel is a 3yo filly and Zenyatta is a 5yo mare. I love them both and they both deserve HOY. Of course all horses develop differently, but, at this point in Rachel's life, Zenyatta was getting ready to make her first start. Can you imagine what Rachel would do if she was still running at 5yo? I think logically speaking, Rachel's accomplishments stand out more. Just my opinion.

Age means little. Often horses are better at 3 than they are at 4 or 5. It all depends on the horse.

They both don't deserve HOY though. The undefeated horse that won the biggest race of the year is HOY. Pretty simple. Just my opinion too.

[toussaud]

No, that would be the richest race in the world. And it is by invitation. You don't even have to earn your way in.

In the pecking order of the biggest races in the world the Dubai World Cup is not even top 3.

yeah it kinda is.

and if you go by biggest races, the breeders cup isn't the biggest. it's the arc. get your facts striahgt. it's been aorund longer, gets bigger fields and pays more.

[Tom]

Kudos to both owners/trainers for managing their horses the way they felt was best for THEM and not giving a hoot about stupid stuff like this.
Both are deserving of HOY and we should be thankful we got to watch both all year long and maybe will see them next year.

Bringing Rachael out west after what she accomplished as a 3yo would have been an airhead move.

The only message we should be sending out is do we really NEED a breeder's cup Think it has hurt the fall racing more than helped it.

[Moyers Pond]

yeah it kinda is.

and if you go by biggest races, the breeders cup isn't the biggest. it's the arc. get your facts striahgt. it's been aorund longer, gets bigger fields and pays more.

The ARC is not as big as the BC Classic. Ask Coolmore, Godolphin, or any big owner.


Do yourself a favor and look at the BC Classic winners over the years vs the winners of other races. It really is not a discussion worth having. The BC Classic winners over the last 25 years are a much more talented group than winners of any other race. It really is not even close. That is why everyone in the world wants to win it.

[toussaud]

The ARC is not as big as the BC Classic. Ask Coolmore, Godolphin, or any big owner.


Do yourself a favor and look at the BC Classic winners over the years vs the winners of other races. It really is not a discussion worth having. The BC Classic winners over the last 25 years are a much more talented group than winners of any other race. It really is not even close. That is why everyone in the world wants to win it.


are you serious?

that doesn't even deserve a response.

[Stillriledup]

Thoroughbred racehorses can only race so many times per year before they're tired and need the rest of the year off. Rachel raced a lot of times and had a hard campaign and needed a long break, she wasn't going to stay in serious training to race in early November, that wouldn't have been smart by anyone's standards.

Zenyatta shouldn't get extra credit because the Breeders Cup committee awarded the BC to Santa ANita a few years ago. That decision to give SA the 2009 BC was made when, in 2006? 2007?

It worked out incredibly perfect, a perfect storm for Zenyatta to have back to back BC's on a surface that she has mastered and the entire world has not.

If the BC was at Churchill this year, things would have been really, really different in how these horses were campaigned and how things shook out at the end.

[SoCalCircuit]

If the BC was at Churchill this year, things would have been really, really different in how these horses were campaigned and how things shook out at the end.

Very true, however, its important to remember that had the BC been on dirt it would have also caused some of the top competitors to not compete, such as RVW and Gio Ponti, so it works in both ways

[toussaud]

considering RVW came in 10th, i would harly call him a top condender

and he would have anyway because coolmore wants that stud money.

[SoCalCircuit]

fair enough, but a turfer and a euro did come in second and third, who likely would have been absent if the BC had been on the dirt. who would have filled their spots? the great macho again? the point is that its a little unfair to say that zenyatta was recipient of a perfect storm via the surface, because that same surface, whether you're a fan on it or not, did attract many admirable opponents who would have been absent had it been on dirt

[reezysrt10]

Age means little. Often horses are better at 3 than they are at 4 or 5. It all depends on the horse.

They both don't deserve HOY though. The undefeated horse that won the biggest race of the year is HOY. Pretty simple. Just my opinion too.

haha age dont matter? ya right

[toussaud]

haha age dont matter? ya right


aaliyah said it best. age ain't nothin but a number

[Cadillakin]

9f or 10f on synthetics is pretty much the same thing.
Baloney! Horses who are unsuited to the distance naturally are greatly disadvantaged by synthetic. I won literally hundreds of bets on fast dirt tracks with horses stretching out to distances that weren't really in their best range. If the track is right, on dirt, horses can do that..

But on synthetic, no f***ing way. If your horse can't stay 9 furlongs on a par pace, he will have NO CHANCE of getting 10.

[toussaud]

fair enough, but a turfer and a euro did come in second and third, who likely would have been absent if the BC had been on the dirt. who would have filled their spots? the great macho again? the point is that its a little unfair to say that zenyatta was recipient of a perfect storm via the surface, because that same surface, whether you're a fan on it or not, did attract many admirable opponents who would have been absent had it been on dirt


who are you to say macho again isn't great?

the only reason he hasn't had a real chance to prove himself as GREAT is beucase of for the last 2 years the world championships have been on a sufrace he's not bred to like whatsoever.
he's a grade 1 winner and multiple grade 1 paced horse on dirt.
macho again and RAHCAEL ALEXANDRA being two. Bullsbay? Asiatic Boy?




Swift Temper (grade 1 winning distaff horse), fabolous strike (multiple grade 1 sprinter), Jackson Bend (would have been a top choice in the j uvenille), Seattle Smooth (grade 1 winning distaff), Hot Dixie Chick (STILL has a good shot at 2YO of the year, world record holder at 5F, munnings (grade 2 sprinter), dublin (hopeful stakes winner), Vineyard Haven (could still be champion sprinter) all said thanks but no thanks becuase of the sufrace. you can probably even add indian blessing.

[Stillriledup]

who are you to say macho again isn't great?

the only reason he hasn't had a real chance to prove himself as GREAT is beucase of for the last 2 years the world championships have been on a sufrace he's not bred to like whatsoever.
he's a grade 1 winner and multiple grade 1 paced horse on dirt.
macho again and RAHCAEL ALEXANDRA being two. Bullsbay? Asiatic Boy?




Swift Temper (grade 1 winning distaff horse), fabolous strike (multiple grade 1 sprinter), Jackson Bend (would have been a top choice in the j uvenille), Seattle Smooth (grade 1 winning distaff), Hot Dixie Chick (STILL has a good shot at 2YO of the year, world record holder at 5F, munnings (grade 2 sprinter), dublin (hopeful stakes winner), Vineyard Haven (could still be champion sprinter) all said thanks but no thanks becuase of the sufrace. you can probably even add indian blessing.


Its like comparing apples and oranges. Zenyatta's style prevents her from ever losing a race because of being compromised by other runners. The only start she was in a position to be compromised was yesterday because the field was big and she being a closer had to worry about traffic.

[toussaud]

Its like comparing apples and oranges. Zenyatta's style prevents her from ever losing a race because of being compromised by other runners. The only start she was in a position to be compromised was yesterday because the field was big and she being a closer had to worry about traffic.


you have not seen all her races, that wasn't even in the top 2 of the races she came close to losing. she won the race at del mar by the hair on her chinny chin chin. i am still not sure she got up.

[Space Monkey]

I have a little different take on this. Rachel got caught in the 3 yr old trap. Forced to peak during the Triple Crown and late summer classics. I have no problem with Jess ending her 3 yr old campaign when he did. But did he do it for the right reason? You don't want to force a horse to go 1 more race than he/she should.

Trainers with older horses can schedule their campaign to peak on the first sat in Nov, BIG DIFFERENCE.

IMO theres no doubt, Zenyatta should be HOY.

Z's 5, RA's 3. Lets see how RA does at 4 and possibly 5. This is Z's time. RA's is next year. Jess has something to prove. He took a stand and it didn't work out. He made a case against synthetics instead of a case against whats good for the horse. He doesn't have to race on poly anymore. Next years BC is at CD. No excuses. Next year will be put up or shut up for Jess more so than RA.

Personally, I hope RA kills them next year. I hope she wins HOY. But not this year.

[kenwoodallpromos]

Well she should have tried the 10f Classic distance in the JCGC instead.

Let's be serious, she took the easier of the two races at Saratoga in the Woodward instead of the Travers, even Jerry Bailey mentioned that yesterday.

She is a great filly, but she never beat anything close to what Zenyatta did yesterday and Zenyatta did it at 10f..
RA avoided classic distance, classic weight, and avoided the now BC Classic winner Z. Yes, IMHO case is closed!

[Stillriledup]

.
RA avoided classic distance, classic weight, and avoided the now BC Classic winner Z. Yes, IMHO case is closed!

You want a 3 yo eastern based filly to fly to the west coast in November to race older makes when she started her year in Feb?

[bane]

RA avoided classic distance, classic weight, and avoided the now BC Classic winner Z. Yes, IMHO case is closed

Yes I agree RA had it very easy by racing on 7 diffrent race diffrent race tracks this year, in 6 diffrent states raced against the boys 3 times. That is worth no merit.

Rachel Alexander and Zenyatta have raced 14 races and RA is not even 4 yet. Yes Zenyatta raced perfect but she was tested truly only once as RA kept going out there. In the new modern era we are sick of seeing horses run every now and then and at least with RA they don't care about being perfect they want to see what she can do... as long as it's dirt.

...It doesn't help that California's racing has just gone down hill but that's the damn goverments fault.

[The Hawk]

Zenyatta is a synthetic-track specialist. We can all agree (I think) that synthetic surfaces CANNOT be lumped in with dirt tracks, so it's essentially a third surface.

In that context: If Zenyatta accomplished what she did this year in turf races, including winning the biggest grass race of the year against the world's best grass horses, does she still deserve HOY over Rachel Alexandra?

[Steve R]

.
RA avoided classic distance, classic weight, and avoided the now BC Classic winner Z. Yes, IMHO case is closed!
I'm sure the folks at Pimlico would be thrilled to hear that you don't consider the Preakness a classic race despite over a century of tradition. And I believe the weight Rachel Alexandra carried in the Preakness was indeed the official weight assigned to fillies in American classic races. Do you even know what the hell you're talking about?

What I find especially fascinating is how early in the year the three-year-old colts were universally considered to be pretty awful and how later in the year the older males were thought of similarly. Yet when Zenyatta defeats those same awful three-year-olds and those same awful older males, suddenly it's magic time. It's interesting, though, that Zenyatta was getting three pounds from Gio Ponti and only beat him a length. Generally, one extra pound at ten furlongs has the effect of slowing a hose by 1/5 of a second, or one length, according to standard formulas used by racing secretaries. Obviously, then, Gio Ponti is two lengths better than Zenyatta, so maybe he should be HOY. Twice Over also gave her three pounds and was beaten 2 1/4 lengths, so he is obviously 3/4 length superior to Zenyatta as well.

[Stillriledup]

If you take away Rachels woodward and Z's BCC and look at the rest of their bodies of work, its not even a comparison. Its pretty obvious that Rachel's non-woodward body of work is far superior to Z's non-BCC body of work.

is the difference between Z's BCC and Rachel's woodward large enough to cancel out the massive advantage Rachel has in her other 7 starts vs Z's other 4 starts?

That's the 64 dollar question.

[ghostyapper]

What I find especially fascinating is how early in the year the three-year-old colts were universally considered to be pretty awful and how later in the year the older males were thought of similarly. Yet when Zenyatta defeats those same awful three-year-olds and those same awful older males, suddenly it's magic time. It's interesting, though, that Zenyatta was getting three pounds from Gio Ponti and only beat him a length. Generally, one extra pound at ten furlongs has the effect of slowing a hose by 1/5 of a second, or one length, according to standard formulas used by racing secretaries. Obviously, then, Gio Ponti is two lengths better than Zenyatta, so maybe he should be HOY. Twice Over also gave her three pounds and was beaten 2 1/4 lengths, so he is obviously 3/4 length superior to Zenyatta as well.

Coming from a guy who kept posting that she was way too slow to ever compete in the race, now you are talking about weight? Why don't you use that scientific weight formula and tell me how many lengths better mtb was than rachel, who he gave 5lbs to in the preakness and lost by LESS than a length?

[cj]

Baloney! Horses who are unsuited to the distance naturally are greatly disadvantaged by synthetic. I won literally hundreds of bets on fast dirt tracks with horses stretching out to distances that weren't really in their best range. If the track is right, on dirt, horses can do that..

But on synthetic, no f***ing way. If your horse can't stay 9 furlongs on a par pace, he will have NO CHANCE of getting 10.

What exactly is a par pace on synthetics? A brisk hotwalk? Now, to be fair, the pace yesterday was decent, but for the most part, they just jog around and fly home in routes. Remember that Blue Grass where that ridiculous sprinter Teufelsberg was beaten like a length. It may as well have been 10 for all the chance he had, but after walking for 6 furlongs, he hung close. That is the "par" for synthetic routes most times.

[cj]

Zenyatta is a synthetic-track specialist. We can all agree (I think) that synthetic surfaces CANNOT be lumped in with dirt tracks, so it's essentially a third surface.

In that context: If Zenyatta accomplished what she did this year in turf races, including winning the biggest grass race of the year against the world's best grass horses, does she still deserve HOY over Rachel Alexandra?

No, not even close.

[SoCalCircuit]

who are you to say macho again isn't great?

the only reason he hasn't had a real chance to prove himself as GREAT is beucase of for the last 2 years the world championships have been on a sufrace he's not bred to like whatsoever.
he's a grade 1 winner and multiple grade 1 paced horse on dirt.

Not to sound like an ass or anything but saying his breeding doesnt like the synthetic is an inaccurate statement. the only reason i mention this is because i was looking at the SA results today and i saw a stakes race was won by kaysandjays, also out of macho uno.

[Stillriledup]

Been doing a lot of thinking about this battle between Rachel fans and Zenyatta fans and its kind of unfair to be posing arguments on the day after one of them won a big race. Lets wait till Jan 1 till the euphoria dies down to reopen this discussion. Too many people not able to think straight after seeing such a stirring performance yesterday. Lets let the excitement die down and we'll look at all the statistics on Jan 1 and see who deserves the Horse of the Year title.

I think that's fair.

[BirdstoneFTW]

I respect that you think Rachel deserves HOY. You can make the argument and it is reasonable. However, you are crazy if you think Zenyatta had a very favorable set up. She had a terrible set up. The pace was not fast at all. She broke dead last and had minor traffic. She still won easily and had a ton of horse left.

And the Woodward was a gutsy race by Rachel, but she beat nothing. Be serious. That was an awful field. Yesterdays field had a bunch of world class horses in it and she blew right by them. She didn't barely hang on against Macho Again.

Even Baffert said it, Zenyatta is HOY.

The guy who hates synthetic touts the horse who has prospered the most from it. :D

[PaceAdvantage]

After yesterday, I don't think I'd ever mention poor Quality Road again. Bless his heart, the horse wants no part of being a racehorse. He needs to be given a wide berth . . . . . like, the state of Montana, maybe would be wide enough.I don't understand how you can come to this conclusion based on one incident. Maybe the horse wasn't feeling well. Maybe somebody did something to piss him off...

I never get why when a horse does something like this, it means he never wants to race again, and never should be allowed to...

[PaceAdvantage]

.
RA avoided classic distance, classic weight, and avoided the now BC Classic winner Z. Yes, IMHO case is closed!The classic distance for a female is not 10f. It is 9f.

Azeri won HOY and NEVER won at 10f (I don't even think she ever tried the distance that year).

[Java Gold@TFT]

The classic distance for a female is not 10f. It is 9f.

Azeri won HOY and NEVER won at 10f (I don't even think she ever tried the distance that year).
And the Classic weight for 3yo fillies is 121 which she carried in the Preakness. As you said 9F is the current standard distance for 3 yo fillies and her two races in that category she won by 20 lengths and 19 1/2 lengths.

As far as the weight Zenyatta had to carry this year just go back and look at the histories of her races that she won this year. They used to be run as handicaps when an older, well qualified mare was expected to give weight based on handicap conditions. I know at least one of those races was changed to weight for age this year so that she wouldn't have to carry the un-godly amount of 128 pounds while nw2x's could get in with 115. Weight for age allowance conditions have been based on the same scale for decades. It was the handicaps that brought weight into consideration. Wait until the weights are announced for the Fall Highweight at Aqu in a few weeks. They used to top out around 140 - 145 but now they top out at 126. Weight has become a joke in racing in the last two decades.

[Moyers Pond]

If you take away Rachels woodward and Z's BCC and look at the rest of their bodies of work, its not even a comparison. Its pretty obvious that Rachel's non-woodward body of work is far superior to Z's non-BCC body of work.

is the difference between Z's BCC and Rachel's woodward large enough to cancel out the massive advantage Rachel has in her other 7 starts vs Z's other 4 starts?

That's the 64 dollar question.

So we are putting the Woodward on par with the biggest race in the world? :lol:

Sorry, but you don't take away wins, especially when one of them was the biggest race of the year against the deepest field in years.

The Woodward was a joke and the filly barely won. Zenyatta basically laughed at more grade 1 winners than have been assembled in a race in decades.

[Grits]

I don't understand how you can come to this conclusion based on one incident. Maybe the horse wasn't feeling well. Maybe somebody did something to piss him off...

I never get why when a horse does something like this, it means he never wants to race again, and never should be allowed to...

Because. He's had gate issues all along. Or, too, there could well have been something wrong with him, and HE knew it. And acting out as badly as he did was his only way of conveying, NO, NO. NOT TODAY. It could've been an ailment, it could've been discomfort and nervousness due to the paddock crowd. Anything.

We don't know. But I do know, I've never seen one get that dangerous behind the gate. He was one powerful animal, and they were barely able to contain him. One kick from those hind legs could have killed a gate crew member. As was stated by others, it became a war of wills. And his won.

[FenceBored]

So we are putting the Woodward on par with the biggest race in the world? :lol:

Sorry, but you don't take away wins, especially when one of them was the biggest race of the year against the deepest field in years.

The Woodward was a joke and the filly barely won. Zenyatta basically laughed at more grade 1 winners than have been assembled in a race in decades.

Do you think that just by repetition you make the Classic the world's biggest race, or this Classic field "the deepest in years?"

There were 9 G1 winners in gate on Saturday for the BC Classic, with the gate scratch of Quality Road. There were 10 G1 winners in the gate for this year's Arc (a race with a bigger purse and more worldwide prestige).

Just in the 3 previous years of the Classic Saturday's numbers weren't remarkable. There were 9 G1 winners in the gate for last year's BC Classic. There were 9 G1 winners in the gate for the 2006 Classic. And in 2007, well, there were only 7 G1 winners, but then again there were only 9 horses in the gate, a higher percentage of G1 winners than this year's renewal.

[Stevie Belmont]

Super article by Ray Kerrison. He hit the nail on the head with this one. They need to find a way to get this done. There no way they can diminish the accomplishments of either horse. They both have done things we might never see again. They put on a show all year and they are both worthy—without a doubt...

It's Dead Heat! Rachel Alexandra and Zenyatta...Both Horses of The Year! — Ray Kerrison Hits A Home Run http://twitzap.com/u/l64 (http://twitzap.com/u/l64)

[Cratos]

Super article by Ray Kerrison. He hit the nail on the head with this one. They need to find a way to get this done. There no way they can diminish the accomplishments of either horse. They both have done things we might never see again. They put on a show all year and they are both worthy—without a doubt...

It's Dead Heat! Rachel Alexandra and Zenyatta...Both Horses of The Year! — Ray Kerrison Hits A Home Run http://twitzap.com/u/l64 (http://twitzap.com/u/l64)

I vehemently disagree with the notion of a co-HOTY award. The award historically has been given to the horse that the HOTY voters felt was deserving of the award and if that is not salutary enough for the nay Sayers on either side of this issue; too bad.

Horseracing is inherently about winning and losing with the exception of the rare dead-heat and even in that situation the competitors meet under similar if not equal conditions to determine the winner.

Also, when the connections of Rachel and Zenyatta had the opportunity during the racing season to match their horses in the same race and they did not for what ever reason.

Therefore you can examine and scrutinize Rachel’s exploits and make a strong case why or why not she should be HOTY. Conversely, the same can be said for the racing record of Zenyatta, and we don’t need an Aldous Huxley dystopian work process to make this decision.

What we need is a decision for the HOTY award going to a single horse and the argument might continue on both sides, but we will live with the decision.

[Jasonm921]

I have a different take on this accomplishment. She is a great horse...no doubt about that but let's stick with reality. She raced on a track that plays extremely favorable to turf runners. Since that is the case it is not uncommon for fillies to beat colts on the turf (hint: see three races earlier...Goldikova). This feat is not the same as a filly/mare doing this in the Breeder's Cup Classic on dirt. I love Gio Ponti. Big fan of the stable and the horse but they worked him on the dirt at Belmont and he couldn't run a lick. But he was the best grass horse in America and ran as such in the Classic. The Dirt horses on the other hand looked lost all day(see D'Funnybone in the Juvenile). Not to take anything away from the mare but it is a bit of smoke and mirrors with not her abililty but the magnitude of the accomplishment. If I were the connections of Zenyatta I would go to the Japan Cup Turf. She would have nothing to lose and could only build on her stature before she says goodbye.

[ghostyapper]

The Dirt horses on the other hand looked lost all day(see D'Funnybone in the Juvenile).

After seeing him at the spa this summer, he was 1 of my favorite 2yo. But I think it's wrong to just blame his performance on the surface. He looked like he was taking to it and around the turn he started making a winning move but as soon as opposition appeared he completely folded.

A bad sign going forward.

[Valuist]

The title of this thread is 100% dead wrong. The wrong message is to give HOY to a horse who raced three times during the year, never left the state of California to a) race on real dirt and b) race with the aid of race day Bute.

Rachel did more work during the YEAR. The award is supposed to be for the year. Not for the first Saturday in November. But seen how messed up the industry is, and the fact that RA is based in KY and not on either Coast, the coastal bias will kick in and Zenyatta will win HOY. I can't believe a fan of the sport would say giving the award to RA would be "sending the wrong message".

[Jasonm921]

But that is how all the dirt to synthetic horses run. They look like they have a shot on the turn and completely fold in the stretch just as Curlin did. Class can only bring them so far. They can't provide that extra kick. This is the same with turf to dirt. Everyone has to stop believing that synthetics are dirt. They are as much a surface change as dirt to turf is. Simple as that. They ran 14 races over the turf this weekend. Take a look at all the dirt horses who ran. Summer Bird (4th) finished the best.

[Stevie Belmont]

Yea the rare exception of dead-heats. You hit the nail on the head buddy..

We have a dead-heat...



I vehemently disagree with the notion of a co-HOTY award. The award historically has been given to the horse that the HOTY voters felt was deserving of the award and if that is not salutary enough for the nay Sayers on either side of this issue; too bad.

Horseracing is inherently about winning and losing with the exception of the rare dead-heat and even in that situation the competitors meet under similar if not equal conditions to determine the winner.

Also, when the connections of Rachel and Zenyatta had the opportunity during the racing season to match their horses in the same race and they did not for what ever reason.

Therefore you can examine and scrutinize Rachel’s exploits and make a strong case why or why not she should be HOTY. Conversely, the same can be said for the racing record of Zenyatta, and we don’t need an Aldous Huxley dystopian work process to make this decision.

What we need is a decision for the HOTY award going to a single horse and the argument might continue on both sides, but we will live with the decision.

[CincyHorseplayer]

If anything and any surface goes,the award should be given to Sea The Stars.

[Stillriledup]

Do you think that just by repetition you make the Classic the world's biggest race, or this Classic field "the deepest in years?"

There were 9 G1 winners in gate on Saturday for the BC Classic, with the gate scratch of Quality Road. There were 10 G1 winners in the gate for this year's Arc (a race with a bigger purse and more worldwide prestige).

Just in the 3 previous years of the Classic Saturday's numbers weren't remarkable. There were 9 G1 winners in the gate for last year's BC Classic. There were 9 G1 winners in the gate for the 2006 Classic. And in 2007, well, there were only 7 G1 winners, but then again there were only 9 horses in the gate, a higher percentage of G1 winners than this year's renewal.


It doesnt matter how many grade 1 winners were in there, they're not synthetic specialists, they werent' at their 'grade 1 form' in there. A grade 1 dirt horse who can't really handle synthetic is just another horse. These are grade one DIRT horses and not grade 1 synthetic horses.

If Mine that bird was put into the BC mile and lost to Goldikova, would we all be saying "goldikova beat a grade 1 winner"? No, we wouldnt say that because MTB isnt a grade 1 turf winner, so we wouldn't be saying goldy beat a grade 1 winner.....but, somehow, we are saying that Z beat grade 1 winners?

[DeanT]

Therefore you can examine and scrutinize Rachel’s exploits and make a strong case why or why not she should be HOTY. Conversely, the same can be said for the racing record of Zenyatta, and we don’t need an Aldous Huxley dystopian work process to make this decision.

I don't know who this Huxley dude is, or what dystopian means, but I agree with your post :)

[Show Me the Wire]

If anything and any surface goes,the award should be given to Sea The Stars.

Not a North American based horse, otherwise a good thought.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Not a North American based horse, otherwise a good thought.


Well OK then.

If were going by how North American horses are classicly judged,then it goes to the best dirt horse in the country.If and only if there is no genuinely accomplished horse on that surface then it goes to the most accomplished turf horse,if none then it would go to the most accomplished horse on the new surface.1 competitive race winners don't qualify.

[Show Me the Wire]

CincyHorseplayer:

You are entitled to your opinion. However, I believe for voting puposes the AWS is considered dirt.

[Stillriledup]

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/horse/breederscup09/columns/story?columnist=finley_bill&id=4633464

[cj]

CincyHorseplayer:

You are entitled to your opinion. However, I believe for voting puposes the AWS is considered dirt.

There are no official rules for such a thing.

[Show Me the Wire]

There are no official rules for such a thing.

When they send out the ballot do you think it is going to have a breakdown like this Dirt, Turf, AWS or just Dirt and Turf?

[cj]

There is not now, and has never been, a specific dirt category.

[Show Me the Wire]

There is not now, and has never been, a specific dirt category.

My point. There is a turf category so by default the only other category must be dirt.

[cj]

Not true at all. All of the "open" awards could have been won by strictly turf horses. Most have...probably not sprinter or 2yo titles because we don't run any races worthy of consideration for those horses, but the rest, sure.

[Show Me the Wire]

Not true at all. All of the "open" awards could have been won by strictly turf horses. Most have...probably not sprinter or 2yo titles because we don't run any races worthy of consideration for those horses, but the rest, sure.

My point is there is a separate category for turf: American Champion Male Turf Horse and American Champion Female Turf Horse.

There are no other major separate catogories based on surface distinction, besides turf.

A voter cannot distinguish between poly form versus dirt form, it is all considered form on dirt or grass. That is it.

[cj]

Ny point is there is a separate category for turf: American Champion Male Turf Horse and American Champion Female Turf Horse.

There are no other major separate catogories based on surface distinction.

A voter cannot distinguish between poly form versus dirt form, it is all considered form on dirt or grass. That is it.

You are fitting the rules to your argument, but that isn't true. There are a couple awards specifically for turf horses, but the other awards are for all surfaces...grass, rubber, dirt, and whatever else might be invented. It doesn't mean a voter can't distinguish between them, of course they can. They have been doing it for years when they give dirt races more credit than turf races.

[Show Me the Wire]

You are fitting the rules to your argument, but that isn't true. There are a couple awards specifically for turf horses, but the other awards are for all surfaces...grass, rubber, dirt, and whatever else might be invented. It doesn't mean a voter can't distinguish between them, of course they can. They have been doing it for years when they give dirt races more credit than turf races.

Read your answer, especially the part I bolded for emphasis. That is the only distinction they can make. If they wanted to make a distinction between dirt and AWS then they would need a category for Champion AWS.

Maintrack is maintrack and turf is turf.

[cj]

Read your answer, especially the part I bolded for emphasis. That is the only distinction they can make. If they wanted to make a distinction between dirt and AWS then they would need a category for Champion AWS.

Maintrack is maintrack and turf is turf.

I disagree, but that is fine. The point is they will do what they want to do anyway, doesn't matter since there are no real rules.

[Valuist]

Show Me the Wire-

When you handicap a race on AWS, do you handicap it the same way you'd handicap a regular dirt race.

I thought not.

[Show Me the Wire]

Show Me the Wire-

When you handicap a race on AWS, do you handicap it the same way you'd handicap a regular dirt race.

I thought not.

Now you are answering the question you posed for me? you answered incorrectly by the way.

Actually I do. I use distance relative to final time with trainer intent in conjunction with class and visual observation of the horse's herd behavior in past races.

To me knowing which horse won't run a lick on the inside is more important than any par or speed figure.

My method works fine for both. Maybe that is why I do not have such major issues with AWS,

[Cratos]

Yea the rare exception of dead-heats. You hit the nail on the head buddy..

We have a dead-heat...

No, we don’t have a dead-heat, we have a decision and that decision is Rachel Alexandra.

Why? Because the vote should not be about the best performance of the year, but which horse through its body of work demonstrated the credentials to be Horse-of-the-Year (HOTY) and that is Rachel

Both Rachel and Zenyatta were undefeated during the 2009 racing season and the equality between them for 2009 stops there because the following illustrates the difference and the reason for Rachel being named my HOTY.

Rachel's 2009 Achievements

Undefeated in all 2009 starts
8 Starts (all but 1 a graded race)
5 G1 stake wins
3 wins against males at the G1 level
First female winner of the Woodward
First female winner of the Preakness

Zenyatta's 2009 Achievements

Undefeated in all 2009 starts
5 Starts (all but 1 a G1 race)
4 G1 stake wins
1 win against males at the G1 level
First female winner of the BC Classic
Won at the 1 ¼ mile distance at G1 Stakes level against males

Other than Zenyatta’s BC Classic win her 2009 performances were pedestrian.

I don’t think this should be a referendum on who is the best horse as the HOTY voters didn’t ascertain in the 1978 HOTY voting between Seattle Slew (who I think is the better horse) and Affirmed.

They named Affirmed HOTY based on which horse’s body of work for that racing season warranted HOTY.

[DRIVEWAY]

No, we don’t have a dead-heat, we have a decision and that decision is Rachel Alexandra.

Why? Because the vote should not be about the best performance of the year, but which horse through its body of work demonstrated the credentials to be Horse-of-the-Year (HOTY) and that is Rachel

Both Rachel and Zenyatta were undefeated during the 2009 racing season and the equality between them for 2009 stops there because the following illustrates the difference and the reason for Rachel being named my HOTY.

Rachel's 2009 Achievements

Undefeated in all 2009 starts
8 Starts (all but 1 a graded race)
5 G1 stake wins
3 wins against males at the G1 level
First female winner of the Woodward
First female winner of the Preakness

Zenyatta's 2009 Achievements

Undefeated in all 2009 starts
5 Starts (all but 1 a G1 race)
4 G1 stake wins
1 win against males at the G1 level
First female winner of the BC Classic
Won at the 1 ¼ mile distance at G1 Stakes level against males

Other than Zenyatta’s BC Classic win her 2009 performances were pedestrian.

I don’t think this should be a referendum on who is the best horse as the HOTY voters didn’t ascertain in the 1978 HOTY voting between Seattle Slew (who I think is the better horse) and Affirmed.

They named Affirmed HOTY based on which horse’s body of work for that racing season warranted HOTY.

If you can include the Mother Goose as a Grade 1 victory for RA, please don't refer to any of Zenyatta's Grade 1's as pedestrian.

Zenyatta won the BC Classic at 10 FL vs. some of the best horses in training.
She put her reputation on the line. 11% of the pace advantage participants voted her as the winner of the Classic. 89% thought she would not.
That's a high risk and high reward situation.

RA ran once against older males. The field was sooo weak that she was installed as the overwhelming 1/5 favorite. Not a high risk situation. Then when Calvin beat the hell out of her to hold on by a head, Jackson started making excuses. Not a high reward situation.

The eclipse award voters make their choice in December. It won't be that close.

[cj]

Cratos is spot on. The full body of work isn't close.

[Vinnie]

All of the hoopla and ballyhoo aside, this is what it essentially comes down to and that is the "body of work" for the year 2009. I love Zenyatta, but, it isn't even close with RA winning HOY by a comfortable margin.

[46zilzal]

All of the hoopla and ballyhoo aside, this is what it essentially comes down to and that is the "body of work" for the year 2009. I love Zenyatta, but, it isn't even close with RA winning HOY by a comfortable margin.
IF you voted, you could express that. But you don't vote

[W2G]

All of the hoopla and ballyhoo aside, this is what it essentially comes down to and that is the "body of work" for the year 2009. I love Zenyatta, but, it isn't even close with RA winning HOY by a comfortable margin.

I couldn't agree more. Put their 2009 PPs side-by-side and there really isn't much to debate. Throw in speed figures and the decision becomes even easier. And the voters will ultimately come to this conclusion. Rachel earned it.

That said, I still advocate that HoY goes to both. Zenyatta is too talented and a true champion in her own way. She could only run in the races her connections chose to. We'll always wonder what she was capable of doing outside of Los Angeles County. They never got to the bottom of her. Her name deserves to be on the list of Horses of the Year.

[Cadillakin]

All of the hoopla and ballyhoo aside, this is what it essentially comes down to and that is the "body of work" for the year 2009. I love Zenyatta, but, it isn't even close with RA winning HOY by a comfortable margin.
I understand your point, and if I didn't think Zenyatta was the better horse, I'd probably agree with you.. But there is no such criteria as "body of work." Grass horses have won HOY. 2 year olds have won HOY. Curlin won HOY last year with only 7 starts, losing two. Goldikova will win champion turf miler with only one race in America.. Summer Bird will win 3 year old colt, although he only won one stakes race on a fast track - all the others were in the slop.. Gio Ponti will win Champion Turf Horse and is probably the favorite to win the championship for older males - although he never set foot on a dirt track... etc...

The criteria rests solely in the mind of the voter. We have to accept that.

[ghostyapper]

Throw in speed figures and the decision becomes even easier. And the voters will ultimately come to this conclusion. to the bottom of her. Her name deserves to be on the list of Horses of the Year.

The same speed figures that said zenyatta simply wasn't fast enough to compete with males or win the breeders cup classic?

The same one's that said she was lost a step from last year but then runs a lifetime best in her final race?

[Vinnie]

I expressed my opinion anyhow and I believe that I am entitled to it. It just so happens to be the most logical choice in this matter.

[Vinnie]

I understand your point, and if I didn't think Zenyatta was the better horse, I'd probably agree with you.. But there is no such criteria as "body of work." Grass horses have won HOY. 2 year olds have won HOY. Curlin won HOY last year with only 7 starts, losing two. Goldikova will win champion turf miler with only one race in America.. Summer Bird will win 3 year old colt, although he only won one stakes race on a fast track - all the others were in the slop.. Gio Ponti will win Champion Turf Horse and is probably the favorite to win the championship for older males - although he never set foot on a dirt track... etc...

The criteria rests solely in the mind of the voter. We have to accept that.

I very much agree with your eloquent post. It is really too bad that both of these incredible horses had to come along within approximately the same time frame becuase it most definitely makes things a bit tough.

[11cashcall]

Do you think that just by repetition you make the Classic the world's biggest race, or this Classic field "the deepest in years?"

There were 9 G1 winners in gate on Saturday for the BC Classic, with the gate scratch of Quality Road. There were 10 G1 winners in the gate for this year's Arc (a race with a bigger purse and more worldwide prestige).

Just in the 3 previous years of the Classic Saturday's numbers weren't remarkable. There were 9 G1 winners in the gate for last year's BC Classic. There were 9 G1 winners in the gate for the 2006 Classic. And in 2007, well, there were only 7 G1 winners, but then again there were only 9 horses in the gate, a higher percentage of G1 winners than this year's renewal.

The field had a total of 18 Gr.1/Group 1 wins among them not count Gr.2 or Gr.3 races

Had RA ran in the race and won it would have been considered the Greatest Feat of all Time.

[Sericm]

If you are a handicapper you should be able to handicap ALL SURFACES!
Don't complain because you can't figure out the synthetics.

Einstein came west and won the Santa Anita Handicap (synthetic).
Zenyatta went to Oaklawn and won the Apple Blossom (dirt).
Colonel John went east and won the Travers (dirt).
Rachel won at Keenland (a synthetic track).

All this b.s. you Eastern guys lay out is just that B.S.
All of a sudden Gio Ponti, Einstein, Twice Over, Summer Bird, Colonel John, etc.
made up one of the weakest Breeders cups is b.S. There were horses that won 17 Grade 1's in that race not counting Zenyatta's.
Zenyatta's win over Ginger Punch is now categorized as nothing more than beating a plodder. What a bunch of crap.

The Breeders cup was devised as Racings Championship day.
For Jackson to ignore that is a disgrace. He took his horse and hid.

Show up on Championship day or shut up!

Sericm

[Show Me the Wire]

....there really isn't much to debate. Throw in speed figures and the decision becomes even easier. And the voters will ultimately come to this conclusion. Rachel earned it.



Really, what do speed figures have to do with anything? Remember the easiest way to win a race is being in front and front runner's, due to their style, earn higher speed figs. Beyer, himself had this revelation and that is why he modified his thinking and admitted the trip impacts the final figure.

[Steve R]

The field had a total of 18 Gr.1/Group 1 wins among them not count Gr.2 or Gr.3 races

Had RA ran in the race and won it would have been considered the Greatest Feat of all Time.
Perhaps on a par with Zarkava's Arc win, but certainly not with Sea Bird's Arc or Secretariat's Belmont.

[W2G]

The same speed figures that said zenyatta simply wasn't fast enough to compete with males or win the breeders cup classic?

The same one's that said she was lost a step from last year but then runs a lifetime best in her final race?

Yes, those ones. I'm just suggesting another piece of information that voters, both sophisticated and unsophisticated, may choose to examine.

BTW, I'm certain that at this point in time under certain conditions Zen is a superior horse to RA, and vice versa. But that's an entirely different argument than choosing one or the other as HoY, if we must choose.

[Steve R]

Really, what do speed figures have to do with anything? Remember the easiest way to win a race is being in front and front runner's, due to their style, earn higher speed figs. Beyer, himself had this revelation and that is why he modified his thinking and admitted the trip impacts the final figure.
Traditional speed figures rely on final time, don't they? Can you explain how a horse running on the front end changes that? Also, the figure purveyors who apply lost ground algorithms favor the come-from-behind horses that have to go wide on turns, so they often get better numbers than the winners if they finish relatively close.

[Show Me the Wire]

Traditional speed figures rely on final time, don't they? Can you explain how a horse running on the front end changes that? Also, the figure purveyors who apply lost ground algorithms favor the come-from-behind horses that have to go wide on turns, so they often get better numbers than the winners if they finish relatively close.

Ever hear a person say a horse gets brave on the lead? Ask Len Friedman, Jerry Brown or Beyer there better suited to explain it to you why fron runners can earn higher or inflated figures.

CJ, I respect your opinion. Do you think it is easier for front runners to earn inflated figures?

[Steve R]

The same speed figures that said zenyatta simply wasn't fast enough to compete with males or win the breeders cup classic?

The same one's that said she was lost a step from last year but then runs a lifetime best in her final race?
Not entirely true, and not all figures. You can verify, if you like, my publicly available figures that show she ran the equivalent of a Beyer 113 in last year's Hirsch and 112 in the Apple Blossom. I assigned her a 111 for the Classic. In fact, going into the Classic only one starter had a higher lifetime figure on dirt or an AWS. From my perspective she did in fact run back to her best prior efforts which she had not done in her prior races this year.

If the pars are correct and the variant calculation is accurate, figures based on time and distance are an excellent expression of physiological output. No one, not even someone who creates figures, says they encompass everything that determines the outcome of a particular race. Horses can step up to competition or they can be intimidated. They can favor a particular surface or they can flounder on it. They can have ideal trips or disastrous ones. But properly constructed figures do tell you how fast a horse ran on a given occasion. How one chooses to use that information is up to the individual, but dismissing them out of hand is like (political comments deleted)

[Cratos]

If you can include the Mother Goose as a Grade 1 victory for RA, please don't refer to any of Zenyatta's Grade 1's as pedestrian.

Zenyatta won the BC Classic at 10 FL vs. some of the best horses in training.
She put her reputation on the line. 11% of the pace advantage participants voted her as the winner of the Classic. 89% thought she would not.
That's a high risk and high reward situation.

RA ran once against older males. The field was sooo weak that she was installed as the overwhelming 1/5 favorite. Not a high risk situation. Then when Calvin beat the hell out of her to hold on by a head, Jackson started making excuses. Not a high reward situation.

The eclipse award voters make their choice in December. It won't be that close.


I share your sentiment about Zenyatta’s BC Classic performance, but the vote is not about “best performance of the year;” it is about Horse-of-the-Year.

Before the race I was one of the 89% that thought she would not win the BC classic and posted such on this forum, but let’s keep the statistics correct because if we use the money wagered on BC Classic as a barometer of the BC bettors sentiment about whether Zenyatta would win or lose the Classic, the percent would be 26.3% which was higher than any other entrant in the BC Classic.

I referred to Zenyatta’s other races as “pedestrian” because although she won them with ease (except the Clement Hirsch Stakes at De Mar) I didn’t find her performance in them to be extraordinary or exceptional.

I don’t understand your comment about Rachel’s Mother Goose performance because it was quality in every sense of the word regardless of who was in the race with her. In that race, Lotta Cash was in the lead at the 6f with a time of 1:08.86 and Rachel caught her between the 6f and 1m points of the race and ran the 1 1/8 mile distance in 1:46.33 with her final eighth mile of the race being run in 12.73 seconds.

I realize that some will say that Rachel “ducked” the BC Classic when her connections, Stonestreet Stables shut her down for the 2009 season in September, but the same “ducking” can be said of Zenyatta when her owner, Jerry Moss had the opportunity to showcase his prized race mare in some other big races during the 2009 campaign and he didn’t do it. There were the JCGC, the Beldame, and the Pacific Classic to name a few that Zenyatta didn’t run in.

Again, the HOTY vote should not be about the single “best performance” of 2009, but the best “body of work” in 2009.

[ghostyapper]

Not entirely true, and not all figures. You can verify, if you like, my publicly available figures that show she ran the equivalent of a Beyer 113 in last year's Hirsch and 112 in the Apple Blossom. I assigned her a 111 for the Classic. In fact, going into the Classic only one starter had a higher lifetime figure on dirt or an AWS. From my perspective she did in fact run back to her best prior efforts which she had not done in her prior races this year.
.

You have still not addressed how all your post race logic in why she won led you to believe and state empatically BEFORE the race that she wasn't even a contender. Now you are just trying to retrofit everything to sound smart. Lest we forget

My own figures confirm she is not a Classic contender

[the_fat_man]

You have still not addressed how all your post race logic in why she won led you to believe and state empatically BEFORE the race that she wasn't even a contender. Now you are just trying to retrofit everything to sound smart. Lest we forget

This type of SPIN must be innate to all FIGURE MAKERS. They're left looking the other way as to the ability of a TRULY GOOD HORSE, OBVIOUS to just about everyone else, then try to make it about:

1) their figures really showed she was this good (which ones? last year's version or the tweaked one this year?)
2) they didn't bet because there was no value
3) her figures on POLY were the best in the race
etc.

This after thinking that she was no better than good enough to beat up on high priced claimers. :lol:

How the **** do they find the balls to show up AFTER the fact and try this shit? It's EMBARRASSING.

I slapped Steve on ignore after reading his 2nd post. Just so much raw split crunching I can stand. Hard to believe people still think they can win this way, and this way only. The opinions that follow from it speak for themselves. :rolleyes:

In another thread, the dude is trying to compare the past 2 CLASSICS based on splits alone. :lol:

[Steve R]

Ever hear a person say a horse gets brave on the lead? Ask Len Friedman, Jerry Brown or Beyer there better suited to explain it to you why fron runners can earn higher or inflated figures.

CJ, I respect your opinion. Do you think it is easier for front runners to earn inflated figures?
What exactly is an inflated figure? Don't figures simply correlate with the time it took to cover a certain distance under the particular race conditions? I suppose if the same conditions showed up in the horse's next start, there is a good chance its figure would be inflated again. In fact, imagine a horse so fast that it got a clear lead in virtually every start and won wire-to-wire each time (you know, like Dr. Fager or Spend a Buck). Were their figures inflated, meaning were they not really as good as they appeared? There are horses that win consistently in fast times and there those that win consistently in times not quite so fast. I think most handicappers would agree that of two horses with equivalent class, you would favor the one that was demonstrably faster.

To me, saying a horse has an inflated figure is another way of saying "I don't understand how he ran so fast." Whether one understands it or not, the physical reality is that the horse got from point A to point B in X minutes and Y seconds. It's a fact and it addresses the limits of the horse's physiology and biomechanics.

[dartman51]

The biggest race in the world is the Dubai World Cup. I don't remember Zenyatta running there.

I'm sure you would get some arguement on that. I believe (don't know for a fact), that given a choice which race they would rather win, the Dubai World Cup or the Kentucky Derby, most would say, the Derby.

[Show Me the Wire]

Steve R

Read Beyer's book.

[ezrabrooks]

Not true at all. All of the "open" awards could have been won by strictly turf horses. Most have...probably not sprinter or 2yo titles because we don't run any races worthy of consideration for those horses, but the rest, sure.

Charismatic over Artax...

[Steve R]

You have still not addressed how all your post race logic in why she won led you to believe and state empatically BEFORE the race that she wasn't even a contender. Now you are just trying to retrofit everything to sound smart. Lest we forget
Retrofit what? I simply didn't consider her a play under the race conditions. Figures, mine and everyone else's, are only part of the equation, albeit a significant one. When I looked at her patterns for this year, she came up way short, so I tossed her. That has nothing to do with whether or not her best lifetime figures met the challenge. At least mine put her right at the top even if Beyer's and BRIS' didn't. I downplayed any possible pedigree advantage for added distance because others were already proven at 10f and she wasn't. Never having faced males was another issue. I should have but didn't throw out the horses unproven on AWS. That would have narrowed the options. Regardless, in one post I believe I did say she was playable at 8-1 or 10-1. I'm sorry you misinterpreted the "not a contender" term. If a horse is in a race it's a contender. But on my list she was no better than fifth or sixth choice and since I don't generally bet 5 or 6 horses she was not a contender. The result doesn't change the way the available information was originally processed.

I probably overestimated the quality of the competition and should have paid more attention to the turf media which all year long was saying how much the three-year-old division and older male division sucked. I didn't agree.

I underestimated the impact of the racing surface. Included in my published short list of selections for the various BC races were 4 of the 6 turf winners and just 1 of the 8 AWS winners. In that regard, I put too much faith in Rip Van Winkle and Mastercraftsman being able to reproduce their turf from on the synthetic surface.

As for post-race logic, I'll emphasize again that I assigned her the best AWS figure in the whole BC, so I fail to see how that could be interpreted as downgrading her performance. It was clearly an exceptional effort. That said, her winning the race doesn't automatically make her the greatest thing since sliced bread. I still believe Rachel Alexandra accomplished more facing a more diverse set of challenges and did it running faster. Zenyatta, my choice for HoY last year over Curlin, represents the classic "what have you done for me lately" mentality. Horses have had extended winning streaks and females have defeated males in Grade 1 races at classic distances many times. What Rachel Alexandra did in 2009 had never been done in the entire history of American Thoroughbred racing.

[Steve R]

Steve R

Read Beyer's book.
I've read all of Beyer's books many times in the last 30 years and I've known him almost as long. What I interpret he means about front running horses is this, quoted from "Beyer On Speed" (1993): "When a horse is able to take a clear early lead, running at a moderate or slow pace, he will almost always earn the best speed figure of which he is capable." The key phrase is "of which he is capable." The reference is to the horse's ultimate ability. I haven't seen anything saying come-from-behind horses can't also earn the best speed figure of which they are capable. And the best figure a horse is capable of earning, regardless of the circumstances, in not inflated. It is only what his body allows him to do.

[toussaud]

HRTV has become a 24 x 7 zenyatta HOY campaign

after the breeders cup they go and ask the "expert trainers" who they think should be HOY. yes, let's go on the backstrech of santa anita park and see if we can get a reall non baised opinion.

[Show Me the Wire]

I've read all of Beyer's books many times in the last 30 years and I've known him almost as long. What I interpret he means about front running horses is this, quoted from "Beyer On Speed" (1993): "When a horse is able to take a clear early lead, running at a moderate or slow pace, he will almost always earn the best speed figure of which he is capable." The key phrase is "of which he is capable." The reference is to the horse's ultimate ability. I haven't seen anything saying come-from-behind horses can't also earn the best speed figure of which they are capable. And the best figure a horse is capable of earning, regardless of the circumstances, in not inflated. It is only what his body allows him to do.

Okay. Say hi to Mr. Beyer for me. I admire his groundbreaking work.

[Stillriledup]

I share your sentiment about Zenyatta’s BC Classic performance, but the vote is not about “best performance of the year;” it is about Horse-of-the-Year.

Before the race I was one of the 89% that thought she would not win the BC classic and posted such on this forum, but let’s keep the statistics correct because if we use the money wagered on BC Classic as a barometer of the BC bettors sentiment about whether Zenyatta would win or lose the Classic, the percent would be 26.3% which was higher than any other entrant in the BC Classic.

I referred to Zenyatta’s other races as “pedestrian” because although she won them with ease (except the Clement Hirsch Stakes at De Mar) I didn’t find her performance in them to be extraordinary or exceptional.

I don’t understand your comment about Rachel’s Mother Goose performance because it was quality in every sense of the word regardless of who was in the race with her. In that race, Lotta Cash was in the lead at the 6f with a time of 1:08.86 and Rachel caught her between the 6f and 1m points of the race and ran the 1 1/8 mile distance in 1:46.33 with her final eighth mile of the race being run in 12.73 seconds.

I realize that some will say that Rachel “ducked” the BC Classic when her connections, Stonestreet Stables shut her down for the 2009 season in September, but the same “ducking” can be said of Zenyatta when her owner, Jerry Moss had the opportunity to showcase his prized race mare in some other big races during the 2009 campaign and he didn’t do it. There were the JCGC, the Beldame, and the Pacific Classic to name a few that Zenyatta didn’t run in.

Again, the HOTY vote should not be about the single “best performance” of 2009, but the best “body of work” in 2009.


Cratos, i have to respectfully disagree with your eloquent points. I believe the Horse of the year should be based strictly on emotion and facts be damned. Who needs facts and stats anyway, they're just a burden and a nuisance. Zenyatta ducked nobody, she toured the USA and defeated males on three different surfaces. She won more races in 2009 than Rachel did also while Rachel sat at Oaklawn park and beat tomato cans, never venturing out to race at any other tracks/curcuits. I know that Rachel won Oaklawn's signature race against a European Turf horse with bad feet and an over the top Derby winner, and that should be good enough. Taking on all comers like Zenyatta did trumps anything that Rachel did, especially since Zenyatta won three more races than Rachel did on the season.

So there.

[Cratos]

Cratos, i have to respectfully disagree with your eloquent points. I believe the Horse of the year should be based strictly on emotion and facts be damned. Who needs facts and stats anyway, they're just a burden and a nuisance. Zenyatta ducked nobody, she toured the USA and defeated males on three different surfaces. She won more races in 2009 than Rachel did also while Rachel sat at Oaklawn park and beat tomato cans, never venturing out to race at any other tracks/curcuits. I know that Rachel won Oaklawn's signature race against a European Turf horse with bad feet and an over the top Derby winner, and that should be good enough. Taking on all comers like Zenyatta did trumps anything that Rachel did, especially since Zenyatta won three more races than Rachel did on the season.

So there.

“Zenyatta ducked nobody; she toured the USA and defeated males on three different surfaces”

“She won more races in 2009 than Rachel did also while Rachel sat at Oaklawn park and beat tomato cans, never venturing out to race at any other tracks/circuits.”

“Taking on all comers like Zenyatta did trumps anything that Rachel did, especially since Zenyatta won three more races than Rachel did on the season.”

Please explain the “facts” behind your above assertions. I don’t have a problem with you believing that Zenyatta should be Horse-of-the-Year, but I do have a problem with your fallacious assertions.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Cratos, i have to respectfully disagree with your eloquent points. I believe the Horse of the year should be based strictly on emotion and facts be damned. Who needs facts and stats anyway, they're just a burden and a nuisance...

I think you simply overlooked the most relevant quotes in the post.

[badcompany]

The Zenyatta groupies want to have it both ways. They cite all the Grade 1 winners in the Classic and that the pace wasn't fast, making Zenyatta's accomplishment more impressive.

However, there's one little fly in the oinment. The horses that were sitting 1st thru 4th at the 1/2 finished the race 8th, 10th, 5th and 11th.

If the pace wasn't fast, then why weren't any of these Grade 1 killers around at the end?

[Steve R]

The Zenyatta groupies want to have it both ways. They cite all the Grade 1 winners in the Classic and that the pace wasn't fast, making Zenyatta's accomplishment more impressive.

However, there's one little fly in the oinment. The horses that were sitting 1st thru 4th at the 1/2 finished the race 8th, 10th, 5th and 11th.

If the pace wasn't fast, then why weren't any of these Grade 1 killers around at the end?
Virtually identical to last year when the early pace was just a tick faster at :47.3, 1:11.3 vs this year's :47.4, 1:11.4. In 2008 the horses 1 through 4 after a half mile finished 12, 10, 5, 9. One difference is the final time last year of 1:59.1 and Raven's Pass' closing half mile in :46.0 even though he was five wide through the final turn.

[Cratos]

I think you simply overlooked the most relevant quotes in the post.

No, I did not because many years ago when I was taking a course in “Logic” in college I was taught and understood that you can’t draw a true conclusion from a false premise and conversely you can’t make a true premise to a false conclusion.

Therefore if the premise is “I believe the Horse of the year should be based strictly on emotion and facts be damned. Who needs facts and stats anyway; they're just a burden and a nuisance...”

Then why support that premise with following false conclusions:

“Zenyatta ducked nobody; she toured the USA and defeated males on three different surfaces”

“She won more races in 2009 than Rachel did also while Rachel sat at Oaklawn park and beat tomato cans, never venturing out to race at any other tracks/circuits.”

“Taking on all comers like Zenyatta did trumps anything that Rachel did, especially since Zenyatta won three more races than Rachel did on the season.”

They are all false because Zenyatta did not tour the USA, she did win more races than Rachel did in 2009, and she certainly did not take on all “comers.”

[johnhannibalsmith]

Well then, I stand corrected. I merely didn't want you to get too confused, as I did initially, if you had simply missed the disclaimer preceding all of the 'facts'. I also then didn't find the post very logical, but I admit, I simply supposed the author wasn't intending to be logical, but rather silly/humorous. Again, my humble apologies and thank you for the well thought out reply.

[Stillriledup]

The Zenyatta groupies want to have it both ways. They cite all the Grade 1 winners in the Classic and that the pace wasn't fast, making Zenyatta's accomplishment more impressive.

However, there's one little fly in the oinment. The horses that were sitting 1st thru 4th at the 1/2 finished the race 8th, 10th, 5th and 11th.

If the pace wasn't fast, then why weren't any of these Grade 1 killers around at the end?


Closers dominate on synthetic going a route of ground, this is one of the main reasons why Z is undefeated.

[ghostyapper]

Horses have had extended winning streaks and females have defeated males in Grade 1 races at classic distances many times. What Rachel Alexandra did in 2009 had never been done in the entire history of American Thoroughbred racing.

This is what you rachel drones don't seem to get, that it makes you look so petty by just saying females have beat males at 10 furlongs in G1's. This wasn't only a G1 it was the 5 MILLION DOLLAR BREEDERS CUP CLASSIC. The derby is the only more prestigious (though not better judge of talent) race in america and rachel did not run in that race.

You also like to bring up how raven's pass ran a better race last year than zenyatta this year to try and diminish her.

But I must ask you how come you never bring up rachel's woodward performance in relation to previous runnings? She doesn't beat Curlin and I think she gets drowned by the likes of Ghostzapper, St. Liam, Lawyer Ron, Commentator, Mineshaft. So lets say she caught a break and this was an unusually weak field for the woodward, making her "historic" campaign a little less impressive. That leaves us with her winning the preakness and haskell. Neither race is even in the top 3 as far as prestigious races for 3yo go and neither field was particularly loaded with talent.

The way you are judging zenyatta's campaign can be used with rachel and her campaign doesn't come out looking as impressive as "doing things not done in the history of racing"

[Stillriledup]

This is what you rachel drones don't seem to get, that it makes you look so petty by just saying females have beat males at 10 furlongs in G1's. This wasn't only a G1 it was the 5 MILLION DOLLAR BREEDERS CUP CLASSIC. The derby is the only more prestigious (though not better judge of talent) race in america and rachel did not run in that race.

You also like to bring up how raven's pass ran a better race last year than zenyatta this year to try and diminish her.

But I must ask you how come you never bring up rachel's woodward performance in relation to previous runnings? She doesn't beat Curlin and I think she gets drowned by the likes of Ghostzapper, St. Liam, Lawyer Ron, Commentator, Mineshaft. So lets say she caught a break and this was an unusually weak field for the woodward, making her "historic" campaign a little less impressive. That leaves us with her winning the preakness and haskell. Neither race is even in the top 3 as far as prestigious races for 3yo go and neither field was particularly loaded with talent.

The way you are judging zenyatta's campaign can be used with rachel and her campaign doesn't come out looking as impressive as "doing things not done in the history of racing"


3 year olds get benefits of the doubt because of age. This is like saying that a Mc Donalds All American isnt' a good basketball player because he can't play in the NBA at the moment.

Rachel only didn't run in the Ky Derby because she wasn't owned by her current owner. If JJ owns her she runs in the derby and wins by open lengths. She did the next best thing, she ran in the Preakness vs the Derby winner and clobbered him.

[PaceAdvantage]

This type of SPIN must be innate to all FIGURE MAKERS. They're left looking the other way as to the ability of a TRULY GOOD HORSE, OBVIOUS to just about everyone else, then try to make it about:

1) their figures really showed she was this good (which ones? last year's version or the tweaked one this year?)
2) they didn't bet because there was no value
3) her figures on POLY were the best in the race
etc.

This after thinking that she was no better than good enough to beat up on high priced claimers. :lol:

How the **** do they find the balls to show up AFTER the fact and try this shit? It's EMBARRASSING.

I slapped Steve on ignore after reading his 2nd post. Just so much raw split crunching I can stand. Hard to believe people still think they can win this way, and this way only. The opinions that follow from it speak for themselves. :rolleyes:

In another thread, the dude is trying to compare the past 2 CLASSICS based on splits alone. :lol:You really need to dial down the rhetoric...you were kicked off once, way back when, and you recently asked to come back...

Because I've always liked some of the things you've had to say in the past (just not the WAY you say them), I welcomed you back...but this is the same ol' shit from last time....

[ghostyapper]

3 year olds get benefits of the doubt because of age. This is like saying that a Mc Donalds All American isnt' a good basketball player because he can't play in the NBA at the moment.

Rachel only didn't run in the Ky Derby because she wasn't owned by her current owner. If JJ owns her she runs in the derby and wins by open lengths. She did the next best thing, she ran in the Preakness vs the Derby winner and clobbered him.

Hmm I like your argument for rachel and the derby. In fact I like it so much I am gonna use it for zenyatta and say had she run in the SA handicap and Pacific Classic she would have won, thus she beat males 3 times, not 1.

I was also wondering if you can help me come up for an adjective for what zenyatta did to the derby winner if beating him by a diminishing length was "clobbering"

[ghostyapper]

3 year olds get benefits of the doubt because of age. This is like saying that a Mc Donalds All American isnt' a good basketball player because he can't play in the NBA at the moment.


Got it. So that means we should crown the mcdonalds all american nba champion? :confused:

[nijinski]

Five ties from 1949 to 1970 , and with two outstamding females now, it shouldn't be a problem.

[Steve R]

This is what you rachel drones don't seem to get, that it makes you look so petty by just saying females have beat males at 10 furlongs in G1's. This wasn't only a G1 it was the 5 MILLION DOLLAR BREEDERS CUP CLASSIC. The derby is the only more prestigious (though not better judge of talent) race in america and rachel did not run in that race.

You also like to bring up how raven's pass ran a better race last year than zenyatta this year to try and diminish her.

But I must ask you how come you never bring up rachel's woodward performance in relation to previous runnings? She doesn't beat Curlin and I think she gets drowned by the likes of Ghostzapper, St. Liam, Lawyer Ron, Commentator, Mineshaft. So lets say she caught a break and this was an unusually weak field for the woodward, making her "historic" campaign a little less impressive. That leaves us with her winning the preakness and haskell. Neither race is even in the top 3 as far as prestigious races for 3yo go and neither field was particularly loaded with talent.

The way you are judging zenyatta's campaign can be used with rachel and her campaign doesn't come out looking as impressive as "doing things not done in the history of racing"
Once again, the logic that leads you to some of your conclusions about what I wrote continues to amaze. By saying I think Rachel Alexandra is a better horse and by saying I thought Raven's Pass's performance was superior, I am diminishing Zenyatta? I don't think so. I'm putting her in perspective as I see it, not how you think it should be. For the third time, and it's been on my web site since Saturday, hers was the best performance on AWS in the BC. For the umpteenth time I am telling you she was my choice last year for HotY. I don't feel a bit of anxiety over my evaluation of her before or after the BC Classic.

I'll put Rachel Alexandra's campaign in perspective this way, by using my figures that have been published for the last 11 years. My figures, unlike Beyer's and others', are not simple speed figures. They incorporate the pace of the race into a single final figure, in effect making the number more akin to an overall energy output than to a final time. It's more like "how good was the race?", not simply "how fast was the race?". Many people get it, some don't. I do use pace line variants in much the same way others use final time variants. However, my variants are not simply daily averages or clustered averages during the day. In the real world, track conditions are changing dynamically all the time and there are occasions (which I can document) when it can be shown that the variant changes from race to race. With that as background I will say, not unexpectedly, that I have absolute faith that the figures I generate are an accurate reflection of the quality of a race on a given day. Whether you can accept that or not is of no concern to me.

According to me, and over the last 11 years, Rachel Alexandra ran the best Kentucky Oaks (by the equivalent of over 4 lengths), the fifth best Preakness (the equivalent of 4 lengths behind Smarty Jones), the best Haskell (the equivalent of just over a length better than Lion Heart) and the third best Woodward (behind only the extraordinary performances of Ghostzapper and Lawyer Ron and 2 1/2 lengths better than Curlin). Now here's something that will undoubtedly have you claiming I am in a conspiracy with the Racing Post, but these are their evaluations for the Woodwards of the horses mentioned:

Ghostzapper 129 (equal to Rachel Alexandra's Mother Goose and Haskell)
Lawyer Ron 128
Rachel Alexandra, Saint Liam and Mineshaft 125
Curlin 122
Commentator 111

The bottom line is that you can evaluate horses any way you like and I can do the same. Just because you can't refute data and are dismissive of the way others do it, you don't have the high ground on the issue. All I've heard from you are comments equivalent to "he's great", "he stinks", "the race has no prestige", "you make it up", blah, blah, blah. As I alluded to earlier, I have never read anything from you where you at least try to back up your assertions with data rather than opinion. If you don't like the way I comment on or evaluate the performance of horses I suggest you simply ignore my posts and take your rants elsewhere.

BTW, how many Grade 1 winners and champions have you been involved with personally over the years? Just asking.

[Valuist]

She doesn't beat Curlin and I think she gets drowned by the likes of Ghostzapper, St. Liam, Lawyer Ron, Commentator, Mineshaft. "

By lumping in Commentator with those other horses, you completely blew your credibility. RA would've broken Commentator down.

[ghostyapper]

By lumping in Commentator with those other horses, you completely blew your credibility. RA would've broken Commentator down.

He was a wildly inconsistent runner but on both horses best day's she's not beating him.

Unless of course you are more impressed by holding off Macho Again compared to holding off a HOY in Saint Liam.

[toussaud]

He was a wildly inconsistent runner but on both horses best day's she's not beating him.

Unless of course you are more impressed by holding off Macho Again compared to holding off a HOY in Saint Liam.


commentator is a joke. he had a history of blowing out allowence horses but foleded like a cheap lawn chair when he faced stiff compitition.

[JohnGalt1]

On ESPN's "Rome is Burning", on Tuesday's 11/9 show, Jim Rome said that a football team that doesn't play in the Super Bowl isn't crowned the champion.

[Hanover1]

Without taking sides, I find it remarkable that virtually nobody mentions the fact that Z SCRATCHED when faced with a muddy surface early this year. Does that count as "not showing up" too??? Dare we call it "ducking"?? Hmmm..lets see, do any of the purists out there recall if RA ran on an off track this year?? (We know the answer...) Was it against males as well?? That fact alone should negate any argument in regards to "not showing up". Is winning BCC mean you are a lock for HOY? (We know the answer to that one also...)

[ghostyapper]

commentator is a joke. he had a history of blowing out allowence horses but foleded like a cheap lawn chair when he faced stiff compitition.

Yes St. Liam and Student Council can't be mentioned with the vaunted Macho Again and Bullsbay.

In fact the latter 2 needed a FASTER pace than what rachel ran in the woodward to beat an 8 YEAR OLD COMMENTATOR.

I sure hope all the other "joke" horses are able to win 2 whitneys and over 2 million for their career.

I also hope that 1 day Rachel can say she beat a horse as good as St. Liam.

[Stillriledup]

Without taking sides, I find it remarkable that virtually nobody mentions the fact that Z SCRATCHED when faced with a muddy surface early this year. Does that count as "not showing up" too??? Dare we call it "ducking"?? Hmmm..lets see, do any of the purists out there recall if RA ran on an off track this year?? (We know the answer...) Was it against males as well?? That fact alone should negate any argument in regards to "not showing up". Is winning BCC mean you are a lock for HOY? (We know the answer to that one also...)


I believe that Zenyatta scratched and the track was officially labeled fast. Does anyone remember what race she scratched out of and what the offical track condition was listed as?

[toussaud]

louisville stakes

track was labeled good.

[badcompany]

He was a wildly inconsistent runner but on both horses best day's she's not beating him.

Unless of course you are more impressed by holding off Macho Again compared to holding off a HOY in Saint Liam.

It wasn't just holding off Macho Again. It was doing so after being cooked in a speed dual with a horse who was in the race strictly as a sacrificial pig.

We've all seen that type of race many times in which a longshot hooks up with a favorite in a speed dual.

The overwhelming most common result is that the longshot drops dead and favorite gets caught late.

That's what made the race impressive. Rachel didn't get caught.

Do you think that race would've even been close had Rachel been loose on the lead?

[Show Me the Wire]

Wasn't a speed duel either. The other horse tried to run with R.A., but couldn't. She was too quick and too fast. If the other horse could have made it a real duel Macho Again wins.

[Bochall]

In this year if the woman in horseracing we have forgotten about Eight Belles and what she could have added to the Zen/Rachel mystique. Imagine a sound 8Belles in the Classic....hmmmm. Think she woulda liked synthetics?

[toussaud]

In this year if the woman in horseracing we have forgotten about Eight Belles and what she could have added to the Zen/Rachel mystique. Imagine a sound 8Belles in the Classic....hmmmm. Think she woulda liked synthetics?


rachael and z would run circles around eight belles

[Bochall]

She was a big girl who ran fast in the spring of her 3yr old season. No telling what she could have turned into at age 4. The real question is whether Larry would have retired her after last year as he did with Hard Spun as a 3yr old (or Fox Hill Farm did).

[CincyHorseplayer]

I see this year as awesome because we saw 3 brilliant champions on 3 surfaces.Rachel Alexandra,Zenyatta,and Sea The Stars made my year watching them.:ThmbUp:

Even though I was a little late on STS.Sorry Charlie D!Still got up early,early for his last 2!

I think this was my favorite year since I got into the races,1996.

Anyway,loved it all.Not looking for the singular truth here...


Joanied,you know what I'm talking about;)

[Valuist]

Wasn't a speed duel either. The other horse tried to run with R.A., but couldn't. She was too quick and too fast. If the other horse could have made it a real duel Macho Again wins.

The pace was already quite fast in that race. RA had every reason to get passed by the perfect trip, pace aided Macho Again but he couldn't get by.

[Steve R]

On ESPN's "Rome is Burning", on Tuesday's 11/9 show, Jim Rome said that a football team that doesn't play in the Super Bowl isn't crowned the champion.
The BC Classic is not the Super Bowl of Thoroughbred racing and it's not in any sense a world championship either. It's a Grade 1 race for older horses held in October/November and whichever horses show up, show up. Sometimes the fields are exceptional as in 1998, sometimes they are not. International Grade/Group 1 stars that weren't there this year included Sea The Stars, Fame and Glory, Cavalryman, Tartan Bearer, Youmzain, Company, Deep Sky, Vision D'Etat, Ask, Getaway, Viewed, Selmis, Rachel Alexandra, Rail Trip and Macho Again among others. The funniest part about Rome's comment is that prior to the the Classic there had been only 7 US non-turf G1 races for males at 10f or longer during the entire year won by just 4 different horses. If people would think more before they talk, maybe they wouldn't make statements as silly as Rome's. Besides, since the number of starters is limited to 14, one could imagine a situation in which some of the best horse's in the world were excluded because NASCAR-configured American race courses couldn't accommodate them. Imagine the Arc or the English Derby limited to 14. What a joke!

[badcompany]

It's not surprising that a tool like Rome would come up with such a ridiculous analogy.

The HOY is not a championship. It's more of an MVP award. MVPs often don't play in the Super Bowl, or the World Series for that matter.

And if the HOY should always go to the winner of the BC Classic, what's the point of even having the award?

[Cadillakin]

The BC Classic is not the Super Bowl of Thoroughbred racing and it's not in any sense a world championship either.I see. So when Tim Ice, Bob Baffert, Jerry Bailey, and many others suggest that when Rachel Alexandra didn't show up for the championship race, she doesn't deserve the ultimate award, these guys are misinformed? And your opinion trumps theirs?

The Breeders Cup is, like it or not, known throughout the world as the "World Championship Series". Many, many of our elite racers are crowned on that day with decisive race-offs... The Euros come here to increase their world standing. Their stud fees rise tenfold when they are successful in our Breeders Cup Races because they have conquered the formidable challenge of facing the Americans on their home soil..

You may prefer Rachel Alexandra this year, but when you have to go so far as to diminish the Breeders Cup races as insignificant, you look like a dolt.. a knucklehead..

Support your sport!

[toussaud]

I see. So when Tim Ice, Bob Baffert, Jerry Bailey, and many others suggest that when Rachel Alexandra didn't show up for the championship race, she doesn't deserve the ultimate award, these guys are misinformed? And your opinion trumps theirs?

The Breeders Cup is, like it or not, known throughout the world as the "World Championship Series". Many, many of our elite racers are crowned on that day with decisive race-offs... The Euros come here to increase their world standing. Their stud fees rise tenfold when they are successful in our Breeders Cup Races because they have conquered the formidable challenge of facing the Americans on their home soil..

You may prefer Rachel Alexandra this year, but when you have to go so far as to diminish the Breeders Cup races as insignificant, you look like a dolt.. a knucklehead..

Support your sport!
funny how when they asked chip wooley what he thought, and he said rachael should get it beucase she showed up for every dance, no one bothered to air it or mention it

it's a strong west coast bias. of course everyone on the backside at santa anita park is going to side iwth zenyatta

however it seems as the more i'm listening people are regaining their senses and realizing rachael is having the better year

[FenceBored]

I see. So when Tim Ice, Bob Baffert, Jerry Bailey, and many others suggest that when Rachel Alexandra didn't show up for the championship race, she doesn't deserve the ultimate award, these guys are misinformed? And your opinion trumps theirs?

The Breeders Cup is, like it or not, known throughout the world as the "World Championship Series". Many, many of our elite racers are crowned on that day with decisive race-offs... The Euros come here to increase their world standing. Their stud fees rise tenfold when they are successful in our Breeders Cup Races because they have conquered the formidable challenge of facing the Americans on their home soil..

You may prefer Rachel Alexandra this year, but when you have to go so far as to diminish the Breeders Cup races as insignificant, you look like a dolt.. a knucklehead..

Support your sport!

If the BC is "known throughout the world as the "World Championship Series" as you say, THEN WHY DON'T WE SEE MORE SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE BASED HORSES IN IT?

Are South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Brazil, Argentina, Chile, etc. not part of the world. If THEY believed the BC was truly a "World" championship, and not just a US, or NA/Western European event would they not show up?

Stop drinking the Kool-aid my friend. The BC is an important event on the North American racing calendar, but when people make claims about it that aren't supported by the facts, they only make themselves look like dolts and knuckleheads.

[FenceBored]

Got it. So that means we should crown the mcdonalds all american nba champion? :confused:

Favorite Trick beat the best older males in training the year he was HOY?
Secretariat as a 2 year old beat the best older males in training the first year he was HOY?

Gee, I must have missed that. If a younger horse has accomplishments, relative to its age and development, which surpass those of older horse, relative to its age and development, the younger horse should get the nod.

[GaryG]

When the Eclipse Award is based on "sending a message" this sport has gotten to be as PC as politics. What's next, affirmative action? As long as the BC is on polywhatever it will not be definitive. Maybe Raven Run deserved HOY last year?

[FenceBored]

On ESPN's "Rome is Burning", on Tuesday's 11/9 show, Jim Rome said that a football team that doesn't play in the Super Bowl isn't crowned the champion.

That's nice. Did he have any other inane irrelevant tautological statements to make?

Did he talk about Mine That Bird not having what it takes to make a good stallion? :rolleyes:

[toussaud]

If the BC is "known throughout the world as the "World Championship Series" as you say, THEN WHY DON'T WE SEE MORE SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE BASED HORSES IN IT?

Are South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Brazil, Argentina, Chile, etc. not part of the world. If THEY believed the BC was truly a "World" championship, and not just a US, or NA/Western European event would they not show up?

Stop drinking the Kool-aid my friend. The BC is an important event on the North American racing calendar, but when people make claims about it that aren't supported by the facts, they only make themselves look like dolts and knuckleheads.


du bai world cup night is the closest thing the world has to a world championship. EVERYONE shows up there. execpt coolmore for some reason.

[ghostyapper]

The pace was already quite fast in that race. RA had every reason to get passed by the perfect trip, pace aided Macho Again but he couldn't get by.

First you tell me how RA would have "broke commentator down." Then you comment on how fast the woodward pace was and how RA should have been passed. Take a look at commentator's splits and get back to me about RA "breaking him down"

[46zilzal]

From the DRF yesterday.


"The greatest mare I ever rode was Bayakoa," said Laffit Pincay at the end of last Saturday, surrounded by fans in the Santa Anita paddock. "And before Zenyatta the greatest mare I probably ever saw was Ruffian. But you know what, I never got the chills watching a race. This race today gave me the chills."

"I was inside the sixteenth pole," said Ramon Dominguez, who beat them all but Zenyatta with Gio Ponti. "That's when I heard the commotion form the public. I looked over and saw her and thought, "Okay" There was nothing I could do. Commenting on her triumph at Oaklawn: "She was wide the whole race and blew by us with her ears like this (giving his fingers the now famous Zenyatta waggle) "I knew that day, she was something very special."

[Steve R]

I see. So when Tim Ice, Bob Baffert, Jerry Bailey, and many others suggest that when Rachel Alexandra didn't show up for the championship race, she doesn't deserve the ultimate award, these guys are misinformed? And your opinion trumps theirs?

The Breeders Cup is, like it or not, known throughout the world as the "World Championship Series". Many, many of our elite racers are crowned on that day with decisive race-offs... The Euros come here to increase their world standing. Their stud fees rise tenfold when they are successful in our Breeders Cup Races because they have conquered the formidable challenge of facing the Americans on their home soil..

You may prefer Rachel Alexandra this year, but when you have to go so far as to diminish the Breeders Cup races as insignificant, you look like a dolt.. a knucklehead..

Support your sport!
You could support your sport by learning a little of its history. The so-called "world championship" was not designated as such until 2003, almost 20 years after the inauguration of the series and it was done by the very same folks running the BC program, not some external objective body. The purpose was primarily for promotional purposes because the races had never captured the fancy of the American public and the name change gave them a different allure. On the other hand, I don't recall the racing authorities in England, Ireland, France, Germany, Italy, Hong Kong, Japan, Australia, Argentina, Brazil, etc, etc acknowledging the BC as a championship series. In fact, there is better international representation in the DWC series of races than in the BC, so perhaps that's the real championship.

You also would be better off not making inane assertions like "their stud fees rise tenfold when they are successful in our Breeders Cup races." So when Raven's Pass won the Classic his stud fee went from 4000 pounds to 40000 pounds. Is that right? You are actually suggesting that Raven's Pass would have gone to stud for 4000 pounds had he not won the BC Classic. Amazing!

As for the European horses coming here to increase their world standing, did you ever wonder why almost no American horses enter the Arc de Triomphe to increase theirs? After all, internationally the Arc is the single most prestigious race in the world whether you choose to accept the fact or not. My experience in working with foreign racing connections is that they come because they think they can win a lot of money and they have done it quite often by sending second and third tier turf horses. It is only the AWS that has tempted them to send horses to the non-turf races.

As for the Santa Anita backstretch contingent, Baffert summed it up pretty well when he said Zenyatta should be HotY and then followed it in the next sentences with "Zenyatta made the Breeders' Cup!" and "I've never seen a crowd so captivated." Those may be good reasons for you but not for me.

In addition, I have no doubt that my support for Thoroughbred racing far exceeds anything you have in mind. How about banning all race day medication? How about lifetime bans for any connection that willfully violates medication rules or is guilty of horse abuse? How about reducing the number of venues and racing days so that the lives of unsound, ill-prepared and untalented horses are not continually put in jeopardy? How about dumping synthetic surfaces and investing in research on making dirt tracks safer? It seems that AWSs may not be safer at all, the toxicological effects of the chemical mix that goes into AWSs has never been studied even though individual components are known carcinogens, and the surface itself essentially destroys all links with the history and tradition of racing. Quite simply, conventional dirt horses don't win on it, so if you are going to keep it, acknowledge it as a third surface and let the specialists find their niche. There is plenty more racing could do and one thing would be to stop hyping the BC as a world championship. It is an insult to racing venues in Europe, Asia, Australasia, Canada, Latin America and everywhere else Thoroughbreds are raced and it is a typical example of American arrogance.

Now let's hear how you support the sport.

BTW, you may THINK I'm a knucklehead. I KNOW you're an idiot.

[FenceBored]

The field had a total of 18 Gr.1/Group 1 wins among them not count Gr.2 or Gr.3 races

Had RA ran in the race and won it would have been considered the Greatest Feat of all Time.

I think you're counting Quality Road's Fla Derby there, which, as he didn't start, you shouldn't. There were 17 G1 wins this year amongst the field of 12 starters for this year's BC Classic. Gio Ponti had 4, Summer Bird had 3, Zenyatta had 3, Einstein had 2, Rip Van Winkle had 2, Mine That Bird had 1, Richard's Kid had 1, Twice Over had 1, which equals 17 G1 wins.

There were 19 G1s last year amongst the field of 12 starters for last year's BC Classic.

So, it still doesn't come up as "the best field in years," and I don't understand why it matters to anyone outside the PR department at BC, Limted. This year's field was a deep, solid field, with noone who couldn't make a case for belonging. Even Awesome Gem, who got his first graded win since Jan. 2007 on October 3rd in the G2 Hawthorne Gold Cup, could claim to belong on the basis of his 3rd place showing in the Classic at Monmouth. Zenyatta proved herself a true great (to anyone from outer Mongolia who might have still had doubts) by making it look relatively easy against a group with strong credentials. Why isn't that good enough? What's this need to claim the field was "the greatest ever," or contained "the best horses in the world?" These claims are demonstrably false and damage the credibility of the organization making them.

As to the vitriol against team RA from some BC apologists, it reminds me of somebody, who after trying to hook up with a person and failing, feels the need to badmouth him/her all over town, and brag about how much more wonderful the person they are going out with is. It reeks of insecurity.

Every year the BC races attract an excellent group of participants. Every year they put on a day, now two days. of great racing. They should be proud of it and satisfied with that. Every year there are going to be top horses who don't come for one reason or another; accept it and move on.

[ghostyapper]

What's this need to claim the field was "the greatest ever," or contained "the best horses in the world?" These claims are demonstrably false and damage the credibility of the organization making them.


I don't think many are calling in the greatest field ever and if they are they're wrong. What they are saying it was the best field this year and a better field than anything rachel has faced. Of course the rachel finatics won't even give them that saying it wasn't even better than the woodward field :lol:

[toussaud]

here is the REAL question that you have to ask as far as the compitition


how many of the compeittors had grade 1 wins over synethic?

3

COLONEL JOHN (SANTA ANITA DERBY)
RICHARD'S KID (PACIFIC CLASSIC)
EINSTIEN (SANTA ANITA HANDICAP)

[Moyers Pond]

here is the REAL question that you have to ask as far as the compitition


how many of the compeittors had grade 1 wins over synethic?

3

COLONEL JOHN (SANTA ANITA DERBY)
RICHARD'S KID (PACIFIC CLASSIC)
EINSTIEN (SANTA ANITA HANDICAP)

Well you can't have it both ways. Either dirt or turf plays like synthetic. And clearly it is turf. So you have the Turf Eclipse winner, and two euros that also had grade 1 wins on a similar surface.

By your reasoning you could say dirt is different at each track, so what we should really be asking is simply how many wins a certain horse has over the track the race was run on.

Essentially, if a horse shows up in a race where the entry fee is 6 figures, the owners all think they have a grade 1 horse that can run on the surface.

Lastly, you can only win the race if you show up. And Zenyatta put a 13-13 record on the line when she didn't have to. The other filly didn't show up.

[toussaud]

Well you can't have it both ways. Either dirt or turf plays like synthetic. And clearly it is turf. So you have the Turf Eclipse winner, and two euros that also had grade 1 wins on a similar surface.

By your reasoning you could say dirt is different at each track, so what we should really be asking is simply how many wins a certain horse has over the track the race was run on.

Essentially, if a horse shows up in a race where the entry fee is 6 figures, the owners all think they have a grade 1 horse that can run on the surface.

Lastly, you can only win the race if you show up. And Zenyatta put a 13-13 record on the line when she didn't have to. The other filly didn't show up.


it plays like synthics. because that's what it is.

[Moyers Pond]

it plays like synthics. because that's what it is.

Actually it plays almost identical to turf. Ask any trainer on it. The synthetics are all different, but Santa Anita's really plays like turf. Baffert has said it over and over.

[FenceBored]

I don't think many are calling in the greatest field ever and if they are they're wrong. What they are saying it was the best field this year and a better field than anything rachel has faced. Of course the rachel finatics won't even give them that saying it wasn't even better than the woodward field :lol:

I would suppose you'd call me a Rachel fanatic and I agree that the BC field on paper was stronger than the Woodward field.

Was the BC field the best field of the year? What criteria are we going to use to decide that, and besides what difference does it make? Would you think less of Zenyatta's victory if it were only the 2nd or 3rd strongest field assembled.

[Moyers Pond]

I would suppose you'd call me a Rachel fanatic and I agree that the BC field on paper was stronger than the Woodward field.

Was the BC field the best field of the year? What criteria are we going to use to decide that, and besides what difference does it make? Would you think less of Zenyatta's victory if it were only the 2nd or 3rd strongest field assembled.

Yes, the BC field was easily the best of the year in any race. That is because there are simply too many races that allow good horses to avoid each other.

Rachel's effort in the Woodward was excellent, but it was a very bad field. The figure suggests she was tired though coming off a huge Haskell effort. Her Haskell was much more impressive than her Woodward, although some argue that a wet Haskell track is tailored made for her.

It would have been interesting to see Rachel give Summer Bird a shot at 10f in the JCGC, but I guess Jess Jackson knew she would likely not beat him. I will be shocked if Rachel ever races at 10f, which is why I bet she doesn't even show up for next year's Classic.

[Steve R]

I don't think many are calling in the greatest field ever and if they are they're wrong. What they are saying it was the best field this year and a better field than anything rachel has faced. Of course the rachel finatics won't even give them that saying it wasn't even better than the woodward field :lol:
You are leaving out one critical component that profoundly affected performances throughout the BC...the surface. There was not one winner in 8 AWS races that previously had not displayed superior form on either an AWS or turf. I don't mean just having raced on those surfaces or even perhaps having won on them. I am talking about an outstanding record.

Zenyatta (3-1), undefeated on AWS
Furthest Land (21-1), undefeated on AWS, 7-3-2-0 on turf
Dancing In Silks (25-1), 11-5-2-2 on AWS, undefeated on turf
Informed decision (7-2), undefeated on AWS
Man Of Iron (13-2), 3-2-0-0 on AWS
She Be Wild (15-2), 4-3-1-0 on AWS
Life Is Sweet (8-1), 8-3-1-1 on AWS, 5-2-2-0 on turf
Vale Of York (31-1), 5-2-1-1 on turf

Over 25% of the AWS starters had never won on either surface and not a single one came up a winner. In fact, I think only two of those horses even hit the board.

I acknowledge your aversion to any sort of statistical analysis of race results, but if you don't see a pattern then you are in denial, the point being that the quality of any field can be compromised by the race conditions. I'm not saying Santa Anita is the only biased surface in the US, but it sure is right up there. The fact that past performances include a separate AW line in the race record summaries further indicates that AWSs are considered a surface distinct from either turf or dirt. I guess we'll have to see how well the SoCal horses and turf horses do at Churchill Downs next fall in the dirt races, although in the last two Kentucky Derbies 41% of the starters were coming in off AW tracks and only one hit the board even though he was beaten a long way.

[ghostyapper]

I would suppose you'd call me a Rachel fanatic and I agree that the BC field on paper was stronger than the Woodward field.

Was the BC field the best field of the year? What criteria are we going to use to decide that, and besides what difference does it make? Would you think less of Zenyatta's victory if it were only the 2nd or 3rd strongest field assembled.

No I have a completely different name for you that I cannot post here. :lol:

Yes it was the best north america field assembled this year and I don't think it's close. The criteria I am using are my own eyes. Any attempt to judge a field based on stats or numbers is futile but I'm sure Steve R will attempt to do it.

Of course it makes a difference that she beat the best field of the year as opposed to the 2nd or 3rd best. Why would it not?

[11cashcall]

What they are saying it was the best field this year and a better field than anything rachel has faced. Of course the rachel finatics won't even give them that saying it wasn't even better than the woodward field :lol:


My point exactly.

[Robert Fischer]

it goes something like: Rachel - about 3 grade2 races, Zenyatta- 1 grade1 race , so Rachel wins by sheer numbers.

If HOY was really important it would be even more disappointing that the Mosses chose to keep seemingly the best of the American thoroughbreds out of all but one top quality race.
It would chastise the (non existant) promoters of horseracing for not creating a matchup,
and It would expose Jess Jackson/Asmussen's juvenile reaction to grade1 racing

[11cashcall]

It would have been interesting to see Rachel give Summer Bird a shot at 10f in the JCGC, but I guess Jess Jackson knew she would likely not beat him. I will be shocked if Rachel ever races at 10f, which is why I bet she doesn't even show up for next year's Classic.


If you watch the Preakness replay,another 10 ft & MTB wins.No way she runs against the boys at 10 panels,not now not ever.Funny thing abt HOY is how JJ was reminding everyone that the Woodward historically was the measuring stick,while emphasizing before BC Day.True as it maybe but this yrs edition
falls short of that imho.

[Robert Fischer]

If you watch the Preakness replay,another 10 ft & MTB wins.

that is relatively complex thing

for one thing The pace in the Preakness was one of the hardest paces of the year for graded dirt routes.
Rachel Burried everything forwardly placed in the Preakness and she helped Mine That Bird a great deal. I mean she absolutely dominated Mine That Bird in the Preakness by many lengths in terms of raw racing.

However, like I was saying in the Classic vs. Woodward thread - how much credit do we give Rachel for going against the grain when it happens to be RACHEL herself dictating those suicidal paces? Sure she deserves acknowledgment in the sense that "wow she ran well against the grain" but you can hardly count these type of things in her favor for either judging her quality in comparison to other horses, or predicting an improved effort with a more ideal trip in future races. At some point creating these closer biased setups in her races becomes a fault. That point is realistically about where you no longer think that she has the flexibility to rate.

In terms of style, the Mother Goose Stakes (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TJTnJSrSBc) kind of reassured those pessimistic doubters from the Preakness who thought she may not rate, but then her Woodward was a regression.

[ghostyapper]

that is relatively complex thing

for one thing The pace in the Preakness was one of the hardest paces of the year for graded dirt routes.
Rachel Burried everything forwardly placed in the Preakness and she helped Mine That Bird a great deal. I mean she absolutely dominated Mine That Bird in the Preakness by many lengths in terms of raw racing.

However, like I was saying in the Classic vs. Woodward thread - how much credit do we give Rachel for going against the grain when it happens to be RACHEL herself dictating those suicidal paces? Sure she deserves acknowledgment in the sense that "wow she ran well against the grain" but you can hardly count these type of things in her favor for either judging her quality in comparison to other horses, or predicting an improved effort with a more ideal trip in future races. At some point creating these closer biased setups in her races becomes a fault. That point is realistically about where you no longer think that she has the flexibility to rate.

In terms of style, the Mother Goose Stakes kind of reassured those pessimistic doubters from the Preakness who thought she may not rate, but then her Woodward was a regression.

It has to do with the competition. When she's facing overmatched females she will rate. But when she goes up against males she wants to be on/close to the front. I think this is pretty obvious looking at her running lines and watching her races.

[Stillriledup]

Can you guys PLEASE (pretty with sugar on top) STOP. QUOTING. TRAINERS. ON. THEIR. ZENYATTA. THOUGHTS.

Please?

Every trainer has an agenda. West coast trainers will all say Zenyatta is the greatest and its a no brainer. What's so hard to understand? People here are quoting trainers as if their word is gospel when all it is is an infomercial for their own interests. So Cal trainers have to see John Shireffs every day walking around the barn area, are they going to say Rachel is the best on the record? No. Of course not.

What Trevor Denman or Jim Rome say also holds zero weight, both these guys have agendas also.

How would it look for Trevor if he came out and said "Rachel is better"? In fact, Trevor has probably never SEEN Rachel live or on television, his comments hold zero weight.

Jim Rome owns a horse trained by Barry Abrams. Barry had a horse, Lethal Heat, that lost by less than 3 lengths to Zenyatta and finished 3rd i believe. If Zenyatta is horse of the year, Lethal Heat's value rises or could rise and surely doesn't go down.

[cj]

It has to do with the competition. When she's facing overmatched females she will rate. But when she goes up against males she wants to be on/close to the front. I think this is pretty obvious looking at her running lines and watching her races.

She does what she has to do to win. In the Preakness, she drew the far outside and had to hustle early so as not to get hung way wide on the first turn. In the Woodward, she drew the rail and hustled out so as not to get boxed in.

She had no problem rating off of Munnings in the Haskell.

[FenceBored]

No I have a completely different name for you that I cannot post here. :lol:

Yes it was the best north america field assembled this year and I don't think it's close. The criteria I am using are my own eyes. Any attempt to judge a field based on stats or numbers is futile but I'm sure Steve R will attempt to do it.

Of course it makes a difference that she beat the best field of the year as opposed to the 2nd or 3rd best. Why would it not?

So, it would matter to you, but you're willfully closeminded about whether it was or not. Brilliance, sheer brillance.

[ghostyapper]

She does what she has to do to win. In the Preakness, she drew the far outside and had to hustle early so as not to get hung way wide on the first turn. In the Woodward, she drew the rail and hustled out so as not to get boxed in.

She had no problem rating off of Munnings in the Haskell.

Is this another one of your joke or kidding posts? She sat a length and less off a sprinter through fast fractions in the slop and that is rating?

[cj]

Is this another one of your joke or kidding posts? She sat a length and less off a sprinter through fast fractions in the slop and that is rating?

Not at all. The pace was so hot the top 3 ran 1-2-3? She basically ran alongside Summer Bird the entire race, at least until she left him in the dust. I guess he can't rate either.

Dirt is simply different than rubber. She is trained to run the way that is most successful on dirt. What a shocking revelation.

[ghostyapper]

Can you guys PLEASE (pretty with sugar on top) STOP. QUOTING. TRAINERS. ON. THEIR. ZENYATTA. THOUGHTS.

Please?

Every trainer has an agenda. West coast trainers will all say Zenyatta is the greatest and its a no brainer. What's so hard to understand? People here are quoting trainers as if their word is gospel when all it is is an infomercial for their own interests. So Cal trainers have to see John Shireffs every day walking around the barn area, are they going to say Rachel is the best on the record? No. Of course not.

What Trevor Denman or Jim Rome say also holds zero weight, both these guys have agendas also.

How would it look for Trevor if he came out and said "Rachel is better"? In fact, Trevor has probably never SEEN Rachel live or on television, his comments hold zero weight.

Jim Rome owns a horse trained by Barry Abrams. Barry had a horse, Lethal Heat, that lost by less than 3 lengths to Zenyatta and finished 3rd i believe. If Zenyatta is horse of the year, Lethal Heat's value rises or could rise and surely doesn't go down.

It is a shame you were not around here back when rachel was running and every single trainer or person in racing that had a good thing to say about rachel was discussed ad nauseum. This included calling her the best RACEHORSE ever.

[ghostyapper]

Not at all. The pace was so hot the top 3 ran 1-2-3? She basically ran alongside Summer Bird the entire race, at least until she left him in the dust. I guess he can't rate either.


Summer bird won the belmont after trailing by more than 6 lengths. He's never been first at any half mile call in his career. Because they ran similar races in the haskell does not mean rachel can rate against males.

[cj]

Summer bird won the belmont after trailing by more than 6 lengths. He's never been first at any half mile call in his career. Because they ran similar races in the haskell does not mean rachel can rate against males.

If she can rate against females, she can rate against males. To suggest otherwise may be the silliest thing I've seen written on the internet, and that says a lot.

[ghostyapper]

If she can rate against females, she can rate against males. To suggest otherwise may be the silliest thing I've seen written on the internet, and that says a lot.

That is the equivalent to saying that in a case we've all seen 1000 times where a front runner alone gets brave and runs a career race will obviously do this again against tougher competition.

[Stillriledup]

One of the problems that fans cry about the most in racing is the stars sitting in the barns or retiring early. People hate when the stars retire early and or just find excuses to not race. Z only ran 5 times this year, she sat in the barn an awful lot. She sat around and waited for one big shot and nailed it. When the OP says "wrong message" isnt' Zenyatta's campaign the wrong message?

Isnt the wrong message sitting in your home state and not traveling the country showcasing your abilities? It seemed to many that Z's undefeated streak was the main reason she didn't venture out, they protected her from losing and the didn't put her in any positions to fail, even though she almost did one time.

I think the wrong message is to tell an owner that he or she can sit around all year, do very little and then show up on the biggest day and if you win that race on the biggest day, you win HOY.

If Z wins HOY, that's telling owners like Jess Jackson that it doesnt' matter that the racing fans in NJ, NY, MD, KY, ARK and Louisiana got to see your horse run, that all the shipping you did for the good of the horse racing industry doesn't mean anything if the right horse fires one big shot on a certain day.

I think the way Z was campaigned was the wrong message moreso than Rachel not racing all the way from Feb to November was the wrong message.

[classhandicapper]

Hell, if Gomez ever learns how to ride Colonel John he might actually win a few of these big ones.

Hey, I thought I was the only one in America that thought that.

I spent a lot of the prior week talking about how I thought he was ready to fire an all time top and used him in my exactas. I thought I was vindicated by his performance there. IMO, he ran quite well, but didn't think anyone would actually agree with me. :lol:

[classhandicapper]

I've been having some private conversations with Steve Davidowitz about Rachel, Zenyatta, and the HOTY controversy. He wrote a couple articles on this for the DRF, but he also gave me permission to include the following thoughts he expressed to me:

The best 3 year old fillies I have ever seen are Ruffian and Rachel Alexandra, who would be number two on my list in The Best and Worst of Thoroughbred Racing (DRF Press, 2007), if I rewrote that chapter today.

The best older race mare, I have ever seen is Zenyatta, who in my judgment is a stronger, better racehorse than Rachel and that would be the only real reason to vote her Horse of the Year over Rachel, given the latter's ambitious spring and summer campaign.

One of the reasons I think that about Zenyatta is that as a deep closer, she defies normal pace issues. Instead of needing a hot contested pace to fire her best rallies, Zenyatta repeatedly has overcome slow and moderate paces and still overpowered them, including the way she man-(woman?)-handled top older male turf horses in the BC Classic off another moderate pace with an adventurous zig-zag trip on a surface very friendly to top turf horses.

As for Horse of the Year: In many prior years, 'Horse of the Year' was defined by a majority of voters as "the best racehorse in America." In other years, the horse with the "best campaign" won the most votes. As most racing fans and racing officials realize, there are no official guidelines. . .Voters have to make their own determinations, just as they do with Most Valuable Player in baseball. . . As of this writing, I am still thinking it through, listening to other people arguments as much as my own.

A few historical examples:

1983: The 3 yr old Slew o' Gold won Wood Memorial, had a great 2nd half of the year and probably deserved Horse of the Year, but the Euro filly All Along won it with a strong late season turf campaign against older males.

1986 Lady's Secret won Horse of the Year, but the 3 yr old turf horse Manila was the best horse in the world and had an ambitious campaign.

1991 Dance Smartly, a 3 yr old filly had a most ambitious campaign, winning the Canadian Triple Crown against males on turf and dirt and winning the BC Distaff; but the modestly accomplished BC Classic winner Black Tie Affair was voted Horse of the Year.

1997 Favorite Trick, an unbeaten 2 yr old (who was not cut from the mold of Secretariat, the only prior 2 yr old named Horse of the Year) was voted Horse of the Year, although there were two other worthy candidates: Silver Charm, who won 2/3 of the Triple Crown and 4 yr old Skip Away, dominating winner of the BC Classic.

[cj]

One of the reasons I think that about Zenyatta is that as a deep closer, she defies normal pace issues. Instead of needing a hot contested pace to fire her best rallies, Zenyatta repeatedly has overcome slow and moderate paces and still overpowered them, including the way she man-(woman?)-handled top older male turf horses in the BC Classic off another moderate pace with an adventurous zig-zag trip on a surface very friendly to top turf horses.

It is amazing to me he doesn't mention the surface is a huge reason she "defies normal pace issues." I thought he was sharper than that.

[Steve R]

It has to do with the competition. When she's facing overmatched females she will rate. But when she goes up against males she wants to be on/close to the front. I think this is pretty obvious looking at her running lines and watching her races.
Rating has never had anything to do with field position. A horse can rate as easily on the front as it can from off the pace. A horse is rating when it is moving easily and comfortably within itself in order to conserve energy for the later stages of a race, that's all. When Spend a Buck went 45 and change, 1:09 and change in the 1985 Derby he was rating very well even with that torrid pace. Watch the video and you'll see a horse simply galloping, relaxed as can be with ears pricked and with no apparent sense of urgency. He opened a 5- or 6-length lead early and maintained it to the wire. He clearly was within himself in the early stages and had plenty of reserve energy for the stretch.

Rachel Alexandra's Haskell, against males, is a classic example of rating. She never acted as if she was straining to get the lead early on, laid comfortably off the pace three-wide through 6f and then drew away. She obviously had plenty of reserve energy to spare. Borel never even sat down on her until they were approaching the quarter pole. And in the Preakness she had enough reserve energy to get the final three-sixteenths in :19.4 which is the average time for the final three-sixteenths of the Preakness over the last 20 years. She wasn't, as some would claim, backing up, at least in comparison to half the recent Preakness winners.

Of course, if you are going to redefine the term to suit your argument then, yes, any horse close to or on the lead early can't possibly be rating.

[Hanover1]

[QUOTE=Stillriledup]I believe that Zenyatta scratched and the track was officially labeled fast. Does anyone remember what race she scratched out of and what the offical track condition was listed as?[/
"Officially" is a relative term in horseracing parlance. Its a stewards call, and we dont have to agree or disagree, just settle for the ruling. It was her first start, and track may have been "officially" rated fast, but it was off.....As I recall, she missed a target work as a result, hence the scratch. (and the track WAS off, however "official") I dont DRF at hand to exactly answer your question, but this is the jist.

[classhandicapper]

It is amazing to me he doesn't mention the surface is a huge reason she "defies normal pace issues." I thought he was sharper than that.

Yea, I don't entirely agree with him on that point, but I do agree with some aspect of it.

In the race where she won by a nose, Life is Sweet was also well off the pace but couldn't close much at all.

After that race I expressed the view that Z's performance that day was monstrous. The reason I felt that way was because Life Is Sweet was already a Grade 1 winner with decent figures for synthetic racing. She also had already competed well against Grade 1 males in what was perhaps the strongest older male race to date. So to me, Life Is Sweet was/is a very good filly. (I played her in the Ladies Classic) If you look at the chart of that race, Zenyatta outkicked her by a huge amount through the stretch. Her last couple of furlongs were run in a spectacular time. I don't think there are too many horses in the world, male or female, that could have won that race that day no matter what the surface.

I think the subsequent performance and figure that Life Is Sweet ran in the Ladies Classic when she got some pace in front of her further vindicated that she's a legitimately good Grade 1 filly (the next race after the nose race was also a very slow paced race).

I sort of feel the way about the Classic too, but less so because of the pace and more so because of the relative moves.

Twice Over and Gio Ponti (who I had boxed in an exacta among my combinations that also included RVW and CJ) are both very solid Grade 1 turfers. They both were moving very well when Z finally got to the outside. When she kicked in, she went past them like they were total mules and it really looked like she had plenty left after the wire. It was visually spectacular and her last quarter was again very impressive. That's just freaky.

The uniqueness of turf and synthetic racing is such that the horses usually do most of their serious running in the last 2-3 furlongs. So for the deeper closers the final times are somewhat limited by what happens in front of them. But no matter what happens in front of her, she's got a gear that makes the other horses look foolish by comparison even if they are very good horses. If she was a colt, after that Classic I would have thought she was spectacular. But as a filly, I simply can't think of another one I have ever seen that could do that. There may be a European filly or two, but nothing I have ever seen in the states.

So when I compare her and Rachel, I think both are amazing. This was quite a year. But I think Zenyatta is better at what she does than Rachel is at what she does. IMO, the figures just don't tell the exact story because the surfaces are unique.

[Seabiscuit@AR]

It is amazing to me that Rachel fans don't mention surface is a huge reason she defies normal pace issues

Many years ago Bill Quirin identified that dirt tracks have a universal track bias in favor of early speed. It seems that people are so used to dirt tracks being strongly biased in favor of leaders they forget about it

The fact is dirt tracks are more strongly biased in favor of leaders than the current Santa Anita surface is biased in favor of closers

[PaceAdvantage]

The fact is dirt tracks are more strongly biased in favor of leaders than the current Santa Anita surface is biased in favor of closersYou state this is a "fact." How exactly is this fact? Who has quantified this?

And they have broken this out by the seven different racetracks that Rachel has won over this year, compared to the three that Zenyatta has won over?

[Stillriledup]

[QUOTE=Stillriledup]I believe that Zenyatta scratched and the track was officially labeled fast. Does anyone remember what race she scratched out of and what the offical track condition was listed as?[/
"Officially" is a relative term in horseracing parlance. Its a stewards call, and we dont have to agree or disagree, just settle for the ruling. It was her first start, and track may have been "officially" rated fast, but it was off.....As I recall, she missed a target work as a result, hence the scratch. (and the track WAS off, however "official") I dont DRF at hand to exactly answer your question, but this is the jist.


I asked because i remember watching that day of racing and seeing the track condition and being baffled as to why she wasn't running. it wasn't a sea of slop. Jackson raced Rachel in a sea of slop at Monmouth

[Stillriledup]

It is amazing to me that Rachel fans don't mention surface is a huge reason she defies normal pace issues

Many years ago Bill Quirin identified that dirt tracks have a universal track bias in favor of early speed. It seems that people are so used to dirt tracks being strongly biased in favor of leaders they forget about it

The fact is dirt tracks are more strongly biased in favor of leaders than the current Santa Anita surface is biased in favor of closers

Dirt tracks don't favor speed horses if the pace is extremely fast in route races. Rachel's Pimlico race and her Saratoga race could easily have resulted in a deep closer sweeping up and crushing.