Zenyatta's Fractions - removes "opinions"

[WinterTriangle]

from the mix.

I'm sure one of you will figure 'em up. Numbers don't lie, and are better than opinions.


I saw such calculations tonight elsewhere, but until the poster gives me permission, I'm not going to post them here. different people figured them up differently, but in the end, they all "matched."

Let's just say that people sometimes don't know what they're "seeing". Unlike dirt races, where a horse wins by 20 lengths, Zenyatta doesn't appear to be doing much, but once you get down to fractions....it's downright..........scary.:)

(also considering that Mike said she never hit top gear, and so many of us saw her somewhat "lumbering." YIKES. Plus she had trouble at the gate, like she didn't move when it opened, and spotted about a length right there, then the part where the crowd was cheering and she thought maybe Mike wanted her to pose.......yet she still cruised by everyone and did what she usally does.....just enough to get the job done.)

always makes me wonder just what is in that engine if it was "all out"???? I don't think she's ever *had* to do that. And, hasn't.:)

[Cadillakin]

from the mix.

I'm sure one of you will figure 'em up. Numbers don't lie, and are better than opinions.


I saw such calculations tonight elsewhere, but until the poster gives me permission, I'm not going to post them here. different people figured them up differently, but in the end, they all "matched."

Let's just say that people sometimes don't know what they're "seeing". Unlike dirt races, where a horse wins by 20 lengths, Zenyatta doesn't appear to be doing much, but once you get down to fractions....it's downright..........scary.:)

(also considering that Mike said she never hit top gear, and so many of us saw her somewhat "lumbering." YIKES. Plus she had trouble at the gate, like she didn't move when it opened, and spotted about a length right there, then the part where the crowd was cheering and she thought maybe Mike wanted her to pose.......yet she still cruised by everyone and did what she usally does.....just enough to get the job done.)

always makes me wonder just what is in that engine if it was "all out"???? I don't think she's ever *had* to do that. And, hasn't.:)

I wrote about this phenomenon of her final times many months ago... but it didn't get much attention.
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=692747&postcount=1

Zenyatta has been all out one time when Mike rode her poorly. Inexplicably, he made a long run down the backside trying to chase a running off front runner. She passed the whole field.. but was staggering at the end.. and Tough Tiz's Sis, who she ran right by on the turn was coming back to beat her nearing the end of the race.. She was all out. Mike rode her like a rookie apprentice that day. You can review the race on Cal Racing if you want to.. Its July 5 08 at HollyPark, race 5.

[Steve R]

I wrote about this phenomenon of her final times many months ago... but it didn't get much attention.
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=692747&postcount=1

Zenyatta has been all out one time when Mike rode her poorly. Inexplicably, he made a long run down the backside trying to chase a running off front runner. She passed the whole field.. but was staggering at the end.. and Tough Tiz's Sis, who she ran right by on the turn was coming back to beat her nearing the end of the race.. She was all out. Mike rode her like a rookie apprentice that day. You can review the race on Cal Racing if you want to.. Its July 5 08 at HollyPark, race 5.
Just a couple of things. First, you should read a couple of physics text books, particularly the sections on the energy of motion. Second, you can't possibly know the extent of a horse's physiological output without a complete physical examination and laboratory testing of critical functions. Anything else in anthropomorphizing.

Concerning Zenyatta's racing style, she ran fractions of :27.0, :50.2, 1:13.3, 1:37.2, 2:00.3. Reverse those fractions and you have :23.1, 47.0, 1:10.2, 1:33.4, 2:00.3. If another horse had done that, you would probably have argued that the horse didn't really stay the distance. In fact, the kinetic energy output of the two horses is exactly the same. Fast fractions late when early fractions are slow is no big deal. The only thing that matters is the energy available over the entire distance.

If you linearize the pace lines of Zenyatta's five races this year you will find that they are essentially identical and that the correlation coefficients are all 1.000. The linear equations for the five races from last to first are:

Time = 11.71 x Distance + 3.49
Time = 11.60 x Distance + 4.16
Time = 11.74 x Distance + 3.75
Time = 11.67 x Distance + 3.05
Time = 11.74 x Distance + 2.39

The slopes, which measure fatigue rate, are virtually identical and suggest her performances were unrelated to what was happening on the front end. The variation in intercepts concerns differences in the inherent track speed on the day. In other words, Zenyatta does indeed run the same race every time regardless of setup. She is a one-run type, albeit with an extended run, but there is nothing exceptional about her style. In fact, based on the consistency of her fatigue rates, one could argue that she is not really ever involved in the race strategy but, instead, simply settles to the rear and begins a sustained move. Admirable for its consistency, but nothing magical. The downside is that with her consistent and sustained 23 and change fractions, she has never displayed what some would call a real turn of foot, the ability to accelerate on the spot as Sea The Stars did, for example, in the late stages of the Coral-Eclipse. She is, in the end, a grinder. That's not a criticism. Just an observation.

As for not ever being extended and considering she is presumably sound, I think the conservative pattern of her racing career argues that she does in fact take a bit of time to recover from her efforts.

[the_fat_man]

Zenyatta has been all out one time when Mike rode her poorly. Inexplicably, he made a long run down the backside trying to chase a running off front runner. She passed the whole field.. but was staggering at the end.. and Tough Tiz's Sis, who she ran right by on the turn was coming back to beat her nearing the end of the race.. She was all out. Mike rode her like a rookie apprentice that day.

The way this race ultimately setup, she was supposed to lose that day. Not only because the setup went against her but because the race was on POLY which absolutely unforgiving in these 'types' of cases. Interestingly, this was the only race in which she didn't make the last move.

[Steve R]

in your post http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=692747&postcount=1, you make the following statement:

"Show me another horse of any era who raced/races at the highest class that runs faster than she on that last turn to the stretch call. IF YOU CAN.."

OK, I will. In last year's Classic at the same track, Raven's Pass cut fractions of :25.3, :24.1, :23.2, :22.2, :23.3. I think that :22.2 on the final turn of a mile and a quarter race trumps pretty much anything Zenyatta has done.

[tucker6]

in your post http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=692747&postcount=1, you make the following statement:

"Show me another horse of any era who raced/races at the highest class that runs faster than she on that last turn to the stretch call. IF YOU CAN.."

OK, I will. In last year's Classic at the same track, Raven's Pass cut fractions of :25.3, :24.1, :23.2, :22.2, :23.3. I think that :22.2 on the final turn of a mile and a quarter race trumps pretty much anything Zenyatta has done.
Steve,

Don't try to overwhelm them with facts. It doesn't work. Use only raw emotion and spittle from your lips when you shout. :lol:

[Show Me the Wire]

.......
If you linearize the pace lines of Zenyatta's five races this year you will find that they are essentially identical and that the correlation coefficients are all 1.000. The linear equations for the five races from last to first are:

Time = 11.71 x Distance + 3.49
Time = 11.60 x Distance + 4.16
Time = 11.74 x Distance + 3.75
Time = 11.67 x Distance + 3.05
Time = 11.74 x Distance + 2.39

The slopes, which measure fatigue rate, are virtually identical and suggest her performances were unrelated to what was happening on the front end. The variation in intercepts concerns differences in the inherent track speed on the day. In other words, Zenyatta does indeed run the same race every time regardless of setup. She is a one-run type, albeit with an extended run, but there is nothing exceptional about her style. In fact, based on the consistency of her fatigue rates, one could argue that she is not really ever involved in the race strategy but, instead, simply settles to the rear and begins a sustained move. Admirable for its consistency, but nothing magical. That's not a criticism. Just an observation.

As for not ever being extended and considering she is presumably sound, I think the conservative pattern of her racing career argues that she does in fact take a bit of time to recover from her efforts.
[bolding added for emphasis]

So basically she wins without the race setting up for her. Very impressive as most horses need the perfect trip or set-up. Another example of her greatness.

[the_fat_man]

Steve,

Don't try to overwhelm them with facts. It doesn't work. Use only raw emotion and spittle from your lips when you shout. :lol:

Steve doesn't quite get it. If raw splits were the key to winning in this game then all the Sartinistas would have retired to the Caribbean by now rather than still being at it, betting 4 horses (win and place) in 7 horse fields. :bang:

[Tom]

If you linearize the pace lines of Zenyatta's five races this year you will find that they are essentially identical and that the correlation coefficients are all 1.000. The linear equations for the five races from last to first are:


Interesting...did you use the fractional times of the point of call times for this?

[bks]

Steve R, thanks for the numbers.

Unfortunately, I think you miss the point. They don't tell the story. You have an entirely un-scientific assumption in your work, which is that her fractional times indicate her actual ability to run. See, they don't, or at least, there's no way to know that they do. All they show is what she's done so far, not what she can do.

The numbers are insufficient to determine her ability, just as they are worthless for predicting how fast she will run her next race.

[ghostyapper]

Steve,

Don't try to overwhelm them with facts. It doesn't work. Use only raw emotion and spittle from your lips when you shout. :lol:

The same facts the mad scientist was using when he said how slow zenyatta was and she had no shot in the classic and was a terrible bet. Rather than it being a humbling experience he just continues with the same cocky crap thinking he knows all when he knows little.

[Steve R]

[bolding added for emphasis]

So basically she wins without the race setting up for her. Very impressive as most horses need the perfect trip or set-up. Another example of her greatness.
And exactly what is the logical link between trip or race setup and greatness? Zenyatta simply grinds it out the same way every time (at least this year in SoCal) and will defeat inferior horses. That's all. And although trip is certainly an issue (and hers was ideal), the notion of setup is grossly overstated. For example, 30 years ago Bill Quirin's computer studies of thousands of races clearly showed that 40% of races involving a speed duel between two horses was won by one or the other, returning a 30% profit even when both horses were bet. This phenomenon exists at 10f as well although the profit is lower. So-called setups only work when individual horses are taken out of their game plan, like being too far back off a slow pace. But when you run the same race every time, regardless of the front end pace, the setup is irrelevant. The horse establishing the strategy still has to finish the race in a faster time. Zenyatta's predictable pace lines have always put her in the lead at the end. She got the last half on Saturday in :47.0. Last year Raven's Pass got the last half in :46.0 and he did it after going 3/5ths faster than Zenyatta through 6f. Do you think she could have won that race? BTW, the front end pace though 6f was virtually identical in both races (actually a tick faster last year), so she would have had the same pace to run at. Most of the time, "setup" victims are made victims by dumb rides. Smith knows she's a grinder and probably just lets her roll. She's always been good enough to get there, but I'm pretty sure she loses the Classic last year.

[Tom]

Steve doesn't quite get it. If raw splits were the key to winning in this game then all the Sartinistas would have retired to the Caribbean by now rather than still being at it, betting 4 horses (win and place) in 7 horse fields. :bang:If you are not going to contribute to the thread, please stay out of it. You have no interest in it, so stop polluting it.

[Steve R]

Steve R, thanks for the numbers.

Unfortunately, I think you miss the point. They don't tell the story. You have an entirely un-scientific assumption in your work, which is that her fractional times indicate her actual ability to run. See, they don't, or at least, there's no way to know that they do. All they show is what she's done so far, not what she can do.

The numbers are insufficient to determine her ability, just as they are worthless for predicting how fast she will run her next race.
Sorry, but when a horse exhibits the same fatigue profile in every race, the patterns actually do mean something. In fact, her fatigue rate is so consistent and predictable from race to race, if you actually knew the real speed of the track on a given day, you could calculate her fractional times within a tick or two from start to finish.

[Steve R]

Steve doesn't quite get it. If raw splits were the key to winning in this game then all the Sartinistas would have retired to the Caribbean by now rather than still being at it, betting 4 horses (win and place) in 7 horse fields. :bang:
As usual, the fat man is the one who doesn't quite get it. I guess he just can't grasp the difference between raw splits and fatigue rates.

[Charlie D]

in your post http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=692747&postcount=1, you make the following statement:

"Show me another horse of any era who raced/races at the highest class that runs faster than she on that last turn to the stretch call. IF YOU CAN.."

OK, I will. In last year's Classic at the same track, Raven's Pass cut fractions of :25.3, :24.1, :23.2, :22.2, :23.3. I think that :22.2 on the final turn of a mile and a quarter race trumps pretty much anything Zenyatta has done.


Hi Steve, some interesting thoughts on an interesting thread.

In the above, the way the races were run would be a major factor in fractions returned would they not??

[Steve R]

Hi Steve, some interesting thoughts on an interesting thread.

In the above, the way the races were run would be a major factor in fractions returned would they not??
Sure it would, although I don't think the races were that much different. Last year Raven's Pass was 10 back of :47.3 and 7 1/2 back of 1:11.3. This year Zenyatta was 13 back of :47.4 and 9 back of 1:11.4. Considering the mare was a few ticks slower early than Raven's Pass was, you might have expected her to finish faster than he did, but it didn't turn out that way. There was a similar situation on the front end as well, with three or four horses close up prompting the early pace setter.

[ghostyapper]

Just to give everyone a quick summary of the mad scientists pre-race opinion (well since he treats it as science I guess it's not an opinion but a fact in his mind).

FWIW, the lowest winning Beyer Figure for the BC Classic since 1990 is 110 with an average of 116.5. Zenyatta has three figures this year of 103, 104 and 99 and her lifetime top is 108. Lord knows I'm not a devotee of Beyer Figures, but the guy can't possibly be that far off. The mare's best ever figure is 6 lengths behind the average BC Classic win. Frankly, I think 10-1 (if she starts) is a huge underlay.

My own figures over the last decade show her median number is 6 1/2 lengths behind the median BC Classic winning number.

My own figures confirm she is not a Classic contender and unlike Beyer Figures they do not discriminate against synthetic surfaces. An analysis comparing my winning figures in graded races beyond a mile at SA, HOL and DMR on the AWS for 2007-2009 and on dirt for 2004-2006 results in no statistically significant difference.

Instead of acknowledging how wrong he was, now all he does is compare zenyatta's performance to last year's winner to knock it. Shameless

[Charlie D]

Sure it would, although I don't think the races were that much different. Last year Raven's Pass was 10 back of :47.3 and 7 1/2 back of 1:11.3. This year Zenyatta was 13 back of :47.4 and 9 back of 1:11.4. Considering the mare was a few ticks slower early than Raven's Pass was, you might have expected her to finish faster than he did, but it didn't turn out that way. There was a similar situation on the front end as well, with three or four horses close up prompting the early pace setter.


What about Zens Ladies Classic Line, how does that compare to RP's Classic???

[Show Me the Wire]

And exactly what is the logical link between trip or race setup and greatness? Zenyatta simply grinds it out the same way every time (at least this year in SoCal) and will defeat inferior horses. That's all. And although trip is certainly an issue (and hers was ideal), the notion of setup is grossly overstated. For example, 30 years ago Bill Quirin's computer studies of thousands of races clearly showed that 40% of races involving a speed duel between two horses was won by one or the other, returning a 30% profit even when both horses were bet. This phenomenon exists at 10f as well although the profit is lower. So-called setups only work when individual horses are taken out of their game plan, like being too far back off a slow pace. But when you run the same race every time, regardless of the front end pace, the setup is irrelevant. The horse establishing the strategy still has to finish the race in a faster time. Zenyatta's predictable pace lines have always put her in the lead at the end. She got the last half on Saturday in :47.0. Last year Raven's Pass got the last half in :46.0 and he did it after going 3/5ths faster than Zenyatta through 6f. Do you think she could have won that race? BTW, the front end pace though 6f was virtually identical in both races (actually a tick faster last year), so she would have had the same pace to run at. Most of the time, "setup" victims are made victims by dumb rides. Smith knows she's a grinder and probably just lets her roll. She's always been good enough to get there, but I'm pretty sure she loses the Classic last year.

As I said hosres need the perfect trip or set-up (not necessarily dumb rides i.e. lack of pace, strong pace etc.) to win. Zenyatta wins regardless of trip or set-up. That, my fellow race enthusiast, is evidence of greatness.

Actually,Mike Smith and Kent D disagree with your assesment. Kent said his horse Summer Bird is a grinder while Zenyatta has a tremendous turn of foot. Mike Smith always talks about Zenyatta's turn of foot. Respectfully, I'll go with the riders' opinion about which is a grinder and which has turn of foot.

But I will agree with your astute observation Zenyatta wins regardless of what happens upfront whether it is slow or fast pace.

[Steve R]

Just to give everyone a quick summary of the mad scientists pre-race opinion (well since he treats it as science I guess it's not an opinion but a fact in his mind).
Instead of acknowledging how wrong he was, now all he does is compare zenyatta's performance to last year's winner to knock it. Shameless
Let me be blunt. You are disingenuous. You can cherry pick statements all you like. Try these and then maybe you should apologize. You are obnoxious on so many levels and you are totally incapable of making a substantive, intellectual contribution to any discussion of Thoroughbred racing. As for knocking Zenyatta's performance, if you did any investigating, you would find I assigned her the best race figure on AWS for the entire BC. By the way, her name actually begins with a capital "Z". I don't have to apologize for saying I think Raven's Pass would have beaten her last year.

1. I don't see the same advantage Beyer does for dirt. That said, and ignoring any "class" effects, Zenyatta's best figures this year by my estimation do not compare favorably with those of several other starters on both dirt and an AWS. Best figures don't predict what a horse will do today.


2. When you go the first half of an 8 1/2 or 9f race in 49 or 50 and change, there is nothing special about a high quality stakes horse finishing the last eighth under 12 or the last sixteenth under 6. And if you run a polynomial regression (correlation coefficient = 1.00000) on her fractions in the race you are referring to (August 9 at Dmr?), Zenyatta's last sixteenth was 5 3/5, not 5 1/5. You may recall that Secretariat ran the last sixteenth of the Kentucky Derby in 5 4/5, a 10f race as a young 3yo after a half in :49.2. Zenyatta's half mile was :50.2.

3. Frankly, I don't know what Zenyatta will do against males because her history against modest fillies and mares or dirt specialists who came up short on plastic isn't very revealing.

4. I was merely suggesting that Zenyatta may not be as fast at 10f as horses like Rip Van Winkle, Summer Bird and perhaps a few others. Then again, she may surprise and step up when in against higher class horses than she has been competing against.

5. But another angle is not to play a horse attempting to try something for the first time, in her case distance (not a given because racing style is not an accurate predictor and some Street Cry's don't stay a classic distance) and males. I would love to see her retire undefeated (she was my 1st choice for HOY last year)...

6. If she can beat all of those, that would really be something in the annals of racing history. Even then, though, the stigma of the AWS will always hang over a Zenyatta win just as it will be debated forever that Curlin lost last year only because the race wasn't on dirt. I'll be rooting for her but I won't bet on her unless her odds are relatively long.

[statik27]

Sure it would, although I don't think the races were that much different. Last year Raven's Pass was 10 back of :47.3 and 7 1/2 back of 1:11.3. This year Zenyatta was 13 back of :47.4 and 9 back of 1:11.4. Considering the mare was a few ticks slower early than Raven's Pass was, you might have expected her to finish faster than he did, but it didn't turn out that way. There was a similar situation on the front end as well, with three or four horses close up prompting the early pace setter.


Your a better handicapper then this argument and you know it Steve.

The track was playing faster last year on both days. Besides your really going to compare races more then a year apart? What about the trips both horses got in the stretch? In last years classic RP was bursting clear of the field with nothing but track in front of him at the same point in this years classic that Z was having to weave her way through traffic. She still ran the last qtr in 23 flat.

[Charlie D]

I don't have to apologize for saying I think Raven's Pass would have beaten her last year




No you don't imho, carry on posting your thoughts Steve as i for one find them interesting.

[Steve R]

As I said hosres need the perfect trip or set-up (not necessarily dumb rides i.e. lack of pace, strong pace etc.) to win. Zenyatta wins regardless of trip or set-up. That, my fellow race enthusiast, is evidence of greatness.

Actually,Mike Smith and Kent D disagree with your assesment. Kent said his horse Summer Bird is a grinder while Zenyatta has a tremendous turn of foot. Mike Smith always talks about Zenyatta's turn of foot. Respectfully, I'll go with the riders' opinion about which is a grinder and which has turn of foot.

But I will agree with your astute observation Zenyatta wins regardless of what happens upfront whether it is slow or fast pace.
You can go back and review Zenyatta's race charts if you like. If Mike Smith considers a predictable string of consecutive 23 and change fractions on SoCal tracks a "turn of foot", with all due respect he simply doesn't understand the definition. I would say it's just a fast horse. Secretariat had a turn of foot in his Preakness when he went from last to first on the clubhouse turn. Sunday Silence had a turn of foot when he accelerated away from Easy Goer on the final turn of the BC Classic. Sea The Stars had a turn of foot when he spurted away from Rip Van Winkle in the Coral-Eclipse. 23+, 23+, 23+, 23+ is not a turn of foot.

As for Summer Bird being a grinder, between the Belmont and the Classic he was never more than a length and a half behind the pace after a half mile in any of his races, a couple in 46 and change going 9 and 10f. Throughout the entire BC Classic he was never more than 4 lengths behond after the first half. I suppose people are entitled to define things however they choose whether it's accurate or not.

[ghostyapper]

Let me be blunt...

I apologize for exposing you're pre-race opinions. I know since they were so far off you wanted to keep them under the rug but sorry I picked up the rug. You're attempt to cover up and give more empty numbers only digs a deeper hole for you. You're pre-race mantra was tossing zenyatta because she was too slow and now we get the gem that "figures don't predict what a horse will do today? Well gee thanks for that genius contribution. Anyone who read any of your pre-race hype however would think speed figures are all you need.

You took a strong stand and were wrong. It happens. But the way you deal with defeat leaves you looking as very small from the verbal attacks to diminishing the mare's performance (this is after saying she had no shot) after winning the breeders cup classic because you weren't as impressed as you were by ravens pass.

[Show Me the Wire]

I guess it depends on the definition of Turn of foot. Usually, turn of foot means a horse can quicken suddenly, which Zenyatta does and then she holds her burst for a sustained period.

[Judge Gallivan]

Regarding Raven's Pass maybe we can use Colonel John as a reliable yardstick. He strikes me as a very conistent type, he never runs an 'off race' and his numbers are always within a tight range. He also proved that he handles pro-ride.

He lost 5 lengths to Raven's Pass and he lost to 4 1/2 lenths to Zenyatta.

I'm pretty sure Zenyatta would have been there or there abouts in the race last year as well.

[Cratos]

Regarding Raven's Pass maybe we can use Colonel John as a reliable yardstick. He strikes me as a very conistent type, he never runs an 'off race' and his numbers are always within a tight range. He also proved that he handles pro-ride.

He lost 5 lengths to Raven's Pass and he lost to 4 1/2 lenths to Zenyatta.

I'm pretty sure Zenyatta would have been there or there abouts in the race last year as well.

From the ¼ mile to the finish

Raven's Pass = 23.25 seconds (2008 BC Classic)

Zenyatta = 23.40 seconds (2009 BC Classic)

Less than a length difference

[Charlie D]

The Colonel carried 5lb more this year too JG


Zen also didn't get the uninterupted run that RP maybe did last year.

[Steve R]

I apologize for exposing you're pre-race opinions. I know since they were so far off you wanted to keep them under the rug but sorry I picked up the rug. You're attempt to cover up and give more empty numbers only digs a deeper hole for you. You're pre-race mantra was tossing zenyatta because she was too slow and now we get the gem that "figures don't predict what a horse will do today? Well gee thanks for that genius contribution. Anyone who read any of your pre-race hype however would think speed figures are all you need.

You took a strong stand and were wrong. It happens. But the way you deal with defeat leaves you looking as very small from the verbal attacks to diminishing the mare's performance (this is after saying she had no shot) after winning the breeders cup classic because you weren't as impressed as you were by ravens pass.
The only stand I took in this forum was that a) disregarding the class angle, she hadn't run as fast as some other BC Classic contenders (true), b) she might step up against higher class competition than she was used to (possible) and that c) I was rooting for her but wouldn't bet her unless her odds were generous (also true, and I didn't play the race at all). If you interpret that as some sort of absolute stand against her, then your interpretive reading skills need some work. As for diminishing the mare's performance, it hardly qualifies as diminishing when I publicly assess her performance as the best in the BC of all eight AWS races. Then again, you appear to be somewhat of a linear thinker who tends to focus on singular ideas, so I'm not surprised that you interpret things the way you do. But if you think I'm supposed to apologize for saying I didn't believe she had shown enough in prior races this year to win the Classic while at the same time declaring that she could move forward and hoping she would win, then you truly are nuts.

[Judge Gallivan]

The Colonel carried 5lb more this year too JG


Zen also didn't get the interuppted run that RP maybe did last year.

Interrupted run? Raven's pass was wide of Curlin and ran the whole stretch in a straight line.

Zenyatta had to weave through between horses. She had to check to go to the right of Twice Over.

All 4 year olds carry 5 pound more than 3- year olds because they are stronger, That's a given. Colonel John is a stronger animal now than he was a year ago.

[Steve R]

From the ¼ mile to the finish

Raven's Pass = 23.25 seconds (2008 BC Classic)

Zenyatta = 23.40 seconds (2009 BC Classic)

Less than a length difference
From the 1/2 mile to the finish

Raven's Pass = :46.0 seconds (2008 BC Classic)

Zenyatta = :47.0 seconds (2009 BC Classic)

Five lengths difference

[Charlie D]

Interrupted run? Raven's pass was wide of Curlin and ran the whole stretch in a straight line.

Zenyatta had to weave through between horses. She had to check to go to the right of Twice Over.

All 4 year olds carry 5 pound more than 3- year olds because they are stronger, That's a given. Colonel John is a stronger animal now than he was a year ago.

Sorry JG, meant uninterrupted and post has been edited

[Judge Gallivan]

The Colonel carried 5lb more this year too JG


Zen also didn't get the uninterupted run that RP maybe did last year.

OK, now I see you edited your post.

[Judge Gallivan]

From the 1/2 mile to the finish

Raven's Pass = :46.0 seconds (2008 BC Classic)

Zenyatta = :47.0 seconds (2009 BC Classic)

Five lengths difference

How much is worth track variant from last year to this?

How much is worth weaving through the traffic (especially for a huge and therefore somewhat cumbersome animal)?

[Steve R]

Interrupted run? Raven's pass was wide of Curlin and ran the whole stretch in a straight line.

Zenyatta had to weave through between horses. She had to check to go to the right of Twice Over.

All 4 year olds carry 5 pound more than 3- year olds because they are stronger, That's a given. Colonel John is a stronger animal now than he was a year ago.
If you recall, Raven's Pass was five-wide on the final turn, went further outside of Curlin approaching the 1/4-pole and drifted out a bit near the wire. Zenyatta was in the two-path entering the final turn, moved to the rail and then swung out entering the stretch. At least that's the way the charts have it. No mention of the mare weaving through horses and that is confirmed by the video replay. She was eased away from the inside in the upper part of the stretch, and was never impeded nor checked. She had a virtually flawless trip.

[Show Me the Wire]

If you recall, Raven's Pass was five-wide on the final turn, went further outside of Curlin approaching the 1/4-pole and drifted out a bit near the wire. Zenyatta was in the two-path entering the final turn, moved to the rail and then swung out entering the stretch. At least that's the way the charts have it. No mention of the mare weaving through horses and that is confirmed by the video replay. She was eased away from the inside in the upper part of the stretch, and was never impeded nor checked. She had a virtually flawless trip.

Flawless trip, that is funny :lol:

[Steve R]

Flawless trip, that is funny :lol:
Ever seen a video replay? Maybe not.

[Judge Gallivan]

If you recall, Raven's Pass was five-wide on the final turn, went further outside of Curlin approaching the 1/4-pole and drifted out a bit near the wire. Zenyatta was in the two-path entering the final turn, moved to the rail and then swung out entering the stretch. At least that's the way the charts have it. No mention of the mare weaving through horses and that is confirmed by the video replay. She was eased away from the inside in the upper part of the stretch, and was never impeded nor checked. She had a virtually flawless trip.

She was behind Summer Bird and had Twice Over to her right. She had to go behind Twice Over. All that time she couldn't unleash her giant stride. Once she did the race was over in 5 seconds.

Raven Pass was much wider but the whole time he had no one in front of him.

If you think that RP's race was much superior how come he only beat Tiago 2 1/2 lenghts?

And if you think that Tiago is approx. as good as Zenyatta - let's just agree to disagree.

[Show Me the Wire]

Ever seen a video replay? Maybe not.
I have, have you. Did you see the walking out of the gate, the wrong lead, the lugging out in the first 1/16th, the hole close in the stretch, etc.

Why do you think the other posters asked about the impeded stretch run, and the traffic because it was non-existent?

[Charlie D]

the hole close in the stretch


That is how i remember it, maybe i need to watch a replay.

[WinterTriangle]

I have track speed comparisons for 2008 and 2009, across races. I will post them along with the fractions.

I'm collecting fractions from 6-8 math whizzes.......so far, they are only 0.01 or 0.02 off from each other, depending on how they figured it....in other words, nitpicking only.

Along with track stats from both years, as well as calculations of Z's lengths behind at each 1/4, there will, or should be, very little difference.

(I've also got my brother on this, who is a Ph.D in physics, even though he is not into horse racing.:) )

In the end, the numbers will speak for themselves.

[PaceAdvantage]

I have, have you. Did you see the walking out of the gate, the wrong lead, the lugging out in the first 1/16th....Is this really considered trouble for a horse like Zenyatta?

A horse like Rachel...yeah...that would be horrendous....

[Charlie D]

Just shown reply on ATR


Zen looked to be going inside Twice Ocer, but ended up going outside Twice Over due to gap closing


She didn''t seem to lose much, if any momentum because of it, so i'd say it didn't have much effect.

[Show Me the Wire]

Is this really considered trouble for a horse like Zenyatta?

A horse like Rachel...yeah...that would be horrendous....

Yes.

[Judge Gallivan]

Just shown reply on ATR


Zen looked to be going inside Twice Ocer, but ended up going outside Twice Over due to gap closing


She didn''t seem to lose much, if any momentum because of it, so i'd say it didn't have much effect.


Yes, there was no trouble that would have to be noted in the charts, I concede that. But you can see the difference in her gallop once she had a clear path and before that.

Plus, for the 1st time in her life that she had to go between horses in the stretch and she passed that test as well. Another big plus for her in my book.

[Show Me the Wire]

But you can see the difference in her gallop once she had a clear path and before that.


:ThmbUp:

[Steve R]

She was behind Summer Bird and had Twice Over to her right. She had to go behind Twice Over. All that time she couldn't unleash her giant stride. Once she did the race was over in 5 seconds.

Raven Pass was much wider but the whole time he had no one in front of him.

If you think that RP's race was much superior how come he only beat Tiago 2 1/2 lenghts?

And if you think that Tiago is approx. as good as Zenyatta - let's just agree to disagree.
What kind of conclusion is that? Of course Tiago is not as good as Zenyatta, and he was inconsistent. But on a given day he had his moments, like his 110 Beyer Figure in last year's Oaklawn Handicap when he ran within 2/5ths of the three-year best time on a day when routes were running a full three seconds slow.

As for the race being over once she unleashed "her giant stride" (an event which makes little sense), the race was actually over as the field entered the stretch. Run a polynomial regression on every horse's fractional time up to the quarter pole and I am sure you will find her projected final time was the lowest of any. For example, based on the data through a mile, when Zenyatta was still 2 lengths behind Gio Ponti, polynomial regression projects her ahead of him by 0.07 seconds at the wire. That's not bad considering the inaccuracy introduced by using fifths of a second and lengths behind as the basis for the 2, 4, 6 and 8f data points. Barring any unforeseen circumstances, she had it won at the quarter pole.

[cmoore]

Just a couple of things. First, you should read a couple of physics text books, particularly the sections on the energy of motion. Second, you can't possibly know the extent of a horse's physiological output without a complete physical examination and laboratory testing of critical functions. Anything else in anthropomorphizing.

Concerning Zenyatta's racing style, she ran fractions of :27.0, :50.2, 1:13.3, 1:37.2, 2:00.3. Reverse those fractions and you have :23.1, 47.0, 1:10.2, 1:33.4, 2:00.3. If another horse had done that, you would probably have argued that the horse didn't really stay the distance. In fact, the kinetic energy output of the two horses is exactly the same. Fast fractions late when early fractions are slow is no big deal. The only thing that matters is the energy available over the entire distance.

If you linearize the pace lines of Zenyatta's five races this year you will find that they are essentially identical and that the correlation coefficients are all 1.000. The linear equations for the five races from last to first are:

Time = 11.71 x Distance + 3.49
Time = 11.60 x Distance + 4.16
Time = 11.74 x Distance + 3.75
Time = 11.67 x Distance + 3.05
Time = 11.74 x Distance + 2.39

The slopes, which measure fatigue rate, are virtually identical and suggest her performances were unrelated to what was happening on the front end. The variation in intercepts concerns differences in the inherent track speed on the day. In other words, Zenyatta does indeed run the same race every time regardless of setup. She is a one-run type, albeit with an extended run, but there is nothing exceptional about her style. In fact, based on the consistency of her fatigue rates, one could argue that she is not really ever involved in the race strategy but, instead, simply settles to the rear and begins a sustained move. Admirable for its consistency, but nothing magical. The downside is that with her consistent and sustained 23 and change fractions, she has never displayed what some would call a real turn of foot, the ability to accelerate on the spot as Sea The Stars did, for example, in the late stages of the Coral-Eclipse. She is, in the end, a grinder. That's not a criticism. Just an observation.

As for not ever being extended and considering she is presumably sound, I think the conservative pattern of her racing career argues that she does in fact take a bit of time to recover from her efforts.

Did you take into account that she probably covered the most distance in each of those races.

A front running style obviously has more going for it then a closer. First thing is they go for the lead when they all of their energy available. The ideal position would be an uncontested lead..The second best scenario is settling 3rd behind a speed duel. They try to set the pace and save ground all the way around the track. Zenyatta has to make her closing run after she has already tapped her bank of energy. A closer to win consistently has a much tougher time then a runner always on the front end. Look at Zenyattas last 2 races before the Classic..A late pace figure of 128 on Oct. 10th. A 121 on Aug. 9th. The 128 late pace figure was needed because the pace very slow. The two slowest race shapes in her last ten starts were a -34 -24 and a -31 -26. Those races were her two highest late pace figures. So pace does have soenthing to do with how fast she runs the last part of a race..

[cmoore]

Sure it would, although I don't think the races were that much different. Last year Raven's Pass was 10 back of :47.3 and 7 1/2 back of 1:11.3. This year Zenyatta was 13 back of :47.4 and 9 back of 1:11.4. Considering the mare was a few ticks slower early than Raven's Pass was, you might have expected her to finish faster than he did, but it didn't turn out that way. There was a similar situation on the front end as well, with three or four horses close up prompting the early pace setter.

Steve..How can you compare two different races a year apart? Your comparing raw times..This is the age of pace figures.

[Judge Gallivan]

What kind of conclusion is that? Of course Tiago is not as good as Zenyatta, and he was inconsistent. But on a given day he had his moments, like his 110 Beyer Figure in last year's Oaklawn Handicap when he ran within 2/5ths of the three-year best time on a day when routes were running a full three seconds slow.

As for the race being over once she unleashed "her giant stride" (an event which makes little sense), the race was actually over as the field entered the stretch. Run a polynomial regression on every horse's fractional time up to the quarter pole and I am sure you will find her projected final time was the lowest of any. For example, based on the data through a mile, when Zenyatta was still 2 lengths behind Gio Ponti, polynomial regression projects her ahead of him by 0.07 seconds at the wire. That's not bad considering the inaccuracy introduced by using fifths of a second and lengths behind as the basis for the 2, 4, 6 and 8f data points. Barring any unforeseen circumstances, she had it won at the quarter pole.

Regarding Tiago, you made it sound as if Zenyatta would have been at least 5 lengths behind Raven's Pass which would make her about 2 1/2 lengths behind Tiago. Tiago was a nice horse and won a G2 (on real dirt) and ran OK on pro-ride but if you think that Zenyatta would have been 2 1/2 lengths behind Tiago in any of his races we better end any discussion.

I can't run a polynomial regression sice I don't know how. I'm not bragging with my ignorance, I'm just saying that common sense is sometimes enough to know if something is plausible or not. Zenyatta 2 1/2 lengths behind Tiago just isn't.

Just like that 1 pound equals 1 lenght at 10f from the other thread. After years of betting British handicaps that's sooooo out of touch with reality that it's almost funny.

[Judge Gallivan]

Regarding Zenyatta's giant stride.

Usain Bolt runs 100 meters in 3 steps less than Tyson Gay.

I believe that Zenyatta's stride is longer than strides of most horses and therefore traffic affects her more than smaller, nimbler horses.

[Cratos]

From the 1/2 mile to the finish

Raven's Pass = :46.0 seconds (2008 BC Classic)

Zenyatta = :47.0 seconds (2009 BC Classic)

Five lengths difference


Last 1/2 mile to the finish

Raven's Pass =:46.38 seconds (2008 BC Classic)

Zenyatta = :47.22 seconds (2009 BC Classic)

4.941 lengths difference

Our calculations are probably slightly different which gives a slightly different result, but I agree with your premise.

[WinterTriangle]

Last 1/2 mile to the finish

Raven's Pass =:46.38 seconds (2008 BC Classic)

Zenyatta = :47.22 seconds (2009 BC Classic)



Cratos, or Steve, or anyone: shouldn't comparisons between RP and ZEN be reflected against the way the tracks played 2008 and 2009? (across races, it appears to have been faster last year):

----------dist------2008-----2009------Diff-----Byr Pts---sec/fl
Dirt Mi---8.0------93.41-----95.50-----2.09-----22--------0.26
Juvee----8.5------100.94---103.48----2.54-----25--------0.30
Sprint----6.0------67.08-----68.14----1.06-----15--------0.18
Classic---10.0-----119.3-----120.62---1.35-----11-------0.14
Avg------8.13------95.18-----96.94----1.76-----18-------0.22

I personally wouldn't know, mathematically, how to adjust for this.

Surely the last 1/2 mile finishes don't tell the whole story without the track figures?