View Full Version : Zenyatta, Star of the show--Art Wilson
rwwupl
11-13-2009, 10:44 AM
Art Wilson captures the meaning of Zenyatta performance in the Breeders Cup Classic below.
The wind is strong, and Zenyatta created it.
P.S. Her Trainer prefers dirt surfaces and says (public and private)her best race was on dirt at Oaklawn, and she is better on dirt.
rwwupl
http://www.insidesocal.com/horseracing/2009/11/star-of-the-show-brought-down.html
Star of the show brought down the house
By Art Wilson on November 11, 2009 10:52 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | ShareThis
Breeders' Cup XXVI brought 58,845 to Santa Anita, the Great Race Place, last Saturday to watch the greatest filly/mare I've seen run in my lifetime, and I've been going to the races since 1973.
Yes, Zenyatta put on quite a show for a turnout that, for the most part, didn't care who they'd bet on when jockey Mike Smith steered the mammoth daughter of Street Cry to the outside and then closed like a locomotive to win the $5 million Breeders' Cup Classic by one length over Gio Ponti.
It was the biggest non-Churchill Downs crowd for a Breeders' Cup since 1986 when 69,155 turned out at Oak Tree to watch horses like Capote, Fran's Valentine, Precisionist and Skywalker run. It was the biggest crowd at Santa Anita, period since 1988 when Alysheba won the Big 'Cap in front of 70,432.
It just shows how important it is for the sport to be able to showcase its stars on big days like Breeders' Cup weekend. Yes, there's no denying the fact a lot of poor management decisions have helped drag the industry down to where it is today, but a big part of the blame can also be pinned on the decision to retire horses before they've developed a following. And once they've developed that following, during the running of the Triple Crown races or what have you, then they're sent off to the breeding shed before we can witness scenes like we did when Zenyatta became the first female to win the Breeders' Cup Classic.
"I think we're all euphoric," Allen Gutterman, Santa Anita's marketing director, told me Sunday morning at Clockers' Corner. "It's been a difficult meet, and to see the reaction (of fans), you feel like you are in a real major-league sport again when something like this happens. It's good for racing when we have these kind of things happen where the fans come out and want to be part of something.
"It shows you how badly we need stars and how the problem is when horses are retired so young. We don't get a chance to develop stars as marketers and race-track operators. It's not just all about the betting, it's about the horses, and people love horses. When you see people with signs for Zenyatta or Rachel (Alexandra) or anybody, that means that they care. That's an emotion that you can't create with giveaways or freebies. It comes from the horse, and I think it's the same thing how people feel about the Lakers or the Dodgers or something like that."
Exactly.
Walter O'Malley's decision in the late 1950s to uproot the Dodgers from Brooklyn and move them to Los Angeles caused a lot of bad feelings. Yes, the Dodgers were a bunch of bums to many Brooklyn fans, but they were "their" bums, and that's all that mattered. They had developed a following, and then they were moved 3,000 miles to the west and the Brooklyn fans had lost something that meant a lot to them.
Same way with horses, only to a lesser extent. Stars like Secretariat, Street Sense, Empire Maker and Smarty Jones are retired way too early, before they can attract the same type of fan base Zenyatta did. And we saw Saturday just how powerful that fan base can become and what it can lead to in terms of drama and excitement for the sport.
Sadly, money rules the world nowadays. It's the reason World Series games are all played at night and why the baseball playoffs are sprinkled with so many needless days off. It's the TV money that calls the shots.
Same with these horses. Breeding rights are so valuable now, few want to risk future riches by racing their stars much beyond their 3-year-old campaigns.
Love him or loathe him for his decision not to bring Rachel Alexandra to the Breeders' Cup because of his disdain for synthetics, but owner Jess Jackson deserves much credit for campaigning Curlin as a 4-year-old and if he does bring back Rachel for her 4-year-old campaign. Ditto the Mosses, Jerry and Ann, for bringing back Zenyatta for her 5-year-old season.
Imagine the sport right now if we hadn't had Zenyatta this year, or if we didn't have Rachel's 4-year-old season to look forward to with anticipation?
Well, that's too depressing to even ponder. Excuse me while I go watch a replay of Saturday's Classic again for the umpteenth time.
1 Comments
rwwupl said:
Art,
You got this one right. Long live Zenyatta.
November 13, 2009 6:52 AM
Leave a comment
Name
Email Address
PaceAdvantage
11-13-2009, 07:30 PM
There must be something wrong with my racing brain.
Contrary to the author in the piece above, the more I watch the BC Classic, the LESS impressed I become...chalk it up to east coast bias I suppose.
But I do understand the Zenyatta fans. Because I feel the same exact way about Rachel Alexandra.
Oops, case closed. I didn't realize her trainer said she is best on dirt. That makes it official.
Show Me the Wire
11-13-2009, 07:38 PM
A question why is only one horse's campaigm labeled "historic" on the home page. Is it a case of bias as both horses made history this year?
ghostyapper
11-13-2009, 07:41 PM
A question why is only one horse's campaigm labeled "historic" on the home page. Is it a case of bias as both horses made history this year?
It's quite simply really. Just like some horses race with blinders on, some posters wear them as well.
I don't think PA posted the Rachel Alexandra label. He put up the Zenyatta video at Youtube, not the other. It took me 20 seconds to look that up, but you guys would rather just make stuff up.
PaceAdvantage
11-13-2009, 08:24 PM
I created NEITHER video, although I did have to edit Zenyatta's video because it contained ALL of her career races...and why are we posting about the videos in this thread anyway?
I will be happy to discuss the videos in the other thread.
Cadillakin
11-13-2009, 08:27 PM
Oops, case closed. I didn't realize her trainer said she is best on dirt. That makes it official.
Who is it that you think would know more about that mare than John Shireffs? I mean, if somebody was a real student of the game, and wanted to get the answer on Zenyatta's best surface, who would know best?
Do you respect those who have the answers? Or will you just hang out in the forums and argue with those who know far less than John Shirreffs?
For myself, I listen to the women and men who know more than I. I place my trust in their point of view.. their words.. I learn from them.
And you? You learn from whom?
Who is it that you think would know more about that mare than John Shireffs? I mean, if somebody was a real student of the game, and wanted to get the answer on Zenyatta's best surface, who would know best?
Do you respect those who have the answers? Or will you just hang out in the forums and argue with those who know far less than John Shirreffs?
For myself, I listen to the women and men who know more than I. I place my trust in their point of view.. their words.. I learn from them.
And you? You learn from whom?
I have spent enough time around trainers to know not to listen to them about most things, particularly their own horses.
If her best surface is really dirt, it would seem really silly mapping out the pathetic, repeat campaign of last year with no dirt races on it.
Stillriledup
11-13-2009, 08:31 PM
Who is it that you think would know more about that mare than John Shireffs? I mean, if somebody was a real student of the game, and wanted to get the answer on Zenyatta's best surface, who would know best?
Do you respect those who have the answers? Or will you just hang out in the forums and argue with those who know far less than John Shirreffs?
For myself, I listen to the women and men who know more than I. I place my trust in their point of view.. their words.. I learn from them.
And you? You learn from whom?
"Who is it that you think would know more about that mare than John Shireffs?"
:lol:
That's gotta be the funniest comment here at PA. I'm going to nominate this is sentence of the year.
"Who is it that you think would know more about that mare than John Shireffs?"
:lol:
That's gotta be the funniest comment here at PA. I'm going to nominate this is sentence of the year.
I have to concur. Imagine Assmussen telling us Rachel's best surface is dirt, then mapping out a bunch of turf and synthetic races for lower purses than he could win on dirt. We'd all think he was nuts.
ghostyapper
11-13-2009, 08:42 PM
There must be something wrong with my racing brain.
Contrary to the author in the piece above, the more I watch the BC Classic, the LESS impressed I become...chalk it up to east coast bias I suppose.
But I do understand the Zenyatta fans. Because I feel the same exact way about Rachel Alexandra.
This is all the more reason that we shouldn't "let the dust settle" after a race before accessing it. I've come to notice in this game that after a race is run the more time that goes on, the more people will try to ignore a race result that doesn't help their opinion.
A perfect example was 2004 with Ghostzapper. Right after the breeders cup was run, even his biggest critics (the smarty parade) conceded that he was a superstar and HOY. As the days went by though they slowly poked holes at his campaign and bc win. By the time december roled around they were back to saying smarty was the best horse of 04 and deserved HOY.
Looks like you're doing the same here
Stillriledup
11-13-2009, 08:42 PM
I have to concur. Imagine Assmussen telling us Rachel's best surface is dirt, then mapping out a bunch of turf and synthetic races for lower purses than he could win on dirt. We'd all think he was nuts.
Its not even that, i mean, lets face it, the only think Shireffs knows about Zenyatta that we dont know is about her day to day health and what kind of training regimen she goes thru. Other than that, we all see the races just like her trainer does, so as far as her on track accomplishments and the accomplishments of her main competitors, i'd rather hear from someone without an agenda, ya know, a strong horseplayer who has an unbiased opinion instead of a guy who's expertise is caring for the horse in the morning and not breaking down videotape or crunching numbers.
lamboguy
11-13-2009, 08:46 PM
i don't think that anyone here would argue that thebreeders cup performance for the Z-lady was a thing of beauty. i don't even think that any horse present or past with no synthetic surface prior experience could have beaten her. but when it came to running on a wet surface, the people that manage the Z-lady decided to scratch from the race. in my opinion they though the mud would compromise her chances to remain undefeated. the camp for RACHEL did not back down on a wet surface for the haskell. a matter of fact ASMUSSEN told me he would run on broken glass that day. we can't help the fact that the owner does not like synthetic surface. i doubt if RACHEL would have won, but with her accomplishments in 2009 RACHEL deserves HOY by a landslide.
Its not even that, i mean, lets face it, the only think Shireffs knows about Zenyatta that we dont know is about her day to day health and what kind of training regimen she goes thru. Other than that, we all see the races just like her trainer does, so as far as her on track accomplishments and the accomplishments of her main competitors, i'd rather hear from someone without an agenda, ya know, a strong horseplayer who has an unbiased opinion instead of a guy who's expertise is caring for the horse in the morning and not breaking down videotape or crunching numbers.
NO doubt about it. I can't tell you how many times I've been with a trainer and told him he has no shot, he laughs, then watches his horse run up the track. A few times telling them they had a big shot and get the "we're just getting a race in him" line given to me, only to see them score by three.
ghostyapper
11-13-2009, 08:50 PM
It's funny how the tides have turned here. Back in the summer/early september whatever jackson/borel/asmussen said was gospel. Jackson said she could get 10 furlongs that meant she could get 10 furlongs. Borel said she wasn't getting caught and didn't like the track, that obviously was true too. Jackson said the only reason he wasn't running her in the travers was because of kensei, then of course that was the only reason.
But now the connections words mean nothing. http://paceadvantage.com/forum/images/smilies/45.gif
I laughed here and elsewhere at Borel's ridiculous comment after the Preakness.
Who are we to question why she didn't run in the Travers. It has nothing to do with ability, it was his decision. Why would I care anyway?
ghostyapper
11-13-2009, 09:12 PM
Who are we to question why she didn't run in the Travers. It has nothing to do with ability, it was his decision. Why would I care anyway?
And who are you to question why zenyatta didn't run on dirt since the apple blossom? It was his decision and has nothing to do with ability.
Works both ways.
And who are you to question why zenyatta didn't run on dirt since the apple blossom? It was his decision and has nothing to do with ability.
Works both ways.
Because it makes no sense to never run a horse on her "best" surface. Clearly he was caught up in the moment.
ghostyapper
11-13-2009, 09:27 PM
Because it makes no sense to never run a horse on her "best" surface. Clearly he was caught up in the moment.
Well I understand why that might run some people the wrong way. But he did run her on dirt once and nothing from that race would suggest that she was worse on dirt so it's possible dirt could have been her best surface.
Considering he ran her strictly in california (and the 3 main tracks don't have dirt) that at least explains somewhat why she didn't run on dirt. Had 1 of the main tracks like hollywood still had dirt and he avoided running her there then you may have a stronger point.
Bobby Frankel said he believed Ghostzapper's best surface was turf. And this without him ever running him on turf and I don't think even working him (at least officially).
DeanT
11-13-2009, 09:42 PM
The mare had a beautiful action on the Oaklawn surface, imo. With a sample size of one I do not think we as horseplayers can make any hard assumption that she is better or worse on dirt.
rwwupl
11-13-2009, 09:47 PM
Because it makes no sense to never run a horse on her "best" surface. Clearly he was caught up in the moment.
What a silly argument. Did it occur that the Trainer and the Owner of "Z" are California based and all major tracks in Ca. are mandated to be synthetic?
The Owner did not vote (he is a member of the CHRB) for synthetics,he abstained.
There is plenty of money to run for and plenty of graded stakes to map out a fine campaign for any stake horse in California. She did seem to make more money with less races than Rachel.
Does that count?
Are you suggesting that she should leave her home State to chase Rachel when Rachel was invited to the big dance that "Z " won and refused to participate?
The "no matter what" people have felt the big wind and will not consider that "Z" left a hoofprint for history.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. ;)
DeanT
11-13-2009, 09:50 PM
Rog,
All you have to know if they are afraid of dirt is ask if the BC was held at BEL this year if they would have went - the answer is a 100% yes. They would have went with that mare if they held it on the moon. I think that is why the Moss's and JS have so many supporters. We want our horses to race in the year end championships.
PaceAdvantage
11-14-2009, 03:03 AM
A perfect example was 2004 with Ghostzapper. Right after the breeders cup was run, even his biggest critics (the smarty parade) conceded that he was a superstar and HOY. As the days went by though they slowly poked holes at his campaign and bc win. By the time december roled around they were back to saying smarty was the best horse of 04 and deserved HOY.
Looks like you're doing the same hereExcept for the fact that there was never any conceding on my part that Zenyatta was HOY....
FenceBored
11-14-2009, 06:43 AM
This is all the more reason that we shouldn't "let the dust settle" after a race before accessing it. I've come to notice in this game that after a race is run the more time that goes on, the more people will try to ignore a race result that doesn't help their opinion.
A perfect example was 2004 with Ghostzapper. Right after the breeders cup was run, even his biggest critics (the smarty parade) conceded that he was a superstar and HOY. As the days went by though they slowly poked holes at his campaign and bc win. By the time december roled around they were back to saying smarty was the best horse of 04 and deserved HOY.
Looks like you're doing the same here
That's only because there WERE a bunch of holes in Ghostzapper's campaign. ;)
What a silly argument. Did it occur that the Trainer and the Owner of "Z" are California based and all major tracks in Ca. are mandated to be synthetic?
The Owner did not vote (he is a member of the CHRB) for synthetics,he abstained.
There is plenty of money to run for and plenty of graded stakes to map out a fine campaign for any stake horse in California. She did seem to make more money with less races than Rachel.
Does that count?
Are you suggesting that she should leave her home State to chase Rachel when Rachel was invited to the big dance that "Z " won and refused to participate?
The "no matter what" people have felt the big wind and will not consider that "Z" left a hoofprint for history.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. ;)
That is probably as weak as it gets. Are you saying the owner couldn't afford a few trips out of town to run on her best surface for bigger purses? Surely you jest. Of course he can map out his own weak schedule, it is his horse. But then don't have the trainer try to tell us her best surface is dirt. It was just further hyperbole on his part.
andymays
11-14-2009, 09:58 AM
That is probably as weak as it gets. Are you saying the owner couldn't afford a few trips out of town to run on her best surface for bigger purses? Surely you jest. Of course he can map out his own weak schedule, it is his horse. But then don't have the trainer try to tell us her best surface is dirt. It was just further hyperbole on his part.
Shirreffs truly believes what he is saying and he's a stand up guy and a credit to racing.
Part of what's hurting Rachel are her connections. I don't have a problem with Jackson or Asmussen but many people do. On top of that you have the two main TV Racing Stations being biased as usual.
As I said before I thought they were way too carefull with Zenyatta earlier in the year. In fact without Rachel raising the bar Zenyatta probably would not have raced in the Classic. It's all a moot (not mute ;) ) point now.
I'm hoping somehow they share the award and if backed into a corner I would vote for Rachel.
Bottom line for me is that synthetic surfaces have brought us nothing but insanity. You can see it on this Board. Without this evil crap none of the heated debate would be going on. How has this synthetic misery helped racing? Someone tell me. :bang:
Indulto
11-15-2009, 12:27 AM
That is probably as weak as it gets. Are you saying the owner couldn't afford a few trips out of town to run on her best surface for bigger purses? Surely you jest. Of course he can map out his own weak schedule, it is his horse. But then don't have the trainer try to tell us her best surface is dirt. It was just further hyperbole on his part.Shirreffs truly believes what he is saying and he's a stand up guy and a credit to racing.
Part of what's hurting Rachel are her connections. I don't have a problem with Jackson or Asmussen but many people do. On top of that you have the two main TV Racing Stations being biased as usual.
As I said before I thought they were way too carefull with Zenyatta earlier in the year. In fact without Rachel raising the bar Zenyatta probably would not have raced in the Classic. It's all a moot (not mute ;) ) point now.
I'm hoping somehow they share the award and if backed into a corner I would vote for Rachel.
Bottom line for me is that synthetic surfaces have brought us nothing but insanity. You can see it on this Board. Without this evil crap none of the heated debate would be going on. How has this synthetic misery helped racing? Someone tell me. :bang:I have to go with cj on this one, AM. Actions speak louder than words. ;)
I don’t have a problem with Asmussen other than he seems to have avoided developing the same synthetic surface skills that have brought Shirreffs such success; which may have played a part in his client’s planning. Jackson paid a king’s ransom for Rachel, and showed the courage of his convictions by running her in the Preakness; but then played it safe the rest of the way at her preferred distance. Even the Woodward posed minimum risk from the two older G1-winning males who had taken turns beating each other at the distance.
If Jackson had stuck by his repeated statements last year against synthetic surfaces, and made a positive statement by keeping his not-yet-synthetically-unproven Curlin out of the BC Classic as he indicated he would, I wouldn’t have a problem with him, either. But he caved in and ran; finishing behind the Moss-owned/Shirreffs-trained Tiago who was also better on dirt than synthetic. His reward for this gallant display of “sportsmanship,” was HOY at the expense of the undefeated, and arguably more-deserving Zenyatta. Now he has another HOY candidate with a prior victory over synthetic that he declined to run against Zenyatta in the BC; not even at 9 f in the Lady’s Classsic. Does he deserve the same consideration again this year?
Which brings us to Moss who some feel deserves special credit for not having been taken in by all the hype generated in favor of the synthetic surface mandate and saying so. While it’s true he didn’t vote for the CHRB mandate, neither did he vote against it -- be abstained. With both these fine fellows associated with Zenyatta, it appears more appropriate to focus more on what they do than on what they say.
What they have done is develop the best thoroughbred in the world at the traditionally classic 10 f as well as the richest thoroughbred in North America. What their competition has done is develop the fastest thoroughbred in North America at 9 f (or if you prefer “at distances shorter than 10 f”), accumulated a less-than-desirable return on their investment, and played a weaker game of chess this year.
I just love it when things that are supposed to be only black or white turn out to be red all over. Zenyatta’s success on synthetic doesn’t erase all the problems they are obviously causing with the average thoroughbred, especially those that don’t benefit from Shirreff’s scrutiny, but neither does the fact that Zenyatta’s accomplishments were achieved on synthetics devalue them.
Seabiscuit@AR
11-15-2009, 03:07 AM
If the Olympics are being held in your home town there is no need to travel anywhere else as the world will come to you
The Breeders Cup races were scheduled for 2 years in a row at Santa Anita plus California generally still stages plenty of G1 races during the year. There was no need for the Zenyatta connections to leave California. If I had been training it I would have stayed in California too
If the BC races had been held on the East coast in 2008-09 it would be an entirely different scenario. But that was not the case
It is obvious from the Apple Blossom that Zenyatta handles dirt fine and based on that run there is no reason to think the trainer is wrong. Zenyatta monstered her opponents that day (one of which was at odds of 2-5)
Zenyatta has won on cushion, polytrack, proride, and dirt
andymays
11-15-2009, 08:30 AM
[font=Verdana]I have to go with cj on this one, AM. Actions speak louder than words. ;) [/color]
I don’t have a problem with Asmussen other than he seems to have avoided developing the same synthetic surface skills that have brought Shirreffs such success; which may have played a part in his client’s planning. Jackson paid a king’s ransom for Rachel, and showed the courage of his convictions by running her in the Preakness; but then played it safe the rest of the way at her preferred distance. Even the Woodward posed minimum risk from the two older G1-winning males who had taken turns beating each other at the distance.
If Jackson had stuck by his repeated statements last year against synthetic surfaces, and made a positive statement by keeping his not-yet-synthetically-unproven Curlin out of the BC Classic as he indicated he would, I wouldn’t have a problem with him, either. But he caved in and ran; finishing behind the Moss-owned/Shirreffs-trained Tiago who was also better on dirt than synthetic. His reward for this gallant display of “sportsmanship,” was HOY at the expense of the undefeated, and arguably more-deserving Zenyatta. Now he has another HOY candidate with a prior victory over synthetic that he declined to run against Zenyatta in the BC; not even at 9 f in the Lady’s Classsic. Does he deserve the same consideration again this year?
Which brings us to Moss who some feel deserves special credit for not having been taken in by all the hype generated in favor of the synthetic surface mandate and saying so. While it’s true he didn’t vote for the CHRB mandate, neither did he vote against it -- be abstained. With both these fine fellows associated with Zenyatta, it appears more appropriate to focus more on what they do than on what they say.
What they have done is develop the best thoroughbred in the world at the traditionally classic 10 f as well as the richest thoroughbred in North America. What their competition has done is develop the fastest thoroughbred in North America at 9 f (or if you prefer “at distances shorter than 10 f”), accumulated a less-than-desirable return on their investment, and played a weaker game of chess this year.
I just love it when things that are supposed to be only black or white turn out to be red all over. Zenyatta’s success on synthetic doesn’t erase all the problems they are obviously causing with the average thoroughbred, especially those that don’t benefit from Shirreff’s scrutiny, but neither does the fact that Zenyatta’s accomplishments were achieved on synthetics devalue them.
Developing Training skills on synthetic (It depends which synthetic surface) has to do with the breeding of the horses in the barn and training them for stamina. Getting horses to finish is much more important. Most of the Trainers out here will work their horses an extra furlong when comparing their regimen to a few years ago. Having a jockey that understands the surface is important as well. How you ride the horse is more important than ever on Pro Ride. I think some of the European Jockeys kept their horses too close to the pace in the Breeders Cup and compromised their best chances in that regard.
As far as Rachel in the Woodward and that spot posing minimum risk, I disagree. Rachel did all the work in that race and still won. Very few could have endured her trip. Zenyatta sat in the perfect spot and cut the corner. She did have some traffic in mid stretch and did win going away in an awesome performance.
http://www.derbytrail.com/wp/?p=881
As if her victory wasn’t impressive enough, the way in which she won borders on impossible. Pressed from the opening bell, Calvin Borel and Rachel Alexandra set brutal early fractions as alternately Da’ Tara, Past the Point, Cool Coal Man, It’s a Bird and Bullsbay took runs at them. The filly fractured them one after another. Macho Again, who was having the affair served to him on a pace plate, took his turn past the eighth pole and could not get past the remarkable poetess in motion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't kid yourself, last year Jackson was "punked" by the two biased networks HRTV and TVG along with all the marketeers at Santa Anita. They suckered him into working Curlin over it knowing full well it was different in the morning and he would work well over it. They tried to do the same thing this year and too his credit he wasn't "punked" again.
Most likely Rachel would have finished at the back of the pack over Pro Ride. This is the part that stuns me. The surface plays a huge role in racing and Pro Ride is more extreme than any other. From what I see on this board quite a few people don't think it matters. Understanding that it does matter, especially on Pro Ride, is fundamental to any discussion.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As far as Moss not voting against sythetics and not voting for them I don't have much of a problem with it. At the time just about everyone bought into the infomercial and the few that didn't were ridiculed as not caring about horses. Baffert was almost run out of town (literally). Mandating them was a rush to judgement and just about everyone involved regrets the decision. Even Shapiro says the mandate was a mistake.
I'm still waiting for some reporter to ask a few different people involved if they recieved any personal financial gain for sellling these surfaces to the public and installing them in California. It's easy to know who these people are because they still make their false claims to this day.
I wonder if anyone would care if they did gain financially from the madate. Would it matter to anyone?
Hey Reporters, ask the effin question already and get these guys on the Record! :bang:
rwwupl
11-15-2009, 10:58 AM
This is a great thread, with outstanding contributers and good logic(for the most part). We, as horseplayers,are opinionated and back our opinions daily and put our money where our mouth is.
Sometimes, the race is so close, there needs to be a photo, and even then there are disputes.
This HOY selection is good for racing, we have two great candidates. The question has taken us beyond inside talking points.
Have I changed my mind on who I support for HOY? Heck No!
Have you changed your mind on who you support? Heck No!, and I do not expect much change on anyones part because we love our game and we are all opinionated with our bias and will find new reasons to make our case no matter what the other side brings up.
Even after the decision is made by others of who the HOY is, there will be arguments . To borrow an old saying from the world of Poker, "The winners laugh and smile and the losers cry deal."
Horseracing is a great game. I am glad it is my lifes passion. I have no regrets.
Oh, here comes Zenyatta, its unbelievable !
rwwupl
11-15-2009, 11:29 AM
P.S. --- Exerpt from Hovdey ,DRF http://www.drf.com/news/article/108938.html
There has been talk of Santa Anita launching some kind of Horse of the Year campaign for Zenyatta, to which Moss said he has no objections.
"I would expect the Breeders' Cup to really make something of this as well," Moss added. "It is the championship series, and if one doesn't acknowledge that, what have you got? You certainly want the event to go on next year attracting the best horses in the world, which it has even this year, save perhaps one.
A good point!
Silly argument...it is a year long event, not a one race title. Zenyatta can have Race of the Year.
DeanT
11-15-2009, 12:37 PM
It might be a silly argument, but forging the BC brand and attracting owners to race in it is very important to the sport, imo. I think as a day and a brand, that day, more than any other, can bring new people to the game. Anything the winners, the tracks and the BC can do to make sure owners support it for the good of the game is a good thing.
If the narrative, worldwide, can change from the Bc being a year end race, to being a year end championship that owners need to point to, will be a good thing for racing.
It might be a silly argument, but forging the BC brand and attracting owners to race in it is very important to the sport, imo. I think as a day and a brand, that day, more than any other, can bring new people to the game. Anything the winners, the tracks and the BC can do to make sure owners support it for the good of the game is a good thing.
If the narrative, worldwide, can change from the Bc being a year end race, to being a year end championship that owners need to point to, will be a good thing for racing.
Maybe, then again maybe not. The BC has sabotaged many once great stakes races. As it is now, nobody cares about anything but the Derby, Preakness, Belmont (if it is for the TC), and the BC outside hard core racing fans. 6 weeks, and then 2 days 5 months later, aren't enough to bring the sport back from the dead. To be honest, not many care about the BC either. It is pretty much the Triple Crown and nothing for non-bettors.
DeanT
11-15-2009, 12:56 PM
I think the BC is a way to attract bettors. What they have done is pretty interesting and the day itself lends itself to growing the game, imo; more than any TC day.
Derby Day is great, there are Derby parties and the infield with once a year fans. That's wonderful, but it is one race and those fans are not there to bet, they are there to be seen and have a party. Even on television there are fashion show pieces and very little betting info. It is one race, then people go home and come back, or not come back next year.
The Breeders Cup is a smorgasbord of races. If people get together and try a pick 6 with all races televised, or are alive in a pick 3 because something caught their eye in those three races it is a good thing and they learn a bit about racing. Worldwide we are seeing them pushing the signal - Singapore bet a few hundred k this year, France did $3M, Mexico did $2M. Betfair did $26M - a record.
Some people watch the final table in the World Series of Poker in one ESPN episode - and that is fine. But I doubt they will be heading to nearest poker table because they are there for that entertainment. However a player who watches the WSOP series on ESPN it is something different - they see poker played as it should be - a grind and a mind game.
Right now the BC does not attract everyone. Some for personl reasons, like Jackson, and some because they do not see it as a year end championship and do not point to it (eg Sea the Stars). If they keep building this brand, distributing the signal everywhere and nudge horse owners with great horses to support it and point horses to it, it is a good thing.
3000 fans went to the Mother Goose this year. Other late stakes drew a handful of fans. We need those horses to worry more about racing in front of people, rather than racing in front of no people. These horses and this day has to be showcased, imo, and I hope all horse owners look beyond the front of their nose (hard to do in racing, I know) and help build it for the next generation of bettors and fans.
andymays
11-15-2009, 01:46 PM
We all know the Breeders' Cup carries extra weight and if it does and all Grade 1 Races are not equal lets assign a defining value to the Graded Races.
How about Super Duper Grade 1 instead of just Grade 1? A Super Duper Grade 1 could be equal to winning two or three grade 1 races. :lol: Just Sayin!
rwwupl
11-15-2009, 02:12 PM
SO--- The 3 year old ran 8 times, The Mare run 5 times, The Mare won more money per start by far. Sort of indicates who faced tougher competition, No?
Carry on. :)
FenceBored
11-15-2009, 02:26 PM
SO--- The 3 year old ran 8 times, The Mare run 5 times, The Mare won more money per start by far. Sort of indicates who faced tougher competition, No?
Carry on. :)
By that logic the competition in the Delta Jackpot and the Sunland Derby is tougher than the competition in the JCGC or the Donn. Love it. :jump:
rwwupl
11-15-2009, 03:59 PM
By that logic the competition in the Delta Jackpot and the Sunland Derby is tougher than the competition in the JCGC or the Donn. Love it. :jump:
Huh?
I guess you do not think much of the Breeders Cup Classic and what it stands for ?
I love it too ;)
FenceBored
11-15-2009, 04:21 PM
Huh?
I guess you do not think much of the Breeders Cup Classic and what it stands for ?
I love it too ;)
Purse value is no indication of strength of competition.
rwwupl
11-15-2009, 05:17 PM
:) Purse value is no indication of strength of competition.
Purse value is a good rule of thumb of strength of competition. Of course ,each person has their own opinion.
I do not think Rachel or "Z" were invited to or considered running in the races you note.
Some of the races the 3 year old filly won, "Z" was not eligible or interested in.
Most connection s of outstanding horses would prefer the title Champion of the Breeders Cup Classic of 2009.
That outstanding horse is named ZENYATTA :)
Most knowledgable horseplayers realize this was not your father's BC Classic. This was just a big purse, 10f BC Turf.
The BC synthetic races remind me of the Cotton Bowl and Rose Bowl. They used to decide college football titles. Now, though they maintain the same name and offer big payouts, everyone knows they just aren't the same.
vBulletin® v3.8.9, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.