Hey PA, What does "rank" mean?

[azibuck]

In another thread, you said:

Was FC rank? I didn't see it. I've seen plenty of rank horses over the last 16 years, and FC did not strike me as one of them.

Can you (or anyone) define "rank" for me? And I'm NOT challenging your opinion, I'm asking for two reasons:

1) I really don't know.

2) Everyone else, like Bailey, and I think even FC's connections, used the term to describe FC.

I'm also a bit curious about whose "fault" it is.

Just looking for some education. Thanks,

az

[Show Me the Wire]

Definition of rank:


A fractious horse, especially when "running rank" , it refuses to be rated early in the pace.

From AINSLIE'S COMPLETE GUIDE TO THOROUGHBRED RACING.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

[SAL]

I always thought that "rank" meant that the jockey was having trouble getting the horse to do what he wanted it to do. In other words, fighting the jockey. In my opinion, FC wasn't that rank, though Santos had to lay the hammerlock on him early on.

[Storm Cadet]

Another way to feel what a rank horse and Santos had to deal with is:

Take a large dog on a walk, like a golden or lab. And he WON'T walk with you, he pulls YOU along for the ride. And you try to hold him back and you pull on the lesh to control him and hold him back from running away... Well, after a awhile that dog expends a huge amount of strength and energy during that walk. Then try to ask that dog to run the last block home, after he just wore himself out trying to pull you along for awhile. He has no gas left. He's sucking wind like you!

Now take that same dog on another day who will walk briskly WITH you at your side, not pulling you. He sure can and will run that last block to the house because he did not expend all his energy fighting you.

Simplistic, but all animals have to be taught and learn.

[PaceAdvantage]

To me, a rank horse is one who is throwing his head about, fighting the jockey tooth and nail....

I'm sure there are some degrees of rankness, and I defer to the professional jockey (Jerry Bailey) who says FC was rank...but I didn't see it....

Sure, Santos looked like he had quite a hold of FC, but Santos rides like that at times (some call it the Chilean Choke Hold)...and if you watch his elbows, he had plenty of give still....

If he was rank, then he ran a hell of a race to be third.....

[WINMANWIN]

Excellent rank analogies in my book Gang. But was I the only one who noticed how Funny's neck was twisted for like 100 yards on the backstretch ? :confused: I'm sure many saw that also.
When I saw the neck turned toward the rail significantly, I knew
Bailey had him, no question.....As most of us know, after watching
1000's of races. Funny was a loser on the backside. I didn't wanna see Funny on the lead either in that race, But Jose
figured no one wants it, He wants to go, so lets GO !!!
Also many thought Funny would love the muddy track.Empire beat him at Aqueduct on a track that was better than Belmont day
but still had moisture. Lets face facts, I am a Big FUNNY FAN,
But trainer Bobby Frankel confided to another trainer after the derby, Funny will not beat EMPIRE MAKER ever again !!! Bobby
Knew EMPIRE WAS HURT PRIOR TO THE DERBY, and backed off
some in his training, so Belmont Day, If you read the quotes
prior, Empire was ready. I must admit I did use both together
on top in tri keys, But lets not be SHOCKED that Funny didnt
complete the triple crown, Empire Maker proved he's a runner also.

[Tee]

Originally posted by Storm Cadet
Another way to feel what a rank horse and Santos had to deal with is:

Take a large dog on a walk, like a golden or lab. And he WON'T walk with you, he pulls YOU along for the ride. And you try to hold him back and you pull on the lesh to control him and hold him back from running away... Well, after a awhile that dog expends a huge amount of strength and energy during that walk. Then try to ask that dog to run the last block home, after he just wore himself out trying to pull you along for awhile. He has no gas left. He's sucking wind like you!

Now take that same dog on another day who will walk briskly WITH you at your side, not pulling you. He sure can and will run that last block to the house because he did not expend all his energy fighting you.

Simplistic, but all animals have to be taught and learn.

I know the feeling well, my guy is very enthusiastic when we start a walk, he pulls hard. He settles down quite nicely shortly after we start - thankfully!! Can only imagine what a rider goes through trying to hold back a thoroughbred.

[MV McKee]

Tough call to differentiate between "rank" and "eager".
There was obviously a difference of opinion between horse and jockey regarding how fast they should be running in the early stages of the race.
From my experience, there was absolutely no doubt that Funny Cide was not tractable, essentially rank, just not in as theatrical a manner as most of us are accustomed to seeing.
While Santos obviously had a strong hold on the gelding, this did not form the basis for my opinion. At approximately the 1/2 mile (to run) pole, Santos relaxed his hold on Funny Cide for 2-3 strides or so. The gelding visibly lengthened his stride for that brief period and actually increased his advantage over Empire Maker by 1/2 length. Santos immediatly took another hold of FC, and so it goes.
If you watch the video, this brief moment is rather easy to detect.
Santos doesn't actually ask Funny Cide at this point, but merely allows him (for the first time) to have his head. The dropping of Funny Cides head and brief acceleration are quite apparent, albeit brief.
As for Santos, I don't believe he "blew" anything. I believe the only horse to lose the Triple Crown solely because of a poor (extremely misjudged) ride was Real Quiet. If Santos had let Funny Cide run early he may have forced Bailey's hand and required Empire Maker to run more than 1/4 mile, but then Ten Most Wanted may have been in the catbird's seat. As it was, the Belmont was essentially a turf race run in the mud. Tough call on the strategy for the jock, but I do know that if he had opened up 10 lengths and lost by the same margin, he'd be getting flamed.

[PaceAdvantage]

One other question....does a rank horse run 6f in a mile and a half race in 1:13 and change??

[Show Me the Wire]

PA:

Yes, if the horse did it while refusing to rate early in the pace. If the horse rated easily how much slower could he have run in its atttempt to control the pace and resulting in something left for the finish. Even better compare how easily E.M. ran the first 3/4 becuase he was tractable.

Fractions should not be used to determine if a horse is rank. It is not how fast or slow the horse runs it is how the horse accomplishes its run. That is what jocks mean when they say time is only important in jail.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally posted by Show Me the Wire
Fractions should not be used to determine if a horse is rank. It is not how fast or slow the horse runs it is how the horse accomplishes its run.

I realize that. I was just trying to provide some bit of evidence that might contradict what we normally think of as the performance of a rank horse. I guess I have to go watch the tape again.....

[karlskorner]

As stated in my chart callers book for DRF

Rank: Used to describe a horse that is fighting his jockey and is unmangeable

[Show Me the Wire]

PA:

I think I understand. apparently rank has different meanings and maybe some of the confusion is because the official chart does not say F.C. was rank.

Chart comment from DRF @, (used for educational purposes)
" FUNNY CIDE broke outward slightly at the start, rushed up to gain the early advantage on the first turn, set the pace well off the rail while in hand along the backstretch, led to the far turn, relinquished the lead to the winner at the three-sixteenths pole, battled along the inside to the top of the stretch then weakened from his early efforts."

Rank to a rider describes a horse that refuses to rate early in the pace. Rank as understood by most people is a fractious horse, a horse that fights its rider, throws its head about, etc. To a chart caller I think rank means an unmanageable. All have a different meaning depending on who is using the term.

Yes, F.C. was rank becuase of his reluctance to relax (rate) on the lead, not becuase he was thrashing about.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

[formula_2002]

Originally posted by PaceAdvantage

Sure, Santos looked like he had quite a hold of FC, but Santos rides like that at times (some call it the Chilean Choke Hold)...and if you watch his elbows, he had plenty of give still....

If he was rank, then he ran a hell of a race to be third.....

I could not help notice Santos's legs. They were almost straight out. Reminded me of one of those Tom and Jerry cartons where a running Tom trying to stop before he hits a wall.

Is that Santos's style?.

Joe M

[kenwoodall]

For a good example of Rank, taken from military term "rank and file" meaning the need to lead, check pp's for sprints start position, and routes 1st call. Very early leaders rarely win, and then only wire-to-wire because they use too much energy too fast. If you ever see those very early leaders lose the lead and regain it, put that horse on your Watch list!!

[PaceAdvantage]

So, even though the chart caller says he was "in hand", he still qualifies as rank. Even though he runs 6f in 1:13 and change, he still qualifies as rank. Even though Santos was riding Funny Cide like he rides a lot of horses, he still qualifies as rank.

SMTW, I don't understand how FC could not be considered rating on the lead, given the fact that he was well under Santos' control (probably TOO much under his control, but that's not FC's fault)....given that he did NOT run off by a quick 5 lengths early on...and given that he set reasonably slow fractions.....

Not to mention FC did not display any of the usual visual clues a rank horse displays (except for his excess lead changes).

Perhaps you could go into some detail as to why FC qualified as rank under your definition....that would be very helpful to me...


==PA

[WINMANWIN]

Nice discussion on Rank, and most posts are correct I think.
But, If anyone has not reviewed the race on the backside, Please
do as FUNNYCIDES Neck was TURNED, TWISTED to the RAIL, and
this running style couldn't HELP matters.So, For clarification
When A STEED runs with his neck twisted, and The jock
obviously, Doesn't want him running like that, I would consider
the term RANK.......or, Possibly NECK TURNED TO RAIL ON BACKSIDE, OR TWISTED NECK ON BACKSIDE.....:confused: LOL
It's strange sometimes when we read the charts..Unless, we see the race Live or via replay, The trip notes can be deceiving. Granted they are Helpful, but they can be better. For instance
I couldn't wait to BET BEAUTIFUL AMERICA the other day at Belmont. She was the chalk, But I saw her last race at Aqueduct
and Knew she was the best that day, but had a horrible trip.
The trip noted was PINCHED BACK START...Yes, and What Else
happened ? She was SHUT OFF Repeatedly in the Stretch and that wasn't mentioned. Just an example of many :rolleyes:

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally posted by PaceAdvantage
[B(probably TOO much under his control, but that's not FC's fault
==PA [/B]

PA:

That is it. Nobody is at fault and F.C. was certainly not being a real bad actor on the track. It simply means F.C. wanted to run faster than Santos wanted and F.C. did not slow down when Santo asked him to slow down. Instead F.C. tried to keep on with the same pace, while ignoring the communication signal from his rider to turn it down a notch.

Hope this calrifies it.

I only answered because, I pretended this question was asked through pm.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

[VetScratch]

I don't want to quibble about the definition of rank.

I do want to point out that plenty of winners, to one degree or another, satisfy characteristics for rankness listed in this thread.

Every exercise rider and jockey knows horses that are always rank. As they say, "That $#@*$ is always a handful!"

Seldom does a horse get described as a rank winner!

Furthermore, once the TV commentators latched onto rank, they pretty much put that word into the mouth of everyone they interviewed after the race. Political correctness dilutes candor when this happens.

I will accept some degree of rankness in FC's case, because we all saw the same race. More, importantly, it appeared to me that FC was simply not "getting hold of the track" and changed leads as a reflexive response.

From those of you in the Belmont inner circle, what I would like to know is FC's reputation on the training track. How he routinely behaves will tell us a good deal about what we might expect in the future, and also help us evaluate the impact of track conditions on Belmont Day.

BTW, for those who argue about track surfaces, the condition of the bottom is just as important as the colloidal surface, and there is no such thing as a horse who "loves the mud" (i.e., a treacherously slippery bottom or constant variations in the depth of the colloidal surface above the bottom).

[freeneasy]

he wanted his own head, santos recognized this and brought him up to the lead. if santos had not put fc on restraints and allowed him to continue with his head he would have easily went to the 3/4s in 1:11:4 - 1:12:0. which could have been good in a number of ways and at the same time detrimental. santos seeing it as a more detrimental then good undertaking, to let the horse go in 1:12:0 held him back to 1:13:0. the statagy was right but the horse did not respond in the manner hoped for. fc had his own mind and instinctively did not want to be held back when restraint was applied. he "ran through" fought through or ranked through the application made by santos to settle him down and relax him through a 1:13 3/4s. he expended at least 1:12 seconds worth of unrecoupable energy in the one minute and thirteen seconds he got to the 3/4s in. he just wasnt in the mood to rated to the degree that santos tried to get him to rate in. not santos fault, not the horses fault. and it sho wadnt mine:D