PDA

View Full Version : Frankel runs Wednesday (8-22)


horses4courses
08-21-2012, 10:48 AM
Race to be shown on HRTV

10:40am ET - attempts 10 furlongs for the first time - his main rivals are St. Nicholas Abbey (2011 BC Turf winner) and Farhh

http://www.sportinglife.com/racing/racecards/22-08-2012/york/racecard/508809/juddmonte-international-stakes-group-1-british-champions-series

York
Juddmonte International Stakes (Group 1) (British Champions Series) 1m 2f 88y
(3yo+, 1m 2f 88y, Class 1, 9 runners)
Winner £411,148 2nd £155,875 3rd £78,010 4th £38,860 5th £19,502 6th £9,788
Going: Good to Firm
Surface: Turf
# Form Horse A Wgt Trainer Jockey OR Naps Odds
1
(6)
5/78-464
Bullet Train 21
5 9-5 Sir H R A Cecil E Ahern 108
2
(4)
1/1-1322
Farhh 21
4 9-5 Saeed bin Suroor L Dettori 122
3
(7)
111-111
Frankel 21
4 9-5 Sir H R A Cecil T P Queally 140
4
(8)
458-337
Planteur (IRE) 63
5 9-5 M Botti R L Moore 117
5
(5)
343600
Robin Hood (IRE) 32
4 9-5 v A P O'Brien J A Heffernan 99
6
(2)
7-16571
Sri Putra 25
6 9-5 hb R Varian N Callan 116
7
(3)
51-2213
St Nicholas Abbey (IRE) 32
5 9-5 A P O'Brien J P O'Brien 124
8
(9)
110-233
Twice Over 46
7 9-5 Sir H R A Cecil I Mongan 118
9
(1)
316545
Windsor Palace (IRE) 27
7 9-5 v A P O'Brien C O'Donoghue 106
Race History

Year Draw Horse A Wgt Trainer Jockey SP
2011 4 Twice Over 6 9-5 Sir H R A Cecil I Mongan 11/2
show more
Betting

Forecast
Frankel (1/7), St Nicholas Abbey (6/1), Farhh (14/1), Twice Over (25/1), Planteur (33/1), Sri Putra (50/1), Bullet Train (150/1), Robin Hood (200/1), Windsor Palace (200/1)

In depth

Verdict
This has always been the plan for the mighty FRANKEL and he can pass this stiffer test of stamina with flying colours. Nothing has managed to get him off the bridle over 1m this year and Farhh, even if he takes his chance, looks to have no hope of reversing Sussex Stakes form with Sir Henry Cecil's superstar. The only worry would be if regular pacemaker Bullet Train and St Nicholas Abbey's stable companions, Robin Hood and Windsor Palace, were to set a suicidal gallop but even then you suspect that the world's top-rated equine performer would have the pace to outpoint St Nicholas Abbey, who is infinitely better over 1m4f. Cecil also runs last year's winner Twice Over and he has place claims along with Sri Putra, who often goes well at a big price in this type of race though did finish behind Farhh and Twice Over in the Coral-Eclipse.

Formwatch
Bullet Train 150-1 (9-7) Led, pushed along and joined 3f out, headed approaching final 2f, outpaced and lot 2nd inside final 2f, well beaten when lost 3rd near finish, last of 4, 10l behind Frankel (9-7) at Goodwood 1m Grp 1 (1) gd.

Farhh 11-1 (9-7) Tracked leading pair, pushed along and switched left 3f out, went 2nd but well outpaced by winner inside final 2f, never any chance, 2nd of 4, 6l behind Frankel (9-7) at Goodwood 1m Grp 1 (1) gd.

Frankel 1-20fav (9-7) Tracked pacemaker, moved upsides on bit 3f out, led approaching final 2f, quickened well clear over 1f out, impressive, won at Goodwood 1m Grp 1 (1) gd beating Farhh (9-7) by 6l, 4 ran.

Planteur (IRE) 10-1 (9-0) Sweating, held up towards rear, headway towards inside 2f out, ridden over 1f out, faded inside final furlong, 7th of 11, 6l behind So You Think (9-0) at Royal Ascot 1m 2f Grp 1 (1) gd in Jun.

Robin Hood (IRE) 100-1 (9-7) Started slowly, headway to lead 10f out, headed and weakened rapidly over 3f out, tailed off and eased, last of 10, well behind Danedream (9-4) at Ascot 1m 4f Grp 1 (1) gs in Jul.

Sri Putra 12-1 (9-2) Held up behind in touch, headway over 2f out, ridden to challenge over 1f out, edged left inside final furlong, stayed on to lead towards finish, won at York 1m 2f Grp 2 (1) gf in Jul beating Afsare (9-2) by nk, 9 ran.

St Nicholas Abbey (IRE) 5-1 (9-7) Held up last, headway under strong pressure and hung right entering final 2f, hard driven and went 3rd inside final furlong, no chance with leading duo, 3rd of 10, 1 3/4l behind Danedream (9-4) at Ascot 1m 4f Grp 1 (1) gs in Jul.

Twice Over 16-1 (9-7) Held up in rear, headway over 2f out, soon not much room brielfy, went 3rd inside final furlong, stayed on, not able to challenge, 3rd of 9, 3 1/2l behind Nathaniel (9-7) at Sandown 1m 2f Grp 1 (1) gs in Jul.

Windsor Palace (IRE) 14-1 (9-12) Soon prominent and wide, disputed after 2f, 2nd entering straight, ridden in 3rd 2f out, no extra over 1f out, 5th of 6, 8l behind Famous Name (9-12) at Leopardstown 1m 1f Grp 3 (1) gd in Jul.

classhandicapper
08-21-2012, 11:46 AM
This is what they've been aiming for. So now we'll get to see if he can pass a new test and finish well at a longer distance against what looks like a decent field.

This should be fun.

Steve R
08-21-2012, 01:35 PM
I believe the race is actually 10.4 furlongs (1 mile, 2 furlongs and 88 yards).

LLHorses
08-21-2012, 03:12 PM
At The Races Program (http://www.attheraces.com/card.aspx?raceid=708808&meetingid=54023&date=2012-08-22&ref=cardmain&refsite=&nav=racecards)

Click on any horses name for a complete race history.


Or here's a PDF Printout (http://data.attheraces.com/images/atrform/racecards/20120822/20120822yor1540atrformtimeformracecardandformdata. pdf)


Scroll down for each horses' last 6 races

Some_One
08-21-2012, 08:03 PM
3 rabbits in the race, going to be very interesting to watch how that unfolds. I think Frankel might ignore them and just stick to Bullet Train for 6f then go on his way.

Stillriledup
08-21-2012, 08:28 PM
I would bet against him. As good as he is in real life (which is very good) the hype is far outweighing his actual talent. No way he can live up to what people seem to expect from him. I don't remember a more hyped horse in all the years i've been following this game.

PaceAdvantage
08-21-2012, 09:08 PM
Surely you jest.

PhantomOnTour
08-21-2012, 09:21 PM
I would bet against him. As good as he is in real life (which is very good) the hype is far outweighing his actual talent. No way he can live up to what people seem to expect from him. I don't remember a more hyped horse in all the years i've been following this game.
Ever heard of Sea The Stars?
.
.
.
.
.
.
or Zenyatta ?

Frankel is one of, if not THE, highest rated horses ever on Timeform....if a horse came around that equaled or bettered the Beyer given Secretariat for his Belmont he would be hyped to the heavens, and rightly so.

Tom
08-21-2012, 10:02 PM
How does he live up to expectations?

Win?

So you say no way i hell he wins, right? As good as he is right now.






OK.

Stillriledup
08-22-2012, 02:45 AM
How does he live up to expectations?

Win?

So you say no way i hell he wins, right? As good as he is right now.






OK.

Actually, i dont think that's true. Zenyatta won and won and won and got bashed and bashed and bashed. Same thing for Rapid Redux, all he did was win and all he did was create another skeptic along the way.

As far as me saying no way he wins, i fully expect him to win by a large margin, that's what usually happens in his races, right? I dont view this stuff from a 'racing fan' standpoint, i'm just looking at from a gambling standpoint. I always look to beat heavy favorites, i dont have to beat too many of them to show a really nice profit. I don't live in Europe so i have no way of betting against him, but this is the type of horse i routinely bet against knowing that i dont have to be right very often to make a pretty good score.

I know, its against the grain and its anti establishment and against the popular opinion, but the only way to survive in this betting game is to go against the public at large. When the whole world is zigging, i'm zagging.

Now, its nothing against the horse himself. this is strictly a gambling opinion and not a 'pretty horsey' opinion. I try and keep my fan side and my gambling side seperate. As a fan, i want him to win by 100 lengths and break all kinds of records and create a world wide sensation that we've seen pegasus actually come out of the sky and visit earth. My betting persona is just looking to beat him, with nothing personal at all entering in the equasion. Its not personal, its business.

PaceAdvantage
08-22-2012, 02:47 AM
Actually, i dont think that's true. Zenyatta won and won and won and got bashed and bashed and bashed. Same thing for Rapid Redux, all he did was win and all he did was create another skeptic along the way.Do I need to point out the obvious in that Frankel has never lost?

Stillriledup
08-22-2012, 04:30 AM
Do I need to point out the obvious in that Frankel has never lost?


I was just commenting on Tom's comment that if you win, you live up to expectations and gave an example of a horse who won won won but that didnt seem to be enough for many. The expectations are so high right now for Frankel, im not sure he can live up to it (keeping the gambling part seperate).

If Frankel opens up a big lead, tires late and hangs on to win by a diminishing half length, will everyone say "he won, he did what he had to do, he's as great as ever". Im not sure people are going to be satisfied unless he wins going away by 5 lengths or more.

Just winning races doesnt seem to be enough for people, they want dominance and they want epic stuff. Z won and won and won, but she didnt win by 10 under a hammerlock, she gave her fans stressful moments on a few occasions and many other occasions she won by 2 lengths or less, that wasnt enough for everyone even though a nose win is the same as a 10 length win, counts just the same in the record books.

I would love to see Frankel win by 10 in his next start and if he has any more starts after that, another 10 length win. I'd also love to see him come for the Breeders Cup, but no way that's going to happen.

If Frankel retires undefeated (which seems likely) and never leaves his home area and never races on dirt and never really races around 3 or 4 turns and all his wins were by open lengths, are you going to feel completely satisfied and ready to annoint him the best in history? Doesnt part of you want to see him outside his comfy zone? As a true sportsman (ok, maybe not ;-)) i'd love to see him do something out of that zone, ya know, like pulling an Akeem Joffer and come to America.

UK View
08-22-2012, 04:36 AM
I was just commenting on Tom's comment that if you win, you live up to expectations and gave an example of a horse who won won won but that didnt seem to be enough for many. The expectations are so high right now for Frankel, im not sure he can live up to it (keeping the gambling part seperate).

If Frankel opens up a big lead, tires late and hangs on to win by a diminishing half length, will everyone say "he won, he did what he had to do, he's as great as ever". Im not sure people are going to be satisfied unless he wins going away by 5 lengths or more.

Just winning races doesnt seem to be enough for people, they want dominance and they want epic stuff. Z won and won and won, but she didnt win by 10 under a hammerlock, she gave her fans stressful moments on a few occasions and many other occasions she won by 2 lengths or less, that wasnt enough for everyone even though a nose win is the same as a 10 length win, counts just the same in the record books.

I would love to see Frankel win by 10 in his next start and if he has any more starts after that, another 10 length win. I'd also love to see him come for the Breeders Cup, but no way that's going to happen.

If Frankel retires undefeated (which seems likely) and never leaves his home area and never races on dirt and never really races around 3 or 4 turns and all his wins were by open lengths, are you going to feel completely satisfied and ready to annoint him the best in history? Doesnt part of you want to see him outside his comfy zone? As a true sportsman (ok, maybe not ;-)) i'd love to see him do something out of that zone, ya know, like pulling an Akeem Joffer and come to America.

Why on Earth would he want to run on dirt?

Do top US horses (ie Zenyatta) need to have run on turf to be considered great.

Outside the US there is literally zero interest in Dirt. That doesn't mean its no good.

UK View
08-22-2012, 05:20 AM
Here's the horses website btw.

Quite a good one with lots of info....

http://frankel.juddmonte.com/

Stillriledup
08-22-2012, 06:00 AM
Why on Earth would he want to run on dirt?

Do top US horses (ie Zenyatta) need to have run on turf to be considered great.

Outside the US there is literally zero interest in Dirt. That doesn't mean its no good.

He doesnt have to do anything the owners don't want him to do, he's already proven he's great. But, there's a difference between great and the very best who ever looked thru a bridle.

In the US, Zenyatta got hammered becuase most of her races were in the West. People wanted to see her travel the country, hit up numerous tracks and beat the best from around the country. She traveled some, but not as much as people would have liked.

Does he have to come to America and 'prove' anything? Absolutely not. But, if he DID actually to come to the states and crushed, i have to believe he would be in the conversation of greatest ever. As of now, i just think he's in the conversation of the greatest European turf horse, but if he's more than just a Euro turf star, its something you have to actually prove on the racetrack.

gm10
08-22-2012, 06:07 AM
Why on Earth would he want to run on dirt?

Do top US horses (ie Zenyatta) need to have run on turf to be considered great.

Outside the US there is literally zero interest in Dirt. That doesn't mean its no good.

I think the only way he runs on dirt is if he gets beaten today. In that case, a dirt BC Classic victory would add value to his reputation and future career as a stallion.

If he remains unbeaten, there is virtually no benefit in risking his perfect record in a dirt race IMO. Who would he be racing against anyway. Imagine if he got beaten by a horse of Drosselmeyer's calibre.

UK View
08-22-2012, 06:14 AM
He will never run on dirt, win or lose. More chance of running in the Turf than anything. Except the Turf is getting weaker by the year, not even G1 standard nowadays.

gm10
08-22-2012, 06:49 AM
He will never run on dirt, win or lose. More chance of running in the Turf than anything. Except the Turf is getting weaker by the year, not even G1 standard nowadays.

I can't imagine him in the Turf, regardless of what happens today. If he wins the Juddmonte, great, he's gone beyond a mile. If he loses, it's probably not going to be because he needs further.

In all likelihood he will finish his career never having raced abroad.

UK View
08-22-2012, 08:00 AM
There is another G1 in France that could come between the Juddmonte and the Champion Stakes (as there are 8 weeks in between).

Teddy Grimthorpe mentioned it as an option but I don't think Sir Henry is keen. Plus it would mean dropping him back to 1 mile, then back up to 1m 2f.

showbet
08-22-2012, 10:32 AM
I don't live in Europe so i have no way of betting against him
I don't know which ADW you use, but you can bet the race on Twinspires or Xpressbet if you hurry. With 10 minutes to post Frankel is 1/9. The second favorite is currently 36/1 and the third favorite is 61/1. The other horses are all 99/1.

davew
08-22-2012, 10:35 AM
Does anyone know where the pools are mixed at if I can bet on Xpressbet?

Does it pool in UK? My probables show 2.04 to win and place with $661 K in straight pool with 5 mtp.

nearco
08-22-2012, 10:35 AM
There is another G1 in France that could come between the Juddmonte and the Champion Stakes (as there are 8 weeks in between).

Teddy Grimthorpe mentioned it as an option but I don't think Sir Henry is keen. Plus it would mean dropping him back to 1 mile, then back up to 1m 2f.

Prix du Moulin on Sep 16th, the same day as the Arc trials (Prix Foy, Prix Neil etc).

gm10
08-22-2012, 10:35 AM
6 million pounds bet on Betfair with 7 minutes to go ...

I have to go against Frankel @ 1/9. I don't believe this is going to be a walk in the park.

Farhh 35/1 is value.

cj
08-22-2012, 10:44 AM
Wow, that was a walk in the park.

ArlJim78
08-22-2012, 10:46 AM
easy winner, no questions about that one.

Some_One
08-22-2012, 10:46 AM
He had more excuses today to lose as he missed the break complely, very fast pace and still won for fun...please, please go to the Arc

Midnight Cruiser
08-22-2012, 10:47 AM
BC needs a shot in the arm and this beast would help. Any doctors in the house?

lamboguy
08-22-2012, 10:48 AM
worldwide pari-mutuel had less than $500,000 to win on him. i guess people are to busy trading futures contracts this time in the morning!

Some_One
08-22-2012, 10:49 AM
Heard 6 million on Betfair before the off, plus the bookies amount.

UK View
08-22-2012, 10:49 AM
Simply incredible. Destroyed a good G1 field again!!

Still on the bridle at 1f pole.

Will NEVER see another like him.

:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

gm10
08-22-2012, 10:51 AM
That performance makes you believe that he could even win the Arc.

lamboguy
08-22-2012, 10:52 AM
BC needs a shot in the arm and this beast would help. Any doctors in the house?
if he happens to come i would suspect it would only be on turf. this horse runs in highpower overdrive for about 7 furlongs, i have never seen anything else that good.

if he does come, the place will have the biggest crowd ever to watch a horse race live.

classhandicapper
08-22-2012, 10:55 AM
I guess he's more than a great miler. :lol:

Now what?

Do they move the chains again?

If he won at 1 1/2M it would add to the legend. If he lost I don't think it would detract much, but that's a lot to ask.

Personally, I'm going to reserve judgment until he wins the Indianapolis 500. He's been ducking that race for 2 years now and I think he could take it. ;)

nearco
08-22-2012, 11:05 AM
Personally, I'm going to reserve judgment until he wins the Indianapolis 500. He's been ducking that race for 2 years now and I think he could take it. ;)

If this horse was any good, and Henry Cecil was any kind of trainer, he would teach him to ride a bike and enter him in the Tour de France.
Average at best.

Tom
08-22-2012, 11:33 AM
Match race with Hansen?

Ooops.
Too late.
Lucky for Frankel!~:D

Awesome horse!

picojim
08-22-2012, 01:59 PM
UgQLCeHgizo

ten2oneormore
08-22-2012, 02:09 PM
2f 88y - 31.15
3f 88y - 42.93
4f 88y - 54.90
5f 88y - 1:07.01
6f 88y - 1:19.47
7f 88y - 1:31.80
1m 88y - 1:43.24
1m 1f 88y - 1:54.69
1m 2f 88y - 2:06.82

castaway01
08-22-2012, 02:20 PM
Yeah, he's pretty good. :)

PhantomOnTour
08-22-2012, 04:35 PM
Gee...how did ever go 10f without lasix? :)

Hoofhearted
08-22-2012, 05:04 PM
I'm a believer, now !
Prior to today I had doubts about his entitlement to the "greatness" appellation tagged to him by many people, and would have argued against his comparison with Sea The Stars.
No doubts now whatsoever; he is a stupendously talented beast. :)

(Slightly off-topic, but was saddened to see how poorly Henry Cecil looked -- even compared to only two months ago. I'm very sorry to say I think we were looking at a dying man).

However, I have in the past hour layed Frankel on Betfair at 3.6 for the Arc de Triomphe. I am absolutely certain that he will not line up on the day -- convinced that he will be sent for the Champion Stakes and then retirement to stud.

Striker
08-22-2012, 05:29 PM
Any chance his timeform rating will be as high as his last(147) or higher after that performance?

Hoofhearted
08-22-2012, 06:09 PM
Frankel paid 2.04 to place?

Yep,
but keep in mind the minimum accepted bet on Tote Place pools in the U.K. is £2.
So the effective official returned Place odds on Frankel were 1/50. :)

The last Betfair Place offered odds I saw just before the off were a little better -- 1.04 :D

stuball
08-22-2012, 06:18 PM
PRETTY Good ----P R E T T E E G O O D

Stillriledup
08-22-2012, 06:18 PM
Yep,
but keep in mind the minimum accepted bet on Tote Place pools in the U.K. is £2.
So the effective official returned Place odds on Frankel were 1/50. :)

The last Betfair Place offered odds I saw just before the off were a little better -- 1.04 :D

I wonder what the American pools looked like, you get 2.10 to place....unless, Twinspires and Xbet didnt take place betting?

ten2oneormore
08-22-2012, 06:35 PM
I wonder what the American pools looked like, you get 2.10 to place....unless, Twinspires and Xbet didnt take place betting?

Twinspires was WIN only don't know about xbet

Grits
08-22-2012, 08:38 PM
Thank you for posting the video of the race. He is incredible. Its a gift to even simply be able to watch him on film. In person, I'd be breathless.

davew
08-22-2012, 08:46 PM
These are the prices shown on Xpressbet
- the place included 3 horses in this race
- the probable win showed $2.04, but says it paid $2.20

Race 4

# Horse Jockey Win Place Show
3 FRANKEL Queally T $2.20 $2.04 -
2 FARHH Dettori L - $4.80 -
7 ST NICHOLAS ABBEY (IRE) O'Brien J - $2.60 -
WinningTrainer: Henry Cecil – Owner: K Abdulla
$1 Trifecta Box Paid $8.90
$2 Exacta (3-2) Paid $8.60
$2 Trifecta (3-2-7) Paid $17.80

Some_One
08-22-2012, 08:57 PM
Timeform Ratings:
Frankel 143+
Farahh & St Nicholas Abby 128
Twice Over 115

Looking at the numbers and the past races, I think they might be 5 points to high, but that is just me.

Some_One
08-22-2012, 09:00 PM
As a footnote, the Sussex Timeforms were revised down 4 points- Frankel 136+ and Farahh 120

gm10
08-23-2012, 03:36 AM
Timeform Ratings:
Frankel 143+
Farahh & St Nicholas Abby 128
Twice Over 115

Looking at the numbers and the past races, I think they might be 5 points to high, but that is just me.

I have Frankel at 134. No way was that 143.

classhandicapper
08-23-2012, 01:53 PM
I have Frankel at 134. No way was that 143.

I rated it as "wow", which is closer to a 134.

To get a "holy freaking cow" (closer to 143), you have win like that and also overcome a tough trip.

RXB
08-23-2012, 09:09 PM
I guess he's more than a great miler. :lol:

Now what?

Do they move the chains again?

If he won at 1 1/2M it would add to the legend. If he lost I don't think it would detract much, but that's a lot to ask.

Personally, I'm going to reserve judgment until he wins the Indianapolis 500. He's been ducking that race for 2 years now and I think he could take it. ;)

Fantastic horse. But I never had much doubt about his ability to get 10f. At 12f, I would have reservations.

sandpit
08-23-2012, 10:37 PM
Fantastic horse. But I never had much doubt about his ability to get 10f. At 12f, I would have reservations.

Considering the minimal amount of effort he uses to win every one of his races, what would lead anyone to believe another quarter mile would be outside of his range?

Yesterday he was still galloping out and all the other horses he just destroyed were already unsaddled. He passed a very good group of horses yesterday with his jock sitting absolutely still while the rest of the riders were all out.

This horse is unlike anything we have seen in a very, very long time, if ever.

Stillriledup
08-24-2012, 12:27 AM
Considering the minimal amount of effort he uses to win every one of his races, what would lead anyone to believe another quarter mile would be outside of his range?

Yesterday he was still galloping out and all the other horses he just destroyed were already unsaddled. He passed a very good group of horses yesterday with his jock sitting absolutely still while the rest of the riders were all out.

This horse is unlike anything we have seen in a very, very long time, if ever.

Im not questioning your assertion that he beat a 'very good group' of horses, but just watching the race visually, it looked like the other runners were complete slugs. I know that horse who won the BC turf with the trainer's son riding, but that horse didnt look like a BC winner by any stretch of the imagination. Maybe these are very good and Frankel is just the best horse who's ever raced, but it didnt look like he was beating anything who could run a step.

RXB
08-24-2012, 01:06 AM
Considering the minimal amount of effort he uses to win every one of his races, what would lead anyone to believe another quarter mile would be outside of his range?


An extra 2f can make a big difference and I feel fairly strongly that 12f would be beyond his best. He might very well win anyway because he's such an amazing talent, but unlike his last 10 races or so I wouldn't necessarily consider the result to be a foregone conclusion if he contested the Arc.

RXB
08-24-2012, 01:09 AM
Im not questioning your assertion that he beat a 'very good group' of horses, but just watching the race visually, it looked like the other runners were complete slugs. I know that horse who won the BC turf with the trainer's son riding, but that horse didnt look like a BC winner by any stretch of the imagination. Maybe these are very good and Frankel is just the best horse who's ever raced, but it didnt look like he was beating anything who could run a step.

Frankel is a brilliant horse.

Stillriledup
08-24-2012, 01:15 AM
Frankel is a brilliant horse.

No argument, he's fantastic. Just wondering how good the also rans are.

Some_One
08-24-2012, 01:21 AM
An extra 2f can make a big difference and I feel fairly strongly that 12f would be beyond his best. He might very well win anyway because he's such an amazing talent, but unlike his last 10 races or so I wouldn't necessarily consider the result to be a foregone conclusion if he contested the Arc.

Makybe Diva won group races from 7f to 16f and of course did the Cox Plate (10f) - Cup (16f) double in consecutive weeks.

UK View
08-24-2012, 06:00 AM
No argument, he's fantastic. Just wondering how good the also rans are.

ST NICHOLAS ABBEY 4 x G1 Winner
TWICE OVER 4 x G1 Winner (3rd to Zenyatta in BC Classic)
PLANTEUR G1 Winner, (3rd in Dubai World Cup)
FARHH 4 x G1 Runner up, certainly G1 class

None of those are too shabby. They are just made to look that way by FRANKEL.

tholl
08-24-2012, 06:25 AM
An extra 2f can make a big difference and I feel fairly strongly that 12f would be beyond his best. He might very well win anyway because he's such an amazing talent, but unlike his last 10 races or so I wouldn't necessarily consider the result to be a foregone conclusion if he contested the Arc.


I agree totally. He reminds me of Brigadier Gerard. Was at his best at a mile. Got a mile and a quarter okay and won the mile and a half King George and Queen Elizabeth on pure class. Arc though is a much tougher 12 furlongs than the King George but the way Frankel won at York I think it's possible but at odds of 1/4 I think I take a shot against.

UK View
08-24-2012, 06:50 AM
I hope he does go for the Arc (although that will deprvie me of seeing him in the flesh one last time), as that would really cement his greatness. I can't see how winning the Champion Stakes will achieve anything? He will most likely be beating a weaker field than the Juddmonte. At least in the Arc he will be taking on different horses. No worries on the trip. He settles perfectly, he's bred to stay. Would win easily.

Some_One
08-24-2012, 09:46 AM
I hope he does go for the Arc (although that will deprvie me of seeing him in the flesh one last time), as that would really cement his greatness. I can't see how winning the Champion Stakes will achieve anything? He will most likely be beating a weaker field than the Juddmonte. At least in the Arc he will be taking on different horses. No worries on the trip. He settles perfectly, he's bred to stay. Would win easily.

I agree, the only horses he could face in the Champion is Cirrus De Aigles (because he is a gelding he can't run in the Arc) and maybe Camelot.

tholl
08-24-2012, 10:09 AM
I want to see Camelot vs Frankel in the Arc. Could be one of the greatest match-ups ever.

UK View
08-24-2012, 10:53 AM
I want to see Camelot vs Frankel in the Arc. Could be one of the greatest match-ups ever.


The trouble with CAMELOT is that he still hasn't run against older horses, and the 3yo Colt division is abysmal this year.

It certainly wouldn't get me excited to see CAMELOT line up against FRANKEL. He is not even in the same league IMO. CAMELOT still has a lot to prove at this stage.

gm10
08-24-2012, 11:33 AM
The trouble with CAMELOT is that he still hasn't run against older horses, and the 3yo Colt division is abysmal this year.

It certainly wouldn't get me excited to see CAMELOT line up against FRANKEL. He is not even in the same league IMO. CAMELOT still has a lot to prove at this stage.

It's an interesting business decision for Ballydoyle/Coolmore. It's all good and well throwing in the likes of St Nic in order to get Frankel beaten at last and lower his future stud value, but can you risk a potential star stallion such as Camelot?

tholl
08-24-2012, 12:30 PM
It's an interesting business decision for Ballydoyle/Coolmore. It's all good and well throwing in the likes of St Nic in order to get Frankel beaten at last and lower his future stud value, but can you risk a potential star stallion such as Camelot?

But being by Galilleo do Coolmore really want to see Frankel beaten?

UK View
08-24-2012, 02:12 PM
But he won't, so it doesn't matter.

Can't see Camelot taking him on anyway.

gm10
08-24-2012, 02:19 PM
But being by Galilleo do Coolmore really want to see Frankel beaten?
Good question ... I'm not familiar with how these calculations go, but I'm sure they have done the sums already, on the farm.

jefftune
08-24-2012, 11:11 PM
I love the track announcer's race call - called it like a boxing match. "and this is all over, the undisputed king of the world."

KingChas
08-24-2012, 11:58 PM
I love the track announcer's race call the undisputed king of the world."

On what side of the pond.............................. :confused:
BC-2012 bring it on....America..win...then you can proclaim king of the world..........No BS then........ ;)

Stillriledup
08-25-2012, 12:12 AM
I love the track announcer's race call - called it like a boxing match. "and this is all over, the undisputed king of the world."

That was comical. I'd love to see him in a race at Santa Anita against Wise Dan and Game on Dude and horses of that ilk. Lets see him rip Wise Dan's bridle off at the BC and they we can talk about kings and worlds.

RXB
08-25-2012, 01:17 AM
I agree totally. He reminds me of Brigadier Gerard. Was at his best at a mile. Got a mile and a quarter okay and won the mile and a half King George and Queen Elizabeth on pure class. Arc though is a much tougher 12 furlongs than the King George but the way Frankel won at York I think it's possible but at odds of 1/4 I think I take a shot against.

Yes, BG is the obviously comparable horse in terms of supreme quality and likely distance preferences. You probably know that when BG won the King George he had to survive a long inquiry after lugging in while tiring late.

Some_One
08-25-2012, 01:41 AM
The problem with the Arc is that it will be the largest field he'll be in and it will be the most talented field he'll face (Japanese TC champ, probable English TC champ, defending Arc champ, defending BC champ, Coral Eclipse champ, HK Cup/defending 3rd place, defending Melbourne Cup champ). As to the distance, he galloped by SNA, his stride looked good throughout and just kept on running a long distance past the wire, I think there would be no problems with the distance if the going is dry in Paris.

PhantomOnTour
08-25-2012, 02:17 AM
That was comical. I'd love to see him in a race at Santa Anita against Wise Dan and Game on Dude and horses of that ilk. Lets see him rip Wise Dan's bridle off at the BC and they we can talk about kings and worlds.
Serious?
Why don't those guys go to Europe and run against him?
CUZ HE WOULD KICK THEIR ASSES and we all know it.

Why must these horse run on dirt for some folk to finally accept their accomplishments?
Why didn't anyone insist that Goldikova run on dirt? They shoulda stretched her out to 10f and tried the BrCup Classic!! :rolleyes:

Stillriledup
08-25-2012, 05:33 AM
Serious?
Why don't those guys go to Europe and run against him?
CUZ HE WOULD KICK THEIR ASSES and we all know it.

Why must these horse run on dirt for some folk to finally accept their accomplishments?
Why didn't anyone insist that Goldikova run on dirt? They shoulda stretched her out to 10f and tried the BrCup Classic!! :rolleyes:

Because "Those guys" arent trying to prove they're the greatest horse who's ever looked thru a bridle. Also, the race announcers in America arent screaming how Wise Dan or Game On Dude is the 'greatest in the world" when they win.

UK View
08-25-2012, 05:57 AM
That was comical. I'd love to see him in a race at Santa Anita against Wise Dan and Game on Dude and horses of that ilk. Lets see him rip Wise Dan's bridle off at the BC and they we can talk about kings and worlds.


Why? I feel we must try and get away from this Dirt/Turf comparison that we always resort to. You may as well compare the best NFL player against the best Rugby player!!

Of course FRANKEL wouldn't beat up those horses on Dirt. Why would he? He's a Turf horse!! Is Usain Bolt not the greatest because he doesn't run 800m? Of course not. This Dirt/Turf comparison should stop. They are practically different sports.

There is Zero interest in Dirt racing in the UK and Europe, just as there is virtually zero interest in Turf racing in the US.

KingChas
08-25-2012, 09:38 AM
Why? I feel we must try and get away from this Dirt/Turf comparison that we always resort to. You may as well compare the best NFL player against the best Rugby player!!

Of course FRANKEL wouldn't beat up those horses on Dirt. Why would he? He's a Turf horse!!


Last time I watched racing at Santa Anita(2012/BC)-I could have sworn they had a "Turf Course". :confused:

PhantomOnTour
08-25-2012, 09:48 AM
Because "Those guys" arent trying to prove they're the greatest horse who's ever looked thru a bridle. Also, the race announcers in America arent screaming how Wise Dan or Game On Dude is the 'greatest in the world" when they win.
Had they run the fastest figures in the history of American racing the folks would proclaim them all timers...that's what Frankel has done in Europe.
What have Wise Dan and Game On Dude ever done to be considered among the best ever ?
Are they undefeated?
Have they absolutely dismissed of their competition like Frankel?
Have they run Beyer figs in the 130's?

KingChas
08-25-2012, 09:50 AM
I do not disrespect Frankel's accomplishments, but at this point in time the trainer/owner's intentions do not differ much from a great "California Mare" that disgruntled some here in the (USA) a few years ago.

Until he crosses the ponds,lakes,seas,mountains, rivers....friendly confines of home......whatever.
I won't buy into this "the undisputed king of the world" label. ;)

PhantomOnTour
08-25-2012, 09:57 AM
I do not disrespect Frankel's accomplishments, but at this point in time the trainer/owner's intentions do not differ much from a great "California Mare" that disgruntled some here in the (USA) a few years ago.

Until he crosses the ponds,lakes,seas,mountains, rivers....friendly confines of home......whatever.
I won't buy into this "the undisputed king of the world" label. ;)
Why do the Euros always have to come to America and not the other way around?
Frankel would fare much better in the Classic on American dirt than Game On Dude would in the Juddmonte Int'l on turf...do you disagree?
American horses rarely go to race in Europe because the trainers and owners know what would happen...ass kicking.
Why didn't Cigar and Zenyatta go run at Royal Ascot?....bums

KingChas
08-25-2012, 10:17 AM
Why do the Euros always have to come to America and not the other way around?

Why didn't Cigar and Zenyatta go run at Royal Ascot?....bums

If they were proclaiming the horse "King of England" I would not dispute that.
When you throw world into the picture then I dispute it.

Cigar won in Dubai.
As for Zenyatta no one dared venture onto her home turf<A>.

Why do the Euros always have to come to America and not the other way around?........you ask.
To be declared "king of the world" this must be done.

Otherwise this comment is just pure hogwash. :D

PhantomOnTour
08-25-2012, 10:21 AM
Why do the Euros always have to come to America and not the other way around?
Frankel would fare much better in the Classic on American dirt than Game On Dude would in the Juddmonte Int'l on turf...do you disagree?American horses rarely go to race in Europe because the trainers and owners know what would happen...ass kicking.
Why didn't Cigar and Zenyatta go run at Royal Ascot?....bums
Do you or do you not agree?
I can't believe I'm even in this discussion with you :faint:

UK View
08-25-2012, 11:11 AM
As far as I am aware it was the US commentary that tagged him "King of the World"? Is that correct?

You guys are still arguing over Dirt/Turf etc.

Its irrelevant. Is there a clamour for your best horses to come to Royal Ascot etc to prove they are the best? No. Do we doubt SECRETARIAT'S brilliance because he never took on our best horses over here? Of course not.

Is anyone in the UK yearning for FRANKEL to go to the Breeders Cup? No.

The increase in quality of Champions Day at Ascot, coupled with the Arc meeting will render the Breeders Cup less and less important in the coming years for UK/Euro horses. A shame because I love the BC and the challenge it entails.

cj
08-25-2012, 12:54 PM
If they were proclaiming the horse "King of England" I would not dispute that.
When you throw world into the picture then I dispute it.

Cigar won in Dubai.
As for Zenyatta no one dared venture onto her home turf<A>.

Why do the Euros always have to come to America and not the other way around?........you ask.
To be declared "king of the world" this must be done.

Otherwise this comment is just pure hogwash. :D

No turf horse needs to come to North America to prove superiority. It would be like Kevin Durant going to the D-League, or Aaron Rodgers playing in the Arena League.

classhandicapper
08-25-2012, 01:03 PM
I think some people might like to see Frankel in the Arc because it's another test and some might even like to see him try dirt (which will never happen), but coming to the US to run on turf would be a huge drop in class and pretty pointless.

Some_One
08-25-2012, 01:22 PM
Because "Those guys" arent trying to prove they're the greatest horse who's ever looked thru a bridle. Also, the race announcers in America arent screaming how Wise Dan or Game On Dude is the 'greatest in the world" when they win.

Because they aren't, Game on Dude did a good job of proving that in Dubai, guess he needs his drugs to be a decent horse

cj
08-25-2012, 02:21 PM
Because they aren't, Game on Dude did a good job of proving that in Dubai, guess he needs his drugs to be a decent horse

Or dirt.

KingChas
08-25-2012, 02:30 PM
No turf horse needs to come to North America to prove superiority.

Well CJ, I justed wanted to see if Frankel is just running against the same old "tomato cans" or should I say the same old "tomoto cons" there.

Also would like to see his fig here in America and the fig one of our insuperior turf horses here would get if they defeated him.
I am sure it would be an inflated lifetime best to keep with the legend.

As for Durant he did play in the D-league = Olympics BB. :D

UK View
08-25-2012, 02:40 PM
Just for interest, here is a list of horses FRANKEL has beaten.

In the course of his 13 races to date, Frankel has beaten the following horses:
Horse Best race(s) won
Canford Cliffs Irish 2000 Guineas Gr.1
St James's Palace Stakes Gr.1
Sussex Stakes Gr.1
Lockinge Stakes Gr.1
Queen Anne Stakes Gr.1
Casamento Racing Post Trophy Gr.1
Colour Vision Ascot Gold Cup Gr.1
Dick Turpin Prix Jean Prat Gr.1
Premio Vittorio di Capua Gr.1
Dream Ahead Prix Morny Gr.1
Middle Park Stakes Gr.1
July Cup Gr.1
Sprint Cup Gr.1
Prix de la Foret Gr.1
Excelebration Prix du Moulin de Longchamp Gr.1
Prix Jacques le Marois Gr.1
Grand Prix Boss Asahi Hai Futurity Stakes Gr.1
NHK Mile Cup Gr.1
Helmet Sires Produce Stakes Gr.1
Champagne Stakes Gr.1
Caulfield Guineas Gr.1
Immortal Verse Coronation Stakes Gr.1
Prix Jacques le Marois Gr.1
Nathaniel King George VI & Queen Elizabeth Stakes Gr.1
Eclipse Stakes Gr.1
Pathfork National Stakes Gr.1
Planteur Prix Ganay Gr.1
Poet's Voice Queen Elizabeth II Stakes Gr.1
Rio De La Plata Prix Jean-Luc Lagardere Gr.1
Premio Vittorio di Capua Gr.1
Premio Roma GBI Racing Gr.1
Roderic O'Connor Criterium International Gr.1
Irish 2000 Guineas Gr.1
St Nicholas Abbey Breeders' Cup Turf Gr.1
Coronation Cup Gr.1 (twice)
Racing Post Trophy Gr.1
Treasure Beach Irish Derby Gr.1
Secretariat Stakes Gr.1
Twice Over Juddmonte International Gr.1
Eclipse Stakes Gr.1
Champion Stakes Gr.1 (twice)
Wootton Bassett Prix Jean-Luc Lagardere Gr.1
Zoffany Phoenix Stakes Gr.1
Dubawi Gold Celebration Mile Gr.2
Premio Loco Ottingen-Rennen Gr.2
Grosse Europa Meile Gr.2
Summer Mile Stakes Gr.2
Park Stakes Gr.2
Rajsaman Prix du Muguet Gr.2
Prix Daniel Wildenstein Gr.2
Ransom Note Joel Stakes Gr.2
Red Jazz Challenge Stakes Gr.2
Saamidd Champagne Stakes Gr.2
Slim Shadey San Marcos Stakes Gr.2
Sri Putra York Stakes Gr.2
Prix Guillaume d'Ornano Gr.2
Strong Suit Coventry Stakes Gr.2
Lennox Stakes Gr.2
Challenge Stakes Gr.2
Worthadd Derby Italiano Gr.2
Premio Ribot Gr.2
Premio Carlo Vittadini Gr.2
Broox Prix Arenberg Gr.3
Bullet Train Derby Trial Stakes Gr.3
Genius Beast Classic Trial Gr.3
Klammer Horris Hill Stakes Gr.3
Native Khan Solario Stakes Gr.3
Craven Stakes Gr.3
New Greenfield Acomb Stakes Gr.3
Rerouted Somerville Tattersall Stakes Gr.3
Side Glance Sovereign Stakes Gr.3
Diomed Stakes Gr.3
Windsor Palace Mooresbridge Stakes Gr.3
Fury Hambleton Stakes L.
Indomito Sachsen Preis L.
Neebras Thoroughbred Stakes L.
Farhh Winner, 2nd Eclipse Stakes Gr.1, 3rd Prince Of Wales's Stakes Gr.1
Glor Na Mara Winner, 2nd Phoenix Stakes Gr.1
Rainbow Springs Winner, 3rd Criterium de Pouliches Gr.1
Happy Today Winner, 2nd Feilden Stakes L.
Picture Editor Winner, 3rd Cocked Hat Stakes L.
Vanguard Dream Winner, 3rd Spring Cup L.
Bonita Star Winner
Castlemorris King Winner
Diamond Geezah Winner
Elrasheed Winner
Eskimo Winner
Gabrial Winner
Lemon Drop Red Winner
Loving Spirit Winner
Man Of God Winner
Robin Hood Winner
Shropshire Winner
Breton Star Placed
Dortmund Placed
Maher Placed

cj
08-25-2012, 02:54 PM
Well CJ, I justed wanted to see if Frankel is just running against the same old "tomato cans" or should I say the same old "tomoto cons" there.

Also would like to see his fig here in America and the fig one of our insuperior turf horses here would get if they defeated him.
I am sure it would be an inflated lifetime best to keep with the legend.

As for Durant he did play in the D-league = Olympics BB. :D

Frankel's competition has done very well when he isn't around. The same can't be said for tomato cans I was referring to when talking about Zenyatta.

Short of Frankel falling down, there is no chance any of our turf horses are beating him. None are close to good enough.

ArlJim78
08-25-2012, 02:57 PM
Frankel has nothing to prove in the US.
I have to say it would be great to see him run in the Arc though.

cj
08-25-2012, 03:03 PM
Frankel has nothing to prove in the US.
I have to say it would be great to see him run in the Arc though.

I agree. Running in the other race would be nothing more than an exhibition. Who would care?

gm10
08-25-2012, 03:06 PM
Frankel has nothing to prove in the US.
I have to say it would be great to see him run in the Arc though.

I'd rather see him win the BC Classic. That would be a much more spectacular end to his career in my view.

RXB
08-25-2012, 03:15 PM
I'd rather see him win the BC Classic. That would be a much more spectacular end to his career in my view.

Pedigree heavily tilted to grass.

ArlJim78
08-25-2012, 03:17 PM
I'd rather see him win the BC Classic. That would be a much more spectacular end to his career in my view.
I have to disagree there. how spectacular would it be if he doesn't take to dirt and loses to an inferior horse?

KingChas
08-25-2012, 03:26 PM
Short of Frankel falling down, there is no chance any of our turf horses are beating him. None are close to good enough.

Not disputing Frankel would not win here, but strange things do happen when some of these big fig European horses step out of their element and onto our surfaces...shall I say.

And if this horse ever gets nosed out and loses what fate bestows him.... :confused:

Since greatness here is now based upon a figure.
Just trying to get a gauge on this horse.

Breeders' Cup Beyer Speed Figures 2011
RACE WINNER BEYER PAR BEYER
Turf St Nicholas Abbey 111.61 108

Not bad. :) But not great. ;)

BC Turf BSF's by year up to 2008.
08 – Conduit – 116
07 – English Channel – 111
06 – Red Rocks – 109
05 – Shirocco – 114
04 – Bettar Talk Now – 111
03 – High Chaparral/Johar – 112
02 – High Chaparral – 111
01 - Fantastic Light – 117
00 – Kalanisi – 110
99 – Daylami – 118
98 – Buck’s Boy – 111
97 – Chief Bearhart – 110
96 – Pilsudski – 115
95 – Northern Spur – 114
94 – Tikkanen – 115
93 – Kotashaan – 111
92 – Fraise – 110
91 – Miss Alleged – 111
90 – In the Wings – 113
89 – Prized – 110
88 – Great Communicator – 113
87 – Theatrical – 115
86 – Manila – xx
85 – Pebbles – xx
84 – Lashkari – xx

gm10
08-25-2012, 03:47 PM
I have to disagree there. how spectacular would it be if he doesn't take to dirt and loses to an inferior horse?

That's part of the attraction I guess ... it's the step into the unknown, on a different continent, on a different surface, against a different style of racing. So many seemingly superior European horses have tried and failed before him ... could he do it ... what an occasion it would be!

classhandicapper
08-25-2012, 09:21 PM
Frankel's competition has done very well when he isn't around. The same can't be said for tomato cans I was referring to when talking about Zenyatta.

Short of Frankel falling down, there is no chance any of our turf horses are beating him. None are close to good enough.

>Frankel's competition has done very well when he isn't around. The same can't be said for tomato cans I was referring to when talking about Zenyatta.<

I don't think any aspect of Zenyatta's career should be compared to Frankel. To begin with one is a filly and the other is a colt. Personal Ensign sucked compared to Spectacular Bid too. The comparison is to other all time great mares and the history is settled on that to all but the haters. She's among them.

classhandicapper
08-25-2012, 09:25 PM
I'd rather see him win the BC Classic. That would be a much more spectacular end to his career in my view.

I'm not going to even try to compare the quality of the greatest turfers in the world to our dirt horses, but I think 10F on dirt would be very demanding over and above the possible (likely?) surface preference. On dirt, you often have to run hard the entire way. It takes a different kind of horse. A few Euros have been competitive, but if he won the Classic he'd deserve a statue in the US too. The crazy part about it is that I would not bet against him unless the price was ridiculously short.

Tom
08-25-2012, 09:41 PM
.....but if he won the Classic he'd deserve a statue in the US too.

Right next to Drosslemeyer's. :rolleyes:

I did like the race call....poetry in destruction.

Stillriledup
08-25-2012, 10:51 PM
I have to disagree there. how spectacular would it be if he doesn't take to dirt and loses to an inferior horse?

But, the announcer said he's king of the world. The king of the world should have no problem with any surface. Unless, he's just the king of European turf and according to the announcer, that's not the case, he didnt specify 'king of europe turf' he went and dragged the world into this.

I think it would be spectacular to see if he's any better than just the best turf horse in Europe, because of now, that's all he's proven and that's all he is.

As far as being 'undisputed' anything goes, i normally like to actually see something happen before i stop disputing something.

cj
08-25-2012, 11:10 PM
>Frankel's competition has done very well when he isn't around. The same can't be said for tomato cans I was referring to when talking about Zenyatta.<

I don't think any aspect of Zenyatta's career should be compared to Frankel. To begin with one is a filly and the other is a colt. Personal Ensign sucked compared to Spectacular Bid too. The comparison is to other all time great mares and the history is settled on that to all but the haters. She's among them.

I agree, but unfortunately that isn't how it went down. She was being mentioned as the greatest ever regardless of sex.

gm10
08-26-2012, 02:37 AM
I agree, but unfortunately that isn't how it went down. She was being mentioned as the greatest ever regardless of sex.

She certainly was the greatest of the horses that I ever saw in the flesh, and that includes Frankel. Ouija Board comes second, then Frankel third.

As for who could beat who, that would depend on the circumstances .... Frankel certainly is King of the World if you're talking only about turf milers. I wouldn't fancy his chances against Ouija Board over a mile and a half, or Zenyatta over a mile and 2F on the dirt/synthetic, however.

classhandicapper
08-26-2012, 01:02 PM
She certainly was the greatest of the horses that I ever saw in the flesh, and that includes Frankel. Ouija Board comes second, then Frankel third.

As for who could beat who, that would depend on the circumstances .... Frankel certainly is King of the World if you're talking only about turf milers. I wouldn't fancy his chances against Ouija Board over a mile and a half, or Zenyatta over a mile and 2F on the dirt/synthetic, however.

I try not to compare horses that make their mark on different surfaces or at much different distances. I can't imagine myself comparing Usain Bolt to Jim Ryun even though I'm pretty sure I know who would win going short vs. long. So why should I compare horses that way. I do give extra credit for demonstrated versatility by distance and surface though. At this point I'd just like to see Frankel do something else new before he retires and I won't hold it against him if he fails.

PaceAdvantage
08-27-2012, 02:47 AM
She certainly was the greatest of the horses that I ever saw in the flesh, and that includes Frankel. Ouija Board comes second, then Frankel third.Wait...WHAT? Zenyatta better than Frankel? Straight up? As in both in the same race on polytrack?

No way.

PaceAdvantage
08-27-2012, 02:48 AM
the history is settled on that to all but the haters.Who in their right mind "hates" a horse? Never understood this type of comment.

UK View
08-27-2012, 04:26 AM
But, the announcer said he's king of the world. The king of the world should have no problem with any surface. Unless, he's just the king of European turf and according to the announcer, that's not the case, he didnt specify 'king of europe turf' he went and dragged the world into this.

I think it would be spectacular to see if he's any better than just the best turf horse in Europe, because of now, that's all he's proven and that's all he is.

As far as being 'undisputed' anything goes, i normally like to actually see something happen before i stop disputing something.

Why are you obsessed with what the announcer said? I seem to remember one a few years back shouting "Look at Curlin go!!", or something similar as 3 horses shot past him in the BC Classic. That doesnt make Curlin useless does it?

And "Undisputed King of European Turf" doesnt exactly roll off the tongue as much does it?

It was just a phrase!!

UK View
08-27-2012, 04:30 AM
She certainly was the greatest of the horses that I ever saw in the flesh, and that includes Frankel. Ouija Board comes second, then Frankel third.

As for who could beat who, that would depend on the circumstances .... Frankel certainly is King of the World if you're talking only about turf milers. I wouldn't fancy his chances against Ouija Board over a mile and a half, or Zenyatta over a mile and 2F on the dirt/synthetic, however.

I think you are overestimating Ouija Board somewhat here. A great filly, yes, but beaten numerous times in Europe against much more inferior types than Frankel. We've had better Mares over here, as good as she was.

gm10
08-27-2012, 06:05 AM
I think you are overestimating Ouija Board somewhat here. A great filly, yes, but beaten numerous times in Europe against much more inferior types than Frankel. We've had better Mares over here, as good as she was.
I was just illustrating that being the greatest or best in the world has more than one meaning.
I saw her in the flesh, and she was unlike any horse that I had ever seen (until Zenyatta).

UK View
08-27-2012, 08:30 AM
Fair enough. She was good.

classhandicapper
08-27-2012, 10:12 AM
Who in their right mind "hates" a horse? Never understood this type of comment.

It's not a literal "hate".

A lot of people initially held the strong opinion that she was a mediocre horse because she was running slow Beyer speed figures and winning by minimal margins in occasional soft fields on synthetic but then watched her win a Classic and just miss in another on dirt where they thought she had no shot based on "figures".

A non hater would eventually come around to understanding why Beyer figures and winning margins were a terrible way to measure her ability and that she was clearly a great mare. (in the beginning synthetic tracks were kind of new and people were just starting to understand why dirt metrics failed to capture synthetic ability well)

A hater is still looking for ways to move the chains, diminish her ability, engage in revisionist history about what they thought initially etc... because they don't want to admit how wrong they were about an all time great mare (even if they aren't aware of it).

Of course there is other extreme, but I never really cared much that some young girls and women were obsessed with her, fans made signs and bought merchandise, the track gave her special days, that she got a spot on 60 minutes etc...

classhandicapper
08-27-2012, 02:09 PM
It's not a literal "hate".

A lot of people initially held the strong opinion that she was a mediocre horse because she was running slow Beyer speed figures and winning by minimal margins in occasional soft fields on synthetic but then watched her win a Classic and just miss in another on dirt where they thought she had no shot based on "figures".

A non hater would eventually come around to understanding why Beyer figures and winning margins were a terrible way to measure her ability and that she was clearly a great mare. (in the beginning synthetic tracks were kind of new and people were just starting to understand why dirt metrics failed to capture synthetic ability well)

A hater is still looking for ways to move the chains, diminish her ability, engage in revisionist history about what they thought initially etc... because they don't want to admit how wrong they were about an all time great mare (even if they aren't aware of it).

Of course there is other extreme, but I never really cared much that some young girls and women were obsessed with her, fans made signs and bought merchandise, the track gave her special days, that she got a spot on 60 minutes etc...

I should add that I was in the same boat as everyone else, but as soon as I started seeing the most versatile high level horses' figures jumping up when switched to dirt and it became obvious the paces were way different, average winning margins were tighter (especially going long) I knew something was amiss with the metrics I was using for dirt on synthetic.

No matter what I think of synthetic, I think that experience made me a WAY better horse player because it forced me to think about the game in different ways. I think I understand it way better now.

PaceAdvantage
08-27-2012, 02:12 PM
Of course there is other extreme, but I never really cared much that some young girls and women were obsessed with her, fans made signs and bought merchandise, the track gave her special days, that she got a spot on 60 minutes etc...I'm actually fine with all this, and never stated anything to the opposite (I don't think...lol). In fact, I think it's great for the game.

I also don't think you can discount winning margins so casually, and to a lesser extent, speed figures.

Winning margins and what those horses do afterwards and did before are a big indicator of what kind of horse Zenyatta was. But I certainly don't want to open up this tired old argument again.... :eek:

Steve R
08-27-2012, 02:37 PM
It's not a literal "hate".

A lot of people initially held the strong opinion that she was a mediocre horse because she was running slow Beyer speed figures and winning by minimal margins in occasional soft fields on synthetic but then watched her win a Classic and just miss in another on dirt where they thought she had no shot based on "figures".

A non hater would eventually come around to understanding why Beyer figures and winning margins were a terrible way to measure her ability and that she was clearly a great mare. (in the beginning synthetic tracks were kind of new and people were just starting to understand why dirt metrics failed to capture synthetic ability well)

A hater is still looking for ways to move the chains, diminish her ability, engage in revisionist history about what they thought initially etc... because they don't want to admit how wrong they were about an all time great mare (even if they aren't aware of it).

Of course there is other extreme, but I never really cared much that some young girls and women were obsessed with her, fans made signs and bought merchandise, the track gave her special days, that she got a spot on 60 minutes etc...
A lot of people may have thought her mediocre based on BSFs, but not all. My own figures had her two best performances prior to her first BC Classic in the 2008 Hirsch at DMR and the 2008 Apple Blossom at OP. Both were about par for older G1 males and I think she was equally good on dirt or synthetics. Those efforts aside (which alone put her in the BC Classic mix in terms of talent), her overall figures were not exceptional and far from the level of so-called "greats". I think that was the issue. She was consistent running against modest competition, primarily on the same circuit at similar distances and on related surfaces. Although I doubt it was intentional, it did seem to pad her resume - unless you dismiss Einstein's caveat about "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results". I think the critics weren't obsessed by hatred as much as they were disappointed that a horse - a very good horse - was elevated to a status inconsistent with her actual ability. Her Classic win was "gimme" when you consider the home field and surface edge she had and the fact that those right behind her were turf horses, the top dirt horses not taking to the AWS at all. The loss to Blame is a better measure of her place in history IMO. Despite how her effort was exaggerated by so many, she lost to a very nice but hardly memorable horse while getting three pounds. I believe that is a fair assessment of where she belongs historically.

I've never been overly impressed with win streaks as an accurate measure of a horse's ability. I tend to focus on which horses were defeated and in what manner (including how fast and by how far). On that basis I believe Zenyatta was the best older filly or mare in a while but lengths away from belonging in the pantheon of racing greats.

PaceAdvantage
08-27-2012, 03:38 PM
Hey, something Steve R and I can finally agree on 100%

gm10
08-27-2012, 04:16 PM
I should add that I was in the same boat as everyone else, but as soon as I started seeing the most versatile high level horses' figures jumping up when switched to dirt and it became obvious the paces were way different, average winning margins were tighter (especially going long) I knew something was amiss with the metrics I was using for dirt on synthetic.

No matter what I think of synthetic, I think that experience made me a WAY better horse player because it forced me to think about the game in different ways. I think I understand it way better now.

I loved Zenyatta from day 1. The way she won her maiden was pure dynamite.

In my view, the that "hate/tomato can" brigade was at least partially driven by ignorance. She had awful early speed but was winning lots and lots of big races with her late speed. The usual theory could not explain such an observation, therefore it was the observation that was wrong (never the theory).

PaceAdvantage
08-27-2012, 05:56 PM
She had awful early speed but was winning lots and lots of big races with her late speed. The usual theory could not explain such an observation, therefore it was the observation that was wrong (never the theory).I'm not sure I follow. Positional speed has nothing to do with where some rank her in terms of history.

It's all about who you beat and how badly you've beaten them...

cj
08-27-2012, 06:06 PM
I loved Zenyatta from day 1. The way she won her maiden was pure dynamite.

In my view, the that "hate/tomato can" brigade was at least partially driven by ignorance. She had awful early speed but was winning lots and lots of big races with her late speed. The usual theory could not explain such an observation, therefore it was the observation that was wrong (never the theory).
PA nailed it. She simply didn't face enough competition for me to be listed along with some of the other greats. Her connections became too enamored with "the streak". Nearly all the all time greats have losses, but for some reason that became the objective, don't ever lose. When finally tried on dirt against males, she ran well but she lost to a horse nobody would consider great.

The surface issue is also big. While you might love rubber racing, many here don't and think the surface is biased towards horses with her running style. That is especially true at 9f/10f.

PaceAdvantage
08-27-2012, 06:30 PM
The surface issue is also big. While you might love rubber racing, many here don't and think the surface is biased towards horses with her running style. That is especially true at 9f/10f.I don't necessarily agree with the surface/bias thing, but simply the surface in general.

The same way Europeans don't care much for dirt racing, and how a dirt runner isn't going to be much celebrated in that part of the world, that's the way we view polytrack runners. Even turf runners in this country are still viewed as second class citizens if you will.

If there are no good dirt runners, THEN turf runners start being talked about in terms of Horse of the Year candidates. It's never the other way around, unless there happens to be some SUPER DUPER FREAK of a turf horse out there in the US, which never happens.

If you want to hang your hat on the surface being biased in her favor, well, you can say the same thing about dirt being biased in favor of horses who race from midpack on upwards...should a horse be viewed as less than worthy because he races near the front on the dirt?

It all boils down to tradition and history. In the US, that is racing conducted on a dirt strip. End of story.

Zenyatta proved she was one of the better fillies or mares to ever race in this country with her just-miss in the BC Classic on dirt. Was she the best filly or mare ever to race here? I say no, definitely not.

cj
08-27-2012, 06:53 PM
I don't necessarily agree with the surface/bias thing, but simply the surface in general.



Yes, I meant the bias thing as a secondary factor. I wasn't clear on that.

RXB
08-27-2012, 08:37 PM
When finally tried on dirt against males, she ran well but she lost to a horse nobody would consider great.


As a November 6YO. If you base Goldikova's ability on races at that stage of her career, she doesn't look quite so great either. Cigar lost to Alphabet Soup at the end of his 6YO campaign. The vast majority of horses are over their peak by that time.

5k-claim
08-27-2012, 08:40 PM
...A hater is still looking for ways to move the chains, diminish her ability, engage in revisionist history about what they thought initially etc... because they don't want to admit how wrong they were about an all time great mare (even if they aren't aware of it). It won't matter. She has written her page in history (and sales catalogs).

She won 13 consecutive Grade 1 races and the all-time N.A. female earnings of $7,304,580.

Of course there are some who can opine away each of those 13 consecutive Grade 1 wins, and Z's career I suppose, with their opinions as to how it was all done with smoke and mirrors and the like, but I am not sure how large their audience is. I am pretty sure that Z is held in extremely high regard by horsemen, and I cannot see anything causing that to diminish as time goes by.

Personally, I give "credit" for the Grade 1 wins at the time of nomination. The Grade 1 races are the prized jewels of catalog pages and bank accounts. It is where the horses are. If you nominate, enter and race in them... you've done your job. Period.

Whoever else shows up for those races is their problem, not yours. And people's opinions about who else showed up? Even less of a problem.

Thirteen of those in a row spread out over two and-a-half years (4/5/2008 - 10/2/2010) speaks for itself.

Of course there is other extreme, but I never really cared much that some young girls and women were obsessed with her, fans made signs and bought merchandise, the track gave her special days, that she got a spot on 60 minutes etc... I thought that added tremendously to the historic story of Z. I loved it. There were horsemen who shared in that excitement alongside the young girls and women with the signs. Probably because they imagined what it would be like to wake up (way too early) in the morning 7 days a week and have a horse like that waiting for them at their barn. Standing behind one of their webbing logos for three years.

That was Z.

.

cj
08-27-2012, 10:59 PM
As a November 6YO. If you base Goldikova's ability on races at that stage of her career, she doesn't look quite so great either. Cigar lost to Alphabet Soup at the end of his 6YO campaign. The vast majority of horses are over their peak by that time.

Of course I know this, but I also know that there is nobody to blame (pun intended) but the connections. They didn't have to keep racing in the same weak races year after year. At the very least they could have attempted one Big Cap, Hollywood Gold Cup, or Pacific Classic. But instead, they worried about the streak.

I suspect based on her performance in her final race that she could have compiled a record worthy of being mentioned with the all time greats. But she didn't, and I don't think horses should get those accolades based on what ifs.

Dahoss9698
08-27-2012, 11:31 PM
A lot of people initially held the strong opinion that she was a mediocre horse because she was running slow Beyer speed figures and winning by minimal margins in occasional soft fields on synthetic but then watched her win a Classic and just miss in another on dirt where they thought she had no shot based on "figures".


It's disappointing that you are still on this disingenuous kick. A lot of people didn't hold a strong opinion that she was mediocre. That's just flat out untrue.

The "haters" as you call them just disagreed with people about her place in history. I don't believe any of the said haters thought her to be mediocre at all. They just didn't think she was the bestest horsey evah, even though she had the best dance moves.

Dahoss9698
08-27-2012, 11:35 PM
It won't matter. She has written her page in history (and sales catalogs).

She won 13 consecutive Grade 1 races and the all-time N.A. female earnings of $7,304,580.

Of course there are some who can opine away each of those 13 consecutive Grade 1 wins, and Z's career I suppose, with their opinions as to how it was all done with smoke and mirrors and the like, but I am not sure how large their audience is. I am pretty sure that Z is held in extremely high regard by horsemen, and I cannot see anything causing that to diminish as time goes by.

Personally, I give "credit" for the Grade 1 wins at the time of nomination. The Grade 1 races are the prized jewels of catalog pages and bank accounts. It is where the horses are. If you nominate, enter and race in them... you've done your job. Period.

Whoever else shows up for those races is their problem, not yours. And people's opinions about who else showed up? Even less of a problem.

Thirteen of those in a row spread out over two and-a-half years (4/5/2008 - 10/2/2010) speaks for itself.

I thought that added tremendously to the historic story of Z. I loved it. There were horsemen who shared in that excitement alongside the young girls and women with the signs. Probably because they imagined what it would be like to wake up (way too early) in the morning 7 days a week and have a horse like that waiting for them at their barn. Standing behind one of their webbing logos for three years.

That was Z.

.

Hard for me to contain the tears after reading this account. I too loved the signs and all of the excitement. What a ride!

Too bad those sign holding girls aren't still following the game and instead have turned to talking to their favorite horseys on facebook and blogs as if the horse is talking back.

That's what Z left us with. Thanks....I guess.

gm10
08-28-2012, 03:53 AM
As a November 6YO. If you base Goldikova's ability on races at that stage of her career, she doesn't look quite so great either. Cigar lost to Alphabet Soup at the end of his 6YO campaign. The vast majority of horses are over their peak by that time.

That is certainly true.
She was a bit slower in her last season, the Zenyatta from the year before would have beaten Blame.

thaskalos
08-28-2012, 07:04 AM
The "haters" as you call them just disagreed with people about her place in history. I don't believe any of the said haters thought her to be mediocre at all. They just didn't think she was the bestest horsey evah, even though she had the best dance moves.

I beg to differ...

There is a very highly-respected handicapper here who predicted that Zenyatta would do well to finish eighth in her final race.

He was kidding, of course...but the message was clear.

He obviously had a slightly LOWER opinion of her than that she just wasn't "the bestest horsey evah"...

Dahoss9698
08-28-2012, 10:00 AM
I beg to differ...

There is a very highly-respected handicapper here who predicted that Zenyatta would do well to finish eighth in her final race.

He was kidding, of course...but the message was clear.

He obviously had a slightly LOWER opinion of her than that she just wasn't "the bestest horsey evah"...

So if whoever this mystery person was was kidding, I'm not really sure what your point is.

But I'm glad you said it, because it really gets to the heart of the issue that apparently the non haters can't let go.

It's a black and white issue with you guys. Either you say she's the best horsey evah, or you think she sucks. No gray area at all.

Not liking a horse in a particular race doesn't mean you think a horse is mediocre. I thought Cigar had no shot in his final race. He sort of proved me wrong with his effort, but does it mean I thought he was mediocre because I didn't like him to win? Of course not.

She was a brilliant mare. Definitely one of the best of all time. But sorry, she's not the best horse of all time and not even top 10. But I will concede she was the best dancer evah and isn't that more important than whatever she accomplished on track?

thaskalos
08-28-2012, 10:14 AM
So if whoever this mystery person was was kidding, I'm not really sure what your point is.

But I'm glad you said it, because it really gets to the heart of the issue that apparently the non haters can't let go.

It's a black and white issue with you guys. Either you say she's the best horsey evah, or you think she sucks. No gray area at all.

Not liking a horse in a particular race doesn't mean you think a horse is mediocre. I thought Cigar had no shot in his final race. He sort of proved me wrong with his effort, but does it mean I thought he was mediocre because I didn't like him to win? Of course not.

She was a brilliant mare. Definitely one of the best of all time. But sorry, she's not the best horse of all time and not even top 10. But I will concede she was the best dancer evah and isn't that more important than whatever she accomplished on track?

Yeah...you are right, of course.

It IS a black and white issue with us Zenyatta guys.

We all thought that Zenyatta was the second-coming of Secretariat...

Luckily for us...there are smart guys like you around to educate us.

Dahoss9698
08-28-2012, 11:59 AM
Yeah...you are right, of course.

It IS a black and white issue with us Zenyatta guys.

We all thought that Zenyatta was the second-coming of Secretariat...

Luckily for us...there are smart guys like you around to educate us.

If it isn't a black and white issue than how do you explain what you are Class are saying here?

Don't you think it possible to realize she was a very good horse, but not like her in a particular race? Isn't it possible to think of her among the greats but not think of her the best ever?

why must it be one or the other?

Look, Holy Bull is the best horse I have personally witnessed in my life and his races stack up with any horse of the past twenty years. But I don't think he's the best ever and I certainly don't think anyone who doesn't recognize his greatness thinks he was mediocre.

Skip Away was an absolute beast for 3 seasons and rarely if ever missed a big dance all across the country. He proved his greatness over and over again against much better horses than Zenyatta ever faced and no one seems to think he's even in the discussion for top 10-15. Does that mean everyone views him as some mediocrity?

I don't understand why the topic of Zenyatta causes people to abandon rational thought, but my only guess is because some were so emotionally invested in her that it clouds their judgment. That's fine, but let's at least call it what it is, instead of pretending that anyone who disagrees she's the best ever is a hater...or thinks she was mediocre. Because it's just not true.

thaskalos
08-28-2012, 12:46 PM
If it isn't a black and white issue than how do you explain what you are Class are saying here?

Don't you think it possible to realize she was a very good horse, but not like her in a particular race? Isn't it possible to think of her among the greats but not think of her the best ever?

why must it be one or the other?

Look, Holy Bull is the best horse I have personally witnessed in my life and his races stack up with any horse of the past twenty years. But I don't think he's the best ever and I certainly don't think anyone who doesn't recognize his greatness thinks he was mediocre.

Skip Away was an absolute beast for 3 seasons and rarely if ever missed a big dance all across the country. He proved his greatness over and over again against much better horses than Zenyatta ever faced and no one seems to think he's even in the discussion for top 10-15. Does that mean everyone views him as some mediocrity?

I don't understand why the topic of Zenyatta causes people to abandon rational thought, but my only guess is because some were so emotionally invested in her that it clouds their judgment. That's fine, but let's at least call it what it is, instead of pretending that anyone who disagrees she's the best ever is a hater...or thinks she was mediocre. Because it's just not true.

Not only have I never said that Zenyatta was "the best horse ever"...I have said many times that she doesn't even belong among the game's "truly greats".

How can I declare that she belongs among horses like Secretariat, Spectacular Bid, Seattle Slew, etc...do you think that I've lost my MIND?

All I've been saying is that she was one of the best mares to ever race in this country....and maybe the best mare in recent memory.

But even THAT was an extravagant statement...according to some of the experts on this board.

Some were saying that she was nothing but a synthetic surface curiousity...who did not even deserve the label "great"...under ANY circumstance.

They compared her accomplishments with those of PEPPERS PRIDE!

Others supplied lists of 20 mares who were supposedly better than Zenyatta.

One of the more distinquished members here even attempted to come up with a list of 35 fillies and mares, who were supposedly better than Zenyatta.

And here you are...telling me, that all these Zenyatta critics were doing was voicing their objections about her not being THE BEST HORSE EVER?

I can only remember ONE poster here who compared Zenyatta to Secretariat...and he was ridiculed by ALL -- Zenyatta fans included.

And yet...you keep on repeating this nonsense as if it were voiced by all the Zenyatturds out there.

You are taking an extreme opinion or two...and turning them into the norm.

If I took those few extreme, ridiculous references about Peppers Pride, and I tried to present them as the common opinion shared by all the Zenyatta critics...then you would throw every insult that you could think of my way.

If you are joking with me...fine.

But don't tell me that you are serious about not remembering any of the derogatory comments about Zenyatta that were made on this board.

You said that we have many differences of opinion...and that you don't want to debate things with me any more. That's fine...I can handle rejection.

But ball-busting pisses me off!

Dahoss9698
08-28-2012, 01:17 PM
Instead of grandstanding and moving the goal posts with each successive post let's get back to your initial response to me in this thread.

You disagreed with me when I said her "haters" didn't think she was mediocre at all. I could provide you with thread upon thread of discussions about her and you'll find very few, if any who find her to mediocre.

That's absolute nonsense and we both know it. So I'll ask again, what was your point?

My point is, it is possible to view her as not the best horse ever....but still understand that she is one of the best mares ever. Not the best...but certainly in the conversation.

I'm not really interested in going back through all of those threads, but something tells me you were a little bit more animated in your praise than you are letting on here. It insults my as well as your intelligence to pretend you don't think she's an all time great when you spent months...even years arguing something else.

I remember the tone of those threads and yes, there were idiots on both sides. But what struck me about those threads and even this one is that you guys are being very dishonest in how you look at the discussions.

It's absolutely black and white. You're either with the Zenyatta folks or against. You won't allow any middle ground.

No one compared her accomplishments to Peppers Pride...at least not seriously. But their streak was similar in that their connections viewed keeping the streak alive as more important than competing in races that would challenge each mare.

Again, if you take the emotion away...and let's not pretend for a second that you weren't overly emotional over her, I think you'll see that what the "haters" were saying isn't that outlandish at all.

If not, whatever. I have no problem debating things with you, but I have no patience for you twisting things in order to serve some agenda. And whether you recognize it or not, you do it a lot. I suppose we all do to an extent.

thaskalos
08-28-2012, 01:27 PM
No...I originally responded to your post because you stated that you don't remember ANY member here disrespecting Zenyatta. Read your post again and you will see.

That's why I brought up the handicapping expert who predicted that Zenyatta would do well to finish eighth in that race.

And I am only assuming that he was kidding with his remark...because he had made plenty of similar posts at that time.

How can you say that you don't remember ANY poster here disrespecting Zenyatta? You forgot about the Peppers Pride references?

Am I the one who is moving the goalposts...or is it you?

thaskalos
08-28-2012, 01:32 PM
No one compared her accomplishments to Peppers Pride...at least not seriously.

Ahh...I see.

Those who compared Zenyatta's accomplishments to Peppers Pride's were only joking...but those who said that Zenyatta was better than Secretariat were serious...:ThmbUp:

thaskalos
08-28-2012, 01:39 PM
I'm not really interested in going back through all of those threads, but something tells me you were a little bit more animated in your praise than you are letting on here. It insults my as well as your intelligence to pretend you don't think she's an all time great when you spent months...even years arguing something else.

.

You are dead wrong...even if it insults your intelligence.

The only time I ever referred to Zenyatta as an all-time great, was when I compared her to horses of her own gender.

Dahoss9698
08-28-2012, 01:40 PM
No...I originally responded to your post because you stated that you don't remember ANY member here disrespecting Zenyatta. Read your post again and you will see.

That's why I brought up the handicapping expert who predicted that Zenyatta would do well to finish eighth in that race.

And I am only assuming that he was kidding with his remark...because he had made plenty of similar posts at that time.

How can you say that you don't remember ANY poster here disrespecting Zenyatta? You forgot about the Peppers Pride references?

Am I the one who is moving the goalposts...or is it you?

Here is the post you responded to. Please show me where I say I don't remember ANY member ever disrespecting her, whatever the hell that means.

It's disappointing that you are still on this disingenuous kick. A lot of people didn't hold a strong opinion that she was mediocre. That's just flat out untrue.

The "haters" as you call them just disagreed with people about her place in history. I don't believe any of the said haters thought her to be mediocre at all. They just didn't think she was the bestest horsey evah, even though she had the best dance moves.

I say they disagreed about her place in history, but they didn't view her as mediocre.

But I'm moving the goalposts? Really?

Steve R
08-28-2012, 01:58 PM
[snip]...They compared her accomplishments with those of PEPPERS PRIDE!...If I took those few extreme, ridiculous references about Peppers Pride, and I tried to present them as the common opinion shared by all the Zenyatta critics...then you would throw every insult that you could think of my way...[snip]
The biggest difference between Peppers Pride and Zenyatta is that the former's best lifetime BSF was 98 while the latter's was 112. That's a differential of 6 or 7 lengths at a mile and a sixteenth. Seems about right, although I think it's odd that being 6 or 7 lengths superior to Peppers Pride would make anyone think it puts a horse anywhere near greatness. I'd feel the same if Zenyatta had retired undefeated in 30 or 40 lifetime starts with a 112 top.

I've been doing figures for 30 years and publishing them for 13. Zenyatta's best figure ranks 129th of 2845 GSWs in non-turf routes and 16th of 1087 among fillies and mares. Had she raced more often against males and/or on dirt, I have no doubt there would have been no record-breaking win streak. Anyone who won't admit the win streak alone enhanced the mare's mystique is in denial IMO. Without that streak she would be another high class female in the tradition of Beautiful Pleasure, Riboletta or Heritage of Gold. That's a notable accomplishment to be sure, but far from legendary.

Everyone has their own value system when it comes to judging race horses. Because of my technical background I emphasize the physiological result of centuries of focused Thoroughbred breeding. Some may be drawn to the drama (or win streaks or money earned, etc) of the races. Others may use anthropomorphism to enhance their connection to individual horses (although I must say that in the 40 years I owned horses of several different breeds, I witnessed far more interesting pre-competition behavior than Zenyatta's "dance"). But for me, if they don't run fast in an historical sense, they can't be great regardless of their win/loss record. But that's just my opinion.

thaskalos
08-28-2012, 02:02 PM
I don't believe any of the said haters thought her to be mediocre at all. They just didn't think she was the bestest horsey evah, even though she had the best dance moves.

So...in your opinion...these "haters" (your word, not mine) only objected because they "just didn't think that she was the bestest horsey evah".

Can you please tell me who among the Zenyatta fans EVER said that she was the best horse EVER?

NONE of us ever said that she was "the best horse ever"...that's YOUR invention...so you can offer an excuse for all the Zenyatta critics out there.

If the Zenyatta arguments were really about whether on not she was the "bestest horsey evah"...than there would hardly be any argument at all!

We would all be in complete agreement!

But there was Peppers Pride...and the tomatoe cans...and the rubber duckies...and the lists of the superior fillies and mares...and the "synthetic surface curiosity" nonsense...etc.

THAT'S what our Zenyatta arguments were really about!

So yes...

You are the one who is moving the goalposts.

Dahoss9698
08-28-2012, 02:09 PM
So...in your opinion...these "haters" (your word, not mine) only objected because they "just didn't think that she was the bestest horsey evah".

Can you please tell me who among the Zenyatta fans EVER said that she was the best horse EVER?

NONE of us ever said that she was "the best horse ever"...that's YOUR invention...so you can offer an excuse for all the Zenyatta critics out there.

If the Zenyatta arguments were really about whether on not she was the "bestest horsey evah"...than there would hardly be any argument at all!

We would all be in complete agreement!

But there was Peppers Pride...and the tomatoe cans...and the rubber duckies...and the lists of the superior fillies and mares...and the "synthetic surface curiosity" nonsense...etc.

THAT'S what our Zenyatta arguments were really about!

So yes...

You are the one who is moving the goalposts.

You can't even get through your post without stretching the truth, huh? Haters, is in fact the word Classhandicapper used. I was just following suit.

Then, instead of just admitting that I didn't say what you said, you totally ignore it and go off on another tangent.

Why would I want to discuss anything with someone who is being disingenuous on purpose for no reason?

thaskalos
08-28-2012, 02:17 PM
The biggest difference between Peppers Pride and Zenyatta is that the former's best lifetime BSF was 98 while the latter's was 112. That's a differential of 6 or 7 lengths at a mile and a sixteenth. Seems about right, although I think it's odd that being 6 or 7 lengths superior to Peppers Pride would make anyone think it puts a horse anywhere near greatness. I'd feel the same if Zenyatta had retired undefeated in 30 or 40 lifetime starts with a 112 top.

I've been doing figures for 30 years and publishing them for 13. Zenyatta's best figure ranks 129th of 2845 GSWs in non-turf routes and 16th of 1087 among fillies and mares. Had she raced more often against males and/or on dirt, I have no doubt there would have been no record-breaking win streak. Anyone who won't admit the win streak alone enhanced the mare's mystique is in denial IMO. Without that streak she would be another high class female in the tradition of Beautiful Pleasure, Riboletta or Heritage of Gold. That's a notable accomplishment to be sure, but far from legendary.

Everyone has their own value system when it comes to judging race horses. Because of my technical background I emphasize the physiological result of centuries of focused Thoroughbred breeding. Some may be drawn to the drama (or win streaks or money earned, etc) of the races. Others may use anthropomorphism to enhance their connection to individual horses (although I must say that in the 40 years I owned horses of several different breeds, I witnessed far more interesting pre-competition behavior than Zenyatta's "dance"). But for me, if they don't run fast in an historical sense, they can't be great regardless of their win/loss record. But that's just my opinion.

Allow me to ask you a question Steve...

Let's forget for a moment that there is a 14-point difference between Peppers Pride and Zenyatta...and let's assume that their speed figures were IDENTICAL. Let's assume that the only difference between them is that Peppers Pride only raced against New Mexico-breds...while Zenyatta raced exclusively in graded stakes.

Does the fact that both horses have identical speed ratings mean that they have similar abilities?

Is a "98" at Albuquerque, or Zia Park...the same as a 98 at Belmont, or Churchill Downs?

Is a Grade 1 race the same as a minor stakes race restricted to NM breds?

Because that's what you seem to be saying here...IMO.

thaskalos
08-28-2012, 02:20 PM
I agree, but unfortunately that isn't how it went down. She was being mentioned as the greatest ever regardless of sex.

Prove it!

thaskalos
08-28-2012, 02:34 PM
You can't even get through your post without stretching the truth, huh? Haters, is in fact the word Classhandicapper used. I was just following suit.

Then, instead of just admitting that I didn't say what you said, you totally ignore it and go off on another tangent.

Why would I want to discuss anything with someone who is being disingenuous on purpose for no reason?

Classhandicapper explained what he meant by "hater" in post #111. Others have used that word long before him...

Plus, Classhandicapper is not in the habit of calling people names...that's YOUR department.

Compare the tone of his posts here with your own posts (#124, #125).

For someone who pretends to hate deflections...you sure like to dance around a lot.

You like asking questions...but you don't like to provide any answers.

And who told you that I wanted to debate things with you?

I said that I admired your handicapping skill...not your debating style.

Dahoss9698
08-28-2012, 02:44 PM
Classhandicapper explained what he meant by "hater" in post #111. Others have used that word long before him...

Plus, Classhandicapper is not in the habit of calling people names...that's YOUR department.

Compare the tone of his posts here with your own posts (#124, #125).

For someone who pretends to hate deflections...you sure like to dance around a lot.

You like asking questions...but you don't like to provide any answers.

And who told you that I wanted to debate things with you?

I said that I admired your handicapping skill...not your debating style.

You still can't just admit that you had what I said totally wrong, huh? In a way it's funny to watch.

You actually implied you wanted to debate things with me and then expressed displeasure that I wasn't interested. Remember posting this a little while ago?



You said that we have many differences of opinion...and that you don't want to debate things with me any more. That's fine...I can handle rejection.


Methinks you've let emotion get the best of you yet again. Apparently the teacher has a few things to learn still.

cj
08-28-2012, 02:46 PM
Prove it!

I am not searching this board, let alone the internet, for something we both know could be easily found. You and I both know I could find countless quotes naming her the best ever.

thaskalos
08-28-2012, 02:58 PM
I am not searching this board, let alone the internet, for something we both know could be easily found. You and I both know I could find countless quotes naming her the best ever.

The only person that I can think of who might have called Zenyatta the best horse ever, was Carlron...or whatever his name was.

And he was ridiculed for it...I'm sure you remember that.

Can you name me another member of this board who might have called Zenyatta that?

I seriously doubt that you'll be able to...no matter how hard you try.

Look...this conversation is ridiculous after all this time...and no one knows that better than me.

It isn't worth starting this all over again.

Let's just agree that she was one of the best mares we have seen in this country...and move on to something else.

thaskalos
08-28-2012, 03:05 PM
You still can't just admit that you had what I said totally wrong, huh? In a way it's funny to watch.

You actually implied you wanted to debate things with me and then expressed displeasure that I wasn't interested. Remember posting this a little while ago?



Methinks you've let emotion get the best of you yet again. Apparently the teacher has a few things to learn still.

I was only joking about the "rejection"...

I have more "friends" than I need at the moment...and I'm not looking for more.

I am surprised that you didn't notice the humor in my remark...

Could it be that your recent losing streak has affected your sense of humor?

Don't worry...it happens to the best of us...:cool:

cj
08-28-2012, 03:11 PM
The only person that I can think of who might have called Zenyatta the best horse ever, was Carlron...or whatever his name was.

And he was ridiculed for it...I'm sure you remember that.

Can you name me another member of this board who might have called Zenyatta that?

I seriously doubt that you'll be able to...no matter how hard you try.

Look...this conversation is ridiculous after all this time...and no one knows that better than me.

It isn't worth starting this all over again.

Let's just agree that she was one of the best mares we have seen in this country...and move on to something else.

Hell, I remember a few horsemen saying it.

I do agree, and I've come to appreciate her more later on. She gained more in defeat for me than she did the prior two years of winning.

Steve R
08-28-2012, 03:13 PM
Allow me to ask you a question Steve...

Let's forget for a moment that there is a 14-point difference between Peppers Pride and Zenyatta...and let's assume that their speed figures were IDENTICAL. Let's assume that the only difference between them is that Peppers Pride only raced against New Mexico-breds...while Zenyatta raced exclusively in graded stakes.

Does the fact that both horses have identical speed ratings mean that they have similar abilities?
No. If the figures are accurate it means they ran equally fast.

Is a "98" at Albuquerque, or Zia Park...the same as a 98 at Belmont, or Churchill Downs?
It should be if the figures are constructed accurately.

Is a Grade 1 race the same as a minor stakes race restricted to NM breds?

Because that's what you seem to be saying here...IMO.
Of course not, although it is possible (but not likely) for a restricted race to be faster than a G1. It happens. Last Sunday a $20K optional claimer for older NY-breds at Saratoga went in 1:22 flat for 7f on a fast track. It was 2 ticks faster than the G1 Test Stakes for 3yo fillies.

The point I was trying to make is that over a horse's career you usually can develop a reasonably objective understanding of how fast a horse runs. Race names and race classifications are irrelevant to the horse. It simply responds to the competition and environmental conditions of the event. Zenyatta didn't know she was running in a G1 anymore than Peppers Pride knew she was running in a state-bred race. They were in those races to win and they ran accordingly under the guidance of their rider.

Don't get me wrong. I think Zenyatta was an outstanding performer. She had my 19th best figure in a non-turf route in SoCal graded races since 1999, equal to what I assigned Dullahan in the Pacific Classic. I actually supported her for HOY when they gave it to Curlin for the second time. But I do draw a distinction between an outstanding performer and a true great. Basically what I'm saying is that I don't think she was any better than the distaffers I mentioned earlier (Beautiful Pleasure, Riboletta and Heritage of Gold). To go one step further, I don't think she's even close to fillies like Ruffian or Princess Rooney. But again, that's my opinion.

classhandicapper
08-28-2012, 03:17 PM
The surface issue is also big. While you might love rubber racing, many here don't and think the surface is biased towards horses with her running style. That is especially true at 9f/10f.

IMO this isn't a valid argument.

By this standard Fager, Slew, etc... should be downgraded because dirt favors speed.

Each surface (and even distance) has some some unique characteristics that favor certain styles of running. Even the synthetic tracks are different.

If anything, she was WAY more versatile than the typical American thoroughbred in that she won on a Grade 1 on dirt, just missed in a Classic on dirt, won on a pro ride surface that turfers seemed to relish, won on a true hybrid surface like Hollywood, and won on a Polytrack surface that tons of horses that like dirt and other synthetics can't run a lick on.

Plus she won from 7F to 10F.

cj
08-28-2012, 03:20 PM
I actually supported her for HOY when they gave it to Curlin for the second time.

You know, I did as well and mentioned it here a few times.

This is from my site:

"Who will be Horse of the Year? If Curlin wins, it will be him, if not, probably Ladies Classic winner Zenyatta. I loved Curlin last year, but I think he will get beat here. If this race were on dirt, it would be a walk over, but I think he will struggle on synthetics."

Still, I'm a hater I guess because I think her connections short changed the horse with the schedule they mapped out.

cj
08-28-2012, 03:27 PM
IMO this isn't a valid argument.

By this standard Fager, Slew, etc... should be downgraded because dirt favors speed.

Each surface (and even distance) has some some unique characteristics that favor certain styles of running. Even the synthetic tracks are different.

If anything, she was WAY more versatile than the typical American thoroughbred in that she won on a Grade 1 on dirt, just missed in a Classic on dirt, won on a pro ride surface that turfers seemed to relish, won on a true hybrid surface like Hollywood, and won on a Polytrack surface that tons of horses that like dirt and other synthetics can't run a lick on.

Plus she won from 7F to 10F.

This is what drives people nuts, the exaggerations. Sure, she won at 7f, but it was a maiden race against nothing. Normally when people use that line, it is for top class stakes races.

It is also silly to try to say how much different all the synthetic surfaces are. The same could be said for dirt. At 9f or 10f on dirt, speed isn't much of an advantage at all. How many Classics or Derbies on dirt are won wire to wire? In certain circumstances, speed can be, but it isn't as common as people like to pretend.

However, on (any of the) synthetics, speed is almost never an advantage. Horses routinely get run down after setting dawdling fractions. To try to call a stone cold closer more versatile than most is just comical.

classhandicapper
08-28-2012, 03:41 PM
You can't even get through your post without stretching the truth, huh? Haters, is in fact the word Classhandicapper used. I was just following suit.

Then, instead of just admitting that I didn't say what you said, you totally ignore it and go off on another tangent.

Why would I want to discuss anything with someone who is being disingenuous on purpose for no reason?

Dahoss,

The term, "hater" has become the fashionable way for identifying people that focus on the negative things about someone. It might be a "African American" thing because I first saw the term used a lot on NBA forums and in tweets from NBA players.

If I'm on a basketball forum and I say "Sure Melo scored 40, grabbed 10 boards, and had 4 assists, but he missed a key free throw and took another dumb shot on the last possession that cost them the game" and I tend to say things like that about Melo all the time, people will refer to me as a "hater".

I don't literally "hate" Melo and they don't think I literally hate Melo.

It's just that a more positive person would say "Without his great game they would have lost by 20 and it's a shame he didn't close the deal" .

Tom
08-28-2012, 03:47 PM
Prove it!

uh, maybe post #79 applies? :rolleyes:

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=77796&page=4&pp=20&highlight=zenyatta

thaskalos
08-28-2012, 03:52 PM
uh, maybe post #79 applies? :rolleyes:

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=77796&page=4&pp=20&highlight=zenyatta

Jesus Christ...

YOU, of all people, can't take a joke?

Where in this post -- or in ANY post, for that matter -- do I say that she was "the greatest horse ever"?

gm10
08-28-2012, 04:10 PM
This is what drives people nuts, the exaggerations. Sure, she won at 7f, but it was a maiden race against nothing. Normally when people use that line, it is for top class stakes races.

It is also silly to try to say how much different all the synthetic surfaces are. The same could be said for dirt. At 9f or 10f on dirt, speed isn't much of an advantage at all. How many Classics or Derbies on dirt are won wire to wire? In certain circumstances, speed can be, but it isn't as common as people like to pretend.

However, on (any of the) synthetics, speed is almost never an advantage. Horses routinely get run down after setting dawdling fractions. To try to call a stone cold closer more versatile than most is just comical.

It depends on how you define "speed" and "versatility".

I think of

a) "speed" as "being on or reasonably close to the pace". Under that definition, it is nearly always a major advantage.
b) "versatility" as being able to win under different circumstances. What use is it when a horse can go a dynamite opening 2F or deliver a stunning stretch run, but it can't get anywhere near the winner?

Dahoss9698
08-28-2012, 04:15 PM
I was only joking about the "rejection"...

I have more "friends" than I need at the moment...and I'm not looking for more.

I am surprised that you didn't notice the humor in my remark...

Could it be that your recent losing streak has affected your sense of humor?

Don't worry...it happens to the best of us...:cool:

At least I have the balls to put my opinions on races out there (beforehand) and I track how they do. I open myself up to criticism when I perform poorly. I'm not playing teacher, while rarely if ever having an opinion. Although the last time (the only time?) you did have an opinion it was a winner, so congrats.

I think if you would look back at this discussion you will see that you either misunderstood what I said, or were just looking for another chance to wag your finger at me.

Save it for someone who gives a shit. You already know I don't.

Dahoss9698
08-28-2012, 04:16 PM
You know, I did as well and mentioned it here a few times.

This is from my site:

"Who will be Horse of the Year? If Curlin wins, it will be him, if not, probably Ladies Classic winner Zenyatta. I loved Curlin last year, but I think he will get beat here. If this race were on dirt, it would be a walk over, but I think he will struggle on synthetics."

Still, I'm a hater I guess because I think her connections short changed the horse with the schedule they mapped out.

Ironically, I did also on Derbytrail. Haters of the world rejoice!

Dahoss9698
08-28-2012, 04:20 PM
Dahoss,

The term, "hater" has become the fashionable way for identifying people that focus on the negative things about someone. It might be a "African American" thing because I first saw the term used a lot on NBA forums and in tweets from NBA players.

If I'm on a basketball forum and I say "Sure Melo scored 40, grabbed 10 boards, and had 4 assists, but he missed a key free throw and took another dumb shot on the last possession that cost them the game" and I tend to say things like that about Melo all the time, people will refer to me as a "hater".

I don't literally "hate" Melo and they don't think I literally hate Melo.

It's just that a more positive person would say "Without his great game they would have lost by 20 and it's a shame he didn't close the deal" .

Seriously?

I know what the term means but thanks.

iceknight
08-28-2012, 04:20 PM
Because "Those guys" arent trying to prove they're the greatest horse who's ever looked thru a bridle. Also, the race announcers in America arent screaming how Wise Dan or Game On Dude is the 'greatest in the world" when they win. They cannot, because all these fine horses are not undefeated... and they have nt won by great margins in successive G1s.

iceknight
08-28-2012, 04:25 PM
If they were proclaiming the horse "King of England" I would not dispute that.
When you throw world into the picture then I dispute it.

Cigar won in Dubai.
As for Zenyatta no one dared venture onto her home turf<A>.

Why do the Euros always have to come to America and not the other way around?........you ask.
To be declared "king of the world" this must be done.

Otherwise this comment is just pure hogwash. :D Why dont you tell that to all your WORLD CHAMPIONS in Superbowl, World Champions in Baseball and World Champions in Hockey.. oh wait Hockey does involve Canada too, so it is a world championship!

I did want to add about Cigar in neutral ground, see that you already are pointing it out!

classhandicapper
08-28-2012, 04:26 PM
This is what drives people nuts, the exaggerations. Sure, she won at 7f, but it was a maiden race against nothing. Normally when people use that line, it is for top class stakes races.

It is also silly to try to say how much different all the synthetic surfaces are. The same could be said for dirt. At 9f or 10f on dirt, speed isn't much of an advantage at all. How many Classics or Derbies on dirt are won wire to wire? In certain circumstances, speed can be, but it isn't as common as people like to pretend.

However, on (any of the) synthetics, speed is almost never an advantage. Horses routinely get run down after setting dawdling fractions. To try to call a stone cold closer more versatile than most is just comical.

It drives you nuts because you have a different opinion than me on some of these issues and I use them to advance an opinion on Z.

I disagree with you about the synthetic surfaces. IMO, there are far greater differences between the various synthetic surfaces than most dirt surfaces. When I say they are different, I'm not just talking about running style. I'm talking about the ability to handle it.

A lot of turfers loved Pro Ride but they don't seem to be nearly as fond of Hollywood's mixture.

A lot of dirt horses run equally well at Hollywood, but I might not want to bet them at DelMar.

You see that sort of thing on dirt tracks, but it's rarer and not even clear to me most of the time if track surface preference is at work. These various synthetic preferences are clearer. Even if you insist on lumping them all together, she won Grade 1s on dirt and synthetic which is more versatile than a lot of other horses.

I agree it would have been way way more impressive if she won a Grade 1 at 7F, but a lot of horses start out sprinting when they are maidens and don't have any success until they are stretched out and go 2 turns. It wasn't like she was a Grade 1 horse that dropped down to beat maidens at 7F. She was a maiden and miles below her best at the time too.

IMO the whole idea that having speed is better or dirt racing is fairer or superior is totally bogus. Dirt racing favors speed - even going long. The valid comparison isn't wire to wire vs. closer. There's only 1 horse on the lead. There are often 8, 9, 10 closers. Sure there are fewer W2W winners going long, but I'm rarely upset if I'm first early in most long races. There's just less of a speed bias than in sprints.

Most Americans started out focusing on dirt racing and the key attributes of successful dirt racing. So that's what they value. That was true of me. That isn't true of me anymore.

I'm never going to downgrade the greatness of a deep closing Euro turfer for having what it takes to win on that surface. For all I know some of them could run a huge race in a BC Classic too.

classhandicapper
08-28-2012, 04:28 PM
Seriously?

I know what the term means but thanks.

I gave the explanation because Pace seemed to take it literally and I assumed it wasn't clear what I meant when you referred to the term also.

cj
08-28-2012, 04:56 PM
I disagree with you about the synthetic surfaces. IMO, there are far greater differences between the various synthetic surfaces than most dirt surfaces.
When I say they are different, I'm also not just talking about running style. I'm talking about the ability to handle it.


Well, we can say a lot of things are different. But that doesn't make them true. All of these things you say can be checked, and most of them fall apart when scrutinized (like the Dutrow short rest stat yesterday).

A lot of turfers loved Pro Ride but they don't seem to be nearly as fond of Hollywood's mixture.

A lot of dirt horses run equally well at Hollywood, but I might not want to bet them at DelMar. You see that sort of thing on dirt tracks, but it's rarer and not even clear to me most of the time if track surface preference is at work. These various synthetic preferences are clearer.

You could have said the same thing when they were all dirt tracks. Hollywood and Santa Anita had some noticeable differences, and Delmar was a completely different animal. Have you checked how turf horses do when switching to the various synthetics, or are you just using well known examples that you happen to remember?


Even if you insist on lumping them all together, she won Grade 1s on dirt and synthetic which is more versatile than a lot of other horses.

What exactly is "a lot of horses"? Most horses never win two G1s, so of course that is pretty rare. But of those that do and actually try more than one surface, it isn't exactly like spotting Bigfoot. There are plenty of dual surface G1 winners. I'd bet there are at least 100, and that is nothing but a guess. Hell, at least one horse won G1s on three surfaces.

I agree it would have been way more impressive if she won a Grade 1 at 7F, but a lot of horses start out sprinting when they are maidens and don't have any success until they are stretched out and go 2 turns. It wasn't like she was a Grade 1 horse that dropped down to beat maidens at 7F. She was a maiden and miles below her best at the time too.

Lets not pretend 7f on rubber is the same as 7f on dirt. They are much more similar to going 1 mile on dirt than they are 7f.

IMO the whole idea that having speed is better or dirt racing is fairer or superior is totally bogus. Dirt racing favors speed - even going long. The valid comparison isn't wire to wire vs. closer. There's only 1 horse on the lead. There are often 8, 9, 10 closers. Sure there are fewer W2W winners going long, but I'm rarely upset if I'm first early in most long races. There's just less of a speed bias than in sprints.

Do you have numbers to back this up, or are you just shooting from the hip? What is the difference between the surfaces at 9f and 10f?

Obviously, speed is better on dirt than it is on synthetics. But is it better because the most talented horses have it, or because of the dirt. If it were just the surface, I think we'd see a lot more horses running on or near the front winning G1 races at longer distances than we do now.

Most Americans started out focusing on dirt racing and the key attributes of successful dirt racing. So that's what they value. That was true of me. That isn't true of me anymore.

I'm never going to downgrade the greatness of a deep closing Euro turfer for having what it takes to win on that surface. For all I know some of them could run a huge race in a BC Classic too.

What deep closing Euro turfer are we downgrading? If you remember, we kept hearing from her connections that she was better on dirt. They just didn't want to run on it because of those treacherous airplanes and Rocky Mountains.

I doubt you'll find anyone that ever dislikes a horse. What people objected to were the connections and the hyperbole. That made many moronic statements that "fans" actually defended.

classhandicapper
08-28-2012, 05:15 PM
The biggest difference between Peppers Pride and Zenyatta is that the former's best lifetime BSF was 98 while the latter's was 112. That's a differential of 6 or 7 lengths at a mile and a sixteenth. Seems about right, although I think it's odd that being 6 or 7 lengths superior to Peppers Pride would make anyone think it puts a horse anywhere near greatness. I'd feel the same if Zenyatta had retired undefeated in 30 or 40 lifetime starts with a 112 top.

I've been doing figures for 30 years and publishing them for 13. Zenyatta's best figure ranks 129th of 2845 GSWs in non-turf routes and 16th of 1087 among fillies and mares. Had she raced more often against males and/or on dirt, I have no doubt there would have been no record-breaking win streak. Anyone who won't admit the win streak alone enhanced the mare's mystique is in denial IMO. Without that streak she would be another high class female in the tradition of Beautiful Pleasure, Riboletta or Heritage of Gold. That's a notable accomplishment to be sure, but far from legendary.

Everyone has their own value system when it comes to judging race horses. Because of my technical background I emphasize the physiological result of centuries of focused Thoroughbred breeding. Some may be drawn to the drama (or win streaks or money earned, etc) of the races. Others may use anthropomorphism to enhance their connection to individual horses (although I must say that in the 40 years I owned horses of several different breeds, I witnessed far more interesting pre-competition behavior than Zenyatta's "dance"). But for me, if they don't run fast in an historical sense, they can't be great regardless of their win/loss record. But that's just my opinion.

IMO it is close to impossible to measure what a horse is capable of when the pace is slow and the horse wins with a lot of energy in reserve. There are averages that can be estimated using pace and closing times, but they don't hold up on an individual basis because every horse has a different level of stamina and speed and will react differently to the same pace. Unfortunately, IMO there is no universal formula even when general abilities are similar.

IMO, it is also incorrect to equate figures that fillies earned against other fillies with figures earned by either males or females against a deep Grade 1 field of males. They are a totally different ball game. The male races tend to be WAY more competitive and that can impact time. IMO some of the fillies that earned monster figures against other fillies on occasion would get crucified in a Classic field.

I'm sure you make great figures.

But I don't think you can say "this is what the horse ran so this is what the horse woud have run under different conditions".

That's the problem with a figure analysis of Zenyatta. She often raced in very slow paced races and finished with an absolute ton in reserve. The only line you can get on her was from her 2 Classics. Even there it's sketchy because in one she had plenty left after the wire and in the other IMO she was already past her peak at 6 and didn't handle the surface/kickback early.

That's the one minor tragedy of her career. Some people will always judge horses by time and she had very few opportunities to run fast.

cj
08-28-2012, 05:44 PM
Even there it's sketchy because in one she had plenty left after the wire and in the other IMO she was already past her peak at 6 and didn't handle the surface/kickback early.

And this kind of stuff drives people crazy too. Both are pure speculation.

You honestly think she had plenty left after her win in the Classic? Based on what? She ran similar 1/4s after the last mile after running very little the first 1/4. If she had a lot left, doesn't she run faster at the end? Her final 1/4 was her slowest other than the 1st when you account for the turn on the 6f to 8f mark.

The other part about not handling surface just doesn't hold water. She ran 85/100ths of a second faster at Churchill than she did in her win at Santa Anita for the first 1/4 on a clearly faster racing surface. If she didn't handle the kickback/surface at Churchill, Santa Anita must have been a disaster...oh wait, she won. You can't upgrade a horse's performance for being very slow early when she loses when that is how she ALWAYS runs.

classhandicapper
08-28-2012, 05:55 PM
Well, we can say a lot of things are different. But that doesn't make them true. All of these things you say can be checked, and most of them fall apart when scrutinized (like the Dutrow short rest stat yesterday).



You could have said the same thing when they were all dirt tracks. Hollywood and Santa Anita had some noticeable differences, and Delmar was a completely different animal. Have you checked how turf horses do when switching to the various synthetics, or are you just using well known examples that you happen to remember?




What exactly is "a lot of horses"? Most horses never win two G1s, so of course that is pretty rare. But of those that do and actually try more than one surface, it isn't exactly like spotting Bigfoot. There are plenty of dual surface G1 winners. I'd bet there are at least 100, and that is nothing but a guess. Hell, at least one horse won G1s on three surfaces.



Lets not pretend 7f on rubber is the same as 7f on dirt. They are much more similar to going 1 mile on dirt than they are 7f.



Do you have numbers to back this up, or are you just shooting from the hip? What is the difference between the surfaces at 9f and 10f?

Obviously, speed is better on dirt than it is on synthetics. But is it better because the most talented horses have it, or because of the dirt. If it were just the surface, I think we'd see a lot more horses running on or near the front winning G1 races at longer distances than we do now.



What deep closing Euro turfer are we downgrading? If you remember, we kept hearing from her connections that she was better on dirt. They just didn't want to run on it because of those treacherous airplanes and Rocky Mountains.

I doubt you'll find anyone that ever dislikes a horse. What people objected to were the connections and the hyperbole. That made many moronic statements that "fans" actually defended.


1. Did you check Dutrow's WIN% and ROI with 3 day repeaters. Everyone was looking at 1-7 days with all horses etc... but I've seen stats that say 5 days and less with repeaters are better for a lot of trainers. Dutrow has been especially good with them. That's one of the reasons I played that horse. The flip side I never checked for Dutrow because I had no reason to, but I did test it in aggregate years ago and it held up.

2. I saw some data posted on the various synthetic surface switches that was in line with some research Jerry Brown said he did privately. I felt it held up well in high profile races I bet or observed. IMO, there is difference between dirt surface switches and synthetic switches.

3. If you look at a lot of Grade 1 horses, you will find a lot that never won sprinting, even as maidens.

4. I've seen data for W2W winners at various distances by track and surface, but I don't use it much in my play other than in a very general way because to me the game is much more day to day and race to race specific. I'm looking at setups and biases. In general on dirt I'd rather have speed even going long.

I think speed is a positive attribute and stamina is a positive attribute (as are other things).

I think each surface/distance/day rewards or punishes how much of each you have and more importantly how/when you use it.

Dirt tends to reward early speed and punish the horses that don't have enough of it that are chasing those that do. It favors speed so much that sometimes a front runner can be dead tired from running too fast early but the chasers can't catch him because they had less speed and got tired chasing.

On turf it also helps to be brilliantly fast, but you can't use too much of it prematurely or you'll die and be caught. You have to use it in a short burst. So jockeys save it for late. But the faster you are the better. Speed is great to have on turf, but it gets punished on turf if not used properly and prudently.

cj
08-28-2012, 06:19 PM
1. Did you check Dutrow's WIN% and ROI with 3 day repeaters. Everyone was looking at 1-7 days with all horses etc... but I've seen stats that say 5 days and less with repeaters are better for a lot of trainers. Dutrow has been especially good with them. That's one of the reasons I played that horse. The flip side I never checked for Dutrow because I had no reason to, but I did test it in aggregate years ago and it held up.

There is no data at that level because almost every runner he ran back in three days had hit the board.

2. I saw some data posted on the various synthetic surface switches that was in line with some research Jerry Brown said he did privately. I felt it held up well in high profile races I bet or observed. IMO, there is difference between dirt surface switches and synthetic switches.

How many have even studied surface switches on dirt? I can tell you I can find bigger spreads in how tracks play amongst several dirt tracks than any of the synthetic ones.

3. If you look at a lot of Grade 1 horses, you will find a lot that never won sprinting, even as maidens.

Again, what is a lot? I would guess those are in the minority. And my point was the surface had a lot to do with that, which you conveniently ignored.

4.

First you say you don't use the tendencies, then type a diatribe on the tendencies. Which is it?

classhandicapper
08-28-2012, 07:55 PM
There is no data at that level because almost every runner he ran back in three days had hit the board.



How many have even studied surface switches on dirt? I can tell you I can find bigger spreads in how tracks play amongst several dirt tracks than any of the synthetic ones.



Again, what is a lot? I would guess those are in the minority. And my point was the surface had a lot to do with that, which you conveniently ignored.



First you say you don't use the tendencies, then type a diatribe on the tendencies. Which is it?

1. The flip side category is hard to study because so few horses come back in 5 days or less. But for some reason 5 days or less is somewhat unique among repeaters for some trainers. My original research goes all the way back to the late 80s (and excluded Oscar)

2. You are looking at it from the running style perspective. I agree that is important. But I think liking or disliking the footing of the surface is a factor also.

3. I think Zenyatta would have won at 7F on dirt against Grade 1 fillies/mares (colts would have been a lot tougher, but if she got a setup she would). I think any horse that won both sprints and routes is doing more than one that can clearly only do one or the other. I don't think the surface matters.

4. LOL.

Here's another diatribe.

If you ask most people whether a horse is fast or not they will generally look at one of two things before answering.

1. Final time speed figures
2. Early speed/pace

I also want to know how fast the horse's top speed is over 2-3 furlongs and I don't care if it's early, middle or late.

Take Drosselmyer and Zenyatta. Two deep closers.

If you put Drosselmyer into a jog for a few furlongs and asked him for his absolute best IMO you wouldn't get much. IMO he was a slow horse. He was probably slower than most high priced claimers over a few furlongs.

If you put Zenyatta into a jog for a few furlongs and asked her for her very best, I think she'd give you 21 and change. Zenyatta was a very fast horse when she was rolling. If we timed all her moves we'd probably find a few 11 second 1/8ths (maybe even a 10 and change) without even doing her best. She was just so big it took her a little longer to get going at the start. Plus she was on a surface that rewarded saving that speed until late. So she wasn't moved until it was the right time. She wasn't back there because she didn't have the speed to get position in the middle of a race like Drosselmyer would be.

IMO fast is fast. It's when and how you use that speed that matters on each surface.

Dirt rewards speed early, middle, or late depending on the setup.

Turf rewards speed, but it has to be used at the right time, which is typically late.

classhandicapper
08-28-2012, 08:41 PM
And this kind of stuff drives people crazy too. Both are pure speculation.

You honestly think she had plenty left after her win in the Classic? Based on what? She ran similar 1/4s after the last mile after running very little the first 1/4. If she had a lot left, doesn't she run faster at the end? Her final 1/4 was her slowest other than the 1st when you account for the turn on the 6f to 8f mark.

The other part about not handling surface just doesn't hold water. She ran 85/100ths of a second faster at Churchill than she did in her win at Santa Anita for the first 1/4 on a clearly faster racing surface. If she didn't handle the kickback/surface at Churchill, Santa Anita must have been a disaster...oh wait, she won. You can't upgrade a horse's performance for being very slow early when she loses when that is how she ALWAYS runs.

It's hard to prove visual things, but I don't think it's speculation.

In 2009, when she finally got outside, I thought she hit a higher gear than she was in just prior to that move. She traveled her last quarter in about 23.2. That's significantly faster than the average quarter for the race. When she went out after the wire I saw no sign she was done. It's not that I think she could have run faster through the stretch. I don't think she could have, at least by much. It's that she still had stamina left after the wire. When you close faster than the average quarter of the race and have something left after the wire (usually only happens in turf racing), it usually means if you moved sooner or the pace was faster you would have put up a somewhat faster final time. Essentially, I am saying if she ran 2 or 3 fifths faster early, there wouldn't have been a corresponding decline in the last quarter. The speculation part is the exact number. That's the impossible part because I can't measure stamina. I can just try to judge if a horse is tried or has plenty left. The nature of racing on synthetic and turf is not for dirt like fast paces or premature moves trying to put up big Beyers. They are timing moves and sometimes going out with something in reserve.

In 2010, it's mostly visual. She got out of the gate a step slow like she often does. But then IMO she reacted slightly to something as the other horses came in on her. After that IMO she didn't look comfortable on the surface for about 1/8th of a mile. As she started to get disconnected from the rest of the field, Smith asked her a little to get her back into it and she did fairy quickly. So the fractions may have been similar, but the early part of the race was not. She's normally where she wound up going easily and comfortably without being used or looking like that. I put added weight on my visual view based on the fact that after the race Smith said something along the lines of her struggling early and not liking the kickback. If I hadn't thought she was struggling early before I heard Smith's comment I would have dismissed it. But in this case I had to take it as verification of what I think I saw.

I love and use numbers. They are essential. But IMO truly understanding this game is not about numbers. There's still too much going on not being measured or even considered. IMO the idea is to try to do what I am doing, but to do it a lot better than I can (kind of like Paul Cornman)

cj
08-28-2012, 09:55 PM
...So the fractions may have been similar, but the early part of the race was not.

More hyperbole...since when is nearly a full second difference in a 1/4 mile fraction, and probably more than a second when taking track speed into account, similar? The pace was very fast and she was last. I don't think she should get the benefit of the doubt for that trip.

Are you seriously using jockey comments as a handicapping tool? I'd rather just throw money in the fireplace than base handicapping judgements on jockey speak. At least I'd get a little heat out of it. I know you said you thought the same thing, but given the race setup it probably helped her if it is even true. I said the same exact thing in the Test Saturday at the break. That bad break was a blessing in disguise for the winner.

5k-claim
08-28-2012, 10:50 PM
Hard for me to contain the tears after reading this account. I too loved the signs and all of the excitement. What a ride!

Too bad those sign holding girls aren't still following the game and instead have turned to talking to their favorite horseys on facebook and blogs as if the horse is talking back.

That's what Z left us with. Thanks....I guess. How do we know what the sign holding girls are still doing? I personally have no clue. I am guessing there could be a crop of young girls with Z posters on their walls today who will be exercise riders (and maybe even a jockey or two) of tomorrow. I am going to go on record as saying some of them will be good. (Come on time machine... find this post!)

And even if it all had been just a moment in time with some wackies who will never be back... well, so what? Life is short.

I have been in this long enough to know that good times in racing are always drying up and then you are right back to Sahara Desert days for a while.

That blog that is written as if Z is doing the typing herself? Yeah, well... that one does sort of weird me out a little bit. So, I just avoid it.

The "best ever" of all time? I seriously would not bet on that. But then again, if such a race was actually run it would probably be won by an 8-1 shot and the exacta would pay $74.00. I cannot imagine that I would be any better at handicapping a "Best of All Time Stakes" than I am at handicapping any other big race. So, ultimately I do not give a shit about the question.

.

classhandicapper
08-28-2012, 10:57 PM
More hyperbole...since when is nearly a full second difference in a 1/4 mile fraction, and probably more than a second when taking track speed into account, similar? The pace was very fast and she was last. I don't think she should get the benefit of the doubt for that trip.

Are you seriously using jockey comments as a handicapping tool? I'd rather just throw money in the fireplace than base handicapping judgements on jockey speak. At least I'd get a little heat out of it. I know you said you thought the same thing, but given the race setup it probably helped her if it is even true. I said the same exact thing in the Test Saturday at the break. That bad break was a blessing in disguise for the winner.

I was talking about Zenyatta's early fractions.

I think it was Randy Moss that argued that she ran close to her typical fractions in the 2010 dirt Classic but was so far behind because the dirt pace was faster than the typical synthetic pace she was used to.

I think he is right about dirt and synthetic paces, but missed part of the story.

IMO there is a difference between breaking a little slow and running X evenly and comfortably without being used vs. breaking a little slow and running X after not handling the track/kickback early and then being used to make up the difference. X does not always = X. Smith saw her getting disconnected and used her to run what she normally runs on her own when comfortable. She made up a huge gap quickly.

I agree with you on the Test.

The winner got off a little slow, but relaxed, rated, and took a good position relative to the leaders that were setting a hot pace. If she got off well she might have been involved in that pace. If she was, it certainly would have diminished her chances.

It usually works the other way around.

It's usually more like It's Tricky. Usually, speed horses that break slowly get used to get back into position or they are not comfortable racing off the pace. So they are at a significant disadvantage.

Usually, deeper closers just drop back to approximately where they would have been anyway. Not a major issue.

I think the break is mostly about whether the horse gets "used" to get it's typical position, a favorable position, etc.... That's the way I view it.

classhandicapper
08-28-2012, 11:04 PM
How do we know what the sign holding girls are still doing?

.

They are at the Zenyatta blog every day asking for new pictures of her baby, asking questions about the weaning process, asking about her current pregnancy, talking about other horses at the farm etc... Few of them are probably betting a dime, but a lot of new racing fans are still engaged and learning about the sport.

My girlfriend visits that blog a couple of times a week and she drives me crazy with updates and pictures.

cj
08-29-2012, 12:11 AM
I was talking about Zenyatta's early fractions.

I think it was Randy Moss that argued that she ran close to her typical fractions in the 2010 dirt Classic but was so far behind because the dirt pace was faster than the typical synthetic pace she was used to.

I think he is right about dirt and synthetic paces, but missed part of the story.

IMO there is a difference between breaking a little slow and running X evenly and comfortably without being used vs. breaking a little slow and running X after not handling the track/kickback early and then being used to make up the difference. X does not always = X. Smith saw her getting disconnected and used her to run what she normally runs on her own when comfortable. She made up a huge gap quickly.

I agree with you on the Test.

The winner got off a little slow, but relaxed, rated, and took a good position relative to the leaders that were setting a hot pace. If she got off well she might have been involved in that pace. If she was, it certainly would have diminished her chances.

It usually works the other way around.

It's usually more like It's Tricky. Usually, speed horses that break slowly get used to get back into position or they are not comfortable racing off the pace. So they are at a significant disadvantage.

Usually, deeper closers just drop back to approximately where they would have been anyway. Not a major issue.

I think the break is mostly about whether the horse gets "used" to get it's typical position, a favorable position, etc.... That's the way I view it.

I know you were talking about her opening fraction, and so was I. What did you think I was talking about? She ran almost 1 second faster at Churchill than she did at Santa Anita, more when adjusted for track speed. Randy Moss is wrong. She did not run her typical fraction. She ran faster. Yet she handled the latter and not the former?

Sometimes our eyes lie to us and I think that is the case here. The fact the others were running faster made it look like she was struggling. Maybe she was, but it was trying to run faster earlier than she was used to doing. I'm sure some of that was her size as you mentioned earlier. But it in no way should be considered an excuse.

I think she broke like always and started out about the same speed as always, but Smith saw that how far back she was so he had to hustle her to keep in contact. I just don't see the kickback/handling the surface excuse. How does a horse not handle the surface for a furlong, then love it for the next nine? It isn't like the dirt kicking back stopped either.

Perhaps, had she faced real competition a few times before the BC on dirt, she would have been able to keep up a little better. That is on her connections though.

GMB@BP
08-29-2012, 10:45 AM
If it isn't a black and white issue than how do you explain what you are Class are saying here?

Don't you think it possible to realize she was a very good horse, but not like her in a particular race? Isn't it possible to think of her among the greats but not think of her the best ever?

why must it be one or the other?

Look, Holy Bull is the best horse I have personally witnessed in my life and his races stack up with any horse of the past twenty years. But I don't think he's the best ever and I certainly don't think anyone who doesn't recognize his greatness thinks he was mediocre.

Skip Away was an absolute beast for 3 seasons and rarely if ever missed a big dance all across the country. He proved his greatness over and over again against much better horses than Zenyatta ever faced and no one seems to think he's even in the discussion for top 10-15. Does that mean everyone views him as some mediocrity?

I don't understand why the topic of Zenyatta causes people to abandon rational thought, but my only guess is because some were so emotionally invested in her that it clouds their judgment. That's fine, but let's at least call it what it is, instead of pretending that anyone who disagrees she's the best ever is a hater...or thinks she was mediocre. Because it's just not true.

Running their "A" race

Holy Bull
Skip Away
Zenyatta

Tom
08-29-2012, 10:48 AM
Jesus Christ...

YOU, of all people, can't take a joke?

Where in this post -- or in ANY post, for that matter -- do I say that she was "the greatest horse ever"?

Yes I can....as indicated by the :rolleyes:

classhandicapper
08-29-2012, 01:19 PM
I know you were talking about her opening fraction, and so was I. What did you think I was talking about? She ran almost 1 second faster at Churchill than she did at Santa Anita, more when adjusted for track speed. Randy Moss is wrong. She did not run her typical fraction. She ran faster. Yet she handled the latter and not the former?

Sometimes our eyes lie to us and I think that is the case here. The fact the others were running faster made it look like she was struggling. Maybe she was, but it was trying to run faster earlier than she was used to doing. I'm sure some of that was her size as you mentioned earlier. But it in no way should be considered an excuse.

I think she broke like always and started out about the same speed as always, but Smith saw that how far back she was so he had to hustle her to keep in contact. I just don't see the kickback/handling the surface excuse. How does a horse not handle the surface for a furlong, then love it for the next nine? It isn't like the dirt kicking back stopped either.

Perhaps, had she faced real competition a few times before the BC on dirt, she would have been able to keep up a little better. That is on her connections though.

I'm not sure which fractions he was comparing, but I'm pretty sure he wasn't comparing her 1st quarter time in the 2010 Classic to her 1st quarter time in the 2009 Classic.

It looks like she ran about a 26 2/5 in the 2010 Classic.

I think he was comparing her typical early fractions adjusted for turns and track speed over a series of races to the 2010 Classic and saying they were similar.

We aren't going to agree on this and that's OK. That's handicapping.

I see a horse that was normally off a step slowly, that settled at the back of the pack, and ran slow fractions that were dictated by field size and the action in front of her, but capable of faster than the 26 2/5 she ran in the 2010 Classic when the action allowed for it (and it often didn't)

In 2010 I see a horse that got away a step slow, got squeezed/crossed in front of a little, looked a little uncomfortable (perhaps kickback) for the first 1/8th of mile or so, then settled, but was getting so disconnected by that time Smith used her to get where she normally is running fractions she's been fully capable of exceeding without urging in the past.

We unquestionably agree the connections made an error not getting one more dirt race into her before then. I think they should have faced Rachel at 10F at Saratoga. If they did, IMO she wins both races and quiets everyone.

Tom
08-29-2012, 02:16 PM
Questing buries them both.

Questing is the greatest race horse of all time.
The debate is over on that one.

cj
08-29-2012, 03:21 PM
I'm not sure which fractions he was comparing, but I'm pretty sure he wasn't comparing her 1st quarter time in the 2010 Classic to her 1st quarter time in the 2009 Classic.

It looks like she ran about a 26 2/5 in the 2010 Classic.

I think he was comparing her typical early fractions adjusted for turns and track speed over a series of races to the 2010 Classic and saying they were similar.

We aren't going to agree on this and that's OK. That's handicapping.

I see a horse that was normally off a step slowly, that settled at the back of the pack, and ran slow fractions that were dictated by field size and the action in front of her, but capable of faster than the 26 2/5 she ran in the 2010 Classic when the action allowed for it (and it often didn't)

In 2010 I see a horse that got away a step slow, got squeezed/crossed in front of a little, looked a little uncomfortable (perhaps kickback) for the first 1/8th of mile or so, then settled, but was getting so disconnected by that time Smith used her to get where she normally is running fractions she's been fully capable of exceeding without urging in the past.

We unquestionably agree the connections made an error not getting one more dirt race into her before then. I think they should have faced Rachel at 10F at Saratoga. If they did, IMO she wins both races and quiets everyone.

I agree. We all see what we want to see. Everyone notices when the horse they bet at 8 to 1 gets blocked, but they rarely notice when the same thing happens to the favorite while their 8 to 1 shot is winning.

It doesn't matter how many times you say it. Moss was wrong about the times. If you choose to believe him, so be it. The 2010 fraction was not similar to the Classic the year before, and it wasn't similar to "typical" for her either. It was as fast as she had went to that call in a long time.

trp
08-29-2012, 08:37 PM
I think it was Randy Moss that argued that she ran close to her typical fractions in the 2010 dirt Classic but was so far behind because the dirt pace was faster than the typical synthetic pace she was used to.

From a Nov. 8, 2010 article by Beyer:

"According to Randy Moss, who created the Moss Pace Figures for the Daily Racing Form, Zenyatta was running as fast in the early stages of the Classic as in any of her races over the last two years. Yet she was out of contact with the rest of the field."

I don't interpret Moss's statement as saying Z ran close to her typical early fractions in the 2010 Classic, but rather she ran at the upper end of her early pace range.

That's very close to what CJ posted.

gm10
08-30-2012, 03:31 AM
From a Nov. 8, 2010 article by Beyer:

"According to Randy Moss, who created the Moss Pace Figures for the Daily Racing Form, Zenyatta was running as fast in the early stages of the Classic as in any of her races over the last two years. Yet she was out of contact with the rest of the field."

I don't interpret Moss's statement as saying Z ran close to her typical early fractions in the 2010 Classic, but rather she ran at the upper end of her early pace range.

That's very close to what CJ posted.

The raw fraction itself ("FRAC") was actually close to her usual, but in relative terms ("EARLY_SPEED") it was on the high side for her.


DATE TRACK FRAC EARLY_SPEED
06-Nov-10 CD 25.69 30
02-Oct-10 OTH 25.63 5
07-Aug-10 DMR 26.56 1
13-Jun-10 HOL 25.84 9
09-Apr-10 OP 25.31 6
13-Mar-10 SA 25.11 15
07-Nov-09 OSA 26.53 17
10-Oct-09 OSA 25.97 2
09-Aug-09 DMR 25.86 4
27-Jun-09 HOL 25.41 20
23-May-09 HOL 25.4 9
24-Oct-08 OSA 25.01 12
27-Sep-08 OSA 24.67 22
02-Aug-08 DMR 24.73 34
05-Jul-08 HOL 25.45 23
31-May-08 HOL 25.48 4
05-Apr-08 OP 24.7 28
13-Jan-08 SA 25.16 2
15-Dec-07 HOL 24.45 22
22-Nov-07 HOL 23.22 13

cj
08-30-2012, 09:48 AM
...Moss was wrong about the times.

An apology is in order. It wasn't Moss that was wrong, but CH remembering what Moss wrote.

KingChas
08-30-2012, 10:11 PM
An apology is in order. It wasn't Moss that was wrong, but CH remembering what Moss wrote.

Well I certaintly was U huh,hoss................... :lol:

KingChas
08-30-2012, 10:31 PM
Correction to CJ quote;
Well It certaintly wasn't U that was wrong, huh,hoss............... :lol:

cj
08-30-2012, 11:23 PM
Correction to CJ quote;
Well It certaintly wasn't U that was wrong, huh,hoss............... :lol:

Well, not in this case it wasn't. I've been wrong many times before though, and I'm sure I will be again very soon.

classhandicapper
08-31-2012, 09:18 AM
An apology is in order. It wasn't Moss that was wrong, but CH remembering what Moss wrote.

I don't think anyone owes anyone an apology.

I never said Moss said she ran similar fractions in both Classics. I said Moss said she ran back to her "typical" fractions and then clarified it further when you compared her two Classics.

We were just looking at two different things.

But the the key point I was making had nothing to do with the fractions.

I never even argued that Moss or you were wrong about the fractions.

I argued there is a difference between a fraction of X going easily and comfortably and a fraction of X getting squeezed a little, looking a little uncomfortable and climbing slightly like a horse that doesn't like the surface or kickback, getting disconnected, and then being used to run the fraction you normally run easily and comfortably.

IMO, she didn't run to fractions. She ran to position. Her fractions were typically a function of field size and the pace in front of her. (They were backing down the paces on her in CA for more than year trying to beat her. That's why she has so many 90s Beyers. She'd just move at the same time, had the speed to get where she had to be turning for home, and then close them down anyway.)

I don't have the time to handicap all races in nearly as much depth as I do major stakes. I don't even look at all stakes in depth. But I often do look at major stakes very closely because I love them and because my classing and other techniques have been very profitable for me for many years and outperform numbers in those types of races. But a lot of it is subjective - which is what makes it profitable and hard to prove.

cj
08-31-2012, 10:25 AM
I think he was comparing her typical early fractions adjusted for turns and track speed over a series of races to the 2010 Classic and saying they were similar.



This is what I was referencing. I said he was wrong if he said that, but he didn't. He said the same thing I did. It was definitely one of her fastest, and certainly her fastest in some time.

Fager Fan
09-02-2012, 10:25 AM
Why do the Euros always have to come to America and not the other way around?
Frankel would fare much better in the Classic on American dirt than Game On Dude would in the Juddmonte Int'l on turf...do you disagree?
American horses rarely go to race in Europe because the trainers and owners know what would happen...ass kicking.
Why didn't Cigar and Zenyatta go run at Royal Ascot?....bums

They didn't go because there is no dirt. We do have turf here. But regardless, the point is that we never call our horses the best in the world because we recognize that some other horses in other countries might have a thing or two to say about that. Frankel may be the best horse in Europe, and the best turf horse in the world, but we turn out the best dirt horses in the world and Frankel can put forth no evidence that he'd even beat our third tier dirt horses. So just stick to calling him what he's proven to be.

Some_One
09-02-2012, 07:06 PM
They didn't go because there is no dirt. We do have turf here. But regardless, the point is that we never call our horses the best in the world because we recognize that some other horses in other countries might have a thing or two to say about that. Frankel may be the best horse in Europe, and the best turf horse in the world, but we turn out the best dirt horses in the world and Frankel can put forth no evidence that he'd even beat our third tier dirt horses. So just stick to calling him what he's proven to be.

A somewhat valid point, but then consider that every independent rating service has Frankel among the greatest of all time and the form lines over the horses he has defeated is impressive would make it a clear to all those, except the willingful blind, that Frankel is better then any dirt or poly horse out there. The expectation for him to race on dirt to prove he is the best of all horses is insane, as such I call then that who ever the best dirt/poly horse in America go over to that side of the pond to prove themselves....oh wait, Game on Dude and Royal Delta already did that in March....how they do again?

Fager Fan
09-02-2012, 07:22 PM
A somewhat valid point, but then consider that every independent rating service has Frankel among the greatest of all time and the form lines over the horses he has defeated is impressive would make it a clear to all those, except the willingful blind, that Frankel is better then any dirt or poly horse out there. The expectation for him to race on dirt to prove he is the best of all horses is insane, as such I call then that who ever the best dirt/poly horse in America go over to that side of the pond to prove themselves....oh wait, Game on Dude and Royal Delta already did that in March....how they do again?

How did Frankel do again? At least the others showed up. Can't lose if you don't run. Sarcasm begets sarcasm, otherwise I wouldn't have mentioned that he didn't run at all, even though he had his choice of races in which to run, all over surfaces to his liking.

I don't think he has to run on dirt. I do think, though, that proving one's self on both surfaces adds to a horse's accomplishments. Europeans aren't generally going to attempt or care to attempt dirt given they have no dirt tracks, but we have greats in our history who did attempt and excel on both.