Horse of the Year

[Cratos]

Originally Posted by pandy

Weather as CJ points out can create a bias, but we've seen that even in seemingly perfect weather conditions for racing Santa Anita can be extremely speed favoring.

There are people who say that there's no such thing as track bias, or that track bias rarely occurs. They are wrong and I don't understand where they get that crazy idea from.

Yes weather can be a retardant to a horse's speed, but that will always be true unless the horse is running in a vacuum.

I believe people who state that there isn't a " track bias" is semantically referring to an environmental bias which is probably a better and more comprehensive way of stating the retardants to a horse's speed.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by Cratos

I agree that the things you mentioned are contributors to retarding a horse's speed, but the most significant one which has been related to by the poster , Masgtri Ludi on this forum is glaringly missing.

Are you referring to things like where the start is in relation to the first turn for certain distances, how tight the turns are etc.. ?

Both types of biases (surface and track layout) are grouped under the same title, but they are different things. One will almost always exist (related to the track layout and first turn) and the other seems to be dependent on weather, track maintenance, moisture etc...

[Cratos]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

Are you referring to things like where the start is in relation to the first turn for certain distances, how tight the turns are etc.. ?

Both types of biases (surface and track layout) are grouped under the same title, but they are different things. One will almost always exist (related to the track layout and first turn) and the other seems to be dependent on weather, track maintenance, moisture etc...

You are correct, track geometry can be a retardant to a horse's speed.

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

1. Because many of the first five, for instance the pre-triple crown races, mean diddly squat. You can say they are a grade 1, but they are by no means equivalent to the races later in the year. They are by no means equivalent to the BC Classic.

2. So, you take those meaningless races out of the equation, and you are staring at a horse winning all year-end honors over a horse who beat him fair and square, 2 of 3 times...with one of those wins at the classic distance of 10 furlongs.

3. And by the way, Bayern got a shit trip in the Preakness, the one race where he lost to California Chrome. See, I can play that game too...

1. You like to arbitrarily change the rules to suit your opinion. The Kentucky Derby is a race that every horse owner wants to win. Therefore, every horse who is a possible contender and is healthy will be entered. The winner of the Kentucky Derby has beaten the best three year old's available. The same applies-to a lesser degree to the Preakness and the Belmont. A win in a Triple Crown event is very important in determining stud fees.

A good showing in the Derby Prep races is also important in determining whether a horse can run in the Derby. Because of the points system now in use, a horse must do well in the preps.

You may be able to say that the Breeders Cup Classic is somewhat more challenging than the earlier three year old races because older horses have been added to the mix. You cannot dismiss those three year old races as "diddly squat." They are important and deserve to be given fair consideration.

2. First of all, they are not meaningless races and you can't take them out of consideration. Then, if you look at the three head to head match ups, you have the Preakness which Bayern lost badly and the Pennsylvania Derby which California Chrome lost badly. Regardless of whether one or the other horse had a bad trip or was not sufficiently cranked up for either race, let's just say that the two races cancel each other out.

That leaves us with the Breeders Cup Classic. Despite the fact that there is some question about the effect of Bayern's left turn on the result of the race, I am going to stipulate that it had no effect and that Bayern won the race fair and square. The question then becomes, "Does Bayern"s victory in the BCC trump California Chrome's superiority leading into the race. I say it does not.

Prior to the Breeders Cup Classic, California Chrome had raced seven times. He had won five of those races. Three of those five victories had come in Grade 1 races, the Santa Anita Derby, the Kentucky Derby and the Preakness. One, the San Felipe was in a Grade 2 stakes and the fifth win was in a non graded stakes for California breds. One of California Chromes two defeats was in the Grade 1 Belmont Stakes while the second was in the Grade 2 Pennsylvania Derby. He was fourth in the Belmont and sixth in the Pennsylvania Derby,

In the meantime, Bayern had raced nine times prior to the Breeders Cup. Classic. He had also won five races. But only one of those, the Haskell was a Grade 1 stakes. Two of Bayern's victories came in Grade 2 stakes; those being the Woody Stephens (at seven furlongs) and the Pennsylvania Derby.
Bayern also won a maiden race and an allowance race. Bayern's four defeats (twice as many as California Chrome) prior to the Breeders Cup Classic, came in the Arkansas Derby (he was third), the Derby Trial (he was second), the Preakness (he was ninth) and the Travers (he was tenth).

How anyone can look at the overall records of the two horses and believe that Bayern was the equal of-or even close to-California Chrome going into the Breeders Cup Classic is totally beyond me.

3. Later.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by mostpost

1. You like to arbitrarily change the rules to suit your opinion. The Kentucky Derby is a race that every horse owner wants to win. Therefore, every horse who is a possible contender and is healthy will be entered. The winner of the Kentucky Derby has beaten the best three year old's available. The same applies-to a lesser degree to the Preakness and the Belmont. A win in a Triple Crown event is very important in determining stud fees.

A good showing in the Derby Prep races is also important in determining whether a horse can run in the Derby. Because of the points system now in use, a horse must do well in the preps.

You may be able to say that the Breeders Cup Classic is somewhat more challenging than the earlier three year old races because older horses have been added to the mix. You cannot dismiss those three year old races as "diddly squat." They are important and deserve to be given fair consideration.

2. First of all, they are not meaningless races and you can't take them out of consideration. Then, if you look at the three head to head match ups, you have the Preakness which Bayern lost badly and the Pennsylvania Derby which California Chrome lost badly. Regardless of whether one or the other horse had a bad trip or was not sufficiently cranked up for either race, let's just say that the two races cancel each other out.

That leaves us with the Breeders Cup Classic. Despite the fact that there is some question about the effect of Bayern's left turn on the result of the race, I am going to stipulate that it had no effect and that Bayern won the race fair and square. The question then becomes, "Does Bayern"s victory in the BCC trump California Chrome's superiority leading into the race. I say it does not.

Prior to the Breeders Cup Classic, California Chrome had raced seven times. He had won five of those races. Three of those five victories had come in Grade 1 races, the Santa Anita Derby, the Kentucky Derby and the Preakness. One, the San Felipe was in a Grade 2 stakes and the fifth win was in a non graded stakes for California breds. One of California Chromes two defeats was in the Grade 1 Belmont Stakes while the second was in the Grade 2 Pennsylvania Derby. He was fourth in the Belmont and sixth in the Pennsylvania Derby,

In the meantime, Bayern had raced nine times prior to the Breeders Cup. Classic. He had also won five races. But only one of those, the Haskell was a Grade 1 stakes. Two of Bayern's victories came in Grade 2 stakes; those being the Woody Stephens (at seven furlongs) and the Pennsylvania Derby.
Bayern also won a maiden race and an allowance race. Bayern's four defeats (twice as many as California Chrome) prior to the Breeders Cup Classic, came in the Arkansas Derby (he was third), the Derby Trial (he was second), the Preakness (he was ninth) and the Travers (he was tenth).

How anyone can look at the overall records of the two horses and believe that Bayern was the equal of-or even close to-California Chrome going into the Breeders Cup Classic is totally beyond me.

3. Later.

Great writeup.

This CC vs Bayern battle really comes down to this. If you throw out the Classic, Preakness and Pa Derby and don't use any of those 3 races at all, what do you have left for both horses?

If you say the Preakness and Pa Derby cancel each other out because those were "non efforts" from B and CC and you say the Classic cancels out because both horses were essentially on the line together so they were "equal" in their performance, you have all the other stuff.......which puts CC WAY ahead of B. Now if CC is "way ahead" of B on all the "other stuff" what the debate really comes down to is what is more important, all the "other stuff" that puts CC 'way ahead" or the small margin that separated them in the Classic.

1) Does 4 inches cancel out the huge "lead" that CC had going into the race.

2) Does CC's more ground lost than Bayern cancel out those 4 inches anyway even if CC didn't have this hypothetical "lead" in accomplishments?

If horse racing instituted a "points" system where you get a certain amount of points for certain accomplishments, and Bayern received 100 points for his Classic win, wouldn't CC receive 98 or 99 points for his classic effort? Or, maybe if you factored in ground loss, you could give CC 102 points for his Classic effort and Bayern only gets 100? No matter how you distributed the points, Bayern would only have, at best, 1 or 2 more points than CC anyway for the Classic.

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

And by the way, Bayern got a shit trip in the Preakness, the one race where he lost to California Chrome. See, I can play that game too...

I guess perspective is everything. I watched the Youtube replay or the race several times and I could see no severe interference with Bayern. He bobbled at the start and maybe had to steady a bit mid stretch.
Then I watched the official replay from Pimlico with the Pimlico announcer. The angle was different and there were definitely instances where Ria Antonia came over and bumped with Bayern. There was at least one instance of bumping with a horse to Bayern's inside.

Compare that with the start of the Breeders Cup Classic. Bayern definitely came over towards Shared Belief-even the overhead shows that. There may have been no actual contact, but Shared Belief had to move sharply left to stay out of Bayern's way. In the Preakness, while Bayern was bumped, he did not have to alter course nearly as much as Shared Belief did in the Breeder's Cup Classic. Yet you seem to think that the start of the Preakness had a significant impact on the result of the race, while the start of the BCC had no impact.

Of course, a major difference is that the problems at the start of the BCC were caused by the horse who eventually won the race; while the problems at the start of the Preakness were caused by a horse who eventually finished last.

[Rex Phinney]

LOL Bayern beating chrome by 6 inches has turned into now 4 inches. Give it long enough and some of you guys will have yourselves convinced that Chrome actually won the classic.

Biggest race of the year in North America, open company, 10 furlongs, Bayern wins gate to wire. This makes the second straight time he beat CC. Chrome runs a good race with a clean trip.

This is not at all difficult. All it says is that too many people are drinking the Kentucky Derby Kool Aid.

As a side note shame on the voters for not putting Tonalist in the finalist for 3YO of the year. He won the Belmont and the JCGC. He was deserving of at least being a finalist.

[The WindfallAngler]

Originally Posted by Rex Phinney

...Biggest race of the year in North America, open company, 10 furlongs, Bayern wins gate to wire. This makes the second straight time he beat CC...

These were CC's two straight races in the wake of his triple crown campaign (post-injury), yes. But let's keep the sample simple and bet with confidence, eh?

Bayern hit the tape soonest, to be sure; his connections made big bucks and, to an extent, so did his backers. But, at best, what Bayern did was "steal it" (in the parlance of our times) whether this means bias-aided, trip assisted, steward ordained or some unholy mix. Only a dwindling few still stubbornly hold he actually "won" it.

[Cratos]

Originally Posted by The WindfallAngler

These were CC's two straight races in the wake of his triple crown campaign (post-injury), yes. But let's keep the sample simple and bet with confidence, eh?

Bayern hit the tape soonest, to be sure; his connections made big bucks and, to an extent, so did his backers. But, at best, what Bayern did was "steal it" (in the parlance of our times) whether this means bias-aided, trip assisted, steward ordained or some unholy mix. Only a dwindling few still stubbornly hold he actually "won" it.

So Bayern was "given" the BC Classic victory because he should have been disqualified (and I don't believe this ar all).

However this "great" horse, CC who had a clean trip and couldn't win.

Therefore how did what Bayern did or did not do affect CC's chance of winning?

[Rex Phinney]

Originally Posted by The WindfallAngler

These were CC's two straight races in the wake of his triple crown campaign (post-injury), yes. But let's keep the sample simple and bet with confidence, eh?

Bayern hit the tape soonest, to be sure; his connections made big bucks and, to an extent, so did his backers. But, at best, what Bayern did was "steal it" (in the parlance of our times) whether this means bias-aided, trip assisted, steward ordained or some unholy mix. Only a dwindling few still stubbornly hold he actually "won" it.

You're making excuses. Plain and simple.

Why California Chrome's owners decided to run their horse in Pennsylvania even though anyone with half a brain knew he wouldn't be ready is their problem. Not the voters. They entered their horse that day in a very ill advised spot because they wanted to get paid. O well.

You're whining and crying that Chrome ran in the triple crown and got injured. Well guess what, Bayern ran in the Derby Trial, Preakness and Woody Stephens (and the Haskell, and the Travers) which all happen in 6 weeks. He was scratched from the San Felipe, because he had foot issues. So he ran just as much as Chrome did, and battled an injury too.

Let me ask some of you who think Bayern "stole" the classic. What are you going to think if he beats Chrome again on Feb 7th? How many times does he have to beat Chrome before you are convinced he is better?

California Chrome is what you get when too many people drink the Kentucky Derby Kool Aid. It means that if a horse wins Derby he gets a pass for the next 7 months and still wins horse of the year. California Chrome did nothing after May 17 to merit winning HOTY. He lost 3 of his last 4 races and never beat older horses.

[clocker7]

Whine whine whine.

Guys, it's just a vote, not your pocketbook. You are the hard core. You should be crowing about your huge scores on Bayern in 2014 and assembling your little shrines to him in your hallway, instead of being distracted by something that is meaningless in pursuit of your passion's real objective.

So how did you manage to be thrown so off track? The first rule is to control your emotions, remember?

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by The WindfallAngler

These were CC's two straight races in the wake of his triple crown campaign (post-injury), yes. But let's keep the sample simple and bet with confidence, eh?

Bayern hit the tape soonest, to be sure; his connections made big bucks and, to an extent, so did his backers. But, at best, what Bayern did was "steal it" (in the parlance of our times) whether this means bias-aided, trip assisted, steward ordained or some unholy mix. Only a dwindling few still stubbornly hold he actually "won" it.

I think Bayern fans using the non dq as a "False flag" when in reality his performance didn't "separate" him from CC in any way, shape or form, dq or no dq.

Love the "unholy mix" comments, i might use that going forward!

[The WindfallAngler]

Originally Posted by Cratos

So Bayern was "given" the BC Classic victory because he should have been disqualified (and I don't believe this ar all).

Whether you believe it--and some, who are skeptical of Bayern, do not (even though they have expressed a profound dissatisfaction with the 2014 Classic, apart from the non DQ)--I never wrote that Bayern was "given" the BC Classic victory.

I said he stole it. Then I offered variations on that theme that could apply.

Originally Posted by Cratos

However this "great" horse, CC who had a clean trip and couldn't win..

Had California Chrome enjoyed a trip as "clean" as Bayern's I am persuaded he would have gone right on by. ...If i understood you correctly.
This is familiar ground, by the way, and is discussed in detail elsewhere.

Originally Posted by Cratos

Therefore how did what Bayern did or did not do affect CC's chance of winning?

Bayern obviously was fully cranked.
While an honest pace would have been helpful, for CC--in that he was making only his second start and he undoubtedly lacked his keenest edge--i reject the notion that CC "needs" a pace meltdown in front of him.

The replays do reveal an injustice, or so I believe. Some perceive it; others do not. This much was clear. Entirely too much was riding on the Breeders Cup Classic, for viewers to suffer such a grotesque spectacle.

[The WindfallAngler]

Originally Posted by Rex Phinney

You're making excuses. Plain and simple.

No, I'm simply skeptical of skimpy samples and race results which are not trustworthy, for Eclipse judging purposes.

But hey--relax! Just because a clear plurality of us refused to join in the metronomic lockstep of you Bottom Liners, doesn't mean your votes weren't counted, heheh.

Originally Posted by Rex Phinney

Why California Chrome's owners decided to run their horse in Pennsylvania even though anyone with half a brain knew he wouldn't be ready is their problem. Not the voters.

Here, you're letting emotions get the better of you. It is YOU who appear to be having a problem. The vote went against you. Play past it!

Originally Posted by Rex Phinney

They entered their horse that day in a very ill advised spot because they wanted to get paid. O well.

Without a doubt, that $400,000 bonus money that CC's connections collected purely for showing up, in the Pennsylvania Derby, was welcome. (Although CC arguably didn't get much out of the paid workout, covered up on the rail as he was.)

The loss is a "problem" only if one accepts the idea Bayern's track record time was a stinging rebuke and repudiation of CC's quality. ...which I do not.

Originally Posted by Rex Phinney

You're whining and crying that Chrome ran in the triple crown and got injured. Well guess what, Bayern ran in the Derby Trial, Preakness and Woody Stephens (and the Haskell, and the Travers) which all happen in 6 weeks. He was scratched from the San Felipe, because he had foot issues. So he ran just as much as Chrome did, and battled an injury too.

Except that Bayern wasn't doing it against the best available competition (which is what competing in all three legs of the triple crown ensures) as CC was doing (even while becoming one of only a few dozen ever Dual Classic winners).

Originally Posted by Rex Phinney

Let me ask some of you who think Bayern "stole" the classic. What are you going to think if he beats Chrome again on Feb 7th? How many times does he have to beat Chrome before you are convinced he is better?

At the risk of seeming flippant, time will tell. Personally, I am persuaded that neither of Bayern' "wins" were earned. Consequently, I would need to watch him win *unassisted* at least once, before I even begin to entertain the notion that CC's Horse of the Year title was not well warranted.

Originally Posted by Rex Phinney

California Chrome is what you get when too many people drink the Kentucky Derby Kool Aid. It means that if a horse wins Derby he gets a pass for the next 7 months and still wins horse of the year. California Chrome did nothing after May 17 to merit winning HOTY. He lost 3 of his last 4 races and never beat older horses.

Keep murmuring that mantra. If Bayern, the *now horse,* keeps beating worlds, then CC's HoY-crown will abrubptly lose luster. His popularity would then wither upon the pages of thoroughbred racing history.

What you'll need to sweat, as 2015 unfolds, will be that Eclipse voters did in fact get it right. (I am one who is convinced the triple crown championship was no further away from CC than a few lengths of lost ground: this was *trouble* the colt could readily overcome, had he not missed a step or two while bleeding out of the gate, from the rail.) But be that as it may.

Voters appear to have sorted out the meaning of those four races. Were they wrong? Stay tuned.

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by Rex Phinney

You're making excuses. Plain and simple.

Why California Chrome's owners decided to run their horse in Pennsylvania even though anyone with half a brain knew he wouldn't be ready is their problem. Not the voters. They entered their horse that day in a very ill advised spot because they wanted to get paid. O well.
Everyone enters every horse in every spot because they want to get paid. But there was a more important reason. Had he not run in the Pennsylvania Derby, California Chrome would have been away from the race track for one hundred and forty seven days when he stepped into the starting gate on Breeders Cup Saturday. The Pa. Derby was an important part of his training regimen.

You're whining and crying that Chrome ran in the triple crown and got injured. Well guess what, Bayern ran in the Derby Trial, Preakness and Woody Stephens (and the Haskell, and the Travers) which all happen in 6 weeks. He was scratched from the San Felipe, because he had foot issues. So he ran just as much as Chrome did, and battled an injury too.
So you think that running in races of one mile, one mile and three sixteenths, and seven furlongs-and winning only the shortest of those races-is equivalent to running in races of a mile and a quarter, a mile and three sixteenths and a mile and half? You have got to be kidding me!!!! As far as foot issues, I believe those were well behind him by the Derby Trial. He did run in the Arkansas Derby three weeks before.

Let me ask some of you who think Bayern "stole" the classic. What are you going to think if he beats Chrome again on Feb 7th? How many times does he have to beat Chrome before you are convinced he is better?

California Chrome is what you get when too many people drink the Kentucky Derby Kool Aid. It means that if a horse wins Derby he gets a pass for the next 7 months and still wins horse of the year. California Chrome did nothing after May 17 to merit winning HOTY. He lost 3 of his last 4 races and never beat older horses.

I don't know what I will think if Bayern beats California Chrome on Feb. 7. What will you think if Chrome beats Bayern? That is a much more likely scenario.

As for California Chrome beating older horses, Bayern only beat older horses one time and California Chrome finished ahead of every one of those older horses which Bayern beat.