W O W ! ! ! !

[Spalding No!]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I have no problem throwing around the word "great" for this horse after just 4 well spaced high level stakes races because of the way he's done it. But imo calling him the best since Secretariat is a bit of a stretch at his stage.

Would this horse be a mortal lock against horses that would get the jump on him like Affirmed, Seattle Slew, and Ghostzapper?

You pointed out the hole in Arrogate's form as it pertains to declarations of greatness, i.e., his well spaced races.

While from a talent standpoint hypothetical one-offs with any of the horses you mentioned might go Arrogate's way in a number of instances, I wonder what the consensus would be for a hypothetical series of races with any of those horses.

For example, if Arrogate took on Easy Goer in the Whitney, Travers, Woodward, and Jockey Club Gold Cup in succession, would he prove superior? If he took on Spectacular Bid in the Malibu at 7f, the San Fernando at 9f, the Strub at 10f, and then the Santa Anita Handicap in the slop all in the span of 9 weeks would he hold together?

As far as the Dubai World Cup, regardless of the trip, my opinion of him can't jump another level as a result of this race, seeing how he beat a horse by only a couple lengths that he had previously dispatched to the tune of 15 lengths about 6 months ago. Especially when that same horse got lit up by Tamarkuz in a BC undercard race last November.

[ultracapper]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

IMO, he was clearly a lot better than the official margin over Gun Runner (who is a solid Grade 1 winner at this stage). But IMHO the impact of the slow start and wide trip are being overrated a bit.

IMO, it's way tougher to be away slowly and rushed into the pace wide than it is to be away slowly and race wide at the back of the pack. I put way more emphasis on extra energy consumption than literal ground loss or where you come from in the pack. He was ridden exactly the way a horse like him should have been ridden once he got bounced around and wound up further back than he would normally race. I would not say the track was playing to the outside, but a few other horses ran quite well despite significant ground loss and the track was certainly more friendly to deep closers than the typical dirt track.

I have no problem throwing around the word "great" for this horse after just 4 well spaced high level stakes races because of the way he's done it. But imo calling him the best since Secretariat is a bit of a stretch at his stage.

Would this horse be a mortal lock against horses that would get the jump on him like Affirmed, Seattle Slew, and Ghostzapper?

How about other greats like Spectacular Bid, Forego, and Alydar.

It's not a mortal lock he would have beaten peak Sunday Silence or Easy Goer.

We didn't get to see a fully matured American Pharoah who was faster early and still clearly moving forward quickly when he retired.

It sounds like he's going to get 3 more well spaced races. I don't see anyone that can threaten him, but we should at least see if he can sustain this level and beat back anyone else that does try before we start dissing some amazing horses between Secretariat and now.

And that's why Smith"s ride was so damn good, if that debate is still going. (I just read the last page. I had stopped at page 5 a couple days ago. The beat down on Smith's ride was too stupid to keep my interest in the thread.)

[whodoyoulike]

Originally Posted by HuggingTheRail

Hunts should have sponsored the race - 1 horse and a bunch of tomato cans...

And, I thought you were going for that it was a "ketchup" race, in your opinion.

[VeryOldMan]

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

While from a talent standpoint hypothetical one-offs with any of the horses you mentioned might go Arrogate's way in a number of instances, I wonder what the consensus would be for a hypothetical series of races with any of those horses.

For example, if Arrogate took on Easy Goer in the Whitney, Travers, Woodward, and Jockey Club Gold Cup in succession, would he prove superior? If he took on Spectacular Bid in the Malibu at 7f, the San Fernando at 9f, the Strub at 10f, and then the Santa Anita Handicap in the slop all in the span of 9 weeks would he hold together?

Nice point. And Easy Goer was coming off the classic Triple Crown duel with Sunday Silence and Spectacular Bid lost to Affirmed previously.

I wish modern day racing gave us those opportunities. They are probably lost forever, given the modern day economics of breeding v. racing.

At least Arrogate has dueled with California Chrome, who is a worthy measuring stick IMO. Others mileage varies.

[AskinHaskin]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

Where is the chart for this race? I'm not finding it anywhere except for the rather useless chart on the DWC website.

They said at some point that the track was sealed. Was it unsealed during the day? Sealed or unsealed for the big race?

Perhaps the best you can do is construct your own chart based on the info provided earlier in this thread:

http://www.dubairacingclub.com/race/...o/trakus-chart



It would begin something like this:


:24.81 :48.28 1:12.93 1:37.86 2:02.159

(where they've gone 11 2/3 meters less than our 1 1/4 miles)


Arrogate ...... 13-12 ..... 12-8 3/4 ..... 10-4 ..... 3-2 3/4 ..... 1-2 1/4

Gun Runner...... 2-1..... 2-1/2 ..... 1-nk..... 1-1..... 2-2 1/4

Neolithic ...... 3-1 3/4..... 3-1 1/4..... 2-nk ..... 2-1 ..... 3-7 1/4

Mubtaahij...... 4-2 1/2 ..... 4-2 ..... 4-1 1/4..... 4-4 1/4 ..... 4-9

Awardee...... 5-4 1/2..... 6-3 1/4..... 6-2..... 5-5 1/2..... 5-10 1/2




So indeed traditional perusal would quickly draw the attention to Arrogate's strong effort against the grain of the race, but it was likely flattered by camera angles and the fact that he was simply much better than the lot of those, both before and after the race.


Keep in mind that, with $803,000 in the win pool at one point, there were ten 99-to-1 shots. (that wasn't 45 minutes before first post at Cahokia Downs on a Friday, with just $117 in the pool)


Had I not been fooled by Bejarano, I would have been on Arrogate since the Travers (instead I went down on American Freedom), and while I am in awe of Arrogate like so many, I'm not quite ready to add him to the Mount Rushmore of horse racing.

Sure he belongs on any Mount Rushmore of racing in the 2000's, but given what racing has devolved into, that is only slightly worth mention.



Somebody pondered how Baffert keeps getting so many monsters... and it seems to be a function of his impressive training regimen and repeated successes, which bring more and more owners willing to spend the big bucks to buy Baffert the sort of horse flesh he likes.

What you don't see in the Form, on the Baffert horses, is a usually-loooooooong workout program begun many months prior to any hint of a first-ever race.

That amount of patience can best be attained by having soooooooooo many runners on the treadmill at one time that your whole way of life isn't thrown-off by any particular one of them stubbing his toe and needing a few months to recover.


Consider Bodemeister as a prime example:

They still talk incessantly about, well, Apollo (and) Kentucky... but Bodemeister, despite not debuting until January 16, was surely more 'fit' for competition by Derby day than are 90% of the runners who go 1 1/4 in Louisville on the first Saturday in May.

That by virtue of the fact that Bodemeister began working steadily way back on June 9 and he had twenty-seven drills in him by the time he debuted in mid-January. During that 7-month span between first work and first start, he once missed 22 days without a drill, but outside of that, the next greatest time between official workouts was a mere 10 days.

People want Baffert to purchase and train horses for them in hope that they too can ride the wave of a champion runner, and with so many clamoring to hire Baffert, he can have his pick of the clients and can afford the very patience which seems to be the difference between his success and that of most others.


Like Bodemeister before him, Arrogate too began official morning moves in June of his 2yo season, but something went amiss after mid-July 2015 and Arrogate didn't return to the worktab until January 12th of last year.

Some trainers might have rushed to make the Derby, but of course Baffert is usually well-stocked with other solid 3yo's so he can afford more than most to be patient with any individual.

Arrogate went 15 days between works in late January, and then there was another issue which had him not working between April 13 and May 13. Before long Arrogate was firing bullets and ready for the maiden win which came on June 5.


Consider that Arrogate listed 36 registered workouts in 2016, along with 6 races (and a routine week off after each race)... which accounts for 48 weeks during the year. A much-deserved month of November without a work, after the Breeders' Cup win, accounts for the rest of the time.


The Baffert runners are simply fit, because all of the various successes have brought the luxury of not needing to push every horse all the time just to earn purse slivers to pay the upkeep.


Bob Baffert just steers the ship as he always has, while everybody involved knows the routine and knows that there really isn't any rush.

We out here just keep seeing Baffert's name connected with good ones, but they in so many cases are interchangeable while the constant is Baffert himself.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by cj

Old fogey syndrome. ��

Maybe I am guilty as charged. I'm definitely an old fogey. There is a tendency for people to glorify what they saw when they were young. So maybe that's a little bit of it. But in my case I don't think that's entirely true.

My other big passion is shooting pool. I've seen all the greats going back to Lassiter, Crane, and Mosconi on through Segal, Varner, Mizerak, on through Archer, Strickland, Reyes, on to the best now. I would say the overall talent keeps getting deeper and is better now than back in the 70s, though the very best back then could hang with these guys now. So I don't seem to have a bias in pool.

I know my classing techniques for high quality horses are solid. I've tested them to death. They are easy to translate over time. I don't have to worry about figure drift, changing figure methodologies, different distance relationships etc...

I'm not trying to diminish Arrogate. I'm just saying that if people saw some of the fields those other horses faced, the trips they got, and the class they showed in battle, they would be a lot less sure that Arrogate was better than they were because he closed down horses like Gun Runner and Neolithic after being away badly on that track that day. And to be clear, I think Arrogate is a killer and I don't think we've seen his best yet. It looked like he had something left at the end.

[rsetup]

Originally Posted by ultracapper

And that's why Smith"s ride was so damn good, if that debate is still going. (I just read the last page. I had stopped at page 5 a couple days ago. The beat down on Smith's ride was too stupid to keep my interest in the thread.)

No doubt about it: Smith's ride was excellent. He did everything right and any notion that he was compromised severely by the start is not well founded, IMO. But I think that Smith's ride is significantly flattered by the camera angles. When I first watched the race, I thought his ride was exceptional and that Arrogate won without any help. Which would truly be phenomenal, given the way the race ultimately set up. But when I looked at the charts, it turns out that he got quite a bit of help. There were layered (prior) moves and he got a pretty decent trip in terms of the flow. I don't think he gets the top two turning for home (Gunner runner, for sure) without help, as Smith would've been forced to move sooner and probably wider. Great ride and help counterbalances poor start.

Also, I think the connections of Shaman Ghost screwed up bigtime by not going to the DWC.

[whodoyoulike]

Originally Posted by AskinHaskin

Perhaps the best you can do is construct your own chart based on the info provided earlier in this thread: ...

It would begin something like this:


:24.81 :48.28 1:12.93 1:37.86 2:02.159

(where they've gone 11 2/3 meters less than our 1 1/4 miles)...

I'm not quite ready to add him to the Mount Rushmore of horse racing.

Sure he belongs on any Mount Rushmore of racing in the 2000's, but given what racing has devolved into, that is only slightly worth mention.



Somebody pondered how Baffert keeps getting so many monsters... and it seems to be a function of his impressive training regimen and repeated successes, which bring more and more owners willing to spend the big bucks to buy Baffert the sort of horse flesh he likes.

What you don't see in the Form, on the Baffert horses, is a usually-loooooooong workout program begun many months prior to any hint of a first-ever race.

That amount of patience can best be attained by having soooooooooo many runners on the treadmill at one time that your whole way of life isn't thrown-off by any particular one of them stubbing his toe and needing a few months to recover.


Consider Bodemeister as a prime example: ...

That by virtue of the fact that Bodemeister began working steadily way back on June 9 and he had twenty-seven drills in him by the time he debuted in mid-January. During that 7-month span between first work and first start, he once missed 22 days without a drill, but outside of that, the next greatest time between official workouts was a mere 10 days.

People want Baffert to purchase and train horses for them in hope that they too can ride the wave of a champion runner, and with so many clamoring to hire Baffert, he can have his pick of the clients and can afford the very patience which seems to be the difference between his success and that of most others.


Like Bodemeister before him, Arrogate too began official morning moves in June of his 2yo season, but something went amiss after mid-July 2015 and Arrogate didn't return to the worktab until January 12th of last year. ...

Consider that Arrogate listed 36 registered workouts in 2016, along with 6 races (and a routine week off after each race)... which accounts for 48 weeks during the year. A much-deserved month of November without a work, after the Breeders' Cup win, accounts for the rest of the time.


The Baffert runners are simply fit, because all of the various successes have brought the luxury of not needing to push every horse all the time just to earn purse slivers to pay the upkeep.


Bob Baffert just steers the ship as he always has, while everybody involved knows the routine and knows that there really isn't any rush.

We out here just keep seeing Baffert's name connected with good ones, but they in so many cases are interchangeable while the constant is Baffert himself.

Thanks, I really (repeat really) appreciate your post. I think you also wrote something similar regarding another horse a little while ago.

I don't know what your sources are but, if true and I do believe they are correct. I'm in trouble as far as trying to fairly compete against you and others with this info.

I hope you continue posting about similar and on other racing topics because I don't think you're just another Joe Schmoe on here.

[thespaah]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

No ire here...I laughed

Thanks for that.....

[GMB@BP]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

The margin of her victories and the manner of her performances leaves little doubt that she was monstrously better than her opposition, who in some cases looked dominant when they didn't run against her.

Songbird had those same margins...No? I am not big on margin of victory.

I would rather look at pace and trips, figures as a better barometer.

[cj]

The game has changed. If you guys are going to wait for a horse to match the record of horses from the 60s and 70s you'll go to your grave disappointed on that front. It isn't going to happen in our lifetimes.

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by cj

The game has changed. If you guys are going to wait for a horse to match the record of horses from the 60s and 70s you'll go to your grave disappointed on that front. It isn't going to happen in our lifetimes.

I think you only have to go back to 2010 and Zenyatta, or go back to 1996 and Cigar.....Not as long ago as you think.

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

I think you only have to go back to 2010 and Zenyatta, or go back to 1996 and Cigar.....Not as long ago as you think.

Zenyatta is an enigma due to surface. There's no way the dirt competition on dirt would've kept falling apart down the lane for a deep closer to always get up just in time.

Rachel's the best female I've seen in the past 30 years. It's too bad she was a shell of her former self at 4. Bad mgmt to not give her the Winter off at the farm.

Blind Luck and Havre de Grace are under appreciated. None of the other top girls ran steadily against another so good. I think Blind Luck ran a 1 in mid year at 3. The two of them ran Rags as good as many top males.

Then there was Royal Delta, Beholder, Songbird, and now Bella. Rags winning a TC race. Eight Belles was a might have been.

I guess my point is that I think this group of females challenge any and all of the great females of the distant past. It's the males who have been lacking. The only explanation seems to be the willingness to run the mares and unwillingness to run the males. When they do keep running, they make a historical impact like CC and now Arrogate. AP won the TC but seems quickly forgotten. A candle in the wind. Maybe these 2 winning so much can inspire others to run another year. Thanks Stronach for the Pegasus, hope you can keep it afloat.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

AP won the TC but seems quickly forgotten.

Awww hell, he won a couple of other semi-important races too...like the Haskell, and the often maligned Breeders' Cup Classic.

But who's counting?

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

Zenyatta is an enigma due to surface. There's no way the dirt competition on dirt would've kept falling apart down the lane for a deep closer to always get up just in time.

Rachel's the best female I've seen in the past 30 years. It's too bad she was a shell of her former self at 4. Bad mgmt to not give her the Winter off at the farm.

Blind Luck and Havre de Grace are under appreciated. None of the other top girls ran steadily against another so good. I think Blind Luck ran a 1 in mid year at 3. The two of them ran Rags as good as many top males.

Then there was Royal Delta, Beholder, Songbird, and now Bella. Rags winning a TC race. Eight Belles was a might have been.

I guess my point is that I think this group of females challenge any and all of the great females of the distant past. It's the males who have been lacking. The only explanation seems to be the willingness to run the mares and unwillingness to run the males. When they do keep running, they make a historical impact like CC and now Arrogate. AP won the TC but seems quickly forgotten. A candle in the wind. Maybe these 2 winning so much can inspire others to run another year. Thanks Stronach for the Pegasus, hope you can keep it afloat.

Since you forgot to mention Cigar, which was also a point from my reply, from October 29, 1994 thru July 13, 1996, Cigar won 16 straight races, tying the record at that time of Citation, ELEVEN of those races were Grade 1's......The incomparable Cigar!