Cigar Is Gone

[OntheRail]

Have this piece hanging on my wall of Cigar. RIP Cigar...

[PhantomOnTour]

Originally Posted by pandy

The great Cigar was responsible for creating a lot of racing fans. I have a framed photo of him on my office wall.

I was a racing fan as long as I can remember, but it's Cigar (and Alphabet Soup) who got me into the game full time.

During college I played a bit and even nailed Unbridled in the Derby.
That win almost derailed my education as I had pipe dreams like we all do.
Alas, I made the choice to finish school, and Cigar came along a few yrs later.
Began to follow his winning streak, and played the undercards of most of his races. The inaugural Dubai World Cup had me captivated, and by that time I was into the game big time.
Once he lost, I was ready to bet against him (on the advice of an older sharp player)...that opportunity came along in the Classic at Woodbine, where some silly system of mine came up with Alphabet Soup...and the rest is history.
After that initial big score I was in it for a lifetime....thx in large part to the great Cigar.

[iceknight]

Here is the Massachusetts Handicap - 15th straight win.. nice call.

[YT="Massachusetts H"]UzqUJqQKpDY[/YT]

[KirisClown]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Holy Bull didn't even deserve to be in the same shedrow as him.

One of the most blatantly asinine comments to ever appear on PaceAdvantage.

[rubicon55]

Nice article in AP
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/a37e4...-after-surgery

[Delta Cone]

I was lucky enough to see Cigar up close in the paddock at Arlington Park.

I'm not an expert on equine body language, but he had a charisma to him that was palpable. Every inch of him oozed confidence, intelligence and class.

Truly the greatest horse I've ever seen in person.

What a shame that he was infertile...it would have been fascinating to see how his offspring performed.

RIP to a great champion.

[KirisClown]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

I think he ended up getting overconfident with Cigar. If you look at his ride in the Hollywood Gold Cup, or the Breeders' Cup Classic, it's basically the same ride. Close to the pace, going very wide, losing ground. He rode the horse like he was under the assumption that the horse was always much the best and that he didn't have to save ground or monitor the pace. It eventually burned him.

Both Bailey and Mott came to the conclusion that front running Siphon was the only serious threat to beat Cigar in that Pacific Classic.. on paper they were spot on. Siphon had just defeated Cigars heir-apparent at the time Geri in the Hollywood Gold Cup. They weren't about to let Siphon get away on the lead again. The fear of Siphon is what ultimately beat Cigar that day.

Bailey spoke about this not too long ago in an interview.

[GameTheory]

Originally Posted by Delta Cone

I was lucky enough to see Cigar up close in the paddock at Arlington Park.

I'm not an expert on equine body language, but he had a charisma to him that was palpable. Every inch of him oozed confidence, intelligence and class.

Truly the greatest horse I've ever seen in person.

Yeah, same here -- saw him a couple of times in SoCal before he was a big deal (turf races with P Val on him!). Just an impressive animal, up close in the paddock you could tell you were dealing with a force of nature.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

On a side note, it's rather ironic that 8 years later Bailey's questionable ride on Eddington to induce Stewart Elliott to move prematurely aboard Smarty Jones, cost racing fans another chance to witness history in the Belmont Stakes.....Two chances at history, Bailey involved on both sides of the coin.

You know, I've watched the 2004 Belmont all sorts of times, and I've also looked at Birdstone's post-Belmont record.

I don't for the life of me understand why anyone thinks that Smarty Jones was the best horse in that race. He was given every chance to win, and got beat by a clearly better horse.

Smarty Jones had the same career as many theretofore undefeated horses-- he stayed unbeaten until he ran into a better horse. Stop blaming Elliott.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by KirisClown

One of the most blatantly asinine comments to ever appear on PaceAdvantage.

You are talking about a horse who won 16 in a row. Did HB ever do anything close to that?

He carried 130 pounds twice and won. Did HB ever do anything close to that?

He won in California, Maryland, Illinois, Massachusetts, and Dubai, in addition to New York and Florida. Did HB ever do anything close to that?

He won the Breeders' Cup Classic and the Dubai World Cup, two of the biggest races in the world. What did HB do when he ran in the biggest race in his career? Stiff.

He won several 1 1/4 mile races against open handicap competition. HB won one, against three year olds, and barely.

He had a great career that included 2 1/2 excellent racing seasons in open competition. HB had 1 excellent season, and half of it was running against 3 year olds.

Holy Bull was just a good horse. Cigar had one of the greatest careers in American racing history.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by KirisClown

Both Bailey and Mott came to the conclusion that front running Siphon was the only serious threat to beat Cigar in that Pacific Classic.. on paper they were spot on. Siphon had just defeated Cigars heir-apparent at the time Geri in the Hollywood Gold Cup. They weren't about to let Siphon get away on the lead again. The fear of Siphon is what ultimately beat Cigar that day.

Bailey spoke about this not too long ago in an interview.

I think one should be careful about reading too much into post-mortems about rides. Whenever a top horse gets beat, there's always an excuse.

As I said, there was nothing different or special about the Pacific Classic ride. Watch the 1995 Hollywood Gold Cup and BC Classic. It's basically the same ride. Stay outside, close to the pace.

It's like Mike Smith blaming himself for Zenyatta's loss. He rode her exactly the same way in all of her wins. If the ride was bad in the loss, it was also bad in all the wins.

In Cigar's case, I think Bailey probably WAS giving up 3 or 4 lengths in many of the wins. He just rode that horse with way too much overconfidence.

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

You know, I've watched the 2004 Belmont all sorts of times, and I've also looked at Birdstone's post-Belmont record.

I don't for the life of me understand why anyone thinks that Smarty Jones was the best horse in that race. He was given every chance to win, and got beat by a clearly better horse.

Smarty Jones had the same career as many theretofore undefeated horses-- he stayed unbeaten until he ran into a better horse. Stop blaming Elliott.

A better horse? lol.

I agree about not blaming Elliott. Instead I blame the two jocks, particularly Bailey, who were so hell-bent at not seeing another jockey take the triple crown that they sacrificed their own horse.

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

You are talking about a horse who won 16 in a row. Did HB ever do anything close to that?

He carried 130 pounds twice and won. Did HB ever do anything close to that?

He won in California, Maryland, Illinois, Massachusetts, and Dubai, in addition to New York and Florida. Did HB ever do anything close to that?

He won the Breeders' Cup Classic and the Dubai World Cup, two of the biggest races in the world. What did HB do when he ran in the biggest race in his career? Stiff.

He won several 1 1/4 mile races against open handicap competition. HB won one, against three year olds, and barely.

He had a great career that included 2 1/2 excellent racing seasons in open competition. HB had 1 excellent season, and half of it was running against 3 year olds.

Holy Bull was just a good horse. Cigar had one of the greatest careers in American racing history.

Holy Bull was more than a good horse. Fine if you want to say Cigar was better since he was, but given that Holy Bull was one of a handful who may've been able to beat him on both their best days, it was sort of an inane comment on your part.

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

You know, I've watched the 2004 Belmont all sorts of times, and I've also looked at Birdstone's post-Belmont record.

I don't for the life of me understand why anyone thinks that Smarty Jones was the best horse in that race. He was given every chance to win, and got beat by a clearly better horse.

Smarty Jones had the same career as many theretofore undefeated horses-- he stayed unbeaten until he ran into a better horse. Stop blaming Elliott.

You are mistaken. My post referred to the "blame" being assigned to Jerry Bailey in both instances.......

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

I think one should be careful about reading too much into post-mortems about rides. Whenever a top horse gets beat, there's always an excuse.

As I said, there was nothing different or special about the Pacific Classic ride. Watch the 1995 Hollywood Gold Cup and BC Classic. It's basically the same ride. Stay outside, close to the pace.

It's like Mike Smith blaming himself for Zenyatta's loss. He rode her exactly the same way in all of her wins. If the ride was bad in the loss, it was also bad in all the wins.

In Cigar's case, I think Bailey probably WAS giving up 3 or 4 lengths in many of the wins. He just rode that horse with way too much overconfidence.

The pace was pretty hot in the Pacific Classic and he moved early. That was the difference.

No disrespect to Smith, but I think even he would admit he gave Zenyatta a few bad rides (that she overcame).

Her last race has been debated to death. I don't it was his fault she got squeezed a little at the start and reacted poorly to the kickback. She started climbing for a few strides which caused her drop even further back than usual until she settled back down. He was brilliant after that. He pushed her back into it by the first turn without panicking and using her too much and then saved some ground without being on the dead rail for too long.