Mine That Bird

[Spalding No!]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Those horses all had to beat better fields than have run in any recent Woodward.

Curiously, many of them couldn't win a race like the Woodward during the majority of the season. I guess they just got good at the right time. Especially given their subsequent records.

And we had a 3 year old filly a couple of years ago, Songbird, who lost by a nose to Beholder. I am sure she would have done fine against New York's handicap division, given Beholder's races against males.

Beholder never faced any NY horses, so why would you presume that? (Let me guess...Hoppertunity?)

I would have loved to have seen how Songbird would have fared in the 2016 Met Mile.

I doubt she would have even been able to see out 10 furlongs in 2:00 3/5 against the likes of Hoppertunity.

A good 3 year old filly can certainly run against older males just like a colt can.

Where's the evidence...aside from Rachel Alexandra?

Jockey Club Gold Cup...never been won by a 3yo filly
Whitney...never
Suburban...never
Brooklyn...never
Metropolitan...never
Gold Cup...never
Santa Anita Handicap...never
Meadowlands Cup...never
Hawthorne Gold Cup...never
Mass Cap...never
Iselin...never

Only one within a couple of decades in a race of any importance was Surfside--who was a Kentucky Derby candidate until going to the sidelines with an injury-- in the Grade 2 Clark in 2000.

We've had 3 year old fillies beat colts in BC races, you know. And those were much tougher to win than the Woodward.

Oh...now we're including sprints all of a sudden.

Nice.

[Spalding No!]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

I think Accelerate's campaign was a classic HOTY campaign. Because I want to see more than one race. After all, as you just pointed out, Cat Thief and Volponi won the BC Classic.

Accelerate over Justify was a no brainer.

But that doesn't mean I would have given the award to Accelerate had he lost the BC Classic. In that situation, I would have looked for someone else.

Total dodge. Good stuff.

Didn't want to see more than one race from Zenyatta, eh? Or was the Milady and Clement Hirsch satisfactory?

[depalma113]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

You don't think a race with those horses wouldn't be stronger than the Woodward?

The BC Classic is the most difficult race in America to win, because it is open and draws everyone good. The Woodward doesn't.

On dirt, no not at all.

[depalma113]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

in the real world, the BC Classic is the toughest dirt race in America to win and towers over all the other formerly important races, because everyone is pointed to it.

The toughest dirt race in America to win is the Kentucky Derby.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

Curiously, many of them couldn't win a race like the Woodward during the majority of the season. I guess they just got good at the right time. Especially given their subsequent records.


Beholder never faced any NY horses, so why would you presume that? (Let me guess...Hoppertunity?)

I would have loved to have seen how Songbird would have fared in the 2016 Met Mile.

I doubt she would have even been able to see out 10 furlongs in 2:00 3/5 against the likes of Hoppertunity.


Where's the evidence...aside from Rachel Alexandra?

Jockey Club Gold Cup...never been won by a 3yo filly
Whitney...never
Suburban...never
Brooklyn...never
Metropolitan...never
Gold Cup...never
Santa Anita Handicap...never
Meadowlands Cup...never
Hawthorne Gold Cup...never
Mass Cap...never
Iselin...never

Only one within a couple of decades in a race of any importance was Surfside--who was a Kentucky Derby candidate until going to the sidelines with an injury-- in the Grade 2 Clark in 2000.


Oh...now we're including sprints all of a sudden.

Nice.

Spalding, just to show how full of it you are and so the board knows your approach:

THREE YEAR OLD FILLIES ARE NOT ELIGIBLE TO RUN IN THE SANTA ANITA HANDICAP.

You just throw together a ton of points in the hope of looking incredibly detailed and hope that people don't notice the BS.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by depalma113

The toughest dirt race in America to win is the Kentucky Derby.

Only if you take into account the 3 year old restriction, i.e., you get one shot.

But in terms of field quality, you have to beat much better fields in the BC Classic.

[Spalding No!]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Spalding, just to show how full of it you are and so the board knows your approach:

THREE YEAR OLD FILLIES ARE NOT ELIGIBLE TO RUN IN THE SANTA ANITA HANDICAP.

You just throw together a ton of points in the hope of looking incredibly detailed and hope that people don't notice the BS.

Nice try. But you being misinformed doesn’t make me full of it.

The Big Cap was open to 3yos for several years, so while a 3yo filly can’t win it now, there certainly was ample opportunity back in the day.

In fact, Stagehand won as a 3yo in the ‘30s defeating none other than the great Seabiscuit.

Next.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

Nice try. But you being misinformed doesn’t make me full of it.

The Big Cap was open to 3yos for several years, so while a 3yo filly can’t win it now, there certainly was ample opportunity back in the day.

In fact, Stagehand won as a 3yo in the ‘30s defeating none other than the great Seabiscuit.

Next.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

European turf racing is a lot different than American dirt and synthetic racing.

I agree with this as far as dirt racing goes.

The long term record of fillies and mares at classic distances (10F) against Grade 1 older males is a LOT better on turf than dirt. It's not unusual at all for fillies and mares to win Grade 1 classic distance events against older males on turf both overseas and here.

Grade 1 fillies/mares also do better sprinting against Grade 1 males on dirt than they do routing.

Fillies also do better among 2yos and early 3yos than 4 and up.

I think some of that is easy to explain.

Fillies seem to mature earlier physically than colts. That's probably why they often do well in in the earlier stakes at 2 and 3 than later when the colts peak and pass them by.

Explaining why they do better against the best sprinters is a little tougher, but the Grade 1 routes for males are better than the Grade 1 sprints. There's more incentive to stretch the best males out to go for the much bigger purses and prestige. A really good filly sprinter can fit better with the best male sprinters because the races are a tad weaker.

I don't have a great explanation for turf, but it probably has something to do with the way the races develop. The overall demands of classic distance dirt races may be tougher than the quick burst late required on turf.

Pretty much everything I am saying is backed by evidence from Beyer Pars for various classes, distances, surfaces and various ages.

IMO, winning the Breeder's Cup Classic is far and away the toughest assignment for a filly/mare in the US or probably anywhere these days. 10F on dirt against fully mature Grade 1 males is a beast of an assignment. That's why so few females were even tried that distance over the years. They try shorter or earlier in their respective developments.

[classhandicapper]

Rachel's 3yo campaign was extraordinary. It was one of the greatest 3yo filly campaigns of my lifetime. She was dynamite.

In the both the Preakness and Woodward she put away other speeds before holding off the late charge. But that's the nature of Grade 1 racing against males on dirt. You don't get to dominate other 3yo fillies on the lead or brush past them with ease because you are so much better. You have to earn it and then hold off the closers.

IMO, Macho Again and Bullsbay weren't high level Grade 1 horses. They took over the older horse division very briefly while it was weak. They were nothing much before or after that 2-3 race sequence.

Mine that Bird had a nice Triple Crown sequence, but the sequence proved to be weak and he did very little after that.

If Rachel ran in a BC Classic at 10F on anything other than a speed favoring racetrack or in a field devoid of quality speed, I'd make the biggest bet of my life against her if there were any legitimate Grade 1 finishers like Zenyatta or better behind her.

That said, at 9F in a race for fillies and mares, Zenyatta probably would have had a tougher time getting her because Rachel would have been tougher at 9F and very few fillies and mares would have been able to keep her honest up front.

I don't see this as one being much better than the other. I see them as fairly close with the conditions dictating the winner.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

Rachel's 3yo campaign was extraordinary. It was one of the greatest 3yo filly campaigns of my lifetime. She was dynamite.

In the both the Preakness and Woodward she put away other speeds before holding off the late charge. But that's the nature of Grade 1 racing against males on dirt. You don't get to dominate other 3yo fillies on the lead or brush past them with ease because you are so much better. You have to earn it and then hold off the closers.

IMO, Macho Again and Bullsbay weren't high level Grade 1 horses. They took over the older horse division very briefly while it was weak. They were nothing much before or after that 2-3 race sequence.

Mine that Bird had a nice Triple Crown sequence, but the sequence proved to be weak and he did very little after that.

If Rachel ran in a BC Classic at 10F on anything other than a speed favoring racetrack or in a field devoid of quality speed, I'd make the biggest bet of my life against her if there were any legitimate Grade 1 finishers like Zenyatta or better behind her.

That said, at 9F in a race for fillies and mares, Zenyatta probably would have had a tougher time getting her because Rachel would have been tougher at 9F and very few fillies and mares would have been able to keep her honest up front.

I don't see this as one being much better than the other. I see them as fairly close with the conditions dictating the winner.

Excellent evaluation.


Personally, I don't know why people get all caught up in which of Zenyatta or Rachel was better.


I thoroughly enjoyed them both for their greatness. And they were both great.



We all need to enjoy the great ones more, and enjoy the sunshine they bring. Who was better? As pointless as asking if Vanilla or Chocolate ice cream is better. To each their own.

[cj]

Let's not forget Zenyatta won on synthetics, not dirt. Of course winning it on dirt is a very tough accomplishment for a female. This is obvious since none have done it. Zenyatta came close in a very sub-par year. I have serious doubts she is anywhere near the winner if the name is Gun Runner, American Pharoah, or Arrogate.

[GMB@BP]

Originally Posted by cj

Let's not forget Zenyatta won on synthetics, not dirt. Of course winning it on dirt is a very tough accomplishment for a female. This is obvious since none have done it. Zenyatta came close in a very sub-par year. I have serious doubts she is anywhere near the winner if the name is Gun Runner, American Pharoah, or Arrogate.

I wish it were on dirt when she was 4 and 5, not 6 taking on younger horses.

[cj]

Originally Posted by GMB@BP

I wish it were on dirt when she was 4 and 5, not 6 taking on younger horses.

Agreed, wish we could have seen that. I thought she should have been Horse of the Year at 4. She had a great season that year. The one at 6 felt more like a lifetime achievement award than one based on actual merit.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by cj

Let's not forget Zenyatta won on synthetics, not dirt. Of course winning it on dirt is a very tough accomplishment for a female. This is obvious since none have done it. Zenyatta came close in a very sub-par year. I have serious doubts she is anywhere near the winner if the name is Gun Runner, American Pharoah, or Arrogate.

Well, does Rachel win the Dr. Fager-Damascus Woodward, the Alysheba-Bet Twice Haskell, or the Silver Charm-Free House Preakness?

Almost always, the fields in these races are subpar when fillies win them.

And as for synthetics, there's no reason to count them as Junior Varsity racing. It wasn't like fillies were winning all the big stakes on synthetic.