I have absolutely no inside information here but “retired” horses simply don’t post formal workouts every couple of weeks after they’ve retired.  I don’t care whether they’re full of energy, taking the edge off, or sneaking out of the barn late at night while their caretakers aren’t looking…it’s not logical and it doesn’t happen.  There are injury risks as well as the fact that horses in the process of being “let down” don’t work progressively faster.

The speculation could be put to rest very easily.  All the Moss’s have to do is say “Zenyatta is officially retired.”  They haven’t done so.   Even today, John Shirreffs said everything BUT those magic words.  He said the owner’s haven’t deviated from their plan.  He said she’s accomplished enough.  He said he hasn’t been told anything new.  But he never said “She’s officially retired” and he never explained why she’s working out the way she is.  Hmmm…

Does this mean she’ll run again?  Definitely not.  So what’s really going on?  Well here’s my theory:

1. They’re keeping their options open.  She still wants to run, the Moss’s don’t want to let go, there are still nagging questions about dirt, about her being handled conservatively, about beating Rachel Alexandra, about her reputation catching up with what they perceive her ability to be – so they’re leaving the door open while they continue to ponder.

2. They’re waiting to see what happens with Horse of the Year.  If she wins, then they can retire happy.  If she loses, then maybe they take their shot against Rachel or keep her in training for another campaign to try to win the title.

3. There are offers on the table for a race against Rachel Alexandra that are too intriguing and too rich to pass out – so again, they’re keeping their options open while they keep listening.  Rachel figures to return in March.  With this light training schedule she could easily be ready for a prep race in March and then hook up in the Apple Blossom at Oaklawn (a track that Zenyatta has already won at) in a showdown for the ages.

Here’s what I think happened.  When Rachel was dominating last year and Zenyatta was barely nosing out second-tier horses while posting Beyer figures of under 100 there was some question about if she was tailing off.  If she was as good as last year.  I’m sure that there was a small measure of doubt at that point about whether she was good enough to beat Rachel at that point.  But her Breeders’ Cup Classic tour-de-force combined with the way she came out of it gave them a confidence spike that she could indeed beat Rachel or anyone else for that matter.  It’s no secret that Zenyatta still has the reputation of a horse who was too conservatively handled, a horse who stayed in her comfort zone for too long, and a horse who never really got the chance to show what she can do.  Her connections feel she’s better than that and given the shape she’s in, they likely feel confident that a few more races could serve to answer all questions, put any doubts to rest, and allow her reputation to catch up with her ability.

Should Zenyatta beat Rachel Alexandra in a dirt race outside California she would unequivocally be considered the greatest female racehorse in American history and one of the best horses overall to ever race.  That’s got to be tempting – especially as the Moss’s read article after article about how Rachel had the better season and traveled more and accomplished more and Zenyatta was just a synthetic track specialist whose reputation is built around a single big win over a questionable surface in an otherwise “safe” season.

With a couple of races standing between Zenyatta and true immortality – and confidence no doubt running high in her camp – clearly her connections aren’t ready to slam the door shut just yet.

Zenyatta vs Rachel Alexandra – let’s hope…

* Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/FTKRacingBlog

* Become a Facebook Fan: http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/pages/Farewell-To-Kings-Horse-Racing-Blog/153345362804?

The one argument I have yet to see?  “Zenyatta had a better year than Rachel Alexandra.”  Why?  Because you cannot make that argument.  By no logical measurement did Zenyatta do more or accomplish more than Rachel Alexandra in 2009 – and THAT is what Horse of the Year is about…WHO HAD THE BEST OVERALL CAMPAIGN.

Yes – Zenyatta’s Breeders’ Cup Classic win was more meaningful than any single race Rachel Alexandra won.  But we don’t automatically award Horse of the Year to the BC Classic winner.  If we did, Raven’s Pass would have been Horse of the Year last year and Volponi would have been Horse of the Year in 2002 and the great Cat Thief would have been Horse of the Year in 1999.  Certainly undefeated Awesome Again would have been Horse of the Year in 1998 ahead of Skip Away, but he wasn’t…because Skip Away’s accomplishments for the year dwarfed what Awesome Again did.  This is the same situation.  If Zenyatta’s Breeders’ Cup Classic win was the most meaningful win of the year by either horse, certainly numbers two, three, four, and five on the list belong to Rachel in the form of her wins in the Preakness, Woodward, Haskell and Kentucky Oaks by 20 lengths.   That speaks to the difference in their overall campaigns: Of the 5 most significant wins of the season between the two horses, 4 of them belong to Rachel Alexandra.

By now we all know the stats: Rachel was 8-for-8 while Zenyatta was 5-for-5.  Rachel won 5 Grade 1′s and Zenyatta won 4.  Rachel beat males 3 times, Zenyatta once.  Rachel won over 7 racetracks in 6 different states, under all conditions, while Zenyatta never left California, never ran over anything but a synthetic surface, and was scratched the one time the track came up muddy.  They all favor Rachel.  From the total domination of her division, to stepping outside her division and beating males while encountering tough trips and pace scenarios that would have done in many other top horses, to becoming the first 3 year old filly to ever beat older males in the Woodward, Rachel Alexandra’s season was one for the ages.  Her connections challenged her at every turn – from running her in different states, on different racetracks, on wet tracks, to facing males in the Preakness from Post 13  just 2 weeks after her Kentucky Oaks win while switching barns, to facing older males at a time when most 3 year old fillies are still running in their own division.  There was absolutely nothing “safe” about her campaign.  They constantly took risks and challenged her when easier races were available.  This type of mentality absolutely needs to be rewarded – particularly in this day and age when horses run so infrequently and rivalries between top class horse so uncommon because most horses run campaigns built around the path of least resistance.

By contrast, Zenyatta’s connections managed her as conservatively as possible right up until the time of the Breeders’ Cup.  She ran a total of just 5 races.  She was scratched from her seasonal debut in Kentucky when the track came up wet and never shipped again.  She didn’t run in the Hollywood Gold Cup – a race her stablemate Life Is Sweet ran in.  She skipped the Pacific Classic – instead getting an extra month off going into the fall.  She ran in exactly the same races she won last year against competition she had proven superior to.  Her connections resisted all attempts to set up a matchup against Rachel Alexandra during fall citing the Breeders’ Cup as the setting for a race like that.  The racing season is more than just the Breeders’ Cup.  Connections who believe that there is no need to challenge their horses or push their horses until they get to the Breeders’ Cup set a bad precedent for the game and certainly don’t deserve to rewarded for that type of mentality.  Suggesting that good horses should never face each other outside of the Breeders’ Cup is just bad policy.

For those who suggest that Rachel’s connections should similarly be punished for passing on the Breeders’ Cup I’d agree had the BC been held on a standard dirt track and had she not shown signs of her challenging campaign beginning to catch up with her.  But it’s now beyond all reasonable doubt that pro-ride is an entirely different surface from dirt and running Rachel on that surface would have meant little more than running her in the Breeders’ Cup Turf.  Regardless, to use an overly cliched phrase in racing: She had done enough by that point.

There is no possible interpretation of their comparative seasons that places Zenyatta even at a level of equality with Rachel Alexandra in 2009 let alone ahead of her.  You cannot possibly compare the years side by side and suggest that Zenyatta had the better year or that she accomplished more.  Take Zenyatta’s BC Classic win for what it was – a single incredible performance – but not something that magically makes an otherwise nondescript year suddenly more impressive than the extraordinary season Rachel had.  Had Zenyatta’s year ended prior to the Breeders’ Cup she wouldn’t have even been # 2 or # 3 in the Horse of the Year voting based upon what she had accomplished to date.  Thus, any argument for her receiving Horse of the Year is built entirely around a single win in the Breeders’ Cup and that’s just not what Horse of the Year is based upon.

Horse of the Year goes to the horse who had the best and most impressive overall season.  In 2009 it all unequivocally adds up to Rachel Alexandra.

* Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/FTKRacingBlog

* Become a Facebook Fan: http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/pages/Farewell-To-Kings-Horse-Racing-Blog/153345362804?

On the other hand…well there is no other hand.  That’s pretty much what you’ve got.  Rachel Alexandra is a 3 year old filly who can run a 116 Beyer Speed Figure against top competition in a fairly run race and a 108-11 BSF when she encounters difficult trip and pace scenarios.

So where does that leave us?  In my last post I talked about how I loved speed figures because they provide us with some means of comparing horses in a historical sense.  Here are Rachel Alexandra’s last several Beyers:

Woodward – 109
Haskell – 116
Mother Goose – 111
Preakness – 108
Kentucky Oaks – 108

For comparative purposes here are some other recent 3 yo filly champs and their top Beyers during their 3 yo filly season:

2008 Proud Spell – Tops of 101, 99, 99, 97
2007 Rags to Riches – Tops of 107, 104, 98, 96
2006 Wait A While -Her accomplishments came on turf.  Dirt top of 90
2005 Smuggler - Tops of 98, 94, 93, 92 in season that ended in July.
2004 Ashado – Tops of 106, 103, 103, 102
2003 Bird Town -Tops of 101, 100, 100, 100
2002 Farda Amiga -Tops of 103, 103, 100, 95

Clearly Rachel Alexandra is FAST.  Much faster than most recent 3 year old filly champs.  When she encountered difficult pace scenarios in the Preakness & Woodward she still ran faster than any recent 3 yo filly champ ran in their best effort, and under normal circumstances she was 10-15 points superior.

So how does she compare to some of the greats?  Well on the positive side, 116 is about as fast as it gets.  On the negative side, there are quite a few who have run figures in that range.  Here are a few examples:

Lakeway ran a 117 winning the Hollywood Oaks.

Surfside ran a 116 winning the Clark (alebit much later in the season)

Silverbulletday ran a 115 in the Alabama – to go along with 109-107-108 in the Black Eyed Susan, Kentucky Oaks, & Ashland.

Go For Wand:

Beldame – 117
Maskette – 105
Alabama – 111
Test – 114
Mother Goose – 104

Then there’s Xtra Heat who couldn’t do it going long, but ran sprint figures of 120, 119, 117 as a 3 yo filly.

Very Subtle ran a 121 when she won the 1987 Breeders’ Cup Sprint over Groovy as a 3 year old filly.

Miesque ran a 119 when she won the  1987 Breeders’ Cup Turf Mile as a 3 yo filly.

I also seem to recall Mantistique running a 115 type number as a 3 yo filly at Hollywood but I have no record of it.  Winning Colors ran a similar number winning the Santa Anita Derby if memory serves, but I have no record of that either.  Winning Colors also ran a 115 in defeat losing to Personal Ensign in the Breeders’ Cup Distaff.

As far as older fillies & mares, clearly they have run faster due to maturity, but for comparative purposes the 2 fastest Breeders’ Cup Distaff’s on record belong to Princess Rooney (120) and Inside Information (119).  The great Lady’s Secret ran a 113 winning the BC Distaff but put up figures of 120 (Woodward), 119 (Ruffian), 118 (Whitney), and 116 (Maskette) in 1986.

“Great” is a term that is thrown around all too easily these days, but what’s the correct definition?  I define greatness as the intersection between extraordinary ability/talent and extraordinary accomplishments.  Many horses have one of the two, but few have both.  Rachel Alexandra displayed both in her 3 yo filly season.  Her 3 yo filly season was as accomplished as any by a 3 year old filly in recent memory.  But others are accomplished too which is where the figure comparison comes into play.

Is Rachel Alexandra substantially more talented than horses like Ruffian, Go For Wand, Silverbulletday and Winning Colors?  Definitely not.  They’re all in the same ballpark and would likely have traded wins with each other had they regularly competed against each other.  But her accomplishments as a 3 year old filly meet or exceed what any single one of them did over the course of a season.

In the final tally you have a horse who was as fast as any 3 year old filly in history and accomplished as much or more than any 3 yo filly in history.   In a single race I’m not so sure she could beat a handful of history’s top fillies, but when her ability is considered collectively with her accomplishments there’s no doubt she’s great and you’d be hard-pressed to say that any single 3 yo filly was better in a combined analysis – thereby making Rachel Alexandra the best 3 year old filly ever!

===============================

* Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/FTKRacingBlog

* Become a Facebook Fan: http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/pages/Farewell-To-Kings-Horse-Racing-Blog/153345362804?

The Breeders’ Cup Classic is often the defining race for Horse of the Year because of what it represents – the central meeting point for 3 year olds and older horse at a classic distance on the dirt.  It’s a race that everyone gears their campaigns toward so there are no excuses – a championship event.  Those factors are not present in this year’s event.  For starters, the race isn’t on dirt.  Some may want to bury their heads in the sand and pretend otherwise, but synthetics are a completely separate surface and most horses have different ability levels on each.  Some, like Santa Anita’s Pro-Ride surface bear little resemblance to dirt and, in fact, appear to favor turf ability and running styles more than dirt form. American racing is built around dirt.  That’s what we’re about and that’s what we reward in our year-end balloting.  Running a race on a non-dirt surface and calling it a “championship” or a ”Breeders’ Cup” race doesn’t make it any more meaningful or impactful or make it any more relevant a measure of dirt ability.  It’s not.  You simply cannot apply the same weight to a “championship” event run on Pro-Ride that you would to a normal Breeders’ Cup Classic run on dirt.

Further diluting the value of a Breeders’ Cup Classic win this year is the quality of the field – or lack thereof.  The 2009 handicap division is the weakest I can ever recall.  There are simply no elite older horses this year.  Horses like Macho Again and Bullsbay and Dry Martini would be also-rans in most years, not trading wins in major Grade 1 races.  It’s just mind-boggling to see major handicap races won with BSF’s barely breaking 100.  In fact, the highest Beyer speed figure recorded by an older male this entire year is a 111 (Rail Trip & Solar Flare).  That’s astounding.  That the Whitney was won by a horse who had never previously exceeded a 100 BSF pretty much says it all about this division.  Add to the fact that Rachel Alexandra and Sea The Stars won’t be in the field and it’s hard to argue that winning the Classic is particularly significant in any way other than purse value to the winning connections.  Yes – there are some good Europeans coming over (and they will probably win) but they are grass horses and this is closer to a grass race than a dirt race.  What it is not is a race that should be the primary determinant of the 2009 Horse of the Year.

With all of the above said, let’s take a quick look at the individual candidates:

RACHEL ALEXANDRA – Needs no introduction.  8-for-8 this year including 5 Grade 1′s and 3 G1 wins against males.  Yes she went to sidelines a month early, but she ran one of the most ambitious campaigns for a 3-year old filly in many years.  She beat males while encountering exceptionally difficult trips and pace scenarios and absolutely demolished her 3 yo filly counterparts – albeit weak ones.  Her 8 wins also took place over 7 different racetracks in 6 different states.  At every path her connections challenged her.  They traveled, they faced 3 yo males in the Preakness and Haskell, they faced older males in the Woodward.  That ambition need to be rewarded.  That mentality is what we need in racing these days in this era where it’s all too common to see top horses never face each other and avoid top competition except for a few select races each year.

SUMMER BIRD – He has matured into a very nice horse and has put together a solid resume.  It seems odd to say that a horse who wins the Belmont, Travers, Jockey Club Gold Cup, & Breeders’ Cup Classic shouldn’t be Horse of the Year, but he shouldn’t.  There are 3 primary reasons why:

1. A Breeders Cup Classic win isn’t as significant as usual.  See above!

2. Summer Bird did absolutely nothing prior to the Belmont.  He was beaten 13 lengths in the Kentucky Derby and had only a Maiden win to his credit prior to the Belmont.  Should he win the BC Classic his record would be 9-5-1-1 with 4 Grade 1 victories.  Impressive but hardly exceptional.

3 – Most importantly, Rachel Alexandra blew Summer Bird away in the Haskell – beating him by 6.  Summer Bird has done nothing wrong, but his credentials with a win in the Classic certainly wouldn’t substantially exceed Rachel Alexandra’s – and in the face of otherwise similar accomplishments a decisive head-to-head win has to be the deciding factor.

ZENYATTA – I previously discussed her campaign and what a disservice her connections have done to her legacy by managing her so conservatively.  This is a horse whose campaign to date defines the concept of taking the path of least resistance.  She will run 5 times – all on synthetics – never leaving California, shying away from any matchups with Rachel Alexandra and never facing males until possibly the Classic.  Obviously if she doesn’t go in the Classic this is all a moot point, but even if she does it is definitely a case of too little too late.  All season long Zenyatta’s connections never looked for a challenge with their champion – and it wasn’t like they had to look very hard.  Having already proven that she was better than California’s older filly & mare contingent, there was no obvious reason to avoid races like the Hollywood Gold Cup or Pacific Classic.  Heck, even her stablemate Life Is Sweet who was on the same schedule at the time ran in the Hollywood Gold Cup.  NYRA desperately tried to arrange a meeting with Rachel Alexandra in the Beldame but her connections publicly shied away from that as well citing the value of the Breeders’ Cup as the meeting place for such an event.  That type of thinking cannot be rewarded.  The Breeders’ Cup is indeed the day to crown champions, but not at the expense of the entire rest of the year.

Bottom line is that even with a win in the Classic, Zenyatta would be 5-for-5 with 4 Grade 1 wins.  She’s had fewer wins than Rachel, fewer Grade 1 wins, and a far less impressive campaign overall.  Where Rachel Alexandra’s connections looked for challenges, Zenyatta’s connection avoided them.  From a public policy perspective you want to reward the connections who campaigned aggressively, not the ones who took the path of least resistance at every available turn.

Then there’s the head-to-head comparison.  If you look only at their races vs females, Rachel Alexandra is 5-for 5 while Zenyatta is 4-for-4.  Obviously Rachel faced inferior horses as a 3 yo filly, but she absolutely dominated her competition – winning races like the Kentucky Oaks and Mother Goose by 20 and 19 lengths.  Zenyatta meanwhile was life and death to beat Annaba’s Creation and won her races in a manner than was much more workmanlike than brilliant or fast.  Should she win this less-meaningful-than-usual Breeders’ Cup Classic it would certainly be an impressive accomplishment for Zenyatta’s legacy, but should that win really count more than a combination of wins in the Preakness, Haskell, and Woodward by a 3 year old filly?  Of course not.  At the end of the day Rachel’s campaign was simply better and more impressive in every way and is far more deserving of reward than Zenyatta’s.  Had Zenyatta run more than 5 times, thrown in a win on dirt or outside California, or another win against males, or shown interest in facing Rachel Alexandra when the powers that be were trying to set up the showdown, then maybe she’d have a case. But she didn’t.  Her connections never challenged her and at this point she’s trailing Rachel by a lot more ground than she could make up with a single Breeders’ Cup Classic victory – particularly one accomplished without beating her primary competition for the title.  Also keep in mind that if the racing season ended right now she wouldn’t even be # 2 in line and perhaps not even # 3 based on what she’s done to date.  It’s about accomplishments THIS YEAR, not reputation and legacy.

Normally the Breeders’ Cup Classic is the culmination of a year of major dirt races.  This year it is not.  It’s a watered-down event on a synthetic surface that plays closer to turf than dirt.  The championship dirt racing season in the US ended earlier this month for all intents and purposes…and at that finish line Rachel Alexandra is comfortably in front by any reasonable measure of comparison.

Rachel Alexandra is your 2009 Horse of the Year regardless of what happens in the Breeders’ Cup.

===============================

* Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/FTKRacingBlog

* Become a Facebook Fan: http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/pages/Farewell-To-Kings-Horse-Racing-Blog/153345362804?