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?

Annual Eclipse Awards are sometimes difficult because there are no clear guidelines in how to comparatively assess ability vs accomplishment.  The general understanding is to simply measure the strength of the overall campaign (although this logic seems to have fallen by the wayside for Zenyatta supporters when it comes to the Zenyatta vs Rachel Alexandra debate for 2009 Horse of the Year). Selecting a champion for the decade is even more difficult because you’re facing the same questions multiplied by 10.  How do you treat a horse who had the most accomplished championship year vs a horse who was clearly the best and most talented champion but perhaps slightly less accomplished?

I’m going to go with a blended answer and take a little from both sides.  My list of champions for the decade are determined by seeing who rises to the top at the intersection between ability and accomplishment.  I will limit it to their individual championship years and not how they performed outside of those years.

2 Year Old Colt – This has to be War Pass who was absolutely brilliant is going 4-for-4 including G1 wins in the Champagne and Breeders’ Cup and recorded Beyers of 103 and 113 in those races.

2 Year Old Female -  I have to narrowly give this to Storm Flag Flying who was sensational as a 2 year old in going 4-for-4 with 3 Grade 1 wins (Matron, Frizette, Breeders’ Cup) and ran fast in the process (94-98-102 BSF’s).  Storm Flag Flying seemed to be getting better and looked poised to become an  all-time superstar before developing some issues at 3, subsequently getting hurt and never really regaining that elite form when she came back.  Closely behind is Halfbridled who was also sensational as a 2yo filly.  Sweet Catamine and Tempera were both extremely fast and quite good but they both lost races unlike the top 2.

3 Year Old Colt – What a tough call as most of these had somewhat incomplete seasons.  Tiznow only won 2 Grade 1′s.  Same with Smarty Jones and Afleet Alex.  Curlin won 3 Grade 1′s in a 6-for9 season.    Bernardini won 3 Grade 1′s in a 6-for-8 season.   My winner is Point Given who won 5 Grade 1′s and Horse of the Year in a 6-for-7 season that was cut short by injury.  His only loss was in the Derby where he inexplicably didn’t fire after making a big middle move – but his overall record was as good as anyone, his accomplishments as strong as anyone, and he won 2 more Grade 1′s than anyone else during the decade.

3 Year Old Filly – Rachel Alexandra…by as big a margin as she won the Kentucky Oaks & Mother Goose.

Older Male - Another difficult call in comparing ability and accomplishment as only Saint Liam and Mineshaft (and now Gio Ponti – who is not considered because his wins were on turf) won 4 Grade 1′s.   Saint Liam was generally not brilliant and certainly wouldn’t make for a popular choice.  Mineshaft had an extremely strong year going 7-for-9, winning in January through September, and running fast.  But he passed on the Breeders’ Cup and beat a fairly weak group (Quest, Hold That Tiger, Volponi, Western Pride, American Style, Olmodavor, Learned, Halo’s Tiger, Revised Note ran 2nd in his wins) so a little luster is lost.

Mineshaft is still probably the most logical winner but I cannot vote against Ghostzapper who was simply incredible in his short 4 win Horse of the Year  season.  His accomplishments were obviously less than some others, but he was as talented as any horse to run since Spectacular Bid and lengths better than any other horse to run this decade.  His Breeders’ Cup was the fastest Classic ever and he beat a very strong field in what was, amazingly, just his 2nd career start around 2-turns and first time ever running 10 furlongs.  He’s my choice.

Older Filly/Mare – Had she not ran horribly in the Breeders’ Cup I’d give the nod to the often-forgotten Riboletta who was as good as just about any filly or mare in years for a few months in 2000.   She was 7-for-11 that year (with 2 of those losses coming on turf)  with Beyers of 115-115-111-110.   But with her glaring 7th place finish in the Breeders’ Cup, this becomes a toss-up between Zenyatta’s 7-for-7 season in 2008 (4 Grade 1′s) and Azeri’s 8-for-9 season in 2002 (5 Grade 1′s).  Ability-wise they were pretty similar – with Azeri perhaps a touch faster than year.  Neither campaign was super aggressive.  Azeri won 1 more race, and 1 more Grade 1, but she also lost a race while Zenyatta didn’t.  But because of those extra wins and the fact that she was slightly more dominant in her victories and didn’t earn most of her wins over synthetics, I’d give the nod to Azeri by a nose.

Turf Male – High Chaparral by a small margin for his 2002 campaign in which he went 5-for-6 with 4 Grade 1 wins including the Epsom Derby, Irish Derby and an easy win in the Breeders’ Cup Turf.   Close runner-up is Fantastic Light for his 2001 campaign where he went 4-for-6 with 4 Grade 1′s and was ultra impressive winning the Breeders’ Cup Turf running a 117 Beyer (vs 111 for High Chaparral).

Turf Female – Ouija Board (2004) where she was 4-for-5 including wins in the English Oaks, Irish Oaks, and an easy win in the BC Filly & Mare Turf.  Her only loss was a 3rd to Bago in the Arc.

On a sidenote, Ouija Board is a horse that I think has been overrated a bit.  People consider her among the best turf females of all-time but her record against males was actually pretty weak.  Ouija Board was actually just 2-for-11 in Grade 1 races against males over the course of her career – with one of those wins coming in Hong Kong.

Sprinter – Tough call between Kona Gold (2000) and Orientate (2002).  Kona Gold in 2000 was 5-for-6 with his only loss coming by a nose.  His Beyers that year were 112-109-119-118-117-114.   Orientate was 6-for-10 in 2002, however his 4 losses were either on turf (2) or going long (2).  Sprinting he was 6-for-6 with Beyers of 109-115-115-112-116-114.   This is a toss-up for me but since it’s impossible not to love a horse like Kona Gold who was very good for a long time, and since he was slightly faster, we’ll give him the nod.

Agree?  Disagree?  Let’s hear your thoughts…

Happy Holidays to all – and as Harvey Pack would say “May the horse be with you!”

* 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?

2 Year Old Colt – I don’t sense any groundswell of support for Vale of York getting it off a victory at 30-1 and Lookin At Lucky lost little in defeat after just missing while breaking from Post 13.  With 4 wins and a second in 5 starts including wins in the Del Mar Futurity & Norfolk, Lookin At Lucky appears in the driver’s seat.

2 Year Old Filly – Hot Dixie Chick was clearly the standout in the division but she called it a season before they even moved back to Belmont and never even went a mile.  BC winner She Be Wild generates little excitement, but her BC win coupled with a runner-up finish in the G1 Alcibiades and a solid record overall should be enough to earn the crown in a year with no standouts in the route races.

3 Year Old Colt – Summer Bird.  Easy.

3 Year Old Filly – Rachel Alexandra.  Easiest vote ever.  If anyone else gets a first place vote, the voter should not only lose their right to vote in the future but also have their name, email address, and Facebook profile link revealed for public humiliation.

Older Horse – Pass please.   This is really a tough one.  At first glance Gio Ponti seems like the obvious answer by default, however I do have a bit of a problem giving an Older Horse Eclipse Award to a horse who never raced on dirt and was only 1-for-3 on fake-dirt (synthetics).  Gio Ponti’s success came primarily on turf…and that’s why they have a Grass championship category.   But if not him, who?  Einstein ran horribly in the BC and Macho Again didn’t even run at all (although I don’t think I could justify seeing him win an Eclipse under any circumstances).  If you have to give an award in this category to a grass horse, isn’t that reason enough for not distributing the award at all?  I guess they can’t collude and persuade every single voter to abstain so it has to be Gio Ponti truly by default.

Older Filly & Mare – Zenyatta.  No witty comment here, sorry.  She’s clearly without equal.

Turf Male – I’m not sure that Gio Ponti would have beaten Conduit even though Conduit didn’t seem to run nearly as well this year compared to last year in winning the BC Turf – and clearly Gio Ponti running in the Classic was strictly a risk/reward proposition as I discussed previously – however his 4 Grade 1 wins on grass still entitle him to the award.  Nevertheless it definitely would have made things a little interesting if he had run in this race and lost – especially as a follow-up to getting beat by the great Interpretation in the Turf Classic at Belmont.   Too bad Precious Passion didn’t get good a little sooner as he’s a tough horse not to like.

Turf Female - No American standout so I think this is where Goldikova gets a lifetime achievement award for her back-to-back wins in the BC Turf Mile.  She’s a well-liked horse so I think she’ll win pretty easily in the absence of any other standouts. and a pretty disappointing year from defending champ Forever Together.

Sprinter – Ummm yeah.  I’m gonna need you to go ahead and not give out this award this year.  Thaaaaanks!  Breeders’ Cup Sprint winner Dancing In Silks was 4-for-5 however he never even ran in a graded stakes race prior to the BC.  Not nearly enough.  Zensational will get some support with his 5-for-7 record including 3 Grade 1′s, but he beat really crappy competition in those wins, benefited from soft trips each time, and ran exclusively over synthetics.  I think he had something to prove in the Breeders’ Cup and I can’t see rewarding him for completely failing to meet that challenge.  That brings us to the dirt horses.  Fabulous Strike is a tough horse not to like and will get a little support but I think he lost a step this year.  2-for-5 with no Grade 1 wins ain’t going to get it done.   Finally, Kodiak Kowboy presently has a fairly unimpressive 3-for-7 record however he did win 2 major Grade 1′s (The Carter & The Vosburgh) while finishing a close 2nd in another (The Forego).  He also beat Fabulous Strike in both of those Grade 1 wins – which is a lot more than you can say about the competition that Zensational was facing.  Again, I’d be in favor of not giving out the award here but since they probably have to my vote would go to Kodiak Kowboy by virtue of having the most going for him on the positive side as a result of his performances in the Carter, Forego, & Vosburgh.

Female Sprinter - Obviously Informed Decision after going 6-for-7 this year including her win in the BC F&M Sprint.  Ventura was clearly best in that race as Informed Decision got the best of the pace scenario, but she’s the one with the win on her resume and an otherwise strong record so she gets the award.  Ever think you’d be hearing the words “Sprint Champion” and “Jonathan Sheppard” in the same sentence?  Me neither!

I’m less interested in the human awards so I’ll skip those for now (other than to say that John Shirreffs definitely deserves the trainer title for getting both Zenyatta & Life Is Sweet to step it up and turn in career best efforts on their biggest days)  and I couldn’t name a single steeplechase contender for a million dollars so no comment there.  As for Horse of the Year…well that will be my next post!   Hopefully Sunday if time and life permit.

* 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?

• Santa Anita – Wow!  For those of you who go there routinely I guess this goes without saying, but WOW (did I say that already?!)…what a view!  Those mountains make for a breathtaking backdrop.

Wow!

• Pro-Ride – Is there any doubt at this point that this is a completely separate surface that bears no resemblance to dirt, plays more like turf, and is extremely difficult to navigate for dirt horses with no past turf or synthetic experience?  When you see consistent horses with strong dirt form completely fail to fire time after time that’s telling you something.  You know the facts by now – not a single dirt horse won or even ran well.  Consistent dirt horses like Music Note, Sara Louise, Summer Bird, D’Funnybone, Devil May Care etc etc all failed to display anywhere near their established form over this track.  Bottom line – these races mean absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things when it comes to dirt horses.  For all intents and purposes you need to treat them the same way you’d treat a grass race for these horses.  America is built around dirt racing so it’s just sad to see us run prominent and championship races on an entirely different surface that holds no historical value or relative significance.  In addition, you can now view some of the performances from last year (ie – Curlin) through an even more colored lense and realize those races are dead throwouts.

What is this stuff?

This really isn't my living room carpet!

• Marathon – If not for the fact that some of these horses were coming from Europe you’d otherwise be hard-pressed to distinguish this race from the Gallant Fox Handicap in December at Aqueduct.  Just silly.

• Juvenile Filllies Turf – Why?  Surprised no one closed into pretty fast fractions.  Nice effort by Rose Catherine stretching out off that sensational debut in a turf sprint at Belmont.

• Juvenile Fillies – Zzzzzzz.  Lots of horses in the picture.  No one all that impressive.  Not sure this race means much in the grand scheme of things except to the winners.  Tough trip for Biofuel (who I bet of course) going 100 wide and getting sideswiped as she was making her move…and still closing well for 4th.

• F&M Turf – Midday figured better than these if Forever Together didn’t return to peak form.  Forever Together didn’t and Midday was.

• F&M Sprint – Some people must be looking at an $8.80 payoff for 7-for-7 on synthetics Informed Decision and thinking “Wow…what an easy game” but this race was as much about pace as anything else.  The race was essentially over after the first quarter as  Informed Decision sat just off a slow 23:1 quarter while probably-best Ventura attempted to close from the back of the pack.  Sara Louise had nothing on the pro-ride.

Informed Decision

• DISTAFF(!) – Not sure if Careless Jewel was just entirely rank or another with non Pro-Ride/Keeneland type synthetic experience (Woodbine is a bit of a different surface than those) who also didn’t handle the surface.  Either way, the Rachel Alexandra comparisons should stop for a while.  She should still make for a nice 4 yo if they stick to the dirt.  Obviously this was one that fell apart from the fast pace as Life Is Sweet came from the back to blow by the field.  Seeing a potent finisher like Music Note lack a strong closing punch again validates the stark  contrast in the surface.

• Juvenile Turf – Whatever.  Congrats to the connections I guess.

• Turf Sprint – Was hoping for chaos again but California Flag looked best if he could avoid an early duel.  Able to get away with a slow 21:2 quarter (well slow compared to last year’s 20:3 duel) he cruised home.

• Sprint – Just bet the fastest last race Beyer.  Easy game, right?!  Zensational got off a bit slow and couldn’t make the lead and showed little thereafter so obviously they decided to rest on their laurels and retire him.  After all what’s left to prove after you decisively beat Talking to MomRoo?  Fatal Bullet threw in his first synthetic clunker after everything seemed to set up well for him.  Champion Sprinter for $100, Alex?

• Juvenile – I’ll leave out the fact that I was alive with 7 of these in the Pick-4 (including Piscitelli for 90k who led through slow fractions and then re-rallied in midstretch) and missed it when I picked the wrong Euros to be my “A’s” (the Sprint eliminated my B’s in this race – which Vale of York was) and just say that obviously Lookin At Lucky lost nothing in defeat here.  I’m sure this race has some Santa Anita Derby or San Felipe  implications or something…but not much else.

• Turf Mile – Another pretty impressive performance by Goldikova who was obviously back on her “A” game.  Clearly one of the all-time good turf fillies, however I still wouldn’t put her near Miesque who ran faster, had a better career overall, and beat significantly better fields in her back-to-back triumphs.    Check out the fact that Miesque ran exclusively against males in the final EIGHT starts of her career – compiling a record of 6 wins and 2 seconds against a very deep and talented group (both in Europe & the US).

• Dirt Mile – Wide open race if Mastercraftsman didn’t fire.  Furthest Land obviously ran back to his last race.  Ridiculous to run this race in the heart of the Saturday card.  In other news, the “Dirt Mile” remains on target to actually be run at 1 Mile on the dirt for the first time next year.

• Turf – Pretty uninteresting race.  Amazing they can only get 7 horses (and just 3 from the US) to run for 3 Million Dollars on the grass.  Conduit wasn’t nearly as good this year as he was last year but it was still enough to get the job done.  Precious Passion is definitely a cool horse who has obviously improved quite a bit and become way more consistent.  It’s rare to see a horse do what he does on the turf so he’s definitely fun to watch.

The Classic!

Zenyatta

• Classic – Well Zenyatta certainly surprised me.  I didn’t expect her to win going in and she certainly looked beaten throughout most of the race but she managed to blow by the field and make history.  The moment gave you goosebumps and the cheering from the crowd reminded me of a playoff game atmosphere after a game-typing basket or Home Run which is remarkable to see at a racetrack.  Nevertheless my analytical side can’t help but view this effort in a slightly different context.  At the end of the day Zenyatta beat a field of primarily turf horses on a surface that almost none of them had run their best efforts over (Gio Ponti’s best efforts are on grass, Twice Over’s also on grass, & Summer Bird’s on dirt).  If Summer Bird faced Gio Ponti and Twice Over going 10 furlongs on the dirt, would you still bet him to run last of the 3?  Clearly Zenyatta is the queen of synthetics but I just can’t treat that the same way that I’d treat a horse who accomplished the same thing on dirt.  It’s a niche surface and it’s less significant than dirt.  Zenyatta very well might be as good on dirt but unfortunately it doesn’t look like we’ll ever get the chance to find out.

I obviously have a lot more to say about Zenyatta and the Classic and I plan to cover Zenyatta and why Rachel Alexandra is still Horse of the Year in separate posts.  I’ll also give some thoughts on the 2009 Eclipse Award picture later in the week as well.

* 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?

At 14 I began making my own speed figures. After that I was introduced to Thorograph & Ragozin sheets. I no longer have the time or energy to make my own figures – and certainly I consider a multitude of handicapping variables from pace to trips to trainers – but speed handicapping has always stayed with me as the core foundation of my handicapping approach. Speed figures are where racing makes sense to me. Speed figures measure how fast a horse ran and at the end of the day isn’t that what we’re all trying to figure out? Certainly there are a number of factors that influence the outcome of a race and this is why the correct application of speed figures involves a lot more than simply betting the fastest last number or fastest average last 3 numbers etc, but at the end of day no horse ever won a race while crossing the finish line in a slower time than his competitors (save for DQ’s of course).

Speed figures have an additional value for me as well. Aside from their practical application in day-to-day handicapping, they allow you to put top performances in some sort of historical or relative context. When a 3 year old wins its debut by 7 lengths, speed figures tell us if we’re looking at a horse that belongs on the Derby trail. When a horse wins by a large margin at a second tier track, the clock tells us if that horse has what it takes to compete with the elite in New York or California. Speed figures also provide the only semi-reliable means for comparing horses from different generations. Every generation has a set of champions, but speed figures are the most reliable method of figuring out just how good each one was and who was better than who. Are they failsafe and absolute? Of course not. But generally, a horse who typically runs 122-119-118-120 is superior to a horse who routinely runs in the 108-110 range.

There are some who detest such an approach but there’s no question that speed figures give us a more reliable assessment of a horse’s ability level than anything else – particularly assessments drawn by nothing more than the untrained human eye or things like wins and class that are either vague or utterly irrelevant without being put into some type of context. Those who are offended by such measurements generally aren’t very analytical or are simply clueless as to what a speed figure actually represents, how it’s calculated, and how it should be properly applied. We mock what we don’t understand. Or, in the words of Neil Peart (obligatory Rush reference – I’ve been slacking in that department thus far): Quick to judge, quick to anger, slow to understand / ignorance and prejudice and fear walk hand in hand…

So what’s the point to all of this beyond writing a basic 3rd grade essay on “Why I like speed figures?” Well first, I will using speed figures and sheet #’s quite frequently in this blog to measure and assess performances as well as to put them into historical and seasonal context. Second, I have several entries planned around the discussing certain top horses and just how fast they really were. Additionally, because of my love for numbers I have accumulated a pretty extensive collection of Beyer Speed Figures from top horses over the years – including many that were published either in the Racing Times or even before then when his figures were available through Bloodstock Research. It should make for some really interesting conversation in the coming days and weeks – particularly with the Breeders’ Cup coming around. With the exception of a few early turf races, I actually have an archive of the winning Beyer Speed Figure for every Breeders’ Cup race ever run…which I’ll publish soon.

A good place to begin though is probably with Rachel Alexandra and how she compares to other top 3 year old fillies over the years. I’ll work on that next…

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

* 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?

Beldame – 6 weeks ago this race was being offered as a potential stage for a Rachel-Zenyatta meeting with the possibility of Icon Project & Careless Jewel being part of the field as well.  Instead it turned into a workout for Music Note with only Unbridled Belle offering any type of G1 form in opposition.  Unbridled Belle got loose on a pretty easy lead, but Music Note was still able to pass her and win in hand, running a very legit figure.

Music Note is a horse that I feel like we never really got to see just how good she is.  She got very good very quickly last year and showed an ability to finish with extremely strong final quarters.  She wasn’t sensationally fast, but as an AP Indy she figured to keep maturing.  Plus, several of her races were little more than public workouts where she simply laid over the field and barely had to run at all.  She ran well in the BC against Zenyatta but the race is a toss for me since it was on synthetics.  Music Note didn’t return until the middle of this year – where she ran inexplicably awful.  Following another small layoff she came back to run huge – defeating Indian Blessing in the 7F Ballerina.   Should she conclude her career with yesterday’s pretty effortless win and another BC race on synthetics we will really not have had the chance to see her truly strut her stuff in a stakes race going a route on the dirt in quite a long time.   Music Note clearly has gotten faster and better at 4 – as her breeding indicated was likely – so I’m definitely disappointed to not get a real season out of her.  I think it’s possible that she may have been able to take that leap and be “special” (ie – The type of horse who can blow a good field away with a powerful closing kick and run 110-type Beyer figures) but due to a combination of circumstances and the BC’s ridiculous decision to run on synthetics, she’ll likely just go down as another in a long line of “what-ifs.”

Vosburgh – 400k for a prestigious Grade 1 sprint on dirt and just 4 horses show up?!  Hard to figure.  The Forego had a full field a few weeks ago.  You would have made 12k just for walking around the track and finishing 5th!  Talented bunch at least.  It’s hard not to love Fabulous Strike.  He’s extremely fast and he’s been on the scene for several years.  I feel like yesterday’s might be the first sign that age is catching up with him.  Watching him get a perfect trip sitting off Go Go Shoot, going by at will, and opening up a couple lengths in stretch, it was tough to imagine that Kodiak Kowboy would be able to mow him down.  The last time that happened (Carter), Fabulous Strike dueled through an insane 1/2 and had to negotiate an extra furlong.  Yesterday he looked like he’d win easily, but surprisingly Kodiak Kowboy ran him down.

Time to give Munnings a rest.  He looked like he might be a sensational sprinter but since his attempted stretch out in the Haskell he clearly isn’t the same animal anymore.

Flower Bowl – I wrote yesterday about Queen of Hearts so it was definitely exciting to see her run a good 3rd.  This was a tough race and my only thought was that Pure Clan would be around.  I didn’t like Dynaforce much who, despite loving a soft turf, doesn’t appear to be the same filly as she was last year.   In the Beverly D she got a perfect trip sitting close to a very slow pace and still didn’t run nearly as well as she had last year.  I got lucky when longshots ran 2nd and 3rd to Pure Clan to make for a nice super, but a look at the fractions over the ridiculously soft turf tells you all you need to know about this race.

Turf Classic – My friend asked if there was any shot that the favorites could be beaten in this race.  I replied “the only real chance is if Musketier steals the race on the front end since there isn’t much speed and his best races aren’t too far off Gio Ponti’s.”  So what happens?  Interpretation, who has never sniffed the lead (and rarely the winner’s circle for that matter) in his long career, goes to lead and has enough left to put away Gio Ponti in the stretch.  I didn’t play Musketier strongly, but this is why racing is maddening sometimes.  The trip that Interpretation got was exactly what Musketier should have been doing.  I can only theorize that his connections decided to take back because he faded so badly last time – but that’s because he dueled through insane fractions in the Sword Dancer.  His prior 2 efforts on the lead both produced solid efforts (100-102 Beyers and a G3 win and a second to Gio Ponti).  For them to sit lengths off a confirmed closer in Interpretation in a race where the early leader essentially goes wire to wire is simply poor strategy.  As for Gio Ponti, there were questions about his ability to get 12 furlongs going in.  Hard to put too much stock in a race like this given the conditions, but the fact that he went by Interpretation and couldn’t put him away is definitely a black mark against him regardless of circumstances.

Some interesting stats on the great Interpretation (who I actually like since I’ve used him successfully many times in the 2nd and 3rd slots).

• Off the board in all 6 prior starts this year
  
• His last win came on Sept 15, 2007 at Philadelphia Park – with 17 straight losses in between
• That race snapped a 1-year and 10-race losing streak as well
• Couldn’t finish in the top half of a 6-horse field at Philadelphia Park last time out

I think it’s safe to say that Gio Ponti’s longshot Horse of the Year chances just evaporated!

Jockey Club Gold Cup – Summer Bird is developing into a very nice horse.  Nice to see Quality Road return to his spring form.   It’s too bad he was rushed into the Travers without proper foundation.  It would have been very interesting to see how good he would have gotten if he had progressed normally rather than going straight from 6.5F to 10F.  At this point it will take a 2009 Breeders’ Cup Classic win by Mine That Bird to deny Summer Bird the 3 yo title.  Given what has been said about Summer Bird’s poor training over synthetics in the spring, I’d pass the BC Classic with him and just prepare him for an early start to his 4 yo campaign.  He’ll win the title anyway unless Mine That Bird sometime pulls off a Classic win – and right now his stock is as high as ever.  Why risk it on a surface he purportedly doesn’t like?

I ‘d love to see Quality Road come back in the Cigar Mile and then have a proper 4 year old season where he’s not playing catch-up.

Macho Again reverted to previous form without an advantageous pace setup like he received in his prior 2 starts.

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?

Rachel Alexandra just concluded the most ambitious, aggressive, and challenging campaign that a top 3 year old filly has seen in this country in many years.  Top fillies and mares have repeatedly faced colts in the past (See Lady’s Secret, Winning Colors, Serena’s Song et al.) but this is a different time and culture.  Nowadays horses generally take the path of least resistance.  That’s certainly been the case with Zenyatta…and then some!  Zenyatta had a fabulous 2008.  She was undefeated, brilliant and breathtaking with her sweeping move to blow by each field at will.  She concluded with a easy win in the BC DISTAFF (That’s what it is and always will be).  She could have retired with a championship and a place in history as a very good mare.

Instead she returned in 2009 and with that came a chance to establish a place among the elite mares in history.  She had the opportunity to step outside the female ranks and shoot for a win or two in a major handicap race vs males.  She could have shipped and won some of the important divisional races in NY – while simultaneously establishing that she was an elite mare on dirt as well.  She could have tried the grass.  She could have done many exciting things to put her talent on display and show just where she belongs from a historical perspective.   Now here we are on October 1st and despite being in training since the spring, Zenyatta has raced just 3 times and done nothing at all outside her comfort zone.  To date her campaign falls well short of even her 2008 season where she at least shipped to Oaklawn for the Apple Blossom and made 7 starts.

With so many ways to do something special this year, for some inexplicable reason Zenyatta’s connections have chosen the most unexciting and least challenging schedule possible this year.  They cite the fact that the Breeders’ Cup is supposed to determine year-end championships but she has already been a champion in her division – this is about becoming extraordinary, not pursuing the ordinary.  The Breeders’ Cup explanation is their rationale for not running against Rachel Alexandra – whose connections likely would have taken Rachel to any dirt track in America to face Zenyatta – which comes across as nothing more than a lame excuse to avoid a showdown with a horse she likely would have lost to and who has certainly surpassed her in rank and reputation.  This also in no way addresses why she couldn’t have faced males in races like the Pacific Classic or Hollywood Gold Cup.  Heck, even her stablemate who was running on the same schedule as Zenyatta was entered against males in the Hollywood Gold Cup.  Neither does it address why she couldn’t ship outside California or run a race of two on dirt to diversify her resume and legacy.  When reigning horse of the year Curlin retured for a 2008 campaign last year, his connections took him to Dubai, Kentucky, tried him on grass, won major races in New York and concluded in California.  Looking back at a champion whose unbeaten record Zenyatta is presently targeting, Personal Ensign faced males in the Whitney and twice beat a Kentucky Derby winning filly to conclude her career.    And here is Zenyatta – facing and beating an extraordinarily weak group of older mares in California time after time while her connections apparently have no desire to test her further.

Certainly Zenyatta’s connections are free to manage their horse any way they’d like, but should she conclude her career with 2 more wins to break Personal Ensign’s record, history will surely take into account how she was managed.  If their goal was to simply ensure that Zenyatta retired undefeated, well then they are indeed doing a masterful job of managing her.  But you can’t have it both ways.  Taking the path of least resistance by avoiding challenges and never venturing outside her comfort zone – particularly in the face of such an aggressive and exciting campaign from Rachel Alexandra by contrast – will surely prevent Zenyatta from ranking alongside the all-time greats of the sport.  She may indeed have that level of talent, but her connections have done an incredible disservice to her reputation and legacy by failing to allow her to demonstrate it on the track.

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?