TDN Letter to the Editor - Rachel v Zenyatta

[smalltimer]

Much has been made about Zenyatta\'s light campaign in 2009.  Many, many posters suggest that she\'s not DONE ENOUGH to be considered for HOY.
Recent history suggests otherwise:

1950\'s the average starts for the HOY was 12.5 starts;
1960\'s the average starts for the HOY was 11.5 starts;
1970\'s the average starts for the HOY was 10.6 starts;
1980\'s the average starts for the HOY was  9.4 starts;
1990\'s the average starts for the HOY was  9.3 starts;
2000-2004  average starts for the HOY was  7.6 starts.

2004 winner Ghostzapper 4 starts 4 wins including 2 G1, 1 G2, and 1 G3, total of 11 career races;

2005 winner Saint Liam 6 starts 4 wins 1 place and 1 off the board.  4 Grade 1 wins;

2006 winner Invasor 4 starts 4 wins 4 G1 wins;

2007 winner Curlin 9 starts 6 wins 1 place 2 shows;
2008 winner Curlin 7 starts 5 wins 1 place 1 off the board, 4 G1 wins.
Career record 16 starts 11 wins 2 places 2 shows 1 off the board.

Zenyatta in 2009, 5 starts 5 wins, 4 G1 wins 1 G2 win.  
Career record 14 starts 14 wins. Seems to be plenty to compare campaigns with previous HOY winners.  Zenyatta HAS done enough to win HOY by existing standards. Time to put that stupid argument to bed.

The idea that Zenyatta didn\'t do enough to merit serious HOY consideration flies in the face of the recent winners.  There\'s been an obvious trend over the recent years for the older horse(s) to make less starts than in previous decades.  

Source for HOY information is Thoroughbred Times, Nov 13, 2004 edition.

[Dana666]

I don\'t think we should be downgrading the BC Classic. I\'m fine with anyone who votes for Rachel, but also acknowledges how superior (and rare) Zen\'s effort was in the BC Classic, and that\'s all I\'ve been saying; otherwise you\'re either not being fair or you don\'t know what you\'re really looking at - I just want people to be honest enough to leave the biases behind - that\'s my toughest thing to do sometimes but otherwise it\'s all about our own ego and not a true evaluation of the horses. Perhaps, one race isn\'t enough to sway the voters, and that\'s fine. I just don\'t see how anyone can weaken the impact of the BC Classic. Another thing we should probably keep in mind is I imagine Z\'s connections had no thought of horse of the year when they mapped out her campaign for 2009 - they probably just wanted to protect her unbeaten record and still compete at the Grade I level with an eye toward repeating as Breeder\'s Cup champion again. As I\'ve said many times, Rachel\'s connections also chose spots they knew she\'s have an edge (however aggressive their campaign really was). You go for the Haskell and Woodward instead of the Travers and Jockey Club Gold Cup - that says it all. So you want Summer Bird at a 1 1/8 on a speed favoring surface but you want no part of him (or Quality Road for that matter) on a deeper track at 1 1/4. I\'m not knocking her connections, they\'re really smart, but let\'s not overstate the difficulty of her campaign. The Preakness was the only really unique and interesting move with Rachel (esp. coming after her Oaks win) and that win really does deserve awe.

[mjellish]

If someone wants to give Zenyatta their HOY vote because she won the classic and is undefeated then I guess that is up to them.  I don\'t want to take anything away from what she accomplished.  But the fact is that Rachel did more on the track this year.  She went 8/8 and shipped around to different tracks, raced different fields that were outside her comfort zone of 3 year old fillies 3 times.  Zenyatta stayed home in CA, beat up on small fields of the same horses and raced outside of her comfort zone only once.  No doubt that she overcame some difficulties along the way.  And Zenyatta\'s closing run in the Classic was awesome.  But we should not give out HOY based upon that one performance, and what she did before that does not stack up with what Rachel accomplished.  I would make a strong case that what Goldikova accomplished this year is almost equally impressive as Zenyatta.  She also won a BC race for the second year in row and dominated her competition.  I don\'t hear anyone talking about her for HOY.  I think there is a small stakes caliber, ex claimer out there who is 16/16 or something like that who has made some devestating late runs and overcome trouble as well and no one is talking about him for HOY either, nor should they.

It\'s just unfortunate for Zenyatta that Rachel happened to be around this year to overhadow the five year old Mare\'s performance.  Zen\'s connections could have chosen to do something about that by mapping out a more aggressive campaign, but they didn\'t.  So in my opinion they should be happy to win Champion Older Mare and to have the winner\'s share of the Classic\'s five million dollar purse.  That\'s compensation enough.  There are other examples of horses that went 5/5 and won a Breeders\' Cup race.  But what Rachel did is unprecedented for a 3 year old filly.  Unprecedented!  It\'s never been done before.

Anyone that tried to run with Rachel early was dusted, and no one was ever able to pass her no matter how fast she ran early or what type of 4w trip she had.  You can feel as sentimental about Zenyatta as you want, but the facts are the facts.  It may be fun to debate, but if Rachel isn\'t horse of the year then god help this already troubled industry.  I may have to switch to greyhounds or turtle races at the local pub for a year just to get the sour taste out of my mouth.

[Frost King]

Racing on the West Coast of the United States for trainer D. Wayne Lukas, Winning Colors won both of her starts at age two. In the spring of 1988, the large filly put on a powerful performance in the Santa Anita Derby, defeating colts her age by 7½ lengths. Sent to Churchill Downs for the Kentucky Derby, she was up against a stellar field of colts including Risen Star, Seeking the Gold, Forty Niner, Regal Classic, and co-favorite Private Terms. As was her habit, Winning Colors broke fast and raced to the lead. Although Forty Niner made a determined charge in the homestretch, she held him off to win by a neck.

So how many of the colts that RA beat are going to the breeding shed? Winning Colors actually beat better colts, than Rachael will have faced this year. So the quality of her competition was not that great. If you don\'t go to the Big Dance, and lay it all on the line like Zenyatta did, you don\'t deserve the \"Big Prize.\" What does the Derby, Travers, Jockey Gold Cup and the Classic have in common? They are all run at the true distance of Champions. Rachael, when she was running in the Preakness, looked like Mine That Bird would have caught her with another 1/16th of a mile. Who was going to catch Zenyatta on Saturday?

[smalltimer]

Good post, much of what I agree with.  The problem on the forum has been the mere suggestion that Zenyatta has not done enough to merit HOY honors.  The earlier post I had referencing Ghostzapper, Invasor, Saint Liam and Curlin suggest without a DOUBT that Zenyatta did do enough to MERIT the honor.  Period.  I\'ve become disgusted by this repetitive nonsense regarding her not having done enough.  If 4-5-6 starts a year and multiple Grade 1 wins were good enough to win HOY honors for those horse mentioned, then its obvious, Zenyatta\'s \'09 season is just as worthy.  Based upon those examples of past winning HOY\'s, how could you possibly suggest that Zenyatta didn\'t \"do enough?\"  The voters overlooked the publics\'s fascination with Smarty Jones and Bernadini and awarded the older horse who had less outs, but won the one that counted.  Its become a point that Rachel did more.  Fine, I think we all get that by now.  My objection has been this flat out bias, and blatant disregard for a legitimate comparison with Z\'s year compared to recent past winners.  Hope I\'m being clear here.  It\'s not that Rachel isn\'t deserving of HOY, her campaign was near flawless, had her people opted for the Jockey Club or Marlboro and won it at the classic distance, it would be hard to imagine anyone other than her winning the honor.  But, she was guided toward the path of least resistance and at 10 furlongs, you really think she can hold up that last 1/8th against a strong group of older horses?  Please.... She was life and death against Macho Again.  If and when Rachel gets fully mature physically like Zenyatta she may possess that type of physical strength and staying power.  Rachel is a great racehorse.  So is Zenyatta.  Anyone that doesn\'t think Ghostzapper, Saint Liam and the other recent winners weren\'t picking their spots and trying to get to the BIG ONE are fooling themselves.
As I posted earlier, I\'m gonna have no trouble if Rachel wins HOY.  She\'s deserving.  But, she had a chance to PROVE she could beat the big mare and her people kept her wrapped up so others like those in this forum could carry the water for her and talk non-stop about her season.  
The expert writers and handicappers in this industry gave Zenyatta a chance in only about 5 of 29 selections.  As it turned out, they weren\'t such experts because they were hauling around that lamebrain baggage regarding synthetics.  Z ran on dirt, cushion, poly and pro-ride...by my count thats 4 different surfaces and she won on every single one. Even the \"experts\" didn\'t know what they were talking about.  
I\'m done on the subject of Zenyatta not having had a year WORTHY of HOY.  She doesn\'t take a back seat to any of the recent winners. She took on the boys and she whipped their butts, and she made it look EASY.  Once Mike let traffic clear in the stretch and moved out, the race was decided.  She ran past the leaders without even taking a deep breath.  She wanted more.  If the race had been 12 furlongs, how far does she win by?  I\'m not talking about a mare who\'s gasping for air in the final 1/8th of a mile, Z\'s a machine that\'s finished every race with plenty left.  Watch the replay, anybody else running at the line?  I apologize if I offended anyone, we\'ll just have to agree to disagree.    
Peace out.

[TGJB]

Come on, guys.

1-- PDub-- I expressely made the point that Rachel beat those horses on the surface they won stakes on, and Z did not. That was the WHOLE point.

2-- Midnight Lute ran a neg 5 on Pro-Ride last year. Twice Over ran a neg 2 IN THIS RACE.

3-- You seriously want to compare the horses Rachel was beating with Aanabals Creation, Lethal Heat et al? Really? Where do you think those mares would fit in the national FM picture, forget about with colts?

4-- I don\'t know anybody with even a reasonably informed opinion who thought the Classic was a great race this year, specifically because of surface. Or last year, for that matter.

5-- Zenyatta did race on dirt. Many think it was her best race. She was a 4yo. Her figure was 6 lengths slower than Rachel ran as a 3YO. That\'s no knock on Zenyatta. Rachel is a superhorse.

6-- Small-- you\'re exactly right, St Liam and Ghostzapper\'s campaigns were no different than Zenyatta\'s-- if you only look at the number ofstarts (Clement J. Hirsch, Jockey Club Gold Cup, same thing). Also, SJ didn\'t beat older horses, Bernardini did it once, neither was a filly. Here\'s what you do-- make a list of the 3yo fillies that have ever won a GI against males going long twice in one year, and another of the 3yo fillies that have won a GI against older males. Post them here, I\'ll be interested in seeing them.

Look-- Zenyatta had a good year. In another year it might even be a HOTY campaign. But it\'s not remotely close to what Rachel did-- she made history. It\'s not even close to what Curlin did the last two years, for that matter. She won one race on a quirky surface against a few good horses (ON THAT SURFACE). Before that she beat up on the Little Sisters Of The Poor.

[smalltimer]

JB,
Very good points, as always.
Life is Sweet is a decent mare, I think she won a race last Friday.  The surface was fake, but the result wasn\'t.
The Classic wasn\'t a great race this year, it was merely historic.
My point being, to dismiss Z as not being worthy of HOY honors, simply denies that others won the award with similar outs and similar Graded wins.
Admittedly, Rachel did make history.  As did Zenyatta.  No other filly will ever be the FIRST 3 year old to beat older horses in a Grade 1 race as Rachel did.  No other filly or mare will ever be the FIRST female winner of the Breeder\'s Cup Classic at 10 furlongs.  Can we agree on that?  A hundred years from now Zenyatta will still be the first filly ever to win the Classic.  That\'s historical.
Thanks, I\'ve had my say.

[Leamas57]

The performance on BC day was a very impressive one of course, but I don\'t read a lot of posts where anyone mentions that the race set up perfectly for her: a deep closing move on a track that killed speed (and dirt specialists) at 10 panels.

Giacomo, Street Smart, MTB all looked like monsters in Derby races where they stayed back on the (faster?) rail and saved ground and horse for a late move.

But they all needed the right conditions because none turned out to be monsters. The posts about the center being slow made sense, though.

She won by a length and a half over GP, a turf-specialist closer who stayed five or six lengths closer to the front throughout.

Bill

[spa]

Wait to see how Z\'s competition does in their next race. You\'ll see JB was correct. If you can\'t see what JB is saying about the ladies,your racing education is not complete.  I believe dirt is Z\'s best surface,check her explosion at Oaklawn. In 50 years,I\'ve only seen that type of surge twice. The first time was Demon\'s Begone,the next time was Z. I still want the match race.

[mjellish]

Yep, Yep, Yep, Yep, Yep, Yep & Yep.  Also, to give credit where credit is due, TGJB was the first to post on this board that Goldikova merited just as much consideration for HOY as Zenyatta.  I should have pointed that out in my post.

I will be the first to admit that I have not made a dime off Rachel this year.  In fact, she cost me money.  I looked at her as being an strong bet against as the heavy favorite in the Preakness, a 3yr old filly coming off a -4 with two weeks rest and facing colts from the 13 post at Pimlico at a longer distance than she had ever run.  Any reasonable handicapper should and would have looked at that race that way and made their bet(s) accordingly.  But she won it anyway, and what she went on to do afterward was unprecedented.

That being said, let me also say that I plan to pay very close attention to her works leading up to her comeback to the track as a 4yr old.  I may even catch a work or two myself in person or find and pay someone who can and knows what to look for.  Depending upon the spot her connections pick and how she trains leading up to it, she may be a great bet against.  Rachel usually works like the monster she is.  I remember my clocker told me before the Derby that no colt looked anywhere near as good as Rachel during Derby week, and that if she would have been going in the Derby she would have been the one to bet.  I believe I posted that here on this board several days before the Oaks.  So if she isn\'t working like a monster that may make her vulnerable in her first race on the comeback.  After preaching her accolades I just wanted to be the first to say that here as well.  I am a horse lover, but a gambler first, after all.  And I think that is what this board should really be about.

[Lost Cause]

I just looked at the Woodward again..and I\'m shaking my head..Rachel had no business winning that race..none..but she did..pressure from beginning to end and still holding on to win..
I love Z and I love watching her races but those of you looking for a match race should take heed and be careful of what you ask for..This is not Anabaaas creation in front of her nor Gio Ponti..because in the words of Tom Durkin..she is indeed Rachel Alexandra ..the great..
Sorry to the Z backers but... she can\'t beat her on dirt...I can\'t see any way from a gambling perspective that I can play Z against Rachel unless Z gets a rabbit in the race..regardless of odds...I would rather skip the race than play against Rachel..I think you all need to cover the names and look at the PPs and the sheets and then say if both horses were the same odds who would I play..

Last post on this
Rachel did more AND is better
HOY in a romp..and I don\'t even care about this HOY stuff...

[P-Dub]

Good points JB, I\'ll give it a rest......finally =).

But if I hear 1 more Mike Smith comment.......(not from you obviously).

Off topic, just watched the Pacquiao fight. Geez, is this guy good.

[basket777]

beat to death.  Now that all the strong willed people have given there thoughts 56 times each ,can we get back to handicapping and winning money.  Isn\'t that the idea ?

[RICH]

It\'s not that she didn\'t due enough, she didn\'t do AS MUCH as RA, pretty obvious from JB\'s and MJ\'s posts

[Cartman]

Please don\'t take this personally. I don\'t mean to be argumentative or critical.

Even though I agree with your conclusion, I don\'t think you are presenting a balanced case. You are presenting the case of someone whose views are totally based on the perceptions gained by making speed figures for dirt races for decades in a country where dirt racing dominates.    


\"1-- PDub-- I expressely made the point that Rachel beat those horses on the surface they won stakes on, and Z did not. That was the WHOLE point.\"

You also said that Pro Ride plays like turf and ignored the fact that Gio Ponti, Twice Over (who both ran very well), and Rip Van Winkle were Multiple Grade 1 winners on turf and that great European turfers dominated the race last year.  


\"2-- Midnight Lute ran a neg 5 on Pro-Ride last year. Twice Over ran a neg 2 IN THIS RACE.\"

Midnight Lute is a sprinter. Paces in sprint races on both turf and synthetic are often fast enough to produce fast final times. The routes rarely are and certainly weren\'t in any of Zenyatta\'s races. Anyone that thinks Twice Over was the best horse in this race either is biased, didn\'t watch the race, or does not understand turf/synth racing.  
 

\"3-- You seriously want to compare the horses Rachel was beating with Aanabals Creation, Lethal Heat et al? Really? Where do you think those mares would fit in the national FM picture, forget about with colts?\"

No, but I definitely want to compare the horses Rachel beat with all the legitimate Grade 1 animals in the Classic. Rachel beat very weak 3YOs fillies, weak 3YO colts, and Grade 2 and Grade 3 older horses.  

\"4-- I don\'t know anybody with even a reasonably informed opinion who thought the Classic was a great race this year, specifically because of surface. Or last year, for that matter.\"

Then you don\'t know anyone that understands how to measure performance and ability for synthetic or turf races where final time figures are often depressed because of pace, but quality is easily recognized. Just because a race is more turf-like and the horses don\'t have fast final time figures does not mean the quality was not very high.  

 
\"5-- Zenyatta did race on dirt. Many think it was her best race. She was a 4yo. Her figure was 6 lengths slower than Rachel ran as a 3YO. That\'s no knock on Zenyatta. Rachel is a superhorse.\"

At the time, Zenyatta was even less experienced than Rachel was as a 3YO. She hadn\'t hit her best stride on synthetic yet either. She also came home in about 23 and had plenty of horse in reserve.  

\"6-- Small-- you\'re exactly right, St Liam and Ghostzapper\'s campaigns were no different than Zenyatta\'s-- if you only look at the number ofstarts (Clement J. Hirsch, Jockey Club Gold Cup, same thing). Also, SJ didn\'t beat older horses, Bernardini did it once, neither was a filly. Here\'s what you do-- make a list of the 3yo fillies that have ever won a GI against males going long twice in one year, and another of the 3yo fillies that have won a GI against older males. Post them here, I\'ll be interested in seeing them. \"

I agree with this. It\'s not biased.  

I have to ask everyone a very simply question.

Why in making the case for Rachel Alexander to be horse of the year does everyone feel compelled to attack Zenyatta with biased interpretations of her ability and performance in the Classic?

TURF, SYNTHETIC and DIRT racing are all different. This fact is too obvious to debate.

IMO, the horses need to be evaluated using different metrics if you want to compare them. If you insist on comparing them using final time figures, then at least compare Zenyatta\'s best synthetic figures with the types of figures world class European turf horses run on turf when they come to the US.

I think you\'ll find that on a relative basis she rates reasonably close to any of them without even considering her superior closing ability and how several of her race times were badly impacted by slow paces.

That would at least keep some perspective on her relative ability.

Zenyatta has the ability to close during the final furlongs and overcome almost any pace throw at her. That\'s one of the key componenents of great turfers and great synthetic runners and she does it as well as any horse I have ever seen.