i remember some posts critical of pat day\'s ride on azeri in th bc (too lazy to look for the thread). just watched the replay, and while velazquez and castellano had tight holds of their mounts, day was a bit loose on the reigns on azeri. the only way azeri could have got the lead from GZ early is if she was urged along early (and then she surely would have collapsed). i think day did a good job to save fifth. if there is any blame, maybe lucas tried to take some of the speed out of her in the mornings so she would have a better chance at getting the 10f. serious redboarding here, but either way, the horse did not belong in a gd 1 10f race, not to mention against the best horses in the country (although i said it before the race also).
Couldn\'t agree more Michael. 5th was better than most of us thought she would do before the race.
I am no Pat Day fan, but the ride he gave her in the Classic was fine. How is she going to beat GZ, RIM, PP at 10 furlongs (or at any distance, really)
Michael D---
I was one of Day\'s critics. In hindsight (and after watching the replay), I agree. Not much else he could have done.
My initial reaction was the rail opened up for you, why not take it and use her strength (her speed). But after watching the replay, no way Azeri gets the lead from those 2 monsters without being pushed way too hard. Another example of why she didn\'t belong.
Good Luck,
Joe B
I agree with everyone. Day did fine.
Paulson is crazy for entering her in that spot and as far as I\'m concerned Lukas should have shown some backbone and explained how f\'n stupid an idea it was. This horse was so mishandled this year it\'s amazing that she managed to do so well despite that.
the horse was as good as ever this year, just looks at her runs at OP and Sar. why she was sent to run over the heavy belmont surface, and why she ran in the BC classic is beyond me. i give credit to lucas, he did get her running very fast without ruining her, but in my opinion, if they had chosen their spots better, the horse would have won five or six gd 1 stakes (including the distaff), and would have easily been f&m of the year (still might get it), and would have come in third in horse of the year voting.
Have to admit I have not seen a replay. I watched the race. By the Classic* I thought the track was lightning and the fractions soft on that surface. In my opinion, if Azeri couldn\'t make the lead on those fractions without extending herself she was amiss, not overmatched.
Finishing positions in different races aren\'t always relevent, but I\'d point out Saint Liam just beat Perfect Drift a length and ran Ghostzapper to a nose. Do you really think Perfect Drift was 8 lenghts inferior to Ghostzapper at 10 marks? He may be, we\'ll see.
There was more at play at Lone Star than meets the eye.
CtC
go to the NTRA site, and watch the replay. day certainly was not rating azeri any more than velazquez and castellano were rating their mounts, in fact, he had the reigns a bit looser than the other two. midway down the backstretch, day started to work on azeri, and the other two jogged away. i think she was completely overmatched. if lucas trained more speed into her in the mornings, she may have had the lead, but in my oponion, would have collapsed at the end, as she did in her other 10f race.... CtC, going 10f, i find it hard to believe that you think she wasn\'t overmatched (if she played her speed game going 9f against the other two, i think it might have been closer, but she has no game going 10f)
CTC,
I can\'t make a reasonably accurate pace figure for 10F at Lone Star, but I would say the pace was moderate/slow given how fast they came home and how fast the final time was.
I don\'t think anyone was beating Ghost or RIM that day even if the pace was a little faster (honest). They weren\'t killing themselves on the front end, but they weren\'t loose either. They did challenge each other at times.
Given an honest pace and less extreme ground loss by some of the other decent horses, I think the margins would have been a lot tighter.
I don\'t think Ghost is 8 lengths better than Perfect Drift, but I think Ghost is more than a neck better than St. Liam.
regarding perfect drift, he tends to flatten after 9f. i first realized this after his kentucky derby run, and have noticed it ever since. a few guys might have his 10f figs fast, but they are just tying those races to 9f races. the horse does not excel running 10f.............. i\'m beginning to think that the modern thoroughbred has reached a point in its evolutionary cycle where 9f is the maximum distance for producing top efforts. GZ may be the lone exception, i think this one MIGHT be as fast as the bid\'s and secretariat\'s going 10f, as for the others, no way.
CtC,
I am guessing you just like to be in the minority opinion and that you can\'t possibly believe that Azeri finishing in 5th signals that Azeri was \"amiss\".
Where do you get this stuff from? That was a very very tough field. I like to be contrarian as well, but EVERYBODY agreed the field was tough. Many predicted Azeri would come in the very back of the pack. She ran respectablly well. I find no shame in losing to any of the horses she lost to. She wasn\'t amiss, they were just better horses. He should she have beaten? Ghostzapper? Roses in May? Pleasantly Perfect? Perfect Drift?
She finished ahead of Dynever, Birdstone, Funny Cide and a few other nice Grade 2 quality colts. I say nice job by Azeri.
I didn\'t think Azeri had a prayer to beat the field in the Classic, but I think she forfeited her only chance to prove me wrong. She was their equal or better on pace. That was her game. She was not overmatched in that regard. If she had played her game, on that day, on that track, I think the results could have been impacted. I\'m not convinced she wouldn\'t have had a major impact. So many horses had problems or were compromised, the race is going to be a difficult tool for future races. It was a very hard race to assign performance figures to and TGJB\'s acumen is gonna be difficult not to defer to, but I am very skeptical.
I don\'t think Roses busted a 3 point top on a negotiated \"hold\". And I don\'t think Pleasantly Perfect and Perfect Dread ran their \"A\" race. Pleasantly looked to be on a tail off after the Dubai race. P.P. had also rarely been so far behind in a race. (He was behind in positions not lengths.) Either I\'m very much mistaken about the pace or P.P. was too far behind a slow pace or he was off for the race. The last two of which mitigate against him equaling his top figure. (Which he essentially did.) Add to that an \"injury\" which influenced his retirement. I understand a lot of the big figures is ground loss. Jerry\'s the best, but this race is grist for being overturned by future results.
I could go on and on regarding this race. I think it was an abomination.
CtC
Afterthought: P.P. did run behind the pace in his Classic win. I suppose its possible the thought was to run the same type of \"closer\" race. If it was planned, it was a departure from the more aggressive P.P. we\'d seen since his Classic win.
Post Edited (12-02-04 18:15)
CtC,
azeri does not have a 10f game, this is where you are wrong. this was known going in, and proven afterwards. she can fly 9f over quick surfaces, but there is absolutely nothing out there that would lead anybody to believe that she would have a strong 10f game. why do people wish lucas cranked her to the max, and day used her early? to see this great champion flutter home and finish last? look at the 10f race at Sar, a track she loves. for me, it was sad to see her struggle home and get beaten badly against those slow horses in the final furlong (yes, i was sad, even though i had a huge bet on SSF).
Post Edited (12-02-04 17:59)
Paulson and Lukas weren\'t there to collect fourth or fifth money. They were there to win and have Azeri go down in history. Nursing her home was not the way to seize the day.
She had a runners chance, especially on that track and it was denied to her. That doesn\'t bother me. I don\'t like her or her connections. They screwed up and further impeached themselves. Awarding her Older Mare would be a disgrace. What I don\'t like is a pace falling apart over mistakes, misjudgements, backroom deals and track bias.
CtC
ok, so what happened in her only other try going 10f? she collapsed in the final furlong running over a track she loves (against very slow horses compared to the ones she faced on BC day). you really need to explain that one if you are going to argue that she had a runners chance in the BC.
Michael, first off, she\'d only been on Saratoga twice. If you follow T-Graph on this you\'ll see she every time she threw a negative 1.5 she bounced in her next race thereafter. TGraph pattern folks would probably say a neg. 1.5 was her performance limit and it impacted her. If you were thinking along those lines that didn\'t bode well for her B.C. Classic, because she had tossed a negative 1.5 three weeks prior to the Classic.
However, I always thought her best races were on the lead and I think TGraphs top figures for her bear that out. Theres no need to get into the reasons why. She had one chance and if her trainer and jockey didn\'t understand that shame on them. I don\'t think she was positioned form wise to throw her top figure, but if she had been put on the lead and was on form, I couldn\'t say for sure where she would have finished, but I\'m pretty sure she\'d of hit the board. Regardless of form, she had to be ridden a certain way to win and she wasn\'t.
CtC
Day was a bit loose on the reigns the entire way, as much so as any other jock who had ridden her in the past (trust me on that, or watch her past races). your only position could be that day should have ridden her along early, something that had never been done before. so your position is that if azeri was ridden along early, she would have been on the lead, and she might have run a strong final furlong (we disagree strongly on that). i would understad if day was strangling her, but that simply wasn\'t the case...if anything, blame the lucas/paulson strategy..... and CtC, this will be clear as day if azeri ever comes back and runs a 10f race.
and CtC, i share your view that when some horses are taken out of their game, it\'s lights out. i saw nothing that pat day did, however, that should have taken her out of her game.
She was already dealing with a big effort 20 days prior and she broke a half step slow. That probably sealed her fate. Pat can get patient even when he shouldn\'t. Thats his problem. She needed to still be ridden aggressively to have a chance. I\'d have preferred Cordero on her for the race. I\'d concede the weight.
Post Edited (12-02-04 19:36)
i watched the replay a bunch of times, and did not see Day rating the horse any more than the horse had been rated in the past. there is really nothing more i can say here. let\'s just say we disagree here. if she runs 10f again, however, and she is on the lead, you are going to lose this one in a big way, because she will never go out fast in a 10f race, and finish up strong.
CTC,
>I don\'t think Roses busted a 3 point top on a negotiated \"hold\". <
IMO, you are almost certainly wrong on this point. RIM ran a spectacular race at Saratoga. That was a brutally competitive pace performance early. Had the pace been even close to honest RIM would have beaten Perfect Drift by a very clear margin that day. I don\'t care what the final figure was that or on BC day, his BC performance was simply a return to that excellent level. I made that point about the Saratoga race multiple times prior to the BC and several people agreed.
If Azeri tried to run with RIM, she may have hurt his chances, but she would have finished last.
CtC,
You are selectively using \"pace\" to help you in certain arguments and then ignoring it in other situations. At least JB is consistent in his vies on pace impacting figures.
What I mean is that you are saying that the RIM figure in the BC was aided by racing close to a slow pace, thus he didn\'t run as fast as the figure suggests.
But, as CH points out, what about the Whitney. That pace was absolutely BRUTAL and you give RIM no extra credit for being \"on\" that pace.
JB has ignored both pace scenarios (I think) in giving the figures in those races. You are weighting the BC against RIM but not giving credit for the Whitney pace problem.
jimbo66 wrote:
> CtC,
>
> What I mean is that you are saying that the RIM figure in the
> BC was aided by racing close to a slow pace, thus he didn\'t run
> as fast as the figure suggests.
>
I\'m suggesting or postulating that the figure for the B.C. Classic may be inaccurate to a certain degree. I fully realize I could be wrong in that theory. I\'ve been wrong many times before when I\'ve taken such a position.
I really don\'t want to get into an analysis of the Whitney. I\'d have to break the days full card down and I don\'t want to do that. I will state its pretty obvious that Perfect Dread lacks the killer instinct this year. Perfect Dread also ran the fastest raw time splits in the Whitney he ever ran and the early pacesetter was \"Yessirgeneralsir\". I\'ll leave it at that. (I\'m fully aware of Bwana Charlies 1:09:2 in the sprint.)
What if the B.C. Classic was figured about 2 full points too fast? What if the track in drying became faster than some may have thought. If the winner ran closer to negative 2 and Azeri\'s best was about negative 1.5. how far from a competitive showing was she? How much more competitive would she have been on form and winging on the lead? And when you contemplate that question, contemplate it upon that track on that day, at that time.
I want to say something here. TGJB is the only figure man that holds the opinion that a racetrack is a living breathing thing. I am of the same opinion.
CtC
CtC,
just separate your \"on form\" theory from pat day\'s ride, and i think your argument makes a bit more sense. if day rides her along early, she collapses, you have enough knowledge of this game to understand that. shift your focus to the lucas/paulson stategy, maybe they took some speed out of her in the mornings? stop blaming this on day, with the bad break, she was not getting the lead without being used rather hard, and azeri had never been used hard early. it\'s rather preposterous to assume she would have finished with a lot of energy in that scenerio.
Michael D. wrote:
> CtC,
if day rides her
> along early, she collapses,
Circumstances tend to indicate it wasn\'t Azeri\'s day, regardless of Pat Day. Thats not the issue. I\'ve never held Azeri in the same awe others have. Her mere entry in the Classic was an error. What did Paulson/Lukas see in the Met Mile that filled them with optimism? But, I believe the Classic was a slower race than others believe and that a large percentage of the horses failed to fire. (Wide was definitely not the place to be on that track and I believe there was more to it than mere wide.) On her best day with her best style Azeri had a chance, not the way she was ridden though.
What shift your focus to the lucas/paulson
> stategy, maybe they took some speed out of her in the mornings?
You dance with what brung ya.
> stop blaming this on day, with the bad break, she was not
> getting the lead without being used rather hard
Whose job is it to have the horse ready for the break? She needed to be used.
Anyway, enough of this topic. Past races need to be scrutinized for one reason: Future Races.
CtC
ok, it\'s day\'s fault because she broke bad. is there any evidence that day can\'t get a horse out of gate? again, probably not smart to blame day for that either. you are digging yourself deeper and deeper into a losing hole. it\'s best you drop it.
CtC,
I guess I am not making my point. Well, it won\'t be the first time. Anyway, last chance for me, then I move on.
If you think the Classic might have been two points too fast BECAUSE of the pace, it is also likely that the Whitney was a few points too slow because of the pace. If you are going to factor pace in, then do it all the time.
I agree with you on pace in general. I also was at least as impressed with RIM\'s Whitney than I was with the horse\'s Classic, because of the pace factor.
But I do disagree with you that GZ needs things his own way. He closes in sprints, stalks in fast paced routes, and goes to the front in routes when the pace is tepid. I call that tractable and Jerry\'s figures point him out as a very serious race horse.
yea jimbo, i also see GZ as a the real deal. up to 9f, i think he might be as fast or faster than any horse in the history of the game. his BC win was over a very slick surface however, so i think the jury is still out on the 10f distance.
I\'m doing a good job of breaking promises to discontinue threads. But after this post, I promise I\'m done in this thread.
First of all, the reason I am at this site is because I have the GREATEST regard for the type of work that TGraph does. Its Jerry for the most part. I have a sense of his acumen and nine times out of ten when I\'ve bucked his work I\'ve gotten burned. I don\'t follow it day to day. I watch from a Grade I perspective to determine how big he says an effort is. I pay close attention whenever theres doubt between figure makers, if you don\'t give TGraph the benefit of the doubt, you\'re just not in tune with how figures are validated. Knowing how fast a horse ran is of course only one part of puzzle and TGJB excels in that endeavor. I do however have great reservations about Lone Star Park and the Classic. Though, I have more work to do upon it yet. In this game certainty is very elusive even ex post facto. But assuming I\'m wrong again, I\'ll say so when I can tell. To my mind, theres a host of post race factors being revealed which need to be considered in determining just what kind of race the Breeders Cup Classic was.
Wide is never a good place to be, but I think it possible that by the time the Classic was run a double bias existed at Lone Star on Breeders Cup Day. Pace was certainly a factor in that. Thats my theory. With the exception of Kela, anything wide died in the dirt. being near rail and out front was certainly the place to be by the ninth race. I certainly know that its always good to have tactical speed and save ground, but like I said, I think it was more than that.
You know why I haven\'t put this down? It\'s because you have a trainer that admittedly has a horse with significant ability, but he\'s cheating with this horse and thats not the extent of it. Cheating isn\'t good enough for him, he also has to negotiate a pace scenario with his main rival. A couple bad breaks and wide turns and POOF, the juiced horse has no pace issue to deal with and the world thinks he\'s a super horse. Well, we\'ll see about that. When I call the race where GZ goes down, maybe TGJB can change my moniker for me. I\'m thinking something tantamount to \"Chuckles the Magnificent Clown\". If I\'m wrong Jerry can change it to \"Chuckles the Once Again Ever So Much More Humble Clown\".
:)
CtC