TDN Letter to the Editor - Rachel v Zenyatta

[TGJB]

From the Thoroughbred Daily News - 11/13/09

A year ago this week, I was responsible for the purchase of a half-interest in a then relatively unknown two-year-old filly named Rachel Alexandra, an interest that was sold seven months later for an enormous profit. I say this to admit that what follows comes from a source that is not unbiased, but I will try to back up my opinion with some facts. For this comparison, I won\'t even be discussing ability, which is measurable (by me, for a living), but accomplishment, which is what an award like this should be based upon.

I understand that everyone is basking in the afterglow of seeing a great mare complete an undefeated career by beating males. But with all due respect to Bill Oppenheim and others, the idea that Zenyatta should get Horse Of The Year over Rachel Alexandra is just silly, when you actually compare their campaigns. When the voters sit down and do that in the cold light of day, I don\'t believe the vote should or will be close.

This year, before the Breeders\' Cup, Zenyatta started four times. All four starts were at home in California, on synthetic tracks, against small fields of locally based fillies and mares that contained a grand total of one 2009 Grade I winner, Life Is Sweet. So if you are to vote for Zenyatta for HOTY, it is strictly on the basis of the Classic. Well, that race contained exactly two horses that had won Grade Is over synthetic this year (Einstein and Richard\'s Kid), some grass horses, and some dirt horses, which are demonstrably completely out of their element over Pro-Ride (see the last two years of results of main track Breeders\' Cup races). Zenyatta beat them at her game, a game she is very good at. She\'s good on dirt, too, as she proved last year at Oaklawn--but most dirt horses don\'t handle Pro-Ride, which is basically grass, so she had a big advantage last Saturday.

Meanwhile, earlier this year, while Zenyatta was beating up Anabaas Creation, Lethal Heat, Briecat, Allicansayiswow and Dawn After Dawn, who between them have won two overnight stakes (and no graded ones) this year, this is what Rachel was doing:

• Racing eight times, at seven different tracks, winning them all.

• Beating colts three times in Grade I races, and beating older males AS NOT JUST A FILLY, BUT A THREE-YEAR-OLD.

• Beating the horses that in 2009 won the Kentucky Derby, Belmont, Travers, Jockey Club Gold Cup, Test, Stephen Foster, Whitney, New Orleans Handicap, Riva Ridge, Tom Fool, Acorn, Arkansas Derby, Chilukki and Oaklawn Handicap-- most of thosehorses males-- and doing it in every case over dirt, the surface where those horses won their stakes.

• And oh yeah, winning this country\'s premiere race for three-year-old fillies by 20 lengths. Imagine if a colt won the Derby by 20. Imagine anyone winning a GI by 20. They make HBO movies about that kind of thing.


None of this is to be taken as a knock on Zenyatta; she\'s a great mare. But she just wasn\'t asked to do very much this year, while Rachel had arguably the greatest campaign any filly has ever had, at the end of which Rachel\'s connections had the good sense not to run her on (effectively) turf, against a specialist on that surface.

By the way, since it\'s what I do-- best race vs. best race, on Thoro-Graph figures, Rachel is about six lengths faster than Zenyatta at a mile and an eighth. That\'s at level weights, and aside from Rachel being two years younger.

Jerry Brown
President, Thoro-Graph Inc

[Dana666]

As I said before, if I\'m being objective (and not going with my gut emotion), I think it difficult to go against Jerry\'s argument mostly as mentioned above. The only weak aspect to it from my point of view is I would not be so quick to discredit the Breeder\'s Cup Classic. Of course, if you take out the Breeder\'s Cup Classic, Zenyatta gets little or no consideration, and it makes his argument much stronger for Rachel, but I do think you have to weigh that race fairly heavily, and then if you still go for Rachel, I have no problem at all with that decision. It\'s not Zenyatta\'s fault the race was on Pro-ride. If you want to play Devil\'s Advocate, you could argue Rachel needed to go out there and give it a try, too. And I noticed Jerry used my angle of what races did the horses Rachel beat win and that\'s as valid for Rachel as it is for Zenyatta, and Rachel\'s list is fairly impressive, but the logic of saying that most horses don\'t handle pro-ride and Zenyatta does, and turf grade one winners are somehow less classy than dirt grade I winners (which is implied if not stated), so Zen running by Gio Ponti is not as big a deal because he\'s a grass horse - I don\'t buy it. And we\'re still dismissing that Z beat the Big cap and Pacific Classic winners on their best surfaces. If Rachel gets it, it was because of her far more aggressive campaign and her brilliance. I do trust Mike Smith when he says we never got to the bottom of Zenyatta, so we\'ll never really know what she was capable of - had she run in the Woodward, I believe she would have ran by Rachel like Rachel was tied to a post, but conversely one could argue had Rachel run in the Derby instead of the Oaks, she might have won by 10 lengths, so where does that get us? No real fan of racing could honestly complain about Rachel being horse of the year though for me she has not yet come close to doing what Zenyatta has done (in her entire career, not so much this year). I guess we\'ll see where Rachel is at 5, right?

[gatodelsol]

Dana,

It may not be her fault that the race was on Pro-Ride, but the only way to compare their races is to assess the competition they ran against. While the BC Classic victory should not be ignored, you can\'t deny that she basically beat a couple of good turf horses and a bunch of dirt horses (which as a group are something like 0 for 100+ in the last 2 BC\'s) and yes I\'ll say what Jerry implied -- the best turf horses are generally slower than the best dirt horses. As a sheet user you also cannot deny that Rachel has consistently run better figures than Zen.  Mike Smith says she can run faster, but the fact remains that she hasn\'t and HOY voting does not and should not take into account speculation about a horses ability.

That said, the move Zen made down the stretch is one the greatest and most exciting things I\'ve ever witnessed.  But not HOY.

[TGJB]

Dana-- if you say that the races Z won before the BC are meaningless in this context (and they are, considering who was in them), and you want to give her HOTY, what you are saying is that WHOEVER won the Classic should get HOTY.

As I said before, you could make a strong case that Goldikova should be HOTY ahead of Z.

[Dana666]

I\'m basically agreeing with you (especially after you posted the sheets), but just not to the extent that you are minimizing the import of the BC Classic; I think you\'re right overall. It would be a joke to consider Z on the races preceding the BC classic, but the classic puts everything in a new light and does need to be strongly factored in, though probably not enough to surpass Rachel - she did too much at too many different tracks, distances, ages - all that is hard to ignore. I\'m just saying why not admit Z\'s BC Classic was one for the ages but overall Rachel still deserved HOY - that\'s more my point if I\'m being clear. But let\'s just say Z got HOY - you and I know if we\'re honest enough to admit it they voted on her entire career and not just this year - it wouldn\'t be fair exactly but you know it could happen.

[SoCalMan2]

To a certain extent, the HOTY award is a referendum on the management of RA\'s season versus the management of Zenyatta\'s season.  In theory, the award is given in recognition of giving us, the fans, the best exhibition of equine talent in a given year.

If you look at the award from this perspective, a vote for Zenyatta will be encouraging future champions to be campaigned the way Zenyatta was campaigned and would discourage campaigns of they type of Rachel Alexandra\'s.  Putting aside the whole issue of who accomplished more, to me, there is no question I would much prefer the most highly talented horses to be campaigned the way Rachel Alexandra was campaigned.  I feel grateful to Jess Jackson for sharing Rachel with us, the fans, in the way he did.  I found Zenyatta\'s season relatively boring and would prefer not to see good horses campaigned that way.  I would be very afraid that, if Zenyatta wins over Rachel Alexandra, future owners will be encouraged to take very conservative approaches and not really let the best horses out there in a lot of places to really show what they can do.

[Rick B.]

Yo -- HP!

THIS is why we don\'t want to stifle debate on this subject, or time-constrain it like it was a mere bag of microwave popcorn.

TGJB\'s comparisons of Zenyatta\'s and RA\'s accomplishments were compelling enough from a factual standpoint (and should be allowed to be printed and taken into the HOY voting booth), but SoCalMan just nailed the spirit of the thing: let\'s not hide the good horses away all year -- let \'em out. Let \'em breathe. Let them run.

Outstanding commentaries, gentlemen. I would have been mighty proud to have written either one.

[smalltimer]

Jerry,

The fastest horse, the lowest TG number doesn\'t guarantee success, if it were that simple we could all just play the horse with the best patterns and figures and retire tomorrow.  Lots of horses ran this past weekend on their preferred surface and got beat.  

California Flag was billed as tough and playable.  Noble Court and Cannonball were the ones to beat. They ran 3rd and 7th.

Crown of Thorns unsound, more likely to go backwards.  Dancing in Silks 2-3 points needed to contend.  Cost of Freedom, could be now.  ALL the FASTEST horses in that race got beat on their preferred surfaces.

Interactif, fastest turf number ever assigned by TG.  A well-beaten 3rd on his preferred surface.  Bridgetown and Buzzword both ran well as you suggested they would.  Pounced could be used in the exotics.

Lookin at Lucky, no development, should try to beat him.  Aikenite, major player (5th), Aspire has the number power (12th)

Gladiatorus, very, very tough (9th), Goldikova, possible play against. Cowboy Cal, tactical speed and very tough (10th)

Furthest Land, may bounce.  

Conduit, good pattern, not improved, respect.  Monzante, top into exotics, could run a new top (6th in a 7 horse field).

Einstein, serious contender (had trouble, ran 11th).  Gio Ponte, could get a piece and did.  Twice Over, bottom of exotics at best (correct).  Richard\'s Kid, live, on best can win, ran 6th.

My point.  The fastest horses in the DRF, Brisnet, and TG get beat.  They get beat on their preferred surface.  

I really enjoy your methodology and your expertise.  TG is by far the best site with the best cappers and \"thinkers\" I\'ve ever seen, but, if we don\'t subscribe to \"THE NUMBERS ARE ETICHED IN STONE AND INFALLIBLE\" theory, you\'ll be subjecting yourself to a verbal flogging by some members. (Such as what I\'ll presumably be receiving shortly).  With some exceptions, you allow us forum members to really strap it up sometimes and get after each other.  There are always elements of nastiness directed towards and from some of us, but we\'re all big boys and shouldn\'t have to resort personal attacks.  

I was hopeful there would be all kinds of huge success stories from the TG members after big hits over the BC weekend.  Maybe I missed \'em?  If so, I apologize.

The lowest number wins....sometimes, not always.

Thanks

[TGJB]

Small-- selective examples, distortion (I was negative on Conduit?) and pulling out of context aside, what the hell are you talking about? The point I made in my letter was that BASED ON ACCOMPLISHMENT, NOT FIGURES, Rachel should get HOTY. RIGHT???

I didn\'t claim my BC analysis was any good. But if you looked at what we posted, the figures themselves held up very well.

[smalltimer]

JB,
Thanks for the reply.  

You make the point based on accomplishment not figures.
Since \"you used best race vs. best race, on TG figures, Rachel is about 6 lengths faster than Zenyatta at a mile and an eighth.\" How is that comment based on accomplishment and NOT based on figures?

I didn\'t intentionally use selective examples....I could have used the entire seminar verbage.  I was simply saying that the \"fastest\" horse, or the horse with the best \"pattern\", or the horse with the \"best\" numbers get beat a lot.  So the mere appearance that this horse or that horse has the superior figures doesn\'t ensure that the faster figure will beat the slower figure.  When a horse is 2-3 points away from being a contender for the win, the horse should be a throw out not a winner.  (Dancing in Silks).  If that\'s the criteria, then how could anyone assume that \"on paper\" Rachel is a couple points faster than Z and thus would be an automatic winner by 6 lengths?  

I wasn\'t making light of your BC selections.  We all know there are few gimmes on those two days, and s**t happens in a race that get horses beat, even when they have the best pattern or have the best numbers.  I purchased the Sheets and the Seminar because I wanted to try to cover all the bases I could, and I would have felt leery about constructing a wager to make a play in a race without knowing  you had a strong opinion about a horse I wasn\'t using.  Fair enough?  That\'s respect for your methodology and not disrespect.  
There\'s a level of expectation when you\'re using what is believed to be the best data in the industry.  Price is what you pay, value is what you get.
Thanks

[TGJB]

95% of the letter was about accomplishment. I made clear the part about figures was separate (hence \"by the way\"). The letter ran in Thorughbred Daily News, and was intended for a general audience that does not already know the figures, as this one does.

And yes, the fastest horse does not always win. Who suggested otherwise?

[Frost King]

I just find it really quite funny, that a distinction is made between dirt, turf and synthetic accomplishments in horse racing. Do we make the same distinctions when we crown the Super Bowl Champion? Do we note the difference between natural field teams and turf teams? Who ever shows up to the year end dance, and wins the big prize is crowned the champion. Why should it not be any different for horse racing? I have yet to hear, that the Super Bowl Champion was the best Artificial Turf team this year, and that is why they won.

[FrankD.]

JB,

Your making a generous assumption that this venue is full of those that can interpret a sheet ?

Sounds more like many should be purchasing the wizard or lawton  as they want to be touted as to who is going to win a race. Quite frankly I\'m shocked at many of the opinions voiced here this past week on a \" numbers web-site \"???

General consensus among those that I spoke with and use sheets on a daily basis was the BC Classic was among Colonel John, Zenyatta, Einstein & Richards Kid and a 0 to a negative 1 would win the race. Let\'s remember that Z was a 5/2 favorite in the race and was not Upset beating Man O\' War.

As for the seminar and the interpreting there of:
Cloudy\'s Knight $ 7.40 place, $ 450.00 tri with the 7/5 favorite and the 3rd choice.

Rose Catherine $ 6.80 place

Beautican $ 9.40 place and a $ cold $ 144.00 exacta with She be Wild and a $ 814.00 tri with Blind Luck the favorite.

Pounced, Bridgetown & Interactif a $ 180.00 tri.

Conduit & Precious Passion a $ 25.00 exacta.

Not exactly a cup crushing weekend but a modest profit on the toughest betting card year in and year out.

Too bad a bet like a Sheila on the pro-ride races because 9/1 on Beautican should have been a 3 zero win/place bet and a huge exacta with Catalano. But I don\'t bet like that on plastic !

[FrankD.]

Dana,

If Zenyatta was ever going to run by Rachel \" like she was tied to a post \" that was the day to do it.

Rachel was making her 8th start of the year on her 7th race track. It was her 5th race in 128 days at 5 different tracks and her 3rd Grade 1 in that time frame against the boy\'s.

Too bad Zenyatta was still in California and had raced 3 times as of September 5th ?

[P-Dub]

Well written Jerry, but as most of us have done in this debate, we can shape information to sound the way we want them to:

- Your list of stakes races won by horses that Rachel has defeated is no less impressive than the ones used to describe Zenyatta\'s opponents.

- Beating colts 3 times and older males. How good were they?? If you want to downgrade Zenyatta\'s opponents, and you certainly have that right, then I wouldn\'t in the next breath talk about the older colts (Macho Again and Bullsbay) without mentioning who they were. Decent older colts, but I wouldn\'t mistake them for Criminal Type. The Preakness, breaking from the outside was outstanding, but fortunately for her that crop of 3 YOs was pretty average. They have come back to do not a whole lot. She held off Mine That Bird who some around here have labeled as a glorified claimer. The Haskell was a good race, helped quite a bit by track and surface bias. She beat a quality horse in Summer Bird, the rest of that field wasn\'t much (Munnings is a sprinter). You can\'t have it both ways, discounting Zenyatta\'s opponents but not a mention of horses RA defeated.

- You say she\'s 6 lengths faster at 1 1/8 on their best. Zenyatta raced exactly 1 time on dirt. Synthetics have slower numbers than dirt. Not exactly a fair sample of races to choose from.

The point is this, if you are going to discuss the races of Zenyatta by downgrading her competition/talking about surfaces/etc.., then you should also discuss the horses Rachel raced against, and I\'m not talking generalities like naming stakes races or using generic terms like older colts and GR 1. She accomplished a lot, but a lot of it was under very favorable circumstances.

If Rachel wins, thats fine. She ran a great campaign, dominant in some races. The Preakness had me out of my chair rooting for her, similar to how I felt watching the Classic. Everytime she ran was must see racing. However,to say it is silly to even debate it ..that is silly.  Like it or not, the BC Classic is one of the biggest races of the year, no matter how many people around here want to diminish it. Before the race, its a great field. After the race, people want to make excuse after excuse as to why horses didn\'t fire and I\'m not talking just the dirt horses. Zenyatta didn\'t choose to have it run on Pro-Ride.

Rachel would make a deserving HOY, she is obviously a tremendous racehorse. She won several top races this year. She won more \"top\" races than Zenyatta. However, Zenyatta won the biggest and that has to count for something. I prefer Zenyatta. But its not silly to debate.