7/2-4 (BEL): Suburban/Dwyer; Futurity/Matron/Bed o' Roses; Prioress

[DaTruth]

Glad to see Flat Out finally win a major stakes race. I've been following him since his maiden win at Fair Grounds over Country Day. It looked like he might be a player in the Fair Grounds/Oaklawn handicap division this year after his win off a nearly 19 month break, but then he went back on the shelf. DRF reports that he cracked a shoulder after the Arky Derby, and has been dealing with quarter cracks. Hope his connections can keep him together the rest of the year.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

Yeah, I just saw his PPs. Ran evenly in the Arkansas Derby (off a late running 4th to Old Fashioned in the Southwest) before disappearing for a year and a half. Crushed a Fair Grounds allowance comeback in December, then disappeared for another 5 months, returning with a second in the Lone Star Handicap. He was beaten less than 3 lengths in the Stephen Foster.

Yep. I thought his race in the Arkansas Derby was better than it appeared to be to most people. I never did read or find out what happened to him all this time. He just disappeared without me ever having seen a write up on him.

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Yep. I thought his race in the Arkansas Derby was better than it appeared to be to most people. I never did read or find out what happened to him all this time. He just disappeared without me ever having seen a write up on him.

the ark derby was better than it appeared/really

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead

the ark derby was better than it appeared/really

Flat Out, his performance, was better than it appeared to be either on paper, or going by what people said about it, at the time.

Is that better said?

[PatCummings]

I played Flat Out in the Foster and basically just forgot to yesterday. My loss. But the reason I was really on to him had to do with the interview Steve had with Brian Pochman from Lone Star before their big race.

Pochman revealed that every Kentucky horseman he talked to before the LSP Hcp asked whether or not Flat Out was coming to the race. He found that so odd because Flat Out, at that point, was just an allowance winner off a long layoff, and that it was somewhat indicative that this horse had been looking really solid in the mornings at Churchill.

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by PatCummings

Pochman revealed that every Kentucky horseman he talked to before the LSP Hcp asked whether or not Flat Out was coming to the race. He found that so odd because Flat Out, at that point, was just an allowance winner off a long layoff, and that it was somewhat indicative that this horse had been looking really solid in the mornings at Churchill.

I would say it had very little at all to do with how Flat Out was training.

I would think the reason (any sharp Kentucky) horsemen (with at least one halfway ok horse) most likely wanted to know if FO was going to Lone Star - was because the Lone Star Park Handicap had a 300K purse, Graded status, and handicap conditions ... and it only ended up as a field of five with Flat Out.

If Flat Out doesn't go - it's a field of four and becomes a very attractive spot to run.

[PatCummings]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

I would say it had very little at all to do with how Flat Out was training.

I would think the reason (any sharp Kentucky) horsemen (with at least one halfway ok horse) most likely wanted to know if FO was going to Lone Star - was because the Lone Star Park Handicap had a 300K purse, Graded status, and handicap conditions ... and it only ended up as a field of five with Flat Out.

If Flat Out doesn't go - it's a field of four and becomes a very attractive spot to run.

And it's not an attractive place to run with five horses, one of whom is coming off a five month layoff, preceded by a 19-month layoff? Bull. How many times are trainers, with horses good enough to be considered for a $300k G3, worried enough that several of them ask specifically about the plans of a horse who has done nothing but win a $50,000 3YO stake in January 2009 and a non-descript allowance event at the Fair Grounds in December 2010?

[Calzone Lord]

You're not making a lot of sense here, Pat.

A competent trainer is one who pays a great deal of care in placing his horses and finding the best spots possible. To do this, you need to worry a lot about who is going where.

If I had an older alw quality horse nominated - and I was interested in taking a shot in a 300K handicap that might only draw three or four other horses - sure, I'd be calling every jockey agent, every turf writer I can think of asking about Flat Out or any other similar contender.

If every trainer was so affraid of running against Flat Out because he was supposedly working so good - why didn't all of these trainer and clockers bother to bet him?

When I was winning those fantasy contests, once a week I would call up trainers and ask them what spots they were considering for a certain specific horse. You can't even manage a friggen fantasy stable properly without knowing who is going where and how tough it might be to finish 3rd.

[PatCummings]

Think what want to think, Doug. Maybe we will disagree here regardless

[JJP]

Not sure how the Prioress has managed to maintain its Grade 1 status. Other than Indian Blessing, the roster of winners over the past 10 years or so is quite forgettable.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by JJP

Not sure how the Prioress has managed to maintain its Grade 1 status. Other than Indian Blessing, the roster of winners over the past 10 years or so is quite forgettable.

Carson Hallow and Xtra Heat ( and even Dream Rush ) not included of course.

If you want to debate this, fine, but a little honesty never hurts.

[JJP]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Carson Hallow and Xtra Heat ( and even Dream Rush ) not included of course.

If you want to debate this, fine, but a little honesty never hurts.

OK you got me. The winners of the 2001 and 2002 Prioress were good horses. I guess I should've specified since 2003. Here's the roster of winners since 2003:

2003: House Party
2004: Friendly Michelle
2005: Acey Deucey
2006: Wildcat Bettie B
2007: Dream Rush
2008: Indian Blessing
2009: Cat Moves
2010: Fanny Freud
2011: Her Smile

Like I said earlier, Indian Blessing is a legit Grade 1 horse. Dream Rush? Maybe on her best day. None of the others were worthy of the inflated Grade 1 rating this race has somehow managed to keep. THAT is the truth.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by JJP

OK you got me. The winners of the 2001 and 2002 Prioress were good horses. I guess I should've specified since 2003. Here's the roster of winners since 2003:

2003: House Party
2004: Friendly Michelle
2005: Acey Deucey
2006: Wildcat Bettie B
2007: Dream Rush
2008: Indian Blessing
2009: Cat Moves
2010: Fanny Freud
2011: Her Smile

Like I said earlier, Indian Blessing is a legit Grade 1 horse. Dream Rush? Maybe on her best day. None of the others were worthy of the inflated Grade 1 rating this race has somehow managed to keep. THAT is the truth.

To be fair, Dream Rush was very good, Fanny Freud as well ( don't forget she got hurt after the race and was retired but her resume holds up just fine for this to be a Grade 1..and Acorn/Test winner Champagne D'Oro was in there as well ). I don't have the complete fields, or all the race records, but overall, if you did a fair evaluation, this race holds up OK in that division.

The Gradings system is far from perfect, and there are many races that deserve reevaluation, but considering it is the only 6F Grade 1 for this division, I think it's grading is relatively warranted, if not moreso. What about the slew of synthetic races that got their Gradings when they were dirt races? Is the Spinster a better Grade 1, or worse, than the Prioress, since the switch in surfaces?

Simply put, you can't fairly cherry pick. The discussion needs to be had in its entirety. I am not saying I am against a serious regrading of US races. But, this race always draws these kinds of comments, and they are not as defendable as it may seem on the surface, and the Grading is far more justifiable than any number of annual races.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

The Gradings system is far from perfect, and there are many races that deserve reevaluation, but considering it is the only 6F Grade 1 for this division, I think it's grading is relatively warranted, if not moreso. What about the slew of synthetic races that got their Gradings when they were dirt races? Is the Spinster a better Grade 1, or worse, than the Prioress, since the switch in surfaces?

Simply put, you can't fairly cherry pick. The discussion needs to be had in its entirety. I am not saying I am against a serious regrading of US races. But, this race always draws these kinds of comments, and they are not as defendable as it may seem on the surface, and the Grading is far more justifiable than any number of annual races.

Before disagreeing with you on the grading of the Prioress, just wanted to say that the MSG show for the race on Monday was excellent. The new pair of Maggie Wolfendale and Mig brought a lot to the telecast, and your analysis of the race was spot on. Looking forward to this week's Man 'O War telecast.

I get the argument about relative merits, but if you compare the depth of the Prioress to races like the Test or the La Brea (the other grade I sprints for 3YO fillies), the Prioress annually seems to come up short of those two. Perhaps this is unfair, but the Prioress is more often like a prep for the Test than an "end" in itself, and I'm dubious of preps being Grade Is (i.e., when they made the Fountain of Youth a Grade I for a short period of time a few years ago even though it's a prep for the Florida Derby). Not that this year is the best example, but the other thing that has hurt the Prioress in many years is its close proximity to the Azalea at Calder. Both races feed the Test nicely, but they also dilute each other.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

I get the argument about relative merits, but if you compare the depth of the Prioress to races like the Test or the La Brea (the other grade I sprints for 3YO fillies), the Prioress annually seems to come up short of those two. Perhaps this is unfair, but the Prioress is more often like a prep for the Test than an "end" in itself, and I'm dubious of preps being Grade Is (i.e., when they made the Fountain of Youth a Grade I for a short period of time a few years ago even though it's a prep for the Florida Derby). Not that this year is the best example, but the other thing that has hurt the Prioress in many years is its close proximity to the Azalea at Calder. Both races feed the Test nicely, but they also dilute each other.

I wouldn't agree that the Prioress is merely a "prep" for the Test. I don't think, generally speaking, horses, particularly sprinters, are really prepping from one race to the next in midseason. In the realm of strictly 3yo filly sprinters (which is by no means some mother lode of great racing talent) it lays a decent enough claim to its Grade 1 ranking. The last 4 runnings of the Prioress have produced at least one subsequent Grade 1 winner each. In several of the last few runnings, there has been at least one previous Grade 1 winner entered in the race. That's no mean feat when you mention that there are only a couple of Grade 1 races for the 3yo sprint division to begin with.

If the Test and the La Brea are drawing better fields a big part of it is the 7f distance each race is carded at. That will draw in several route types on top of the sprint population. The La Brea also has calendar position over the Prioress, being late in the year so that it draws in a lot of well meant comebackers, a few late bloomers, and also has the benefit of an extra 5 months whereby some horses that weren't accomplished around the time of the Prioress, suddenly are major stakes winners.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

I wouldn't agree that the Prioress is merely a "prep" for the Test. I don't think, generally speaking, horses, particularly sprinters, are really prepping from one race to the next in midseason. In the realm of strictly 3yo filly sprinters (which is by no means some mother lode of great racing talent) it lays a decent enough claim to its Grade 1 ranking. The last 4 runnings of the Prioress have produced at least one subsequent Grade 1 winner each. In several of the last few runnings, there has been at least one previous Grade 1 winner entered in the race. That's no mean feat when you mention that there are only a couple of Grade 1 races for the 3yo sprint division to begin with.

It's not "merely a prep" for the Test, but when how often do you hear connections say that they are pointing to the Prioress? If you look at horses like Fanny Freud and Dream Rush, their connections had stated that they were pointing to the Test, and the Prioress was the bridge to get them there.

Maybe it's just a matter of how you view "Grade I" racing. To me, Grade I ratings should be reserved solely for "championship" quality races. (There are far too many that have the designation these days, but that's another discussion.) While the Test has generally had deep fields worthy of the designation, the Prioress has often not had fields of similar depth or quality. It's not to say that the Prioress is a "bad" race, I just don't believe it's worthy of a Grade I designation.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

It's not "merely a prep" for the Test, but when how often do you hear connections say that they are pointing to the Prioress? If you look at horses like Fanny Freud and Dream Rush, their connections had stated that they were pointing to the Test, and the Prioress was the bridge to get them there.

Maybe it's just a matter of how you view "Grade I" racing. To me, Grade I ratings should be reserved solely for "championship" quality races. (There are far too many that have the designation these days, but that's another discussion.) While the Test has generally had deep fields worthy of the designation, the Prioress has often not had fields of similar depth or quality. It's not to say that the Prioress is a "bad" race, I just don't believe it's worthy of a Grade I designation.

Breeders like selling G1 winners, what does quality have to do with a good sales pitch?

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

It's not "merely a prep" for the Test, but when how often do you hear connections say that they are pointing to the Prioress? If you look at horses like Fanny Freud and Dream Rush, their connections had stated that they were pointing to the Test, and the Prioress was the bridge to get them there.

I wouldn't argue with the Test being the most important race of the year for 3yo filly sprinters, and one of the biggest for any 3yo filly in this country (thinking back to when horses like Go For Wand, Versailles Treaty, Heavenly Prize, etc contested the race).

But that doesn't mean there's some sort of Derby trail-like road to get them to the race. It's a 7 furlong sprint. I think its safe to say for the most part that horses that run in races like the Acorn, Prioress, Azalea, etc. before the Test, are in those races to win. In addition, since most of the same horses shows up from race to race within the division, you have to think that all the Grade 1 races in a given division are affected.

If the Prioress has been weak for years now, then I'd presume that the Test itself hasn't been so hot, either.

Where's the list of the last 10 Test winners? We already know that a good chunk of them were Prioress winners, too.

While the Test has generally had deep fields worthy of the designation, the Prioress has often not had fields of similar depth or quality. It's not to say that the Prioress is a "bad" race, I just don't believe it's worthy of a Grade I designation.

Well, the Prioress was only made a Grade 1 about 10 years ago so it must have been doing something right to get that far. With the shift in NYRA stakes recently essentially ending the Triple Tiara of old, the Acorn has taken a more prominent role in the 3yo filly sprint ranks. Since the Prioress sits between that prestigious race and the Test, I think its possible that the Prioress will grow stronger over time. Like I said, it's at least maintaining a "one Grade 1 winner" quota for the last several runnings. They might have to change the distances to make them more logical.

[JJP]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

To be fair, Dream Rush was very good, Fanny Freud as well ( don't forget she got hurt after the race and was retired but her resume holds up just fine for this to be a Grade 1..and Acorn/Test winner Champagne D'Oro was in there as well ). I don't have the complete fields, or all the race records, but overall, if you did a fair evaluation, this race holds up OK in that division.

The Gradings system is far from perfect, and there are many races that deserve reevaluation, but considering it is the only 6F Grade 1 for this division, I think it's grading is relatively warranted, if not moreso. What about the slew of synthetic races that got their Gradings when they were dirt races? Is the Spinster a better Grade 1, or worse, than the Prioress, since the switch in surfaces?

Simply put, you can't fairly cherry pick. The discussion needs to be had in its entirety. I am not saying I am against a serious regrading of US races. But, this race always draws these kinds of comments, and they are not as defendable as it may seem on the surface, and the Grading is far more justifiable than any number of annual races.

I agree 100% re: the synthetic races. The Blue Grass has become a joke. Maybe it looked like I was picking on the Prioress (which I am) but it isn't the only one. But it is a prime example of how the Graded Stakes committee appears to be asleep at the wheel. And when those Kee races are run again, this point will probably be revisited.

[Indian Charlie]

All this talk about downgrading g1s is pointless right now, because due to the lack of quality horses lately, there really aren't many grade 1 caliber races being run anywhere in the USA.

And by the word 'many', I'm being generous.