3 year old filly Eclipse?

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

You make an interesting point. Honestly, I try and stay away from the eclipse stuff, because it's a popularity contest IMO. I just disagree that Indian Blessing is far and away the top 3 year old filly this year. I'm not sure who is, and unfortunately we'll probably never know. But I do know that Zaftig beat Indian Blessing rather soundly, in a race Indian Blessing had a pace advantage in.

I believe IB is the best but I won't disagree with anyone that has a different opinion and definitely won't argue with anyone that doesn't agree that it's clear cut. It certainly isn't. If I had a vote, I think the way that I would vote would be for the horse that I thought was the best combination of most accomplished and best. I think that IB best combines what I'd look for.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

But isn't one of the giant problems in the game today the BC? Why should so much ride on one race?

If you compare it with other sports - It would be like saying "why should so much ride on one game?"

The Patriots had a much better overall season than the Giants last year - but the championship basically all boiled down to one game in Arizona.

I don't have a problem with the concept of the Breeders Cup at all - and the only people who seem to are the people who were around before the Breeders Cup started in '84.

The idea of having these great field of dirt horses compete over synthetic surfaces that are atleast as much like turf as they are dirt doesn't sit well with me.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

It was meant as a day to decide championships that were up for grabs between horses from all different parts of the country who otherwise wouldn't likely meet.

It's not like the Super Bowl in that the winner is going to be the champion - but - if a championship isn't clinched - as it isn't in the 3yo filly division - it becomes like the Super Bowl in a way - because the championship will be won based on what happens that day.

It's also ALWAYS the best betting day of the entire year because of big fields loaded top to bottom with great quality.

[Betsy]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

Wasn't she merely a length away from Proud Spell for most of the backstretch, drafting in behind in the garden spot, much as a sharp-witted cyclist would?

Seriously, though, in terms of pace, I agree that she wasn't the beneficiary. By race setup I meant more that her stablemate, Little Belle, who is at least of listed stake calibur, was sent out to basically tease Proud Spell (perhaps baiting that one into dueling or a premature move to the lead). Meanwhile, Music Note could just stalk Proud Spell (her only real rival) and pounce when necessary. All this with the race contested at 10f, perhaps the biggest advantage any entrant in the race enjoyed.

Certainly she's not outclassed by Proud Spell and maybe, having been untested up to that point, she will be more "battle hardened" next time she locks horns with a comparable rival.

However, replaying the Alabama just now I did kind of overstate how easily she cruised up to Proud Spell at the 1/8th pole. Seems like she might have that other AP Indy flaw we've seen in some of his other horses (most notably AP Adventure). When the real running started around the far turn, Music Note got left about 2 lengths by Proud Spell despite being under a bit of a drive from Castellano. Only once they straightened up did it look like she would inhale Proud Spell. Perhaps that's what took some of the edge off her finish.

She might be, like Easy Goer, a Belmont horse.

Again, I'm going to bypass your comments about all of AP Indy's flaws as a sire because I just don't know where you are coming from here. The Alabama was not MN's best race, IMO and in the opinion of her connections. In this race, she didn't cruise up as she normally (and willingly does - do not compare her to AP Adventure, who was no good) does. She had to work a bit. This was in part because her CCA apparently took something out of her (her workout at Greentree center in Saratoga wasn't that good and you'll note that I posted about that here at the time; also, read the Blood Horse's recap of the Gazelle. They wanted Javier to wrap up on the filly because he had let her run a huge race in the Oaks and that took some starch out of her in the Alabama).

I've never understood why MN or any horse gets penalized by fans for having some sort of "advantage" at a greater distance. I can understand if one horse is carring 10 lbs fewer than another, but in this case, any advantage MN has is genetic. In any case, if LB was supposed to be some sort of rabbit, she (or rather Maragh, her jock) did a lousy job. Instead of setting racehorse fractions (I'm not asking for blazing, just even ordinary), he decided to strangle LB and set trotting horse fractions.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

I agree about the surface thing. But isn't one of the giant problems in the game today the BC? Why should so much ride on one race?

Absolutely NOT. The BC is not a problem of the game today. It wasn't a problem in previous years when trainers actually ran their horses in other races throughout the year AND ran in the BC. The problem is the way people train and race their horses these days. It's not the BC's fault that trainers like Dutrow don't want to run Kip Deville only 4-5 times in a year or that trainers like Frankel decide that they need to have their last prep in August or early September. Don't blame the BC for that. Also, don't blame the BC for the way Eclipse voters decide to vote. It's not the BC's fault that the top horses get together so infrequently during the year that the BC is often the only place they will meet each other. The concept of the BC was to bring together all of the best horses in each division for a championship day of racing and that's still what it does now. Well, two days but you get the point. If Curlin and Commentator do indeed run in the BC and they face Big Brown and Henrythenavigator, New Approach and Duke of Marmalade......where else outside of the Bc could you ever hope to have that kind of race? There are many problems in the sport. The BC is not one of them.

[RolloTomasi]

Again, I'm going to bypass your comments about all of AP Indy's flaws as a sire because I just don't know where you are coming from here.

Aside from his undesirable racehorse characteristics, A.P. Indy has one of the worst "unsoundnesses" a stallion can have from a purist's perspective. His genitalia are flawed. He has one testicle. Both he and many of his sons (entire or not) pass on this trait at a high incidence. Some of his male offspring have even been near sterile (eg AP Valentine). Thankfully, artificial insemination is not allowed with Thoroughbreds, otherwise, were he to become an overwhelmingly dominant sire, the breed would be headed towards infertility. I suppose the endpoint would be something similar to a mule...

The Alabama was not MN's best race, IMO and in the opinion of her connections. In this race, she didn't cruise up as she normally (and willingly does - do not compare her to AP Adventure, who was no good) does. She had to work a bit.

Based on Proud Spell leaving her high and dry at the 1/4 pole, I'm gonna hold out and say that she doesn't have the turn speed of a more agile horse, something we've seen a lot of with AP Indy horses, particularly the plodding type.

This was in part because her CCA apparently took something out of her (her workout at Greentree center in Saratoga wasn't that good and you'll note that I posted about that here at the time; also, read the Blood Horse's recap of the Gazelle. They wanted Javier to wrap up on the filly because he had let her run a huge race in the Oaks and that took some starch out of her in the Alabama).

She had a month in between races. She ran her race at Saratoga. She just finally ran into a good horse that wasn't compromised by racing luck. Castellano had a ton of horse when he pulled alongside Proud Spell. The CCA Oaks didn't take the starch out of Music Note (for 4 straight weeks?) down the lane...Proud Spell sticking her neck out and locking horns with her did...

I've never understood why MN or any horse gets penalized by fans for having some sort of "advantage" at a greater distance. I can understand if one horse is carring 10 lbs fewer than another, but in this case, any advantage MN has is genetic.

That wasn't the point. We all know Music Note probably prefers more ground than Proud Spell. That's what makes Music Note's loss to that one, at her preferred distance, all the more definitive.

In any case, if LB was supposed to be some sort of rabbit, she (or rather Maragh, her jock) did a lousy job. Instead of setting racehorse fractions (I'm not asking for blazing, just even ordinary), he decided to strangle LB and set trotting horse fractions.

As I said in the other post, I don't think she was suppose to go rocketing out of there. Music Note hasn't up to this point shown any sort of reliance on the early fractions of a race (at least as a 3yo), so I don't think that was an issue. But its possible that Little Belle was in there to hound Proud Spell and in particular Proud Spell's jockey, who has been called out more than once for being a bit green at this stage of his career. Maybe she was just in there because it was another slam-dunk, ho-hum Grade 1 placing that enhances her value. Either way, it didn't do Proud Spell any favors having to put that one away after soft fractions and then have to brace herself for the stablemate that was laying in wait throughout.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

It's not the BC's fault that the top horses get together so infrequently during the year that the BC is often the only place they will meet each other. The BC is not one of them.

With the advent of all these BC-sponsored races, BC Preview Days, and various "preps" designed to give individual stars an easy race heading into the big day, isn't the BC (directly or not) at least partially responsible for diluting all the big horses so that they can avoid each other throughout the year?

Not to mention a big reason why trainers campaign their horses the way they do nowadays is because they have the BC as the ultimate goal. That's why you got guys like Ron Ellis and Bobby Frankel telling you about how they're gonna get such and such a horse to the BC after it wins a Grade 2 at Santa Anita in February.

[Cannon Shell]

AP Indy passes on undesirable racetrack characteristics? Is winning a shtload of stakes now considered bad? He has something like 12% stakes winners in an era where 6% is considered good. Not to mention he is a very good broodmare sire.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

AP Indy passes on undesirable racetrack characteristics? Is winning a shtload of stakes now considered bad? He has something like 12% stakes winners in an era where 6% is considered good. Not to mention he is a very good broodmare sire.

That part was supposed to be tongue-in-cheek. Betsy kept mentioning that she wouldn't address all the flaws in his offspring that I was pointing out.

I figured the testicle thing would be the coup d'grace...

For what its worth, I always thought that a lot of his horses never realize the promise they show in their maiden and allowance races, even if they do go on to become stakes winners.

[King Glorious]

If the BC is the reason for trainers designing schedules the way they do now, why wasn't that the case from it's inception? People used to train horses and run in the big races and still make the BC. Somewhere along the line, that's changed. Back in 1987, Alysheba, Bet Twice, and Lost Code got together for the Haskell. Java Gold, Gulch, and Broad Brush met in the Whitney. A few weeks later, Alysheba, Bet Twice, Java Gold, Cryptoclearance, Gulch, Polish Navy, and Temperate Sil all got together for the Travers. Polish Navy met Bet Twice again in the Woodward. Java Gold went in the Marlboro Cup and the JCGC. The horses kept on facing each other in the late summer and fall and this was with the BC on the schedule. These days, that wouldn't happen. Some of those horses would instead go in the Jim Dandy. Some would go in the WV Derby. Some would go in the Penn Derby. Some might have gone to try the turf since they have those big purse races in Virginia. Some would just skip races in order to be fresh for the BC. I don't see how the BC can be blamed for the way that people think. I remember a time when it was common to run a 2yo 5-6 times and then have a 3-5 race prep season before the Kentucky Derby. But somewhere along the way, ideas have changed. It's not uncommon to see trainers give their horses 2-3 races as 2yo's and then only two races as at three before trying the Derby. Smarty won the Derby in his 7th start. How many had Barbaro had before the Derby? How many had Curlin had? How many had Big Brown had? Does anyone blame the Derby for the changes in training and racing philosophy? No. So why blame the BC? The main concept of the BC has not changed. It's the training and racing philosophy that has.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

If the BC is the reason for trainers designing schedules the way they do now, why wasn't that the case from it's inception? People used to train horses and run in the big races and still make the BC. Somewhere along the line, that's changed. Back in 1987, Alysheba, Bet Twice, and Lost Code got together for the Haskell. Java Gold, Gulch, and Broad Brush met in the Whitney. A few weeks later, Alysheba, Bet Twice, Java Gold, Cryptoclearance, Gulch, Polish Navy, and Temperate Sil all got together for the Travers. Polish Navy met Bet Twice again in the Woodward. Java Gold went in the Marlboro Cup and the JCGC. The horses kept on facing each other in the late summer and fall and this was with the BC on the schedule. These days, that wouldn't happen. Some of those horses would instead go in the Jim Dandy. Some would go in the WV Derby. Some would go in the Penn Derby. Some might have gone to try the turf since they have those big purse races in Virginia. Some would just skip races in order to be fresh for the BC. I don't see how the BC can be blamed for the way that people think. I remember a time when it was common to run a 2yo 5-6 times and then have a 3-5 race prep season before the Kentucky Derby. But somewhere along the way, ideas have changed. It's not uncommon to see trainers give their horses 2-3 races as 2yo's and then only two races as at three before trying the Derby. Smarty won the Derby in his 7th start. How many had Barbaro had before the Derby? How many had Curlin had? How many had Big Brown had? Does anyone blame the Derby for the changes in training and racing philosophy? No. So why blame the BC? The main concept of the BC has not changed. It's the training and racing philosophy that has.

1987 was one of the greatest 3yo crops of modern time. There were so many good horses, they had to face each other. In fact, they made short work of all the 3yo and up races, too (Polish Navy, part of the lower echelon of the division, took down the Woodward). Using that group as a basis for your argument is preposterous.

The Penn and West Viriginia Derbies also didn't have $750,000 purses back then, either.

As far as the Derby goes, a lot of what you spoke of has to do with the race being a great "waster" of horses, meaning that a lot of horses don't come out the other end after the classics. Trainers with a good 3yo nowadays rightly or wrongly are probably looking beyond the Derby (maybe towards the BC?) and thus make adjustments.

The BC, on the other hand, is a great "waster" of races...

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

1987 was one of the greatest 3yo crops of modern time. There were so many good horses, they had to face each other. In fact, they made short work of all the 3yo and up races, too (Polish Navy, part of the lower echelon of the division, took down the Woodward). Using that group as a basis for your argument is preposterous.

The Penn and West Viriginia Derbies also didn't have $750,000 purses back then, either.

As far as the Derby goes, a lot of what you spoke of has to do with the race being a great "waster" of horses, meaning that a lot of horses don't come out the other end after the classics. Trainers with a good 3yo nowadays rightly or wrongly are probably looking beyond the Derby (maybe towards the BC?) and thus make adjustments.

The BC, on the other hand, is a great "waster" of races...

Your are sort of making the point for me. The Penn and WV Derbies are options that weren't there before. At least not real options for top horses. Add in the Indiana Derby and some other races.......there are just more options nowdays for top horses to avoid each other. That's not the fault of the BC that they avoid each other so much that the BC is one of the rare chances to get them all together and thus, a lot of emphasis is placed on the BC results when it comes to time for voting for championships.

Getting back to the Derby, I think that you are avoiding the question. The question is since so much has changed in the way people prepare for the Derby, why aren't people blaming the Derby? The answer is because the Derby hasn't changed. It's been the first Saturday in May for the longest and the only thing that's changed is the way people prepare for it. Same with the BC.

[SniperSB23]

The BC is far from perfect but does anyone actually think we would have ever seen Bernardini, Invasor, and Lava Man face off a couple years ago if it wasn't for the BC? Bernardini would have been retired as HOY after the JCGC and all the Lava Man supporters would still be claiming he was best. Invasor would have gone on the shelf after the Whitney to rest up for his campaign in Dubai the following spring. If you have a top 3yo, and a top older horse on each coast they will find ways to duck each other without the BC, especially with all the superowners (and supertrainers) out there that will never run their horses against each other in anything but the BC.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Your are sort of making the point for me. The Penn and WV Derbies are options that weren't there before. At least not real options for top horses. Add in the Indiana Derby and some other races.......there are just more options nowdays for top horses to avoid each other. That's not the fault of the BC that they avoid each other so much that the BC is one of the rare chances to get them all together and thus, a lot of emphasis is placed on the BC results when it comes to time for voting for championships.

Getting back to the Derby, I think that you are avoiding the question. The question is since so much has changed in the way people prepare for the Derby, why aren't people blaming the Derby? The answer is because the Derby hasn't changed. It's been the first Saturday in May for the longest and the only thing that's changed is the way people prepare for it. Same with the BC.

Well what I was getting at in an earlier post, and perhaps this doesn't make sense as far as those specific 3yo races you mentioned go, was that all these "new" trumped up races are created with the BC in mind so that horses can get to the BC by following a path of least resistance.

And as far as the Derby goes, I didn't avoid the question. People do blame the Derby. The Derby trail (not necessarily the actual race--Eight Belles was the first horse to break down in it in a while) trashes horses. That's why the training/campaigning has been altered, but not the race itself. Its been around for well over a hundred years, not twenty.

The BC is not in the same boat. The Derby is just one part of the season (and traditionally the pinnacle), with many other prestigious races (from every division) taking the spotlight at various times throughout the year. The BC tries to drown all that out (once again, indirectly) and compress the entire season into a single day of racing, to the detriment of all those other historic races which ultimately become moot in the grand scheme of things.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

The BC is far from perfect but does anyone actually think we would have ever seen Bernardini, Invasor, and Lava Man face off a couple years ago if it wasn't for the BC? Bernardini would have been retired as HOY after the JCGC and all the Lava Man supporters would still be claiming he was best. Invasor would have gone on the shelf after the Whitney to rest up for his campaign in Dubai the following spring. If you have a top 3yo, and a top older horse on each coast they will find ways to duck each other without the BC, especially with all the superowners (and supertrainers) out there that will never run their horses against each other in anything but the BC.

Actually, back in the day, without the BC and with the Belmont Fall Championship meet being the lynchpin of the year, you might have seen those 3 horses hook up not only once, but possibly 3 times (in the Woodward, Marlboro Cup, and Jockey Club Gold Cup).

Then we might not have to speculate if Bernardini was truly a typical, gutless, overrated AP Indy.

We would have known for sure...with 3 straight, non-threatening 2nds.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

Actually, back in the day, without the BC and with the Belmont Fall Championship meet being the lynchpin of the year, you might have seen those 3 horses hook up not only once, but possibly 3 times (in the Woodward, Marlboro Cup, and Jockey Club Gold Cup).

Then we might not have to speculate if Bernardini was truly a typical, gutless, overrated AP Indy.

We would have known for sure...with 3 straight, non-threatening 2nds.

Do you honestly believe that would still happen if there was no BC? I sure as hell don't.

[zippyneedsawin]

Originally Posted by hrfan

It was not clear cut to me either, but with Proud Spell's loss, i feel shes all but lossed it, especially if she does not race again this year... If Music Note wins the Lady's Classic its her's, if she does not and Indian Blessing wins her sprint race i think its her's, if they both win, i think it goes to Music Note because she will be beating a champion and Zenyatta, if they both lose i think it comes back to Indian Blessing

I don't think you could be more wrong here. It's still Proud Spell's as of now unless Music Note or Indian Blessing wins a BC race. It's not lost.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Why not? Pretend the BC, after years of bad decisions decided to fold. I know it will never happen, but since we're all playing the what if game, bear with me. You don't think a greater emphasis would be placed on races like the Woodward and JCGC? Before we were born they were the championship races and now with the BC they are mere preps. I'm not saying the BC is all bad. But IMO it's importance is far too great. I think it should be the other way around. I understand what the point of it was, but I think it's outdated and it has grown into something it shouldn't.

Cause too many divisions have top horses with the same owners and/or same trainers. The BC is the only day where the purses are high enough that they'll actually run against each other. Plus with the Cali races, including the Goodwood, getting G1 status there is even less incentive for any horse there to come east. You would have years where the top 3yo and top older horses on both coasts never meet when they would have if there was a BC.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

Actually, back in the day, without the BC and with the Belmont Fall Championship meet being the lynchpin of the year, you might have seen those 3 horses hook up not only once, but possibly 3 times (in the Woodward, Marlboro Cup, and Jockey Club Gold Cup).

Then we might not have to speculate if Bernardini was truly a typical, gutless, overrated AP Indy.

We would have known for sure...with 3 straight, non-threatening 2nds.

You and Betsy should just cut the crap and screw already.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

Plus with the Cali races, including the Goodwood, getting G1 status there is even less incentive for any horse there to come east. You would have years where the top 3yo and top older horses on both coasts never meet when they would have if there was a BC.

To be honest, the Goodwood is perhaps the only existing race that the BC "improved" from a graded ranking and purse perspective. Oak Tree bolstered the race (and also created the Lady's Secret for females) specifically to serve as BC preps. Back in the day, it was just a Grade 3 race, mainly because in fact, the top CA handicap horses did go east for those races at Belmont (eg John Henry, Lemhi Gold, Turkoman, Bates Motel, Exceller, Cougar II, Island Whirl, Precisionist, Crystal Water, Ancient Title, Jaklin Klugman, Gate Dancer, etc.).

It also probably helped that Del Mar had no marquee handicap at the time either, with just a Grade 3 (the Cabrillo) standing in place of what would become the Pacific Classic. CA Handicap horses didn't have much to do at home beyond the Hollywood Gold Cup in June.