Roger Stein on Beyer on Zenyatta

[Indian Charlie]

By the way Rupert, her debut and her second start were, at least to me, her two most impressive starts prior to the BCC this year.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

How about the 2008 Vanity?

Yes, you are right. They went the half in :46 1/5 in that race. After 3 furlongs in that race, she was about 12-13 lengths back, not 20 lengths back like in this year's BC Classic.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

By the way Rupert, her debut and her second start were, at least to me, her two most impressive starts prior to the BCC this year.

I thought her 2008 Apple Blossom was huge. Not only was it extremely impressive visually but as I said in another thread, I think she ran much faster that day than anyone gives her credit for. I think the official time of the other big race that day was wrong. Like racereplays.com, I had the Oaklawn Handicap in 1:50.34, not 1:48 3/5 (the official time they came up with 2 days later). Zenyatta ran 1 1/16 miles in 1:42 3/5 just 1 hour earlier.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Even if you don't buy any of my arguments, I still don't see how anyone could say that the slight check turning for home didn't cost her the race. She only lost by a head. I think that slight check cost her more than a head. Blame got an absloutley perfect trip. Zenyatta did not get a perfect. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that I would expect Zenyatta to get a perfect trip. When you're a dead-last come-from-behinder in a 12 horse field, you're usually not going to get a perfect trip. But hypothetically if both horses got a perfect trip, I think Zenyatta would have won.

Like I said, she lost....get over it already.

She got a nearly perfect trip and plenty of pace to run into. She ran well and just missed. Her performance doesn't need all of these reaches, what if's and excuses. Again, she ran well. She was beat by a better horse. Not much better, but he was better that day.

If you are going to play the what if games, might as well do it for her wins also. What if Switch doesn't switch to the wrong lead late in the Lady's Secret? See how silly this could get? Stuff happens in races.

[Dahoss]

This seems like as good a place as any to post this piece written by Vic Zast. The comments are pretty good as well.

http://www.horseraceinsider.com/Zast...talk/#comments

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I thought her 2008 Apple Blossom was huge. Not only was it extremely impressive visually but as I said in another thread, I think she ran much faster that day than anyone gives her credit for. I think the official time of the other big race that day was wrong. Like racereplays.com, I had the Oaklawn Handicap in 1:50.34, not 1:48 3/5 (the official time they came up with 2 days later). Zenyatta ran 1 1/16 miles in 1:42 3/5 just 1 hour earlier.

It was huge, but why continue to argue it? Come over to the top 6 for 2011 thread.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I thought her 2008 Apple Blossom was huge. Not only was it extremely impressive visually but as I said in another thread, I think she ran much faster that day than anyone gives her credit for. I think the official time of the other big race that day was wrong. Like racereplays.com, I had the Oaklawn Handicap in 1:50.34, not 1:48 3/5 (the official time they came up with 2 days later). Zenyatta ran 1 1/16 miles in 1:42 3/5 just 1 hour earlier.

Yeah, maybe. I've seen bad times before. Really, I don't think it's really defined if she's a better horse on dirt or synthetic, nor do I really care. I just think it's logical she was so far back early in the BCC because it was a race with an unusually fast pace, for her.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

Like I said, she lost....get over it already.

She got a nearly perfect trip and plenty of pace to run into. She ran well and just missed. Her performance doesn't need all of these reaches, what if's and excuses. Again, she ran well. She was beat by a better horse. Not much better, but he was better that day.

If you are going to play the what if games, might as well do it for her wins also. What if Switch doesn't switch to the wrong lead late in the Lady's Secret? See how silly this could get? Stuff happens in races.

If that hadn't happened with Switch, Zenyatta retires with 18 wins and 1 second in 19 starts.

I'm really doubtful Z wins that race.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

I just think it's logical she was so far back early in the BCC because it was a race with an unusually fast pace, for her.

Obviously.

And Rupert is going through her past races and picking out fractions - without taking into consideration the speed of the racing surface.

Go to Zenyatta's race two starts back at Del Mar. She was 7.5 lengths behind a 50.61 half mile going 8.5fs.

One race earlier - you had an opt claiming race for fillies at a mile on the same surface go 45.59 for a half mile. The winner of that race was a filly in for a 40K claiming tag.

So, Zenyatta's race went 5.02 full seconds - or about 30 lengths - slower to the half mile than some ordinary N1X opt claiming route for females.

Here are the charts of these two races run over the same surface 30 minutes apart:

http://www1.drf.com/drfNCWeeklyHorse...00807&raceNo=8

http://www1.drf.com/drfNCWeeklyHorse...00807&raceNo=9


I don't know why it is - but A LOT of people are just hopelessly lost by stuff like this. If you're going to compare fractions with fractions at different tracks - you better be able to adjust for speed of surface.

I've seen hopeless $5,000 claimers cut fractions of 21 and change 44 flat and run 1:09 at Turf Paradise. There are days at Calder where the track is so slow that Grade 1 sprinters would be lucky to beat 23 flat and run 6fs in 1:12 and change. Obviously - Turf Paradise to Calder is an extreme example - but her So. Cal pace fractions that keep getting quoted are run on faster racing surfaces than ones at most Eastern dirt tracks.

Lookin At Lucky romped in the Haskell getting 9fs in 1:49 4/5. Blame won a Grade 1 at Churchill in the Stephen Foster in 1:49 1/5.

The day Zenyatta won the Santa Margarita earlier this year - Dance To My Tune and Floating Heart finished a nose apart and both completed 9fs in 1:48 2/5.

To use the pace fractions Zenyatta ran in the Santa Margarita and compare them with other horses in the BC Classic .. is every bit as stupid as saying Dance to My Tune and Floating Heart would have won the Haskell by 8.5 lengths because their final time was 8.5 lengths faster. Just ignore the speed of the racing surface.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

If that hadn't happened with Switch, Zenyatta retires with 18 wins and 1 second in 19 starts.

I'm really doubtful Z wins that race.

If Steve Haskin trained Blame - Zenyatta would be 20 for 20 right now. I actually heard him suggest on Byk's show before the Classic that he thought the best way to beat Zenyatta would be to get behind her early - and because he says "she hangs a bit when she gets to the lead" he thought a horse like Blame might be able to catch her hanging late.

Just imagine Garret Gomez going into that race and trying to wrestle Blame back behind Zenyatta early on. Blame is consistantly about 12 to 15 lengths faster than Zenyatta on pace figures this year. He couldn't get behind her early on if he was strangled back.

It's another example of not taking speed of surface into consideration. It's like they had no idea how slow paced Zenyatta's races truly were because they took her fractions at face value without using a variant to adjust for speed of surface.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

If Steve Haskin trained Blame - Zenyatta would be 20 for 20 right now. I actually heard him suggest on Byk's show before the Classic that he thought the best way to beat Zenyatta would be to get behind her early - and because he says "she hangs a bit when she gets to the lead" he thought a horse like Blame might be able to catch her hanging late.

Just imagine Garret Gomez going into that race and trying to wrestle Blame back behind Zenyatta early on. Blame is consistantly about 12 to 15 lengths faster than Zenyatta on pace figures this year. He couldn't get behind her early on if he was strangled back.

It's another example of not taking speed of surface into consideration. It's like they had no idea how slow paced Zenyatta's races truly were because they took her fractions at face value without using a variant to adjust for speed of surface.

But the dapples...

[Thunder Gulch]

As Costanza says "Remember, its not a lie if you believe it."

[The Indomitable DrugS]

I actually tip my cap to Zenyatta for her BC Classic race - even though the speed figure was horrible and the pace collapse benefited closers and all that - knowing Smith wouldn't let her lose contact with the field, I doubted she could sustain her run for as long as she did. I even really thought she might stop.

I'd love to see how she runs next time after a race like that. I'm not a big bounce guy - but those are the type of tough races that can lead to form declines in the near term. She looked like an extremely tired horse after the race. After those California wins - she'd come back looking not tired in the least.

For a horse who was getting used to loafing early and sprinting late in all of her races - having to run very hard for the final 8 furlongs while getting that dirt in her eyes and nose couldn't have been any fun.

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

I think she would have had a hard time running down Hystericalady in the 2008 Lady's Secret the way the pace of that race unfolded.

would have been fun to see, IMO that was the best race, along with the 08' AB that I had seen her run. The comment line should have been "won as pleased".

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

I actually tip my cap to Zenyatta for her BC Classic race - even though the speed figure was horrible and the pace collapse benefited closers and all that - knowing Smith wouldn't let her lose contact with the field, I doubted she could sustain her run for as long as she did. I even really thought she might stop.

I'd love to see how she runs next time after a race like that. I'm not a big bounce guy - but those are the type of tough races that can lead to form declines in the near term. She looked like an extremely tired horse after the race. After those California wins - she'd come back looking not tired in the least.

For a horse who was getting used to loafing early and sprinting late in all of her races - having to run very hard for the final 8 furlongs while getting that dirt in her eyes and nose couldn't have been any fun.

Lots of people predicted the exact scenario that somewhat played out, that she would have to be used early and would not be able to make a run late because of this........I guess they believe they were proven right by the result.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

If Steve Haskin trained Blame - Zenyatta would be 20 for 20 right now. I actually heard him suggest on Byk's show before the Classic that he thought the best way to beat Zenyatta would be to get behind her early - and because he says "she hangs a bit when she gets to the lead" he thought a horse like Blame might be able to catch her hanging late.

Just imagine Garret Gomez going into that race and trying to wrestle Blame back behind Zenyatta early on. Blame is consistantly about 12 to 15 lengths faster than Zenyatta on pace figures this year. He couldn't get behind her early on if he was strangled back.

It's another example of not taking speed of surface into consideration. It's like they had no idea how slow paced Zenyatta's races truly were because they took her fractions at face value without using a variant to adjust for speed of surface.

WOW.

Haskin has lost it.

Then again, Zenyattas great ability to expose retardism for what it is, is priceless.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by 10 pnt move up

Lots of people predicted the exact scenario that somewhat played out, that she would have to be used early and would not be able to make a run late because of this........I guess they believe they were proven right by the result.

If they made a profit on the race - I doubt they'll feel like the result proved them wrong.

Either way - she was a VERY poor even money shot who happened to run fine.

You have to bet against even money shots who are wildcards. The bookies in Europe almost got smoked at 7/2 on her .. but I'm not so sure 7/2 is even a fair price on a wildcard.

If you go by results - even the very best handicappers and bettors are going to be proven wrong A LOT. They're flesh and blood animals with a human on their back. If a horse improves one second over the distance of a mile - that's six lengths. Most races are so closely matched that the way they're run will ultimately determine who wins.

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

If they made a profit on the race - I doubt they'll feel like the result proved them wrong.

Either way - she was a VERY poor even money shot who happened to run fine.

You have to bet against even money shots who are wildcards. The bookies in Europe almost got smoked at 7/2 on her .. but I'm not so sure 7/2 is even a fair price on a wildcard.

If you go by results - even the very best handicappers and bettors are going to be proven wrong A LOT. They're flesh and blood animals with a human on their back. If a horse improves one second over the distance of a mile - that's six lengths. Most races are so closely matched that the way they're run will ultimately determine who wins.

Well one of them had her at 10/1 chance.........she lost so I guess they were right, I just would have loved that 10/1 at the top of the stretch, and would take it any day of the week if the race is run again and again with the same dynamics.

She was not even money on my line, I had her about 5/2 to 3/1, so she wins that race better than a quarter of the time.........after the race I think I did not give her enough credit, she probably wins it like 40%. I gave horses like Quality Road, and to a certain extent LAL to much credit for some of those easy wins against nada.

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

Gio Ponti? Mastercraftsman? Summer Bird?
Come on dude.

Turf Turf Dirt

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Obviously.

And Rupert is going through her past races and picking out fractions - without taking into consideration the speed of the racing surface.

Go to Zenyatta's race two starts back at Del Mar. She was 7.5 lengths behind a 50.61 half mile going 8.5fs.

One race earlier - you had an opt claiming race for fillies at a mile on the same surface go 45.59 for a half mile. The winner of that race was a filly in for a 40K claiming tag.

So, Zenyatta's race went 5.02 full seconds - or about 30 lengths - slower to the half mile than some ordinary N1X opt claiming route for females.

Here are the charts of these two races run over the same surface 30 minutes apart:

http://www1.drf.com/drfNCWeeklyHorse...00807&raceNo=8

http://www1.drf.com/drfNCWeeklyHorse...00807&raceNo=9


I don't know why it is - but A LOT of people are just hopelessly lost by stuff like this. If you're going to compare fractions with fractions at different tracks - you better be able to adjust for speed of surface.

I've seen hopeless $5,000 claimers cut fractions of 21 and change 44 flat and run 1:09 at Turf Paradise. There are days at Calder where the track is so slow that Grade 1 sprinters would be lucky to beat 23 flat and run 6fs in 1:12 and change. Obviously - Turf Paradise to Calder is an extreme example - but her So. Cal pace fractions that keep getting quoted are run on faster racing surfaces than ones at most Eastern dirt tracks.

Lookin At Lucky romped in the Haskell getting 9fs in 1:49 4/5. Blame won a Grade 1 at Churchill in the Stephen Foster in 1:49 1/5.

The day Zenyatta won the Santa Margarita earlier this year - Dance To My Tune and Floating Heart finished a nose apart and both completed 9fs in 1:48 2/5.

To use the pace fractions Zenyatta ran in the Santa Margarita and compare them with other horses in the BC Classic .. is every bit as stupid as saying Dance to My Tune and Floating Heart would have won the Haskell by 8.5 lengths because their final time was 8.5 lengths faster. Just ignore the speed of the racing surface.

If Zenyatta would have run in the allowance race at Del Mar where they went the half in :45 3/5, do you think she would have been 35 lengths back? Is that what you are saying? If you honestly think that, I give up.

In the BC Classic, there was clearly something bothering her in the early going of the race. Just watch the way she's moving. She's never looked like that before. She bobbled at least once or twice. You ask Cannon Shell or any trainer out there if that horse looked comfortable in the early going of that race.