Travers Buzz: Quality Road a yes..

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by tector

I would not be surprised if you don't see QR again this year, or even ever (on a race track, that is).

What was asked of this very talented horse was ridiculous. His connections should be ashamed of themselves. If anyone at ESPN had some balls, and could quit whining for a minute about how RA did not come to one of the few horse races they bother to show nowadays, they might have been a little more pointed in addressing the issue.

It is getting unbearable to watch horse racing coverage on TV nowadays. Most of the TVGers are a joke, ESPN is worse and HRTV...zzzzzz (although that is beginning to look good in comparison).

I here he was not doing well after the race. That really sucks.

[Merlinsky]

Originally Posted by tector

I would not be surprised if you don't see QR again this year, or even ever (on a race track, that is).

What was asked of this very talented horse was ridiculous. His connections should be ashamed of themselves. If anyone at ESPN had some balls, and could quit whining for a minute about how RA did not come to one of the few horse races they bother to show nowadays, they might have been a little more pointed in addressing the issue.

It is getting unbearable to watch horse racing coverage on TV nowadays. Most of the TVGers are a joke, ESPN is worse and HRTV...zzzzzz (although that is beginning to look good in comparison).

There were a few things that annoyed me about them today and normally I'm more forgiving, but there was the weird implication before the Travers that there's only one 3yr championship that QR could get because RA didn't show. I forget the exact wording, but that was the idea it sounded like they meant, and of course that's ridiculous as they could both get 3yo honors for their respective genders hypothetically. I know they know it, but that's not how it came out.

[tector]

Originally Posted by Merlinsky

There were a few things that annoyed me about them today and normally I'm more forgiving, but there was the weird implication before the Travers that there's only one 3yr championship that QR could get because RA didn't show. I forget the exact wording, but that was the idea it sounded like they meant, and of course that's ridiculous as they could both get 3yo honors for their respective genders hypothetically. I know they know it, but that's not how it came out. It's fake drama. I'm liking the new season of Jockeys and would really appreciate it if Corey Nakatani could come sucker punch somebody.

That would be entertaining at least.

I watched the HRTV broadcast first, then watched the whole ESPN show in HD on my DVR, skipping through the talk about the other races. Other than Hank's observation that he was playing against QR because he thought QR might be a short horse, EVERY single thing they said about the race turned out to be utterly wrongheaded, which is pretty remarkable since it was won by a 5-2 shot, not some monster longshot. But the most aggravating thing they all harped on was that "RA needed to be here"? Really--why? Because it is one of the few races you show now, having eviscerated your horse racing coverage? Gee, it turns out she beat your Travers winner by a half dozen last time out. (BTW, SB seems to be a mighty fine horse).

RA is running in open company next weekend. Anybody who wanted a piece of her could show up there. When I suggested that QR might want to consider that, I got mocked. Doesn't seem so crazy now, does it? But his connections had their agenda, regardless of how sensible the methods that had to be employed
.
As an aside, I don't know where this NYRA propaganda about the Travers being a "must" comes from. Secretariat didn't run in the Travers--he went to the Whitney. His stablemate, Riva Ridge, blew it off as well. I'm sure if looked I could find plenty more examples.

RA is running the most aggressive campaign of any 3yo filly in modern times. Screw all the whiners--just show up and beat her already. The rest is all BS loser talk.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by tector

That would be entertaining at least.

I watched the HRTV broadcast first, then watched the whole ESPN show in HD on my DVR, skipping through the talk about the other races. Other than Hank's observation that he was playing against QR because he thought QR might be a short horse, EVERY single thing they said about the race turned out to be utterly wrongheaded, which is pretty remarkable since it was won by a 5-2 shot, not some monster longshot. But the most aggravating thing they all harped on was that "RA needed to be here"? Really--why? Because it is one of the few races you show now, having eviscerated your horse racing coverage? Gee, it turns out she beat your Travers winner by a half dozen last time out. (BTW, SB seems to be a mighty fine horse).

RA is running in open company next weekend. Anybody who wanted a piece of her could show up there. When I suggested that QR might want to consider that, I got mocked. Doesn't seem so crazy now, does it? But his connections had their agenda, regardless of how sensible the methods that had to be employed
.
As an aside, I don't know where this NYRA propaganda about the Travers being a "must" comes from. Secretariat didn't run in the Travers--he went to the Whitney. His stablemate, Riva Ridge, blew it off as well. I'm sure if looked I could find plenty more examples.

RA is running the most aggressive campaign of any 3yo filly in modern times. Screw all the whiners--just show up and beat her already. The rest is all BS loser talk.

Serena's Song might have an argument with the last paragraph. Winning Colors too.

[tector]

Neither ever ran in open company as a 3YO. WC never did.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by tector

Neither ever ran in open company as a 3YO. WC never did.

I get that but open company doesn't necessarily mean the toughest competition. Easy Goer faced tougher competition in his own division from Sunday Silence than he did in open company when winning the Whitney and JCGC. Winning Colors facing Personal Ensign in the Maskette and BC Distaff is a much tougher challenge than Rachel facing Bullsbay and Asiatic Boy in the Woodward. Running in the Travers today would have been facing tougher competition than she'll get in the Woodward. Winning Colors faced the boys in all three TC races plus the SA Derby then ended it with two against a hall of famer. Serena's Song won the Jim Beam and the Haskell against males and later beat older mares Heavenly Prize and Lakeway (no slouches there) in the Beldame. I'd argue that facing Heavenly Prize and Lakeway was a tougher challenge than what Rachel will face next week. For me, it's not the race name but the competition faced that settles it for me.

[tector]

She just beat today's winner by a half dozen.

What you are saying is that her competition is lousy. She has no control over that. Open company means you are taking all comers--you can't be any more aggressive than that.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Yeah .. it was certainly a nice day for the company line of her form.

Not only did the horse she just destroyed in the Haskell win the Travers - but an ice cold on the board Sara Louise got the job done.

Even though Sara Louise beat RA at a mile ... it was around one-turn .. RA has been flawless around two turns.

[tector]

I will readily concede that other 3YO fillies faced tougher competition. But when a top 3YO filly is running in open company, that is almost unheard of in the US in recent decades. I recall that in 1990 there were calls for GFW to go to the Classic, which was viewed as a suspect bunch. That Dupont broad was conservative, and wanted to keep her with the girls.

Oh well.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by tector

She just beat today's winner by a half dozen.

What you are saying is that her competition is lousy. She has no control over that. Open company means you are taking all comers--you can't be any more aggressive that.

I don't think it's lousy. After watching today's Travers, I went back and watched her Haskell again and was even more impressed with how she toyed with Summer Bird. I understand that she doesn't control who enters against her and I also understand that open company generally means you are taking on the best. But it's not always the case. If Rachel's people announce after this race that she's going in the Beldame and then Zenyatta's people say they are going to challenge her, that would be more aggressive than staying home for the Goodwood wouldn't it? Sure, the Beldame is restricted and the Goodwood is open but which one would honestly be the bigger challenge to you?

[tector]

I think you have a problem with vocabulary.

She can only go where she goes--she can't control who is willing to show up. Your example requires the highly unlikely event that Team Zenyatta grows a pair. Obviously RA will show up for that if she is still healthy--but as you state it, she has no control over all that: the nutless bunch in CA have to act first. That is reacting and, in this case, reacting to imaginary events that are unlikely to happen. So while you are pondering what will be very likely counterfactuals, Team RA have to choose real races to run in--and they are choosing them very aggressively.

[tector]

BTW, Gary West had a good column on a related note:

http://startelegramsports.typepad.co...rachel-go.html

August 28, 2009
How much further can Rachel go?

No challenger can beat her in the Woodward. Rachel Alexandra, quite simply, is several lengths better than the older horses who are likely to line up against her on Sept. 5 at Saratoga. Asiatic Boy, It’s a Bird, Macho Again, Bullsbay – no, they can’t beat her.

But she can lose. And not just because it’s a horse race and anything can happen, as Mine That Bird reminded everyone on the first Saturday in May and as horses continue to remind us everyday.

No, they can’t beat her in the Woodward. As trainer Kiaran McLaughlin said, nobody wants to run against Rachel Alexandra these days. She’s so talented and intimidating she could scare away older horses from their feed tubs. McLaughlin said he would consider taking Asiatic Boy elsewhere and traveling all the way across the country, to Del Mar for the Pacific Classic, rather than take on Rachel Alexandra in the Woodward.

But she can lose, simply because horses, even great ones, can’t perform in the stratosphere indefinitely. She has been in training all year. She began her campaign in February after only a respite at the end of 2008, when she finished her juvenile season by winning the Golden Rod on Nov. 29 at Churchill.

Early in the year, I saw her in New Orleans, and even then she was training and running like something supernatural. And since then, without taking a backwards step, she has progressed steadily. Her Kentucky Oaks was historic, two weeks later on a track she didn’t particularly like she won the Preakness, then she dazzled in the Mother Goose, and then gave an even better performance in the Haskell, defeating Summer Bird by six lengths.

So when does she reach the summit of her potential, when does she level off, when does she demand a moment of rest to recover from this relentless outpouring of superlative effort? She loves to train and loves to run; but that’s all part of an attitude and an invincible spirit that make her unique. When will her body overrule the attitude and spirit to demand a rest?

The great Personal Ensign, largely because of physical problems, raced only 13 times in a three-year career. In 1988, in a lustrous campaign that ended with her victory over Winning Colors in the Breeders’ Cup Distaff, Personal Ensign had seven races in 6 1/2 months. The great Zenyatta has raced only 12 times in her unbeaten career. Last year, in a memorable championship campaign, she had seven races, taking time off from mid-January until April and never twice racing in the same month.

Horses simply don’t do what Rachel Alexandra has done – that is, they don’t compete from one end of the calendar to the other, at the highest level, while traveling throughout the country. In 1988, Personal Ensign raced at four different racetracks, only one of them outside of the New York-New Jersey area. Last year, Zenyatta raced at four different racetracks, only one of them outside of California. Saratoga will become the seventh racetrack this year to host Rachel Alexandra, who’ll be making her eighth start of the season.

Her campaign could be one of the most impressive the sport has seen since Cigar’s in 1995. Running from January to October, he won all 10 of his starts, at six racetracks. He was able to begin the campaign with a trio of outings at Gulfstream and end it with three at Belmont, and he had a break of 11 weeks along the way, but he performed at a very high level with each and every step around the racetrack. The difference perhaps is that Rachel Alexandra began at high level and steadily has reached higher.

But how much longer can she continue to progress and excel? How much further can she go with this display of superiority? Sam Houston, with James McIngvale as sponsor, has proposed a $1.75 million race in December, the Gallery Furniture Distaff, to bring together Rachel Alexandra and Zenyatta. But what are the chances that both horses will still be in training in December and still performing up there in the rarefied regions? Almost none.

Given her extensive travel, eight starts could be enough for Rachel Alexandra. If the Woodward is especially demanding, I would expect it to be her final start in 2009. If she again wins impressively and bounces out of the race with her typical enthusiasm, I then would expect her connections to consider one more outing, with the hope that Zenyatta might make an appearance at Belmont Park. But that would have to be the end of Rachel Alexandra's campaign, wouldn't it? Yes, she's special and unique and something of an anachronism, but even she has her limits. We just haven't seen them, and I don't know that we ever will or that we'd even want to.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by tector

I will readily concede that other 3YO fillies faced tougher competition. But when a top 3YO filly is running in open company, that is almost unheard of in the US in recent decades. I recall that in 1990 there were calls for GFW to go to the Classic, which was viewed as a suspect bunch. That Dupont broad was conservative, and wanted to keep her with the girls.

Oh well.

I remember that but as with some of the others, I thought she took on the tougher challenge by facing Bayakoa. I thought Bayakoa was light years better than any of the males in the Classic.

I'm glad you added the "in the US" part because that's where I was going next. I think it's too bad more American trainers don't take the chance. Off the top of my head, the only ones I remember doing it were Safely Kept, Meafara, and Very Subtle all in the BC Sprint, Jolypha in the BC Classic, Borgia, Sierra Roberta, and Behera all in the BC Turf, Miesque, Ski Paradise, Ridgewood Pearl, Six Perfections, and Goldikova all in the BC Mile and Surfside in the Clark. And all of them were pretty successful when they were given the chance.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by tector

I would not be surprised if you don't see QR again this year, or even ever (on a race track, that is).

What was asked of this very talented horse was ridiculous. His connections should be ashamed of themselves. If anyone at ESPN had some balls, and could quit whining for a minute about how RA did not come to one of the few horse races they bother to show nowadays, they might have been a little more pointed in addressing the issue.
It is getting unbearable to watch horse racing coverage on TV nowadays. Most of the TVGers are a joke, ESPN is worse and HRTV...zzzzzz (although that is beginning to look good in comparison).

Tector-

No disrespect but it didnt seem like too many people had a problem with QR's appearance in this race before it was run. You posted twice to this thread before the race was run and didnt once question the connections choice of putting QR in the travers. Two industry types (their opinions i greatly respect) on this thread defended the move after it was brought up. In all the threads leading up to the race there were only about 4 people that questioned the move at all.

Are you criticizing the connections now because of something you saw in Quality Road Pre race? Meaning, did the horse obviously not look well and in your opinion should have been scratched?

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by tector

I think you have a problem with vocabulary.

She can only go where she goes--she can't control who is willing to show up. Your example requires the highly unlikely event that Team Zenyatta grows a pair. Obviously RA will show up for that if she is still healthy--but as you state it, she has no control over all that: the nutless bunch in CA have to act first. That is reacting and, in this case, reacting to imaginary events that are unlikely to happen. So while you are pondering what will be very likely counterfactuals, Team RA have to choose real races to run in--and they are choosing them very aggressively.

There's no problem with vocabulary just a difference of opinion as far as what's being aggresive. You happen to think that running in the Woodward is aggresive because it's open company. I happen to think that if she went to California and faced Zenyatta in the restricted Lady's Secret, that would be more aggresive. I don't deny that Rachel's people are going out of the box and being more aggresive than 99% of the people out there have been over the years, especially with a 3yo filly. I just fee that taking on the toughest challenges is being the most aggresive and despite the Woodward being an open race, I don't think it's the toughest challenge at all. To me, the Travers would have been 5x more aggresive and challenging than the Woodward.

[tector]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I remember that but as with some of the others, I thought she took on the tougher challenge by facing Bayakoa.

Dude, you are kind of a johnny-one-note, and an uncomprehending one at that.

They didn't choose the Distaff because it was "tougher" or more sporting or whatever you might think. I might agree with you that Bayakoa was better than the Classic field although, in retrospect, you must give Unbridled his due. But GFW's connections choose the Distaff precisely because they viewed the Distaff as the "safer" spot--which is not necessarily the same thing as "softer".

And upon such things are tragic irony built.

[tector]

Wait, you didn't hear anybody question going 1.25 off a 6.5 prep off a long layoff? What planet have you been on?

If QR is done for this year (and he very well may not be), will it be fair to ask the question then?

This was a rush job. Pletcher has essentially conceded that. If the horse is out because of it, presumably even you will concede it was not the wisest course. I am just saying it now.

[tector]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

There's no problem with vocabulary just a difference of opinion as far as what's being aggresive. You happen to think that running in the Woodward is aggresive because it's open company. I happen to think that if she went to California and faced Zenyatta in the restricted Lady's Secret, that would be more aggresive. I don't deny that Rachel's people are going out of the box and being more aggresive than 99% of the people out there have been over the years, especially with a 3yo filly. I just fee that taking on the toughest challenges is being the most aggresive and despite the Woodward being an open race, I don't think it's the toughest challenge at all. To me, the Travers would have been 5x more aggresive and challenging than the Woodward.

A lot of people are not going to California it seems. The best sprinter in the country is another one.

The BC crapped the bed on this. That has been beaten to death. Quit changing the subject.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by tector

Wait, you didn't hear anybody question going 1.25 off a 6.5 prep off a long layoff? What planet have you been on?

If QR is done for this year (and he very well may not be), will it be fair to ask the question then?

This was a rush job. Pletcher has essentially conceded that. If the horse is out because of it, presumably even you will concede it was not the wisest course. I am just saying it now.

Read the thread Tector. I did question it...before the race. You didnt say a single word about it. As a matter of fact, you hypothesized about him WINNING.

So if Quality Road wins, you wouldnt have said anything. But because he loses, his connections should be tarred and feathered. NICE.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by tector

Dude, you are kind of a johnny-one-note, and an uncomprehending one at that.

They didn't choose the Distaff because it was "tougher" or more sporting or whatever you might think. I might agree with you that Bayakoa was better than the Classic field although, in retrospect, you must give Unbridled his due. But GFW's connections choose the Distaff precisely because they viewed the Distaff as the "safer" spot--which is not necessarily the same thing as "softer".

And upon such things are tragic irony built.

All I know is whether they thought it was the safer spot or not, it wasn't. So I wouldn't have given her more credit for being in the Classic than for being in the Distaff. The only one that's not comprehending is you. You are set on the belief that because she's running in the open race, that's the toughest challenge and you can't accept that, even with numerous examples of how restricted races can be tougher, it's not always the case. I believe that the argument can be made that by going in the Woodward instead of the Travers, they are chosing the LESS aggresive approach.