Shirreffs' latest gem

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

First it was the insurmountable Rockies, then it was equating Rail Trip to 'the highest mountain,' and now this, his reasoning behind not shipping Zenyatta to the Beldame. It actually has little to do with Zenyatta!



Yes, that's right folks. It's not that he's scared to ship his champion mare, it's no longer the Rockies that are the problem, it's that there's no one who could possibly take care of his other horses for the handful of days he'll be out of town! God dammit, if only Shirreffs were a good 'telephone trainer.' Oh well, just our luck!

That is totally legitimate. If he ships her to New York, he doesn't want to ship her all the way back to California and then ship all the way back to Kentucky. He would go straight to Kentucky from New York. If he does that, he's going to want to be in Kentucky and watch her train. If it was for a week, it wouldn't be a big deal. But it would be a very big deal if he was away for 5 weeks. He's a hands-on trainer. He watches all of his horses train every day. He doesn't like to miss a single day. He is extremely conscientious.

There are actually some trainers that don't even watch their horses train. They sit in their office all day and rely on their assistants. Shirreffs is not like that. He watches everything, every day. He will notice if the slightest thing is off. That is why he is so good.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

He wants another cup cake Grade 1 win.

Rinterval shipped over the rockies to lose her 20th race in her last 21 attempts in fine fashion. 3rd place finisher Princess Taylor has lost 18 races in a row.

Level weights against those horses again? How can you pass that up?

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

That is totally legitimate. If he ships her to New York, he doesn't want to ship her all the way back to California and then ship all the way back to Kentucky. He would go straight to Kentucky from New York. If he does that, he's going to want to be in Kentucky and watch her train. If it was for a week, it wouldn't be a big deal. But it would be a very big deal if he was away for 5 weeks. He's a hands-on trainer. He watches all of his horses train every day. He doesn't like to miss a single day. He is extremely conscientious.

There are actually some trainers that don't even watch their horses train. They sit in their office all day and rely on their assistants. Shirreffs is not like that. He watches everything, every day. He will notice if the slightest thing is off. That is why he is so good.

You're a bright guy, which makes this all the more interesting. What is it about Zenyatta and her connections that makes people lose all rational thought?

They act like no one has ever shipped before and people eat it right up. It's pretty amazing.

[Thunder Gulch]

I don't see how the guy has enough time to train while he's thinking of all of these lame excuses. He must have an assistant write this stuff while he's grooming the animals.

[justindew]

Assuming the plan is to run in the BC Classic, won't we get our answers then? I mean, either she'll win the race two years in a row and retire 20 for 20, or she'll lose and people can say she was overrated (which is probably a ridiculous thing to say, but whatever.) I don't see the need to criticize every move the team makes.

I say, why ship to NY when a prep in CA will do just fine?

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by justindew

I don't see the need to criticize every move the team makes.

I say, why ship to NY when a prep in CA will do just fine?

Here an explanation:

1) Your Horse of the Year is a NO SHOW for the AB (after losing to Z's caddy)
2) YOUR Fastest Horse in Training falls on his face in the Whitney (eliminating all those STUPID arguments that he can get 10F once and for all)

It's called 'taking the offensive'.

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

Here an explanation:

1) Your Horse of the Year is a NO SHOW for the AB (after losing to Z's caddy)
2) YOUR Fastest Horse in Training falls on his face in the Whitney (eliminating all those STUPID arguments that he can get 10F once and for all)

It's called 'taking the offensive'.

Is her race Saturday good enough to win the Whitney?

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

Is her race Saturday good enough to win the Whitney?

Was her race in the Hirsch last year good enough to win the BC Classic? No, but it didn't stop her from winning it.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

You're a bright guy, which makes this all the more interesting. What is it about Zenyatta and her connections that makes people lose all rational thought?

They act like no one has ever shipped before and people eat it right up. It's pretty amazing.

She shipped in April for the Apple Blossom and she's going to ship again in November for the BC Classic. Shipping across the country twice in a year is a reasonable amount.

With regards to horses shipping in general, it really depends on the horse. But even if a horse was a great shipper, I probably wouldn't ship the horse across the country more than 3 times in a year.

With regard to keeping the horse in Kentucky for 5 weeks, if you know John Shireffs you wouldn't have any doubt that he would be uncomfortable with that. The guy is incredibly anal and wants to oversee everything. I don't think that's a negative. It's good that he is so conscientious.

[Thunder Gulch]

Ok, so don't ship but run the best races out west. Tiago and Giacomo ran them, or does she not measure up to those two??

[letswastemoney]

Originally Posted by Thunder Gulch

Ok, so don't ship but run the best races out west. Tiago and Giacomo ran them, or does she not measure up to those two??

I think because Zenyatta is female, they are getting as many easy G1s as possible rather than going for the more difficult open company G1.

Tiago and Giacomo had no other G1 options other than to run in the open company races.

[PSH]

They have said all along that their ultimate goal is to run in the BC Classic at CD. Everyone will have their chance to run against her at that point. If JS pulls out of that race then we are opened to criticize them.

The days of all the best horses running against one another in all the big stake races has long passed us.

Would it be great to see RA vs. Zen in the race in NY? Of course it would. Is it a little tiring to see them both race against allowance and G3 type of horses? Of course it is.

But, it is what it is and we will have to wait to see who shows up in the BC Classic.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by PSH

The days of all the best horses running against one another in all the big stake races has long passed us.

And if this doesnt change the days of horseracing period will have passed us. There is absolutely no reason that fillies aren't running against the best horses if they can beat them, which both RA and Z have proven that they can. They are basically worthless as their owners wouldn't sell them anyway and there is a ceiling on what they are worth as mares already if they did try to sell them. Ego and greed are killing the sport at the top. What else would keep Zenyatta in CA to run against Rin Tin-Tin and company and Jess Jackson on the bum-a-palozza schedule?

It may be like this but it doesn't have to be.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Thunder Gulch

Ok, so don't ship but run the best races out west. Tiago and Giacomo ran them, or does she not measure up to those two??

You have a point but at this point, winning the Goodwood doesn't do anything for them. There's no real upside. There's only downside. They don't need to run there to win HOY.

I'm sure they think they could win the Goodwood, but they probably figure "Why gamble at this point?". She would have to run harder in the Goodwood than the filly race. The harder you run, the more risk you take in terms of not coming out of a race good. Since their goal is to win the BC Classic, how dumb would they feel if she ran her butt off to win the Goodwood and it knocked her out? They are so close to their goal at this point. Why take a risk (even if it's only a small risk) when there is really no upside to that risk. They want to be 100% healthy for the BC Classic. The best way to ensure that happens is by having an easy race rather than a tough race for her final prep.

In addition, they are going to be taking a risk of getting beat in the BC Classic and ending her streak. At this point, I think they'd rather take that risk just once rather than twice.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

You have a point but at this point, winning the Goodwood doesn't do anything for them. There's no real upside. There's only downside. They don't need to run there to win HOY.

I'm sure they think they could win the Goodwood, but they probably figure "Why gamble at this point?". She would have to run harder in the Goodwood than the filly race. The harder you run, the more risk you take in terms of not coming out of a race good. Since their goal is to win the BC Classic, how dumb would they feel if she ran her butt off to win the Goodwood and it knocked her out? They are so close to their goal at this point. Why take a risk (even if it's only a small risk) when there is really no upside to that risk. They want to be 100% healthy for the BC Classic. The best way to ensure that happens is by having an easy race rather than a tough race for her final prep.

In addition, they are going to be taking a risk of getting beat in the BC Classic and ending her streak. At this point, I think they'd rather take that risk just once rather than twice.

you could have just said this instead of the long paragraph:

The owners are chickens.


Seriously? There is no upside to winning a G1 against males? That is absolutely incorrect.

There is no upside in winning your 15th race against the same crappy females in the same crappy situation (aka the Zenyatta Stakes).

The owners are such chickens that it almost makes you root for her to lose so maybe they will actually take some chances with their horse..

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

you could have just said this instead of the long paragraph:

The owners are chickens.


Seriously? There is no upside to winning a G1 against males? That is absolutely incorrect.

There is no upside in winning your 15th race against the same crappy females in the same crappy situation (aka the Zenyatta Stakes).

The owners are such chickens that it almost makes you root for her to lose so maybe they will actually take some chances with their horse..

Considering they are running in the BC Classic, I don't think there is any real upside to running in the Goodwood. If she can beat the boys in the BC Classic for the second year in a row and finish her career 20 for 20, she will be immortalized forever. I don't think winning the Goodwood would really add anything to that legacy. It all comes down to this year's BC Classic.

If she's 20 for 20 with 2 wins in the BC Classic, I doubt anyone will look at her PP's and question why she didn't run in the Goodwood.

[Thunder Gulch]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

You have a point but at this point, winning the Goodwood doesn't do anything for them. There's no real upside. There's only downside. They don't need to run there to win HOY.

I'm sure they think they could win the Goodwood, but they probably figure "Why gamble at this point?". She would have to run harder in the Goodwood than the filly race. The harder you run, the more risk you take in terms of not coming out of a race good. Since their goal is to win the BC Classic, how dumb would they feel if she ran her butt off to win the Goodwood and it knocked her out? They are so close to their goal at this point. Why take a risk (even if it's only a small risk) when there is really no upside to that risk. They want to be 100% healthy for the BC Classic. The best way to ensure that happens is by having an easy race rather than a tough race for her final prep.

In addition, they are going to be taking a risk of getting beat in the BC Classic and ending her streak. At this point, I think they'd rather take that risk just once rather than twice.

"Only downside"...that sums it up. Actually facing a challenge and losing is considered downside in their mind. It's not about PROVING you are the best, it's all about perpetuating this fraud of a record. The horse isn't a fraud, she's a great mare, but the record is.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Thunder Gulch

"Only downside"...that sums it up. Actually facing a challenge and losing is considered downside in their mind. It's not about PROVING you are the best, it's all about perpetuating this fraud of a record. The horse isn't a fraud, she's a great mare, but the record is.

She will be facing the biggest challenge possible in the toughest race of the year in the BC Classic.

You can't say the record is a fraud. She's running in grade I after grade I.

As I said in another thread about a month ago, you guys are using a totally different standard to measure her than other great mares. Personal Ensign ran 10 of her 13 lifetime races at Belmont. She ran once at Saratoga and once at Monmouth. So out of her 13 lifetime races, 12 were in New York and 1 was in New Jersey. She only left the area once to run in Kentucky. And how many times did she face the boys? I think it was once. Yet I've never heard anyone complain that Personal Ensign didn't travel enough or didn't face the boys enough.



That being said, I still understand where you are all coming from. The grade 1s against fillies on the west coast are not very challening races for Z. As others have said, these races are almost like exhibitions. It is somewhat boring to watch Z beat up on medicore fillies. I agree with that. I see where you're all coming from. I understand why you would be frustrated. I don't blame you. But by the same token, I understand why the connections are doing what they are doing and I can't really fault them at this point. If they would have refused to face RA in the AB earlier in the year, then I would have faulted them. But they were actually eager to face RA. At this point, it's different. They are very close to their goal and they don't want to do anything to screw it up. I can't blamethem . I see where they're coming from. I also see where you are all coming from and I understand your frustration.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

She shipped in April for the Apple Blossom and she's going to ship again in November for the BC Classic. Shipping across the country twice in a year is a reasonable amount.

With regards to horses shipping in general, it really depends on the horse. But even if a horse was a great shipper, I probably wouldn't ship the horse across the country more than 3 times in a year.

With regard to keeping the horse in Kentucky for 5 weeks, if you know John Shireffs you wouldn't have any doubt that he would be uncomfortable with that. The guy is incredibly anal and wants to oversee everything. I don't think that's a negative. It's good that he is so conscientious.

I swear if I had a nickel for every time Arkansas was called "across the country" I'd be a rich woman.

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

I swear if I had a nickel for every time Arkansas was called "across the country" I'd be a rich woman.

I prefer the rational that NY and Kentucky are nearby. I see that a lot.