Zenyatta v. Rail Trip??

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

He has shown in the past to be able to run faster early and still run a good race. My only point is the "great comeback" was nothing more than a workout. He only ran for the last 1/4 or so.

Not to resurrect an old discussion (Eskendereya's Wood), but isn't this why Rail Trip's race was pretty impressive on Saturday. Despite nearly identical fractions, his final running time was over three seconds faster than the other 8.5F races on the card, and on a (synthetic) surface that often compresses margins of victory, he drew off to win by over three lengths while in hand.

Here's a horse that has run triple-digit Beyers on a half-dozen occasions, certainly far more than any of the females that Zenyatta has been beating up on. If he's going to get 10F, it's probably at Hollywood Park (as he did last year). And while we must be careful of trainer-speak, maybe this horse is improved as a 5YO.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by miraja2

Zenyatta's connections did make two different attempts to run their horse against the best out there: the BCC and the Apple Blossom. In one instance she ran against the worst BCC field ever on her preferred surface, and in the other one nobody ended up showing up to run against her. Those are hardly the connections' fault.

Actually. They waffled on the BCC until they knew for sure it was going to be a very weak spot.

They also knew that RA was behind in her training and that there was a realistic chance she couldn't make it to the Apple Blossom

They've been very shrewd.

[Smooth Operator]

LOL @ this "worst BCC field ever" drivel

Euros dominated the race in '08 … and they sent over a couple more good ones for the '09 edition on the very same surface …. and Z schooled them in the lane.

Your time would be better spent talking about the 'worst Woodward and Haskell fields ever'.

Your time would be better spent learning how to breathe with your mouth closed.

[CSC]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Actually. They waffled on the Woodward until they knew for sure it was going to be a very weak spot.

They also knew that they couldn't beat Zenyatta and that was when they decided to invent a consumable excuse why she couldn't make it to the Apple Blossom

They've been very shrewd.

FIFY

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

Not to resurrect an old discussion (Eskendereya's Wood), but isn't this why Rail Trip's race was pretty impressive on Saturday. Despite nearly identical fractions, his final running time was over three seconds faster than the other 8.5F races on the card, and on a (synthetic) surface that often compresses margins of victory, he drew off to win by over three lengths while in hand.

Here's a horse that has run triple-digit Beyers on a half-dozen occasions, certainly far more than any of the females that Zenyatta has been beating up on. If he's going to get 10F, it's probably at Hollywood Park (as he did last year). And while we must be careful of trainer-speak, maybe this horse is improved as a 5YO.

Under no circumstances would I consider a horse sitting behind an overmatched foe in very slow time then flying home late impressive. This is especially true when said horse has never shown the ability to do this from farther back than second in his entire career.

Again, I'm not knocking the horse, it was a workout, nothing more. I would think he will have trouble being ready for the HGC off this effort alone.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Smooth Operator

LOL @ this "worst BCC field ever" drivel
Euros dominated the race in '08 … and they sent over a couple more good ones for the '09 edition on the very same surface …. and Z schooled them in the lane.

Your time would be better spent talking about the 'worst Woodward and Haskell fields ever'.

why is one a suitable topic, and not the other? the horses who rachel beat were no good according to you, yet zenyatta also faced some of the same horses in cali at years end-yet the bcc talk if being worst ever is drivel... neither horse has beaten much at this point. the points against one are just as valid against the other. the points for each as well.


at this point, i wish both would retire so i could quit seeing endless threads with the same tired arguments.

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Under no circumstances would I consider a horse sitting behind an overmatched foe in very slow time then flying home late impressive. This is especially true when said horse has never shown the ability to do this from farther back than second in his entire career.

Again, I'm not knocking the horse, it was a workout, nothing more. I would think he will have trouble being ready for the HGC off this effort alone.

These were essentially the same type of horses RT was running against with the exception of the GC and the Pacific. If the time was 'very slow' then why did Tres Borrachos not hold on better, the way he did in the Gold Cup --- was that pace 'very slow', as well? Or was that pace 'fast'?

Moreover, if the pace was 'very slow', then why did all the horses that were behind RT early ALSO get wiped out in the lane (with the exception of Slew's Tiznow)? Hadn't Dakota Phone shown that he could stay relatively close to RT in a number of their meetings? What was the problem on Saturday? I mean, he was BEHIND RT and backed up in the lane relative to him.

You've obviously developed a good model here and it works for you. But some of the things you write just don't make sense to me. It stems from the assumption that numeric pace is a larger set than setups -- moves with a race and the type of race it is-- and that your figures determine how you 'see' races. The underlying assumption is that such a system will reveal things that are not immediately obvious. While this is a good thing, what's obvious is that the way horses run, more often than not, is a good indication of who exactly the 'pace' favored and who exactly ran well and poorly.

It seems to me that 'slow' and 'fast' paces need to 'result' in the same 'type' of race, a distinct type for fast and a distinct type for slow, on a consistent basis. From the little I've been able to follow, this isn't the case.

[cmorioles]

Well, the horses aren't machines and they aren't always in the same form. Tres B is clearly not the same horse, and the rest stink. There is a reason Rail Trip was 6/5 ML coming off an eight month layoff.

As far as numeric pace, it works pretty well. Setups can work well too. Together they tell the whole story.

[the_fat_man]

All I'm saying is that if we consider what the other horses did in that race, RT ran pretty well. We can argue that the others were off form, or whatever, but in order to be able to do so, we need to be on top of these horses a lot more than you and I are, as we play multiple tracks. It can't be the case that everything else in the race was off form.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

All I'm saying is that if we consider what the other horses did in that race, RT ran pretty well. We can argue that the others were off form, or whatever, but in order to be able to do so, we need to be on top of these horses a lot more than you and I are, as we play multiple tracks. It can't be the case that everything else in the race was off form.

He did run well.....but did you really look at the pps of the others? Save Dakota Phone, who never really was much on dirt, the others were decidedly mediocre at best. Now, considering how poorly Dakota Phone ran, and given his general synth consistently, it is fair to say he is, in fact off form.

That's not to say it wasn't a decent race by the winner, and certainly it was a great start off an eight plus month layoff, but his competition was non-existent.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Under no circumstances would I consider a horse sitting behind an overmatched foe in very slow time then flying home late impressive. This is especially true when said horse has never shown the ability to do this from farther back than second in his entire career.

Again, I'm not knocking the horse, it was a workout, nothing more. I would think he will have trouble being ready for the HGC off this effort alone.

I believe he will be running in the Californian next, then the Gold Cup. This was good first step off a nine-month layoff.

[CSC]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

I believe he will be running in the Californian next, then the Gold Cup. This was good first step off a nine-month layoff.

My experience with Ellis is he is far better off an extended layoffs than the perverbial second off the layoff as for most Trainer's. I would be leary if one is expecting big improvement from him in his next. Depending on the field I will gladly bet against him at his projected underlay but hey that's just me.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Cardus

This post is missing a few "I's".

It's time to heed the advice of others....and where better to start than SCUDS.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Back to the topic, are people really excited about Rail Trip?

Am I excited? Not really.
But he is an older male horse who actually ran a pretty good route race. Given how infrequently that happens these days, a potential matchup between he and Zenyatta is (sadly) more interesting than most potential races out there right now.

[rgustafson]

Originally Posted by 10 pnt move up

Who are the really good 1 1/8th or beyond horses, the only one with any real ability is slated to run four times this year in Quality Road, who else?

I believe that there is one other older horse besides Quality Road, who, if he stays healthy, could be a real threat at these longer distances. That horse is Battle Plan, also trained by Pletcher. Anyone know what race he is pointing to next?

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

I believe he will be running in the Californian next, then the Gold Cup. This was good first step off a nine-month layoff.

I agree, I'm just not ready to crown him some big horse yet.

[smuthg]

I haven't read all the way through all 8 pages of this post, but does a start in the Vanity preclude a start in the Gold Cup? The plan was to take on Rachel in the Apple Blossom off 3 to 4 week layoff. Why not get to 17 with a Vanity win and then worry about the Gold Cup. It seems pretty clear that they don't want to run at DelMar, thus they could make a trip to the east coast and still have a chance to get one last prep at Santa Anita prior to the Breeders' Cup.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by smuthg

I haven't read all the way through all 8 pages of this post, but does a start in the Vanity preclude a start in the Gold Cup? The plan was to take on Rachel in the Apple Blossom off 3 to 4 week layoff. Why not get to 17 with a Vanity win and then worry about the Gold Cup. It seems pretty clear that they don't want to run at DelMar, thus they could make a trip to the east coast and still have a chance to get one last prep at Santa Anita prior to the Breeders' Cup.

You're right, it doesn't have to, but apparently, it does: http://www.drf.com/news/article/112840.html. If Shirreffs perceives the Hollywood Gold Cup as the "highest mountain possible," then we now why Zenyatta's connections seem to place her in "mole hills" of races.

[smuthg]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

You're right, it doesn't have to, but apparently, it does: http://www.drf.com/news/article/112840.html. If Shirreffs perceives the Hollywood Gold Cup as the "highest mountain possible," then we now why Zenyatta's connections seem to place her in "mole hills" of races.

I hadn't seen that, thanks for posting...