Zenyatta

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by philcski

But the early fractions are the difference in the quality of the horses running.

Looking at the pace comparison between the races, they probably should have been :45 2/5 versus :46 2/5. If they go :45 2/5 in the DM, they still run 1:35 1/5 (and there's a different winner of the race). If they go :46 2/5, it's highly unlikely they go 1:35 1/5, but then again these are G1 males versus G3 females. They are supposed to be running better early fractions.

I partially agree but not totally. I would expect the grade I, male milers to run at least a full second faster than Distictive Dixie even if there wasn't much pace in the race. Even if they ran equal early fractions, I would expect the males to run a mimimun of a second faster. I agree that better quality horses usually run faster fractions but not always. I see plenty of grade I races where the fractions are not fast. On the other hand, fast fractions don't always translate to faster times. They usually do, but not always. If the best horses in the race are speed horses, if the fractions are too fast it may slow down the final time. But if the best horses in the race are come-from-behinders then a fast pace will almost always improve the final time.

Anyway, I can't tell you exactly how much the track slowed down over the course of the day. Between the two races we're talking about, it may have been only a tick or two but I think that track does slow down later in the day. Do you disagree that the track slowed down over the course of the day on opening day (Oct 31)?

[slotdirt]

Oh good God. Three Melbourne Cups does not equal one Breeders Cup Classic on pro-ride? Will someone please help the Bid get out of his box?

Getting pwned by Cannon is one thing - happens all the time - but getting pwned by Pedigree Ann? That's the stuff of legend.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I partially agree but not totally. I would expect the grade I, male milers to run at least a full second faster than Distictive Dixie even if there wasn't much pace in the race. Even if they ran equal early fractions, I would expect the males to run a mimimun of a second faster. I agree that better quality horses usually run faster fractions but not always. I see plenty of grade I races where the fractions are not fast. On the other hand, fast fractions don't always translate to faster times. They usually do, but not always. If the best horses in the race are speed horses, if the fractions are too fast it may slow down the final time. But if the best horses in the race are come-from-behinders then a fast pace will almost always improve the final time.

Anyway, I can't tell you exactly how much the track slowed down over the course of the day. Between the two races we're talking about, it may have been only a tick or two but I think that track does slow down later in the day. Do you disagree that the track slowed down over the course of the day on opening day (Oct 31)?

I don't think there's any evidence to support that. Especially considering the fact that you're dealing with 2yo's without a lot of established form.

The three outliers would be the 5th, 6th and 11th- the 5th, an allowance won by almost 20 but in a rather modest time- resulting in a 73 raw Beyer; the 6th, a very fast maiden won by 8 for an 84 raw Beyer, and the 11th, a slow maiden won with a raw Beyer of 59.

5th: The connections of Blame sent out the winner, who was visually impressive- but the also-rans looked like they wanted a place to lie down. There's a good chance this is a negative key race.

6th: Steve Asmussen sends out a dominating 2yo winner who went off favored in his 2nd start and ran well, then crushes in his 3rd start. I've heard this story before.

11th: The winner went off at 3-1 despite being in the 12 hole and debuting at Presque Isle, 4th beaten 6 lengths. The only other horse to run went off favored, and was dreadful at KEE. Clearly, this was the weakest of the three maiden races at 6F on the day. Not surprising that it was also the slowest race on the day.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by philcski

I don't think there's any evidence to support that. Especially considering the fact that you're dealing with 2yo's without a lot of established form.

The three outliers would be the 5th, 6th and 11th- the 5th, an allowance won by almost 20 but in a rather modest time- resulting in a 73 raw Beyer; the 6th, a very fast maiden won by 8 for an 84 raw Beyer, and the 11th, a slow maiden won with a raw Beyer of 59.

5th: The connections of Blame sent out the winner, who was visually impressive- but the also-rans looked like they wanted a place to lie down. There's a good chance this is a negative key race.

6th: Steve Asmussen sends out a dominating 2yo winner who went off favored in his 2nd start and ran well, then crushes in his 3rd start. I've heard this story before.

11th: The winner went off at 3-1 despite being in the 12 hole and debuting at Presque Isle, 4th beaten 6 lengths. The only other horse to run went off favored, and was dreadful at KEE. Clearly, this was the weakest of the three maiden races at 6F on the day. Not surprising that it was also the slowest race on the day.

You might be right. It's hard to say. The filly that won the 2nd race looks like a nice filly and I would have exepcted her final time to be about a second or so faster than the winner of the final race. So that is evidence that does not support my argument.

On the other hand, the 9th race that day (an allowance race that was as strong as a stakes race) went in 1:19. That $40k filly that won the 1st race ran 1:12 3/5 which is almost as fast. Yet I don't think that filly would have finished within 5 lengths if she was in the 9th race. To me that is some evidence that the track was slower later in the day.

So I don't know. There is conflicting evidence.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

You might be right. It's hard to say. The filly that won the 2nd race looks like a nice filly and I would have exepcted her final time to be about a second or so faster than the winner of the final race. So that is evidence that does not support my argument.

On the other hand, the 9th race that day (an allowance race that was as strong as a stakes race) went in 1:19. That $40k filly that won the 1st race ran 1:12 3/5 which is almost as fast. Yet I don't think that filly would have finished within 5 lengths if she was in the 9th race. To me that is some evidence that the track was slower later in the day.

So I don't know. There is conflicting evidence.

There isn't as much difference between a $40k claimer and an N1X for 2yo's; hell, Nina Fever ran the best 2yo non-stake race for winners at KEE this fall in a $30k race. I think the reason for this is most 2yo's with ability get tossed straight into stakes and skip allowance company.

I didn't think a whole lot of that allowance race when I looked at it, to be honest.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by philcski

There isn't as much difference between a $40k claimer and an N1X for 2yo's; hell, Nina Fever ran the best 2yo non-stake race for winners at KEE this fall in a $30k race. I think the reason for this is most 2yo's with ability get tossed straight into stakes and skip allowance company.

I didn't think a whole lot of that allowance race when I looked at it, to be honest.

In general you are right that most 2yo's with ability do go straight into stakes races and the2 year old allowance races often times are not that strong. But this was not a typical 2 year old allowance race. The favorite in there had just won easily at Belmont and run a 93 Beyer. The 2nd choice in there won by 10 lengths first time out at Calder and got an 80 Beyer. That horse was purchased privately after that race for $350,000 and would have gone for more if he wasn't by D' Wildcat. This was his first start since the purchase. Then there was the Catalano horse had just run 4th in the Grade III Arlington Washington Futurity. And then there was the Pletcher who had been working heads up with More Than Real and Pluck. On paper, it looked like a stakes race.