world t bred rankings

[CSC]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

Since they're done overseas I can't fault you for not knowing how these are compiled. The numbers are assigned to horses based on their best performance in a given year. If you're not familiar with Harbinger go to Youtube and watch his race at Ascot. If you watch it and then think that from Japnshe should be ranked with him my hats off to you.

As far as what happened one, two and three years ago, they matter as much in those rankings as they do the HOTY vote. Blame was also a graded stakes winner before she won the Classic last year.

Check the races of Snow Fairy, her Oaks victories and especially this early morning's QE II from Japan, I think she's better than Ouiji Board.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Harmonius showed much more speed than ever before and absolutely obliterated Evening Jewel by an extremely lopsided margin for a turf race at Keeneland.

I don't disagree that she was better than EJ when EJ beat her in the Del Mar Oaks .. but that doesn't mean you have to pretend that she didn't improve a ton in her next race when Shirreffs started to drill on her.

I'm not pretending, I agree. But why leave out that part?

You don't have to pretend Blame didn't improve in the Classic, because you have some weird thing against his campaign. He did and the prep served it's purpose.

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by CSC

Check the races of Snow Fairy, her Oaks victories and especially this early morning's QE II from Japan, I think she's better than Ouiji Board.

That was phenomenal, I watched it last night (or morning). It was hilarious how much money Ave took in the pools.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

You don't have to pretend Blame didn't improve in the Classic, because you have some weird thing against his campaign. He did and the prep served it's purpose.

Obviously he improved - but in my opinion because of pace...the same reason Fly Down improved. Fly Down got bounced around and didn't have the most candy of trips - and still Blame didn't improve on him from the JCGC to the BC Classic.

It's pretty sad if we have horses running 5 times a year like Blame did - and they have trainers keeping them short like you believe. Stall didn't want to have him to sharp because he might bounce from the stress of a big race and his hard campaign? Come on.

It's a prep because he lost and ran slightly below par. It's a prep for Fly Down because he lost and ran slightly below par. I suppose it was the Super Bowl for Haynesfield because he was loose on an easy lead and ran huge.

That stuff is so after the fact. If Rail Trip was sharp and set a real strong pace and ran Haynesfield into the ground - and Blame and Fly Down come swooping by and the pace sets up so Blame runs a 109 Beyer .. than it's not a prep.

[zippyneedsawin]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Obviously he improved - but in my opinion because of pace...the same reason Fly Down improved. Fly Down got bounced around and didn't have the most candy of trips - and still Blame didn't improve on him from the JCGC to the BC Classic.

It's pretty sad if we have horses running 5 times a year like Blame did - and they have trainers keeping them short like you believe. Stall didn't want to have him to sharp because he might bounce from the stress of a big race and his hard campaign? Come on.

It's a prep because he lost and ran slightly below par. It's a prep for Fly Down because he lost and ran slightly below par. I suppose it was the Super Bowl for Haynesfield because he was loose on an easy lead and ran huge.

That stuff is so after the fact. If Rail Trip was sharp and set a real strong pace and ran Haynesfield into the ground - and Blame and Fly Down come swooping by and the pace sets up so Blame runs a 109 Beyer .. than it's not a prep.

Personally, I think the jock switch also helped Fly Down a bit.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Obviously he improved - but in my opinion because of pace...the same reason Fly Down improved. Fly Down got bounced around and didn't have the most candy of trips - and still he didn't improve on Blame from the JCGC to the BC Classic.

It's pretty sad if we have horses running 5 times a year like Blame did - and they have trainers keeping them short like you believe. Stall didn't want to have him to sharp because he might bounce from the stress of a big race and his hard campaign? Come on.

It's a prep because he lost and ran slightly below par. It's a prep for Fly Down because he lost and ran slightly below par. I suppose it was the Super Bowl for Haynesfield because he was loose on an easy lead and ran huge.

That stuff is so after the fact. If Rail Trip was sharp and set a real strong pace and ran Haynesfield into the ground - and Blame and Fly Down come swooping by and the pace sets up so Blame runs a 109 Beyer .. than it's not a prep.

You are smarter than this, I know it. And it's not after the fact. I said it right after the JCGC and before the Classic.

It's weird, you use Beyers when they suit your arguement, but not when they don't.

[CSC]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

That was phenomenal, I watched it last night (or morning). It was hilarious how much money Ave took in the pools.

That was a performance I would rank right there with Harbinger's King George.

Btw Ouija Board never finished higher than 3rd in the Japan Cup, abeit one of her tries was against Deep Impact, this one is interesting, a repeat of the QE II will make her close to unbeatable. But connections are coy. If anything I hope we see Snow Fairy next year at the BC!

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

It's pretty sad if we have horses running 5 times a year like Blame did - and they have trainers keeping them short like you believe. Stall didn't want to have him to sharp because he might bounce from the stress of a big race and his hard campaign? Come on.

And yet you're totally comfortable proclaiming Zenyatta, with her arduous 6-race campaign, as merely prepping in her pre-BC starts simply because she uncorked a bullet work right before the race.

I guess Blame working in :58+ with stablemate Apart (who subsequently took a Graded Stakes) before the Classic isn't considered a "screw tightening" program.

John Shirreffs is clearly the only trainer in North America who knows how to get a horse ready for a big effort. He's the greatest horseman alive.

To bad his sportsmanship is inversely proportional to his horsemanship.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

You are smarter than this, I know it. And it's not after the fact. I said it right after the JCGC and before the Classic.

After the JCGC is after the fact. That's as after the fact as it gets.

You said it because the horse ran worse than you expected and you expect him to bounce back and run better in the next race.

Originally Posted by Dahoss

It's weird, you use Beyers when they suit your arguement, but not when they don't

The Beyers improved between the two races because his circumstances improved. Same exact thing with JCGC 3rd place finisher Fly Down.

The Beyer declined with Haynesfield because of circumstance.

Trips and circumstances dictate outcomes.

Basically - I believe Blame improved because his setup did. I believe Fly Down improve because his setup did. I believe Haynesfield declined sharply because of the difference of his two trips.

You seem to be saying that Blame improved because his trainer purposefully kept him short for the JCGC .. and Fly Down improved because Zito also purposefully kept him short and couldn't care less if he won the JCGC .. and Haynesfield won the JCGC because it was his Super Bowl .. and he declined sharply in the BC Classic solely because he won the Super Bowl last time and the Classic was just his Pro Bowl game or letdown game and he was over the top.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

You seem to be saying that Blame improved because his trainer purposefully kept him short for the JCGC .. and Fly Down improved because Zito also purposefully kept him short and couldn't care less if he won the JCGC .. and Haynesfield won the JCGC because it was his Super Bowl .. and he declined sharply in the BC Classic solely because he won the Super Bowl last time and the Classic was just his Pro Bowl game or letdown game and he was over the top.

This not what I am saying at all and you know it. Read Rollo's post. He explains it pretty well.

The after the fact stuff is a nice touch though. Especially coming from you.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

And yet you're totally comfortable proclaiming Zenyatta, with her arduous 6-race campaign, as merely prepping in her pre-BC starts simply because she uncorked a bullet work right before the race.

I guess Blame working in :58+ with stablemate Apart (who subsequently took a Graded Stakes) before the Classic isn't considered a "screw tightening" program.

John Shirreffs is clearly the only trainer in North America who knows how to get a horse ready for a big effort. He's the greatest horseman alive.

To bad his sportsmanship is inversely proportional to his horsemanship.

Shirreffs is the single greatest trainer I've ever seen with workouts. Look at his records with first time starters when he had 505 farms

He has developed a pattern of doing this stuff with established stakes horses. It's why I liked Life Is Sweet in the Distaff so much last year.

As for Blame's 58.80 work - you have to consider the speed of the race track - a 2-year-old maiden named Impersonataor actually worked a 58.40 bullet that morning .. and he was off the board in his next start. I doubt it was anything like Zenyatta's two works .. where she worked with two horses, a fresh horse was thrown at her in the middle of the work, and she worked for almost a furlong past the wire.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

The after the fact stuff is a nice touch though. Especially coming from you.

It's totally after the fact! If Blame won the race by five - would you still say it was a prep and he was short?

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

He has developed a pattern of doing this stuff with established stakes horses. It's why I liked Life Is Sweet in the Distaff so much last year.

Just like this year's JCGC, I think the 2009 BC Distaff was a result of the pace and not Life Is Sweet's specific workout pattern.

You wearing a Mill Ridge baseball cap as you type this filth?

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

It's totally after the fact! If Blame won the race by five - would you still say it was a prep and he was short?

When I bet the JCGC I spread, using all 4 of the main contenders, including Haynesfield. Almost immediately after the race I said Blame ran like a horse that needed the race and I couldn't wait to bet him back. My betting indicated I didn't think Blame was going to be fully cranked.

My only point is Stall did not have Blame fully cranked because the goal was not the JCGC. You disagree. Apparently Shirreffs is the only trainer that points to a specific race and trains that way.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

Just like this year's JCGC, I think the 2009 BC Distaff was a result of the pace and not Life Is Sweet's specific workout pattern.

You wearing a Mill Ridge baseball cap as you type this filth?

You're probably right - that was the other reason I liked Life Is Sweet. She finished behind Letheal Heat twice in a row - and rolled in the BC Distaff.

I wish you would have told Serling that Mott was tanking Unrivaled Belle on Super Saturday... because he called her a lock for that race. Do the man a favor!

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

Apparently Shirreffs is the only trainer that points to a specific race and trains that way.

He's the best around at doing it.

He's a wizard at getting horses ready off of workouts.

Blame and Fly Down both benefited equally from preps - and Haynesfield won his Super Bowl and lost his Pro Bowl.

I'm sorry - but I don't buy it. They weren't beating Rinterval and Switch by slight margins with a horse who has an established pattern of running peak performances in the Breeders Cup.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

He's the best around at doing it.

He's a wizard at getting horses ready off of workouts.

Blame and Fly Down both benefited equally from preps - and Haynesfield won his Super Bowl and lost his Pro Bowl.

I'm sorry - but I don't buy it. They weren't beating Rinterval and Switch by slight margins with a horse who has an established pattern of running peak performances in the Breeders Cup.

Who is denying Shirreffs isn't good at it? I'm saying he isn't the only one that can do it.

You don't think Blame benefitted from the JCGC? Hilarious.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

You don't think Blame benefitted from the JCGC? Hilarious.

He benefited enough from it that Fly Down got into some trouble and benefited at least as much or more.

We aren't going to agree on this.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

He benefited enough from it that Fly Down got into some trouble and benefited at least as much or more.

What does one have to do with the other? I'll save you the time....nothing.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

You're probably right - that was the other reason I liked Life Is Sweet. She finished behind Letheal Heat twice in a row - and rolled in the BC Distaff.

I wish you would have told Serling that Mott was tanking Unrivaled Belle on Super Saturday... because he called her a lock for that race. Do the man a favor!

Part of the problem with this argument is that you are taking it too literal when one uses the term "prep". I'm not really sure if it was Al Stall's intent to lose the JCGC but certainly its possible he didn't, in his judgement, "crank" the colt to full capacity. Or maybe he couldn't have the horse "fully crank" because he hadn't run in 6 weeks or so. Or maybe its all on the horse and he simply wasn't training as well as he did for the BC Classic.

Simply put, the running line for the JCGC was reflective of a classic "prep". That says nothing of the trainer's actual intent. See Thunder Gulch's Blue Grass, Sea Hero's Blue Grass, Unbridled's Blue Grass, Go For Gin's Wood, Unbridled's Super Derby, Tiznow's second Goodwood, Lemon Drop Kid's Jim Dandy, Street Sense's Kentucky Cup, etc. A lot of those efforts were, as you say, the result of pace scenario and other non-ideal conditions (which might be applicable to Unrivaled Belle--who finally got out of the sitting duck spot chasing clear frontrunners in the Distaff). But they still can be called "preps", if for no other reason than their respecitve trainers saw enough to continue on to the Big Dance afterwards.

At any rate, whether you want to say that Blame's JCGC was below par or not, it certainly wasn't a "stinker" or "horrible" as I have seen it referred to, and certainly should not mean that he doesn't deserve HOY.