Zenyatta v. Rail Trip??

[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.