Jerry Brown's letter to TDN on HOY discussion

[Travis Stone]

The debate continues, yet everyone refuses to bring dynamics into play when talking about the Woodward. It's making my head hurt. I don't care if she beat Macho Again by a whisker's whisker... the dynamics of the race were piled against her as high as you can pile them, and she still won.

[CSC]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

The debate continues, yet everyone refuses to bring dynamics into play when talking about the Woodward. It's making my head hurt. I don't care if she beat Macho Again by a whisker's whisker... the dynamics of the race were piled against her as high as you can pile them, and she still won.

Yes, but by only a desparate head. One can say the same thing about Zenyatta's Classic, the race was hardly made for a deep closer to win especially with the loss of a pace prescence moments before the start of the race and she did it with more authority and against a much deeper field quality wise than RA did. If HOY was solely based on who is the superior horse, Zenyatta should win, Rachel is a fine filly in her own right but competition does matter and given both had to overcome some sort adversity in both races. How can anyone say Zenyatta wasn't more impressive.

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by CSC

Yes, but by only a desparate head. One can say the same thing about Zenyatta's Classic, the race was hardly made for a deep closer to win especially with the loss of a pace prescence moments before the start of the race and she did it with more authority and against a much deeper field quality wise than RA did. If HOY was solely based on who is the superior horse, Zenyatta should win, Rachel is a fine filly in her own right but competition does matter and given both had to overcome some sort adversity in both races. How can anyone say Zenyatta wasn't more impressive.

So the fractions and race flow didn't matter because Quality Road got scratched? Wow.

The fact of the matter is that Zenyatta had a TERRIFIC trip in the Classic. The fact that Smith negotiated those tight spots with that heffer without getting into any trouble is nothing short of amazing. The pace completely collapsed in front of her, but I guess you and Trevor Denman are the only people who thought she needed to be a "superhorse" to win from four lengths out on a track that favored closers in a race that was falling apart.

Zenyatta did some terrific things and ran against the race flow repeatedly in her career, but she did not do so in the Classic. Not in any way, shape or form.

NT

[CSC]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

The fact of the matter is that Zenyatta had a TERRIFIC trip in the Classic. The fact that Smith negotiated those tight spots with that heffer without getting into any trouble is nothing short of amazing. The pace completely collapsed in front of her, but I guess you and Trevor Denman are the only people who thought she needed to be a "superhorse" to win from four lengths out on a track that favored closers in a race that was falling apart.

Zenyatta did some terrific things and ran against the race flow repeatedly in her career, but she did not do so in the Classic. Not in any way, shape or form.

NT

Yes, she did have a nice trip, by staying on the rail until Smith let her out. but let's not confuse this into a 'Giacomo' random result. The pace was not super fast and she did it with authority. I think alot of people just like to look at that inside - outside move as the only reason she won. It couldn't be further from the case, I never was a fan of hers till this race but one thing I can do is recognize an extraordinary performance as she had that day. She never asked for my respect as a racefan but she earned it that day.

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by CSC

Yes, she did have a nice trip, by staying on the rail until Smith let her out. but let's not confuse this into a 'Giacomo' random result. The pace was not super fast and she did it with authority. I think alot of people just like to look at that inside - outside move as the only reason she won. It couldn't be further from the case, I never was a fan of hers till this race but one thing I can do is recognize an extraordinary performance as she had that day. She never asked for my respect as a racefan but she earned it that day.

Who's confusing it to a Giacomo type result? The trip goes far beyond the fact that Smith saved ground then got a break every time he needed a spot before the sea parted for her just outside the eighth pole.

You can't possibly analyze trips without taking the pace into account and it worked incredibly well in Zenyatta's favor in the Classic.

Like I said before she won despite some negative pace setups earlier in her career, of course she beat complete mediocrities in doing so, but she did it nonetheless.

NT

[CSC]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

Who's confusing it to a Giacomo type result? The trip goes far beyond the fact that Smith saved ground then got a break every time he needed a spot before the sea parted for her just outside the eighth pole.

You can't possibly analyze trips without taking the pace into account and it worked incredibly well in Zenyatta's favor in the Classic.

Like I said before she won despite some negative pace setups earlier in her career, of course she beat complete mediocrities in doing so, but she did it nonetheless.

NT

It wasn't like everything went her way completely, she had a flat footed start spotted the field more than a few lengths, like I said this is a grade one field with fractions of 24.16 - 47.88 fractions a walk in the park for a horse like Regal Ransom. I think what is lost or taken for granted is the ease in which she went by the best dirt/synth field of the yr, we can argue surfaces but you put a very good horse on a big stage and she still exceeds expectations, that's something great in my books.

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by CSC

It wasn't like everything went her way completely, she had a flat footed start spotted the field more than a few lengths, like I said this is a grade one field with fractions of 24.16 - 47.88 fractions a walk in the park for a horse like Regal Ransom. I think what is lost or taken for granted is the ease in which she went by the best dirt/synth field of the yr, we can argue surfaces but you put a very good horse on a big stage and she exceeds expectations, that's something great in my books.

Your passionate distaste for Rachel Alexandra and your incessant fervor to prop up Zenyatta clearly makes you incapable of objectively analyzing the way the Classic played out.

Look at the chart and see where the horses on the lead finished. It'll become very clear.

Look, the Classic was a very good effort from an exceptional horse but to turn it into some other-worldly performance like you seem to be trying to do is irrational. In truth, Zenyatta's Classic win was probably about the fourth most impressive Classic win in the last six years.

NT

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

Who's confusing it to a Giacomo type result? The trip goes far beyond the fact that Smith saved ground then got a break every time he needed a spot before the sea parted for her just outside the eighth pole.

You can't possibly analyze trips without taking the pace into account and it worked incredibly well in Zenyatta's favor in the Classic.

Like I said before she won despite some negative pace setups earlier in her career, of course she beat complete mediocrities in doing so, but she did it nonetheless.

NT

you're wasting your time.

[CSC]

Originally Posted by Danzig

you're wasting your time.

I feel the exact same way, a waste of time.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Danzig

you're wasting your time.

you are right. Its like argueing with a brick wall.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by CSC

Yes, she did have a nice trip, by staying on the rail until Smith let her out. but let's not confuse this into a 'Giacomo' random result. The pace was not super fast and she did it with authority. I think alot of people just like to look at that inside - outside move as the only reason she won. It couldn't be further from the case, I never was a fan of hers till this race but one thing I can do is recognize an extraordinary performance as she had that day. She never asked for my respect as a racefan but she earned it that day.

You have no clue how to recognize an extraordinary performance.

You still say "oh Rachel only beat Macho again by a whisker" THAT was an EXTRAordinary performance. So was Zenyatta's.. but you have proved you cant recognize an extraordinary performance.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by CSC

Yes, but by only a desparate head. One can say the same thing about Zenyatta's Classic, the race was hardly made for a deep closer to win especially with the loss of a pace prescence moments before the start of the race and she did it with more authority and against a much deeper field quality wise than RA did. If HOY was solely based on who is the superior horse, Zenyatta should win, Rachel is a fine filly in her own right but competition does matter and given both had to overcome some sort adversity in both races. How can anyone say Zenyatta wasn't more impressive.

I can.

Rachel was incredibly impressive time after time after time. Zenyatta was incredibly impressive once.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

The debate continues, yet everyone refuses to bring dynamics into play when talking about the Woodward. It's making my head hurt. I don't care if she beat Macho Again by a whisker's whisker... the dynamics of the race were piled against her as high as you can pile them, and she still won.

I've posted on this before. Speaking in the historical perspective of two turn Grade I races at Saratoga (Whitney and Woodward), the internal fractions of the Woodward were not that fast. They were average, at best, for a Grade I race at 9F.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

I've posted on this before. Speaking in the historical perspective of two turn Grade I races at Saratoga (Whitney and Woodward), the internal fractions of the Woodward were not that fast. They were average, at best, for a Grade I race at 9F.

Originally Posted by Cardus

It's making my head hurt that people do not understand the above.

Based upon Moss pace figures, the pace of the Woodward was one of the faster routes of the year. But the kicker is she was a 3-year-old filly facing elders! That's pretty remarkable. Furthermore, in the two of the faster races to the standard route pace call, she was a winner...



Above that, pace dynamics, race shapes and flow aren't just about the fractions. It's about pressure... which was there non-stop. She wilted the competition in the Woodward. Say what you want about Macho Again and his inconsequential future starts, but he was a quality race horse at Saratoga and in good form, yet he still couldn't catch her.



I will certainly give credit where credit is due, and Zenyatta overcame some pretty insane pace scenarios in her wins this year. Many of her races were very slow early. The question there is who you are running down. Running down a weak horse with a slow pace is a lot easier than holding off a quality horse with a fast pace, in my opinion.

For the record, the Classic was very similar to last year... as Per Moss...

And Zenyatta’s mad dash through the stretch in the Classic came after a pace that was not substantially quicker than the 2008 running.

Par: 56-66-81-91/97
Classic ’09 (Zenyatta): 52-63-77-89/97
Classic ’08 (Raven’s Pass): 53-61-73-87/96
Santa Anita Hcp ’09 (Einstein): 46-61-72-86/94

But I'm not about criticizing the abilities of either. I recognize both as pretty special. The arguments people are attempting to make to dispel Rachel Alexandra's year-long domination of horse racing, however, does not trump the big win for Zenyatta, in my opinion.

Using comparative handicapping and conditional results such as "If she beat him, then he should beat her and him while they beat the others" is baseless. Arguments about overall career records "need not apply." Speed figures? They don't count... two different surfaces. The fact Rachel Alexandra skipped the Classic? How is it fair to criticize synthetics in everyday handicapping but when someone uses the surface to dictate a decision, it's suddenly not?

Horse of the Year is not about who would beat whom. Does anyone think Favorite Trick would have beat Skip Away? Of course not. Horse of the Year is about recognizing the body of work for the year. And in my opinion, and it's unfortunate because truthfully, and ultimately, Zenyatta probably wins her fair share of head-to-head match-ups against Rachel, the body of work Rachel Alexandra put out this year was a notch or two better.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

Above that, pace dynamics, race shapes and flow aren't just about the fractions. It's about pressure... which was there non-stop. She wilted the competition in the Woodward. Say what you want about Macho Again and his inconsequential future starts, but he was a quality race horse at Saratoga and in good form, yet he still couldn't catch her.

Rachel ran a very gutsy race in the Woodward, and it was an awesome experience to be at Saratoga that afternoon. But let's not make the performance more than it was. To say that she "wilted" the competition is a gross overstatement. Da' Tara was eased in his race prior to the Woodward (was he wilted that afternoon by Le Grand Cru), so to use his result as evidence of the strength of the pace is not compelling. The only other forwardly-placed horse in the race was Past the Point who, as evidenced by his subsequent effort in the Bold Ruler, is clearly not the same horse that took Curlin to the wire in the 2008 Woodward.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

Rachel ran a very gutsy race in the Woodward, and it was an awesome experience to be at Saratoga that afternoon. But let's not make the performance more than it was. To say that she "wilted" the competition is a gross overstatement. Da' Tara was eased in his race prior to the Woodward (was he wilted that afternoon by Le Grand Cru), so to use his result as evidence of the strength of the pace is not compelling. The only other forwardly-placed horse in the race was Past the Point who, as evidenced by his subsequent effort in the Bold Ruler, is clearly not the same horse that took Curlin to the wire in the 2008 Woodward.

Wilted is relative... she did wilt that field, but what degree of wilt is this wilting in the larger world of wilting? That's a fair debate, but is minor in the bigger Horse of the Year debate.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

Rachel ran a very gutsy race in the Woodward, and it was an awesome experience to be at Saratoga that afternoon. But let's not make the performance more than it was. To say that she "wilted" the competition is a gross overstatement. Da' Tara was eased in his race prior to the Woodward (was he wilted that afternoon by Le Grand Cru), so to use his result as evidence of the strength of the pace is not compelling. The only other forwardly-placed horse in the race was Past the Point who, as evidenced by his subsequent effort in the Bold Ruler, is clearly not the same horse that took Curlin to the wire in the 2008 Woodward.

Name the last horse to run with Rachel and live to tell about it? Is Big Drama or was Big Drama quick enough.. Even wonder colt lol Summer Bird was left for dead in the Haskel .. Because Rachel is HoY doesn't mean she is necessarily better then Zenyatta it just means her total years accomplishments are superior to the efforts of Zenyatta.. I have really no clue which one is better? To me Rachel SEEMS faster SEEMS better..

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by freddymo

Name the last horse to run with Rachel and live to tell about it? Is Big Drama or was Big Drama quick enough.. Even wonder colt lol Summer Bird was left for dead in the Haskel .. Because Rachel is HoY doesn't mean she is necessarily better then Zenyatta it just means her total years accomplishments are superior to the efforts of Zenyatta.. I have really no clue which one is better? To me Rachel SEEMS faster SEEMS better..

Not that it's her fault, because she can only run against those that line up in the gate against her, but Rachel never competed in a race where one of her rivals was a quality speed horse that could go a route of ground. (Big Drama certainly doesn't fit that bill, and his pre-race antics at Pimlico only hurt his cause further.) I have always wondered what the outcome of the Woodward would have been had Nick Zito's entry in the Woodward been Commentator rather than Da' Tara. (Yes, I know he was retired by that point, but he's the type of horse that I'm thinking of.)

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

Rachel ran a very gutsy race in the Woodward, and it was an awesome experience to be at Saratoga that afternoon. But let's not make the performance more than it was. To say that she "wilted" the competition is a gross overstatement. Da' Tara was eased in his race prior to the Woodward (was he wilted that afternoon by Le Grand Cru), so to use his result as evidence of the strength of the pace is not compelling. The only other forwardly-placed horse in the race was Past the Point who, as evidenced by his subsequent effort in the Bold Ruler, is clearly not the same horse that took Curlin to the wire in the 2008 Woodward.

So the horses on the pace were bad, which means she should have set a very fast pace and buried them. Then the horses who were closing are also bad so she should have been able to hold them off easily.

Those are high expectations for a 3YO filly who had been tested on multiple occasions and was facing older horses for the first time.

NT

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

So the horses on the pace were bad, which means she should have set a very fast pace and buried them. Then the horses who were closing are also bad so she should have been able to hold them off easily.

Those are high expectations for a 3YO filly who had been tested on multiple occasions and was facing older horses for the first time.

Just so words aren't put in my mouth, I'll give you my recap of the race: Rachel set a rapid (not suicidal, as has been described) pace. Calvin chose to put her on the pace and out in the 2-3 path rather than taking back and getting boxed (as many people before the race thought Past the Point was likely to be a "dead send" from the outside post, as he was in last year's Woodward, and if Borel rated, Rachel could end up a marked horse like Ginger Punch was in the 2008 Go For Wand). She faced steady pressure to her inside from a weak race horse in Da' Tara for about five furlongs. When Da' Tara gave way, Rachel was hounded by Past the Point, but hard, head-to-head pressure from that rival never materialized. She shook loose on the turn and held off a determined challenge from an in-form closer in Macho Again (no world beater, but a legitimate Grade II type) under steady pressure in a very gutsy effort.

She was clearly the best horse in the Woodward, as she was in all her races this year and is a future Hall of Famer, but the attempts by some to elevate the Woodward performance to some kind of other-worldly performance, IMO, are wrong. Efforts of that caliber in this race belong to horses such as Holy Bull, Formal Gold and Ghostzapper. When trying to compare great performances in an historic race, I don't think "for a filly" is the standard. (And just so no one thinks I'm Rachel-bashing, while Zenyatta's win in the Classic was an outstanding performance by a terrific mare, it pales in comparison to the Breeders' Cup Classic performances of horses like Ghostzapper, Ferdinand, Sunday Silence, Awesome Again and the 3YO Tiznow.)