Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > Main Forum > The Paddock
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-17-2010, 12:26 AM
blackthroatedwind blackthroatedwind is offline
Jerome Park
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 9,939
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin View Post
Blame went the half in about :48 4/5 and Zenyatta was spotting him about 5 lengths at that point. If she can lay 5 lengths behind him in :48 4/5 and only lose by a head, I think she would be able to run down Life at Ten, even if Life at Ten slowed down the pace.
I love the language....she was " spotting " him five lengths....as though she gave him a head start.

Too funny.
__________________
Just more nebulous nonsense from BBB
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-17-2010, 12:42 AM
Rupert Pupkin Rupert Pupkin is offline
Del Mar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind View Post
I love the language....she was " spotting " him five lengths....as though she gave him a head start.

Too funny.
She did give him a huge head start. If they ran that race again, there is no way in hell that she would be 10 lengths behind him after 3 furlongs. He went :37. If you think that is her normal race to be 10 lengths behind a horse running 3 furlongs in :37 then I don't know what to say.

We'll never know for sure why she was so far back. It could have been the dirt in her face. Or as Cannon hypothesized, it could have been because Mike Smith did not warm her up in the post parade (in the 40 degree weather) and it took her the first 3 furlongs to get warmed up.

If they run that race again and everything went the same way in front of her, she's probably 3-5 lengths behind Blame after the 3 furlongs instead of 10 lengths behind him. That would have put her 13-15 lengths off the after 3 furlongs instead of 20 lengths off the lead.

I'm hardly the only one that thinks this. If you ask any trainer on the west coast, they will tell you the same thing. It doesn't mean for sure that we are right but it's the viewpoint of every person I know (not counting this board).
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-17-2010, 12:49 AM
Indian Charlie's Avatar
Indian Charlie Indian Charlie is offline
Goodwood
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Southern Maine
Posts: 8,708
Default

Or it could be just as DrugS predicted would happen, and why.

She's never been in a quick paced race before, and almost by default, she was going to be further back than ever before.

Either that, or God willed it. Too bad Pat Day wasn't on Z. I think God would have been on Team Zenyatta that day if he had.

I wonder if I'm the first person to ever use Zenyatta and god together in the same sentence.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-17-2010, 01:06 AM
Rupert Pupkin Rupert Pupkin is offline
Del Mar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Indian Charlie View Post
Or it could be just as DrugS predicted would happen, and why.

She's never been in a quick paced race before, and almost by default, she was going to be further back than ever before.

Either that, or God willed it. Too bad Pat Day wasn't on Z. I think God would have been on Team Zenyatta that day if he had.

I wonder if I'm the first person to ever use Zenyatta and god together in the same sentence.
That is simply untrue. She's been in plenty of races over the course of her career where the paces were similar or even faster and she was nowhere near that far back. When she broke her maiden, they went the half in :44 4/5 and she was only 8 back. In her next race, they went :46 1/5 and she was only 4 back. Granted her style has changed in that she now comes from much further back but I highly doubt that she can't comfortably be closer than 20 lengths back when they run 3 furlongs in :35. There have been plenty of races over the last year when they went :47 and change and she wasn't anywhere near 20 lengths back after 3 furlongs in any of those races.

The only race that was anything close to this was last year's BC Classic. I can't figure out what was going on with her in the early going in that race. She wasn't herself at all. She wouldn't switch leads which is unusual for her. Mike Smith tried two or three times to get her to switch before she finally did it.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-17-2010, 01:10 AM
RolloTomasi's Avatar
RolloTomasi RolloTomasi is offline
Oriental Park
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,612
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin View Post
That is simply untrue. She's been in plenty of races over the course of her career where the paces were similar or even faster and she was nowhere near that far back. When she broke her maiden, they went the half in :44 4/5 and she was only 8 back. In her next race, they went :46 1/5 and she was only 4 back. Granted her style has changed in that she now comes from much further back but I highly doubt that she can't comfortably be closer than 20 lengths back when they run 3 furlongs in :35. There have been plenty of races over the last year when they went :47 and change and she wasn't anywhere near 20 lengths back after 3 furlongs in any of those races.

The only race that was anything close to this was last year's BC Classic. I can't figure out what was going on with her in the early going in that race. She wasn't herself at all. She wouldn't switch leads which is unusual for her. Mike Smith tried two or three times to get her to switch before she finally did it.
How about the 2008 Vanity?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-17-2010, 01:24 AM
Rupert Pupkin Rupert Pupkin is offline
Del Mar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RolloTomasi View Post
How about the 2008 Vanity?
Yes, you are right. They went the half in :46 1/5 in that race. After 3 furlongs in that race, she was about 12-13 lengths back, not 20 lengths back like in this year's BC Classic.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-17-2010, 01:20 AM
Indian Charlie's Avatar
Indian Charlie Indian Charlie is offline
Goodwood
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Southern Maine
Posts: 8,708
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin View Post
That is simply untrue. She's been in plenty of races over the course of her career where the paces were similar or even faster and she was nowhere near that far back. When she broke her maiden, they went the half in :44 4/5 and she was only 8 back. In her next race, they went :46 1/5 and she was only 4 back. Granted her style has changed in that she now comes from much further back but I highly doubt that she can't comfortably be closer than 20 lengths back when they run 3 furlongs in :35. There have been plenty of races over the last year when they went :47 and change and she wasn't anywhere near 20 lengths back after 3 furlongs in any of those races.

The only race that was anything close to this was last year's BC Classic. I can't figure out what was going on with her in the early going in that race. She wasn't herself at all. She wouldn't switch leads which is unusual for her. Mike Smith tried two or three times to get her to switch before she finally did it.
Are you really comparing her 10f dirt race to her debut race and her second start?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-17-2010, 01:21 AM
Indian Charlie's Avatar
Indian Charlie Indian Charlie is offline
Goodwood
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Southern Maine
Posts: 8,708
Default

By the way Rupert, her debut and her second start were, at least to me, her two most impressive starts prior to the BCC this year.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-17-2010, 01:29 AM
Rupert Pupkin Rupert Pupkin is offline
Del Mar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Indian Charlie View Post
By the way Rupert, her debut and her second start were, at least to me, her two most impressive starts prior to the BCC this year.
I thought her 2008 Apple Blossom was huge. Not only was it extremely impressive visually but as I said in another thread, I think she ran much faster that day than anyone gives her credit for. I think the official time of the other big race that day was wrong. Like racereplays.com, I had the Oaklawn Handicap in 1:50.34, not 1:48 3/5 (the official time they came up with 2 days later). Zenyatta ran 1 1/16 miles in 1:42 3/5 just 1 hour earlier.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-17-2010, 12:56 AM
Dahoss Dahoss is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 10,293
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind View Post
I love the language....she was " spotting " him five lengths....as though she gave him a head start.

Too funny.
I also like "that's hard to say". Which means yeah, she probably would have gotten beat.

She got beat fair and square Rupert...get over it already.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 11-17-2010, 01:18 AM
Rupert Pupkin Rupert Pupkin is offline
Del Mar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dahoss View Post
I also like "that's hard to say". Which means yeah, she probably would have gotten beat.

She got beat fair and square Rupert...get over it already.
Even if you don't buy any of my arguments, I still don't see how anyone could say that the slight check turning for home didn't cost her the race. She only lost by a head. I think that slight check cost her more than a head. Blame got an absloutley perfect trip. Zenyatta did not get a perfect. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that I would expect Zenyatta to get a perfect trip. When you're a dead-last come-from-behinder in a 12 horse field, you're usually not going to get a perfect trip. But hypothetically if both horses got a perfect trip, I think Zenyatta would have won.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-17-2010, 01:33 AM
Dahoss Dahoss is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 10,293
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin View Post
Even if you don't buy any of my arguments, I still don't see how anyone could say that the slight check turning for home didn't cost her the race. She only lost by a head. I think that slight check cost her more than a head. Blame got an absloutley perfect trip. Zenyatta did not get a perfect. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that I would expect Zenyatta to get a perfect trip. When you're a dead-last come-from-behinder in a 12 horse field, you're usually not going to get a perfect trip. But hypothetically if both horses got a perfect trip, I think Zenyatta would have won.
Like I said, she lost....get over it already.

She got a nearly perfect trip and plenty of pace to run into. She ran well and just missed. Her performance doesn't need all of these reaches, what if's and excuses. Again, she ran well. She was beat by a better horse. Not much better, but he was better that day.

If you are going to play the what if games, might as well do it for her wins also. What if Switch doesn't switch to the wrong lead late in the Lady's Secret? See how silly this could get? Stuff happens in races.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-17-2010, 01:38 AM
Dahoss Dahoss is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 10,293
Default

This seems like as good a place as any to post this piece written by Vic Zast. The comments are pretty good as well.

http://www.horseraceinsider.com/Zast...talk/#comments
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-17-2010, 09:38 AM
Indian Charlie's Avatar
Indian Charlie Indian Charlie is offline
Goodwood
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Southern Maine
Posts: 8,708
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dahoss View Post
Like I said, she lost....get over it already.

She got a nearly perfect trip and plenty of pace to run into. She ran well and just missed. Her performance doesn't need all of these reaches, what if's and excuses. Again, she ran well. She was beat by a better horse. Not much better, but he was better that day.

If you are going to play the what if games, might as well do it for her wins also. What if Switch doesn't switch to the wrong lead late in the Lady's Secret? See how silly this could get? Stuff happens in races.
If that hadn't happened with Switch, Zenyatta retires with 18 wins and 1 second in 19 starts.

I'm really doubtful Z wins that race.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 11-17-2010, 10:20 AM
The Indomitable DrugS's Avatar
The Indomitable DrugS The Indomitable DrugS is offline
Flemington
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 11,007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Indian Charlie View Post
If that hadn't happened with Switch, Zenyatta retires with 18 wins and 1 second in 19 starts.

I'm really doubtful Z wins that race.
If Steve Haskin trained Blame - Zenyatta would be 20 for 20 right now. I actually heard him suggest on Byk's show before the Classic that he thought the best way to beat Zenyatta would be to get behind her early - and because he says "she hangs a bit when she gets to the lead" he thought a horse like Blame might be able to catch her hanging late.

Just imagine Garret Gomez going into that race and trying to wrestle Blame back behind Zenyatta early on. Blame is consistantly about 12 to 15 lengths faster than Zenyatta on pace figures this year. He couldn't get behind her early on if he was strangled back.

It's another example of not taking speed of surface into consideration. It's like they had no idea how slow paced Zenyatta's races truly were because they took her fractions at face value without using a variant to adjust for speed of surface.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 11-17-2010, 10:27 AM
randallscott35's Avatar
randallscott35 randallscott35 is offline
Idlewild Airport
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 9,687
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS View Post
If Steve Haskin trained Blame - Zenyatta would be 20 for 20 right now. I actually heard him suggest on Byk's show before the Classic that he thought the best way to beat Zenyatta would be to get behind her early - and because he says "she hangs a bit when she gets to the lead" he thought a horse like Blame might be able to catch her hanging late.

Just imagine Garret Gomez going into that race and trying to wrestle Blame back behind Zenyatta early on. Blame is consistantly about 12 to 15 lengths faster than Zenyatta on pace figures this year. He couldn't get behind her early on if he was strangled back.

It's another example of not taking speed of surface into consideration. It's like they had no idea how slow paced Zenyatta's races truly were because they took her fractions at face value without using a variant to adjust for speed of surface.
But the dapples...
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-17-2010, 11:55 AM
Indian Charlie's Avatar
Indian Charlie Indian Charlie is offline
Goodwood
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Southern Maine
Posts: 8,708
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS View Post
If Steve Haskin trained Blame - Zenyatta would be 20 for 20 right now. I actually heard him suggest on Byk's show before the Classic that he thought the best way to beat Zenyatta would be to get behind her early - and because he says "she hangs a bit when she gets to the lead" he thought a horse like Blame might be able to catch her hanging late.

Just imagine Garret Gomez going into that race and trying to wrestle Blame back behind Zenyatta early on. Blame is consistantly about 12 to 15 lengths faster than Zenyatta on pace figures this year. He couldn't get behind her early on if he was strangled back.

It's another example of not taking speed of surface into consideration. It's like they had no idea how slow paced Zenyatta's races truly were because they took her fractions at face value without using a variant to adjust for speed of surface.
WOW.

Haskin has lost it.

Then again, Zenyattas great ability to expose retardism for what it is, is priceless.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.