Why Rachel should go to Santa Anita
Posted Under: Breeder's Cup, Jess Jackson, Rachel Alexandra, Zenyatta
In the moments after Rachel Alexandra’s obliteration of six overmatched rivals in yesterday’s Haskell, majority owner Jess Jackson proclaimed, “We’re not going to the Breeders’ Cup.”
He needs to reconsider.
As if we needed further proof, the Haskell demonstrated again the two best non-turf horses in training today are the two magical fillies, Rachel Alexandra and Zenyatta. The former has constructed an eight-race winning streak with, for the most part, clinical ease; outside of a hard-earned Preakness victory, her races have looked more like coronations than contests. The latter, meanwhile, remains undefeated in 11 starts.
Rachel, doing her running mostly in the East, is awesome. Zenyatta, the West Coast star, is fabulous. East, of course, is East, and West is West — but in this case, the twain should meet. And the logical spot for them to meet is at the Breeders’ Cup.
As a horse owner, I’m not one to spout off about how other owners should handle their horses. I know exactly how much work goes into even one victory — exactly how many things have to go just right — and how fragile and fleeting good form can be. Most of the criticism leveled at owners is, I think, unfair. But in this instance, the case is clear.
Zenyatta’s connections have been abundantly clear. She’s going to the Breeders’ Cup, and she’s running in the major female races in Southern California on her way there. It’s a campaign that, while not especially ambitious, makes perfect sense. She’s running in major races on a major circuit en route to the season-ending championship.
The Rachel camp, meanwhile, is clearly fishing around for more mountains to climb. She’s thrashed fillies by an average of 20 lengths in her last two tries against them and now owns two victories over boys, including both the Kentucky Derby and Belmont winners. What’s left?
To take on the defending champ, Zenyatta, at the Breeders’ Cup.
The reason for not doing so appears to be that Jess Jackson doesn’t like the surface he derides as “plastic,” and his reason for not liking it is that Curlin seemingly didn’t take to it in last year’s Breeders’ Cup. While he’s by no means alone in disliking polytrack, the failure of one horse to handle it is no compelling reason to keep a different horse off it. And, of course, Curlin and Rachel are completely different horses, with completely different running styles, at completely different times.
In fact, she already owns a victory over polytrack, an allowance score at Keeneland last year. While that’s no guarantee that she’d take to Santa Anita, it certainly is an indicator that she might.
Some folks have suggested that her running style wouldn’t be suited to polytrack, but that’s ridiculous. The truth is that horses with tactical speed — and she has superior tactical speed and tremendous tractability — win far more than their fair share of races at every distance on every surface. She can get to wherever jockey Calvin Borel wants to put her and accelerate at will; that’s a winning combination no matter the surface.
Others have intimated that Zenyatta’s camp should bring her to Rachel. It’s always seemed to me, though, that one of the perks of being the champ is that folks have to come to you, and not the other way ’round. A year ago, when Ginger Punch was the reigning queen, Zenyatta traveled to Oaklawn to trounce that one. Now, as champ, her connections have made her schedule clear; anyone who wants a piece of her knows exactly where and when to find her. Moreover, while the Rachel camp has suggested a real dirt track would be a “neutral” surface, the fact is that Rachel has exactly as many wins over poly — one — as Zenyatta does over real dirt.
The obvious solution for Team Rachel would be to give her a race over the track at Santa Anita before the big race and see how she does. If she likes it, then it’s on to the Breeders’ Cup. If not, fine — head back to real dirt. There’d be no harm done; no one would think less of her if she were unsuited to the surface. Curlin, for example, still won Horse of the Year, despite losses on both grass and polytrack.
The Breeders’ Cup should not have been awarded to Santa Anita in two consecutive years. Though any surface will give a boost to some horses while disadvantaging others, putting the ostensible championships in the same place two years running compounds the problem. While we know that Zenyatta has thrived at Santa Anita, we have only one definitive way of finding out how Rachel would take to it — for her connections to put her in a race there. That’s what’s in the best interests of the game.
One thing’s for sure: If the two fillies do face off, it will be the race of the year — wherever, and whenever, it takes place.
Reader Comments
The Santa Anita surface is Pro-Ride, not polytrack. There is no “plastic” in it. Curlin handled the surface just fine. He lost because he couldn’t maintain an impressive move on the turn through the stretch. If he had been unable to handle the surface, he wouldn’t have made that move. Run Rachel in the Breeders’ Cup. If she wins, that’s great; if she doesn’t, it’s not the end of the world. It’s just a horse race.
The Pro Ride surface at Santa Anita is Hocus Pocus Junk. It is closer to turf more than any other synthetic surface and running on or near the lead and winning over that surface is tough. Remember last years Breeders Cup. The closers won the races. In addition to that there was close to a 50% carryover rate because it is an inconsitent surface as well. Gary Stute was recently quoted as saying that 80% of Trainers dislike that surface.
What more do you need to know than what I’ve outlined above. Stay away Rachel. Good for Jackson. Synthetic Surfaces are a blight on Horse Racing for sure!
I so totally agree with your story on Rachel Alexandra and Zenyatta. Since Rachel has already proven she can run on a synthetic track, what would be the harm for her to try a prep at the Oak Tree meeting. Then if things went OK stay on for the Breeders’ Cup, if not then let her have a rest and try at Churchill next year. However, a year is a long ways off and you just never know what may happen to a horse during the time span of a year.
Thanks for checking in, Steve and Andrew, and for taking the time to comment.
Steve — I’m aware that SA is not poly and was merely using that as a catchall for artificial surface. Also aware that it’s not plastic — that’s Jackson’s word, not mine. I tend to agree with you re: Curlin, too, but it’s been the contention of his camp that he couldn’t handle the surface, so…
Andrew — I know horseplayers generally hate synth-tracks (though I don’t), but I think they’re likely here to stay. I think that California acted precipitously and without sufficient consideration when it mandated artificial tracks everywhere — you likely could have gotten similar results from digging up and re-laying dirt tracks — and that the Breeders’ Cup compounded the problem by giving the big day to SA twice in a row. Nevertheless, the only people who lose out b/c Jackson hates “plastic” are the fans.
I have a purely selfish reason for wanting Rachel to go to Santa Anita. I will be there for the Breeder’s Cup and would be on cloud 9 if there was a race between these two. Talk about history in the making!
Agree that RA should try the ProRide, but not because she has to go to Zenyatta’s place. Rachel Alexandra is practically a lock on the HOTY title, Zenyatta is doing everything right to stay #1 in the Older Female division, but absolutely nothing to be HOTY. The challenger would be Zenyatta, she’s the one who still hasn’t run a single open-company championship race.
@Andrew: If Stute is right, how come the vast majority of California trainers spoke out in favor of synthetics? And your “inconsistent surface” created the most logical results of any BC in recent history. What you perceived as a closer’s track is what I’d call the absence of a strong speed bias.
MALCER, The majority of Trainers spoke out in favor of synthetic surfaces over two years ago. Since then they are overwhelmingly against them. They are more expensive to maintain and are not nearly as safe as the infomercial claimed they would be. Richard Shapiro and another former head of the CHRB came out and said they were a mistake. Having a particular surface for one good day of the racing a year makes no sense in my opinion. Let me remind you that there were almost 50% pick 6 carryovers at Santa Anita. This is unheard of. One day of what you call logical results is great but what about the rest of the year?
Simply put why should Rachel have to run on Zenyatta’s turf, why is it up to Jess Jackson to put his horse on a surface she is unfamiliar with. I don’t see Jerry Moss rushing to move his horse east and run on dirt.
How is Zenyatta any more of a “champ” than Rachel is?? At this point from a historical standpoint of what they achieved Rachel is FAR SUPERIOR, Zenyatta has ran on nothing but plastic and “want to be plastic” tracks, NEVER, against the boys. Where was Zenyatta at last years Preakness, or Haskell…wait I’ll answer that, in California on plastic.
One more point, Curlin did not handle the “want to be plastic” well; on dirt he would have beaten those horses by multiple lengths. If you don’t believe that then how can you explain Tiago beating him, they had raced multiple times on dirt and Tiago couldn’t even sniff his butt, it wasn’t he couldn’t sustain his run it was the “want to be plastic” track.
Thanks for checking in, Tricia, Bill Vicki, and Malcer.
Couple factual corrections on your thoughts, Bill: 1) Zenyatta has raced on real dirt, when she beat Ginger Punch and others at Oaklawn last year; 2) one reason she didn’t run in last year’s Preakness or Haskell was that, as a four year-old, she was ineligible. She didn’t debut until November of her three year-old season.
Forgive my inaccuracies, but the fact remains where was she two years ago…stating she didn’t debut until November simply proves my point as to who the real champ is. That’s great that she’s run of dirt, so why has Jerry Moss stated he won’t take her east to run against Rachel?
One more point as a three year old Rachel has faced and defeated the top males in her age group twice; Zenyatta has yet to run against any males of any age!!!
I totally disagree. The author is correct — the Breeder’s Cup should not have been awarded to Santa Anita two years in a row. On the other hand, it should not have been awarded to Santa Anita at all — if they were going to run “dirt” races on synthetic. They are two entirely different surfaces — as different as dirt is from turf. Given this “logic” why not run the Breeder’s Cup Turf races on dirt???
Jess Jackson is the best (two-legged) thing to happen to racing in a very long time. He is a true sportsman — and caving in to pressure (again?) and run RA on “plastic” for a “dirt” race is simply not sporting.
Until it is the Breeder’s Cup Synthetic Classic, it makes no sense to run “dirt” horses in a race that has gotten terribly confused — thanks (in part) to the misguided policy of the CA racing board to force “plastic” down the track operators throats. If you need any proof look at the horrendous breakdown record at Del Mar in the opening week.
I hope that RA is tried on the turf at some point … but synthetic tracks are all different from one track to another — and if the experience at Del Mar is of any value — the same synthetic track is different from day to day and even race to race. Hopefully, racing will come to its senses and realize that a well-maintained dirt surface is more consistent and just as safe as any synthetic surface out there.
Last year in the Breeders’ Cup, the best horses won most of the races on the Pro-ride:
ZENYATTA $3.00
STARDOM BOUND $5.60
VENTURA $7.60
MIDSHIPMAN $9.20 and SQUARE EDDIE were co-favored at 7-2 and virtually ran 1-2 the entire way.
MIDNIGHT LUTE $7.40
ALBERTUS MAXIMUS $14.60 went on to win the G.1 Donn H. over EINSTEIN.
The biggest prices were on MUHANNAK $26.80, who benefitted from the horrible ride Dettori gave favored SIXTIES ICON (stopped to a walk entering the stretch) and…
RAVEN’S PASS $29.00 who was clearly best in the Classic…anyone who says CURLIN was the same horse after his Dubai trip is smokin’ the “ganja”. Curlin’s class made that move, but he was not in the proper condition to defeat the Euros… that is why TIAGO ran past him late.
RACHEL is great, the best 3y.o. (but wait, QUALITY ROAD just broke the 6 1/2 furlong track record in the G.2 Amsterdam despite stumbling at the start!) and ZENYATTA the reigning champion. If both are undefeated before the Breeders’ Cup, the only way to settle this is on the track. Trouble is, there are some very nice 3y.o. colts in Europe that could spoil that dream showdown.
@BILL YATES…does the reigning champion have to travel to the contender??? No, never! The Breeders’ Cup has been their goal…all of ZENYATTA’s ‘09 runs are a means to that end. RACHEL has to run on ZENYATTA’s turf because that is where the Breeders’ Cup is held. Next year, RACHEL will have home court at CD for any new challengers.
AMATEURCAPPER, BS, next year Zenyatta will not run on dirt, mark my words!
As far a Curlin, was he the same, no, but you would have to be somking “ganja” (what ever that is) to think Tiago could EVER beat him, except on plastic and plastic want to be tracks!
Thanks for checking in, commenters old and new.
Stephen, I agree that poly surfaces are different — so are dirt surfaces. Anyone who’s run horses at, say, Laurel and Monmouth can vouch for that. But we generally shrug that off for dirt, whereas for synth-tracks, it’s a big deal. Moreover, my point here is that the sporting thing to do is to try her once on poly — there’s no reason not to — and if it works, go on to the BC. If not, no harm done — head back to dirt. Simply to dismiss running in the BC b/c Curlin didn’t like it makes no sense. These horses ought to meet, and the logical spot for them to do so is at the BC — the very race that was created to bring together great horses like these.
Amateurcapper:
To say the best horses won most of the BC races on the Pro-Ride and using post-time odds as evidence is misguided. That says more about bettors across the country who made astute decisions regarding who had the necessary synthetic form for success on that track.
Would Stardom Bound or Midshipman have won dirt? I highly doubt Stardom Bound would have, and Midshipman would have had to run against Vineyard Haven, a buzzsaw at the time.
I love the fact that you say “as a horse owner, I’m not one to spout off about how other owners should handle their horses” ; then immediately spout off about how another owners should handle his horse.
For the good of the sport Jackson should keep Rachel on the shelf and keep denigrating fake dirt. Synthetics have proven to be a huge mistake and it’s time to stop pretending otherwise. Since the main reason for the switch has proven to be untrue (see Del Mar) there is no reason to keep it around.
Is that Waquoit the horse? Typing with hooves? Right on!
First, I don’t see the synth-tracks as a “huge mistake,” and I’m not sure there’s data to support that. At the very least, the jury’s out on the utility of synth-tracks. To use a bad week at one track as “proof” that synth-tracks are not safer is, of course, absurd.
Second, the thing that’s driving me here is quite simply that Mr. Jackson routinely tells us how he’s all about the good of the sport and that’s all he cares about. Fine — prove it. Take on Zenyatta — or at least, don’t rule it out without trying her on the track.
Bottom of the line, the Breeders’ Cup is the definitive moment of the horse racing calendar. There will always be connections that have to come up with excuses as to why their prized thoroughbreds didn’t perform to their expectations. The fact of the matter is Curlin may have not been the same horse he Breeders’ Cup day as he may have been during the year. Oh well! They are living creatures! They are not machines! (except for Secretariat, and maybe Rachel). Jackson and his filthy choice of a trainer need to live up to their words and do what’s right for horse racing. Put what they deemed as an embarrassment from Curlin’s defeat, behind them. Zenyatta’s connections have been forth right all along with their campaign. No ducking from them. Since when has it become o.k. to plan not to run in the biggest race of the year. Where horses come from all over the world and have been coming since it’s inception. Many times European horses would come to run on a surface they wouldn’t have even trained on much less run on before. They can travel thousands of miles to another continent to decide things on the track, but J.J. can’t travel across country because everything doesn’t meet to his exact standards. It’s such a shame such a magnificent animal is connected to him. Keep giving him a free pass people. He and his crooked trainer are both a black eye to racing!
Hmm….the best horse in the world not running in the most prestigious race on the continent? It may happen.
Oh yeah, I’m not talking about Rachel, but Sea The Stars. Currently rated the top horse in training, Sea The Stars’ connections don’t want to run him on turf that is too soft. He already scratched from the Irish Derby and his connections are already putting question marks on the Arc due to the wet nature of Paris in the autumn. I haven’t seen him being castigated in the British/European press the way that Rachels’ team has been here.
Like it or not, some horses have a fondness or distaste for certain tracks and surfaces. Remember that Skip Away probably couldn’t have won a $10k claimer at Churchill and Miesque probably wouldn’t have beaten Fourstardave at Saratoga.
Personally, I’m not as upset about Rachel not going to the BC as I am about Team Zenyatta not racing, as yet anyway, out of her comfort zone. I know they probably want her to retire undefeated, but only by daring to be great are you great. She’s already in the HOF, now she needs to do more–if not ship east, then at least try the boys at least once.
Oh she’ll try the boys. I have no doubt it’ll happen sometime this year. As far as going east. She did do that in the Apple Blossom last year and had no problem beating the best the east coasters could muster. Why is she penalized for running on the west coast. She doesn’t have the option of picking and choosing which grade one she wants to run in. Back east they can pick where they want to run, and against who. You don’t like the weights you get at Saratoga, wait until next week there’ll be another grade one down the road at Monmouth. Don’t like the competition, you can go to Delaware next weekend. Etc. Etc…..Out here you don’t like your situation, you can’t very well go to Golden Gate to find a grade one, or go to Turf Paradise for one. Yet in some people’s minds it’s o.k. for horses to travel all of a couple of hours down the road and it’s considered a great feat, while the only way Zenyatta or any west coast horse can get any credit, is to travel three time zones, and at least 1500 miles. Other wise they’re blasted because they don’t leave their “comfort zone”.
I agree with Jess Jackson. It is time for the industry to stand against these synthetic/plastic tracks. It was a nice experiment that has not worked. The best horses should be on the best tracks unfortunately California tracks with their synthetics have lost their importance in racing. Its time to admit defeat and go back to a more organic approach. I want California racing to be relevant again. Thanks
Both horses have raced and won Graded stakes on dirt at Oaklawn Park. I do agree with Mr. Jackson that synthetic tracks were a premature experience. I refer to them as landfill tracks.I can see where some locations might need to consider them, but look at where they are: Keenland, Arlington and the entire left coast. Canada I can understand, but California weather? If someone who paid millions for a filly wants to dictate where she runs, then that is the American way. Look how long it took for Seabiscuit-War Admiral match race to materialize.
Bill Finley had the best idea…a neutral track like Oaklawn this fall in a one-day special event. We would love to see it.
Why Oaklawn in the fall? How about a little one day special event, that’s been on the schedule for the last twenty six years, called the Breeders’ Cup in the fall? You know why? Because Mr. Jackson and his boy have painted themselves in such a corner about the track being the ONLY reason Curlin got beat. It would diminish their arguement if they brought out Rachel. Let’s just hope his ego gets the best of him and he does the right thing for racing. Besides, what does he have to lose? If she wins, she’s the super horse everyone feels she is. If she loses, “Plastic” is the only thing that could’ve beat her. It’s a win, win for their egos.
Man you guys need to get a job. This is not going to happen no matter how much you whine. Jess and Jerry know what is best for their horses, period.
Zenyatta will stay at home, beat up on the competition, win the Breeders Cup, win the Eclipse for older mare, retire and be a broodmare.
RA will run in the Travers, barely beat Quality Road, win the Eclipse for horse of the year. Jackson will keep her in light training and ship her to Dubai for the Classic. Win or lose she will be retired.
This will put an end to all of your banter and we can concentrate on the other 10,000 race horses competing domestically.
Oh yeah, Zenyatta will be bred to………… Curlin, an in-bred cross to Mr Prospector, 3X4, but a fitting end to this insanity.
Zenyatta would get her ass handed to her.
Come on ,it’s not even a contest–The Big “Z” keeps beating up on the same tomato cans in the woeful SOCAL circuit. California racing has slipped so much in the last ten years it’s almost on a par with Turfway. Check out the cheap claimers every day running at Del Mar compared to the average card at The Spa.
Jackson is a real sportsman and is looking to next year and Dubai , not a meeting at Santa Anita with a local spoon feed heroine who has never run against colts or any quality horses in 2009
I agree with Bill. California racing is garbage. That being said, it’s not Zenyatta’s fault she races there. She went to Oaklawn last year and it was no contest, The Breeders’ Cup happenend to be at her home track. She can’t be faulted for that either. She would have faced whoever came out. She destroyed Cocoa Beach, Music Note, and Ginger Punch the best the East coast had to offer. What else can she do but run against boys. Something which she will do later this year I’m sure.
I think we often confuse what we “want” or “would like” to see with what “should” happen.
For example:
would we all like to see Rachel vs Zenyatta? Yes.
would we all like it to be in the Breeders’ Cup? Yes. (although, I’m still unclear which “Classic” Zenyatta is supposedly definitively pointed towards…seems to me she could just as easily wind up racing on a Friday as opposed to a Saturday).
“Should” it be in the Breeders’ Cup? I think that’s where it gets a bit grey. In a perfect world - absolutely, but if for whatever reason (and it’s not just Curlin that makes Jackson dislike synethetics…anyone not smoking the “ganja” who recalls last year will remember he wasn’t fond of the synthetics leading up to the ‘08 Classic either…this isn’t a 2009 development in Jess’s opinion)you don’t think your horse will favor that ground, then don’t go.
Why? Because what happens when we push our horses too much for our own amusement? Oh, that’s right…they break down and have to be euthanized.
Sorry, but I want no part of that. Not that it would be a foregone conclusion (far from it), but how would we feel if it happened and only because we had whined so loudly for it to happen?
And again, I must ask…just months ago, Jackson was “mad” in may people’s minds for entering Rachel against 3-year-old boys on the dirt in the Preakness. Folks commented that “if she breaks down, I’ll never forgive him!” and were ready to bloody their hatchets with his scalp.
Now many of these same voices DEMAND that she go 3,000 miles west, onto a pro-ride surface she’s never been on (Keeneland ain’t Santa Anita, no matter how you slice it), and take on not just boys, and not just 3-year-olds, but potentially the top older horses in the world?
Something doesn’t make sense….methinks if anyone needs to check their ego, it’s the folks assuming their own opinions are definitive judgements and trashing those who disagree.
Frank said it best when he mentioned how much preparation has to go into any winning effort. Likewise, it takes quite a healthy dose of things going wrong (rather than just one person’s actions) to get us where we are today.
Bottom line though - why worry about it? If we spend all this time hyping Rachel vs Zenyatta, you know what will happen….
Colonel John, Sariska, or Sea of Stars will swoop in and steal the show.
It always works like that.
In other words -it ain’t worth getting our panties in a bunch over.
As “good for the sport” as people think Rachel vs Zenyatta would be - I think we miss the point.
ANY race featuring Rachel is “good for the sport” and potential front page news.
Nobody (outside of us racing fans) gives a rats about Zenyatta. Let me be clear - I LOVE Zenyatta. She’s my “slow cheetah” - gave her out as my first public handicapping selection in her maiden race - but I know that nobody in my circle of friends knows who she is, yet they all know Rachel.
My point being - we don’t need Rachel vs Zenyatta to appeal to a broader fan base. All we need is Rachel. The only people Rachel vs Zenyatta matters to are us - racing fans - and we ought to know better by now that when we focus on two specific horses, a third one invariably beats us each and every time.
Great article Frank.
Thanks for checking in, Kevin, and for the kind words. But I’ma have to disagree with you on a couple of things.
First, I think it’s an enormous leap of logic to go from where I am — that she ought to try the Pro-Ride once, see how it goes, and make a judgment from that — to where you are, which is that if she does, she’ll break down and be euthanized. In other words… eeeeassssyyy, skipper.
Second, I disagree that it’s only about Rachel. While she’s obviously the biggest star right now, I think it would be an absolute marketing bonanza to have East vs West, two super-fillies, the conqueror of the boys vs the undefeated defending champ — it would provide spectacular marketing opps that Rachel on her own (or Rachel running against the faceless mass of mediocre older males) just doesn’t provide.
Finally, Jackson and friends haven’t provided any reason or indication (to my knowledge) that they don’t think she’d like the pro-ride — just that Jackson himself doesn’t like it. Hell, they tried Curlin on the grass when it was pretty clear that that wasn’t going to work the way they wanted it to.
Why does it matter what surface they run on? It’s about the horse.
To a degree, you ought to do things that are good for the game that puts food on your table. There are, however, limits to this, and with this situation we have reached those limits. It was bad enough that the CHRB forced the state tracks to install artificial surfaces but the Breeders’ Cup compounded problems by awarding the event to Santa Anita for two straight years. Jess Jackson doesn’t like artificial surfaces and many, many West Coast trainers I’ve spoken to are in accord with him. Bob Baffert, in his Hall of Fame induction speech, said he almost quit the game, demoralized, when Del Mar put down its surface, which anybody — take DRF’s Brad Free, for one — will tell you has eliminated the value of a truly fast horse. Baffert’s wife told him to pack up his horses and take them to Saratoga. Yes, that may have been playing to the house a little bit, but you get the point. I have never been a great Jess Jackson fan, but he saw a great horse, a horse capable of doing wondrous things, and bought to her allow her the chance to do them. She won the Preakness — enough for a career right there — and then the Mother Goose and Haskel in laughers. She blew the doors off an excellent Belmont winner. She, herself, owes the game nothing and has given us everything, besides Mine That Bird’s shocking Derby, the only genuinely riveting racing in North America this year. So no one, and I mean no one, should tell the connections of this horse what they need to do. They need to do what’s best for their horse and themselves, even if that means nothing more than feeding a philosophical need to publicly snub the inflated demands of the Breeders’ Cup and those who have staked their reputations on artificial tracks. I admire the handling of Rachel Alexandra and will live if she never meets Zenyatta. The filly owes me nothing.