You’ve got to hand it Jess Jackson. The man sure knows how to keep things interesting. Following his official announcement today that his filly Rachel Alexandra will not run in the 2009 Breeders’ Cup Classic at Santa Anita this October, the horse racing world is once again buzzing with passionate debate. Already folks are lining up on one side or the other. Depending on where you stand, his decision was either totally correct or tragically flawed.
Given my history of affection for his previous champion, it’s probably not surprising that I’m in the former camp.
Allow me to explain in detail.
First things first. Not a single day has gone bye since last October that I haven’t remembered with disgust the sight of watching Curlin, the world’s undisputed best dirt horse, struggle over a turf impersonating Santa Anita Pro Ride in the 2008 Classic. As a testament to his courage, heart, and talent, he managed to get to the front as the field straightened out for the stretch, but it was only for a fleeting moment. Within seconds he was being blown past by the likes of eventual “champion” Raven’s Pass. In my mind, for fans of Curlin and for horse racing, this was an absolutely unforgivable crime.
I said it last year, and I’ll say it again now:
“Artificial surfaces produce artificial (dirt) champions.”
It’s really as simple as that.
Now, looking back at Jess Jackson and his decision: Put yourself in the man’s shoes. Despite it being a veritable money pit from a profitability standpoint, the man brought back the 2007 Horse of the Year “for the fans”, and raced him around the world from Kentucky, to New York, to Dubai. He was victorious everywhere he went. What was the thanks he had in the end? Oh yeah, that’s right: “Hey Jess, now you have to ship your horse to California to run over a plastic surface!”
Great, grand, wonderful. Way to ruin our precious little field trip!
Now we’re left with a perplexing situation. Just weeks ago, folks were declaring their “concern” that Jackson would have the audacity to run Rachel Alexandra in either the Preakness or the Belmont. “My god….has he lost his mind??? Doesn’t he realize she’s just a filly?”
Rachel put those concerns to bed by romping from gate to wire, holding off the Kentucky Derby winner to become the first filly in 85 years to win the Preakness. Moreover, she instantly established herself as the most popular 3-year-old in the nation, as well as the most talented.
Fast forward to today, and it’s amazing that suddenly Jackson is a villain for not wanting to run his horse in (presumably) the Breeders’ Cup Classic? What? I seriously don’t get this.
The infamous “keyboard cat” of youtube fame plays off a true villian
Wouldn’t she be facing boys again in the Classic? Wouldn’t she also have to tackle a new surface? How is that not MORE alarming than the worries expressed prior to the Preakness? Sometimes I think folks just love to hate. Give ‘em any excuse in the world, and they’ll seize on it. Truth be told, Rachel has been on synthetics before. She’s got a victory at Keeneland at the Allowance level, but the Pro Ride at Santa Anita is an entirely different story.
Need another consideration? What about her running style? She’s basically a front runner, with the ability to press/rate if the situation demands. My question for fellow handicappers is this: When considering the chances of a speedy type such as Rachel, aren’t you more comfortable with such a runner on a true dirt surface than a synthetic surface? To be fair, it’s not like front runners DON”T win at Santa Anita. They do…in fact sometimes they win in bunches, but typically you expect a synthetic race to be run closer to a traditional turf race – with a bit of a cavalry charge finish. My suspicion is that if Rachel had to fight for the lead every step of the way, as she did against Big Drama in the 2009 Preakness, that she’d probably fade in the stretch. I’ve no interest in seeing that, personally, and I’m sure Jess feels the same way. It’s not fair to the horse, it’s not fair to the purity/integrity of the game and the “championships” themselves, and it’s certainly not fair to those that love her and want to see her put in position to succeed.
Consider for a moment the role of the owner in all of this. In other sports, such as football, we praise coaches who “get the most of their athletes” by “putting them in position to win.” Sending Rachel to run in the Classic over the Pro Ride at Santa Anita would not be consistent with “putting her in a position to win.” In fact, in my mind it would be more like playing someone out of their natural position.
“Oh, what’s this? Manny Ramirez moves in from Left Field to play Shortstop! This ought to work out well for the Dodgers!”
Obviously that would be crazy, right? Well, perhaps with the right Performance Enhancing Drugs…nah, never mind. It’d be sheer lunacy. Heck, even the picture below of Manny walking to his outfield position through shortstop just looks wrong.
Or, think of it this way. If you follow pro football transactions, and specifically along the defensive line, you’ll hear teams talking about needing a “3 technique tackle”, or a guy who can play Defensive End in a base 3-4 defense as opposed to a 4-3. True, you get a few “tweeners” who seem suited for both, but bye and large players tend to succeed when they are put in the correct position and given the best chance to succeed.
For example, Tom Brady will likely once again be the top player selected in many of our Fantasy Football drafts in the coming months (provided the owner holding the 1st pick wasn’t burned by his injury last year). He’s one of the top quarterbacks in the game (if not THE top). But you’d never stick him in at Running Back though, would you? You’d never ask him to suddenly play middle ‘backer, either. That would be insane. Why? Because you’d be asking him to play out of his natural position.
Tom Brady; Great quarterback, probably a crappy linebacker
Rachel Alexandra’s natural position is taking a field gate-to-wire over a true dirt surface. That’s where she excels. That’s when she’s in the “best position to succeed.” Why on earth should someone be forced to place her anywhere else? Just because it’s “the Classic?” I only ask that for all those who are determined to blame Jackson for “ruining the Breeders’ Cup” by refusing to run her, that you have the same level of anger directed at the Breeders’ Cup for their decision to force the hand of owners who aren’t interested in bringing their dirt horses to run for plastic championships. In my opinion they’ve now cost us 2 potentially brilliant champions in both Curlin last year, and Rachel this year.
…And all for the lure of the marketing dollar. That’s what this is really all about anyway. The only reason the race is at Santa Anita again this year is so the BC could schmooze it up with local businesses and sell more infield real estate See, personally, as a fan of racing, I could give a rats ass about that stuff. I don’t really care how much Nextell is ponying up (no pun intended) for an advertising booth. What I care about is seeing championship caliber racing. If you look at it that way, if we’ve sold out the true spirit of top quality racing for the almighty marketing dollar, then I’m actually happy if this entire decision blows up in their collective faces.
Seriously….I can’t let this go….didn’t it just feel hideously wrong to anyone but me when handicapping the “dirt mile” last year when it wasn’t even going to be run on dirt? There’s just something basically wrong with that, no matter how you slice it.
Jackson took one for the team last year. He sent his horse like he was supposed to. He gave it the old college try. It didn’t work. What’s that famous saying folks like to trot out from time to time to sound uber-intelligent? “Those who do not learn from the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat them.” Well, sounds to me like Jess has learned from the mistakes of the past, and he’s determined not to repeat them. After all, you don’t become as successful and wealthy as he is without having a keen ability from a decision making standpoint.
Several weeks ago in the Daily Racing Form, Steven Crist pondered whether it was time to revive the idea of permanently moving the Breeders’ Cup to a “neutral” site like Churchill Downs. I couldn’t agree more. Especially if we’re going to pretend that the Classic is our biggest race and should have a major say in determining who our overall champion is.
“Artificial surfaces produce artificial (dirt) champions.”
That’s my take. What’s yours?
“What I care about is seeing championship caliber racing”…. like on that BC surface @ Monmouth ….
Weather is one thing – that was in neither Monmouth nor the BC’s hands. The DECISION to hold the BC at Santa Anita two years in a row, on the other hand….
Truth be told it’s a shame that Monmouth didn’t enjoy better racing, as I think they would’ve put on a much more (positively) remembered event.
Plus, as a Curlin fan…can’t say I was disappointed with the outcome, beyond George Washington breaking down of course.
Raven’s Pass was bred in Kentucky with a solid dirt pedigree. If anything he was up against it in Europe on soft turf. The dirt surface might have suited him well, the faster the better, especially with his miler speed. Winning players know that John Gosden is one of the most astute horsemen on the planet and when his horses are in form they run powerfully. Frankie Dettori has a quick mind and is an expert judge of pace. There’s nothing “plastic” about the outcome of last years BCC.
RA isn’t running in the BC for the simple reason that she doesn’t figure to be good enough or versatile enough to fit any of the offered conditions.
Some of the grass horses if I remember did well on that surface last year. Not all the dirt horses will win on it. I lost interest really in those races because they are not run on a dirt track.
Your baseball and football analogies don’t quite work, because to become Champion in these sports a team will have to eventually overcome any opponent and adversity fate throws at them. Even if a given Green Bay Packers team excels in freezing temperatures against weak rushing defense and on natural grass, they may have to eventually beat an opponent with a phenomenal D-Line on AstroTurf in the heat.
Every racetrack has its biases, Churchill has in the past had very speed-favoring and very rail-favoring periods, and not all horses like the particular type of Dirt surface there equally. Doesn’t advocating Churchill as a permanent location just mean you’d prefer a different kind of non-neutral racetrack?
@Don – Ravens Pass was actually one of my top choices last year, for many of the reasons you reference. Also thought he looked brilliant on TVG’s “the works” leading up to the Classic. If memory serves, I went with Curlin and Go Between as my top two, with Raven’s Pass as my third choice. Had Henry the Navigator over the Duke of orange jam as well.
Still, I do think there was much “plastic” about last year’s Classic. As always, I’ve nothing but respect for your opinion, but I just don’t feel that Raven’s Pass would’ve won the Classic had it been on a true dirt surface.
@Mike – many expressed similar sentiments in the aftermath of last year’s BC. I’ll still watch….they are still BIG horse races….and I’ll probably wager very heavily, but I’m left thinking they could be so much more.
@Walter – Interesting point about Churchill. I know some folks who aren’t fond of that track say it’s often “too hard” and tailored to promote speed. The “neutrality” that Crist was talking about was really with respect to distances (i.e., “neutral” to horses/barns based on the east coast and west coasts alike).
In the end, all things being equal, I’ll still take Churchill over Santa Anita for the BC.
It’s not that I’m anti-synthetic, or have anything against the So Cal tracks. Far from it….god knows I play them more regularly than any others – it’s just that I don’t think the BC chamipionships should be decided over them at this point in time.
He is a chicken sh*t and a pansy. he wants no part of Zenyatta as she will blow RA’s doors off. True champions don’t duck synthetics. Plastic my ass.
What a flawed argument! Midnight Lute, Midshipman, and Albertus Maximus are not synthetic specialists. They are also not European horses who came to dominate on the synthetics. Midshipman won close to the lead. Curlin was beaten by superior horses on the day. Curlin didn’t race against high quality horses in 2008 as opposed to 2007, and was not ready for the quality of that field. The race was not won by some filler so give credit to the high quality of Raven’s Pass.
The major flaw with Jackson’s argument….he bought Rachel to race her against champions in a race where fans were demanding to see her, and now he is not going to race her against champions because he is being a sore loser over Curlin. It just proves that he bought Rachel out of ego. Someone needs to buy her from him to race her against champions. This sport is a joke of infighting.
I for one agree with you and I think that Jess Jackson is making the best decision possible. Last years breeders cup was as “fake” as they come. It catered to big name horses like Zenyatta who owners aren’t brave enough to tippy-toe out of their comfort zone with her! Dirt is the world renowned championship surface and should stay that way.
If last years Breeders Cup championships had been on dirt then I have no doubt that Curlin would have romped in the classic yet again.
And for all those who say that Jackson is just ducking the competition like Zenyatta, stop being so ignorant! Curlin took all comers during his campaign under Jackson, and Rachel has already faced the boys (and beat them) in the first half of her three year old year. Jackson ducks nobody, he is a true sportsman and loves the thrill of real competition. What was stopping Zenyatta from running against the boys last year? Ane I’ll just go out on a limb here and say that I doubt her connections will have the guts to run her against the boys this year.
Anyone who could possibly defend Jackson’s actions clearly lost money on Curlin’s loss in last year’s breeders cup. I am not defending Zenyatta’s connections either. Sour Grapes!
@Brian A: Maybe that sentence came out wrong, but every major racing jurisdiction except for America runs their Championship on Dirt. I am with you, however, that Jackson has earned enough credit for his Curlin campaign that we can be certain ducking Zenyatta is not the reason (especially since I guess Jackson would have chosen the Classic, while Zenyatta may well run in the Distaff again).
As for last year’s BC: how quickly we forget! Scores of handicappers (myself included) felt that Curlin had slipped a little over the course of his pre-BC starts and were sceptical about his chances. He ran a good fourth in a race in which the top two IFHA-rated horses of the year finished first and second. Results in last year’s BC matched up better with previous forms than those in any other recent BC. Non-BC results from Santa Anita also don’t support the notion that ProRide is fundamentally unfair to horses who perform well on Dirt.
To me the level of scorn last year’s BC has gotten has as much to do with being upset over losing to the Euros as with anything else.
yours, Walter
sorry, it was supposed to say “every major racing jurisdiction except for America runs their Championship race on Turf”, of course.
Where to begin…
First, always appreciative of the opinions, whether they are congruent with my own or not. That’s what I’ve always loved about racing fans – we’ve all got passionately clung to beliefs.
A few thoughts:
@Jess Izapansy – if anyone in this thread has an axe to grind (accusing people of such seems to be a common theme in comments here), it’s clearly you…especially given the location your IP and email addresses return to. Someone isn’t happy on the job, are they?
@Alejo – You’ve claimed my argument is “flawed!”, so now it’s my turn to respond:
You said: “Curlin was beaten by superior horses on that day.”
Really? So the runners who finished ahead of Curlin that day were “superior?”
Didn’t Tiago finish 3rd?
Hmmm… seems to me we saw Curlin vs Tiago enough times to know that such a result would never have occurred on a dirt track. But low and behold look what happens when the race moves to Pro Ride. Sorry, but I don’t buy that argument for one minute.
You then say:
“Anyone who would defend Jess Jackson clearly lost money on Curlin last year.”
Again – nice try, but wrong.
I gave out Raven’s Pass as one of my top picks (I did have Curlin as my top pick, but had mentioned it was a “heart” pick….couldn’t pick against my favorite guy, that would be blasphemy) and managed to cash a handsome ticket on him. Even pointed out leading up to the race that he was the “most interesting of all the Euro shippers” and had looked fantastic in the workouts. No sour grapes from a money perspective…just as a fan who doesn’t believe that Curlin is somehow instantly inferior to runners who got past him on the Pro Ride. In my mind, all that proves is that they were better Pro Ride runners. Good for them.
@Malcer – agreed that “turf” is the predominant surface from a world perspective, but “our” races are predominantly run on dirt.
You also make a great point I was going to chime in on…for all this talk of “chicken shits” and “ducking” (not from you) – somebody show me again just where it’s written that Zenyatta is even running in the Classic this year?
Last I heard her camp was still fine with running in the Ladies’ Classic again. Somehow that’s beyond complaint from the masses, but if Jess says “well, we won’t be there, we’re looking to go here instead” it’s a crime against humanity and the man’s name must be drug through the mud. I just don’t get it. Much thanks for bringing that up as I actually meant to include that in the original post.
Also agree that it’s fair to say it’s questionable whether the Pro Ride is “unfair to dirt horses.” That’s not really the argument I was trying to make, so apologies if it came out that way. I do think it’s fair to say that not ALL good dirt runners fair as well on Pro Ride as they do on dirt, which is why I don’t consider it the proper venue for the Classic. But, then again…even with dirt tracks you get horses who like one particular location and not another. With respect to Curlin and Rachel though, I think their records of showing up at multiple locations and consistently running big races suggests that as long as the race is on dirt, they’d have a much better shot.
All – as for the other themes here:
I don’t have a problem with the decision from Zenyatta’s camp (whichever way they choose to go). I’ve got nothing against the Moss family , and happen to be a big fan of her connections. Hell, I’ve been one of the biggest Zenyatta fans since her maiden race. She is my “slow cheetah” after all – and very special to me. That’s why I made that tribute video to her that you see in the right hand sidebar.
Likewise, I really don’t have anything against Santa Anita, Pro Ride, or synthetics in general. Lord knows the overwhelming majority of the races I play are on the So Cal circuit. I just don’t think it’s the appropriate venue for the Classic.
And no, I’ve no personal scorn over “losing to Euros”. I was actually hoping Zarkava would’ve come over last year and was bummed when she didn’t.
If my heart were filled with scorn for Euros, trust me, that’s what I would’ve written about.
I stand bye something that came up back when it was vogue to criticize Jess for running Rachel in the Preakness (ironic, considering it’s now vogue to criticize him for NOT running in the Classic…funny how things turn on a dime) – that I’ll refrain from ever again demanding a horse run in a particular race. I may want to see them (and very badly at that) but I’m not going to resort to name calling and villifying if someone chooses a different path for their horse than i would have personally.
That just feels a bit like standing in the Coliseum, demanding that our blood lust be quenched by the ordering of more gladiators into combat for our amusement.
Send the horse where you feel puts them in the best position to succeed. If that’s inconsistent with the demands of the masses, so be it. Those same voices calling for the horse to be entered will be the same ones quick to criticize the minute something goes wrong.
For a bit of a mood lightening aside – I just looked at the stats here and noticed that someone arrived here twice by google searching:
“TVG black guy wins”
WTF???
Since I obviously didn’t make that clear enough: I didn’t accuse you of thrashing the Euros or declaring Pro-Ride “unfair”, I was talking about the general level of over-the-top scorn last year’s BC got. Of course Pro-Ride (and other synthetic surfaces) create different races than traditional dirt, especially the extremely speed-favoring dirt previously in place in California, but from the reaction last year’s BC has spawned, you’d think that those races were decided by lottery.
Personally, I’ve been very consistent in my opinions on how RA and Zenyatta should be campaigned, and have stated before that I will take a horse that lost a real challenge over one that avoided it anyday.
Well said, Malcer. I totally undestand.
It’s funny…I actually don’t recall the BC races being that difficult to figure out last year…at least in hindsight (can’t say I did all that well at the actual windows, but we cashed some pretty big ones along the way). Nearly all the horses who made positive impressions on TVGs “the works” ran well.
Case in point, I remember most of the buzz over the Euros in the Classic was focused on the Duke and Henry….it was crystal clear from watching the workouts that Duke of Marmelade was not particularly comfortable in his works over the surface. Raven’s Pass and Henry, however, seemed to be thriving. As for Curlin, I probably projected my hope that he was taking to the surface a bit too much. The handicapper’s greatest weakness is his heart….followed closely by stubborness.
Also thought Donativium looked awesome in the pre-race workouts.
And you bring up another very valid point about the previous CA surfaces that is well worth taking into consideration. Would races on those surfaces really be better? If so, for whom? Quite often turf racing is more exciting than dirt racing…especially at the finish.
Solid points.
Read all the comments – they were of interest. Firstly – SANTA ANITA was ’selected’ for 2 years consecutively because A) KAHLEEFORNYA[Ahrnold's pronounciation] is in the ’shitter’ economically and B) the weather there is usually ok[aside from the fires, mudslides] go figure?! CURLIN was a very good horse. The artificial surface is good for some horses – not good for others. Is ‘THE PAMPLEMOUSSE’ just a SANTA ANITA horse? Maybe. We might never know. RA will not run in the BC. THAT IS THE OWNER’S PEROGERATIVE. Would ZENYATTA defeat RA??? Maybe we will not know – it would be a good race. HAS RA ‘SPURRED’ INTEREST IN THE ‘GAME OF HORSERACING’ – MOST DEFINITELY!!! With the triumph in major races of progeny of MaryLou Whitney’s BIRD HORSES – we may be viewing a new major breeding arm to revitalize/reinvigorate this sport. ARTIFICIAL v. DIRT will be an ongoing divide/debate in the future for us all.
So you make such a big deal about Tiago finishing ahead of Curlin….as if an inferior horse would never beat a top horse on dirt. You act like Curlin has never been beaten on dirt. Name a single breeders cup winner from last year that was a out of the ordinary on any surface.
Why did a horse like Midnight Lute replicate his dirt form? Everything is a fluke because you want it that way.
Edit: you know what….I’m not even doing it…
All – much thanks to all who voted. Do check out Steven Crist’s article in the DRF, which makes many of the same points I was trying to hit upon (my apologies for not being as clear and concise as Crist):
http://www.drf.com/drfNewsArticle.do?NID=104972&subs=0&arc=0
So as not to confuse, those points being:
-The BC would be better served being run on a true dirt surface.
- that the decision to run at Santa Anita 2 years in a row was based on marketing dollars, and not in the spirit of having the best true championship possible.
- that running the BC over a synthetic track undermines the entire purpose of the BC – which is to have a DEFINITIVE year-end championship.
Headed off to go see Rachel in the Mother Goose. Over 100 fanclub members coming along for the trip. Then Zenyatta just a few minutes later!
Take Back Saturday!
[...] Uh-oh…here comes that nasty debate again. [...]
[...] got in this horse and if they have any plans of seriously competing for Horse of the Year honors while skipping the Breeders’ Cup Classic, then they need to win BIG races. And you KNOW they’ve got such plans. The Haskell, quite [...]
[...] obvious answer would seem to be yes. I’ve already gone on record defending the decision of Jess Jackson to avoid running over what he refers to as “plastics” so I won’t go down that road [...]