HORSE OF THE YEAR DEBATE IS GOOD
Now that guest writer Jeff Shapes has convinced Paulick Report readers that Zenyatta deserves not just Horse of the Year but Horse of the Decade honors, we thought we would interject another voice on the Horse of the Year debate. This one is from Aron Wellman, a 32-year-old California attorney who joined Barry Irwin’s crew at Team Valor International after enjoying success in forming his own racing partnerships. Wellman doesn’t take a position on the Rachel Alexandra vs. Zenyatta debate, but agrees with the recent decision of the National Thoroughbred Racing Association and National Turf Writers Association to disallow co-Horse of the Year votes, a move endorsed by Daily Racing Form publisher Steve Crist and many fans.
Take our poll in the left-hand column of the Paulick Report home page and let us know whether you think there should be one Horse of the Year or co-recipients for 2009.
Incidentally, Ray has returned from Japan, but the slacker insisted on taking part of today off to “recover” from the trip. My question: does Santa Claus need time off when he travels around the world on Christmas Eve? I don’t think so. Not that I’m comparing him with Mr. Claus.
Ray promises (threatens?) to write one more piece about his Japanese adventure when he wakes up from his slumber. - Bradford Cummings
By Aron Wellman
The Horse of the Year debate is in full force.
There are those who stand in Zenyatta’s corner and there are those who are in Rachel Alexandra’s corner.
And then, there are those who believe that the honor should be shared between Zenyatta and Rachel.
Who I think should be awarded the honor of distinction is irrelevant. That’s not what this letter is about.
What I do think is relevant is the debate itself and how it relates to the current state of our industry.
At a time when our industry is faced with unprecedented challenges and the very real threat of extinction hovers over us, the temptation to sell out is fierce. Staying true is hard to do. Man-made racetracks, kinder whips, slot machine bailouts; these are all ideas people have come up with and instituted in an effort to redefine horse racing and make it a more acceptable sport to a public that has virtually ignored us for decades.
We all want our industry to survive. But at what cost? Haven’t we taken this P.C. thing a little too far? Shouldn’t we be looking at ourselves in the mirror and ask ourselves whether we’ve gone too soft?
My father told me a long time ago, "This is not a game made for men who wear short pants."
Yet, it seems like every day I open up the trades, our industry is resculpting its very being to cater to people who wear short pants.
Without getting into the validity of whether synthetic racetracks are safer, or newly designed whips are gentler on a horse, or whether slot machines at a racetrack will save the day, I ask you this:
How many people do you know bought a horse, wagered on a race or attended the racetrack because of a shift to a synthetic surface or because jockeys were using softer whips?
How many people do you know who went to a racetrack intending to play slot machines and ended up betting on a horse race?
How, you ask, does this have anything to do with the Zenyatta versus Rachel debate?
The Zenyatta versus Rachel debate epitomizes the very essence of what the sport of thoroughbred horse racing is all about. We are a different breed. The debate is what separates us from other sports and what attracts people to our racetracks, the betting windows and inspires people to breed and race thoroughbreds. Soft stances have not translated into progress. They have only contributed to the downward cycle we find ourselves in.
Horse racing is not a game of luck where you pull a handle and hope the slots align. It’s not black and white like a batting average, scoring average, passer rating or how fast a race is run or the height a person jumps. The debate is why people gamble on horses in our country through a parimutuel system. Everyone wants to be smarter than the next guy.
Awarding co-Horse of the Year to these two great fillies is a cop-out. Furthermore, it would just be another instance whereby our industry sells-out in an effort to appease a public wearing short pants and who we hope will come to our racetracks, bet on our races and buy our horses. Why else would we even consider awarding co-Horses of the Year?
Co-Horse of the Year? That’s like saying we should go back and alter the finish line for any great race that ever took place. Let’s extinguish great rivalries like Affirmed and Alydar, Sunday Silence and Easy Goer, Ferdinand and Alysheba, Personal Ensign and Winning Colors and call all the tremendous battles those horses ever fought dead-heats because it would just be so much better if neither of those horses had to "lose."
The saying, "That horse ran too good to lose," echoes throughout grandstands and backstretches frequently. The saying would be applicable no matter what the result of the race for Horse of the Year. Despite its’ veracity, it remains a figure of speech and our sport accepts the notion. Those who can’t, wilt under the pressure that our sport’s participants are faced with every second of every day.
I cannot imagine anybody in the thoroughbred horse racing industry being keen on their child participating in a youth sports league that doesn’t keep score, a new phenomenon penetrating society in an effort to avoid hurting a young, impressionable child’s feelings. By awarding co-Horses of the Year, we are basically throwing away the scorecard and abandoning the very mystique that attracts people to our sport. We keep score, technically, on paper, and perhaps more importantly, in the hearts and minds of our faithful, which only contributes to the intrigue of a debate like the one our industry is experiencing now between Zenyatta and Rachel.
Softening up policy is causing us to lose more patrons, fans and owners, not attract them. This theory that there should be no loser contradicts the very principal upon which horse racing was founded. Those who succeed in our sport, love our sport and support our sport focus on winning, not the fear of losing. The type of person who is drawn to racing is not the type of person who would lobby for co-Horses of the Year. The type of person drawn to our sport has thick enough skin to accept the fact that one of these fillies will be crowned over the other and invite the debate to persist from now until eternity. That’s what our sport is all about.
Enough is enough with our sport conforming to the desires of individuals who do not possess the make-up to withstand the rigors of our tough game. The time has come for us to stick to our guns and stay true. Finding our backbone again will resuscitate supporters we have lost along the way and it will attract the kind of person we’re looking for.
So, I argue, take a side. Choose a corner. Let the best woman prevail. The sport will be the biggest winner.
Tags: affirmed, alydar, Alysheba, barry irwin, bradford cummings, daily racing form, Easy Goer, ferdinand, horse of the year, Jeff Shapes, National Thoroughbred Racing Association, national turf writers association, Paulick Report, personal ensign, Rachel Alexandra, Ray Paulick, Steve Crist, sunday silence, team valor, winning colors, zenyatta
December 8th, 2009 at 10:12 am
HOY debate is just plain wrong. Rachel won the award for what she did all year. This year alone she has more than half the wins Zenyatta has in her entire career and she is 5. Rachel won 8 times and did what no filly has done in 150 years of racing. What did Zenyatta do ? She beat males on a track she is undefeated on BIG DEAL. She is a year long poly fiber recycled rubber horse that didn’t win a race on dirt or turf all year and never stepped out of California. Do you really want to compare that with what Rachel did this year ???
Zenyatta had a great race but Rachel had a great YEAR.
December 8th, 2009 at 10:36 am
Draynay, we’re going to work on your critical reading skills. Who should win horse of the year was not the point of this esaay.
December 8th, 2009 at 10:50 am
I’m pretty sure the last line of the article contains “So, I argue, take a side. Choose a corner.” which is exactly what Draynay is doing.
December 8th, 2009 at 10:52 am
Even tho’ it is off subject I’d have to agree with Draynay !!!!!!!!!!
December 8th, 2009 at 10:53 am
Sorry Draynay, in your speed to dismiss Z you misspoke, “Rachel won the award for what she did all year.” Hmmmm…(1) the award has not been given yet; and, (2) RA was pulled significantly BEFORE the end of this US stakes race year.
Question: What fillies/mares over 150 years are you comparing RA too?
Tiznowbaby: I think your point will be lost on Draynay…but keep on trying…good point, either way.
December 8th, 2009 at 10:59 am
While Z started what………………………………4 times all year ?????????????
December 8th, 2009 at 11:09 am
Are we judging just starts and wins? It’s a little more than that, which many have already rationalized no matter whose corner you’re in. Still think a 5 yo mare winning in the BCC (never been done and with a good year in these times under her belt) is worthy of unique consideration.
Why didn’t RA race one more dirt stakes to seal the deal?
December 8th, 2009 at 11:18 am
To me the deal is sealed. It’s RA. How would one more dirt stakes have sealed the deal in YOUR eyes? She didn’t prove enough? I don’t get it.
December 8th, 2009 at 11:29 am
That she was managed for the ENTIRE year, even considering her owners’s distate (would that be hate?) for syn’s. That she wasn’t pulled from racing because she was spent (or injured…again, training management). That she wasn’t coming to SA for the BC strictly because of the surface.
If she was (is) in top form, what would have been another good stakes she might have been entered in? That was a serious question, not a cheer for Z or a sneer of RA.
December 8th, 2009 at 11:38 am
But given this debate, I don’t see how one more dirt stake would have sealed the deal for anyone on the fence. Since they campaigned her knowing there would be no BC start (he said that very early on), he tested her to the max after purchase. I say she needed and deserved the rest of the year away from the races.
December 8th, 2009 at 11:54 am
That she was still fit, ready to roar and not ducking the BC because of owners’s strict distaste of the surface. Maybe the connections decided to rest on their, err RA’s laurels and not an unreasonable approach.
I’m sure, because of owners’s possibly short sighted desires (ego ?) and training schedule that RA truly needed the rest, especially considering the change of ownership and training objectives.
Still wonder if they had decided to run one more time, where would they have gone. I think the lack of decision says allot. Actually, one could argue in some ways the same about Z, except she’s 5.
December 8th, 2009 at 11:56 am
I’ve been involved with racing in one way or another for 50 years and I will state unequivocally that of the fillies or mares I have seen on the track in that time on all surfaces, Zenyatta wouldn’t be among the top 20, although Rachel Alexandra would. Winning the BC Classic as the favorite is no miracle even if some doubted Zenyatta’s chances. The public always has been the best handicapper and the public was right again. The race was not especially fast by BC Classic standards and the American competition, which had been trashed all year long by the turf media and most professional handicappers, didn’t suddenly become superstars just because they showed up. And a 1-2-3 finish by an AWS superstar and two turf horses should tell us something about the profound surface bias working in Zenyatta’s favor. Even after the fact, the published speed handicappers (e.g., Beyer and BRIS) and the published class handicappers (e.g., the Racing Post and Timeform) evaluated her performance as notable but not great by any historical standard. Combine the Classic result with her somewhat embarrassing earlier 2009 campaign and Zenyatta clearly comes up short for Horse of the Year. On the other hand, her only real competition for the award accomplished things never before seen in the history of the sport.
The argument that the filly quit too early in the year is bogus from the start. Other horses have missed the fall races and still been named Horse of the Year. The most notable example is Criminal Type whose last race in 1990 was also the Woodward (where he ran 6th). Despite the early departure he defeated Unbridled for the title even though Unbridled won the two most prestigious races in North America and two of the most prestigious in the world, the Kentucky Derby and the BC Classic.
American racing can only be damaged by continuing to insist that the BC races are world championships. Not only isn’t it true, it is an insult to racing venues around the world. But that’s just me, because if I had to name a true world championship race it would be the Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe hands down. The significance of many BC races is greatly exaggerated.
December 8th, 2009 at 11:59 am
I was on Zenyatta band wagon. There is a special site that shows Zenyattas and Rachels races. Wow. What a differance in the two. Rachel was so good every race. She showed so much more brilliance. I can’t remember the site but someone here should know it. It’s going to be tough vote for everyone involved. Zenyatta and the Mosses should get a special Eclipse for saving a lucluster Breeders Cup. It was like watching a so so football game and on the last play of the game someone runs it back 100 yards to win the game. Thats how we all felt.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
The US insults international racing venues all the time with our training methods (not all), schedules, drugs and trainer/jock violations, penchant for 2-3yo races and need for speed mentality (sprints).
Is the importance of the BC diminished because the greats internationally don’t show up? The Dubai championships are modeled off of our BC venture…with a ton more money.
Super 3yo filly/mare can reasonably compete with good to great colts/geldings of same age; it gets tougher as they age.
RA would have been beaten by MTB at the Preakness with another 1/16th of a mile. Pure speculation, but I still think a 5yo mare winning like she did, deserves the nod. The people voting have already made up their minds. Doesn’t matter what we say here.
Steve:
How many of those horses that got HOY pulling from the schedule early did it by choice, injury or lacking much quality competition?
December 8th, 2009 at 12:16 pm
How many HOY awards have been awarded primarily on the fact of a BC win? I don’t really know, but IIRC, many……
RA is going to race again next year and if she is as great as she appears to be she will prove that she is not just a 1 year flash in the pan. Zenyatta has had more successful years than most in a time when many are retired from racing at age 3. She has outlasted many, and deserves the award. I guess you could call me a Zenyatta fan.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
Steve:
Could you please explain why Z wouldn’t be in the Top 20 and RA would? Seriously, not a slam. I would just like to know what 20 horses you’re talking about, beside RA. In other words, I’m not so sure RA deserves to be there either….but she has some more time on her side.
p.s. What you attribute to surface bias, I attribute to training skill set and horse ability…regardless of surface. And not really sure why speed numbers are the tie breaker in this case as syn’s typically play like turf numbers. BTW, I don’t expect to change anyone’s mind, just to encourage a more reasonable debate…which is frequently lacking on both sides of this debate.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
Although I believe Zenyatta to be the better horse, Rachel was given more to do this year.
But, in the end I don’t think in it matters who wins HOY. They both are incredible examples of the thoroughbred, both were brilliant this year, and both did things never done before. You can’t lose with whoever wins the award, IMO. Neither will be enhanced in value — they’re both priceless. Neither will be enhanced in reputation — they’re both highly thought of, and with the fullness of time, I think both their reputations will grow larger.
I don’t think it’s fair to consider Rachel a flash in the pan. She had a very good 2YO season, and she had a long, strong 3YO campaign (at least in this day and age). It’s not like she was brilliant for three races and then shut down (*cough* Zensation).
I dearly hope that Rachel’s form makes the transition to her 4YO season. Sometimes that doesn’t happen, and she had a hard end of the year. If she continues in form, she will be so much fun to watch.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
Mr. Wellmon,
Your comments are riddled with bad logic and shaky opinions. Let’s touch on a few examples.
1) You said, “There are those who believe that the honor should be shared between Zenyatta and Rachel.”
That assumes those who favor allowing the so-called dual option would actually vote for that option. That is incorrect. I have an opinion and plan to vote for Rachel Alexandra.
However, for a small group of people to decide how votes should be cast smacks of the old political cliche’ — a few men in a smoky room deciding who should be nominated for public office. Big Brother is telling me how I can vote and I don’t like it.
Split voting used to be allowed. Why not now?
2) You said, “Awarding co-Horse of the Year…is a cop-out. Furthermore, it would just be another instance whereby our industry sells-out in an effort to appease a public wearing short pants and who we hope will come to our racetracks, bet on our races and buy our horses.”
Earth to Mr. Wellmon. If the public doesn’t “come to our racetracks” and “bet on out races” there will be no races. Period.
The single most important reason racing is in the tank is because its alleged leadership has had no clue about how to treat the public like valued customers. Or, when it does, it has been unable to make it happen because of arcane betting regulations and kid gloves treatment of trainers who violate medication rules.
When racing succeeds (as at Saratoga and Del Mar) is has nothing to do with the management of those tracks, it is an accident of circumstance.
The “public” to which I’ve spoken has a firm opinion between Rachel and Zenyatta, but, for the most part, would rather see co-winners than their favorite lose.
3) You said, “Enough is enough with our sport conforming to the desires of individuals who do not possess the make-up to withstand the rigors of our tough game.”
That’s an interesting comment. It sounds exactly like what the leadership of the American automotive industry said when apprised of the shoddy quality of its products. It sounds exactly like what they said when apprised that people preferred German and Japanese auto technology. Detroit’s attitude was, “If we make it, they will buy it.”
We know how that worked out, don’t we?
December 8th, 2009 at 12:37 pm
No one here seems to have noticed that Wellman thinks we shouldn’t try to do everything possible to make our sport safer and to improve its image among those who think it is cruel, which it partly is. He thinks that our only true fans don’t care about the animals at all because they don’t wear short pants. He hasn’t been to a track in SoCal in the last 20 years.
It is not only the fans we lose when horses break down, but owners are discouraged when injuries end careers. Trainers lose business and jockeys’ lives are put at risk.
I happen to be the kind of horseman who can stomach a tragedy after seeing too many up close. I rode horses who broke down with me on their backs. I held them while they were put down in front of me. I own horses today. I want my investments protected, and I do not want to see my beautiful horses abused. I am not alone.
Wellman is obviously not aware of how many appalled fans and owners left this sport after watching Eight Bells break down. His kind of cold hearted opinion is what we don’t need in our sport. This piece he wrote should be condemned by all of you, but you are all stuck on this “who’s the best” argument. I am disgusted.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:46 pm
The current state of racing has little to do with softness – unless by that you mean the soft-headed stupidity of all the various little Caesars and their minions that cling to parochial power while racing’s overall popularity continues to spiral downward. Over the past 30+ years, they have among them reduced racing to a small-time fringe sport to which few pay any attention at all.
Maybe that’s OK with you as long as the fringe remains loyal. Maybe you would like to regress the sport back to the good old days when no one noticed misuse of the whip and everyone just shrugged and said “oh well, that’s horseracing” when a horse broke down on the track.
Today, the only way no one will care about a horse breaking down is if no one is watching. Racing needs to attract new, young fans. In the animal-friendly 21st century, prioritizing the welfare and safety of the horses on and off the track is not PC – it’s good business. Unfortunately, racing’s handling of its many safety/welfare issues to date has been bungled. No surprise considering who’s been in charge (no one has been in charge). Synthetics? How dumb was that? Why not get rid of all the drugs and breed/race tougher horses? There’s no logic or consistency.
Let HOY be decided fairly, based on what each horse accomplished in 2009.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
D. Masters:
Zenyatta doesn’t rate among my top 20 fillies or mares because 1) she wasn’t fast enough and 2) apart from the BC Classic she almost never challenged outside of her comfort zone in terms of distance, surface or quality of competition. Which do I believe were better? The following would be a representative list in no particular order. Recall, these are fillies and mares I actually saw race.
Shuvee
Susan’s Girl
Ta Wee
Princess Rooney
Lady’s Secret
Dahlia
All Along
Ruffian
Beautiful Pleasure
Rachel Alexandra
Personal Ensign
Miesque
Goldikova
Ouija Board
Azeri
Paseana
Bayakoa
Chris Evert
Winning Colors
Go for Wand
Serena’s Song
Dance Smartly
Allez France
Pebbles
December 8th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
Beating Gio Ponti in a single race over a synthetic surface does not make you HOY. In the Strub, which was also run over a synthetic surface, Gio Ponti finished in fifth place. Should the four horses that finished in front of him that day be considered for HOY?
Gio Ponti is a turf horse, not a synth horse. The same goes for Summer Bird. Summer Bird is a dirt horse, not a synth horse. The same goes for just about every other horse in that field. Yes, Zenyatta beat them, but she beat them while their chances were severely compromised because the other horses had almost no form to speak of over a surface that didn’t exist until a couple of years ago.
And yes, I realize that Zenyatta won the ‘08 Apple Blossom on dirt and that her connections have indicated she is probably better on dirt than synth. But in the BC Classic, her competition clearly didn’t take to the pro ride all that well, and it clearly gave her an edge. If she raced Gio Ponti on turf, do you seriously think she would beat him?
Because of these reasons, and others, we do not hand out HOY honors based on a single race. Not in the past. Not now. Not ever. We give HOY honors to the horse that was best over the entire year. And that horse was Rachel Alexandra.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
Steve, don’t forget Zarkava. (Of course, for purposes of this list, you may be excluding fillies who never raced in NA. But, you did mention the Arc in a previous post, so thought I’d pass this along.)
December 8th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
Racing has dead heats. Two horses can win a race. Why can’t 2 horses win HOY? I have always been one of those soft hearted people and always will be and proud of it. Jesus Christ was one of those soft hearted people. Horses breaking down or dying in fires,etc. always upsets me greatly and sometimes I would like to flog some person or persons responsible like he did to those people cheating people at the temple. Racing should do its best to cater to the soft hearted people otherwise those people may ensure its demise. The horse is the athlete who makes the money. The horses should be protected from bad jockeys,bad trainers,bad owners,bad breeders,bad vets,bad farriers,unsafe tracks,unsafe barns,etc. Just like children they should be protected from those who would victimize them.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
QUICK, Who won HOY four years ago? 7 years ago? 11 years ago? 13 years ago? I can probably count on my left hand how many got those right without looking it up! This award/trophy will be forgotten long before anyone forgets the Classic or Woodward! With that said, I disagree, The powers to be should have allowed three choices to vote on, Rachel, Zenyatta, or BOTH. They should have allowed that choice, Still doesn’t mean that the BOTH choice would have won, I don’t see the harm in allowing that option! Also, Rachel will win HOY, But, Zenyatta would have beaten Rachel if they had met…
December 8th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
No matter which one of these fillies (yes, I know Zenyatta is technically a mare) you prefer, the smart thing to do would have been to let the voters have the “both” option. Spare me the righteous indignation of the handful of traditionalists who think that doing so would somehow have injured the integrity of the process. Rarely is the sport handed a golden PR opportunity. It had one this time, and it whiffed, whether Rachel or Zenyatta is the ultimate winner.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:04 pm
Looks like you misspelled Aron’s last name, should be Wellman according to the Team Valor website.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:16 pm
Steve, Beautiful Pleasure but not Zenyatta? Are you serious?
December 8th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
Josh Pots:
Zarkava! Absolutely! Also undefeated but won from a mile to a mile and a half, captured a French filly classic race and topped it off with an Arc win from off the pace ridden out. When you also consider the horses she defeated - Duke of Marmalade, Goldikova (twice), Soldier of Fortune, Dar Re Mi and Youmzain among them - she towers over Zenyatta.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:32 pm
This entire Rachel vs. Zenyatta debate it pretty pathetic. You people act like your own them, or trained them, groomed them, etc. etc. It’s so childish. GROW UP.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:39 pm
Steve, what about Genuine Risk.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
Nothing like keeping the interested fans distracted article after article when real issues are begging to be addressed.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
Short pants? It’s hard to believe a 32-year-old has a dad old enough to use that archaic phrase. Was he 60 when you were born?
December 8th, 2009 at 3:25 pm
To the original topic statement “Horse of the Year Debate is Good” I’d have to retort that the same logic puffed up political Town Hall meetings and look what value that added.
It gets tiresome and turns off most people when the ‘debate’ is nothing more then degrading remarks against one horse in trying to elevate the stature of another.
So, no, I really don’t think think this adds much value.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
Tapit, I so agree!, Wouldn’t it be nice if all the passion this meaningless argument brings out in everybody could be directed to the REAL issues that are important for this great sport to survive? Let’s ALL forget about The Drugs, The Over-breeding, The thousands of OTTB’s that are sent to slaughter each year, All the neglected OTTB’s that are at rescue’s awaiting forever homes with NO support from their former connections! Yeah, let’s forget all of that and devote all of our energy to who should get HOY! You have to be kidding me! I welcome arguments my way, Maybe then these valid arguments will be given more attention…
December 8th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
The debate regarding HOTY is good…….it means there are people who follow the sport and care about Thoroughbred racing. When there are no more debates, then it’s time to worry about our fading industry. Whether we may remember the HOTY from 3 years ago isn’t important. What is important is that the FANS OF THOROUGHBRED RACING….RACHEL AND ZENYATTA FANS….are given a fair shake; and honestly, the only way to level the field is to have three choices, RA, Z, and both……….Steve Christ was right, and so was Haskin….these felllows have been around this sport a heck of a long time and I trust their judgment and agree that “both” would be the right thing to do because of the extraordinary circumstances of 2009………we will never, in our lifetimes, see another year so dominated by the gals……….it was awesome, remarkable, and they deserve a “dead heat” in the voting. Personally, RA had a much more rigid, difficult campaign than Z, and she inspired us month after month……outdoing herself each time. What a wonderful year of racing….memories we will cherish for a very long time. GO RACHEL!!
December 8th, 2009 at 6:03 pm
Priscilla-
In no way, shape or form do I ever state that racing shouldn’t do whatever it can to improve horse safety or attempt to improve its’ image. I am a horseman through and through and my love of horses is paramount to everything I do in this game. Team Valor treats its’ horses with the highest level of care and respect and the best interest of our equine athletes is not just a priority, it is our number one priority. I began on Southern California backsides at age 8 mucking stalls, walking hots, grooming horses and eventually acted as foreman for a stable until I graduated law school. I’m not sure where you came up with the statement that I have not been to a racetrack in So Cal for 20 years, but despite the fact that Team Valor has a global operation and we race all over the world, I am based in So Cal and frequent the backsides of Hollywood Park, Santa Anita and Del Mar as well as attend the races there often. In fact, I was at Hollywood Park 3 times just within the past week! I know the state of racing in So Cal intimately and across the world for that matter.
The point of my piece to which you have responded was not to address safety issues, it was to address a general attitude our industry leaders have taken in an effort to appease a public who doesn’t care about our sport, nor will most of them ever do anything to contribute to our sport on any level. Synthetic racetracks are a prime example of leadership attempting to appease the public under the guise of horse safety. There has not been one single bit of hard evidence that I have seen to prove to me that artificial surfaces, specifically in the US, are safer for horses. Since you seem to be most interested in So Cal, I can assure you that the horse population, field size and general attitude of horseman is not indicative of the synthetic revolution proving successful. The same can be said of the new “popper” whips that have become mandatory in several jurisdictions.
I am pro-horse and I am pro-industry. But let’s focus our reform initiatives on the right people, the kind of people who will attend our racetracks, buy and breed horses and bet on races. Rushing to judgment and knee-jerking ourselves into this “safety” net is not going to help our industry.
December 8th, 2009 at 6:39 pm
Aron:
On the contrary, synthetic tracks do reduce catastrophic injuries. They were mandated with good intentions, but our SoCal tracks have not followed manufacturers’ guidelines with regard to maintenance. Santa Anita did not even use the recommended materials. When properly installed and maintained, they have proven to be safer.
I have seen too many horses come back after a race bleeding in the flanks from whips. If every jockey uses a popper whip, then no one has an advantage, and we remove a valid criticism of our sport. Horses don’t need to be whipped bloody to win a race.
You began your article with an inhumane tone by implying that our sport is for people with tough skins, or as you put it, don’t wear short pants and don’t have soft hearts. I am not a bleeding heart softie. Our horses are not pets. This is a business and these are working animals, just like the ones on my family’s North Dakota cattle farm years ago, where no man wore short pants. But we do not have to accept unnecessary abuse or inadequate safety, especially when we have the technology to improve it.
It is good business to appeal to people’s natural love of animals and to avoid repulsing them from our sport. We all say that we put the horse first, but you contradicted your article with your reply that your “love of horses is paramount to everything I do in this game.” I understand that you were using examples of changes we have made to preface your argument for not allowing co-Horse of the Year, and I agree with that position. But you should have stuck with just the soccer example where it’s lame to think kids can’t take losing.
Promote safety and humane treatment, and we might attract new fans. Instead you told people to suck it up because horses are going to go down and if you can’t take it, get lost, you’re not the kind of fan we are looking for anyway.
December 8th, 2009 at 6:44 pm
this has been a special year.regardless of which horse we are backing they were both pretty spectacular.i do not see any harm coming from sharing the horse of the year with the two most brilliant stars we have seen on the track for some time.times change we must change with them.i think the public may say”hey it isn’t all politics” or”gotta be in to win club” or same old jockey club”in other words..stiff and unyielding..i believe that a lot of outsiders believe that it only the very elite can win at this game.be it racing, breeding or winning a hoy award and are turned off by that..splitting the award could be seen as yet another move by horse racing ..showing they understand special things can happen and acknowledging it .we saw what happened when belles died..racing started small steps to improving the sport..let them keep moving forward..
what the heck..give it to them both
December 8th, 2009 at 6:48 pm
We need to all get a life. We need a Tiger Woods thread.
December 8th, 2009 at 7:54 pm
Erin Thompson wrote: Steve, Beautiful Pleasure but not Zenyatta? Are you serious?
—————————————————————————————————————-
Serious? Like a heart attack. Between mid-1999 and mid-2000 Beautiful Pleasure was the essence of speed and brilliance. She was faster, more exciting and more dominant than Zenyatta has ever been. Her Personal Ensign, Beldame, BC Distaff and Hempstead Handicap were among the most spectacular performances ever by an older filly or mare. She won G1 races at Belmont, Saratoga and Gulfstream Park including the Matron Stakes at two. She defeated a string of extraordinary distaffers including Banshee Breeze, Silverbulletday and Heritage of Gold, all of which were superior to any filly or mare Zenyatta ever faced. She had physical problems toward the end of her career, but it didn’t negate her awesome earlier achievements. Now if you want to bring up the 14-race streak, you should know I consider consecutive wins about as unimportant as lifetime earnings, especially when a bunch of them are against essentially the same horses at the same distance at the same venue and on a racing surface better relegated to the trash heap.
December 8th, 2009 at 8:14 pm
Rachel Alexandra is HOY in my book - she ran on many different tracks - beat the boys 3 times and won one of the 3 jewels of the triple crown. What major races did Zenyatta win as a 3 year old?
Zenyatta is a good racemare but not great like Rachel.
December 8th, 2009 at 8:15 pm
Some have suggested the passion in this debate be directed toward more compelling issues threatening Thoroughbred racing. And they are right. However, the outcome of the Horse of the Year voting is important because if Zenyatta wins it sends a clear message that the BC Classic alone is more important than an entire campaign regardless of its historical implications. And it it would fly in the face of tradition. Raven’s Pass didn’t get it even though he overcame far more to win his Classic than Zenyatta did in hers. Awesome Again didn’t get it despite an undefeated campaign because of Skip Away’s exceptional record between February and September of 1998. Unbridled didn’t get it despite winning both the Classic AND the Derby. The last thing American racing needs is to perpetrate the myth that the BC Classic is all important. It’s not. Only rarely does one find a Classic field remotely comparable to the average Arc field, as in 1998. More often it’s a mixed bag of a couple or three championship quality horses plus whatever is left standing after a long season. Some Classic fields have been quite ordinary, as in this year. Regardless, when a single race trumps an entire season, the significance of the award is greatly diminished.
December 8th, 2009 at 10:28 pm
I really enjoyed this article, and agree with it wholeheartedly. You made a great point, and saying there should be a Co-Horse of the Year is silly. Thank you so much for a wonderful article.
I’m with Zenyatta.
December 9th, 2009 at 1:34 am
Dr. Roman:
The following would be a representative list of my top 20 fillies/mares in no particular order:
Shuvee
Susan’s Girl
Ta Wee
Princess Rooney
Lady’s Secret
Dahlia
All Along
Ruffian
Beautiful Pleasure
Zenyatta
Personal Ensign
Miesque
Goldikova
Ouija Board
Azeri
Paseana
Bayakoa
Chris Evert
Winning Colors
Go for Wand
Serena’s Song
Dance Smartly
Allez France
Pebbles
Oops, I see I’ve overlooked Busher, Regret, and Genuine Risk (+countless others)–my mistake. Ah well, it’s just one man’s opinion in any case.
Interestingly enough, I saw a clip of Gary Stevens saying that Zenyatta would probably beat Winning Colors, Serena’s Song, and Rachel Alexandra in a race. He did ride WC and SS after all, but then again it’s also just one man’s opinion.
I’m guessing Mr. Stevens’ analysis wasn’t statistical in nature but rather seat-of-the-pants type calculations.
December 9th, 2009 at 6:32 am
Millions of Europeans still can’t bet on racing events because of restriction on gambling endorsed by the EU courts. The campaign at http://www.right2bet.net is trying to open the market and put an end to state run monopolies that deny consumers choice and value. Please support the petition!
December 9th, 2009 at 9:35 am
I appreciate the list of personal Top Twenty racing fillies and mares. Some expected, some missing (like GR…maybe Peppers Pride and a few oldies), but good info and discussion about this game that die-hard fans (good and bad times) have a passion for…like Ray’s list better.
Can’t find an answer to my question in the posts: If RA had continued to race, what would have been a good stakes race, excluding syn’s of course?
December 9th, 2009 at 9:56 am
Aron Wellman’s piece was excellent. Hopefully it will provoke positive responses from the well paid folks @ NTRA (suppose their 25% budget cut will include salaries???).
December 9th, 2009 at 10:37 am
My vote for HOY goes to both horses! Rachel Alexandra and Zenyatta were both AWESOME and they BOTH deserve the award. This was an exceptional year for Horse Racing and we need to keep the interest alive so that it can thrive and attract new racing fans. I feel it would be unfair to award only one horse this year. Reward them both, for what they have accomplished. After all, when will we see two AWESOME fillies do this again, in the same year?? I love BOTH of them and pray they will share the award and be entered in the history books. God Bless Rachel Alexandra and Zenyatta and Merry Christmas to Everyone !
December 9th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
Rachel is HOY and we all know it.
In the HISTORY of racing what 3 year old has gone undefeated for the year winning at Saratoga, Belmont, and Churchill besides Rachel Alexandra. Go back 150 years and name them.
Case closed.
December 9th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
So Draynay, because Man o’ War, Count Fleet, Sysonby, and War Admiral, who were all undefeated at three, did not win races at all three of the tracks you named, does that make beautiful Rachel a greater race horse than each of them?
December 9th, 2009 at 4:37 pm
Well, clairvoyent Draynay…if we ALL KNEW, then we wouldn’t be here discussing the difference of opinion on what we all, individually think what consitutes our pick for HOY this year.
Re: Saratoga, Churchill, Belmont…WTH??? That’s your defining criteria? The freakin’ track? Then you’re going to leave out a ton of good horses. Excuse me, but RAs best run (to me) was the OAKS and then the Preakness. Name races please. And if the case was closed, I wouldn’t and you wouldn’t be posting here.
December 9th, 2009 at 7:10 pm
D Masters you must be new to racing. The legends of racing have ALL won at those tracks. Belmont, Churchill and Saratoga are the foundation tracks of the sport where all the legends have raced and won. Zenyatta never even raced at one of them.
Rachel is the only 3 year old in history to win at all three and go undefeated. And Tiznowbaby what it means is RACHEL did something at three that Count Fleet, Man o’ War and War Admiral did not. The greatest horses EVER did not accomplish what Rachel did at 3.
What did Zenyatta accompish ? She beat males once on a poly rubber track.
Zenyatta is little more then a glorified Peppers Pride.
December 9th, 2009 at 7:53 pm
FIRST OF ALL…..COUNT FLEET WAS A THREE YR OLD UNDEFEATED AND DID NOT RUN AT ALL 3 TRACKS THAT U MENTIONED…(DIDNT GO TO SARATOGA) DIDNT HAVE TO…..& BY THE WAY…COUNT FLEET,TOM FOOL, WAR ADMIRAL, SYSONBY COULD PULL 2 STARTING GATES & BEAT RACHEL WITH SPEED TO SPARE..
December 9th, 2009 at 8:03 pm
……..& BY THE WAY…COUNT FLEET,TOM FOOL, WAR ADMIRAL, SYSONBY COULD PULL 2 STARTING GATES & BEAT RACHEL WITH SPEED TO SPARE..
December 9th, 2009 at 9:44 pm
Draynay:
“The legends of racing have ALL won at those tracks. Belmont, Churchill and Saratoga are the foundation tracks of the sport where all the legends have raced and won. Zenyatta never even raced at one of them.”
I don’t recall Kincsem, Eclipse, or Nearco running at any of those tracks. Granted there was a whole ocean or two separating horse from track… Nonetheless I won’t hold this blemish on their respective careers against them–I still consider them legends of racing.
You know, (a bit) more recently Sea the Stars was a pretty nice racehorse. Don’t know if he’ll be elevated to Legend of Racing status–early retirement, future stud career, time will tell, etc. Just checked his past performances though and didn’t see any of the aforementioned tracks either.
p.s. just out of curiousity, I wonder why Pimlico, Santa Anita, and Keeneland weren’t added to this prestigious list?
December 9th, 2009 at 10:23 pm
yah…..& he forgot to mention EMPIRE CITY & HAR DA GRA havre de grace in the way it is really spelled but prnounced har de gra…& hialeah…ledgends all ran at hialeah
December 9th, 2009 at 10:41 pm
and i fotgot where many of the legends in the yesteryear were stabled & ran..
JAMACIA RACE TRACK & THE WALT WHITMAN HOTEL
December 9th, 2009 at 11:25 pm
Dray, you didn’t answer my question.
Are you saying Rachel is a greater racehorse than Man o’ War because Man o’ War didn’t race at Churchill Downs and she did?
December 9th, 2009 at 11:40 pm
Tiznowbaby I will repeat my answer. I am saying Rachel has done what many of the greats of the past could never do.
Kincsem ? Lol… try to stick to the Bloodhorse top 100 you nut.
Eugene ? Tom Fool ? Are you kidding me his times would scare no one today.
I can tell you this for sure to …. I have never seen a better 3 year old then Rachel. Not since 1969 anyway.
I would put her 3 year old season on par with Citation.
December 10th, 2009 at 12:15 am
Here’s a good point…. go to the NTRA website and you will see a headline about voting for the “Moment of the Year” Award. If you go to the link it will show you which moments you can choose from. Roughly 30% of your choices are about Rachel Alexandra. Four total. Zenyatta is mentioned once. Why? Because she was asleep all year. RA is HOTY. Give Zenyatta moment of the year if you want, she’s deserving. But she did not a run a HOTY season, she ran a HOTY race, once, in the BCC. RA>Zenyatta.
December 10th, 2009 at 1:10 am
Draynay:
Wow.
You’ve managed to insult Sea the Stars, Armed, Citation, Triple Crown Champions past-present-and-future, Man o’ War, Kincsem, the nation of Hungary, horse racing on the entire continent of Europe, not to mention most of the people on this board. All in one post! Now that’s something.
Well I for one am not insulted. It is true–I am a nut. Thanks for the shout-out, brother!
But back to topic. Here’s one man’s opinion: Rachel is a great filly who ran the far better campaign this year. Zenyatta is a great mare who beat far better horses this year.
Let the voters decide and then we’ll start with a whole new round of incendiary posts. Which is the point of this article, really. Although I suppose the posts could be non-incendiary as well.
December 10th, 2009 at 5:50 am
Some of these posts are priceless (in a good way)…I needed the smiles and chuckles this morning. Thanks.
And sincere thank you’s out to RA and Z (and connections) for a memorable year.
December 10th, 2009 at 7:44 am
Draynay, please answer this question: Is Rachel a greater racehorse than Man O’ War since she raced at Churchill Downs and he did not?
December 10th, 2009 at 7:51 am
Draynay, oh wait, I found your answer on another Paulick Report post. You wrote:
“The two greatest 3 year old campaigns ever are by Citation and Rachel Alexandra. Feel better now Tiznowbaby? If I had to pick at 3rd and 4th it would be Man o War and Alydar. Yes, 5th would be Secretariat.”
So you do say Rachel is greater than Man O’ War. You also say that Alydar had a better 3YO year than Affirmed, Secretariat, Beldame, Miss Woodford, Sysonby, Count Fleet War Admiral, and countless other.
And you take Eugene to task? You, Draynay, have lost any possiblity of credibility by ranking Rachel above Man O’ War and Alydar above Affirmed and Secretariat.
December 10th, 2009 at 8:25 am
Ray said: “…But back to topic. Here’s one man’s opinion: Rachel is a great filly who ran the far better campaign this year. Zenyatta is a great mare who beat far better horses this year. ..”
A thoughtful summation…thanks.
December 10th, 2009 at 9:37 am
there is a person on here that i dont know if it is a male or a filly that absolutely doesnt know a horse if he or she slept in bed with one..the trouble is: for one to compare a thoroughbred
that he or she has never seen run in person to one that has run on television in todays time
is a flat out joke u see that i am trying to be real nice…..
December 10th, 2009 at 10:11 am
EUGENE LEVY:
(1) Thank you for your service to this country.
(2) See you found the CAPS LOCK toggle function, didn’t bother me either way…content counts, regardless of understanding internet “protocol”.
(3) The best in this world doesn’t rely on sex criteria (unless you’re making babies; and even that is changing)….it’s the humans that attempt to define or quantify it. It is what it is. Good, great and superior are taken note of because it is based on talent and the fates. We have a tendency to pigeon-hole it for our understanding and convenience.
(4) I hope you’re not addressing me specifically, because I’d have a spouse that would be really angry if there was a horse in our bed.
Keep on posting!
December 10th, 2009 at 11:05 am
Did I type Alydar ? Lol. Sorry Affirmed. It was getting late !
Rachel, Citation, Affirmed, Man o War, and Secretariat would be my top 5.
Tiznow I am not going to get into a debate about who’s flawless 3 year old campaign was better Man o War or Rachel’s. Just remember Rachel is a filly.
I saw Affirmed race 5 times and Secretariat twice. I was more impressed with Affirmed.
December 10th, 2009 at 11:21 am
OK, I forgive you the Alydar comment, and I’ll give you a smidge of credibility back. However, I don’t agree with you.
December 10th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
Zenyatta took on males one time in her entire career. Rachel has already been there and done that 3 times. One race does not make a year. Rachel had the greatest 3 year old season of any filly in history and perhaps the greatest by any horse. Rachel is clearly HOY.
December 10th, 2009 at 6:44 pm
I say Beldame and Miss Woodford had the greatest seasons for a 3YO filly.
December 10th, 2009 at 6:59 pm
This year alone Sea the Stars had a better 3yo season.
In HISTORY? Off the top of my head I can name at least 20 better 3yo seasons.
Words like BEST, GREATEST, EVER, HISTORY, LEGENDS, etc. indicate a level of adoration that seems, well, a little over the top. Capitalization doesn’t help matters.
Rachel Alexandra is a great filly and ran a great campaign no question. I don’t know that I’d use those words or put her in that company at this point in time. You kind of have to wait a little bit and see how things play out.
I mean Rachel’s 20 1/4 length victory in the Oaks may very well turn out to be even more impressive than Citation’s 8 or Secretariat’s 31 in the Belmont… Oh wait, I see she the 2nd place finisher in the Kentucky Oaks was Stone Legacy. Was that the same Stone Legacy in a CLAIMING race 3 months later?
Have some perspective, brother.
December 11th, 2009 at 10:04 am
Funny how we defend the legends of the past. At 3 Secretariat was not near as perfect as Rachel and Man o War never ran as fast as Rachel. But we pretend that they are somehow better because of legend., Was Secretariat great ? Yes but never for more then 3 or 4 races. He had a habit of throwing in a clunker now and again. What Rachel did at 3 has rarely been achieved by any horse but for a filly to do it is all the more amazing.
December 11th, 2009 at 11:32 pm
HOF jockey Gary Stevens has said that Zenyatta is the greatest racehorse he has EVER seen. The past CEO of Santa Anita has said that Zenyatta is the greatest racehorse he has EVER seen in over 70 years of following horseraces. The track announcer at Hollywood Park has said that Zenyatta is the greatest racehorse he has EVER seen. HOF jockey Mike Smith has said Zenyatta is the greatest racehorse he has EVER seen. Bob Baffert has said that Zenyatta was the greatest female racehorse of all time. Zenyatta is the greatest “googled” racehorse of all time. She leads in the Daily Racing Form voting by a 2-1 margin. She already won the Bloodhorse.com voting by almost 1,000 votes. She is the landslide leader in EVERY casino and book offering betting on the HOY. It goes on and on.
Zenyatta has single handedly revived horseracing to a level not seen in years. She is the perfect specimen, the perfect racehorse.
December 12th, 2009 at 1:27 am
Heh, heh. Thanks for that Chester. I stand corrected.
I do pay a little more heed when guys like Gary Stevens and Bob Baffert say stuff like EVER, ALL TIME, etc.
And as I responded to earlier, Gary Stevens has said in a race between Winning Colors, Serena’s Song, and Rachel, “Zenyatta wins for fun” or something to that effect. Sure he’s a west coast guy, but he did ride WC and SS after all. I’m guessing none of us here can say the same?
Search it on youtube: Gary Stevens Zenyatta Rachel
December 14th, 2009 at 11:45 am
Draynay, seriously? Do you seriously think Rachel would be perfect if she’s faced older horses FIVE time or run on the grass? Or in the Belmont?
The last five races of Secretariat’s career were against older horses. It wasn’t one; it was five. Do you seriously think Rachel would be unbeaten if she had raced in the Belmont, the Whitney, the Man o’ War, the Marlboro, the Woodward and the Candian International? Where are her world records?