The Paulick Report is pleased to once again offer the pedigree insights of Edwin Anthony in the weeks leading up to the Kentucky Derby. Ed has lifelong experience in the Thoroughbred industry, has practical experience planning matings for his family’s stable and formerly as a pedigree adviser to Three Chimneys Farm. His perspective is straightforward and refreshingly opinionated, and I advise anyone interested in Thoroughbred pedigrees to pick up a copy of his book, “The American Thoroughbred (Volume One)”—available for purchase here.
In this first of a series of articles, he looks at the pedigree of Fasig-Tipton Fountain of Youth winner Eskendereya. – Ray Paulick
ESKENDEREYA (Giant’s Causeway—Aldebaran Light, by Seattle Slew) By Edwin Anthony
I wrote a series of eight pedigree profiles for horses on the “Triple Crown trail” starting about this time last year, and recent Fountain of Youth (G2) winner Eskendereya will serve as the first horse in our series this season. It’s interesting to look back at the horses we profiled last year (Friesan Fire, Quality Road, Pioneerof the Nile, Dunkirk, I Want Revenge, Papa Clem, Chocolate Candy, Rachel Alexandra) to see how they fared.
Quality Road is obviously a top horse (he missed the Triple Crown with quarter cracks), while Dunkirk and Pioneerof the Nile were each able to place in one classic race, and I wrote a token piece about Rachel Alexandra because she looked like a very special filly, even though she had not won anything more than a G2 race at that stage. Only a fortune teller could have predicted Rachel Alexandra’s Horse of the Year campaign after changing hands or the rapid ascension of Birdstone (sire of longshot classic winners Mine That Bird and Summer Bird) as a major classic influence.
Even though I have studied Thoroughbred pedigrees for going on 25 years, no one can get around the folly of bad luck, injuries in training, or the fact that many horses look dominant going nine furlongs (a mile-and-an-eighth) but simply aren’t up to the demanding task of running classic distances at a competitive speed.
That’s the mystery of stamina and genetics that we’re constantly trying to figure out. Of course, even a horse that is capable of competing at classic distances still needs to put out the effort, and sometimes horses have off-days just like people.
If nothing else, we strive to learn about the strengths and limitations of the stallions and ancestors under discussion and hope to come out smarter on the other side. At the very least, we want to learn what strategies are working in pedigrees, even if some of them aren’t up to the classic standard. Who are the soundest horses, where is the stamina coming from, and what ancestors are best to inbreed to? These are the answers we’re looking for.
Pedigree analysts (like myself) try to identify patterns in graded stakes results as a way of predicting the future. Given that the Storm Cat line has been a poor source of classic winners, then you probably wouldn’t want to lean heavily on Storm Cat’s sons (or stallions out of Storm Cat mares) in your stallion recommendations for breeders that want to breed for the classics. The Storm Cat line hasn’t had a winner of a Triple Crown race since Tabasco Cat in 1994, although Bluegrass Cat was second in the Kentucky Derby, Belmont, and Travers in 2006. You should note that Bluegrass Cat is out of a mare by classic influence A.P. Indy and his dam is heavily inbred to the foundation mare La Troienne, including being from the Numbered Account (champion 2YO filly by Buckpasser) branch of that important family.
So, while the Storm Cat line is dominant in 2-year-old racing and in races contested at distances of 9 furlongs or shorter, it does not appear capable of producing classic types, unless there is a LOT of help on the dam side of the equation. Of course, when you start to speak in these kinds of absolutes, a special horse can come along and provide us with the exception to the rule.
Storm Cat’s son Giant’s Causeway was a tough campaigner in Europe out of a good racemare by Rahy, with a second dam by English Derby winner and classic influence Roberto. He was undeniably consistent and high class, winning a series of Group 1 races at more than a mile. In his final start, he gave classic distance specialist Tiznow a real run for his money in the Breeders’ Cup Classic, that being his only start on dirt. So, Giant’s Causeway was sound, very fast, and capable of competing with top horses at the American classic distance of 10 furlongs (a mile-and-a-quarter). This makes him an exception among sons of Storm Cat, as most of his sons that have found any measure of success at stud were much better at a mile or less and have passed on this penchant for speed among their progeny.
Giant’s Causeway has already sired Grade 1 winners in America over 10 furlongs like Heatseeker (Santa Anita Handicap), Frost Giant (Suburban), and Red Giant (NWR, Clement L. Hirsch Memorial Turf Championship), so you can see that if there is a son of Storm Cat capable of siring an American classic winner, then Giant’s Causeway is probably the one.
The runaway win by Eskendereya (by Giant’s Causeway) in the Fountain of Youth (G2) was more than visually impressive. You could see that the horse really relished the opportunity to go two turns, and he is now 3 for 3 on the dirt, his only losses coming in his first start (a maiden event on turf at Saratoga) and a poor effort in the Breeders’ Cup Juvenile (G1), contested over the synthetic surface at Santa Anita. He was reported to have a troubled trip in that race as well.
I have often thought that a true classic type horse is able to simply get into a steady gallop and carve out “12’s,” which is to say that he can consistently complete each furlong of a race in 12 seconds. It becomes increasingly difficult to do with each furlong, as the muscles begin to tire, and Secretariat’s world record time of 2:24 in the 1973 Belmont (over 12 furlongs) is the best example of a horse being able to accomplish this feat over such a distance. It’s not about an explosive move or “turn of foot” with classic horses; it’s steady horsepower over a distance. Classic horses “stay” (as the Europeans like to say), while horses more suited to shorter distances simply run out of gas, unable to maintain a steady stream of “12’s” on the toteboard teletimer.
This is exactly what Eskendereya did to the field in the Fountain of Youth (G2)—he galloped them into submission. After taking over after a half-mile in a soft 47.92, he completed six furlongs in 1:12.41, a mile in 1:36.54, with a final time for nine furlongs of 1:48.87, echoing the many 12-second furlongs before the last one. So, like several other sons of Giant’s Causeway, Eskendereya looks capable of running a distance of ground as far as 10 furlongs at a competitive rate of speed. Let’s look at the bottom side of his pedigree to check for more stamina.
Eskendereya’s damsire, Seattle Slew, won the Triple Crown and has been a very successful classic influence, with descendants like A.P. Indy (Belmont, Breeders’ Cup Classic), Bernardini (Preakness, Travers), Cigar (Breeders’ Cup Classic, Dubai World Cup), Lemon Drop Kid (Belmont, Travers), Mineshaft (Jockey Club Gold Cup, Suburban), and Slew o’ Gold (Jockey Club Gold Cup twice) serving as notable examples.
Alydar (second in all 3 Triple Crown races to Affirmed) is the sire of Eskendereya’s second dam, and beyond the fact that he sired two Kentucky Derby winners (Alysheba and Strike the Gold) and a Belmont winner (Easy Goer), Horse of the Year Point Given (Preakness, Belmont, Travers) was produced by a mare by champion Turkoman, he being a son of Alydar.
We know that inbreeding to the family of Almahmoud (second dam of both Halo and Northern Dancer) has been quite successful, and Giant’s Causeway is a very good example of this, as Storm Cat is a grandson of Northern Dancer and Rahy (his damsire) is out of a mare by Halo. The pedigree of Eskendereya shows why a six-generation computer program is a good investment, as his third dam carries intensive inbreeding to the Almahmoud family as well. His third dam is by Northern Dancer himself (giving Eskendereya “balanced” inbreeding to Northern Dancer—through a son and a daughter), and while his fourth dam was sired by the stout stamina influence Ribot (winner of the 12-furlong “Arc” twice) his fifth dam is actually the mare Cosmah, she being the dam of Halo and a daughter of Almahmoud. Thus, Eskendereya is not only inbred to Northern Dancer through a son and a daughter, he is inbred to Halo’s dam, Cosmah, 6 x 5 and carries four total crosses of Almahmoud.
As the ancestors Northern Dancer, Halo, and their granddam Almahmoud get further back in pedigrees, this reinforcement strategy of crossing horses inbred to Almahmoud should continue to find success and revive their influence in classic pedigrees. My parents bred and raced Preakness winner Pine Bluff (inbred 4 x 4 to Almahmoud), and I have noticed him working well with reinforcement of Almahmoud’s genes, crossing successfully with stallions like More Than Ready (by Southern Halo—closely inbred to Almahmoud), Menifee (by Harlan—closely inbred to Almahmoud), and Jules (from the Northern Dancer family and carrying Halo in his pedigree). So, it seems to be a strategy that is paying dividends with stallions and mares already carrying inbreeding to Almahmoud.
Given the fact that Giant’s Causeway has already proven capable of siring runners that excel at classic distances, and the fact that Eskendereya carries a number of other classic influences in his pedigree (Seattle Slew, Alydar, Ribot, and intensive inbreeding to the influential Almahmoud family), I’d say that his classic prospects look very bright indeed. His clear preference for dirt racing and ability to string together one 12 second furlong after another only boosts his stock, in my opinion. If Eskenereya can arrive in Louisville with a solid Florida Derby (G1) effort under his belt, he should be a very strong contender.
Edwin Anthony was the staff pedigree consultant at Three Chimneys Farm for six years and has penned dozens of articles on pedigree research. He also published The American Thoroughbred (Volume I) in 2008, which can be ordered via the banner ad link on this web page or on his web site at www.thoroughbredadvisor.com.
By Ray Paulick Jerry Moss has been living a dream since moving to California from his native New York in 1960. In 1962, with trumpeter and band leader Herb Albert, he formed A&M Records and over the next quarter century produced music for a diverse group of recording artists ranging from The Carpenters, Joan Baez, Phils Ochs, and Cheech & Chong to Joe Cocker, Janet Jackson, Oingo Boingo, The Tubes and The Police—and that’s only a very small list. He and Alpert were inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 2006. His life as a Thoroughbred owner has been pretty groovy, too, especially in recent years. Moss and his wife Ann won the Kentucky Derby with Giacomo in 2005, and Zenyatta has carried them to consecutive Eclipse Awards as champion older mare during an unbeaten career that hit a high note at Santa Anita last November when she became the first distaffer to win the Breeders’ Cup Classic. She is currently preparing for an April 9 showdown against Horse of the Year Rachel Alexandra in the $5-million Apple Blossom Invitational at Oaklawn Park. Moss also serves on the California Horse Racing Board, having been appointed by California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2004. He was the only member of that panel not to vote in favor of the synthetic track mandate when it was proposed in 2006. Moss abstained, believing more research and study was needed before such a significant change was enacted. He, along with Zenyatta’s trainer, John Shirreffs, have become critics of the synthetic surfaces. Moss spoke with the Paulick Report about the synthetic track controversy and a variety of other subjects. Let’s go back to 2006 when the push was made for synthetic tracks. What was your position? I frankly wasn’t prepared for the speed at which this was enacted. I thought we needed more data and felt we shouldn’t be rushing off to do this, causing tracks to spend $40 million based on one season at Turfway Park. Yet if you were in the room that day–and the truth is every vendor, Polytrack, Cushion Track, Tapeta, they all had people show up and do demonstrations—that meeting was hell bent on doing this. There were only five commissioners present, and the overall support from TOC and CTT (Thoroughbred Owners of California and California Thoroughbred Trainers), and particularly from two trainers, Richard Mandella and Howard Zucker, was rampant. The room was rocking to do this. First I made a statement that we should all study it enough to pick one surface and be consistent and no one took that seriously. We could have managed it better with maintenance. We took this vote, and I was hoping someone would stand up and say, ‘You can’t do this.’ I said, ‘I abstain, I think we need more time.’ We had been fortunate enough to win the Kentucky Derby the previous year with Giacomo, and I felt these tracks would make it so much more difficult for the owner of a California horse to achieve the dream, to win the Derby. Sometimes you can train on Polytrack and do well, but it’s hard to race on it and transfer the same form to dirt. The nature of the tracks changes every day. We run on three different synthetic tracks in Southern California and a fourth, quite different track, is at Golden Gate (near San Francisco), and every one of them changes every day. It’s been very hard for trainers to build up the strength of horses on these tracks. With John Sadler now president of CTT, an open poll of trainers came up with a 70% vote to reinstall dirt. I hope we live up to that. I think it’s a big, divisive thing that’s happened. We have enough divisiveness. If Santa Anita takes the lead and installs a dirt track, it would become the center of racing again in the U.S. People will still complain about the track. Everybody complains about the condition of the track, every trainer. At least with a dirt track you’ve got people with years of experience in maintaining it. With this stuff, nobody knows anything. We were told we wouldn’t need water and that couldn’t be further from the truth. We were told there would be lower maintenance costs. Our horse Tiago had a huge piece of rubber in his nose. It took us weeks and months to get this gook out of his mouth. The fibers melted from the heat. What are some of the other challenges the industry faces in California? Getting our product across to the consumer. I’m pleased that the CHRB is really concentrating on the mini-satellites. We’ve had a bill put forth in the state legislature that seemed to allow a greater number of them to commence operations, but there’s a restriction they had to be 20 miles away from an existing track or wagering site. In all this time, only one mini-satellite got set up—at a card club in Gardena, and they’re doing really well. It showed people still have an appetite for our game. A friend of mine owns movie theaters and wants to incorporate bet facilities in movie theaters. I think it’s a great idea, yet nobody seems to be jumping up and down about it. The thing that really gets me down about our game is we have so many wise men who are so negative. I feel that’s what’s plaguing our industry. Not enough guys who want to put their money up and take a shot. The dream keeps getting dimmer. There are some new thoughts blossoming. Our new CHRB chairman (Keith Brackpool) has some good ideas, some practical ideas. He’s thinking positively. What needs to happen to reverse the trend? Leadership. Are there national solutions to racing’s challenges? I firmly believe you need a national presence. We need to figure a way to do this. We’ve got these little fiefdoms, powerful in their regions. There’s no national medication policy; it’s like the Cincinnati Reds playing on different drugs than the New York Mets. It’s just not right. Different rules apply to different places. There’s got to be some national policy. It’s been tried. Business has to operate with one negotiator. It’s also gotten to be too hard for the public to get to see these races, like the Derby preps last weekend. These were some big races, but they weren’t on ESPN and were hardly reported in the papers. The Kentucky Derby still gets a good (television) rating, and the Breeders’ Cup is a big event. People do tune in on big days. But look at something like NASCAR. They are all over the place. Your expertise is in entertainment, and you’ve seen a lot of changes in the music business in terms of distribution and technology. What has the music industry done differently in the face of those changes, as opposed to how the racing industry has reacted? The internet has taken its toll on the sale of records. A large segment of the population started exchanging files and getting music for free. But artists are still making music and the emphasis for making money for these artists is through new sources—personal appearances. Artists in this for the long haul have to keep performing, attach themselves to an audience, people who show up for them, and buy their products. It is possible to be a success in the music industry. Television is more important than before. If you’re talented you’ve got to get your message to the people—and promote it. What are the chances state government can help in California? California breeding has gone way down. California homebreds used to make up a much bigger percentage of the races. State government has done very little in the time I’ve been on the CHRB. It’s very disappointing what the legislature or governor have done for the industry–so far it’s been dismal. But the state is in trouble. I understand where Arnold (Gov. Schwarzenegger) is having to reduce money for breast cancer diagnosis. How can he do something for a rich man’s game like horse racing while reducing the number of teachers in our schools. Clearly, we need some help. But positive thinking and a unified approach to the legislature and governor would certainly benefit. We’ve got to think more positively. People have to let go of some things. We have to move on. We gave up the stage coach a long time–and we moved on. You mentioned how musicians are now emphasizing personal appearances more today. Can racing ever recapture some of the on-track business it lost to simulcasting and advance-depoisit wagering? My belief is that people’s habits have changed. I don’t know if people have that much leisure time these days. In the 1980s when on-track business was strong, you still had the same number of sports–basketball, baseball, NFL, lots of different stuff. Today everybody has to work harder, our economy is still in trouble. To come out and hang out for the whole afternoon is hard for people, their attention spans have changed. That’s why you’ve got to make TV a little easier for them. Are we better off with ADW, even though it’s had a negative effect on on-track business? Yes I’d have to say so. At least it’s brought in the opportunity of a new generation that understands the internet effectively enough to place a wager. I bet on TVG now and then. I think it’s a handy tool. And I’m happy that BetFair owns TVG. Gaming professionals understand racing. They understand gaming. I think they do a pretty good job on TVG—they try to be entertaining. It would have been very easy to send Zenyatta off to Kentucky to be bred after her second Eclipse Award. What factors went into your decision to keep her in training? The initial decision to retire her was purely mine. After the Breeders’ Cup Classic I said what else can I ask her to do? I didn’t talk to my wife, to anybody on the team, I just said I think we’ve got to retire her. We went to visit her at the barn and this was a horse that obviously was liking her job. She’s been there four years now, and we were, what, going to send her to Kentucky? Before the Eclipse Awards, my wife and I said if John thinks she can go another year and she’s happy, let’s do it. She loves the show, she loves the people. The Classic didn’t take that much out of her. John and Dottie (racing manager Dottie Ingordo, Shirreffs’ wife) said, ‘Yeah, she can be pretty good next year.’ The decision to retire her was an emotional one on my part and the decision to keep her in training was more of a reasonable one. She’s a star. How can racing seize the opportunity to promote the Apple Blossom and any other races involving Zenyatta and Rachel Alexandra? I believe Mr. (Charles) Cella is a great showman. He’s almost in a class by himself. Back in 1927, someone said, ‘Mr. O’Brien the most amazing thing has happened; a man has flown across the Atlantic Ocean all by himself.’ O’Brien says, ‘That’s fantastic, but let me know when a committee does it. That would be amazing.’ The point is an individual can accomplish anything. Charlie was able to pull this off and you’ve got to give him credit for it. Whatever devise he wants to promote this race is absolutely fine, and I believe he’ll come out of it making money.
By Ray Paulick
Jess Jackson could have waited until Friday night at 9 o’clock or so to send out a press release anouncing his regrets for not pointing Rachel Alexandra to the April 3 Apple Blossom at Oaklawn Park. Oaklawn owner Charles Cella had proposed increasing the Apple Blossom’s purse to $5 million if Jackson’s 2009 Horse of the Year and the unbeaten two-time champion mare Zenyatta were both in the starting lineup for the race.
That’s what the president of Toyota did—schedule a press conference for 9 p.m. on a Friday night–to respond to mounting public outrage over safety problems with cars produced by the world’s leading automotive manufacturer. Spin doctors always advise their clients to put bad news out late on a Friday to get the lowest possible publicity and media coverage.
But not Jess Jackson. He had the courage to send out a press release at the end of the business day on a Wednesday, when most racetracks East of the Mississippi were closed due to blizzard conditions. His press release was very clever, too, utilizing an old-fashioned smokescreen—a grand proposal for a three-race series between the two distaffers—to obscure the fact Rachel Alexandra would skip the Apple Blossom. To make matters worse, he made trainer Steve Asmussen the fall guy who had to deliver the bad news: ““Out of respect for the level of competition and the importance of this race, I have told Mr. Jackson it was not in the best interest of the horse to race on April 3,” Asmussen was quoted as saying in the press release. “Getting to this level of fitness after a six-month layoff takes time. If all goes according to schedule, and we do not have any further weather delays, the earliest we could have a prep race would be the middle of March. It is then not fair to Rachel to ask her to race again three weeks later.”
I could be wrong, but I think that’s the most Jackson has allowed Asmussen to say since the California winemaker bought Rachel Alexandra after her victory in the Kentucky Oaks last spring.
But the confusing part of the release was Jackson’s statement that the proposed racing series between Rachel Alexandra and Zenyatta has been “in the works for several weeks.” If that’s the case, why did Jackson indicate even the slightest bit of interest when Cella proposed the Apple Blossom purse increase?
Also, why is Jackson suddenly relying on the National Thoroughbred Racing Association to put something together? The NTRA owns no racetracks, has no authority over tracks, stakes schedules or race conditions, and doesn’t even have any juice left with television networks.
If anything, Jackson should be asking the Breeders’ Cup—not the NTRA–for assistance in putting the series together and promoting it, since racing fans hope the two fillies will remain sound throughout 2010 and eventually go head-to-head in either the Breeders’ Cup Classic or Ladies’ Classic this fall at Churchill Downs. A series of races betweem the two leading up to the Breeders’ Cup would be in that organization’s best interests, and the Breeders’ Cup does have stronger ties to ESPN for broadcast opportunities.
Finally, if the proposal by Jackson was genuine, why on earth were Jerry and Ann Moss not even mentioned in the press release. As Zenyatta’s owners, I think they might want to have some say in this proposed series.
We are pleased to introduce a new weekly feature today, the Paulick Report Forum brought to you by Breeders’ Cup. Every Wednesday, we’ll talk with a Thoroughbred industry player about the game we all love, trying to get a better understanding of where we’ve been and where we may be headed. One thing I’ve learned throughout my years in this industry is that nothing comes easy. We are a sport and a business fraught with divisiveness, incoherence and confusion. But at the same time we are blessed to have many participants with great intelligence, insights and dedication. In short, we never know where the next good idea may come from.
We hope you will read each week’s Forum, offer your thoughts on the subject being discussed, and suggest to us other areas where we can advance the discussions that need to take place to get our industry moving in the right direction once again. Thanks to the Breeders’ Cup for their sponsorship of this process.
It surprised me when Christophe Clement said that he has spent half of his 44 years in the United States. Maybe it’s the heavy French accent he still retains, or simply the blur of the years going by so quickly. But the third-generation horseman has made America his permanent home since 1991. He’d spent a couple of years here in the 1980s, working for Taylor Made Farm and trainer Shug McGaughey, before returning to Europe, where he served for four years as assistant to Luca Cumani in Newmarket, England. Earlier in his life, he had apprenticed for the master horseman Alec Head in Chantilly.
Clement, coming off an outstanding year when Gio Ponti won two Eclipse Awards for the Ryan family’s Castleton Lyons as turf male and older male champion, is preparing the 5-year-old son of Tale of the Cat for a possible run at the $10-million Dubai World Cup. He’s looking at a prep race at Tampa Bay Downs on turf in February prior to taking on the world’s best over the Tapeta Footings surface at the new Meydan racetrack in Dubai. Gio Ponti is coming off a second-place finish to Zenyatta in the Breeders’ Cup Classic over the Pro-Ride synthetic track at Santa Anita.
In this, our first Paulick Report Forum brought to you by Breeders’ Cup, Clement provided some insights about the sport of Thoroughbred racing and how it’s changed during his lifetime.
What is it about international racing that is important to you?
First of all, with the Dubai race I can give you 10 million reasons. If it was a million-dollar race, I wouldn’t be going. I would be going instead to the Santa Anita Handicap. In the case of the Dubai World Cup, the purse has a lot to do with it.
But international racing is important. I’m just a trainer, but if I was a breeder or an owner, I would say it is very important for the breed to know which horse is the best and which sires are better. I saw an article in the TDN that said, as recently as 20 years ago, 80% of the world’s leading stallions stood in the United States. Today that number is 50%. The United States does not permeate world breeding the way it was 20 years ago.
From a personal standpoint, I don’t get as many fillies or mares sent from Europe to race here and then be bred to American stallions. Their owners are keeping them in Europe.
Why the shift?
A couple of things. First there is medication. People refuse to talk about it, but a lot of people in Europe still don’t want to breed to U.S. sires because those horses raced on medication. A lot of Europeans do not understand why we continue to allow medication while the rest of the world is doing OK without it.
That’s one of the factors. It is an issue for some people. There are two things I would like to see changed. I am convinced Grade 1 races should not be handicaps. It’s not healthy to use weight to try and beat the best horses. Allowance conditions are fine. This is something Bobby Frankel and I talked about, and Bobby was against handicaps in Grade 1s. I also believe there should be no medication in Grade 1s because we use these races to improve the breed.
So why do we continue to permit it?
I don’t know. Every track is different. There is no federal authority. No racing commissioner. The Graded Stakes Committee took grades away from Pennsylvania because they failed to do the proper testing, but there is limited means to enforce national rules. I’m just a trainer. These are some of my thoughts. I’m trying to win a race tomorrow.
You said there were two major reasons for the shift in stallion power away from the U.S.
Right. Secondly, the two groups, the Maktoums and Coolmore, have given European breeders access to some very good stallions because they are retaining some of the best racehorses. Twenty or 30 years ago the world’s best horses came to Gainesway—horses like Lyphard, Riverman, and Blushing Groom. This year, apparently no American farms bid for Sea the Stars. 20 years ago an American farm would have. Aside from Giant’s Causeway and Kingmambo, it’s been quite a while since an exciting European horse came to the United States as a sire. The top milers in Europe are no longer coming here, either.
What training methods have you adapted from your European background?
I am more American than European. I’m 44 and have spent more time in this country than anywhere else. But I’ll say this. When Sir Michael Stoute or Andre Fabre wake up in the morning they have a choice of tracks on which to train their horses. Here it’s the main track or the training track. Those guys have a much wider choice for their horses.
We should have access to all surfaces: dirt, turf and Polytrack. If you have a good dirt track, like in New York, a good turf course, and a good Polytrack surface to race or train over on days when it’s very wet, it would be very popular. But the problem is who pays? It would be very expensive. In an ideal world, that’s the way it would be. A dirt track should be safe if maintained the right way. Turf is safe, and off the turf races could be run on a Polytrack.
You recently cut back on the number of horses you have in California. Is it because of the problems with Santa Anita’s surface?
It’s Mother Nature. I’m not against Santa Anita. They did everything they could. Wherever you are, you have to deal with Mother Nature. It’s been very wet out there. One reason Gio Ponti came back East is I found that the flight to Dubai will be easier from Florida than California.
In the United States all trainers think they are track superintendents, but the track superintendents know their job. There is no ideal surface 365 days a year. Bob Baffert was really negative on Polytrack, but he’s such a smart guy and a good trainer he’s really adapted. He’s doing great on that surface.
What can American trainers learn from others around the world?
When you work for the people I’ve worked for, you learn that change is not always negative. People in racing don’t like change. Change is not always a bad thing. We should be more open minded about change. A typical thing is the synthetic tracks: trainers should be more open minded. Of course it will not be perfect from day one, but it is ridiculous to be so against it, just as it is ridiculous to be against dirt racing. It doesn’t have to be one or the other. The Kentucky Derby is on dirt and should remain on dirt, and the Belmont Stakes is on dirt and should remain on dirt. But we shouldn’t exclude Polytrack from our racing because it represents change.
Finally, how do you feel about Rachel Alexandra’s owner Jess Jackson’s recent comments that the field for the 2009 Breeders’ Cup Classic was not nearly as good as the 2008 race when his Curlin was defeated?
I think it’s just another reason that he should have participated in the race.
Due to three recorded workouts in the last six weeks, there is speculation that Breeders’ Cup Classic champion and Horse of the Year finalist Zenyatta may not be retiring after all. Asked for an answer as to why she is still working out in trainer John Shirreffs barn, Shirreffs told the Daily Racing Form, "That decision is Mr. Moss’s and he hasn’t said anything other than what he said after the Breeders’ Cup."
I don’t know Mr. Shirreffs but from my years in politics, this sounds like a classic non-denial to me. Not saying that Zenyatta is coming back, but I also wouldn’t rule it out.
While Ray is traveling back from Osaka (hopefully we won’t have to hear too much about jet lag once he returns to the United States), he wanted to reignite the debate over Horse of the Year. The following piece was submitted by Jeff Shapes, a marketing communications consultant, freelance writer and horse racing enthusiast, not necessarily in that order.
By Jeff Shapes
There’s one overriding reason Zenyatta should win the Eclipse Award as Horse of the Year over Rachel Alexandra, and it has nothing to do with their comparative records on the racetrack. No, Zenyatta has earned the honor because her electrifying performance in the Breeders’ Cup Classic flew in the face of the general negative assessment of her chances to win the event, while at the same time capping off a brilliant, undefeated career that put her into the discussion of who is history’s greatest female race horse. Now, if that doesn’t make her Horse of the Year, they might as well retire the award.
Yes there had been speculation that if Zenyatta ran in the Classic and won, there’d be a Horse of the Year debate. But in their heart of hearts, not to mention their racing opinions, those speculators, whether in public or not, didn’t believe Zenyatta had what it took to beat the “big” boys in the big race. Indeed, there were some who said she shouldn’t even run in the Classic, since there wasn’t really anything to gain. Better to protect her legacy as an undefeated champion with another romp in the Ladies’ Classic, than to go out with a loss chasing an unattainable goal.
Need some proof of how little regard the experts had for Zenyatta in the run up to the Classic? Despite being tabbed the pre-race wagering favorite, not one of the 11 media members whose selections were published by USA Today in its Breeders’ Cup preview picked Zenyatta to win. And east coast bias wasn’t in play. Joining writers from the New York Daily News, New York Post, Lexington Herald-Leader and Albany Times-Union in giving Zenyatta the thumbs down were the national correspondent of the Daily Racing Form, horse racing writers from the Associated Press and USA Today, an editor of the Thoroughbred Times, an on-air personality from HRTV and racing writers from the Los Angeles Daily News and San Diego Union-Tribune, in whose backyard Zenyatta ran all except one of her career races.
Want to bring in some more exulted names? Joe Drape of the New York Times did not pick Zenyatta, and neither did Steven Crist of the Daily Racing Form. The Washington Post’s Andy Beyer, inventor of the Beyer Speed Figure, the acknowledged statistical method for comparing racetrack performances under different race conditions? He labeled Zenyatta a throw out.
Luckily, Zenyatta’s connections had much greater faith in their magnificent mare than the experts. Questioned for not shipping Zenyatta to a traditional dirt track to take on Rachel Alexandra head-to-head, team Zenyatta stuck to their guns of getting her ready for the Breeders’ Cup the best way they thought how. If that meant staying in Southern California and competing exclusively on synthetic surfaces, well that’s how it would be done. And though they never stated it, the guess here is that winning the Classic as a finishing touch on a Hall of Fame career, not to mention the historical achievement such a win would represent, was probably the long-range goal of those who guided Zenyatta’s career.
Of course, Rachel Alexandra’s connections, like most others in the racing world, assumed their filly had a stranglehold on Horse of the Year when she concluded her 2009 season with a win in the Woodward Stakes at Saratoga in early September. It was Rachel’s eighth victory in eight races, accomplished at seven racetracks in six states, with three coming over male competitors. Her campaign encompassed eye popping performances in such keystone events as the Kentucky Oaks, Preakness Stakes, Mother Goose Stakes, Haskell Invitational and the aforementioned Woodward, and was highlighted by either record breaking victory margins or historical firsts just about every time she left the starting gate.
With such a resumé, who could blame Jess Jackson for putting Rachel away for the winter, especially since she probably needed a rest after an exhausting year (visible in the Woodward). But, had the Breeders’ Cup Classic not been held on a synthetic surface, there’s little doubt Rachel would have continued her season and run at least one more race to conclude a campaign for the ages. After all, it was Jackson himself who announced his intention to run Rachel in next year’s Breeders’ Cup at Churchill Downs at the same time he said he would not run her this year on Santa Anita’s Pro-Ride because of his distaste for synthetic surfaces (or plastic as he labeled them).
Can we know how a Zenyatta-Rachel Alexandra showdown in the Breeders’ Cup Classic would have played out? Is there a certainty that had Rachel been entered in the race, Team Zenyatta would have taken her on? Would Rachel have performed as poorly on the synthetics as last year’s Horse of the Year, Curlin, and as other “dirt” horses seem to? These questions can never be answered. But what is fact is that Zenyatta showed up on Championship Saturday and won the most important North American race that’s open to all Thoroughbreds regardless of age or sex. This was no Raven’s Pass swooping in and leaving nothing behind but a few footprints.
By Ray Paulick
In the sale ring, on the racetrack and in the breeding shed, A.P. Indy has been a star. The son of Seattle Slew topped the 1990 Keeneland July yearling sale when he sold for $2.9 million. He was the champion 3-year-old and Horse of the Year in 1992, his victories including the Belmont Stakes and Breeders’ Cup Classic. He’s been leading sire in North America on two occasions—2003 and 2006—and he has sired the winners of 10 or more Graded/Group stakes races in eight of the 14 years he’s had runners on the track.
Furthermore, A.P. Indy has developed into a leading sire of sires, with eight sons ranking in the top 100 on bloodhorse.com’s leading sires by North American earnings for 2009. One of those sons, Pulpit, has two of his own sons on the list, Tapit and Sky Mesa. So, including A.P. Indy, his sons and his grandsons, 11 of the top 100 positions by North American earnings trace to this horse sired by a Triple Crown winner, produced from a broodmare of the year, Weekend Surprise, who is a daughter of another Triple Crown winner, Secretariat.
A.P. Indy is also the leader by number of American Graded Stakes winners of 2009, with nine sons and daughters winning 14 AGS races. His sons Pulpit and Malibu Moon rank second with seven AGS winners each. A.P. Indy has achieved this great success at stud without the benefit of super-sized foal crops. Only one of his 14 crops exceeded 100 foals, and the average size of each of his foal crops of racing age is 71. The average number of foals in each of Pulpit’s nine crops is 62, and the average for Malibu Moon’s seven crops is 79.
Perhaps less is more.
Three of A.P. Indy’s nine American Graded Stakes winners of 2009 won Grade 1 races: Flashing (Test and Gazelle), Music Note (Ballerina and Beldame) and Telling (Sword Dancer Invitational). Malibu Moon has two Grade 1-winning daughters, Funny Moon (Coaching Club American Oaks) and Devil May Care (Frizette); Pulpit sired Grade 1 winners Pyro (Forego) and Mi Sueno (Del Mar Debutante). Two other sons of A.P. Indy sired Grade 1 winners of 2009, Jump Start (Rail Trip, Hollywood Gold Cup) and Stephen Got Even (I Want Revenge, Wood Memorial).
One of his most exciting sons to enter stud is Bernardini, whose first crop turns two years old in 2010. A.P. Indy has already solidified his position as one of the most influential and important sires of the modern era, but his final chapter is yet to be written.
By Ray Paulick
Voting for the Eclipse Awards will begin in just over a month, and the biggest debate and perhaps most hotly disputed division will be for Horse of the Year, where early- and mid-season leader Rachel Alexandra and undefeated Breeders’ Cup Classic winner Zenyatta will vie for the most votes from members of the National Turf Writers Association, Daily Racing Form staff, racing secretaries at National Thoroughbred Racing Association tracks and Equibase chartcallers.
I hope voters will spend as much time assessing the relative merits of some of the other categories as they will on Horse of the Year. Specifically, if they take their responsibilities seriously, they will examine as much of the season-ending statistics on leading breeder as possible before casting their votes. As I’ve written before, I don’t think that’s been the case in some years. Too many voters simply look at which breeder has won the most money.
If that’s the criteria, then Frank Stronach’s Adena Springs will win the outstanding breeder award for the sixth consecutive year. But Adena’s breeding program has produced just two American Graded Stakes winners of 2009, a far cry from some of its previous Eclipse Award winning years. Adena Springs-bred horses have won all that money through the size of Stronach’s broodmare band, producing runners that started 3,568 times in North America so far this year, far more than any other operation. The average earnings per start for Adena-bred horses is just $3,286. Those aren’t bad numbers, nor is the 14% win rate, but I don’t think they should qualify Adena for another Eclipse Award.
The award for outstanding breeder shouldn’t be about who has the biggest operation or who wins the most money. Scanning the list of leading breeders of American Graded Stakes winners of 2009, there are 10 entities that have bred at least three AGS winners alone or in partnership. They are Darley and Stonerside, with five each; Juddmonte Farms and Edward Evans, four each; and with three each are Gainsborough Stud, Phipps Stable, Classic Star, Diamond A Racing, William Farish, and Wertheimer et Frere. Our leaders list only includes Gainsborough and Phipps Stable in the group with three as their AGS winners won a total of five graded stakes, versus four or three for the others.
So if the Eclipse Award for outstanding breeder should go to one of those operations, which one? You can make a case for several, but special attention should be given to Saudi Prince Khalid’s Juddmonte, which has won four previous Eclipse Awards in this category (1995, and 2001-03). Juddmonte is third behind Adena in money won in North America, with $6,771,260, and has done so with only 280 starts, 41 one of which resulted in winners. That works out to an average of $24,183 per start.
Unlike some of the other breeding operations, Juddmonte sends the majority of its homebreds to Europe to begin their careers, and they don’t normally bring the poor performers back to the U.S. once they have established their form. So its North American stable is stocked with quality from the outset.
A large part of Juddmonte’s success is attributable to the consistently top-class work done by Hall of Fame trainer Bobby Frankel, whose death earlier this week was mourned by the Juddmonte family and everyone in racing who knew him.
Another breeder having an outstanding year with his homebreds is Edward P. Evans, whose four AGS winners have won six races (though one of them, Charitable Man, was sold at the Keeneland September yearling sale. Evans has a much more select broodmare band than Juddmonte but has still managed to produce the winners of $4,154,264 from 506 starts (89 winners), putting him eighth in the money rankings. His average earnings per start is $8,210.
There are still some big races to be run, so it’s too early for me to say who I think should win as outstanding breeder. But the hope is when the ballots are sent to voters, the voters will spend some time assessing the overall quality of the horses a breeder produces.
Much has been written and said about the incident at the starting gate before the Breeders’ Cup Classic involving Quality Road, who was eventually scratched from the race after he refused to load. Alex Brown, an exercise rider for trainer Steve Asmussen, publisher of the Alex Brown Racing website, and a leader of the anti-slaughter movement, offers his opinion on the subject. – Ray Paulick
By Alex Brown
For animal rights activists this year’s Breeders’ Cup Classic was not about the grace and brilliance of Zenyatta. It was about the “animal abuse” targeted at Quality Road by the gate crew, and the platform that abuse provides to support an anti-racing agenda.
I have read Internet articles, and have been forwarded e-mails targeted to news reporters, that include rhetoric that is deliberately inflammatory and without substance. Some of this discussion is posted here.
The rhetoric includes the idea that the gate crew is vindictive. What? That the gate crew favored hometown Zenyatta at a cost to others. Does this really deserve a response? I have read speculation that Quality Road was struck with a buggy whip after he was blindfolded. I would think that those who appear so excited about this opportunity to highlight our sport in such poor graces would at least confirm whether or not Quality Road was indeed struck with a buggy whip after being blindfolded. And finally I read in an e-mail about the number of horses that have died at the hands of gate crews. Really, how many?
The reality is that much of this rumor and speculation comes from people who know little about our horses and horse racing. And their target audiences, who are similarly less knowledgable about our sport, are easily convinced. If two people say it on the Internet, it must be true.
I have worked with many gate crews in North America, from Houston in Texas to Toronto in Ontario. Working for trainer Steve Asmussen, we bring each horse to the gate for schooling each week. I see the gate crew work a lot. The gate crew’s job is tough and not without risks. I have not always agreed with the decisions they have made with horses I am riding that are reluctant to load. But their decisions are always made with their best intentions. Those working on gate crews do, for the most part, have a “machismo” type of attitude. But they are putting themselves in risky situations on a frequent basis.
So I am a little aggrieved that the only thing animal rights people want us to remember about Zenyatta’s terrific performance is the near tragic circumstances that conspired before the race. And these same animal rights people are on my team. We are all arguing for the end of horse slaughter. We believe it is inhumane and unnecessary. But if you are a horseman who should you believe? The pro-slaughter argument that horse slaughter is humane and is necessary or the anti-slaughter argument that it is inhumane and unnecessary. This latter argument is delivered by the same people who are willing to use speculation and inflamed rhetoric to damage our sport.
And for anyone interested in the reality of the Quality Road situation, here it is. Ugly, yes. But let’s stop the speculation and inflamed rhetoric and if there is something to learn from this situation then let’s learn. And let’s hope we see Quality Road back at the races to show us how brilliant he too can be.
Finally, thanks are due to the guy on the gate crew who managed to catch hold of Quality Road as he came out of the gate, blindfolded. Without his quick thinking I shudder to think what might have happened.
By Ray Paulick One or two million dollars just doesn’t get you what it used to.
Was it that long ago that felonious financier Robert Brennan shook up racing’s Triple Crown with a $2-million bonus linking victories in three stakes at the now-defunct Garden State Park in New Jersey with a win in the Kentucky Derby? Spend a Buck went after and won that bonus following his runaway victory in the 1985 Kentucky Derby, leaving officials at the three Triple Crown tracks apoplectic when he skipped the Preakness and Belmont Stakes. They were so worried they went out and did the unthinkable: working together to create their own bonus scheme (which has now lapsed after Visa dropped its Triple Crown sponsorship).
The original Triple Crown Challenge bonus would pay a total of $5 million in purses and bonus money to any horse that won the Triple Crown (it was upped to a $5-million bonus plus purse money in 1997), and a $1-million bonus to the horse accumulating the most points from top three finishes in all three races. The latter bonus was dropped after the 1993 Triple Crown.
The absence of a bonus hasn’t hurt the Triple Crown, although without a participation bonus there have been fewer 3-year-olds running in all three races. I guess the feeling is that the owner of a horse that wins the Triple Crown will get his bonus when he retires him to stud (assuming he’s not a gelding or filly).
This past year, several entities clamored to get 3-year-old filly superstar Rachel Alexandra and older female champ Zenyatta in the same race. Jim McIngvale, the Houston furniture store owner better known as Mattress Mac, made the first run by offering to put up $2-million for a match race at Sam Houston Race Park in his home town. That gave McIngvale 15 minutes or so of free publicity, but it was a match race that was never going to happen. (McIngvale’s Gallery Furniture recently announced it is sponsoring a new $100,000 race on the Texas Day Champions program Dec. 5 at Sam Houston, proving he’s more than a publicity seeker. McIngvale and the Houston track haven’t given up on a race involving the two fillies, either, and offered $1.5 million if they showed up to face one another during the track’s winter meeting.)
TVG then teamed up with the New York Racing Association in an effort to get Rachel Alexandra and Zenyatta to both contest the Oct. 3 Beldame at Belmont Park. TVG offered to put up $400,000, which would increase the purse for the Grade 1 race to $1 million. That at least got some consideration from both camps, but it wasn’t in the cards for either Rachel Alexandra or Zenyatta.
Finally, the Breeders’ Cup gave it the old college try, offering to pad the winner’s share of the $5-million Breeders’ Cup Classic if both Rachel Alexandra and Zenyatta were in the starting gate. That would have resulted in a $3.7-million winner’s share of the Classic. But Rachel’s majority owner, Jess Jackson, had already made it clear he wouldn’t run his filly on the synthetic track at Santa Anita which he disparagingly calls “plastic.”
It’s no wonder, then, that the Japan Racing Association is having a hard time getting much buzz over its Autumn International series of four Grade 1 races on consecutive Sundays, beginning Nov. 15 with the Queen Elizabeth II Commemorative Cup, and continuing with the Nov. 22 Mile Championship, the Nov. 29 Japan Cup and Dec. 6 Japan Cup Dirt. The four races offer about $13 million in total purses, plus lucrative bonuses for horses that have won or finished second in major stakes in North America, Europe, Australia or Dubai.
For example, if Kentucky Derby winner Mine That Bird won the Japan Cup Dirt, a 1 1/8-mile race run clockwise at Hanshin racecourse in Osaka, he would receive $1.37 million of the $2.9-million purse but also get a bonus of $1.37 million for his Derby win, making the victory worth a total $2.7 million. That’s about the same as the Breeders’ Cup Classic’s winner’s share of its $5-million purse. I’d venture to say Mine That Bird would face a much softer field in Japan than he’ll see on the Pro-Ride track at Santa Anita. Of course, he could run in both races.
The Derby is but one of 12 American races whose winners would qualify for a bonus ranging from $525,000 to $1.37 million for winning the Japan Cup Dirt. Even a second-place finish for those horses in Japan would pay them a bonus between $210,000 and $550,000. Click here to see the bonus scheme for the Japan Cup Dirt.
The Japan Cup on turf has similar bonuses. That race winner could take home more than $4 million in purse money and bonuses and the second-place finisher could win as much as $1.6 million in purse and bonus money. Click here for complete information on the Japan Cup’s purse and bonus details.
Nevertheless, based on recent interest in the Japanese races from American horsemen, it’s doubtful many serious contenders will be shipped to Tokyo or Osaka to contest these rich races, bonuses or not. No American horse has won the Japan Cup since 1991, when the late Charlie Whittingham sent Golden Pheasant postward for a victory. Golden Pheasant was the fourth American horse to win the Japan Cup in the race’s first 11 years.
In recent years, the Japanese have dominated the race with horses they bred or bought in the West as yearlings, winning nine of the last 11 runnings. The quality of Japanese-bred horses has improved, largely through the importation of stallions and broodmares from Europe and the United States in the 1980s and ‘90s. I think Americans have gotten tired of sending their horses over to Japan and getting their butts kicked.
The Japan Cup dirt, inaugurated in 2000, has had just nine runnings, with eight going to Japanese-trained horses. The lone exception was in 2003 when the Doug O’Neill-trained Fleetstreet Dancer, a previously unheralded runner in California, posted a huge upset.
American horsemen have been leery of sending good horses to the Japan Cup dirt, in part over legitimate concerns that the dirt tracks in Japan are deep and sandy. In fact, when Fleetstreet Dancer won, it may have been due in part to the fact rain tightened up the racetrack.
There’s a lot of money at stake in the Japan Racing Association’s Autumn International races, but purse money apparently doesn’t carry as much weight as it used to for some horse owners. Either that, or American horses ain’t what they used to be.
