Monday, November 30, 2009

Who beat who

The Horse of the Year debate has largely centered on whether Zenyatta's Breeders' Cup Classic win was impressive enough to usurp Rachel Alexandra's position as the best in the U.S.

I have allowed that in winning the Classic, Zenyatta defeated the most accomplished field assembled this year in North America, but I have also asserted that her four-race campaign ahead of the Classic was so uninspiring that a vote for her amounts to anointing the Breeders' Cup as a winner-take-all event.

I wanted to quantify my view that Rachel Alexandra ran the better campaign this year, so I looked at each of the fields they faced and counted up Grade 1 wins, graded stakes wins, graded stakes placings, stakes wins, and stakes placings. The results are cumulative (e.g., Grade 1 wins count in every other category, Grade 2 wins count in every category but Grade 1, etc.).

Here is the master chart: Who beat who

From left to right, the first column lists the horses Rachel Alexandra beat in each of her eight races, including duplicates. The second column lists all the individual horses Rachel Alexandra beat. The third column lists the horses Zenyatta beat, including duplicates. The fourth column lists all the individual horses Zenyatta beat.

As expected, the Breeders' Cup Classic is clearly the strongest race either of them won, but I do think the chart vindicates my position that Zenyatta did not win impressive enough races before the Breeders' Cup to earn my Horse of the Year vote.

Rachel Alexandra defeated 47 separate horses (including three horses twice) who won 88 races and earned $18-million. Those 47 horses include nine Grade 1 winners and 19 graded stakes winners.

Zenyatta defeated 25 individual horses (including six of those horses twice and another [Life Is Sweet] three times) who won 52 races and earned $16.4-million. Those 25 horses include eight Grade 1 winners and 11 graded stakes winners.

If you remove the Classic from Zenyatta's season, then she beat one graded stakes winner of 2009: eventual Ladies' Classic winner Life Is Sweet. That's right, in the four races before the Breeders' Cup, Zenyatta faced one graded stakes winner in 2009 and it was her stablemate.

To attempt to compare apples to apples as much as possible, let's forget the three races Rachel Alexandra ran before the Kentucky Oaks and focus only on her May-September schedule and five Grade 1 races. In that span she defeated nine Grade 1 winners and an additional seven graded stakes winners.

The Classic was amazing--the race of the year--but it doesn't make its winner Horse of the Year in a year that another horse won so many important races while beating so many accomplished horses.
_ came correct at 10:19:00 AM

47 soothsayers:

  1. Seems like you spent a lot of time on the spreadsheet.

    So who do you think would win if both horses raced in the Breeders Cup Classic?
    ReplyDelete
  2. Eddie D,

    It is better to be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
    ReplyDelete
  3. Read this article. It was written two days before Zenyatta won the Breeders Cup Classic:

    http://blogs.dailynews.com/horseracing/2009/11/zenyattas-camp-wanted-to-meet.html

    Zenyatta's connections were going to the Beldame. Once Jess Jackson saw this, he left the Beldame and went to the Woodward. Jess knew the Travers was a "rock" and the Beldame was a "hard place"....so what did he choose:

    "the cupcakes" in the Woodward.

    The Clark Handicap exposed the Woodward for what it was. Macho Again finished 9th and Bullsbay finished 7th.

    2009 "Horse of the Year" goes to the brilliant racemare "Zenyatta".

    2009 "Horse of the Year" odds:
    http://www.theonlinewire.com/20/5936/GAMBLING-ARTICLE/2009-Eclipse-Horse-of-the-Year-Odds.aspx
    ReplyDelete
  4. Why is Eddie D a fool, "Anonymous"? Because you don't like the conclusions that are most likely to be reached from the facts? Do you have any facts for us to consider, in the alternative -- or are you just another Internet cheap shot artist?

    Mr. DeRosa, no matter how anybody feels about who should be Horse of the Year, I applaud you for your dispassionate look at the actual details of both Zenyatta's and Rachel Alexandra's 2009 campaigns -- hopefully, other Eclipse voters are performing the same sort of objective analysis, instead of just voting with emotion.
    ReplyDelete
  5. It's really easy for the connections of a horse to say they were pointing to a certain race after that race has come and gone, but I don't remember any serious talk of Zenyatta shipping East other than Shirreffs going on and on about how he hates the detention barn at NYRA tracks (Jackson balanced this out, of course, by being adamantly against running on "plastics").

    This Blood Horse article clearly shows that the Beldame was on Jackson's radar had Zenyatta committed to that race.

    http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/52372/rachels-options-open-after-woodward
    ReplyDelete
  6. Who wins if both horses race each other?
    ReplyDelete
  7. All the betting line at BoDog proves it that they have a clever linemaker -- they are likely going to take a TON of money from left coast bettors who think Zenyatta is a mortal lock to win HOY.
    ReplyDelete
  8. It would be interesting to know where the majority of voters live?

    I've got a feeling more votes will come from the East Coast....
    ReplyDelete
  9. I don't know where most of the voters live who vote as part of Daily Racing Form or National Thoroughbred Racing Association, but I can give you the demographics for the National Turf Writers Association segment.

    NTWA voters from each state:

    Kentucky (36), California (22), New York (21), New Jersey (8), Illinois (7), Maryland (6), Pennsylvania (4), Washington, D.C. (3), Louisiana (3), Massachusetts (3), Texas (3), Nevada (3), Washington (3), Arkansas (2), Connecticut (2), Florida (2), Delaware (2), Georgia, Iowa, Idaho, Indiana, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, Washington, Ontario, and Scotland (all with 1) Total: 140
    ReplyDelete
  10. Thanks for the hard work.

    There's a reason the Triple Crown is run in three states. Road wins must account for something. Big Z never left home. She might've devoured Rachel. She was never given the shot, this year, at anyone beyond CA. They did what's very best for the mare. I respect that. But that campaign pales next to Raitch's.
    ReplyDelete
  11. Thanks Eddie for the breakdown. NTRA & DRF are based out of the East Coast, so it's save to say that it's 70 - 75% East Coast voters.

    Geography will play a huge part. Does the public know who each voter is and who they voted for? (Like the Heisman)
    ReplyDelete
  12. NTRA is based in Lexington and NYC, yes, but its the racing secretaries of member tracks who vote, so there will be some West Coast representation there, though more votes likely still come from the East.

    The NTWA publishes who votes and for whom they voted. The other two blocs do not release that information.
    ReplyDelete
  13. Thanks for the breakdown of the NTWA voters by each state. I believe that favors Rachel. But I'm not quite willing to wager on it until the BC fervor dies down.

    We've had races renamed Zenyatta, the Governator booed on Zenyatta day, etc. What will comes next to keep the Big Z in the newz and in the voters minds ?
    ReplyDelete
  14. If we're talking about who would beat whom, Goldikova would smoke Zenyatta. Zenyatta has never taken on a horse with that much acceleration. Check the final time for the Mile.

    So, that's useless. Would Zenyatta beat Rachel on synthetics and as a fresh horse? Absolutely. I think Rachel would beat Zenyatta on dirt at 9 furlongs. Rachel has consistently run faster times and higher Beyers than Zenyatta. Look at Summer Bird, he isn't a synthetic horse, but Rachel easily beat him by 6 lengths. Zenyatta beat him by less than 3, and he's better on dirt.

    Rachel simply did more, and no Horse of the Year should be awarded for 1 race. It didn't work for Awesome Again, who beat a better field than Zenyatta did, and I hope it doesn't work for Zenyatta. I'm afraid it will, though, due to hype for Zenyatta and lack of hype for Rachel and her connections.
    ReplyDelete
  15. Zenyatta gets the "pro-ride" penalty....end of discussion.
    ReplyDelete
  16. Eddie..Good work, I think the spreadsheet clearly shows that RA beat more Grade 1 horses in more races. I also think the history of 3 grade 1 wins against males including the Preakness means alot.
    ReplyDelete
  17. Your spreadsheet is similar to what I put together. I had believed the competition both horses faced was similar until I broke it down like you did. It's clear Zenyatta faced the better competition in the BCC, however quite a few of the horses had not won in 6 months. The field is still better than what Rachel in any single race, but factor in the horses that hadn't won in 6 months and the field is not as stellar as people think.

    Rachel showed race after race how good she is. Rachel is more deserving of HOY.
    ReplyDelete
  18. A complete apples to oranges comparison for the majority of the year--RA raced in RESTRICTED races versus three-year olds (male and female), Z raced versus the CA poly crew. In the end RA ran and hid and Z showed up.

    What this really shows is how poor of a group of handicap horses we have in the US at this time!! Look at who ran 1-2 in the Clark--new three-year old shooters.
    ReplyDelete
  19. Sir,

    Your logic is brain-dead. For nobody in this day and age sees a "key race" as relating in any way to what the horses did two months ago, or three years ago (in the case of the UAE Triple Crown).

    A key race relates only to what the horses have done since...

    This angle exposes once and for all that Rachel Alexandra's 2009 campaign was no more than "a series of stunts" (according to one clever observer) performed against the backdrop of an extremely sub-par collective group.

    In what other year would the entire list of also-rans in the Preakness have combined for a single fast-track win in the 6 1/2 full months since the Preakness?

    Consider the Woodward, and that exactly none of the runners in that race of Sept. 5 have won again.

    Then consider the Haskell, and that none of the males in the Haskell have won on a fast track since that race four months ago.

    When considering Zenyatta, the most important filly & mare race in North America was won by daylight by a horse who served as no more than Zenyatta's punching-bag all season long.

    A comparison of the competition faced by Zenyatta in 2009 and the competition faced by Rachel Alexandra in 2009 renders the end decision a no-brainer in favor of Zenyatta.

    Each faced open company once all year, with Rachel Alexandra going off at 1-to-5 and winning by a desperate head over a terrible field. Zenyatta, in turn, swallowed one of the deepest Classic fields in recent memory and was never even all-out when so doing.

    ... and this doesn't even begin to touch on the culmination of an undefeated career.

    The season-ending success by Zenyatta has served only to expose Rachel Alexandra's 2009 campaign as the assembly of extremely weak individual races which comprised it.
    ReplyDelete
  20. Wow - to say Goldikova would beat Zenyatta because she has more acceleration is simply silly. Grass is the only surface where you get 'late acceleration' like Goldikova has and races on.

    The Woodward field was a joke. It wouldn't even qualify for a G3 if they rated the 2009 field!

    Granted Zenyatta could have danced a few more times , but the fields RA faced in the Preakness and the Haskel were filled with horses yet to prove they want to win at a distance. To this day, most haven't come back to win at 9 furlongs or further in graded company. Since RA has controlling speed and faced bad fields - she SHOULD have won those races.

    Zenyatta's Classic was easy the race of the year for 2009, in fact it should rate with Arazi's Juvenile as one of the Best of All BC races ever.

    Zenyatta should be HOTY.
    ReplyDelete
  21. In a match race it would be no contest. Zen needs help on the front end to beat R.
    ReplyDelete
  22. I don't have an issue with calling into question the quality of the competition Rachel Alexandra beat other than the fact that those same questions are not applied to Zenyatta's campaign.

    This wasn't the greatest renewal in the history of the Preakness, but a horse Rachel dueled with early, Big Drama, did go on to Charles Town and beat Russell Road on his home track.

    Is that the greatest accomplishment in the history of the Turf? Of course not, but it's better than anything Zenyatta beat in the Vanity did during the year.

    People lament that Rachel Alexandra's "hand picked" her races. I don't understand how you "hand pick" races completely outside your division. The Preakness, Haskell, and Woodward were light years ahead of the Clement Hirsch and Lady's Secret in terms of ambition.
    ReplyDelete
  23. Great job Ed.

    RA had a tougher campaign, ran more races, ran against the males on more occasions and still got the job done. Z simply beat up on the fillies and mares then made one go at the boys, in her own backyard, on her surface.

    RA's quality of competition can be called into question, but the fact of the matter is, what the eff did Z run against EXCEPT in the Classic. Nada, nothing, zilch.

    RA ran more races, against the boys more often. That campaign schedule would've taken a lot out of any stallion, much less a big filly. She got it done, END OF STORY.

    In a race next year, with a normal size field, RA would kick Zenyatta's ass.
    ReplyDelete
  24. Thanks for the numbers Ed.

    Perhaps this is the beginning of a formula to determine champions if we can't get it done on the track. Anyhow this is a great new twist thrown into a discussion that was getting stale. Again, excellent work.

    I see that ZENYATTA beat a total of 25 horses who earned an average of $668,775.

    RACHEL ALEXANDRA beat a total of 47 horses who earned an average of $384,202.

    Averages usually aren't greatest way to compare nubmers - since you can sort the spreadsheet, you try finding the medians to see how much different the results are.

    Anyhow, it looks to me like ZENYATTA's Classic victory puts her in a position to claim that she beat better stock than RACHEL did.
    ReplyDelete
  25. Well said.

    Also, Rachel ran 4 important and historic races

    The Oaks - wins by 20

    The Preakness - First Filly to win in 80 years and from the 13 post

    The Haskell - Destroys Summer Bird by 6 lengths

    The Woodward - Repelled the bids of four separate older male horses.

    Rachel is HOY
    ReplyDelete
  26. It doesn't matter who would win in a head-to-head match-up between Rachel and Zenyatta.

    Secretariat was Horse of the Year in 1972 as a 2yo. The older horses would have destroyed him.

    Favorite Trick was Horse of the Year in 1997, Skip Away would have destroyed him.

    Azeri was Horse of the Year in 2002, War Emblem would have destroyed her.

    Horse of the Year isn't about the fastest horse, it's the horse that accomplished the most in that year.
    ReplyDelete
  27. emily lang- my sentiments exactly.

    I love and cheered for Z all year long. her win in the classic was amazing. BUT when it comes right down to it, Rachel deserves HOY. the contest simply should not be judged based on ONE race, no matter what that race is.
    ReplyDelete
  28. Respectful to all posts...

    There have been some ridiculous arguments and comments made that have no true bearing on the point. Especially the one about a match race. All horse players know pace makes race and a match race eliminates that important part of racing so save those stupid comments.

    All that matters in HOTY voting is who comprised the best year. That is Rachel obviously. By sheer numbers of races, different venues, different challenges and facing the stronger gender.

    But dont forget Zen beat that other filly at Oaklawn last year, she is no one track pony and obviously the better racehorse. Period.

    So in summary HOTY is simple, one big race is impressive but Rachel series way more impressive reagardless of how weak the males are. They are still males. But Zen best horse! Holla back
    ReplyDelete
  29. Hoofprintsandhorseplay -

    You're kidding right? Take The Points won the 1 1/4 G1 Secretariat, which is after the Preakness. Summer Bird had already won the 1 1/2 Belmont going into the Preakness then went on to win two 1 1/4 G1s (Travers, Jockey Club Gold Cup). This is the distance you're referring to - over 9F, and the wins came after the Preakness. Any other falsehoods you want to throw out there?
    ReplyDelete
  30. Of course Rachel is going to beat horses with less earnings because she ran mostly in 3yo restricted races. Zenyatta had to run in 3yo and up races.
    ReplyDelete
  31. I am shocked that so many so-called horsepeople/ handicappers refuse to seriously acknowledge that despite how the turfwriters vote, ZENYATTA has already galloped into the history books as one of the great mares of all times. Her PERFECT career, effortless running style, over dirt and synthetics, pace or no pace, at the classic distance was without precedent. She showed up at the BIG DANCE and beat the BEST the WORLD had to offer! If you have followed this game long enough, you have to know that we may never witness this again! Zenyatta ANSWERED ALL the questions. Maybe next year will be Rachel's year, but this year belongs to Zenyatta.
    ReplyDelete
  32. This seems like a really inaccurate way to try to compare the competition of the two horses. They both raced in wildly divergent races- Rachel mostly against 3 yr old fillies with a couple races against 3 y old colts and one against older. Zenyatta raced against older fillies and mares and against the best field of older horses in NA this year. Blindly adding up Graded wins and placings to compare 3 yr old fillies to older males is completely inaccurate.

    Zenyatta beat the best horses Rachel Alexandra beat plus much better ones. She beat Life is Sweet 3 times and gave 12 lbs to the next highweight in her other start while Rachel received weight in all of her big races.

    Don't forget how good Life is Sweet is. She finished third against a top full field in the Hollywood GC (Bullsbay was 10th I believe). Remember the top two horses ran 1-2 around the track and she was the only one to close that day. The only two bad races she ran were at 8.5f against insanely slow fractions of 48 4/5 and 49 and 3/5. Only a super horse could have closed into fractions that slow...
    ReplyDelete
  33. What Donny probably meant to say is, "Don't forget how good Life Is Sweet is on synthetics" since she got drilled in her only dirt start and hasn't won a stakes race on turf.

    Granted, you could say the same about horses Rachel Alexandra faced since she beat some horses on dirt whose only stakes wins are on synthetic and/or turf.

    The Jockey Club's Performance Rates say that Rachel Alexandra is 17 lengths better than Zenyatta.
    ReplyDelete
  34. No- I meant Life is Sweet is an extremely good horse. She's only run on synthetics this year so you'd have to go back over a year to try and find a dirt race. Obviously, you can't compare that form to her current form. How good was Rachel last year?

    Half of the top dozen tracks in North America use a synthetic surface. You can't take away from horses that won major races at top tracks just because you don't like the surface.

    Any ratings that rate Rachel as 17 lengths better than Zenyatta obviously can't be taken seriously. Neither can a spreadsheet that ranks wins over Flashing and Just Jenda higher than wins over Colonel John and Awesome Gem. Synthetics condense winning margins and we've learned that speed figures are irrelevant on them when compared to dirt.
    ReplyDelete
  35. Donny's comments illustrate my problem with the Rachel-Zenyatta debate.

    I very clearly stated that the BC Classic was the best race run this year, but Donny still felt compelled to say, "a spreadsheet that ranks wins over Flashing and Just Jenda higher than wins over Colonel John and Awesome Gem can't be taken seriously."

    The spreadsheet merely shows the horses Rachel Alexandra and Zenyatta beat this year and the number of wins and placings by each in different kinds of stakes races.

    Is Just Jenda better than Colonel John? Of course not, but I'll take her in a race with Briecat.
    ReplyDelete
  36. Zenyatta didn't race against older mares, most of the mares she raced against are 4 years old though one or more were five years old. As for older males, there were 2 in the Classic. Adding up the races as Eddie D. has done is a good start to evaluating the competition. I think looking at the horses age factors into this too. Is a three year old filly racing against three year old males the equivalent of a five year old male racing against three old males? I'd think not. How does this get factored in?
    ReplyDelete
  37. Eddie D,

    Have a clue, man. You need only isolate the season had by Life Is Sweet in races when not facing Zenyatta to assure yourself that you're looking at a runner who is light years above anything that Rachel Alexandra met this year.

    Consider, then, that Zenyatta repeatedly used Life Is Sweeet as a personal punching-bag before Life Is Sweet went on to trounce the field in the biggest Filly & Mare race in North America this year.

    The actual size of the fields means nothing, as demonstrated by Ghostzapper's HOY campaign of four races including a pair of four-horse fields.

    We don't care who won the UAE Triple Crown in 2006 - it just plain isn't related at all to the 2009 North American Horse of the Year.
    ReplyDelete
  38. Eddie D- For starters, to take Just Jenda over Briecat (as far as the Rachel vs Zenyatta argument goes)you would have to give add 15lbs to Just Jenda in the race as that is the weight Zenyatta gave.

    You're attempting to manipulate numbers by blindly adding up graded stakes that we all agree aren't equal. Not to be rude, but the spreadsheet is a complete waste. You're spreadsheet would rank the Preakness as a top race because of Musket Man, Mine That Bird, Friesan Fire, and Pioneerof the Nile and none of those horses have won since and three (i believe) haven't raced since after coming out of the race with injuries or needing layoffs. Your spreadsheet would have given Secretariat less points for beating Sham three times than beating 3 different 3 year old fillies

    What you're also forgetting is that Zenyatta and Life is Sweet have won nearly every single G1 or G2 race for fillies and mares in California over the last two years. That means if you judge horses strictly by Graded wins, there have not been many opportunities for those horses. Horses Zenyatta beat like Life is Sweet, AllIcansayiswow and Lethal Heat are graded placed against Boys this year so it wasn't a horrendous group- just a group that couldn't match Zenyatta.
    I still don't understand how people can't give Zenyatta credit for her non B.C. wins. She beat Life is Sweet, who is clearly the best female not named Rachel or Zenyatta, 3 times and gave 12 lbs to the next highweight in her other start. We don't need a spreadsheet to see that.
    ReplyDelete
  39. I wouldn't rank Life Is Sweet in my top ten of females running in North America this year.
    ReplyDelete
  40. Eddie D.

    You still don't get it:


    This is not about 'your' top ten anything.

    The Eclipse Awards are about who accomplished the most this year.

    There simply cannot be ten female Thoroughbreds who raced in North America during 2009 who have accomplished more than Life Is Sweet accomplished in 2009.

    This idiotic notion of ranking your top ten, or top five, or top anything, as if your own personal favorites (or cashed tickets) should have any impact on the Eclipse Awards is just wrong.

    Furthermore, Rachel Alexandra faced heavily restricted company all year, and got extremely soft lots of same.

    Zenyatta topped the 2009 winners of eleven unrestricted Gr. I stakes this year while Rachel Alexandra topped the 2009 winners of three unrestricted Gr. I stakes this year.

    One remains undefeated, the other does not. Zenyatta earned more money in 2009 than did Rachel Alexandra.

    How many different ways can you flip the same coin and have it come up 'Z' ??
    ReplyDelete
  41. Just looking at the raw numbers in the spreadsheet, the BCC field was the best, followed by the Preakness, Woodward, and Haskell. The worst assembled field is in the Vanity. I can't give Zenyatta any credit for the Vanity at all, to me it's an empty win because the horses she faced won no graded stakes coming into the race or after the race. As for the Clement Hirsch and Lady's Secret, Life Is Sweet didn't hit the board in either race and was beaten by Anabaa's Creation (who hasn't won a race), Lethal Heat (who hasn't won all year), and Cocoa Beach who won at 1 mile on the turf. Though I think Life Is Sweet is a solid horse, she was beaten by lesser quality horses. That shows inconsistency to me, and in my opinion, lowers the overall quality of the field in these two races.

    This is why I don't give Zenyatta much credit for her four non BC wins.
    ReplyDelete
  42. "The Eclipse Awards are about who accomplished more this year."

    Indeed. That's why I'm voting for Rachel Alexandra as Horse of the Year.

    "One remains undefeated, the other does not."

    Actually, both horses were undefeated in 2009.

    Ten female racehorses who raced in North America in 2009 who accomplished more than Life Is Sweet: Dar Re Mi, Diamondrella, Forever Together, Goldikova, Informed Decision, Midday, Music Note, Rachel Alexandra, Ventura, Zenyatta
    ReplyDelete
  43. "I wouldn't rank Life Is Sweet in my top ten of females running in North America this year."

    Thanks for proving my point. Anyone using criteria that doesn't inlcude Life is Sweet in the top ten is dead wrong in how they're evaluating the filly and mare division. Having Music Note who I believe won one route race and 2 races (and lost to Life is Sweet) is ridiculous. The rest you listed are turf horses and a sprinter.
    ReplyDelete
  44. One of the dolts reading this blog just implied that the Preakness field was the best field that Rachel Alexandra faced this year.

    That field continues to prove itself to be among the shittiest Classic fields of all time. (yet another last-out Preakness runner came back the other day at 2-to-5 and got creamed)

    The more people talk, the more obvious the Zenyatta conclusion is.
    ReplyDelete
  45. And the field Zenyatta faced in the Vanity? How many horses in that race have won a race? Better yet, how many have even ran another race since the Vanity?

    Outside of the Classic, the only decent horse Zenyatta faced was Life Is Sweet. Yet in the Lady's Secret, Milady, and Clement Hersch, she finished behind Lethal Heat twice (who's never won a race this year) Cocoa Beach (who won at one mile on turf), and Anabaa's Creation (who's never won a race this year).

    Zenyatta's campaign is obviously lacking in comparison to Rachel Alexandra's. Rachel is more deserving of HOY.
    ReplyDelete
  46. This last guy clearly doesn't understand "restricted" company.

    When you step outside of "restricted" company once all year, go off at 2-to-5, and then win desperately by a head over a terrible, terrible field, you have no right to Horse of the Year.

    Why is this so difficult to understand?
    ReplyDelete
  47. Exactly! Zenyatta stepped outside of restricted sex races once all year, therefore has no right to HOY.
    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)