Thursday, March 18, 2010
Can’t Zenyatta and Rachel Fans Just Get Along?
SARATOGA SPRINGS, NY, March 19, 2010--In the aftermath of last weekend’s preps for the ballyhooed Apple Blossom Invitational--Zenyatta’s amazingly athletic, Colin-like performance in the Santa Margarita, and Rachel Alexandra’s disappointing effort in the Fair Grounds Ladies--emerged much of the same vitriol that surfaced during the run-up to the 2009 Horse of the Year vote.
If that notion is truly the case, then include me out. Once again, the discussion of these two great females continues to devolve into an extension of the East vs. West diatribe so prevalent virtually everyone on the Internet late last year.
It just wasn’t possible, from within and without the industry, to celebrate both fillies. Every time their names were mentioned in the same sentence, a health care debate broke out.
Speaking personally, my intention is to continue reporting and commenting on events involving these brilliant females as they develop this season but unwilling to engage in any more back and forth relative to provincial bias. Hopefully by year’s end, the matter will be settled definitively between the rails.
This fit of pique, even before last Saturday’s results had a chance to sink in, was brought on by an e-mail blast I received from a Southern California-based clocker whom I very much respect. In part, these were his words:
“…Jess Jackson was basking in his glory in what seemed an east coast united effort to bring the Horse of the Year crown to Rachel in January, and Jackson even took some shots at the level of competition from the 2008 & 2009 Breeders Cup Classic.
“…Guess what 'Cabernet Jess', neither of your best horses, Curlin nor Rachel Alexandra, would beat Zenyatta. That's right, Curlin would never beat Zenyatta, and Rachel will never get the chance because Jess is taking his ball and going home.
“…Zenyatta is the better horse, hands down, and if the media stopped judging horses because of the surfaces they raced over, or by how far they won, and concentrated on achievement, I am confident we would have had a much closer race for Horse of the Year.
“…The East Coast media is very much like a Republican congress, voting by affiliation rather than common sense or practicality. There is no more 'doing what is right' but follow your congregation. Amen…”
I’m not sure what upset me most: The fact that I’m automatically supposed to agree with my East Coast-based brethren because they hunker down in the same part of the country as me or being likened to a Republican member of Congress?
I also voted for John Shirreffs for Eclipse Trainer of the Year because of his flawless handling of a flawless mare, getting her to peak on the day when the whole world watched her make history, all while under the pressure of trying to manage an undefeated career. There’s no disparagement of Steve Asmussen in that.
Why does this have to be an either-or situation? Why does a positive opinion of one represent a negative opinion of the other? Maybe because even the keepers of the Eclipse flame, myopically failing to recognize the uniqueness of the 2009 Horse of the Year question, ruled that it must be one, and not the other.
Fast-forwarding back to last Saturday, I thought that Zenyatta’s performance, winning the Santa Margarita in her six-year-old debut under highweight of 127 pounds, was, in its way, more impressive than her historical Classic victory.
Horses of her size and with running style should not have their forward momentum slowed at such a critical juncture. Horses her size are not supposed to be that nimble. Horses her size are not supposed to be bent in half before snaking their way through rivals, no matter how comparably inferior.
And, finally, after all that, accelerating into full stride to take the lead in the shadow of the wire, horses are not supposed to flick their ears forward immediately, as if, yes, there was more where that came from. Stated more simply, Zenyatta’s Santa Margarita belongs in a time capsule.
Not so the performance of 2009 Horse of the Year Rachel Alexandra, who had her own challenges to overcome but couldn’t, finishing second without an excuse. But there were reasons for her un-Rachel-like performance. A six-month layup, longer than routine for horses in the recycling stage, is one.
There were others, such as the weather related on-again, off-again training schedule. And of possibly greater consequence, the changes in she displayed that sometimes portend physical or mental issues that have yet to surface.
Let’s remember that Rachel Alexandra was gutted by older males in the final race of an eight-month long campaign. Two speedsters that challenged her early and often were beaten by double-digit margins, finishing about 20 lengths back.
Then, when late-rally Macho Again--talented enough to win the Stephen Foster earlier in the season, a race that has emerged as one of America’s most prestigious Grade 1 tests--made his run, a three-year-old filly found more, beating him back after it appeared if just for an instant that she was beaten.
The 2009 Woodward Stakes was just as responsible for her New Orleans Ladies defeat as was the lack of conditioning and sufficient mental preparation. It wasn’t that she had only seven recorded workouts to get ready for her return from a lengthy absence. The problem was she didn’t do it the right way.
When measured by the eye and against the clock, her workouts were very un-Rachel. All through her three-year-old season, she worked quickly when asked but was never a run-off. But she showed signs of that this spring.
Even an 80 percent, Rachel Alexandra should have beaten Zardana. Her rider was told to reserve something for next time. To do so, Calvin Borel had his feet firmly in the dashboard, her head obviously under maximum restraint.
Clearly, principal owner Jess Jackson and Steve Asmussen have made the right decision backing out of the Apple Blossom. Given the circumstances, she never would have beaten the behemoth mare from California.
But that’s not the point. The point is that it wouldn’t be the right thing to do. Her connections don’t know where they’re at because off that race they cannot know where she is with herself.
The transition from three to four-year-old can be as puzzling as that of two to three-year-old. Not only might Rachel Alexandra not be better and stronger at four, she might not be as good as she was at three given the most ambitious campaign ever waged by a latter day sophomore filly.
So the only choice the camp had is to do what they did; not point for a specific race, allowing the filly to come to top form on her timetable, not their’s. It truly would be folly to do it any other way. Even Zenyatta’s camp acknowledged that.
And how many times will the two great fillies meet in 2010? The best guess is more than once. But it’s still possible, of course, that she’ll never race again. To think not is to evaluate the situation with blinkers on.
“I think I read Zenyatta's lips after the race when she heard Rachel got beat,” the e-mail concluded. “I think she was singing 'don't stand, don't stand so close to me'. I wonder if she was referring to Rachel.”
I know it’s probably a coincidence, but I think I saw the same thing, as Rachel Alexandra galloped back to be unsaddled after her defeat: “Time is on my side, yes it is.” Let the games begin.
Written by John Pricci
Write/Read Comments (68)
|