Roger Stein on Beyer on Zenyatta

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

One of the most ridiculous arguments that Beyer makes is that Zenyatta is better on synthetic surfaces and that running on synthetic surfaces are the main reason that she was 19 for 19. It's totally the opposite. She almost lost a few different races because of the surface. On the synthetic surfaces, she's beating horses by a neck that she would be beating on the dirt by 5 lengths (more like 10 lengths at 1 1/4 miles).

Beyer argues that come-from-behinders do beter on synthetic tracks. It is true that synthetic surfaces favor come-from-behinders in general. That is true in general, but all come-from-behinderds are not the same. Some have a really quick turn of foot and have push-button acceleration. That type of come-from-behinder is going to have a big edge on synthetics. A big, long-striding horse (like Zenyatta) that doesn't have that push-button acceleration, is actually at a disadvantage on a synthetic track. She's at a disadvantage because she is sometimes forced to make up 2-3 lengths in the final 1/8th of a mile against a horse that can sprint home the final 1/8th. It's tough to make up 2-3 lengths on a horse that is sprinting home in :11 2/5. That is why she barely beat some horses that she would beat by 5 lengths on the dirt. On the dirt, you don't have to worry about somebody sprinting home in :11 2/5.

So in your opinion her record would have been the same if there was no such thing as synthetics? That seems like a pretty big stretch.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

So in your opinion her record would have been the same if there was no such thing as synthetics? That seems like a pretty big stretch.

It depends who she would have been running against. If she would have been running in 12 horse fields against grade I males, of course she would have got beaten plenty of times.

But against the horses she faced in California, I think she would have won by far bigger margins had the races been on dirt.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

It depends who she would have been running against. If she would have been running in 12 horse fields against grade I males, of course she would have got beaten plenty of times.

But against the horses she faced in California, I think she would have won by far bigger margins had the races been on dirt.

I think she would have had a hard time running down Hystericalady in the 2008 Lady's Secret the way the pace of that race unfolded.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

I think she would have had a hard time running down Hystericalady in the 2008 Lady's Secret the way the pace of that race unfolded.

It's hard to say. She won that race very easily. She won by 3 1/2 lengths. On the other hand, Hystericalady moves way up on the dirt so it's hard to say. Zenyatta is obviously going to be more vulnerable to a horse like that at 1 1/16th than at 1 1/8 miles or 1 1/4 miles.

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

I think she would have had a hard time running down Hystericalady in the 2008 Lady's Secret the way the pace of that race unfolded.

would have been fun to see, IMO that was the best race, along with the 08' AB that I had seen her run. The comment line should have been "won as pleased".