Showing posts with label orb. Show all posts
Showing posts with label orb. Show all posts

  • Has the Breeders’ Cup Become Detrimental to Racing?

    POSTED Jan 11, 2014 By Derek Simon

    Since the Eclipse Awards were announced, many racing fans have been weeping and gnashing their teeth over the nominees.

    My friend Laura Pugh of Horse Racing Nation was so incensed by the Eclipse candidates that she even made a video about it… which, I suspect, will soon be screening at Cannes — only with Shia LaBeouf playing the part of Pugh.

     “It’s a list of Breeders’ Cup winners — literally,” lamented Pugh in her YouTube production. “If you won a Breeders’ Cup, you got nominated.

    “Is there something wrong with this?” Pugh continued. “No, if you had a good season to go along with it, of course there’s nothing wrong with it.”

     But therein lies the rub, according to Ms. Pugh and others. Some horses did not have a good season to go along with their BC success — horses like Ria Antonia, for example.

    (Click on image to enlarge)

    “Why in the heck is Ria Antonia on this list of nominees,” asks Pugh. “… She won one big race — one big race! And it was by a nostril — nose — excuse me, it wasn’t even by a nostril, she won it by [disqualification] … all her other races this year were dismal. Tell me how she is on here over Sweet Reason?”

    OK, I will tell you, as well as the others who feel likewise, why Ria Antonia has been nominated for an Eclipse Award: It’s because she won a championship race. After all, the Breeders’ Cup events are dubbed “World Championships” (in typical American sports fashion, “world” has a distinct U.S. feel).

    Yes, Yes, I know — that is precisely what irritates critics of the BC.  There are, after all, other races run throughout the year. Still, I don’t see anything wrong with acknowledging that certain events mean more than others.

    How else would one explain Orb being on the list of Eclipse nominees?
    (Click on image to enlarge)

    Let’s be real, outside of a tremendous spring, in which he captured four straight races, Orb was a complete bust. He was spanked in the Preakness, slapped down in the Belmont (by fellow Eclipse nominee Palace Malice), beaten in the Travers and buried in the Jockey Club Gold Cup.

    But he’s an Eclipse Award candidate thanks to one race — the Kentucky Derby, which, as it turned out, was his last win of his career (Orb has been sent to stud).

    And this emphasis on big-race wins is not just a U.S. phenomenon. Guess how many Prix de l'Arc de Triomphe winners have won a Cartier Racing Award (the European equivalent of an Eclipse Award) for Horse of the Year over the past 11 years?

    Try six.

    EUROPEAN HORSES OF THE YEAR THAT ALSO WON THE ARC
    (during the year in which they were honored)

    2013 – Treve
    2009 – Sea the Stars
    2008 – Zarkava
    2007 – Dylan Thomas
    2005 – Hurricane Run
    2003 – Dalakhani

    In fact, outside of Frankel, who was European Champion in 2011 and 2012, all the other Cartier Horse of the Year honorees won either the Arc or — are you ready for this? — a Breeders’ Cup race.

    Granted, Ouija Board (Horse of the Year in 2004 and 2006) and Goldikova (2010) had other big wins on their resume in addition to the BC events that they captured, but it’s worth noting that the former won just three of nine races in 2006 — and two of them came against restricted (female) company.

    Personally, I have no problem giving (much) greater weight to the BC races and other races of historical significance. What do you think?
     
    How important should the Breeders' Cup races be to Eclipse Award voters?




      
    pollcode.com free polls 

  • Simon Says Racing Podcast

    POSTED Nov 27, 2013 By Derek Simon
    TwinSpires' Derek Simon discusses all the latest happenings in the Sport of Kings with Ed DeRosa of Brisnet.com, including a look at Ed’s latest column about the exploits of social-worker-and-auditor-turned-“self-employed statistical analyst” Ron Cooper.

    In the U. of Bet segment, Dave “The Horse Handicapping Authority” Schwartz opines on database handicapping and answers the age-old question: Why would anyone who (supposedly) wins at the races sell stuff?

    Lastly, in the Handicapping segment, Ryan Patterson of GradedStakes.com defends Orb’s virtue as a promising young sire.




  • Will Orb Be a Successful Sire? Don't Bet On It.

    POSTED Nov 21, 2013 By Derek Simon
    I was not a fan of Orb, the race horse.

    On the first Saturday in May, when the bay son of Malibu Moon came barreling down the stretch to catch Golden Soul and Revolutionary — two horses I did like — and win the 2013 Kentucky Derby, my opinion cost me.

    Yet, just a few weeks later, after racing fans and pundits alike had anointed Orb “the chosen one”— the three-year-old superstar destined to break the Triple Crown drought and “save” racing (sometimes I think racing has been saved more than “sugar bear” from that old Elton John song) — I was vindicated.

    Orb finished a non-threatening fourth in the Preakness Stakes and followed that up with a distant third in the Belmont Stakes. After a brief freshening, he returned with an encouraging third-place showing behind eventual Breeders’ Cup Classic runner-up Will Take Charge in the Travers and, then, got crushed by 22 ¼ lengths in Jockey Club Gold Cup against older foes.

    It was shortly after the Gold Cup debacle that owners Stuart Janney and Phipps Stable decided to call it a career for Orb. As usual, it was economics — Adam Smith’s detestable “invisible hand” — that played the largest part in the decision.

    “From an economic point of view, the risk/reward is not what you’d like,” Janney told turf writer Joe Clancy. “I was pretty optimistic that he would have had a really good four-year-old year, but at the end of the day it was going to be tough to bring him back. If everything went right, we were looking at a 10-percent upside if he had a good year and a 40-percent downside if he didn’t.”

    “You might as well take advantage of the value that’s out there at the time,” echoed Claude “Shug” McGaughey, Orb’s trainer. “If something were to happen next year, and he got hurt or didn’t have a good year, then we didn’t make the right decision for him or for anybody.”

    I wonder.

    I mean, look, I get it: There is value in winning America’s greatest horse race, the Kentucky Derby. And that value extends beyond the purse or the prestige of the race. But given that racing is a business and that retiring Orb was, by the owner’s own admission, a business decision, I’ve got to question the “business” assumption that winning the Kentucky Derby makes one… well, uh, a better lover.

    Frankly, when I factor in the way in which he won the Derby — reserved early in a race that featured a torrid pace — I become almost convinced that Orb is going to be a dud at stud.

    However, before I present my case, I thought I would consult with some experts in the field. Although I’m sure many assume just by looking at my driver's license picture that I am “in the know” when it comes to the mating habits of horses, the truth is I know very little about the subject.

    Laura Ross, on the other hand, knows her studs… although she would probably prefer that I express my confidence in her abilities as a bloodlines expert some other way. According to Ross, “Orb has the pedigree to do extremely well at stud.”

    “His female family is pure class,” she wrote me. “His dam was an allowance-class winner; second dam was a stakes winner; and his third through fifth dams are blue hens.

    “Orb likely carries the X-Factor gene through his dam,” Ross continued. “If so, he will pass it along to his fillies, who could become amazing runners. His offspring will be mid- to late-season two-year-olds (July onwards) and most will prefer going a mile and farther. He has the pedigree to sire a classic winner.”

    Stop. You had me at X-Factor, Laura. (Does this mean that Simon Cowell might be able to “save” racing as well?)

     

    Ryan Patterson of GradedStakes.com agrees with Ross — but not because of Orb’s X-Factor. Instead, Patterson is impressed by Orb’s package (again, Ryan would probably prefer different wording).

    “[Orb] is what everyone should be looking for in a stallion,” he notes. “Precocious, athletic, well bodied, well-bred and a Grade 1 classic winner on the track … Orb is the complete package.”

    Sid Fernando, former bloodstock editor of The Daily Racing Form, had this to say: “It's the only Phipps Derby winner, and Phipps-bred sires are terrific prospects. So many have done well, including many lesser-raced than Orb. Claiborne is hot right now with War Front, and that helps to draw mares. Plus, Orb is by the AP-line, and Claiborne lost their good son of AP, Pulpit.”

    OK, now here’s why I think that these fine folks — who have probably forgotten more about pedigree research than I know — are wrong about Orb.

    He doesn’t have any speed.

    And past Derby winners who lacked early foot simply haven’t fared that well in the breeding shed. The chart below lists the Derby winners with highest (slowest) early speed rations in modern (post-1920’s) Kentucky Derby history:



    (Click on image to enlarge)
    While the Sire Production Index (SPI), which relates the earnings of a sire’s progeny to the national average, is slightly higher than normal (1.00), the adjusted SPI, which factors in the quality of the dam, is lower than normal.

    Of course, I understand that these numbers are difficult to gauge in a vacuum, so I’ve also produced stats on Derby winners that recorded the lowest (fastest) ESRs since 1930. This list is headed by a horse that many consider to be one of the most influential sires of the past 20-40 years — the late, great Seattle Slew:



    (Click on image to enlarge)
    * Won the Triple Crown.

    Notice that the “early speed” Derby winners were better sires in nearly every category — more crops, more foals, more foals and starters to win, more lifetime starts, more lifetime wins and a higher SPI and adjusted SPI.

    Ironically (given that we’re told breeders focus on speed rather than stamina these days), 12 of the 13 horses on the latter list raced prior to 2000, whereas five (of 14) on the former list met that criterion. 

    What do you think? 

    How will Orb perform as a sire?





      
    Courtesy of Pollcode.com free polls 

  • The Ultimate guide to betting entries

    POSTED Sep 27, 2013 By Unknown
    I've lamented before about the horseplayer compulsion to pick THE winner, and nothing upsets that need more than coupled entries.

    When it comes to the pari-mutuel pool, though, you don't get extra credit for saying Real Solution will win the Joe Hirsch Turf Classic rather than "the Ramsey entry." The flipside benefit to that is even if you're wrong then you can still get paid of Big Blue Kitten or Joe's Blazing Aaron win.

    The biggest reason touts don't like coupled entries is because they think it automatically hurts their value. Yes, if you like the less likely winner of a coupled entry, then you will undoubtedly get a lower price, but does that mean you're getting less value?

    In the case of the Flower Bowl where I see Laughing as the most likely winner but Tannery as the best chance for an upset, the answer is NO. In the case of the Hirsch where I see Big Blue Kitten as a far more likely winner than either of his entrymates, the answer is YES.


    Let's look at the Flower Bowl where the aforementioned Alan Goldberg-trained duo of Laughing and Tannery is 8-to-5 on the morning line. Those odds represent a 38.5% chance of either winning. If you see Laughing as a 5-to-2 choice (28.5%) then that leaves a 10% chance for Tannery, or fair odds of 9-to-1.

    Both prices are overlays to me, as I see Laughing winning this race 33% of the time for fair odds of 2-to-1 and Tannery getting the job done 20% of the time for fair odds of 4-to-1. Even if the entry is 3-to-2 then Tannery would have to be 6-to-1 individually to offer better value (Bet 100 races, the entry wins 53 times and pays $5 for $265. Alone, Tannery wins 20 times and pays $14 for $280. If she's 5-to-1 then the return is only $240).

    But I do most of my betting in the pick "N" pools, and in this case the Flower Bowl entry makes things easier on me because I like both horses and can now single. This is the opposite situation as the Hirsch where I think coupling the Ramsey horses lowers my expected value on them while increasing it dramatically on Slumber, who I like second off the year layoff.

    Individually, I could make a case for either Big Blue Kitten or Real Solution at a certain price, but I think their coupling will make them a betting interest that people feel they "have to use" in the multis, and while either winning wouldn't shock me, I just don't think the value is there when I like a horse better, anyway.

    The other race on the stakes portion of the Belmont card with coupled entries is the Kelso Handicap that includes the Lapenta-owned duo of Easter Gift and Jackson Bend. Neither would be favored individually, and getting "two for one" with these appeals to me since I don't fully trust Graydar off the bench giving weight. Souper Speedy will also be on my tickets.

    There are no coupled entries in the Jockey Club Gold Cup, which is too bad from a wagering standpoint because I think coupling the Mott and Pletcher horses (Flat Out and Ron The Greek for the former and Cross Traffic, Palace Malice, and Vitoria Olimpica for the latter) would inflate the price on others, including my top pick Last Gunfighter.

    Palace Malice has actually run faster than Cross Traffic has early on occasion (e.g. the 1 1/4-mile Kentucky Derby), but based on their last couple races I think it's fair to assume Cross Traffic will have the lead down the backstretch.

    Palace Malice, Orb, and Flat Out will try to get to the leader before Last Gunfighter does, but at 10-to-1 I'm hoping a sort of "pressers duel" develops between those three and that they go too quickly on that expansive far turn. That leaves Ron The Greek and Last Gunfighter to close, and I'll take the latter, though for the Pick 4 I'll use Flat Out as an "A" as well.

    That was a lot to go over, so let me make sure I'm clear about my picks (especially since they're not all listed above!): Royal Delta (Beldame), Souper Speedy (Kelso), Strapping Groom (Vosburgh), Santulli/Goldberg entry (Flower Bowl), Slumber (Hirsch), Last Gunfighter (JCGC), Mucho Macho Man (Awesome Again), Cleveland Indians (American League Wildcard contender).

     Want even more insight? Check out Joel Cunningham in that Breeders' Cup purple!

  • Game On Dude still the country's best horse

    POSTED Aug 26, 2013 By Unknown
    The results of this weekend's races--despite the favorite rolling in the Pacific Classic Stakes and an upset in the Travers--did nothing to change my thoughts on the championship picture for Horse of the Year and three-year-old male, respectively.
    Game On Dude is still in the Horse of the Year drivers seat by virtue of his third Grade 1 win--all at 1 1/4 miles and on three different surfaces. Wise Dan could have five Grade 1 wins by the end of the year, but it will be impossible to deny Game On Dude Eclipse Awards as Horse of the Year and champion older male if he finally gets his Breeders' Cup Classic (he'd have won both awards in 2011 or 2012 with a win in that race).

     I've had Game On Dude "ranked" on top since his Hollywood Gold Cup win, and he'll stay there unless he loses the Breeders' Cup.

     And Orb is still the top three-year-old male by virtue of his Kentucky and Florida Derby wins to go along with blacktype in the Belmont and Travers Stakes. Palace Malice remains in second with the Belmont and Jim Dandy wins, but is in a position of needing to win races to dethrone Orb. "Much the best" fourth-place finishes won't cut it--even in great races like the Jockey Club Gold Cup or Breeders' Cup Classic.

     Speaking of Palace Malice and the Travers, him rounding out the superfecta has to be the most celebrated fourth-place finish in the history of the Turf outside Jazil and Brother Derek dead heating for fourth in the 2006 Kentucky Derby Presented by Yum! Brands. I don't disagree that he was among the best in the race, but I don't think he was "much the best" nor do I think he'll never lose to his peers again.

     Orb (my pick) had absolutely no excuse considering the trip. He flattened and somehow held on for show (this description works well for his Belmont as well), but unlike the Belmont when he was a gassed horse racing for the sixth time in five months, he probably needed this race. I'm not giving up on him--especially if he shows up in the Jockey Club Gold Cup in the 10-to-1 range.
    Will Take Charge ran well considering how he had to get there, and he ran fast. I guess all this praise of the winner, third-, and fourth-place finishers means I should love Moreno, too, but I'm just not sold.

     As for Will Take Charge's championship aspirations, it comes down to winning. I still have him behind Verrazano on the three-year-old depth chart. The Travers is a real nice race to win but that and the Rebel doesn't usurp a Wood Memorial-Haskell double, though another graded win probably would--especially if it comes against older.

     My America's Best Racing/ESPN poll for the week is:

     1. Game On Dude, 2. Wise Dan, 3. Royal Delta, 4. Cross Traffic, 5. Obviously, 6. Point of Entry, 7. Sahara Sky, 8. Fort Larned, 9. Flat Out, 10. Successful Dan.

     Biggest race this coming weekend is the Woodward.

  • The Travers Stakes 'Conspiracy'

    POSTED Aug 23, 2013 By Derek Simon
    I’m not one for conspiracy theories.

    Despite the recent CIA admission that Area 51 does, indeed, exist, I don’t believe that little green guys from a distant planet are playing an extraterrestrial version of “Punk’d” on the citizens — all 57 of ‘em — of Rachel, Nev.

    Likewise, I don’t believe that the Moon Landing was an elaborate hoax or that Elvis Presley hasn’t left the building.

    But I’m concerned about Saturday’s Travers Stakes.

    In what way, you ask? Have I received word that Tupac Shakur will be listed as a late rider change, replacing Joel Rosario aboard Orb? Am I privy to inside information on Moreno?

    Of course not.

    We all know that even Tupac’s hologram is too heavy to ride Orb and that trainer Eric Guillot would never pass on secret information regarding his stable star — he’s already made his thoughts on Moreno public… over and over again.

    No, my suspicions have to do with the tactics of two primary contenders in Saturday’s Saratoga feature and the unintended consequences of an oft-dissed and dismissed racing rule.

    You see, back in the early days of racing, the powers that be realized that horses owned and/or trained by the same individual(s) presented a dilemma to the betting public: mainly, that one or more of those entrants would be in the race strictly to benefit one of the others.

    For example, everybody with functioning gray cells knows that Hedevar was not entered to win the 1967 Woodward Stakes or the 1968 Brooklyn Handicap. Trainer Frank Whitely, Jr. entered Hedevar in those races for one reason and one reason only: to run Dr. Fager off his feet and set the table for Damascus, Whitely’s 1967 Horse of the Year.

    However, since both Hedevar and Damascus were coupled in the wagering, i.e. they ran as a single betting interest, it really didn’t matter what Hedevar did — unless you were a fan of Dr. Fager, of course (sportsmanship is not the issue I’m tackling here).
    Over the years, as field sizes waned and the public’s appetite for more betting choices increased, the rules governing coupled entries have been greatly relaxed. Today it is not uncommon to see horses owned by the same connections listed as separate betting interests.


    For the most part, these relaxed rules have not posed a problem… but Saturday’s Travers Stakes is different.



    In the Travers, two of the main contenders, both trained by Todd Pletcher, have similar running styles and what they decide to do, tactically, could literally spell the difference between victory and defeat — for one or both of them.

    Of course, I’m talking about Verrazano, the 2-1 morning line favorite in the Travers, and Palace Malice, the 5-2 second choice.



    NOTE: Click HERE for a free sample report that explains what the data above means.

    Both horses like to be on or near the pace and, while I was not overly impressed with Verrazano’s latest score in the Haskell (I thought the -6 late speed ration was a little weak), I do think that his success — or lack thereof — hinges on what his stablemate elects to do.

    Simply put, Palace Malice is incredibly versatile. He won the Belmont after recording a ridiculously fast -11 early speed ration and, then, rated beautifully in the Jim Dandy while earning a 0 ESR.

    When one considers that both Verrazano and Moreno prefer a slow and steady pace — Guillot has publicly admitted this (I told you earlier the guy likes to talk) — I think “Palace” should press the early issue. In effect, do to Moreno and Verrazano what Hedevar did to Dr. Fager nearly 40 years ago — run them off their feet.

    The question is: Will he? Will Pletcher allow one of his entries to compromise the chances of the other? Or will he play it safe and send neither horse to the lead.

    Guillot paints a picture of what could happen should the latter transpire.

    "I would imagine Todd wouldn't be pressing his own horse with Palace Malice and Verrazano together; that wouldn't make much sense," he told The Bloodhorse. "So, somebody's going to push me, and, hopefully, they push me so far up front, or push me to the point where the other one can't catch up. That would be the best-case scenario."

    This is why the coupling rules were initially put in place… and why I’m concerned about the Travers Stakes.

    Biggie vs. Tupac

    On this week’s “Simon Says” podcast for TwinSpires.com, I had an interesting discussion with Ed DeRosa about the so-called East Coast Bias.


    Knowing that my colleague was born in Ohio — he recently went back and his city was gone (sorry, I couldn’t help myself) — I naturally assumed that Ed would vehemently disagree with my assertion that the East Coast Bias in racing is alive and well.

    Much to my surprise, Ed agreed with me.

    “There’s an East Coast Bias,” he stated, adding, “By and large, I sorta agree with your point that the onus to ship east is completely unfair when many of these horses — champions — don’t ship west either.”

    I think the following table, which lists the last 10 Horse of the Year winners illustrates the point quite nicely:

    (Click on image to enlarge)


    FREE Win Factor Report for Saturday’s Jackpot Five

    Click HERE to receive your free Win Factor Report for Saturday’s Jackpot Five races.

  • The case for Orb to win the Travers Stakes

    POSTED By Unknown
    The Travers Stakes is one of those races where there is an onus to have A PICK.

     When someone asks you, "Who is going to win the Grade 1, $1-million Travers Stakes on Saturday at historic Saratoga Race Course?" The convention is that you have a one-horse answer. I.e. hedging for value or pace or other bet types (e.g. "I'm playing an exacta with...") is not allowed.

     So here it is. My pick to win the Grade 1, $1-million Travers Stakes--a race for three-year-olds going 1 1/4 miles on dirt on Saturday at Saratoga Race Course is...

    There are plenty of reasons not to like Orb: The Preakness was dreadful, and he flattened in the Belmont before an 11-week break into this. That'd be enough to pass at even money, but I'm hoping for 4-to-1 against a competitive group. His Kentucky Derby remains among the fastest race of the year, and while it'd be easy to assess that to track condition and pace (both factors, yes), neither of those things were in play when he romped in the Florida Derby over eventual Preakness runner-up Itsmyluckyday.

    The other thing I like about Orb is his running style. He has the reputation as being a closer, but he's capable of making a strong move earlier in the race as needed--like in the Derby when he moved from 17th to 5th on the far turn.

     Given Moreno's suicide mission to try to win the Travers gate to wire (granted, the only way he can win), Verrazano and Palace Malice will be breathing down his back. It'll be interesting to see which stablemate moves first, but I can't imagine Joel Rosario will want either to be far away when they all turn for home. Those who think Orb is a deep closer do so at the risk of not realizing he might be in front by the eighth pole.
    Orb's Class Ratings, pace figures, & Speed Ratings
    Orb is one of four horses in the Travers who have run a 120+ E2 pace rating. This rating measures a horse's pace from the start of a race to the second call. Orb earned his 122 in the Kentucky Derby, which as a route means that figure represents his speed for the first six furlongs. Following that 122 Orb earned a late pace rating of 91, which is easily the highest LP figure of any of the 120+ horses. Verrazano posted a 126 in the Derby and came home with a 55. Will Take Charge did a 121-67 in the Derby, and Palace Malice went 129-57.

     Yes, a slower pace is expected here, which we certainly have seen can benefit Palace Malice at longer distances (he won the 1 1/2-mile Belmont with a 109-104-88 versus 127-129-57 for the Derby) and Verrazano at shorter distances (he's the only horse in the race to be above par at every point in call in a singular race, which he did in the 1 1/8-mile Haskell when earning pace ratings of 102-115-101), but the aforementioned presence of Moreno sets it up for the pop we saw from Orb in the Derby.

     So that's my case for Orb on top, but I think the best wagering opportunity is in betting against a 2-3-8 exacta box. That is, playing against two of Orb, Verrazano, and Palace Malice, respectively, to finish out of the top two. So for me, if Verrazano or Palace Malice wins that's OK as long as either of the Godolphin pair (#1 Romansh or #9 Transparent) sneaks in underneath, and I'll also put my thing down, flip it, and reverse it Missy "Misdemeanor" Elliott style.

     So 2, 3, 8 with 1, 9 and 1, 9 with 2, 3, 8 for $12 plus a $1 exacta box 1-9 for a little insanity insurance (plus my birthday is 1-9).

     I'll pay attention to the odds board, though. Orb is a play for me at 4-to-1. Given the big day and casual crowd, I think there's a better chance I get the right price on one of the big three than the others, and I think Orb is the most likely to offer that fair price.