Tinky

‡ Knightsbridge: Classic Contender or High-Class Rabbit? When Knightsbridge was declared a "go" in the Breeders' Cup Classic, there was some chatter along the lines of "fade Sovereignty, as if he were 100% they wouldn't have entered Knightsbridge". That view, to my mind, is unlikely to be correct. If Mott/Godolphin believed that Sovereignty was not at least close to 100%, I doubt very much that they would run him. The more likely explanation for the decision to enter both is that tactically they compliment one another, and the presence of Knightsbridge as a serious pace factor should benefit Sovereignty. Also, particularly given the recent loss of Medaglia d'Oro, which stood at Darley America, if Sovereignty were to win the Classic, it would catalyze further strong interest in him as an exciting new stallion prospect. Yes, Knightsbridge also has significant stud value, but he is neither a Classic winner nor a Champion, and his only Grade I win to date came at the expense of a very modest field. And given that, I would say that there is little doubt which of the two runners Godolphin would prefer to win the Classic. So, rather than thinking that Knightsbridge's entry is a negative sign for Sovereignty's chances, I view it differently. Tactically, his presence should benefit his stable-mate, and in the unlikely event that something less than a strong pace were to develop, Godolphin would have a runner that could benefit as a result. Let's assume, however, that a strong pace were to develop. Would Knightsbridge be a serious contender to win under such circumstances? I am skeptical, and partly because despite his having won a Grade I race over 10f. in his most recent start, there is evidence to suggest that he may not be as effective beyond 9f. as he is up to that distance. In the linked article below, I analyzed Knightsbridge's Pacific Classic performance, and I encourage readers who haven't read it to do so. Here's an excerpt: The pace was quite strong: 23.17 45.94 1:10.02 1:35.66 and while the winner was superficially impressive as the gap widened through the stretch, the fact is that he crawled home. These were Knightsbridge's fractions, rounded to fifths of a second: :23 1/5 :22 4/5 :24 :25 3/5 :26 3/5 That the gap between the winner and the rest of the field widened significantly over the final quarter-mile was more of a reflection of the relative weakness of Knightsbridge's opponents, than some sort of tour-de-force performance. Further underscoring the point, the 104 Beyer figure that he earned in the Pacific Classic was his slowest winning figure of any of his five Graded race wins. It is also worth noting that by far his two best performances from a speed figure standpoint came in races in which he dominated modest opponents. In fact, he has never beaten horses of anywhere near the class of Forever Young or Sovereignty, and the best horses that he has faced, Book'em Danno and Nysos, both finished ahead of him (see attached DRF PPs). Yes, he did finish ahead of Journalism in the Met Mile, but given that one's disappointing three race campaign this year, I wouldn't read much into it. Knightsbridge appears essentially to be a free-running type, but versatile enough to track the pace in a close attending position. That description also fit Fierceness, which ran a gallant second to the well set-up Sierra Leone, despite being swept in close to a very fast pace in the 2024 Classic. That he ran such fast fractions through the early and middle sections of the race is why he was beaten when stamina became paramount, and it begs very similar questions about Knightsbridge's chances on Saturday. He is now a fully mature five-year-old, and is coming off of two superficially impressive wins. I could understand why some might be tempted to take a shot, if his odds are attractive. But given the questions about his ability to stay a strongly run 10f. well, or "switch off" so that he might conserve energy for the final furlong, along with his arguably "dressed up" record of winning races against clearly inferior horses, Knightsbridge strikes me as a bet against. And while I used the expression somewhat tongue-in-cheek, I do expect him to serve essentially as a high-class rabbit (see attached image) for Sovereignty. Finally, please be sure to use the proper British pronunciation: high-clahss, to insure that Sir Knightsbridge won't be offended. 😀

A fine impressionist painting of the Keeneland walking ring by the late New Zealand-born artist Peter Williams (1934 – 2018).

‡ An all-time classic handicapping book. If you haven't read it, seek out a copy on eBay, or elsewhere. It's worth reading for the anecdotes alone. It was based on Andy's profitable year betting in 1977, when $50,000 had the equivalent purchasing power of $278,000 in today's dollars. Not a bad gig. 😀

Excellent news!

Decisions, decisions...

‡ Breeders' Cup Blast From the Past: Stung by a Poor Shoemaker Ride In the mid/late 1980s I had begun to publish some of my work, but was still gambling fairly seriously, as well. In early November of 1987, I was in California to cover the Breeders' Cup at Hollywood Park, which turned out to be extraordinary, both as a group of races, and betting experience. They offered a Pick-9 that day (yes, nine races), including what I recall as at least one allowance race after the seven Breeders' Cup races had been run (I can't locate a full set of charts). That allowance race, one of the two non-BC races in the pick-9, was won by a Fappiano filly (I think), which in retrospect made some sense as she was 1st Lasix. But given that it was a pick-9, and I did not want to invest a lot of money on the ticket, I couldn't go very deep at all, and had to single a few horses. All four of my singles were in the BC races, and three of them won: Very Subtle (16/1 - Sprint), Miesque (7/2 - Mile), and Ferdinand (1/1 - Classic). I hit one of the two non-BC races, and the only single and BC race that I missed was the Juvenile Fillies, thanks to a bizarre, and wholly uncharacteristic ride by the great Bill Shoemaker. The filly that I had singled in that race was named Jeanne Jones. She was trained by Charlie Whittingham, and was sent off as the second favorite (2.20/1) behind a four-horse Lukas entry. She was, oddly enough, and along with her trainer's star of the day, Ferdinand, by Nijinsky. Though a brilliant turf horse himself, and much more of a turf influence as a stallion, Nijinsky had remarkably gotten two horses that were good enough to have had big chances in Breeders' Cup dirt races on that particular day. Despite an obviously strong pace developing, for some inexplicable reason Shoemaker rode Jeanne Jones aggressively early, and she not only forced a :22 quarter, but had taken the lead by the half in :44 flat, and covered 6f. in 1:09 flat (see attached chart). I was shocked, and none too happy, but when she drew well clear into the stretch, it appeared that she might actually win in spite of it all. It wasn't to be. She shortened stride, was stopping badly late, and the late-running longshot Epitome nailed her on the wire (see video linked below). It was a painful wait before the photo finish result was announced, and a particularly painful "dirty nose" loss. youtu.be/dX1PSBe13eI To make matters even worse, I happened to have been watching training with Gary Young during the week leading up to the BC, and we had both taken note of how well Epitome had been training. But as it would have radically increased the cost of my ticket, I never seriously considered using her. The upshot of all of the above is that I ended up with seven out of nine winners, and I believe two or three times. I don't recall the exact amount, but it was well into the thousands. Yet despite that fairly juicy consolation, and my having done well otherwise during the day, I always wondered what the 8/9 payout would have been, had Shoemaker not decided to unveil his best Earlie Fires impression. To be fair, Whittingham subsequently came to believe that the filly also resented the whip, and you can see signs of it in the video as Shoemaker smacked her late in the race. So despite her early efforts, she probably would have won had she been hand-ridden home! *** As a final note, it was, nevertheless, a fantastic day of racing, and undoubtedly one of the very best of the Breeders' Cups. Very Subtle was a sensational winner of the sprint; easily in the top five sprint performances of any that I have seen over ~50 years. Miesque was brilliant, as she was again at Churchill the following year. And the Ferdinand – Alysheba stretch battle ranked right up there with the Easy Goer – Sunday Silence, and Tiznow – Sakhee Classics.

Nothing to knock about Englishman's final breeze in preparation for the BC Sprint. And he hugged the rail impressively on the turn in the gallop out.

Welp, a particularly porcine effort from Pagode yesterday (unplaced as the 2.48/1 favorite; see attached chart for details). If I were managing him, I would choose one of these courses of action: • shorten him up to 6-7f., and have him ridden like a one-run type; in other words, use fairly extreme waiting tactics in order to take advantage of tiring front-runners, and, crucially, momentum • find a long race on dirt (10f.+), send him to the lead, and find out if he gains courage while running scared Of course he could always be dropped in class in an effort to find opposition so weak that he might win in spite of his limitation, but given that he does have a fair amount of ability, that would presumably be a last resort.

‡ Every Sucker Horse Has Its Day? "Sucker horse" is an old, derogatory expression for a racehorse that doesn't like to win. It promises, but doesn't deliver, and therefore lures in the "suckers" to wager on it. Most such horses do end up winning at least a race of two, when the competition becomes weak enough, or circumstances favor it sufficiently. But they certainly can prove frustrating to bettors, which is why it is important to try to distinguish those horses which appear to be exaggerating their (follow the leader) herd instincts, and those that have repeatedly come up short for less damning reasons. In today's 7th race at Keeneland the program favorite at 5/2 is Pagode, a four-year-old gelding trained by Joe Sharp. Having broken his maiden on debut by a nose, Pagode was predictably outrun at odds of 65/1 when for some reason being placed next in the Gotham Stakes at Aqueduct. Unsurprisingly, he was sent off as a heavy favorite (1/2) when shipped to run next in an allowance race at Horseshoe Indianapolis. That he finished second, beaten four lengths, should, especially in retrospect, have sent off some warning bells. Ignoring one turf start (up the track), Pagode has now finished second in six consecutive races, the most recent two at odds of 4/5 and 7/5. See his attached DRF PPs for details. So, I decided to take a look at a couple of replays. I choose his most recent two, and have embedded clips of the stretch runs of each. To my eye, Pagode appears to be the type of horse that is not eager to hit the front. The most obvious symptom is that he tends to alter course slightly (in or out) when faced with the prospect of passing a horse. Another is how easily he appears to cruise up to the leaders, before making heavy weather of the more important action in the run to the wire. As can be seen in his PPs, Pagode has above-average ability, and relative to his competition in today's race has earned the fastest speed figures. But that is largely why he has been bet in his recent starts, and it wasn't enough. Two other factors could possibly help him to get over the hump: it is his second start out of the Joe Sharp barn, and Luis Saez will be aboard for the first time. Saez is a strong rider, and that could make a difference. But horses of this type are generally more likely to win not because of brute strength on the part of the rider, but when the final challenge is timed advantageously. The less momentum, the tougher it typically is to overcome the heard instinct. Which why horses that are reluctant to hit the front often benefit from well-timed late runs. So, what do I think about Pagode's chances today? I'll let Bart do the talking (see attached image).

‡ Knees Up! Together Now, a three-year-old half-sister to (the overrated) City of Troy, broke her maiden today in her fourth start. She had been beaten as the favorite at odds of 6/4 and 2/7 in her previous two runs this year, and finally obliged at 1/5. All four of her runs have been in races contested over ground softer than good, and it may not have been a coincidence. I say that because she shows the type of pronounced knee action which is typical of horses that tend show their best on softer ground. As you watch her in the embedded video clip, imagine the concussive force that would be produced by that type of action on firm ground.

When it comes to equine art, I tend to prefer impressionism over realism. But I do appreciate the extraordinary detail found in many of today's photographic images of racehorses. In the attached photo, note the small clod of turf caught in the filly's hoof, the toe-clips and farrier's fine nail work, her sweat, exascerbated by the breast-plate, the condition of her rider's cap, etc. Impressive.

Thanks to @ChadAhalt for the attached find. apparently the graphic was posted by the TwinSpires ADW feed, and not Laurel. So apologies for my mistaken assumption. But having said that, it appears that there was either a serious timing error relating to "the instant" that the host track (Laurel) triggered the "post-time/off-bell lock", or there actually was wagering allowed up until 23 seconds into the race. And either way, it seems quite problematic. nitter.gq/ChadAhalt/status/21121…

Two horses training up to the same Breeders' Cup race breeze over the same track and distance, on the same morning. Had they started together and recorded those times, Phileas Fogg would have finished 30 lengths ahead of Forever Young. Thirty lengths! 😀 A good illustration of why many consider training to be more of an art than a science.

‡ Whoosh! Ombudsman displayed a very impressive turn of foot, for which last year's top-rated turf horse, Calandagan, had no answer, while winning the Champion Stakes at Ascot yesterday. To be fair, the latter is arguably better suited to 12f., despite having beaten Ombudsman in the same 10f. race last year. Note that both horses carried 133lbs., though it was not a handicap event, and I believe that the last time that an American Champion carried that weight to victory was in 1977, when serious handicaps still existed. 50 years ago! Forego won both the Metropolitan Handicap (Met Mile) and his fourth consecutive Woodward Stakes toting 133lbs. that year, and also won the Nassau County Hcp. carrying 136 during the same campaign.

‡ Keeneland: Better Late Than Never Three days after there were erroneous payouts on the Turf Pick 3 at Keenland (see linked/embedded post), the track has finally admitted that a mistake was made. However, I have to say that they seem to have tried very hard to avoid taking any direct responsibility for it. The Keeneland Racing @keenelandracing X feed manages to provide a link, without even hinting at a problem: "Update on Keeneland Turf Pick 3 payouts from Wednesday, Oct. 14 →" keeneland.com/wagering/wager… On that (above) linked page, this is the first line: "Regarding the Turf Pick 3 on Wednesday, Oct. 14, there was an error affecting certain payouts following a change in racing surface." There was an error! That immediately reminded me of a classic from the long-running comic strip Life in Hell, produced decades ago by Matt Groening (creator of The Simpsons). I have attached it. While it does appear that Keeneland is going to attempt to make the "customers who purchased the 52 affected tickets" whole, I would argue that the problem should have been recognized and publicly discussed much earlier, and that all customers, whether they wagered on the race or not, deserve something more of an explanation than the equivalent of "mistakes were made" in the Groening cartoon.