I don't understand what matz is doing with union rags

[Affirmed1]

Check the above out. Today's topic is "Can Union Rags stretch out"?
I will remain mysterious as to what the blog concludes. Good reading.

[zinn21]

Kimberly Mine wrote:

Secretariat--9 starts at 2
Riva Ridge--9 starts at 2
Swaps--6 starts at 2
Seattle Slew--3 starts at 2, 3 preps

Equibase reports Secretariat with 6 starts at 2 and 3 starts at 3 for a total of 9 starts prior to Derby. RR 5 and 2; Swaps 3 and 2; SS 3 and 3.

[Monsun]

but i do find this interesting. i keep, stupidly meticulous stats on everything that is horse racing. by my record./. JL has never won a graded stakes race past 9F. I might be wrong but i really do not think so.

And how many stakes races longer than 9F did JL ride, on a truly competitive horse?

[ratherrapid]

matz is the one that injured Barbaro. that's all i remember.

[bdw0617]

matz is the one that injured Barbaro. that's all i remember.

And Chokokee (sp)

[kimberley mine]

Kimberly Mine wrote:

Secretariat--9 starts at 2
Riva Ridge--9 starts at 2
Swaps--6 starts at 2
Seattle Slew--3 starts at 2, 3 preps

Equibase reports Secretariat with 6 starts at 2 and 3 starts at 3 for a total of 9 starts prior to Derby. RR 5 and 2; Swaps 3 and 2; SS 3 and 3.

I stand corrected re: the 1970s horses, I changed the format I was using to record things mid-stream and forgot to change them.

I do, however, stand by my analysis: that horses with only two preps OR four runs or fewer prior to the Derby have a significantly higher wastage rate than horses who ran more often.

Here's the breakdown for the Preakness. RBP = runs before Preakness as a 3yo.

Shackleford--2 runs at 2, 4 RBP, still in training
Lookin at Lucky--6 runs at 2, 4 RBP
Rachel Alexandra--6 runs at 2, 4 RPB
Big Brown--1 run at 2, 3 RBP, did not face older
Curlin--unraced at 2, 4 RBP, 2-time Horse of the Year and champion older male
Bernardini--unraced at 2, 3 RBP
Afleet Alex--6 races at 2, 4 RBP, did not face older
Smarty Jones--2 races at 2, 5 RBP, did not face older
Funny Cide--3 races at 2, 4 RBP
War Emblem--4 races at 2, 5 RBP
Point Given--6 races at 2, 3 RBP, did not face older
Red Bullet--unraced at 2, 4 RBP
Charismatic--7 races at 2, 8 RBP, did not face older
Real Quiet--9 races at 2, 4 RBP
Silver Charm--3 races at 2, 4 RBP
Louis Quatorze--4 races at 2, 5 RBP
Timber Country--7 races at 2, 4 RBP, did not face older due to illness

Three horses had three runs at 3 before the Preakness: Big Brown, Bernardini, and Point Given. Two of them were done before the end of their 3yo season.

Of the rest, throwing out Timber Country as his problem was illness and not injury, 8 ran as older horses, three were injured, and 2 were retired sound to stud at the end of their 3yo season. Rachel Alexandra is a bit of an unusual case in that she went for a spell (sound but wore out) in September of her 3yo season after facing older males at WFA, but returned as an older mare for a 6-month campaign, again finishing sound but wore out.

It's not quite as striking as the Derby picture, but it does show that the horses who were raced more often before the Preakness were significantly more likely to run out their 3yo season, face older horses, and return for a handicap horse campaign.

[diomed]

Kimberly Mine, I suspect that Rachel was not 100% sound when she retired. She had a bullet work prior to the BC and then that same week they announce she was done. Not saying she broke down but I suspect they were "hush" "hush" about something. It didn't add up(the way she was 'suddenly' retired when training great). A horse that was 100% sound when retired was AP Indy. It still irks me to this day. We were all robbed of him not racing at 4.

[kimberley mine]

Kimberly Mine, I suspect that Rachel was not 100% sound when she retired. She had a bullet work prior to the BC and then that same week they announce she was done. Not saying she broke down but I suspect they were "hush" "hush" about something. It didn't add up(the way she was 'suddenly' retired when training great).

I always had the feeling that her connections went to the well with her one time too many, over the course of her career. Injured maybe, but SOUR for sure.

[bdw0617]

Kimberly Mine, I suspect that Rachel was not 100% sound when she retired. She had a bullet work prior to the BC and then that same week they announce she was done. Not saying she broke down but I suspect they were "hush" "hush" about something. It didn't add up(the way she was 'suddenly' retired when training great). A horse that was 100% sound when retired was AP Indy. It still irks me to this day. We were all robbed of him not racing at 4.

I don't like to trainer bash but.. rachel at her absolute best was under hal wiggins. Steve Got to ride the coat tails of hiss training for a few month. by 2010 the gig was up.

he was just so damn inflexible with her. then if i am not mistaken the whole time she was turned out she was really in a stall? he just did not handle her right IMHO. will never forgive him for that. i don't think she was hurt or anything but by the personal ensign she was a shell of her former self.

throw (a primed and ready to go, 100% healthy and on her game) Rachel in the BC Classic of 2010... you are talking about potentially one of the greatest races of all time. more top heavy then the 2004 breeders cup with my fav horse of all time ghostzapper.

curlin to a lesser extent, once they had to stop feeding him steroids, same deal.

that filly was so unreal. it hurt me to see her be a shell of herself in 2010.

[diomed]

I don't think Hal Wiggins would have dared to run her in the Preakness, Haskell or Woodward though... Would she have even been entered to run against males with him? That is the question. Assmussen dared to face males but probably bottomed her out in the process. Alas, we will never know.

[bdw0617]

I don't think Hal Wiggins would have dared to run her in the Preakness, Haskell or Woodward though... Would she have even been entered to run against males with him? That is the question. Assmussen dared to face males but probably bottomed her out in the process. Alas, we will never know.

it was not wiggins that was the issue it was rachels owner.

also everyone talks about that, but i don't think that had anything to do with it. she was fine in the woodward though it was a tough race. I think he dropped the ball from that point on. the half quasi break from racing, the 5 furlong works very monday rather she wanted them or not, the not having a definitive plan to achieve what goal? just bad all around

you know, even though she did not run in against boys, wiggins and company knew what they wanted to do and they had a game plan for doing exactly that and exactly that they did.

[DDT]

bdw0617

You started this thread bashing Matz, for someone who does not like to bash trainers it seems to me that you do a lot of it. The thing to remember here, especially from someone who does not breed, own or train horses, is your opinion on trainers means absolutely nothing.

DDT

[Joltman]

[quote="kimberley mine"


Back to the original topic of the thread, I find it odd that a former 3-day event trainer doesn't put a stamina base on his animals. Sure, you don't want to go over a XC course every day, but by golly you are doing a 4-mile gallop 4-5 days a week, because otherwise the cardio just isn't there.

This is where the heart rate conditioning really comes into play. Get the heart rate up, keep it in the correct interval for the correct length of time. It's no different than getting the cardio fitness correct for polo or eventing, two other intense sports that require intense conditioning.[/quote]

I think when Matz is training at Fair Hill he's probably doing more stamina type gallops. If the horses are on track, they can't get the same kind of foundation or maintain it. I wonder how long that foundation holds up - or does it crumble over time without sustaining training?

jm

[pfrsue]

matz is the one that injured Barbaro. that's all i remember.

And Chokokee (sp)

If so, then Louis needs to rethink his Phalaris theory.

I find the wording of these posts disturbing. Matz was the trainer of both horses, yes, but I think it's bordering on libel to say definitively that he personally injured these horses.

[bdw0617]

matz is the one that injured Barbaro. that's all i remember.

And Chokokee (sp)

If so, then Louis needs to rethink his Phalaris theory.

I find the wording of these posts disturbing. Matz was the trainer of both horses, yes, but I think it's bordering on libel to say definitively that he personally injured these horses.

i agree. and i did not mean anything by that. but he did train both horses.

i saw the race in which Cholokee went down and IMHO it had more to do with the track then the trainer if antyhing to do with the trainer. just saying he did train both horses.