Dear Jess Jackson: WTF?

I really don't need to write all that much on the sudden retirement of Horse of the Year Rachel Alexandra. The headline here pretty much sums up my thoughts.

Owner Jess Jackson mentions no injury in his retirement announcement for the filly. He just says she isn't quite the same horse now that she was a year ago, and it's time for her to lead a "less stressful" life.

OK, so she wasn't dominant at 4 like she was at 3. She still was never worse than second in a race this year and tried her guts out every time, just like always.

Only yesterday, Rachel Alexandra fired a bullet work on the Oklahoma training track at Saratoga; 48 and change. What in the world was that work about if Jackson was thinking of shelving the filly forever? Just to prove she could still breeze 48 and change?

If the multimillion-dollar filly was 24 hours away from even possible retirement, why was her health and welfare risked by so much as a breeze?

It doesn't make sense.

It's frustrating, because I wanted to see Rachel Alexandra at the Breeders' Cup this year.

Did she fit in the Classic? Oh, hell no. Not at 10 furlongs. Not vying for the lead with Quality Road and getting overhauled at the end by the more likely winners Zenyatta and Blame -- maybe even getting passed by Fly Down, who is coming into his own and would love the pace those two set.

Did she fit in the Distaff? (Please don't make me call it "Ladies Classic.") ... Far more likely. But I'm willing to speculate right now that Jackson decided he didn't want to risk seeing her beaten by Blind Luck. Or Devil May Care. Or both.

I tweeted recently that I'd actually like to see Rachel Alexandra go against males again at the Breeders' Cup. Rachel Alexandra's early speed and doubtless guts could be a blast to watch in the dirt mile, or the Breeders' Cup Sprint, win or lose. And losing to males would be less embarrassing than if she loses (again) to a foe of her own gender.

Nope. Like the neighborhood kid who owns the football and whose mom always seems to call him home for dinner early, it's "game over" for the rest of us, too.

Even if there should have been at least one more play run before this contest really was over.

Horse of the Year Rachel's best, and best for Rachel

How do you define "better off?"

That's an important question in light of the results from my recent poll, in which more than two-thirds of respondents (27 out of 40) said they believed that Rachel Alexandra is not "better off, a year after being bought and campaigned by Jess Jackson and Steve Asmussen."

I presume most readers who took a stand against Jackson and Asmussen believe that Rachel is not as healthy and fit a horse now as she was last year, or perhaps as she might have been with different handling. Certainly she's beatable now -- defeated twice in a row in desperately close finishes during her first two starts in 2010. And she had proved unbeatable in 2009, going 8-for-8.

I'm going to come down on the side of the minority here. For her utmost impact on racing history, for her value, and for her long-term legacy, I think Rachel Alexandra benefited from Jess Jackson and Steve Asmussen.

What's certain in a situation like this is that nothing can be certain. Hindsight might be 20/20, but speculation (though I love engaging in it, too) usually isn't worth 20 cents.

There are, however, certain truisms of racing and horses. Not the least of these is that some horses are simply better (or at least more dominant among their peers) at age 2 or 3 than they ever will be after, while others are later-maturing.

And one axiom of life that's hard to ignore is this: You must strike while the iron is hot.

When Jackson's Stonestreet Stables acquired Rachel Alexandra after her scintillating, record-breaking victory in last year's Kentucky Oaks, there was little doubt he'd just bought the best 3-year-old filly in the country.

Bought had he bought the best horse?

That handy hindsight tells us probably not, since her unbeaten ways have not carried over into 2010, while Zenyatta continues to stand 17 hands tall at 16-0 lifetime. But by the end of last season, history shows, Jackson had bought the eventual Horse of the Year.

Following her crushing Oaks win, had Rachel stayed in the hands of her first trainer, Hal Wiggins, and her breeder, Dolphus Morrison (who doesn't believe in racing fillies against colts), she would have been pointed to the Black-Eyed Susan-G2 at Pimlico on Preakness Eve. Barring some freak incident or catastrophe, she'd have likely smashed a short field of sophomore fillies by the same sort of margin she'd posted in the Oaks. And while that win would have been another big step toward being champion 3-year-old filly, it would have done little toward earning her a Horse of the Year crown, and virtually nothing toward stamping her career as legendary.

Instead, Jackson and Asmussen entered her in the Preakness. There, Rachel did most of the work on the front end of a 9 1/2-furlong test, put away a talented speed horse in Big Drama (a 7-furlong record-setter) and still had the grit to hold off a gutsy Derby-showing Musket Man and the sharp and fast-closing Derby champ Mine That Bird to claim an historic win. She had beaten boys, she was the first filly since Nellie Morse in 1924 to win the Preakness, and now talk quickly shifted toward whether Rachel Alexandra could become Horse of the Year.

Jackson and Asmussen shrewdly backed off the throttle for Rachel's next start. They entered her at Belmont in the Mother Goose, which drew up predictably short after almost nobody thought it wise to enter their girl against Super Girl. She romped in the Mother Goose, setting stakes records for time and margin, but clearly expended much less effort than had she been asked to face colts and geldings again on the heels of her Preakness win.

Already 6-for-6 on the season with three Grade 1 wins, Rachel was positioned to at least stake a claim to Horse of the Year by collecting two more noteworthy victories. She gathered those in the Haskell Invitational -- where she all but ran Belmont Stakes winner Summer Bird and speedy sprinter Munnings off their feet in the slop -- and in September's Woodward Stakes at Saratoga, becoming the first female ever to win that race against older males; a race run since 1954.

By the finish line of her Woodward win, Rachel had done enough -- as the Eclipse voting months later bore out -- to be named Horse of the Year, despite not running in the Breeders' Cup and not facing Zenyatta, who scored an historic win of her own on that championship weekend as the first female ever to win the Breeders' Cup Classic.

The campaign clearly took a lot out of Rachel. She was cooped up (a debatable choice versus true turnout) for months before starting back to work. And unlike her championship season of 2009, she's proved unable to muster the gumption to stave off any and all challengers, getting nipped at the wire in the New Orleans Ladies Stakes by 6-year-old Zardana and nosed out of the La Troienne-G2 at Churchill by Unrivaled Belle.

But is Rachel worse? Isn't it possible that on these dates -- remember, Rachel's first two starts since a lengthy layoff -- a very fit older mare and a rising 4-year-old who is more lightly raced and at the top of her form cycle, were just a little bit better?

And even if Rachel is not her former self, who's to say she would have been anyway, even with less aggressive handling?

John Shirreffs has done a masterful job with two-time champion older female Zenyatta. She didn't race at all as a juvenile, and Shirreffs thereafter brought the giant mare along slowly, allowing her to grow into her body and her talent. As a result, she is as brilliant at age 6, if not more so, than she was during her first championship season at age 4.

But there's no guarantee that a softer handling of Rachel Alexandra at age 3 would have resulted in a 4-year-old filly to rival Zenyatta at 4. A more conservative course for Rachel at 3 could have still resulted in a 3-year-old filly title, but hardly Horse of the Year, and she still might not be any better at age 4 than she's proven so far to be.

And let's face it: Unlike Jerry and Ann Moss, who have chosen to bring Zenyatta back at age 6 for another season of racing (for which we should be cascading them with roses), there's almost no chance that Jess Jackson has any interest in racing Rachel at age 5, let alone 6. She'll be in the breeding shed next late-February or early March, being covered by Jackson's two-time Horse of the Year Curlin. So what was better for Rachel's future value as a broodmare (and the prospective prices of her foals)? Two really good seasons and one "lesser" championship among fillies and mares?

I think -- for her value (a practical concern in a sport that is a business) and for her legacy -- Rachel Alexandra was better served by one full-throttle season in which she shook the racing world and made history almost every time she ran, with the well-earned reward of 2009 Horse of the Year.

It's a trainer's job to recognize how and when to get the most out of his horse. Nobody could have gotten more out of Rachel Alexandra in 2009 than did Steve Asmussen; she was Horse of the Year.

Did that leave her "short" in 2010? It's impossible to say with any certainty; we can only be guessing. So that's no more than a definite maybe.

But it's safe to say that if Rachel Alexandra had been handled more conservatively last year, she'd only have been the champion 3-year-old filly, not Horse of the Year.

And this year, she probably still wouldn't be able to beat Zenyatta.

So long, Eskendereya; hope you're bred to soundness

For the second straight season, a runaway winner of the Wood Memorial has approached Kentucky Derby Day as the likely favorite in the race, and been scratched before the Run for the Roses due to injury.

And with word of the retirement of this year's stunner of a scratch, it's possible we'll never see either of them race again. (Although last year's defector, I Want Revenge, just this morning posted a published work at Aqueduct; 3f in :38.25.)

Zayat Stables has announced that Eskendereya, victor in a runaway Wood, is through with racing due to the soft-tissue injury that kept him out of the Derby. Owner Ahmed Zayat says he will retain a significant ownership stake in the horse in a partnership with Jess Jackson, billionaire owner of Stonestreet Stables and Horses of the Year Curlin and Rachel Alexandra.

Zayat said that he and Jackson "will work to develop the best progeny for American racing."

Word of advice, Messrs Zayat and Jackson: A program to breed "the best progeny for American racing" really should endeavor to eliminate the trend of the fleet-but-fleeting, six-race superhorse.

In other words, as stallions, 4-for-6 Eskendereya, "not so much;" 11-for-16 Curlin, closer to a "yes," though his own sire raced but eight times and his dam not at all.

I understand that the current market will greet Eskendereya with open arms, just as it has eight-race wonder Empire Maker (who stands for $50,000 this year), sire of Zayat's own 10-race G1 winner Pioneerof The Nile, who didn't race past the Preakness his 3-year-old year. It shouldn't, but it will.

At the very least, I beg of you -- all of you, not just these men of abundant wealth, but anyone who is mating sire to dam in hopes of a racehorse -- give more than passing thought to soundness.

We've apparently spent the last several generations of thoroughbred breeding so focused on horses who'll breeze a 10-flat eighth at a 2-year-old sale to bring top-dollar -- and hopefully win a few graded stakes on their way to a post in one of those 20 starting gates at Churchill on the first day of each May -- such that now many of the fastest aren't even holding together long enough to reach the targeted race, let alone competing at age 4 and beyond.

Empire Maker raced eight times and Pioneerof The Nile's dam, Star of Goshen, only five; her dam just six. It could be argued that Pioneerof The Nile exceeded expectations by reaching double-digits in starts.

Lava Man went to post 47 times. With Slew City Slew (42 starts) and Li'l Miss Leonard (18 races) as his parents, it makes perfect sense. (And while Lava Man's second dam, Pink Native, was unraced, her sire Be a Native, raced 42 times, and her dam, Pink Khal, answered the call to post on 57 occasions.)

So please present Eskendereya nothing but mares from lineages that demonstrated rock-solid soundness. Mares who ran a couple-dozen times themselves, and who have siblings that totaled starts in the 40s or 50s. Or hundreds.

I just checked the stats. Empire Maker from his first three crops has 66 percent starters from all foals (not a particularly high number, but not atrocious). Yet their average number of starts per runner for Empire Maker's 190 foals to race: 6.5. Even accounting for the fact that a third of his runners just turned 3 and have had little chance, that simply isn't good enough. For example, fellow fourth-crop sire Macho Uno has a band of runners who are the same age as Empire Maker's, yet their number of starts average 9.2, a disparity I suspect will widen rather than narrow as these stallions' records develop over the next decade or more.

A fast horse is a thing of wonder.

Fast and fragile is not in the best interest of the horse, nor of racing's future. And there should be no wondering about that.

Rachel one year post-purchase: Better for it?

I launched this blog one year ago tomorrow with a lengthy pondering of the Rachel Alexandra purchase by Jess Jackson.

The brilliant 3-year-old filly had just completely left a field of her contemporaries in the Kentucky Oaks, leaving some to wonder whether she might have belonged in the Derby, instead. We would know within less than two weeks whether Rachel Alexandra "belonged" with the boys, as Jackson's camp, including trainer Steve Asmussen, pointed her toward the Preakness, instead of Pimlico's Black Eyed Susan, the traditional filly target. And her jockey, Calvin Borel, begged-off his Derby winner, Mine That Bird, to pilot his favored filly to victory in the Preakness, the first female to win the race since Nellie Morse in 1924.

Here we are a year later, and many steps have been run; races and championships won. Rachel was set on a course that her breeder and first owner, Dolphus Morrison, would never have taken; racing her three times against males. Morrison is among those owners (and trainers, and fans) who think that fillies belong in filly races, colts and geldings have "their" races, and never the twain shall meet.

Rachel proved up to the task in 2009. For Jackson and Asmussen, she rebounded from her gritty Preakness win with a cakewalk by record margin and time in a short-field running of the Mother Goose. Then she trounced a field of boys -- including Belmont Stakes winner Summer Bird -- over a wet track in the Haskell Invitational, becoming only the second filly to win that summer classic. (The first was champion Serena's Song in 1995.) Last, she gutted out a front-running win in the Woodward Stakes at Saratoga, the first female ever to win that race, which has been run annually since 1954.

Though she skipped the Breeders' Cup at Santa Anita -- owner Jackson had said for months he would not run his filly on the Pro-Ride synthetic course there, referring to such surfaces as "plastic" -- Rachel Alexandra's historic campaign was rewarded with Eclipse awards, not only as champion 3-year-old filly (which she was beyond doubt), but for Horse of the Year, to the chagrin of those who favored lifetime-unbeaten older mare Zenyatta.

The filly who had already set three records in 2009 for Morrison and his trainer and dear friend, Hall Wiggins -- that is, stakes-record times in the Golden Rod at Churchill and Martha Washington at Oaklawn Park, and a margin record in the Oaks -- went on for Jackson/Asmussen to set two records in the Mother Goose, and to win three indisputably historic victories vs. males. With Morrison and Wiggins it isn't an unreasonable assumption that Rachel would have been 3-year-old champion filly anyway. But with Jackson and Asmussen's aggressive handling, she became Horse of the Year.

So it would be difficult to argue that Rachel Alexandra was sold from a good situation into a lesser one.

Or would it?

After a grueling 3-year-old campaign, Rachel was laid-up for months without a work. She has come back to run tenaciously in a pair of stakes races -- and has lost them both by slim margins, the New Orleans Ladies to Zardana and most recently the La Troienne-G2 to Unrivaled Belle. Losing to an elder like Zardana in a comeback race after a long layoff is less surprising than being nipped at the wire by a fellow 4-year-old who'd made half as many lifetime starts and never won above the Grade 3 level.

Was Rachel Alexandra merely ahead of her age group as a 3-year-old, and now they've caught up? If so, she would hardly be the first horse to have been as good (especially by comparison) as she'd ever be at age 3 (or in some cases even at age 2), but only a "good" or even "average" horse at age 4 and beyond.

Or is she just not the same filly that she was in 2009? Has she "lost" something along the way? A step, or a little bit of heart? ... And if so, whose fault (if anyone's) is that? Should she have been handled more conservatively -- say, like a John Shirreffs might do, and did with Zenyatta at ages 3 and 4?

So on the anniversary eve of this blog, a poll: Rachel Alexandra, better off with Jackson and Asmussen?

Vote. And discuss in the comments thread, please. I can't wait to see what some of you think on this subject.

I'll tell you what I believe after the poll closes.

Meanwhile, I hope more than nine people vote, unlike my last Rachel poll. Geez, she gets beat once (now twice) and all the Rachel fans go into hiding?

Horse of the Year no longer 'unrivaled belle'

For those keeping score, the correct response in my recent poll should have been "someone else." Nobody had it.

When asked whether Rachel Alexandra would win the La Troienne S.-G2 at Churchill Downs today -- or would Zardana make the 2009 Horse of the Year start the season 0-for-2 by defeating her again as she did last out in New Orleans -- a whopping nine individuals cast their ballots. Five cast their aspersions on Rachel (in a manner of speaking) by choosing Zardana to win.

Well, you're all wrong.

In a stirring stretch drive -- Rachel's third in as many races dating back to September's historic and grueling victory over older males in the Grade 1 Woodward Stakes -- a fellow 4-year-old filly, and a lightly raced one at that, showed that the champion does have her equals. Unrivaled Belle, making her eighth lifetime start and coming in off a Grade 3 win at Gulfstream, outfinished Rachel by a head at the wire.

Good for Rachel and her connections that she was only 90 percent. Next time she'll win.

Still, it has to be discouraging for owner Jess Jackson, trainer Steve Asmussen, jockey Calvin Borel, and all of Rachel's fans. She's come quite close to winning both of her starts after a lengthy layoff. She does seem to have shown guts down the stretch. But -- despite setting relatively easy fractions of :24.79 and :48.81, she didn't have enough in the tank to finish off the competition at only a mile and a sixteenth.

Remember, Rachel won the Preakness at 9 1/2 furlongs last year after setting fractions of 23-flat and 46 3/5. But on this day, she can't finish the job going a furlong shorter and on an easier pace.

If this is the case -- And who is to say at this point? -- Rachel wouldn't be the first horse to have been better at 3 than she'll ever be again.

And it's worth noting that after such a layoff -- about six months between her last race of '09 and first of '10 -- Rachel still might not be at her 4-year-old best. That "90 percent" line isn't necessarily an untruth told by Jackson; just something you don't really say on the eve of a race because it sounds like you're either sandbagging or getting your alibis in line before they're even needed. So Rachel in her third start off the layoff, a common angle to play for handicappers, might be just enough better that she beats whomever tries her down the lane on that occasion.

Unless that "whomever" is Zenyatta. Because if the likes of Zardana and Unrivaled Belle can run down Rachel Alexandra during stretch drives in consecutive races, there'd likely be no holding off the closer of all closers.

Excuse me, please, Mr. Jackson

What body part is it to which excuses are compared?

That thought crossed my mind as The Blood-Horse reports today -- on the eve of the La Troienne S.-G2 at Churchill Downs -- that principal owner Jess Jackson has declared his filly, reigning Horse of the Year Rachel Alexandra, "90 percent fit," declaring that she "should win."

Nothing like lowering expectations for a champion.

Jackson's statement allows him to appear as though he has confidence in his filly. After all, he says that she "should win." If she does, all the better, because she did it without even being at her best; her owner said so before the race. But if she doesn't win, well, the connections already have the built-in excuse that she was only "90 percent fit."

I think it's a safe bet that the John Shirreffs barn's Zardana is 100 percent fit, or close as a horse gets (because Shirreffs and Co. just don't seem to run horses that aren't). And considering Zardana has beaten Rachel once this year already, 90 percent of whatever Rachel's packin' might still not be enough.

Jackson upped the rhetoric, and lowered the bar, by adding that should Rachel lose on Friday, it's no big deal. That's because Friday's race is just one more baby step toward "the ultimate goal," in Jackson's words -- the Breeders' Cup this fall at back at Churchill.

I hope Rachel makes it there and I hope she's even better than she was throughout 2009, her championship season.

But I'm not very confident in her chances in the La Troienne. Probably not even 90 percent.

Rachel going 0-for-2 in 2010?

With the draw of the $400,000 La Troienne S.-G2 on Friday's Kentucky Oaks undercard, and word that defending Horse of the Year Rachel Alexandra will face just five foes, it's time for a poll, which I haven't undertaken in a good while.

Among the quintent to line up against Rachel Friday will be Zardana, the 6-year-old who handed a loss to 2009's most fabulous filly in her 2010 debut, the New Orleans Ladies Stakes. Zardana is trained by John Shirreffs, who also conditions "that other Z-girl," twice-champion older mare (and still undefeated) Zenyatta.

Can Zardana (or someone else) get one over on Rachel again, leaving her 0-for-2 in 2010? ... That's the poll.

Thinking deeper, if the Shirreffs barn can bit ... err, mare-slap ... Rachel twice in as many tries with their undoubtedly lesser runner, will Jess Jackson and company ever let their girl meet the other player in 2009's horse of the year debate?

Team Rachel: A camp divided?

So the Apple Blossom showdown between Rachel Alexandra and Zenyatta is off the board, leaving fans to wonder when the two will actually meet.

But there's an even bigger question in my mind right now.

Just how panicked -- and potentially divided -- is the Rachel Alexandra camp?

In the wake of Saturday's loss in the New Orleans Ladies Stakes by the reigning Horse of the Year, who was making her 2010 debut, comments by the principals give us more than a few hints at what they were thinking not only going into that race, but looking ahead to the now-scratched Oaklawn appearance.

Rachel's faithful rider, Calvin Borel, defended his filly as "a real racehorse" who didn't quit despite being headed in the stretch by eventual winner Zardana. "She needed the race, that's all."

And Rachel certainly did need the race. She'd been off since a Sept. 9 win against older colts and geldings in Saratoga's Woodward S.-G1. And while some discussion group friends of mine think she had plenty of work prior to her return, I disagree. Though she had seven published works after her four-and-a-half-month layoff, the first of those came on Jan. 31. I've had trainers tell me in the past that it usually takes two or even three months to bring a horse back to the starting gate off a significant layoff. Rachel started the New Orleans Ladies Stakes some 42 days after her first official work back at the track -- only six weeks, maybe a little bit short.

Trainer Steve Asmussen seems to know it.

"The filly's lacking fitness," he said immediately after the race. "It was my job to have her there, and I didn't do it. ... She's not where I thought she was and if I had thought she'd get beat, she wouldn't run."

But she did run. And not all that terribly, posting a Beyer speed figure of 100, not exactly crappy for a race that was six months after her last start. And one wonders what might have happened had Borel let the girl run instead keeping her in a stranglehold in an apparent attempt to teach Rachel to rate.

"I wanted to let her run her race early, but they wanted me to wait," Borel said after the loss. "I wanted to go on past the speed horse (42/1 Fighter Wing) early. I'd have got by her anytime and my filly could have gone on, but they wanted me to wait and not get into her until the sixteenth pole."

Steve Haskin of The Blood-Horse details the many ways that Rachel seemed "not the same" on Saturday. And he astutely points out that had one or another of a very few things gone Rachel's way -- say, if Borel had let the champion have her head, or had Zardana not shipped east from California for the race -- the reigning Horse of the Year might well have won (in the latter case, quite handily) and the Apple Blossom would still be a "go."

But it isn't, and not because her trainer wrote off the upcoming race. Haskin notes that only an hour after Asmussen told reporters that Rachel had come out of Saturday's loss quite well, her principal owner, Jess Jackson, was scrapping the Oaklawn showdown.

I can't completely blame him, but it is starting to look like Jackson is training this horse, rather than letting his Eclipse champion trainer do the job.

Rachel's trainer initially said there was no way his filly could race against Zenyatta at Oaklawn because he didn't have time to work her up to a prep race and then get her back fit for an early-April Apple Blossom. Then Jackson finagled Oaklawn into setting a slightly later date for the Grade 1 race (not to mention bumping the purse tenfold, from $500,000 to $5 million if both Rachel and Zen race). And Asmussen was left with no choice but to get Rachel into a race by mid-March if he had any hope of turning her back on April 9.

Asmussen has said the filly isn't as fit as he'd like, though he reports she came out of her prep race well, apart from a gutsy and narrow loss. But literally minutes after Asmussen's statement on Rachel's post-race condition, Jackson nixes the Apple Blossom sooner, rather than later, and instead of allowing his trainer at least a few days to see whether the filly can bounce back in time to face Zenyatta for $5 million.

Borel laments being instructed to hold back his filly in a race that she might have run off with if not choked on the backstretch. And he doesn't say that "he" or "Steve" wanted Rachel rated at all costs, probably to teach her to save energy in a race against the late-kicking Zenyatta. Rather, Borel says "they" wanted the jockey to hold back his horse. If you think the second part of "they" is anyone other than Mr. Jackson, then I have a yearling who is guaranteed to win the 2012 Kentucky Derby, and shares are reasonably priced in the low six-figures.

Granted, Jess Jackson paid untold millions for this filly less than a year ago, off her smashing victory in early May's Kentucky Oaks. And the 2009 campaign plotted for her thereafter resulted in an undefeated season and honors as both top 3-year-old filly and Horse of the Year. He's certainly played a hands-on role throughout as is his right; it's his horse, and his money.

But Jackson less and less seems the type to just hire top professionals and trust them to do their jobs, without meddling. Asmussen is apologizing for not having the horse where she needed to be for a pair of races I'm not sure he really wanted her to run in the first place. And Borel sounds frustrated as the man in the irons, being told to rigidly employ a strategy that he clearly thinks got his filly beat. And they're all probably scrambling for answers.

Losing, even narrowly and with guts, has a way of exposing every tiny crack in a team's foundation. And the contrast between Rachel's and Zenyatta's connections becomes even more stark.

Way back last June, when Zenyatta's owner, Jerry Moss, got a little too bold in his statements about letting his unbeaten mare hunt down the upstart filly wherever, whenever, he soon backed down. I speculated that change of heart came after a discussion with his trainer, John Shirreffs, whose course for the horse was being speculatively altered. It wasn't long before those two were harmonizing again on their smash hit, "We're Breeders' Cup Bound."

I'm not sure Team Rachel has it so together.

And whether Rachel Alexandra has a great 2010 and any chance of beating Zenyatta -- should they ever meet -- depends on her humans getting back on the same page in the songbook.

So Rachel 'ducks' first

Unfair headline aside, the connections of 2009 Eclipse Award Horse of the Year Rachel Alexandra have bowed out of a potential showdown with two-time champion female Zenyatta in the April 3 Apple Blossom Handicap at Oaklawn Park.

Oaklawn had offered a $5 million purse for the Grade 1 race -- and planned to extend the 8.5-furlong test to 9 furlongs for this year only -- provided both champion females would be entered. But Rachel's principal owner Jess Jackson, upon advice from trainer Steve Asmussen, said on Wednesday that just isn't going to happen.

Frankly, they have a good reason. Rachel Alexandra only recently began working again at Fair Grounds after sitting idle for several months following her historic Woodward Stakes win over older males in early September at Saratoga. Meanwhile, Zenyatta pretty much hasn't missed a beat since winning the Breeders' Cup Classic over males in November at Santa Anita. While retirement allegedly was in the offing, Zen kept working, and from her drills she seems sharp enough to walk onto the track and beat just about anybody, tomorrow.

So, with the date being Feb. 10, an April 3 showdown of such magnitude would clearly be in Zenyatta's favor. Rachel will need a race or two before she could be expected to run her best, and frankly, on her schedule, April 3 might be her first race back. Surely Zenyatta will have run at least once in California (and probably crushed a field) before then.

What next? Jackson says he's working with the NTRA on devising a three-race challenge for the top females, that would "to rival the Triple Crown." Unless some colt is poised to actually win that crown on Belmont Stakes day, it's safe to say that Jackson's statement is not hyperbolic. All racing eyes -- and many outside the sport -- will be on Rachel and Zen when they finally do hook up on a racetrack somewhere.

Still, I'm disappointed it won't be at Oaklawn, because I intended to be there as my next stop on the Unexpected Vacation Circuit.

Poll: STS over Rachel, 2-1

The votes are in, and my readers, at least, heavily side with Sea The Stars over Rachel Alexandra as the "best horse you won't see" at this year's Breeders' Cup.

Truth be told, Sea The Stars isn't definitely out of the Breeders' Cup. Owner Christopher Tsui says it's 50-50 whether the Irish-bred Cape Cross colt will run for the first time on an all-weather surface in trying to win the Breeders' Cup Classic at Oak Tree at Santa Anita in November.

But I figure he won't be there.

Sea The Stars is riding a seven-race win streak, five of them in Group 1 stakes. It's an historically unprecedented season, as well. He was not only the first horse since Nashwan in 1989 to win the English Derby and Two Thousand Guineas "double," but surpassed that feat by becoming the very first to go on and win the Prix de l'Arc de Triomphe. He should be hands-down European champion and has little or nothing to prove by winning the Breeders' Cup Classic among a field that is likely to include among its favorites a pair of horses he's beaten several times before: Rip Van Winkle and Mastercraftsman.

Of course, Rachel has had quite the historic 3-year-old campaign of her own. From record-setting romps in the Kentucky Oaks and the Mother Goose Stakes, to beating colts in the Preakness Stakes (first filly to win since Nellie Morse in 1924) and Haskell Invitational, to becoming the first female ever to win the Woodward Stakes against older males, Rachel is easily the Eclipse 3-year-old filly champion on this side of the pond, and the leader in the clubhouse for Horse of the Year.

She's definitely not running in the Breeders' Cup. Principal owner Jess Jackson has made that clear for months, and recently confirmed that her Woodward win would be her last race in 2009.

But at least Jackson says we'll see Rachel on the track in 2010. Sea The Stars is destined for stud duty in Ireland without running at age 4.

Both horses staged historic campaigns. Both were clearly the best of their age and gender -- Rachel perhaps best of both genders -- on their respective continents. And since a majority of my readers are Stateside, I figured a poll between Sea The Stars and Rachel would have relatively close results.

I was wrong. It appears that even American fans are beginning to realize what racing and bloodstock experts have noted for some weeks now -- Sea The Stars is one of the best Europe has seen in ages. He garnered 37 of the 56 votes cast, for 66 percent. Rachel had 18 votes for 32 percent. (One vote was cast for Some Other Horse, namely Caribbean standout Sicotico.)

Of course, the some of the same superlatives used for Sea The Stars can be said of Rachel Alexandra. There have been some great 3-year-old fillies over the past 20 years -- Ashado, Silverbulletday, Go For Wand and others -- but it's hard to ignore that Rachel has done things even the likes of those champions never accomplished.

It will be a bit anticlimactic not to see Rachel and Sea The Stars (presuming he doesn't) running in the Breeders' Cup.

Still, there should be some very good races. And if an American horse manages to rebuff the British Invasion in the Classic, it will be an historic Breeders' Cup weekend in its own right.

History in the making, and the ducking

You win some, you lose some. And apparently when phenomenal filly Rachel Alexandra is declared a probable for a Grade 1 race never before won by a female, you gain one and might lose one among the older male horses that had been pointed toward the race.

Steve Asmussen, trainer of Rachel Alexandra, revealed on Monday that she would bypass the Travers S.-G1 and a third shot at 3-year-old males in favor of facing those boys' elders in the Woodward S.-G1. Both races are at Saratoga. The Woodward has never been won by a filly or mare.

The announcement spurred West Point Thoroughbreds to point its Grade 1-winning 4-year-old colt, Macho Again, toward the Woodward, as well. He had been training at Churchill Downs since a second place finish in the Whitney H.-G1 and initially was to skip the Woodward in favor of a little extra rest before the Oct. 3 Jockey Club Gold Cup-G1 back at Belmont.

That was great news for race fans, some of whom had actually suggested Rachel would be pointed toward a race -- reminder, a race never won by a filly -- as a way of ducking competition. Macho Again would have made the Woodward about as tough a field as Rachel could have been expected to face from this year's handicap division, considering Einstein was already bound for the Pacific Classic at Del Mar to face the best of the West.

But trainer Kiaran McLaughlin might make the opposite choice for his previously Woodward-bound horse.

McLaughlin said he contacted Sheikh Mohammed bin Khalifa al Maktoum, the owner of his 6-year-old Grade 2 winner, Asiatic Boy, about ducking Rachel and crossing the country to race in the Pacific Classic instead of Saratoga's Woodward, to which the horse had previously been pointed.

"I sent an e-mail overseas to talk to the owner and racing officials," McLaughlin told The Blood-Horse, adding that it isn't definite his horse will dodge a meeting with Rachel. The nomination to the Pacific Classic, which is run a day after the Woodward, merely gives Asiatic Boy another option.

"Nobody really wants to face Rachel Alexandra these days," said McLaughlin, which must come as news to the nobodies at West Point, who decided to alter plans and face Rachel rather than lay out of a race that hadn't been on their horse's schedule.

McLaughlin said giving Rachel an eight-pound break -- which she'll receive in the Woodward for being a 3-year-old and a filly -- might just be too much. Calling Rachel "great," a word he says is used too often but is appropriate in her case, McLaughlin flatly said he wanted no part of her. Wherever her principal owner Jess Jackson might send her. Ever.

"She's beat everybody that's gotten in the gate with her this year. Luckily, I haven't gotten in the gate with her and don't look forward to getting in the gate with her with Asiatic Boy," McLaughlin said. "... (S)he's great for the sport, and it's nice that Mr. Jackson chose some of these spots to show how great she is. He said he's hoping to run her next year as a 4-year-old, and that's nice to hear, but I don't look forward to running against her ever, with anything."

That might make perfect sense from a let's-don't-get-our-horse-beat-ever angle. But for McLaughlin to laud Rachel Alexandra as "great for the sport" and applaud Jackson for spotting her against males to prove her worth -- then tell us not to count on him and his horses to be a part of what's "great for the sport" -- leaves me disappointed in a trainer I normally find easy to root for.

I hope the Sheikh and trainer McLaughlin decide to keep Asiatic Boy in the East and face Rachel. If so, good luck to them.

If not, and if Rachel does happen to lose the Woodward, I hope it's Macho Again who proves to have been the man for the job.

Maybe West Point -- which sells and manages racehorse partnerships -- simply sees a Woodward with Rachel as too big a marketing opportunity to miss, win or lose. But winning would be a just reward for seeing history about to be made and choosing to be a part of it by running in, rather than from, the race.

Hey there, big boy! ... Youthful Rachel Alexandra to strut her stuff against older males in Woodward

The interminable wait for information from the Rachel Alexandra camp  that everyone was squealing about over the weekend has ceased: The brilliant 3-year-old filly will next race on Sept. 5 in the Woodward Stakes against older males.

The G1 Woodward at Saratoga, a 9-furlong event run since 1954, has never been won by a filly or mare.

Connections say the decision was based not only on how well Rachel has been training, but the work of her Stonestreet stablemate, Kensei. The colt who most recently has won the Dwyer and Jim Dandy stakes will run in the Travers against his own age while Rachel steps up for principal owner Jess Jackson to face elders. No reason to run them both in the Travers, where only one can win, and when Rachel could make more history.

"Legacy," said trainer Steve Asmussen when asked about the primary reasoning behind the choice of race. Adding a little shot at Claire Novak, perhaps, Asmussen said, "Jess' sportsmanship ... is quite obvious instead of talking. No filly has won the Woodward. For everything else that she's done, I think it's a showcase or a platform that she's worthy of."

Now, I suppose, let the haters commence -- or, more accurately, continue -- with the talk of how Rachel is ducking Quality Road or even Kensei.

Yeah, what a sissy move. The testicle-dragging donkeys the 3-year-old filly be racing in the Woodward include: 6-year-old Asiatic Boy (UAE Derby-G2, second in the Dubai World Cup to Curlin); This year's Whitney H.-G1 winner Bullsbay, a 5-year-old; 4-year-old past Fountain of Youth-G2 winner Cool Coal Man; 6-year-old millionaire It's a Bird; and last year's surprise Belmont Stakes winner, Da' Tara.

But the field won't include Stephen Foster-G1 winner Macho Again, who is resting up for the Jockey Club Gold Cup-G1 in October.

So, you know, beating the remainder that do start in the Woodward will be almost meaningless.

Jess Jackson: 'Guardian of the Galaxy'

With his usual dose of European horse racing pragmatism, Malcer has weighed in from well on the far side of the pond about the way Jess Jackson is yanking the chain of the American sports media and turf fans, potentially to the detriment of the sport.

Spurred by dueling commentaries from Claire Novak at ESPN.com (who thinks Jackson is displaying a lack of sportsmanship by being so vague about his plans for top filly Rachel Alexandra) and Ed DeRosa (who defends Jackson from Novak on his Big Event Blog), my blogging friend in Germany nails shut the case in favor of Novak right from his headline.

At his blog "The Dresden File," Malcer cautions Mr. Jackson that, "The World Isn't Waiting."

From a global sports perspective, he couldn't be more correct.

Sure, the racing world waits with bated breath to know where Rachel Alexandra is racing next. And "Guardians of the Galaxy" devotees take polls on what's the most interesting upcoming storyline: Adam Warock & the Universal Church of Truth or maybe Rise of the Badoon as a major stellar empire.

Nobody else gives a flying fig.

DeRosa writes from the perspective of a horse racing addict (a monkey that rides both our backs) who knew darned good and well that Rachel Alexandra wasn't running in today's Alabama S.-G1 against fellow 3-year-old fillies at Saratoga. He points to her workout patterns under trainer Steve Asmussen, which indicate she wasn't on the brink of a start.

"John Scheinman of the NYRA press office and trainer Mark Hennig both noticed that," DeRosa writes, "so it's not like deciphering Asmussen's motives required possession of the Rosetta Stone or an advanced degree in reading tea leaves."

No, and I didn't even need that much information to write off the Alabama as her next start. Be it sportsmanship or ego, Jess Jackson's appetite isn't sufficiently fed by watching his filly crush a field of four by 20 lengths, the likely result of an Alabama that included Rachel. (As it is, the Alabama today features eight entries, only one of which is at longer odds than 8/1 in the morning line.) He wants to fry bigger fish, and he wants more of them on the stringer.

I suspect Claire Novak, who has followed racing since childhood and has reported/commented on it for quite some time now, didn't exactly need a lightning bolt from the sky to strike her with the foreknowledge that Rachel wasn't running today, either.

Not so with the rest of the sports media. The non-turf guys and gals. The people with press passes to the Kentucky Derby but who don't know why it's even called "turf writing" when most of the races are on dirt anyway.

For racing to stop being a boutique or niche attraction -- the "Guardians of the Galaxy" of the sports world, only understood and appreciated by the sort of fan who never misses an issue -- the general sports media needs a little spoon-feeding. Jess Jackson is doing that after a fashion, but his evasive, noncommittal statements leave reporters not really knowing what the spoon holds on any given day until it's in their mouths. Could be chicken soup. Could be huitlacoche.

Eventually, only the die-hard turf media are waiting in line every day for another taste. The other sports reporters have scurried off to baseball, hot dogs and apple pie, or at least to NASCAR and a fried bologna burger.

Granted, I knew Rachel Alexandra wouldn't be in today's Alabama Stakes. Ed DeRosa knew it. Claire Novak probably knew it, even without "waiting for the overnight" as she mentions at ESPN.com.

So why can't Jess Jackson just flippin' say so, two or three or five days in advance. And he can, but he doesn't want to. We're all just too amusing as playthings.

"It's fun to have the speculation," Jackson told the Albany Times-Union.

Fun for him, sure. Fun for some of us, maybe, though Claire Novak is no longer giggling. And it is not good for racing as a general-consumption sport.

The longer Jackson waits to commit, the shorter time any given facility will have to promote Rachel's upcoming appearance. That is not such a big deal at Saratoga -- potential site of three out of Rachel's four remaining "races under consideration" -- but it would become a huge concern for Philadelphia Park should Team Rachel opt for the $1 million Pennsylvania Derby-G2 on Sept. 7. A good problem to have, I suppose; better than running without Rachel. But you'd like to have some lead-time to prepare for an overflow crowd and to put on the best possible show.

More important, casual race fans and the general sports media -- which is largely bereft of even casual race fans these days -- get bored quickly with Jackson's little game of "no news makes good news."

So I'll spare us all the drama -- Rachel Alexandra isn't running in the Pennsylvania Derby. Hardly likely, anyway, unless Jess Jackson wants to make me in particular look the fool.

Whatever Jess Jackson wants next, it awaits him at the Spa.

If Jackson -- who doesn't need the money but has bellyached about purses anyway -- desires a $1 million pot, it's there for his filly in the Travers S.-G1 against 3-year-old colts and geldings next Saturday, and at a new distance for Rachel; 10 furlongs.

A shot at older fillies and mares? The Personal Ensign-G1 is the very next day and also at Rachel's untested distance of a mile and a quarter, albeit for much less money.

Really wanna prove Rachel's mettle in historic fashion? Run her against the older males in the Woodward S.-G1 at 9 furlongs on Sept. 5. No filly or mare has ever won the race. So what if the $500,000 purse is barely walking around money for a man with $1.8 billion?

I think it's down to the Travers or the Woodward. I'm not sure the Personal Ensign is enough of a test, for either Rachel or her mercurial owner. But body-slamming the 3-year-old colt/gelding division by sweeping the best of three falls would be quite a feat. And emasculating the older male handicap division in the Woodward gives Rachel a piece of racing history even more rare than her victory in the Preakness, which no filly had won since Nellie Morse in 1924.

Maybe strategy somehow plays into this game of hide-and-seek that Jackson is playing. But I don't really see how. Wherever Rachel shows up, she'll have to race whomever else is entered, and she'll still be one of the favorites. And even if Jackson is trying to ensure a better field -- that is, to dupe the Rachel-dodgers into racing his filly against their collective will by being the last to commit -- there's nothing to stop an entire field from scratching-out on race day if their connections really don't want to run against her.

So, DeRosa's valid suggestion that we as fans and media lack patience notwithstanding, once Rachel crushed colts in the Haskell there never really was any good reason for Jackson and Team Rachel to be playing five races against one another as if they're all somehow on equal footing.

Perhaps Jackson is trying to fashion himself as a latter-day Tom Smith. The great Seabiscuit's trainer played games with the clockers and media, even using a look-alike horse named Grog to hide his star horse's true workouts. And the conditioner was notoriously short on information, to the point of being nicknamed "Silent Tom."

Whatever his motivation, it's clearly working to the satisfaction of Jess Jackson, the individual. Not so much, I'm afraid, for a publicity-starved sport that could stand to have the connections of its biggest star in a quarter-century be a little more accommodating with the general sports media and fans.

Because, as "The Dresden File" states, the rest of the sports world just isn't going to sit around and wait for Rachel Alexandra news. They've got better things to do. Like counting sheep.

And we'll have to try and wake them long enough to watch whichever race it is, once Mr. Jackson makes up his mind.