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.

Runs like a girl: How Rachel, Zen, Proviso and others might be changing U.S. racing's gender bias

A thrilling 2009 racing season ended with a sharp debate among fans over whether 3-year-old filly Rachel Alexandra or 5-year-old mare Zenyatta -- who never faced each other during the season -- deserved to be named Horse of the Year.

That nod eventually went to Rachel at the Eclipse Awards. And since Zen's owners, Jerry and Ann Moss, decided to keep her in training instead of breeding her this spring, it looks as though we might get to see these two hook up early as April 9 in the Apple Blossom Handicap at Oaklawn Park. Hopefully both females will stay healthy all season, meet more than once, and the thrills of 2010 might rival those of '09.

But decades from now, when we look back on the campaigns staged by the connections of Rachel Alexandra and Zenyatta in 2009, I wonder whether their seasons might be recognized as having a broader influence on the course of American racing.

That is, 2009 just might have been the year in which American thoroughbred trainers stopped being so scared of boys.

When breeder Dolphus Morrison sold Rachel Alexandra to Jess Jackson and company, shortly after her smashing win the Kentucky Oaks, Jackson and new trainer Steve Asmussen did something Morrison said he'd never do: Point the filly toward a race against colts. Morrison -- like many in the racing game -- believes that fillies and mares should only race against other females. Going up against males, so the thinking goes, is asking too much of a filly or mare, physically. But two weeks and a day after her record-setting margin in the Oaks, Rachel Alexandra most of the work on the front end and held on at the wire against Kentucky Derby winner Mine That Bird to beat colts and geldings in the Preakness Stakes, becoming the first filly to win that race since Nellie Morse in 1924.

Rachel, as any half-awake observer of horse racing knows, wasn't done facing boys after her historic Preakness score. She kicked around a short field of fillies in a boringly brilliant performance in the Mother Goose Stakes, then returned to the boys' club in the Haskell, running Belmont Stakes winner Summer Bird right off his feet to win by 6 1/2 lengths over a sloppy track at Monmouth. In September, Rachel recorded her third victory against males -- this time older horses -- by becoming the first female ever to win the Woodward Stakes at Saratoga.

Rachel Alexandra finished the year 8-for-8, three of those wins in Grade 1 races against males. And perhaps her season forced the hand of Zenyatta's connections -- the Mosses and trainer John Shirreffs. They opted to let their big, lifetime-unbeaten mare tackle males in the Breeders' Cup Classic at Santa Anita last November, not just because Zen "fit" in the race, but to make a lasting impression on one of the sport's biggest days in an effort to help the reigning Eclipse champion older female add Horse of the Year to her credentials.

Zenyatta won the Classic with powerful style, becoming the first female ever to win that race in 26 runnings. It was enough to more than cement her place in history; just not quite enough to beat out Rachel for Horse of the Year.

What has happened since? Well, nothing for either of these females, other than training toward their 2010 campaigns. But a lot for some other fillies and mares.

On Saturday at Santa Anita, the Juddmonte Farms' mare Proviso, trained by Bill Mott, "closed desperately in the final sixteenth" to become the first female ever to win the Grade 1 Frank E. Kilroe Mile Handicap. The British-bred mare nosed out Grade 1 winning Brazilian-bred Fluke, ridden by Joe Talamo, to score the historic win. Multiple G2-winner Battle of Hastings was third in a solid field of males that, on this day, got beat by a girl. (And a second female, Tuscan Evening, was entered in the race, but scratched by conditioner Jerry Hollendorfer after she drew the far outside post.)

And, on the same card, British-born mare St Trinians actually was sent off as the 3-1 favorite in the Grade 1 Santa Anita Handicap, a race that had never been won by a female in its 72-year history. Make that 73 years, as St Trinians suffered a difficult trip and finished sixth; Misremembered won from a full field of 14. But the fact that a mare was the post-time favorite in a race never before won by a female suggests that bettors believe the girls can compete.

I was actually a bit surprised that Zenyatta wasn't in the "Big Cap" Saturday. It looked like a field she could beat, but instead she is pointed toward the Grade 1 Santa Margarita for fillies and mares this coming weekend. Maybe Shirreffs thought that going right back up against males after a four-month layoff was too much to ask. And in the end, Misremembered's winning time of 2:00.20 was faster than Zenyatta's victorious time over the same track and distance in November's Classic, so to win, Zen would really have needed to bring her A-game.

Flashing back to '09, Rachel and Zen weren't the only females to take on, and defeat, male horses in big races. Ventura defeated males in the Woodbine Mile-G1 in Canada on Sept. 20. And 3-year-old Evita Argentina beat nine boys to win the Grade 2 San Vicente Stakes a year ago in February.

It really shouldn't come as a shock to American fans that the best females can run and win among males at the highest levels of the game. In Europe and elsewhere, they do it all the time.

Many times champion turf mare Ouija Board during the earlier years of this 21st century defeated males in the Group 1 Prince of Wales in England, and the G1 Hong Kong Vase, as well. She placed or showed among the very best males in top races such as the Japan Cup (won by Deep Impact), Coronation Cup (Shirocco), Irish Champion Stakes (Dylan Thomas), and the Prix de l'Arc de Triomphe (Bago). And when Ouija Board lost the Hong Kong Group 1 Queen Elizabeth II Cup in 2006, the race was won not by a male, but by another female, South African-born Irridescence.

Then there's Australian champion Makybe Diva -- a racing female so good and so famed she became known simply as "The Mare." She defeated males at least a dozen times, including three consecutive renewals of the biggest race in Australia, the Group 1 Melbourne Cup, from 2003-05.

There's an adage in horse racing that an owner or trainer should keep himself among the best company, and his horse among the worst. And certainly taking on lesser challenges is the faster route to the winner's circle. But I have to believe that a big part of racing is the desire on the part of the connections to let your horse meet and beat the best competition it can.

Sure, most of the time fillies and mares will continue to run against other females. Just as a statebred race limits the competition, making it easier for a horse to win or place well and earn his keep, gender-restricted races are typically easier spots to run and win for a filly or mare, and every trainer and owner wants to win; needs to win in order to pay the bills.

Still, if the conditions fit and your filly is tight and right, there are boys to be beaten, everywhere from the maiden ranks all the way up to Grade 1 races. And I'd like to see more females given the chance.

Despite 'plastic' hype, Rachel should stay ready to run

Jess Jackson is practically giving away Rachel Alexandra's place in the Breeders' Cup, but I'm not buying. Not yet, anyway.

The principal owner of the best filly in the land says his girl who beat the boys in the Preakness might race colts and geldings again in the near future, but she isn't going to California to face reigning queen Zenyatta in the Breeders' Cup. Jackson, whose racing concern is dubbed Stonestreet Stables, says he doesn't want Rachel Alexandra running on "plastic," his term for the synthetic surfaces that have been mandated by California for all major racetracks.

Santa Anita, which will host the Breeders' Cup for the second straight year, has a Pro-Ride brand surface for the main track. Jackson says it plays in favor of a grass horse, and he has evidence to prove it. His horse Curlin was bested last year by a European invader, Raven's Pass, in the Breeders' Cup Classic at Santa Anita.

"I have a very strong dislike for plastic surfaces," Jackson said. "I've seen dirt horses run on plastic -- they struggle over it. Curlin did last year. I think plastic favors turf horses."

Jackson seemed dead serious about skipping the Breeders' Cup with Rachel. "I'm absolutely certain," he said. But he really needs to rethink his position.

By crushing her peers in the Kentucky Oaks and then gutting out an historic victory in the Preakness, Rachel Alexandra has positioned herself for a run not at champion 3-year-old filly, which is all but in the bag, but the Eclipse Award as Horse of the Year. I could see her winning that prize without beating Zenyatta in the Ladies' Classic at Santa Anita. I cannot see the award being conferred on her if she doesn't even try.

Jackson of all people should realize that throwing a stinker on synthetics doesn't ruin a horse's resume for the award, nor his reputation, considering Curlin's honors last year that were bestowed despite his forgettable final race. The big chestnut gave his best at Santa Anita, over a surface he didn't like, at the end of a lengthy, global 4-year-old campaign, and he was respected for it. The same respect would be afforded Rachel if she sweeps undefeated for 2009 into Southern California, but can't beat Zenyatta in her own back yard, which the older mare apparently has no intention of leaving between now and then.

And that brings me around to the Breeders' Cup officials and their lame idea of running consecutive Cups at the same track for the first time in the event's quarter-century history, a move that's looking worse all the time.

I already laid as much blame on the Breeders' Cup's doorstep as I did at the houses of Zenyatta's owners, Jerry and Ann Moss, and trainer, John Shirreffs, for their decision not to challenge Zenyatta on the road this summer. With big purses and Grade 1 races to run at on the SoCal circuit of Hollywood Park, Del Mar and Santa Anita, and considering her seeming invincibility over the synthetic surfaces, why go anywhere else?

Now that decision by the Breeders' Cup could -- if Jackson is true to his word -- prompt Zenyatta's greatest (only real?) competition to skip "the biggest race of the year."

It's purely speculation, but reasonable to believe that had Jackson not watched Curlin struggle over Santa Anita's Pro-Ride last year, i.e., had that race been run elsewhere, he'd not fear running Rachel there this year. And if the Breeders' Cup were being run at any track with a traditional surface this year, Rachel would be there, presumably so would a potentially unbeaten (lifetime) Zenyatta, and Zenyatta might have been tested on the road at some time this year, to boot.

Since that horse-hockey decision is already out of the barn, it's worth returning our attention to the horse we can still catch -- Rachel, if she's in her stall, so she can be put on a plane to Santa Anita this fall.

If Jackson limits her to abusing short fields of 3-year-old fillies -- as she's likely to do this weekend in the Mother Goose S.-G1 -- then the glory of her Oaks-Preakness double fades a bit with time. Even if he and trainer Steve Asmussen send her out in the Haskell or Travers against 3-year-old males and she wins, Zenyatta remains potentially unbeaten for her whole career, with back-to-back victories in the Breeders' Cup (the latter earned while Rachel sat on the sidelines) to leave the season's last big impression on Eclipse voters. And if Rachel should lose to a colt or gelding in the Haskell or Travers, her Horse of the Year chances take what I believe would be an insurmountable setback without redemption in the Breeders' Cup.

Jackson and Asmussen can sandbag all they want right now. But their filly should remain on a course for racing at Santa Anita on Breeders' Cup day.

Rachel Alexandra has a 2-year-old win over synthetics at Keeneland, a race in which her Beyer speed figure was consistent with her dirt efforts at the same stage of her career. Maybe it isn't her favorite surface, and maybe she would go to Santa Anita, not give her best, and lose to a champion. (Or a long-shot that, almost inconceivably, beat them both.)

But Rachel wasn't unbeaten when Jackson bought her. The filly's win-streak might not extend through next year anyway if Jackson races her at 4 as he suggested Wednesday. And there's more to be lost for Rachel's reputation and public goodwill by "chickening-out" of a scrape with Zenyatta -- "plastic" home-track advantage or not -- than there is by racing and losing.