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. xitter.cf/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.

‡ Ka Ying Rising Beaten in Australia Earlier today the outstanding Hong Kong-based sprinter Ka Ying Rising was narrowly denied a repeat win in the G1 $20 million (AUD) Everest by the four-year-old filly Tempted. Under the conditions of the race, the filly received a 2kg (4.4lbs) sex allowance. The defeat provided fuel to those who felt going in that Ka Ying Rising was overrated, based in large part on the vast majority of his races having been won in Hong Kong. But there were several factors that worked against the gelding in the Everest, and they must be considered in order to fairly interpret his performance. The first point is that while Ka Ying Rising looked well while galloping in his preparation for the race, his lone "barrier trial" – a workout with several other horses – was not particularly impressive, despite his rider having had him well in hand. Secondly, he was drawn 11 of 12, and an outside post is considered by Australian racing experts to be a disadvantage over that course and distance. If you watch the linked video from the beginning, you will see from the drone angle why that is the case. Ka Ying Rising, though he broke well, was forced to race wide into the turn, and remained wide throughout. That ground loss, when coupled with the eventual winner's inside post and excellent, contrasting trip, was more than enough to have made the difference. Thirdly, the geldings rider, Zac Purton, arguably made two mistakes, by not placing him in a more forward position early, and then by failing to "cover him up". So the loss could also be reasonably explained, at least partly, by Ka Ying Rising having been given too much to do in the final quarter-mile. Though riders and trainers are of course inclined to make excuses, this is what trainer David Hayes had to say post-race (source: racing.com): “Sometimes eleven can be a bonus, but he got caught wide. He settled a bit further back than we thought he would, and if we have to take a positive out of it, he was in front one stride after the post.” “The first and third horse cut the corner and really had dream runs, and we had a horror run being six-wide, no cover. “But he was brave, and I love the way he finished, but I hate the result.” There were also questions about the ground possibly coming up to soft, but despite it being less lively than typical Hong Kong courses, the race was run in "eight and change". His rider suggested that the surface felt a bit loose, and that could have slightly worked against Ka Ying Rising, by blunting his acceleration to a minor degree. But I don't consider it to be a serious excuse. What I would say about the result, with the qualification that I was not there, and may have missed important pre-race visual information, is that while there are enough legitimate excuses to assert with confidence that Ka Ying Rising was the best horse in the race, it was still a touch disappointing that he failed to overcome those obstacles. What separates the truly greatest horses from the rest is an ability to overcome seriously difficult obstacles. Seattle Slew's defining performance, in my view, and I'm not alone, was his narrow loss to Exceller in the 1978 Jockey Club Gold Cup at Belmont. In other words, the obstacles that he almost fully overcame in that race were so extraordinary, that he did more to prove his greatness in that loss, than in any of his impressive victories. The obstacles that Ka Ying Rising narrowly failed to overcome in the Everest, while meaningful, were trivial relative to those that Seattle Slew faced. Which is another way of saying that while he ran bravely, and I still hold him in very high regard, I think it would be reasonable to perhaps lower him a notch on a list of all-time great sprinters. youtube.com/watch?v=jD_rJoBH…

John Skeaping (1901–1984) is best known to most American racing fans for his iconic sculpture of Secretariat in the Belmont paddock. But long before Big Red completed his Triple Crown, Skeaping painted the horse and rider used by SHELL (motor oil and gasoline) in some of its advertising materials. The attached image is of a vintage poster dating to 1952.

‡ Big Stallion Books Viewed Through Another Lens There are two interesting and useful interactive graphs displayed in the recently released online Jockey Club "Fact Book". Both are sorted by book sizes. The first image attached at the bottom of this post reflects the numbers and percentages of stallions standing in 2000 (top) and 2025 (bottom). With a focus on stallions which covered >150 mares, consider these facts: ▶️ in 2000, there were a total of four stallions that covered >150 mares; in 2025, the number was 42, a tenfold increase, which can also be expressed as a rise of >900% ▶️ in 2000 those four stallions represented 0.08% of sire population; in 2025, the 42 stallions represented 4.14% of the sire population; the 0.08-4.14% rise is equivalent to an increase of ~5000% Interestingly, thought not surprisingly, all four of the stallions in 2000 that covered >150 mares stood at Ashford Stud (aka Coolmore America): 176 Tale of the Cat 166 Hennessy 164 Stravinsky 153 Southern Halo *** The second attached image reflects the numbers and percentages of mares that were covered by stallions in the various categories. I again focussed on the category of stallions that covered >150 mares. ▶️ in 2000, the aggregate number of mares bred to stallions which covered >150 mares was 659, representing ~1% of the total number of mares bred; in 2025 there were 7,998 mares bred to stallions in that category, which represented 31.79% of the total number of mares bred, an increase of over 3000% ▶️ Based on the recently released 2026 figures, there were 8,789 mares that were bred to stallions which covered >150 mares, representing 35.4% of the total number of mares bred; that equates to an increase of ~3400% over the 25 year period Put more simply, in 2000, approximately one out of every 100 mares was bred to a stallion which covered 150+ mares; in 2026, over one-third of all mares bred were covered by stallions in that category. *** Do the above numbers reflect a healthy industry trend? Clearly not, in my view. And while there are certainly no easy solutions, the incentives that have led owners and breeders down this dubious path could be effectively altered. The essential problem, though, is the lack of an authoritative central body, which would be in a powerful enough position to enact policy decisions designed with the long-term health of the industry in mind, even over the objections of some of them stakeholders. Failing that, and it is very difficult to imagine how such a body might be created today, the likelihood of the current most powerful stakeholders (e.g. major stud farms) choosing to help modify, let alone reverse the dubious course, given that such actions would adversely impact their near-term bottom-lines, is discouragingly small.

‡ About Those 2026 Jockey Club Breeding Numbers There has been much more than the usual chatter about the recently released Jockey Club breeding statistics, and most of it relates to the high numbers of mares covered by individual sires. That much of the reaction appears to be critical is arguably a positive sign, but somehow I imagine that the owners of major stud farms aren't losing much sleep. As regular readers know, I have been writing about the dubious practices of overbreeding stallions, and especially those which are unproven, for many years. One of the reasons why the related numbers are receiving increased attention and scrutiny is the unabated decline in the registered foal crop (19 of the past 20 years). The total estimated for the North American crop in 2026 (17,000) is less than half of the number in 2006 (38,105). See the attached Jockey Club chart for sobering details. Focussing on the mares covered (see second attached image), consider the following facts: ▶️ number of sires bred to 200+ mares: 17 • number of mares bred to those sires: 3,724 • percentage of total mares bred: 15.5% ▶️ of the 17 sires, eight had no runners represented when the mares were booked; in the absence of any data relating to race results, breeders are largely breeding to such young sires in hopes of profiting from selling the resulting foals, rather than breeding to race ▶️ number of mares bred to the unproven sires with 200+ covers: 1,885 • percentage of total mares bred: 7.8% ▶️ of the 17 sires, eight, or 47%, stand at Coolmore • of those eight sires, four had no runners represented when the mares were booked ▶️ number of sires bred to 175+ mares: 34 • number of mares bred to those sires: 6,925 • percentage of total mares bred: 28.9% *** Unsurprisingly, the numbers above reflect problems that while not new, are certainly not showing signs of abating, let alone moving in a more healthy direction. All stallions are obviously unproven early in their career, but when half of the 17 stallions that were bred to 200+ mares fall into that category, it is bound to lead to further degradations. Breeding hundreds of mares to such stallions before they have even sired a single winner is a dubious breeding practice, and promiscuously breeding questionably sound mares to such stallions compounds the potential damage. Does anyone believe that unproven sires such as Citizen Bull, Corniche, Locked, Barnes or Goal Oriented, which averaged 7.8 starts on the track, are being bred to a meaningful percentage of mares that either demonstrated durability while racing, or had thrown multiple foals which fall into that category? The great increase in the quantity of mares sent to both fashionable stallions, and (worse yet) unproven young sires, has also had the effect of sharply reducing the pool of good mares available to solid, though less fashionable sires. It's a very damaging second-order effect, as given better mares, at least some of those stallions would become more successful, and in turn help to: • create broader attractive variety for owners and breeders • support middle-class owners, trainers and breeders • reverse the insidious trend of bloodlines being further compressed

‡ Magnitude in the Breeders' Cup Classic Damned if you do, damned if you don't? Magnitude, winner of the Dubai World Cup over Forever Young, and the Stephen Foster in a fast time, is one of the principal contenders in the upcoming Breeders' Cup Classic. While he is clearly not the type of one-dimensional horse that needs to be in front every step of the way, it is, I would argue, important to note that he is still essentially a free-runner, and is most comfortable and effective when setting or forcing the pace. I've marked up his lifetime DRF PPs (attached) to illustrate the point. ▶️ His record is 15 starts 8-2-1. In each of his eight wins (highlighted in green), Magnitude either set or forced the pace. In all four of his unplaced efforts, and his third, beaten over 20 lengths in the Travers (coral), he was unable to gain, or maintain a forward position. He was beaten, and at times badly, by numerous inferior horses (in terms of class), when unable to gain or maintain a forward position. ▶️ His four highest, and five of his six best Beyer Speed Figures (blue) were earned when he set or forced the pace. Note that there is no Beyer available for his Dubai World Cup win, but it can safely be assumed to have been among his four highest. ▶️ The two running lines that are highlighted in yellow represent anomalies. The first, the Gun Runner at the Fair Grounds, was a race in which he chased Built around the track, and was able to hold second (of five). Not a bad effort, in retrospect, given that Built is developing into a nice sprinter, but still only an 80 Beyer, which suggests that Magnitude failed to show his true colors, and was somewhat discouraged when outrun through the middle stages of the race. ▶️ The Pennsylvania Derby was a more clear anomaly, as he was able to rally from off of the pace, though not far off, to finish a creditable second behind Baeza. It was the only race in which Magnitude earned a triple-digit Beyer despite not having set or forced the pace. ▶️ The other two data points that I highlighted (in pink) are interesting for another reason. Since the arguable inflection point of Magnitude's career, when he crushed his opposition in the Risen Star at odds of 43/1, he has only finished worse than second twice, and been beaten by a significant margin twice. All of those occurred in the two highlighted races at Saratoga. He reportedly became agitated prior to the Travers, and stumbled at the start of the Whitney, but I suspect that it is no coincidence that by far his two worst performances came over the Saratoga main track. *** While it may be comfortable for handicappers to draw a line through Magnitude's poor effort in the Whitney, I would suggest that his chances of success in the BCC will be closely related to his trip. Should, for example, Sovereignty be withdrawn from the race, and Knightsbridge entered, that would almost certainly reduce Magnitude's chances of winning significantly. Napoleon Solo could also be a thorn in his side. In essence, I would not be inclined to back Magnitude unless I was confident that he would either dominate the pace, or press other than a strong pace. And it is difficult to imagine either happening, barring key scratches. Beyond that, despite his anomalous effort in the Pennsylvania Derby, I have little confidence that he is likely to come running from off of the pace to gain a place. Perhaps his new rider, Flavien Prat, will work some magic, but based on the colt's form to date, I'd be inclined to bet against it. *** The above brings us to the embedded recent workout video, in which Prat got a feel for Magnitude. He is on the outside (white saddle pad) of a talented, lightly raced allowance winner named Preside (blue pad). There are some interesting nuances to note. The work was clearly designed so that Magnitude would sit off of his workmate. That could well be a hint of the strategy to come in the Classic. Note also that he pulls roughly even at the head of the stretch, and both colts are essentially allowed to finish on their own courage, as they say. Then, watch what happens after the wire. Prat gives a couple of flicks of the whip to Magnitude, yet Preside remains very narrowly ahead, up to and through the point at which both riders are easing up. I am not trying to suggest that Magnitude is an ungenuine horse, or that he lacks competitive drive. But I am suggesting that what can be seen in the work could possibly be connected to the colt's relative lack of success in races in which he was unable to set or press the pace. After all, free-running horses tend to be more, and at times much more competitive when they are allowed to race freely. Magnitude appears to be fully tractable while sitting off of his workmate, and caught up with that one willingly. But the latter appeared to "want it" more. All of this, if correct, could put Asmussen and Prat between the proverbial rock and a hard place. Let the colt roll, and live or die up on what could be a very fast pace, or plan to sit several lengths off of it, and hope that for the first time in his career, and up against the strongest field that he has ever faced, he will rally to victory.