The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

re: The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

Barb Lewis — Sat, 14 Mar 2009 20:09:36 GMT

Easy Goer was a great horse as was Sunday Silence. The impact that Sunday Silence has left in the thoroughbred world thro his progeny speaks for itself! Don't ya think

re: The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

KLC1975 — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 05:58:18 GMT

I think you oversimplified the whole Easy Goer/Sunday Silence rivalry. First of all, Easy Goer was comprimised in all of his races versus Sunday Silence due to the timing/distances of his prep races. The date and or distances of the Gotham, Wood, JC Gold Cup have all been changed since 89. Sunday Silence was simply the fresher, better prepared horse by Whittingham in all of their confrontations. The Wood was two weeks before the Derby in 89! Sunday Silence had a four week break. The JC Gold Cup was a mile and a half three weeks before the Classic. Whittingham admitted Sunday Silence had an advantage going into the Classic due to Easy Goer coming off a 12 furlong race. So although I accept Sunday Silence won the championship that year, I truly believe if given the current dates/distaances of Easy Goer's preps existed in 89, we would have had a different ballgame!!

re: The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

Julie L. — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 19:43:45 GMT

Being a true native of California having been born in San Bernardino I have over my 50 years seen and heard all of the reasons as to why east coast racing is suppose to be superior to west coast racing but the truth of the matter is it's all horseracing and some horses will favor one track over another for whatever reason that they do or there are those horses that bless us with the ability to run great on any track they are put on. And yes we have had some great horses come from California, our last triple crown winner Affirmed was based in California using the Santa Anita Derby as a prep for the Kentucky Derby but some east coast people like to forget that and Florida likes to remind everyone that he was foaled in their state and yet was conceived in Kentucky so just who can really claim Affirmed other than the racing fans who loved him.

re: The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

Fred — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 17:07:30 GMT

Danylson,

"If that's not horse of the year I don't know what is.

Try the horse that has the big black butt. Easy Goer, had the best view of it that year.

Jeez, Louise, how can anyone be asking who is better when it was decided on the track 3 of 4 times. What more can possibly be asked?

This isn't college football. We don't need to vote when they actually raced. What is the point of running the races if the results mean nothing?

I guess it is fair game to conject that Sham was better than Secretariat. Oh you poor fools, forget the race, Sham was better. Really, that's how ridiculous you Easy Goers' sound.

re: The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

Elwood — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 02:16:32 GMT

East Coast racing is way better than west coast. Look at the sires!

Take out Pleasantly Perfect and Cee's Tizzy and what have you got?

re: The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

tim — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 03:18:30 GMT

Sunday Silence vs Easy Goer? What else did SS need to do. What is more important than going head to head? If the Classic was a mile and a half things may have been different. But it's not, so get over it. If you think Easy Goer was better, you're still in denial and you best go to a professional to find out why you feel that way.

The second half of the 80's was Camelot. So many great horses and what a wonderful time for arguably the greatest man to ever hang a bridle on a horse. Charley had so many great horses over so many years and it was no secret of the fondness he held for SS. Just go to the Whittingham Pub at Del Mar and look at the pictures on the wall.

If he thinks that way, that's good enough for me.

BUT, if you need to measure these two horses further you must include their careers after racing. As close as they were on the track the measure of their progeny couldn't be further apart. One was, to put it mildly a disappointment, the other a foundation sire in another country and Japan knew a good thing when they had it.

East coast bias, yes it is real and I don't lose any sleep over it. Funny though, you go to Las Vegas and all the people who talk funny are there and you ask them, 'where you from', that's right, Nu Yalk, or Joysey. There's no bias when it comes to vacation and having fun, they all come out west.

re: The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

Ek — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 17:50:48 GMT

Or could it just be that there's a dearth of high-quality racing on the left coast? One look at DRF on a daily basis at the cards from Santa Anita, Hollypark and Del Mar leaves the reader with a distinctly bland taste in his or her mouth. That said, the notion that California-based runners won't be voted an Eclipse because that is where they're domiciled is farcical. With wins in this year's Cup, Zenyatta, Stardom Bound and Street Boss are champions and, in the case of the former, she probably doesn't need to win. And can we permanently ban BREEDER-APOSTROPHE-S-CUP!!! It's Breeders' Cup. Any fan should know that!

re: The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

Jeremy — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 08:59:15 GMT

Someone commented about Cigar not being able to win 2 classics. He almost won, coming up a neck short and he was tailing off. The Sunday Silence/Easy Goer will forever be debated. I'm not a fan of synthetics because now it gives turf horses a chance to beat dirt horses. Dirt races should be kept on real dirt surfaces. Thats why there are different surfaces. I just find interesting that a horse who couldnt win on turf or dirt can all of a sudden becomes a synthetic wonderhorse and win itself a grade 1.

re: The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

Marc W — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 21:12:12 GMT

These were two great horses, trained by great trainers but I will put it in a different light. Wayne Gretzky had the greatest hockey mind ever-he didn't have the hardest shot, nor a great skater, but he knew how to score, when to pass and how to win. Bill Russell/ Wilt Chamberlin -one guy was a fantastic scorer and one that had all the championship rings because he realized it was a team sport and did what it took to win.

Sunday Silence knew how to and wanted to win more , only 1 1/2 miles prevented him from being 4 for 4. In a match race though I would not guarantee victory-but he wasn't running in a match race. When talent is similar the horse that knows how and does what it takes to win, usually does. Think the big 2 A's. Affirmed-was he really better? He and Sunday Silence were both extremely handy horses you could do anything with along with being game-the other two had there quirks although hardly lacking in equal talent at the very least.

As for the east coast bias-it is deserved, especially in the past. It is much closer now, but I still think their is a bigger edge going that way-but think of it-CA has a big 3 track circuit as does NY, but then you have NJ, DE, KY (usually considered the east) and even Canada (ON) and Maryland so it is only logical the east will have more kicks at the can.

Do you really want to put TuP or EmD in the west coast camp? It is quite unfair-numbers have it in the east coast camp.

re: The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

DANYLSON — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 04:50:14 GMT

MRO,NICOLE; I AGREE WITH BOTH OF YOU. SUNDAY SILIENCE AND EASY GOER WERE IN A SPECIAL CLASS BUT EASY GOER WAS THE MONSTER OF THE TWO. I ACCEPT THE KENTUCKY WAS A LOST BUT BOTH THE PREAKNESS AND CLASSIC WERE COMPROMISE BY PAT DAY. I AM NOT BLAMING PAT DAY BUT I JUST THINK IN BOTH RACES HIS DECISIONS WERE QUESTIONABLE..TO THIS DAY I STILL WONDER WHAT HAPPEN TO DAY WHEN HE GOT CLOSE TO SUNDAY SILIENCE AND STOPPED PUMPING EASY GOER IN THE CLASSIC, WAS HE SCARED THAT THE SAME THING IN THE PREAKNESS WOULD HAPPEN IF HE MOVED THEN, I THINK THAT IS WERE HE LOST THE RACE,HE HESITATED AND THOSE PRECIOUS SECONDS COST EASY GOER THE WIN. THE ONLY CLASSIC THAT YOU WACTH OVER AND OVER AND SAY TO YOURSELF," the best HORSE did not win". NOTICE I PUT HORSE BECAUSE SUNDAY SILENCE AND CHRIS M. WERE THE BETTER TEAM BUT EASY GOER WAS THE BETTER HORSE THAT DAY. IF THEY WOULD HAVE RACED IN CALIFORNIA IN DECEMBER THAT YEAR EASY GOER WOULD HAVE WON,,HE WAS JUST SO BETTER EVEN THOUGH SUNDAY SILIENCE WAS GREAT. THAT YEAR THE CLASSIC WINNER DID NOT JUSTIFY THE BEST HORSE OF THE YEAR, EASY GOER WON 7 GR.1 BROKE SECRETARIAT'S RECORD FOR A MILE AT AQUEDUCT AND RAN THE SECOND FASTEST BELMONT IN THE HISTORY WITHOUT GETTING WHIPPED,NOW IF THAT IS NOT THE BEST HORSE THAT YEAR I DON'T KNOW WHAT IS?

re: The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

Becky Johnston — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 19:14:27 GMT

Easy Goer won the Swale Stakes at Gulfstream Park.

re: The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

Grey K — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 15:25:52 GMT

Yeah, there is an East Coast bias but what about the Blood Horse cover story on muscle injury when horses switch surfaces, dirt to synthetic? If I were Steve Asmussen, I wouldn't be so worried about Curlin losing as I would be worried about an injury. True the horse will most likely retire after the Breeder's Cup but there seems to be some risk to the change of surface.

re: The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

Householder — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 00:22:04 GMT

I guess the better question is not that Sunday Silence never won in New York but rather did Easy Goer ever win outside of it? Sunday Silence made a career out of being over shadowed whether it be to the 2 million dollar trained Houston in the Santa Anita Derby or the Blue Bloods and Old Money that was Easy Goer. The fact of the matter is that Sunday Silence trained up to the Preakness in a bar shoe that Charlie clipped the end of come race time and he still put away Easy Goer. He simply was the better of the two being less than 100%.

re: The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

dave — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 23:03:04 GMT

It's even possible to make money on the East Coast bias. Intangaroo at 5-1 in the Ballerina might be the overlay of the year. She'd only won two Grade I races at the distance, including a win on dirt over Hystericalady. What about double digit odds on Maryfield in last year's Filly & Mare Sprint, even though 1) she'd successfully come east to win the Ballerina; 2) she was a closer in a field loaded with early speed; and 3) she'd shown that she loved the mud?

re: The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

bill — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 13:07:59 GMT

It's races like the Clement Hirsch that has us right coast guys going nuts. How can you take a time of 1:57 and change for a mile and a quarter seriously. Red Giant is no Secretariat. Heck, when the Bid ran that time on dirt most east coast guys just nodded and assumed it was just another anomaly on a pool table like track. And we knew how good the Bid was, but the time was attributed to the nature of the track. Now how will these horses who just emerged victorious at Belmont on Saturday handle the pool table turf course at Santa Anita?? How is it remotely possible to figure out how those horses will adapt to that surface after slogging through the muck and mire of Belmont? It's not California, it's just the stark differences in racing surfaces - dirt and grass - which twist my brain into a pretzel!

re: The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

fatjoe1 — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 09:48:10 GMT

when will everyone learn...

it's the over racing,breeding for speed &the tight turned race tracks that cause breakdowns...

cal racing will always take a back seat to east coast racing-because east coast racing is better-

oh yeah when was the last time you saw mule racing in n.y. state?

re: The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

NJ — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 06:21:12 GMT

I bet on Sunday Silence in all 4 races with Easy Goer. And I've bet a ton a CA horses that shipped East.

That has nothing to do with my dislike for AWS races. I rarely bet them and will not in the BC either. But I will play BC turf races.

I hope Curlin skips the BC Classic. Because that may be a more effective anti-AWS message than just seeing CA handle decreases. You can blame the economy and the price of gas all you want. I believe the real culprit is AWS. At least in my case, it surely is.

re: The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

Susan — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 00:51:52 GMT

I agree there's a bias. I feel that East Coast fans think that the long "tradition" and age of their tracks somehow makes them better. But I think that Del Mar is the most beautiful and enjoyable track ever and I support the CA synthetic surface regulation 100%. I think a real champion proves, over several years, that he or she can handle a variety of tracks with a variety of surfaces and conditions over a variety of distances against a variety of company. In my mind a horse like Lost In The Fog, with 11 wins at 9 tracks, has shown more quality and is more enjoyable to watch and root for than a horse who retires at 3 after winning four rich races in a row at Churchill and Belmont. Even if they're Triple Crown races. I love how we've been able to watch Curlin really show his greats at 4, rather than departing the tracks after a year. Last time I went to the track I won an exacta on a stakes race with the winner being 9 and the placer being 7 years old - now that tells me they have some dedicated owners!

re: The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

Monica V — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 23:17:07 GMT

I remember very well the rivalry between East Coast and West Coast in 1989. Easy Goer and Sunday Silence were two great horses and no one really gave Sunday Silence much respect and all his wins against Easy Goer were flukes and Pat Day gave Easy Goer a bad ride in the BCC. Nonsense. Easy Goer was a great horse. There is no doubt about that. He was unbeatable until he met up with Sunday Silence. It was the same horse who beat him 3 times! Not 3 different horses, the same horse. Even the coverage at the Breeder's Cup that year was extolling all the virtues of Easy Goer and his royal bloodlines and Sunday Silence not so royally bred and even Durkin's race call was biased toward Easy Goer. "Sunday Silence braces for the oncoming power of Easy Goer who is right at his neck"

What happened then? Sunday Silence took off and left him 2 1/2 lengths behind and did win the race by 1/2 length. Easy Goers best distance with Sunday was 1 1/2 miles. He never hit his best stride until he'd raced 1 1/4. He needed his best stride to beat Sunday Silence. At 1 1/2 miles Easy Goer was unbeatable. Sunday's best distance was 1 1/4.

I don't think the East vs West Bias is as bad as it used to be. During Seabiscuit's era, racing was relatively new here but in the last 60 or 70 years, West Coast racing is every bit as good as East Coast. California bred the only horse to win two Breeder's Cup Classics. Even the mighty Cigar couldn't do that.

Yes, I believe it still exists but not to a great extent. It's always fun though when the East Coast heroes meet the West Coast Heroes! And to throw a little West Coast bias in, there is no better place to race in Late October or early November than Southern California. We have fantastic winters! I went to Churchill for the BC in 1988 and practically froze to death in the rain. Nope California is the place to be that time of year!

re: The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

The Colonel — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 21:48:08 GMT

I appreciate your putting into words what I've suspected about the general lack of respect for horses based here in SoCal. I find it unfair that a horse who's done wonders here will never be considered for an Eclipse Award simply because he never won in the East. But knowing that the likes of Colonel John, Zenyatta, and Intangaroo who are based here have gone East and won there I hope the voters will seriously consider them and other horses for the Awards.

I loath the stigma of this year's Breeder's Cup. Horse races are unpredictable no matter how many numbers get crammed into handicapping. Both a champion and a second-rate horse can win on the big day. Should it be the only measuring stick? No. But showing up on the Big Day (because the Triple Crown is restricted to 3yos on dirt) is so important, and I hope trainers will stop threatening to duck out just because they don't think their horses will perform on the surface. It's not sportsmanlike, but these days we don't have sportsmen, only moneymakers.

Big Brown would've made an excellent turf horse.

re: The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

nicole — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 21:29:44 GMT

Easy Goer and Sunday Silence were basically even talent wise in my opinion. They only raced 4 times and Easy Goer and Sunday Silence practically tied in the Preakness and Easy Goer might have won the Breeders Cup if his jockey wouldnt have waited so long. Im a Sunday Silence fan myself, but the two of them were unstoppable and I find it really hard to pick which one was better than the other. Its awesome having 2 amazing horses that are practically equals in the same year.

re: The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

schabelli — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 20:26:43 GMT

MRO, I'll take 3 of 4 as the better horse anyday. Replay the 2008 Belmont. Do you really think ANY of those horses who beat Big Brown are actually better than him?

On that day in 1989 Easy Goer was better but on all the rest Sunday Silence had his number.

re: The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

MRO — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 17:50:42 GMT

Replay the 1989 Belmont Stakes. Easy Goer was the best 3-year old of 1989.

re: The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

Robert — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 17:33:26 GMT

I think a good question would be is if Lava Man had not run in the BC Classic would he have been Horse of the Year?

Mineshaft didn't and he was Horse of the Year for winning all of his races back east in 2003. Lava Man won all three of the California Classics in 2006.

The East Coast bias is alive and well and always will be.

re: The East Coast Bias - Do they race in California?

Cgriff — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 17:15:51 GMT

I agree - synthetics are the object of fear and prejudice in much of the industry and the media. Like all prejudice - it will be aleviated by knowledge and interaction.

No one said it was perfect - and it looks like Pro-Ride had found the best mix so far for the California climate - but if it is found in long term studies to be safer than dirt? What is is then? An abberation that should be blotted out or a step forward in the scientific evolution of racing surfaces?

The dirt tracks in America play as differently as synthetic track-to-track. Dirt in 1900 is not the same as it is in 2008. It could be argued that a current dirt track is no more natural in the way it's combined, layered and treated than an artificial surface. Why should synthetic tracks be so maligned?

Simple - because its new - and the handicappers haven't figured out how to play it, and the breeding operations who have sunk all their eggs into the "precocious speed" basket are faced with tracks that play more to stamina and strength - like the turf stars - who run on the only truly natural, untampered surface available. Grass is grass -you can't layer it, drain it or play with it. It just grows.

As the author said - great horses can run and win on any track anywhere.