10f a classic prep?

Before I get washed away in the flood of Breeders Cup pre-entries I wanted to revisit a question or thoery mentioned at Thoroughbred Champions. Some have made the assertion that 9 preps are the best way to go for the Classic. They feel that faster early fractions in 9f races put more fitness into a horse but that the shorter distance doesnt take as much out of them. I decided to see if any weight should be given to that theory.

From 1996 to the present there has been 120 Classic starters. 61 of them have prepped in races that were 10f or more. Thier cumulative record is 61-2-6-8. Conversely those who prepped in races that were 9f or less compiled a record of 59-8-4-2. On face value it seems to be a romp for the 9f horses. 8 winners compared to just 2. However if one looks inside the numbers it tells a different story. Most of the preps are run at 9f so it means that virtually all the 10f classic preppers come from the Hawthorne Gold Cup and Jockey Club Gold Cup. It also means that many of those horses finished out of the money in those races. Basically the 10f prep group consists of a good many longshots. However they still managed to fill just over half of the total Classic in the money placings.

I tend to look at the 10f horses's lack of classic victories as mere coincidence. They've run well enough in the Classic to suggest that a 10f prep itself is not the factor that seperates winners and losers.