Was pace key to Gold Cup result?

Home Forums Tipping and Research Trends, Research And Notebooks Was pace key to Gold Cup result?

This topic contains 55 replies, has 1 voice, and was last updated by Gingertipster Gingertipster 4 years, 6 months ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 56 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #25732
    Gingertipster
    Gingertipster
    Participant
    • Total Posts 24125

    Interesting stuff about Gold Cup sectionals by Simon Rowlands (our own Prufrock) on the Timeform/Betfair site.

    Got me thinking…
    It was certainly slow until 3 out and a slow over all time. Stats which usually favour prominent runners. However…

    I wonder whether they went too fast from 3 out. ie In a human 10,000 metres race, it doesn’t matter if the runners go Marathon pace for the first 8,000m… If they do the next 1,000m at true 800m pace the leaders will still tire…

    On His Own advantaged by being outpaced, although a front runner the fact he couldn’t keep up allowing him unintentionally to do optimum fractions for the three fences – together with Lord Windermere and The Giant Bolster who both had their runs delayed (held up). Silviniaco Conti and Bobs Worth doing too much from 3 to 2 out and not having anything left.

    Form suggests the Gold Cup was a far from vintage renewal, with front two in the betting failing to perform and third best injured/falling. It crossed my mind that a similar thing possibly happened last year, with Long Run and Sir Des Champs getting in a battle too early and Bobs Worth (although the rightful winner) flattered by his margin of victory.

    value is everything
    #471972
    Bachelors Hall
    Bachelors Hall
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1221

    lol

    I discovered another word that bypasses the wordfilter.

    The race itself was a complete and utter forgettable mess. A Newmill-esque fluke.

    Let us cherish the magnificence of More Of That and banish the "Gold Cup" to the realms of obscurity.

    #471981

    stilvi
    Participant
    • Total Posts 4584

    Agree with BH there are some races that are just not worth the time analysing to death. This is one of them.

    Everything suggested that last year’s RSA was average at best. The only people celebrating yesterday’s result would be connections, bookmakers and those who just like throwing a few quid at outsiders. I doubt that bookmakers have ever had two better results in succession than Very Wood and Lord Windermere.

    #471982
    Gladiateur
    Gladiateur
    Participant
    • Total Posts 996

    I blame the delay caused by the injury to Daryl Jacob before the previous race and the two false starts. If the race had been run on time, we’d have got a different result. Nine times out of ten, either Bobs Worth or Silviniaco Conti would win that race; it’s just that at

    that exact moment in time

    , the stars aligned for that particular result.

    Liam Treadwell and whichever racecourse lackey caused the second false start have many questions to answer.

    #471990
    RedRum77
    RedRum77
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1566

    You might just as well say that if Ruby had be riding

    ON HIS OWN

    that it would have won. :lol:

    #471991
    Gladiateur
    Gladiateur
    Participant
    • Total Posts 996

    You might just as well say that if Ruby had be riding

    ON HIS OWN

    that it would have won. :lol:

    Would that be the same Ruby Walsh who hasn’t ridden a steeplechase winner at the festival for five years?

    :wink:

    #472013
    ricky lake
    ricky lake
    Participant
    • Total Posts 2413

    A very interesting initial question posed by the Ginger one , well worth some thought imo , I am loathe to rubbish anything that prufrock publishes , as simply put he is on another level when it comes to race analysis

    The simple explanation is the best in most cases …here it is

    Silviano did not get home , he led at the last ….Bobs had enough at that point the ground was too fast for him , the closers all swamped the front runners because on the gold cup course

    you HAVE to stay

    …they had stamina in abundance , if the contest went on for another furlong they would have pulled 25 lengths clear

    Its about the best staying chaser , yesterday showed that once again ….lets enjoy it , Im sure the bookies did :mrgreen:

    Ricky

    #472044
    thisthatandtother
    thisthatandtother
    Member
    • Total Posts 152

    stilvi
    15 Mar 2014, 07:21
    Agree with BH there are some races that are just not worth the time analysing to death. This is one of them.

    Couldn’t agree more. Still haven’t watched the race, heard the result and that was enough. Bog standard handicappers first and second in the blue riband of NH racing – what next?

    #472046
    Gingertipster
    Gingertipster
    Participant
    • Total Posts 24125

    The simple explanation is the best in most cases …here it is

    Silviano did not get home , he led at the last ….Bobs had enough at that point the ground was too fast for him , the closers all swamped the front runners because on the gold cup course

    you HAVE to stay

    …they had stamina in abundance , if the contest went on for another furlong they would have pulled 25 lengths clear

    Its about the best staying chaser , yesterday showed that once again ….lets enjoy it , Im sure the bookies did :mrgreen:

    Ricky

    It’s certainly possible Conti didn’t stay Ricky. Bob’s Worth has form on good ground that (up to that point) was his best. So doubtful ground was an issue; especially with his action. Might have been not fast enough, but that’s also out because he made ground up when the pace was at its strongest. May be he just had an off day (or even year)? His Irish win nowhere near the Gold Cup winning form.

    For whatever reason (may be it does not matter why) the two best horses ran poorly, third best injured during the race… so someone had to win. However, for future races/form study – I like to understand why things happened.

    value is everything
    #472060
    The Young Fella
    The Young Fella
    Blocked
    • Total Posts 2106

    On His Own must have been showing something to get supplemented, but you’d think he is a low 160s horse nowadays if you are being very generous. The Giant Bolster is established in that ballpark and Lord Windermere’s RSA Chase win was no great shakes, so it does all point to a poor Gold Cup. It wouldn’t be the first in recent years though.

    We had to endure War Of Attrition and Kicking King as admirable yet mediocre winners, the forcefield of misfortune that seemed to kill off or injure every other possible 170+ staying chaser of Best Mate’s era and Synchronised’s year.

    Classic or even above-average Gold Cups are rare birds. We have only had Kauto Star (x2), Denman, Long Run (arguable) and perhaps the much underrated See More Business fitting that bill in the last fifteen years.

    It’s all subjective I suppose. I see a lot of people on forums and social media saying this was the worst Gold Cup ever, but I think they have short memories.

    #472075
    AndyRAC
    AndyRAC
    Participant
    • Total Posts 320

    It might have been an exciting race, but quality wise it’s debatable. So many horses in contention turning in, and still there jumping the last, probably suggests it’s only an ‘average’ running.

    Winning a Championship race doesn’t make you a Champion, especially after running poorly in previous races. So I’d still think Bob’s Worth is still the top 3m chaser, with SC and CC close behind.

    It just proves you have to be a special horse to win both at Kempton and Cheltenham.

    #472082
    SirHarryLewis
    SirHarryLewis
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1201

    We had to endure War Of Attrition and Kicking King as admirable yet mediocre winners, .

    Tad Harsh on Kicking King I would suggest. His CV was pretty up to scratch.

    SHL

    #472093
    freeradical
    freeradical
    Member
    • Total Posts 340

    Had Lord Windemere been with another stable e.g. Emma Curtis with a fairly well publicized health issue in the yard earlier in the year, this result would perhaps not be looked not so surprising. Culloty’s horse’s were dismal over the Christmas period. The trainer said it himself, at Cheltenham you need to be patient, so in some ways LW pace was key rather than the pace of the others.

    #472104
    The Young Fella
    The Young Fella
    Blocked
    • Total Posts 2106

    We had to endure War Of Attrition and Kicking King as admirable yet mediocre winners, .

    Tad Harsh on Kicking King I would suggest. His CV was pretty up to scratch.

    You might be right there and he might have just been a victim of the era. Look at all of his biggest achievements and he never beat a true top-notcher at the highest level – just a bunch of pitsy marshmallows.

    #472131
    steeplechasing
    steeplechasing
    Participant
    • Total Posts 5293

    You don’t go into a championship race with two horses around 180 – trained to the minute – and come out of it with a field full of 160ish horses – it just doesn’t happen imo. The Gold Cup time was less than seven seconds faster than The Foxunters, run 40 minutes or so after the big race.

    The rails were moved yesterday morning "between 7 and 11 yards on the inside of the ‘chase course" (Simon Claisse), offering a strip of ground that had not been raced on for a year. Given that the year also saw an unprecedented amount of water falling on it, and that most of the field raced on that strip for most of the race – except the finish

    where the first three came up on older ground

    – could that have something to do with the result?

    The going announced was for the whole track – I wonder if Mr Claisse used his stick on that fresh strip? I’d be very interested to see a stick reading from it.

    An unusual pace can, of course, throw up a strange result. But Geraghty reported that he thought they were going a stride to fast for BW throughout; the winner could not go the pace at all until turning in for the last time. And yet the time was nothing special.

    Yesterday was Lord Windermere’s first win on ground without soft in the official description (Timeform gave it as Good, Good to Soft in places). Bobs Worth’s connections have always insisted he is a better horse on decent ground – there’s insufficient evidence in the formbook to form a solid objective assessment of that claim.

    Anyway, it’s nothing more than a theory on what was a very strange day at Cheltenham, all in all. Bobs Worth’s poor run at Haydock and the general form of the Henderson yard could also be seen as casting some doubt on his running. But I’m not having it that Silv Conti didn’t get the trip after bottomless stamina won him the King George. That race, of course, might have left a mark on him, so the front two could, conceivably have run well below form. Whatever happened, seven minutes didn’t turn two horses with a ratings advantage of between 16/19lbs and 25/28lbs into a pair of donkeys.

    Never argue with a fool. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience, then onlookers might not be able to tell the difference. https://lazybet.com/

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 56 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.