1000 Guineas 2015

I agree with you Ginger, there is a doubt about her stamina lasting out. I’m taking the view that she is the classiest horse in the race and it hasn’t yet been proved she won’t stay the mile. Her last race wasn’t that encouraging, I’m not ducking that issue, but she wouldn’t be the first horse to bounce back from a slightly lacklustre run.

If she runs anything like her best, she has to be in the shake up and I thought that the 20/1 (first 4) with PP was just too good not to take the chance.

I see that as I type this, she has halved in price, it won’t be from mug punters chancing £15 e/w like me that will have caused a shift like that in a race like this. Hannon’s horses are often bet down if there is a degree of stable confidence, I’m hoping that is where the money is coming from. I hope she rewards us both for keeping a little faith in her.

What a freak of a jockey, seriously! Must admit I genuinely didn’t have this filly as a miler. On the other hand, so much for the Fred Darling 1-2! Aside from Tiggy Wiggy that is, hats off to those who thought she will run a big one here.

SeaBirdII wrote:

What a freak of a jockey, seriously! Must admit I genuinely didn’t have this filly as a miler. On the other hand, so much for the Fred Darling 1-2! Aside from Tiggy Wiggy that is, hats off to those who thought she will run a big one here.

I agree Seabird, as I mentioned in the 2000 Guineas thread, he is simply the best jockey on the planet. Well done to Ryan, Legatissimo and Lucida both look very decent. I was completely happy with Tiggy Wiggy’s run, she was beaten by two better horses, but she didn’t disgrace herself at all, setting a blistering pace and keeping on for a well deserved third. That will do nicely

Only really watched the race once and best horse on the day won. However, my instant reaction was that if the first two meet again over a mile, I would be all over Lucida to reverse this form.

The winner has the advantage to two runs already and I think the good pace has set the race up for her. You would have to doubt it will get such a nice pace in future races and I think Lucida became a great target for the horse to aim at.

I think the winner will prove a better horse at 10f

I see Marsh Hawk went off the 11/5 fav yesterday at Dusseldorf in the Henkel-Stutenpreis listed event over a mile and finished dead last beaten 32 lengths.
Back to the drawing board for that one.

lushlashes wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>IBRacing wrote:</div>
I’m another that wouldn’t have picked the winner with ten picks. Congrats to anyone that did.

I was on Lucida but not heavily as I thought this was a very open race and I’m not convinced it will turn out to be a particularly good Guineas.

Well Gleaneagles is being hailed as ‘exceptional’ and the 1000 guineas was 3 seconds faster on the same ground. I think that alone means that the first two home are equally exceptional.

You can’t compare the times for the two Guineas races and form any strong conclusion.

This is my pet hate with these vague going reports and trying to trust them implicitly.

You need to compare the relative times for all the races on both days to find out what the conditions were for each day.

There was a headwind on Saturday and all of the comparative times for the same distances over the two days were in the order of three seconds faster on the Sunday.

A couple of examples were:-

The 1m 1f race won by Balty Boys on Saturday was timed at 1.51.70
The 1m 1f race won by Bragging on Sunday was timed at 1.48.33

The 6f race on Saturday won by Twilight Son was timed at 1.13.50
The 6f race on Sunday won by Eastern Impact was timed at 1.09.82

Quite clearly the conditions on Sunday were much more conducive to faster times and there is nothing at this stage to suggest Lucida or Legatissimo are exceptional. Time will tell if they are even average for Guineas 2nd and 1st.

I backed Lucida at 14/1 (win only unfortunately), and I think on another day the result may have been different. The winner won well in the end but events somewhat conspired against the Bolger horse.

Having broken poorly, Manning had two options: to sit and hope for a split, or take action and pull the filly wide. At the time, I was happy enough that he made a decision and did something proactive, but in hindsight he’d probably have been better off waiting in the hope for a gap. With the new cut off, there was actually quite a bit of room, and Moore had oceans of space to come through on the winner.

Added to breaking poorly and being pulled out wide, Manning may have sent Lucida for home a fraction early. I’d find it hard to be too critical though, as he was probably quite unaware of what was happening well inside him and Tiggy Wiggy and Fadhayyil looked the ones he had to beat at that point.

I felt that the winner’s energy was probably used far more efficiently than the runner-ups, and should they meet in a decent ground Irish Guineas I’d give Lucida a good chance of reversing the form.

seethesun wrote:

I think there is an argument for both sides though, especially based on the two examples given.

You would fully expect there to be a time difference between Balty Boys and Bragging as there is a class difference between both horses.

The debate over Twighlight Son and Eastern Impact has a big pace difference to consider too. A bigger field of approx 18 runners are nearly always going to produce a quicker time than a race of 6-7 runners.

So I would not be so sure that Sunday was more conducive to quicker times, compared with the Saturday. It’s very difficult to gauge. I felt both Guineas were a good test, but I feel the 1000G was won by the best 10f horse in the field. The 2000G was won by the best miler in the field.

I don’t think it is difficult to gauge at all. Almost all the races were faster on the Sunday than the Saturday. It’s a ball park guide of course and the pace comes into it to some extent but three second gaps, pretty consistently over the two days is as certain as you can get that the conditions were set for better times on the Sunday.

I don’t pay too much heed to the class difference angle. Handicapper Dandy Boy clocked a faster time than Black Caviar, carrying 1 lb more, at Royal Ascot over the same course and distance on the same day as Australia’s super mare. She was rated 26 lbs superior and she was all out to win.

The only race over the two days which wasn’t faster on the Sunday was the 5f race, which was slower on the Sunday. I didn’t include it, not because it didn’t fit the argument, but because it would have been a ridiculous comparison, with a 2yo maiden on the Sunday versus a 5yo sprinter on the Saturday. The 2yo horse was carrying the bigger weight of the two as well, and on weight for age, not to mention any handicap ramifications, he would have been due a shed load of weight from the older horse.

I think it would be folly to assume that it wasn’t faster on the Sunday and as my last evidence on the subject I will cite the two 1 and a half mile races over the two days.

1m 4f Saturday won by Second Step was timed at 2.32.37

1m 4f Sunday won by Asteroneus was timed at 2.29.02

Both horses carried nine stone but Second Step was rated seventeen pounds higher on 110 to Asteroneus on 93 and they are the same age.

Despite the small field on Saturday, Odeon set a good pace from the front and Pether’s Moon went after him first. Both horses seemed to pay for it late on as they weakened badly and the class horse Telescope took over but he was mowed down by Second Step in the closing stages. How a horse rated more than a stone lower, could have run a time 3.35 seconds faster the following day cannot be explained away by a faster pace, which is the only logical reason left as to why it would have been faster, had conditions been equal on the two days.

People can choose to believe what they want and that’s the joy of racing but I would exercise caution in thinking that Legatissimo could run three seconds faster than Gleneagles if they met in a race.

The Racing Post have Gleneagles on 123 and Legatissimo on 116 so he’s in front on that score. Time will tell if both or either rating is accurate, but I would be concerned about the fillies race more. I don’t know what mark Tiggy Wiggy is deemed to have run to, but it clearly wasn’t her 117 figure. The concern I have is that despite being happy with how she ran, the Hannon team are now dropping her down from a mile. That is surely some indication that she hasn’t run near her best at the mile trip. The two horses who beat Tiggy Wiggy in the Fred Darling both ran stinkers in the 1000 Guineas and Tiggy Wiggy would have beaten them without running any better than she did in The Fred Darling. How strong is the race from the fourth horse downwards? It’s a bit a of a guessing game for now and Gleneagles was also having his first run, at a time when his stable have been having enough disappointments. He won comfortably, whereas it was hard work between the other two fillies. These are the reasons that make his performance more exciting I would think.

One of the stopwatch boys might have figures for the two days but in my mind it was patently faster by a fair way on the Sunday.

I’m taking the three seconds faster than Gleneagles with a Siberian Salt Mine for now.