2000 Guineas 2014

The best thing to come out of this years 2000gns is the fact that ‘Long John Glosden’ still cant train a Guineas winner and even when beaten fair and square he still makes pathetic excuses.His horse will win the St James Palace stakes on fast ground irrelevant of what his punter unfriendly trainer says.

Wtf has Gosden done for you to wish that?

Seems you’re the one being "unfreindly".
He’s always very forthcoming and gives his opinion whenever asked for it. That’s surely a good thing for punters, even if you/we sometimes don’t agree with that opinion?

…And John Gosden has won a Guineas, the 1000 Guineas with Lahan.

A lot better for the "punter" than Jonjo.

He’ll probably be odds on come Derby Day.

I notice the winner has entries in the Dante and Derby and has a decent chance on pedigree of staying the longer trip.

If he goes to Epsom I would see no reason why Australia would reverse the form on today’s evidence.

Feel free to have your opinion. The fact is that Australia was always touted as more of a Derby type and he was not beaten far by a horse who had already had a run this season. Anyone can check and see that Hannon horses have a very modest record over middle distances and Aiden O’Brien seems to have half an idea of winning Epsom Derbies. I don’t think much of Night Of Thunder’s chance at Epsom and will bet to that effect. Australia is as low as Evens already while Night Of Thunder is available at 20/1.

Make what you will of those facts.

Credit to the winner. I would have backed him but was convinced he wouldn’t like the ground, too fast, a bit like Kingman 1st and 2nd eh.! wait till they get a bit of cut. Don’t see the problem with the way the race went one of those things, champions have to be versatile and overcome tricky obstacles don’t think Kingman can have too many excuses probably better over 7f than a mile and opposite for NoT.

John Gosden had a face that was a cross between amazement and having just sucked forty lemons. I suspect that, despite all the negativity and threat to pull out if the ground was firm, they were pretty sure they had a horse who would take some beating. I thought that as well but racing has a habit of booting you in the plums just when you feel they are looking nice and juicy.

If the Greenham form had held true they would have had a cosy winner, but today was a different day, different track and different distance and we know that horses are not machines. The winner was allowed to go off at big odds because punters latch on to all sorts of horses for their own reasons.

If Kingman had won by three lengths from Night Of Thunder today I am sure everyone would have looked back and opined that The Greenham was the key race, with Night Of Thunder perhaps closing the gap on Kingman with the run under his belt and the extra furlong having helped him to do so. It could have been expanded that Australia had run well for a Derby type and Kingston Hill had found the hurly burly compared to mud at Doncaster all against him. We might be saying that War Command (shock horror) was perhaps not the greatest Coventry and Dewhurst winner after all the argument on the matter.

That didn’t happen though and somehow a 40/1 winner means the race was unsatisfactory. John Gosden knew where his horse was drawn and they should have tried different tactics if so concerned that the berth was such a factor. Somehow, Night Of Thunder managed to cope with the draw, but then again he had a really high draw in stall

3

On the day, Kingman just wasn’t as good as John Gosden or I thought he was and the Frankel comparisons were proven to be premature and misguided. As Ginger said the Gosden stable has been in less devastating form recently and jt fav Cloudscape ran modestly later in the card. I worry for my Oaks horse Taghrooda tomorrow!

Each to their own but in my opinion that was the most unsatisfactory classic race I think I have ever seen. That is irrespective of any betting implications. It was just a wreck of a race.

Kingman went to post having absolutely hammered Night Of Thunder at Newbury. There were seemingly no excuses for Night Of Thunder. In that race Kingman pounced on Night Of Thunder and basically left him for dead. If Night Of Thunder had been remotely fancied to turn the tables would he really have been sent off a 40/1 chance?

Today the tactics for Kingman would have been quite simple, get as much cover as possible and quicken up to lead inside the final furlong. The split made those tactics virtually impossible to execute successfully. He couldn’t get any cover, Doyle felt he had to get him racing much earlier than ideal and the result was Fallon coming through to pick up the pieces as the second failed to see it out.

The winner may go on to prove himself but today he has taken advantage of a set of circumstances that Newmarket should be doing their utmost to prevent happening again by moving the stalls to the rail.

It seems there were a couple of people here who thought he was too big a price. But perhaps, it was Gosden himself (in spite of APKs feelings) who called it correctly in his pre race interview when he suggested that the impressive victory of his horse last day lent a lot to the others not settling properly. This was repeated by Fallons after the race.

At the end of the day, maybe Kingman might have won with more cover but you dont deserve or always get that in any race and thats what separates the true champions from the very good. The best horse won on the day. There was no real hard luck story.

I have watched the race a few times and, to be honest, there appear to be no hard luck stories. Whatever opinion you may have held about the main market rivals prior to the event, fact is they were both prominent at the business end and were beaten by a very highly regarded animal.

Kingman fans shouldn’t be disappointed. He travelled well and showed another fine turn of foot, but he really slaps the ground and it’s no surprise that he has suffered with a joint problem. It’s folly to assume that he was beaten by a combination of the ground and undulations, which was a pre-race worry of mine. One could argue that eight furlongs was plenty far enough. He was striding on with real purpose at the furlong pole, but was ran out of it inside the final half and Australia was second a stride after the line.

The hype behind Australia was somewhat vindicated and he looks an exciting colt when tackling further – all roads lead to Epsom, He is a real talent, but doesn’t appear to have quite a grasp on the job just yet compared to others. There is significantly more to come.

Of the vanquished, it should be noted that many colts fail to fire in this race. In recent years, Power and Roderic O’Connor were both humbled in this event, but redeemed themselves with victory in the Irish 2,000 Guineas, while Toronado was only fourth last year but gained revenge on Dawn Approach at Goodwood.

It wouldn’t surprise me if a few of the fancied runners left this form well and truly behind.

——————————–

We’ve all done it, but I’m going to respond to a couple of posts I submitted on Page 5 – I get plenty wrong, but a little research goes a long way!! Well done, Bos!!

As it stands, I like the Richard Hannon-trained pair. I have already explained my preference for Toormore, but Richard Hughes adores Night Of Thunder and he looked very promising as a juvenile.

It should also be noted that his sire, Dubawi, has an excellent record in this event during the past five years. He has been responsible for Makfi (1st 33/1), Dubawi Gold (2nd 33/1) and Hermival (3rd 16/1). Night Of Thunder is also trading at generous odds prior to his expected return at Newbury.

I’ve backed both Hannon colts antepost (although they also have an interesting third string in the shape of Shifting Power who is set for the Free Handicap).

Toormore had already gone three-for-three and won a Group 1 before Night Of Thunder even set foot on a racecourse, but word is that Richard Hughes jumped off after Doncaster and said they had a better 2000 Guineas candidate in this chap.

Today the tactics for Kingman would have been quite simple, get as much cover as possible and quicken up to lead inside the final furlong. The split made those tactics virtually impossible to execute successfully. He couldn’t get any cover, Doyle felt he had to get him racing much earlier than ideal and the result was Fallon coming through to pick up the pieces as the second failed to see it out.

The winner may go on to prove himself but today he has taken advantage of a set of circumstances that Newmarket should be doing their utmost to prevent happening again by moving the stalls to the rail.

I would agree with that apart from moving the stalls to the rails, all sorts of interfence occurred when they were on the rails previously.
Overwatering is the problem, good fast consistent ground would have seen them all come down the centre. Did they split into 2 groups last year when the ground was much faster? Newmarket got the race they deserved.

Overwatering is the problem, good fast

consistent

ground would have seen them all come down the centre. Did they split into 2 groups last year when the ground was much faster? Newmarket got the race they deserved.

Must have been very in"consistent" for the two groups to finish so close.

The overwatering encouraged the jockeys to seek out the faster ground, note the 3 different going stick readings across the track, whether it was or not is another question.

Going stick readings of 7.7,7.9 and 8.0 is not good to firm, 9.0 last year was good to firm.

Why all the negativity about an honest reaction from Gosden? I am sure there are plenty of people who could understand his disappointment. If you prefer Teddy Grimthorpe has given the diplomatic version. He is probably just as disappointed but that’s his job.

Any comparison with Frankel was media led and nothing to do with Gosden.

Where has anyone said the race was unsatisfactory purely because it threw up a 40/1 winner? The negatives which you appear to have ignored were entirely directed at the way the race unfolded. I don’t think anyone is arguing that given the way the race was run the best horse won. The question is do you want your classic races run in this manner? A few people on here appear indifferent but I suspect many outside this little bubble might agree that yesterday’s race was effectively ruined as a spectacle.

Perhaps you can enlighten everyone as to what different tactics you would have used on Kingman?

When are you going to stop banging on about War Command? You still appear obsessed with that Coventry Stakes win. Personally, I think he was brilliant on that day but for whatever reason he hasn’t produced that performance again. He was disappointing yesterday but was he really any more disappointing than Toormore? It appears winnning’ this argument was almost more important to you than the actual race itself.

For those who haven’t read your previous on the subject:-

https://theracingforum.co.uk/horse-r … ND#p502073

The game is supposed to be a sport and there is something to be said for being able to accept defeat with good grace. If you saw Graham Wylie and the class way he accepted the defeat of On His Own in the Gold Cup, where he was advised that he might get the race on appeal but refused to pursue that route as it was "unsporting", you would have seen a man who was a credit to the true sporting ethos.

I never blamed Gosden for the Frankel comparison, I merely said that the notion was ill considered. Hype and Gosden go together like water and petrol and he would probably find a negative if asked to write a review of Frankel himself.

It is self evident that the 40/1 winner is causing most of the furore regarding the result. Had the Fav won and the second Fav been second (as was very nearly the case) there would have been little complaint from punters. I find the notion that the draw in a 14 runner race played a big factor and a horse drawn two boxes away from Kingman winning the race backs that up.

Sometimes you have to suffer the draw but with a 14 runner race and plenty of room James Doyle had an important advantage in that he was sitting on a hold up horse. If you watch the race again Kingman is pretty slowly away, perhaps by design, giving Doyle a chance to see where the other jockeys were heading. If cover were such an important factor it surely made sense to be in the bigger group. Being on a hold up horse there is no need to rush across and how many stalls widths would he have needed to cover to join the bigger group before the race began in earnest?

With a turn of foot horse you always wonder how far the horse can travel before the turn of speed becomes less effective and perhaps in Kingman’s case the answer is 8 furlongs.

War Command and his form are an ongoing topic, every time he runs we get a chance to evaluate it further. The game is all about opinions and one opinion was that War Command was a great bet at 7/1 for the 2000G immediately after the Coventry. I didn’t think he was and as the Coventry runners seemed incapable of putting up a win, I had doubts about the form. Other posters have different opinions and defended the form. Excuses were put forward for War Command’s defeat and less exciting wins and I think it should be reasonable to disagree with that and question the horse’s full ability. I await the excuses for him being unable to finish ahead of a soft ground Racing Post trophy winner yesterday but for me he is a horse who won one race in great style at 20/1 who never looked anything like that in his other starts. Everyone posts here with their opinions and while those opinions continue to be challenged it is natural to see it through to the conclusion. The record now shows War Command wasn’t a good bet at 7/1 for the 2000G and (for whatever reason) he never played a part in the race. If it bothers you that much don’t read my input.