- This topic has 255 replies, 44 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 5 months ago by
.
- Posts
Very impressive performance – winning a G1 by 57 lengths isn’t something you see too often. But I still think he’s a track/ ground dependent horse. However, I’m willing to change my opinion he performs well at Kempton on better ground.
At the moment, you’d think a better race for him could be in France in May when they do get proper soft ground, but that is probably unlikely.
The horse has only ever won 1 race with the word good anywhere in the going description and that was a novice chase at Warwick when he was in a 4 runner race against horses he was significantly superior to. He was the only horse in yesterdays race who really relishes heavy ground so its not worrying that he won by so far.
Of course it’s a great performance from Bristol but I would want to hold fire about hailing him Arkle reincarnate. I think the ante-post markets have it right and he should make his presence felt at Kempton but I’d imagine a Gold Cup win is unlikely unless the heavens open on the day and Noah’s Ark makes an appearance over Cleeve Hill.
I think SkyBet, Betway & Betvictor have it right by going 14/1 for the Gold Cup. Bet365 and WilliamHill look spineless cutting him down to just 8/1 whilst the 25s available with Unibet and 888 Sport looks generous enough if you think we’re in for a very wet March.
Cue Card retire or not?
Well, on the face of the Racing Post Ratings handed out yesterday, Cue Card ran to a figure of 128, which is 40 lbs below his already declined mark of 168. The Tizzard chaser was rated 180 at his peak by the Racing Paper.
Further problems come from the fact that they had to push Bristol De Mai up to a ridiculous looking 185, in order to have Cue Card running within 3 stones of his current rating.
If we were to accept that Cue Card ran to his current mark yesterday, we have to rate Britol De Mai 225. If we look at it the other way and say Bristol De Mai ran to his previous mark of 160, then Cue Card ran to 103 yesterday.
The truth most certainly lies somewhere between the two scenarios but where exactly?
It seems highly odd that Bristol De Mai would find a huge personal best on his 23rd start, particularly when the figure awarded is one that Kauto Star only bettered once in his career, and is higher than Denman EVER recorded in his career.
I would personally say it was more realistic to give Bristol De Mai 171 and have Cue Card on 114. If he can run three stones below form, then why not four? If Bristol De Mai goes out on Boxing Day and slaughters his field on better racing ground, then the Arklesque ratings can then begin. Until then it’s Walter Mitty stuff in my opinion.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
Anyone that saw ‘BDM’s Peter Marsh romp knew he was a player for yesterdays race…Horses for courses applies to this fellow.I backed him for last seasons Gold cup singing his praises but he wasn’t good enough.If however yesterdays form is to be taken literally and the clock shows he ran 10secs faster than the handicap later on then all the beaten horses ran well below par.’BDM’ goes to Kempton with 2 big guns to beat in ‘Might Bite’ and ‘Thistlecrack’ if he beats them he wins the Gold cup and my theory goes out the window.I can see him winning 4 Betfair chases like ‘King Kauto’ but to add a a coiple of KG’s and a Gold Cup or 2 aswell just seems impossible to me.I like the horse a lot but he fiddles his fences and lands too steeply to be a King George/Gold cup contender..I hope I’m wrong and he wins the Million.
Like to know what drugs the person doing the Racing Post Ratings is on to arrive at their current rating of 185.
Would be interesting to hear exactly what the explanation/justification for assigning that mark is and actually BDM’s mark in general because if you look at how they have rated him since his first Haydock romp in heavy ground on 23 January 2016 it has gone up and down like a sodding yo-yo.
You can’t take performances like that at face value. Another example of wide margin in a grade one in recent times is Apples Jade beating Ivanovich by 41 lengths at aintree. Going into that race both sceau Royal and Roman de senam were rated 141 but she beat one by 48 lengths and the other by 51 lengths, does that mean she ran to a rating of 191? Of course not. Take it with a pinch of salt when such wide margins are recorded unless the horse repeats such wins in a variety of conditions
At the risk of doing this to death . . . I accept that in conventional terms within the structure serious punters have always used, that some graspable interpretation of a performance is necessary, but it would not stand up logically to the man in the street.
Here is the position this convention seems to have left us in:
Had Bristol De Mai not turned up yesterday, the others would very likely have been considered as running to their marks. The race would have been run in a much slower time. As Cue Card didn’t fall I think it’s fair to assume he’d have won, and today the great comeback would have been hailed and instead of an RPR of 128 it’s likely it would have been about 168.
So, instead of what we appear to have today – a whole field not running to their best, to their marks – they’d all be handed much higher RPRs . . . for running the same time or very close to it as they ran yesterday. In fact, given how they finished, let’s say it would have been maybe 3 to 5 seconds slower than yesterday (their time, not Bristol De Mai’s time).
So, for running either the same or more slowly as he did to get a mark of 128, CC gets a mark of 168.
Is that logical to you in trying to measure the merits of a racehorse?
Don’t bombard me please with paragraphs about optimum pace to bring out the best etc., I can buy that when something sets off in front at a mad pace and a couple follow him and all three end up collapsing in a heap to be overtaken by those who laid well off the suicide pace. The difference between such races and yesterday was that the ‘suicide pace’ horse didn’t collapse. He just kept going farther and farther away.
And does our system grant him credit for pulling off such a monumental feat? Er, no, afraid not. Just condemnation of the subsequent plaudits/ratings he does get from some.
I had another lengthy twitter debate on this last night and a common riposte from critics who believed everything else hadn’t run its race was, ‘Oh, it was a wonderful performance by the way, but . . .’
To which I say, make up your mind. You cannot have it both ways. Make a choice between wonderful performance and ‘the rest were crap on the day’.
Will he win the Gold Cup by 57 lengths on good ground? No, he won’t. But does that lessen what he achieved yesterday? Not in my book.
I wonder if the general hype that is everywhere in life these days has blunted general perception of historic performances like Bristol De Mai’s?
The bare facts are that, for the first time in history (to the best of my knowledge) a Grade One steeplechase was won by 57 lengths and by a horse who has probably not yet matured. There was no Foinavon event behind him. There was not a single fall or unseat.
Fifty-seven lengths. Take a few seconds and think about that.
Even as a horse on the way down, do you really think Cue Card did not stay? As you said yourself in a recent post, one thing that tends to improve as horses age is stamina. Look how he battled back today to get second. That might be a very tired horse but it’s not a non stayer.
I suspect Bristol De Mai’s sectionals in the ground will be something to see. He had a couple of them at it turning down the back on circuit two, and had them all under the cosh after jumping five out – that’s an awful long way from home and I believe he just burned them out.
A shame Sizing John wasn’t in the field to give us a better measure of what Bristol De Mai achieved today.
No, I don’t think Cue Card stayed. Cue Card was once fully effective at 2m and at that time probably would not be effective at 3m. Last season he was fully effective at 2m4f to 3m, but at that time may no longer have been effective at a fast 2m. So Cue Card has already stayed further the older he’s got; but every horse reaches a distance he’s not going to stay no matter what age they are.
You would expect a horse that only stays 2m4f to perform better at 3m than a horse that only stays 2m. Similarly… A horse that truly stays 3m and not 3m1f175yrds on very soft ground (the two together are important as they place more emphasis on stamina) will perform over 3m1f175yrds on very soft ground better than one that only truly stays 3m on a speed favouring surface. Therefore Cue Card will perform better in Saturday’s conditions (in the home straight) than Tea For Two who clambered over the last. Doesn’t mean Cue Card stayed the trip.
Value Is EverythingHe put in a great round like acapella bourgeios did last year and he deserves credit for doing so, the ratings hes been giving etc will obviously fall flat unless he gets what he likes, but that dosent take away from his performance there, being so young youd think theres betfair chase victories left in him for a few years yet
I wouldnt put a rating on any of the others yesterday its tough to say what they ran to thats not taking away from BDM,did he deserve a mark of 180 odds for that – probably
Will he maintain that – no
Is he virtually unbeatable at haydock on heavy – probably
It was a weak grade 1 in terms of numbers but the opposition wasnt useless, he routed them and had enough in the locker to probably go round again without being asked
@Steeplechasing
Joe with you 100 per cent on everything you have said about Bristol De Mai and especially with his age in mind he’s progressing fast. I do remember that last season BDM had some problems when he hit his near fore in a race and it caused a lot of soreness pre Cheltenham..This time hopefully he will keep sound and his jumping seems to have improved noticeably this year.Read an interesting piece in the RP last night about BDM’s sire who sadly died last year regarding the unusually high winning margins that his progeny are achieving.
You might have read this but I copy it here for anyone who hasn’t: –Bristol De Mai’s pulverising display in the Betfair Chase at Haydock on Saturday provided further evidence, if it were needed, of the huge loss the National Hunt breeding scene suffered when his sire Saddler Maker was lost to a hind leg fracture at Haras de Cercy in May 2016.
In November alone, the small but highly talented band of Saddler Maker’s progeny that have found their way into British or Irish yards had already landed the Grade 2 Prestbury Juvenile Hurdle (Apple’s Shakira – by 17 lengths); the Listed T A Morris Memorial Mares Chase (Dinaria Des Obeaux – by 22 lengths); the Grade 2 Clonmel Oil Chase (Alpha Des Obeaux); the Grade 2 Lismullen Hurdle (Apple’s Jade) and the Grade 2 Charlie Hall Chase (Bristol De Mai).
The Nigel Twiston-Davies-trained grey Bristol De Mai first etched his name into the story of Saddler Maker, who began to gain traction with breeders on a consistent basis as recently as 2012, when he became his sire’s first top-flight winner with victory in the Future Champions Finale Juvenile Hurdle at Chepstow in 2014.
Having put a remarkable 57 lengths between himself and runner-up Cue Card on Saturday, Bristol De Mai bettered the winning distance achieved by his sire’s other Grade 1 winner, with Apple’s Jade having sauntered to a 41-length success in the Anniversary 4-Y-O Juvenile Hurdle during last year’s Grand National meeting.
Things turn out best for those who make the best of how things turn out...The reason some can’t take BDM win at face value is the Haydock factor as it’s basically just a gaff track these days with its deep ground and trolley fences etc.
If he had won by 57 lengths at a more conventional course like Aintree,Ascot or Newbury then you really could go full on with his rating.Hadn’t realised Saddler Maker was no longer with us; have only recently been taking an interest in his progeny. We’ve lost an awful lot of top NH sires recently.
The race is nowhere near being done to death on this forum, because a fairly obvious factor is being left out when considering times.
Trying to compare times from previous Betfair Chases is a nightmare because the distance has been so inconsistent.
Kingscliff was the first Betfair winner, when the distance was 2 miles 7 furlongs, he clocked 6m 5.40s.
Cue Card won the race over 3 miles 24 yards last season on Heavy ground and he clocked 6m 22.72s.
The major factor this year is that the race was over 3m 1f 125y. Winner Bristol De Mai has won in a time given by the Racing Post as 7m 1s.
Watching the replay on You Tube, it takes Cue Card 14 secs to hit the line after the winner does. That’s a ballpark time of 7m 15s seconds for Cue Card.
When you compare the times, it means that Cue Card was out on the course for 52.28 seconds longer than he was last season.
Rather than talking about sectionals etc, it is more sensible to consider the fact that we are looking at getting on for a minute difference from one year to the next. The ramifications of that need to be discussed before considering anything else. Twitter really isn’t the format for proper scientific analysis.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
There nay be a minute in the difference of cue cards performances but the ground this year must have been heavier than last year, Also races tend to be run a different paces and styles. And also cue card had to use up some energy early on to keep up with BDM in the ground and therefore emptying quicker than usual
GT, another one to amicably disagree on, I think. Cue Card has hammered the likes of Don Poli, Silv Conti, Coneygree and a few others over 24f or more on easy/soft/heavy ground. I can’t have it that he doesn’t stay, especially after that brutal KG he won. I was at Haydock in 2013 when he won his Betfair in soft ground and the image of him staying on to draw clear of a field that included Dynaste, Silv Conti, Bobs Worth, Long Run and Tidal Bay will live long in the memory.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.