- This topic has 255 replies, 44 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Anyway, if you want a figure, I’d add Dan’s 35lbs to Bristol De Mai rather than taking it off Cue Card – we are talking their official ratings here – and for this race only would give Bristol De Mai a figure of 195.
Doesn’t sound as if you’re accepting Cue Card is on the decline.
Value Is EverythingSteve, I’d hate to think anybody ‘needed my approval’. And I don’t need anything from you either. Some people are inclined to admit when they are wrong or have misunderstood something and some are inclined to try to cover up their embarrassment by insulting the person they deem responsible for highlighting it. You know which category you’re in so, no, I don’t need anything from you.
There’s nothing more I can usefully add here. I respect everybody’s opinion, while disagreeing with a few, and I’ve largely enjoyed the debate. Roll on Kempton.
You admitted yourself that you didn’t understand the way ratings and times didn’t seem to tie in and that is why I suggested you were out of your depth. You are putting forward a notion that is at odds with assessors and time specialists. It is at variance with everything I learned in Mathematical analysis when I was at university.
In any data set a standout figure has to be treated with suspicion and we have more than twenty figures for Bristol De Mai that are at odds with the one figure from Saturday.
As Gingertipster has said, when looking at a “field” running badly, you have to put it into perspective. Shantou Flyer and Traffic Fluide were pretty much no hopers coming in. Tea For Two has never looked consistent to me and he ran 40 lbs below his mark in a Handicap last time, a Handicap where the winner Smad Place ran like a box of rawl plugs next time. Outlander was listed as “Inconsistent” in a preview for the Betfair and his Lexus win has not yielded another winning horse since. That leaves Cue Card, who has been on the canvas more than Rembrandt of late and his Handicap mark has been going down steadily this past while.
Cue Card was dropped another 2 lbs for last Saturday’s run but he clearly ran nowhere near that new figure of 166 in the Betfair. The Tizzards have suggested they will look for an easier target for Cue Card next time, suggesting they may finally be accepting that age has caught up with a horse whose jumping has deserted him at the top level,particularly when he has to go faster than he was capable/able to go in the conditions, last time.
The bulk of the authors on this forum have simply taken the view that only one horse ran its race in the Betfair, and based on similar results in the past, and how it panned out moving forwards, that seems the sensible view.
I have nothing to retract as erroneous here. I am not the one suggesting that a horse has broken an age-old framework and may have beaten Arkle at his peak.
Given all the evidence, and the lessons from History, the very strong likelihood is that Bristol De Mai won in a manner that will not be reflected in future. He beat non-stayers, no hopers, a poor Lexus winner and a horse with rattled confidence who is ageing and deteriorating in form.
If Bristol De Mai routs his field on better ground at Kempton, I will be the first to admit I got it completely wrong and will rattle the Turkey drumstick across my bonce.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
Roll on Kempton.
There’ll probably still be arguments even after Kempton except if he hacks up by 10+ lengths. Even though he was an easy winner, he put in a relentless gallop, that which we can agree on, and in the ground this must haven taken its toll. Although a month between races you could easily see BDM bombing at Kempton and even pulling up. I for one won’t be saying Haydock was a fluke if this was to happen. It was a top class performance just not the best of the last 50 years.
Credit to Steeplechasing – the kid has taken a hell of a pounding in this thread but keeps on coming back for more! Huge left hook from Ginger, crunching uppercut from Stevecaution but he still won’t hit the canvas.
While I’m willing to accept Bristol De Mai is an improved horse this season (only young, notably was still pulling three-out in the Gold Cup after being too keen all the way), I think it’s hugely A-grade to take that performance at face value.
The clamour to give a specific rating to a horse immediately after a performance just seems ridiculous in this case. I just don’t see how anyone – no matter whether they are coming at this from a visual, stopwatch or holistic angle – can have any sort of confidence in assigning any rating to that performance. We have the big P and little p symbols so I’d suggest all authorities implement a ? symbol too. That could indicate an ‘informed guess’ for special cases like this and would be open to amendment once future evidence comes to light.
Homer, Chiming in one last time to correct – and many others have seen it the way you have – the belief that I said it was the greatest performance in the past 50 years. It wasn’t and I didn’t. I said it was the most extraordinary performance. Had he taken 30 minutes to complete the race, that too would have been extraordinary.
I wonder how much of the backlash I’ve received has arisen from people misinterpreting the meaning of one word.
Homer, Chiming in one last time to correct – and many others have seen it the way you have – the belief that I said it was the greatest performance in the past 50 years. It wasn’t and I didn’t. I said it was the most extraordinary performance. Had he taken 30 minutes to complete the race, that too would have been extraordinary.
I wonder how much of the backlash I’ve received has arisen from people misinterpreting the meaning of one word.
What other horse of the last 50 years ran to 195?
Value Is EverythingI think is worth considering expectations of connections and pundits before the Betfair on Saturday.
Just at random I looked at the Liverpool Echo.
The connections of Bristol De Mai stated that they felt the Betfair Chase was probably Bristol De Mai’s “Gold Cup” because of his like for the track and soft ground. They were hopeful, rather than bullish.
Cue Card was reported as having to be respected as a three time winner but his falling and advancing years were cited as reasons for passing on him for the Betfair. Tea For Two was mentioned for beating Cue Card previously but ruled out for running poorly first time up this year (Two stones lower than when beating Cue Card according to Racing Post figures)
Last season Tea For Two ran to 154 on his first start and 157 on his next run, so it’s not like he was likely to come on a ton for the race, in fact his effort in the Old Roan chase was the lowest RPR he had ever recorded in a Chase prior to the Betfair debacle. The connections of Tea For Two seem to have said little coming in to the Betfair but surely there was little reason to be bullish.
Gordon Elliott summed up Outlander as being “A bit hit and miss” adding that “We just have to hope he is on a going day”
The Liverpool Echo summarised by simply saying that “Shantou Flyer and Traffic Fluide are also running”
When you take it all into context there wasn’t really much expectation and most were hopeful at best.
In the end the official handicapper summed it up thus:-
“I want to give the horse credit for what he appears to have achieved,” Smith said. “You could come up with a figure that’s off the scale for a performance like that but I think that would be irresponsible, when there were clearly concerns about the opposition provided on the day.”
Smith said the beaten horses, Cue Card, Outlander and Tea For Two had “massively underperformed” in attritional conditions.
Believe what you will.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
No its 3 words – one nine five 😉
That’s an amazing coincidence.
I was talking to Celtic manager Brendan Rodgers last Friday and asked him what formation he would employ if meeting Paris St Germaine again. He quickly replied 1-9-5
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
Timeform have rated Bristol De Mai 173+ and noted that it is hard to be confident about rating the race with absolute certainty.
They observed that Cue Card “Looked a shadow of the horse who had won the race previously” and they dropped his rating by 7 lbs.
Outlander was said to have “Continued his up and down profile” with an “Awkward display”, while Tea For Two “Seemed to find the extreme test at the trip too much”
All fairly obvious observations I would have thought.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
What other horse of the last 50 years ran to 195?
No its 3 words – one nine five 😉
Fair play. You both have me in checkmate there :)
Just to clarify my posts on this thread.
I am in no way questioning Steeplechasing’s knowledge of horse racing. His experience and expertise in Jumps racing is far in excess of mine. I respect Joe as a terrific judge.
My issue is solely with the rating he has given for Bristol De Mai here. I strongly feel it will be proved a freak performance. I also feel Joe has got it wrong in giving Cue Card and the others credit for running anything like their best.
I apologise for using the unfortunate term “Out of your depth”, that was merely referring to awarding such a high figure for this one race, it was in no way referring to anything generally, simply the one race. I am sorry if it came across as doubting Joe’s experience and excellent knowledge of the sport that forms his username. Joe is as excellent an analyst of horses physical jumping mechanics as I have seen.
In this race I felt it wise to avoid taking the performance at face value and I remain confident that this will surface as the fact in due course.
I am sorry if it came across otherwise. Joe is one of the best writers on the internet and in no way was I trying to undermine that fact. All I was saying is that I think he is massively wrong in his interpretation of the one race here. Sorry Joe.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
No worries, Steve. It was the hottest topic I’ve ever posted if blowback is anything to go by. From my blog to here to my twitter feed there was a huge reaction. Everyone stands by their position.
I don’t think I changed any minds. The core of my concern was and is that I think racing treats outlier performances like Bristol De Mai unfairly. The jousting that built around that proposal was what caused most of the ‘trouble’ because racing folk need above all else (and I completely understand it) to pin everything to numbers and comparisons (it bears repeating – I TOTALLY understand that need).
My secondary point was that no matter the level of desire for nailing a figure to a performance, sometimes you simply cannot. You are doing nothing but guessing. Educated guesses perhaps, but guesses all the same. Even Phil Smith.
“When you win a race like that, it’s almost impossible to try and put up a sensible figure,” says BHA Head of Handicapping Phil Smith, the man tasked with the job of putting a number on Bristol De Mai’s 57-length Betfair Chase romp at Haydock on Saturday. (sportinglife.com)
Anyway, I’m now definitely done with it here although I’ll blog again soon on the basic premise of handicap ratings.
I am in no way questioning Steeplechasing’s knowledge of horse racing. His experience and expertise in Jumps racing is far in excess of mine. I respect Joe as a terrific judge.
I apologise for using the unfortunate term “Out of your depth”, that was merely referring to awarding such a high figure for this one race, it was in no way referring to anything generally, simply the one race. I am sorry if it came across as doubting Joe’s experience and excellent knowledge of the sport that forms his username. Joe is as excellent an analyst of horses physical jumping mechanics as I have seen.
I am sorry if it came across otherwise. Joe is one of the best writers on the internet and in no way was I trying to undermine that fact. All I was saying is that I think he is massively wrong in his interpretation of the one race here. Sorry Joe.
Hear, Hear Steve. I would definitely have doubted myself if yourself and GT, two other excellent judges, hadn’t come to the same conclusion.
On reflection I rated the horse 175. I thought it was better than a 170 but not a 180 performance so just went halfway. But again this was probably a pure guess. Hopefully he and/or some other horse can reach these lofty heights Joe is talking about as we need another superstar in this division. Hopefully Douvan & Altior can get over their problems to the fly the flag in the two mile division. At the end of the day I think all Racing fans want horses to capture not just the fans but the general public’s imagination to keep racing in the news for the right reasons.
I can’t say I’ve stayed in touch with this thread in the aftermath but does that 33s for the Gold Cup look good or what now for BDM..
It does seem good but I can’t get away from the fact that he’s 3/3 at Haydock on Soft/Heavy whilst 0/2 at Cheltenham on Good. Plenty of rain before or during the festival would help his chances. I wouldn’t be too disheartened if he disappointed at Kempton as the race must have taken a bit out of him no matter how easy it looked. He’s got a month so he could be OK. Bookies aren’t convinced either as he’s a general 10-12/1, certain to go for the GC barring injury, the same price as Douvan.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.