- This topic has 74 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 8 months ago by
.
- Posts
Well, he has achieved the feat 14 times now (if I’ve caught them all).
Thanks for debasing your own hypothesis.
I’m not following you?
His results are outstanding, he regularly defies the odds.
What’s your point?What’s your point?
That if something has been done fourteen times, it can’t be that difficult to do!
He has won nearly 300 G1s, and achieved the 1-2-3 in 14 of those 300.
Assuming an average field size of 10 say, probability theory would
indicate that he would have achieved the 1-2-3 in about 8 of those races,
so he’s defying those odds as well.I believe that answers that !
But I can’t believe that you think that achieving a 1-2-3 in a G1 race ‘can’t be that difficult to do’.
Please point out some examples of all the other cases that have happened if it isn’t that difficult to do.Please point out some examples of all the other cases that have happened if it isn’t that difficult to do.
There’s no need for me to do so
Your original assertion was that having the first three in the Arc was the greatest feat of training ever. The fact that training the first three in Group One races happens fairly regularly suggests that, while an incredible achievement, it isn’t unique.
Once AO’B (or any other trainer, for that matter) trains the first six in a championship event, I’ll consider Dickinson’s “Famous Five” surpassed. Until then, I’ll stick to the mathematical fact that 5>3.
Anyone making this particular equation must also take in to account sires. Galileo is THE best sire around and over middle-distances is even more dominent. Galileo being a Coolmore stallion, AOB has far more progeny of the top sire than anyone else. Had the only three horses sired by Galileo in the Arc and at least three others (Minding, Seventh Heaven and US Army Ranger) who were entered and did not run. Take a look at the Dewhurst decs, three of AOB’s six enteries are by Galileo, the only horses by the top sire in the race. AOB/Coolmore also have far more middle-distance bred animals than any other trainer, so will have far more top class/potentially top class middle-distance horses than any other trainer. Next year, look at the first entry stage for the Derrinstown Trial and you’ll see what I mean.
Value Is EverythingPlease point out some examples of all the other cases that have happened if it isn’t that difficult to do.
There’s no need for me to do so
Your original assertion was that having the first three in the Arc was the greatest feat of training ever. The fact that training the first three in Group One races happens fairly regularly suggests that, while an incredible achievement, it isn’t unique.
Once AO’B (or any other trainer, for that matter) trains the first six in a championship event, I’ll consider Dickinson’s “Famous Five” surpassed. Until then, I’ll stick to the mathematical fact that 5>3.
Very poor response, I’m disappointed.
Firstly, I never made such an assertion.
And you can’t follow up with examples to prove your original statement, and you just can’t admit that it only happens regularly for Aidan.
And we all know that it is Aidan O’Brien that is unique here, not just his feat in the Arc, that’s the icing on the cake.
And you’re now moving the goalposts to first 6.
And your maths
There are always begrudgers, while the rest of the world (the vast majority of whom are completely unaware of Dickenson’s 5) hail Aidan’s feat.
Anyone making this particular equation must also take in to account sires. Galileo is THE best sire around and over middle-distances is even more dominent. Galileo being a Coolmore stallion, AOB has far more progeny of the top sire than anyone else. Had the only three horses sired by Galileo in the Arc and at least three others (Minding, Seventh Heaven and US Army Ranger) who were entered and did not run. Take a look at the Dewhurst decs, three of AOB’s six enteries are by Galileo, the only horses by the top sire in the race. AOB/Coolmore also have far more middle-distance bred animals than any other trainer, so will have far more top class/potentially top class middle-distance horses than any other trainer. Next year, look at the first entry stage for the Derrinstown Trial and you’ll see what I mean.
True, but the three horses involved were still relatively unfancied, what was the tricast again?
All had lost their last race. OOSG was running over the distance for the first time, it was the equivalent of a 2 mile chaser running the Gold Cup distance for the first time. Highland Reel was on the go since March. Found was considered the perennial bridesmaid.Firstly, I never made such an assertion.
Look back to the opening post in this thread.
I deduce that you’re relatively new to racing if you haven’t heard of Dickinson’s “Famous Five”; don’t assume that just because you’re oblivious to it means that “the vast majority” of racing followers share your ignorance.
I’ll also assume that you’re blissfully unaware that Sir Michael Stoute trained the first three in the 2009 King George at Ascot, so Aidan’s not the only one who has saddled the 1-2-3 in a big race.
And my maths is perfectly fine, by the way; five is still greater than three.
Take a bow oh my god that is the biggest achievement any trainer has ever done world wide
Before you change it.
Take a bow oh my god that is the biggest achievement any trainer has ever done world wide
Before you change it.
Oh dear, that’s not me.
Firstly, I never made such an assertion.
Look back to the opening post in this thread.
I deduce that you’re relatively new to racing if you haven’t heard of Dickinson’s “Famous Five”; don’t assume that just because you’re oblivious to it means that “the vast majority” of racing followers share your ignorance.
I’ll also assume that you’re blissfully unaware that Sir Michael Stoute trained the first three in the 2009 King George at Ascot, so Aidan’s not the only one who has saddled the 1-2-3 in a big race.
And my maths is perfectly fine, by the way; five is still greater than three.
Never said I hadn’t heard of Dickenson’s 5.
And I’m waiting for the list of 1-2-3s, one doesn’t prove your theory that it happens regularly (Aidan O’Brien aside).
And 5 from 11 is not greater than 3 from 16.
That was my original assertion, that achieving the first 3 in a field of 16 is less likely than achieving first 5 in a field of 11, all factors and variables aside.
That’s a mathematical fact.
One cannot say that Dickenson’s feat is superior based on numbers alone. That’s my only assertion. No other comparison is possible.The chance of Dickenson’s 5 horses filling the first 5 places in an 11 runner field is
5/11 * 4/10 * 3/9 * 2*/8 * 1/7 = 0.00216450.
The chance of O’Brien’s 3 horses filling the first 3 places in a 16 runner field is
3/16 * 2/15 * 1/14 = 0.00178571.
The odds are 1.212 in favour of Dickenson, his chances of the first 5 were 20% greater than Aidan’s first 3.Oh yeah- I’d forgotten that all horses had equal chances in a race.
Here is my original post (and your comment!)
I’m happy to move on from this subject now, and leave it at that.
Gladiateur has completely messed up by getting the wrong person and post (not to mention the accusation of dishonesty). So it’s end of discussion as far as I’m concerned.I’m happy to move on from this subject now, and leave it at that.
Gladiateur has completely messed up by getting the wrong person and post (not to mention the accusation of dishonesty). So it’s end of discussion as far as I’m concerned.My mistake: I didn’t look at who was posting what (I rarely do- I look at the posts, not the poster) and quoted somebody else. Apologies.
I’ll leave it at that, too- although your assertion that 3 from 16 being likely than 5 from 11 is a mathematical fact is based upon the assumption that all outcomes are equally probable.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.