The home of intelligent horse racing discussion
The home of intelligent horse racing discussion

King George VI and Queen Elizabeth Diamond Stakes 2006

Home Forums Big Races – Discussion King George VI and Queen Elizabeth Diamond Stakes 2006

Viewing 17 posts - 35 through 51 (of 93 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #74187
    ratpack
    Member
    • Total Posts 96

    and there was me thinking he was a slow boat:o

    #74188
    Shadow Leader
    Member
    • Total Posts 763

    Maybe so, tdk.  I’m happy enough though! ;)

    #74189
    deltaman
    Member
    • Total Posts 190

    ‘Heart’s Cry’ for me, the only horse to beat ‘Deep Impact’ and would have won the Japan Cup…beaten by ‘Alkaased’ (after Frankie halfed thrashed it to death!) but no ‘shock to see the Electric one finish like a train as in the Dubai World Cup, sod it! I’ve just talked myself out of a bet!         ;)

    #73828
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Total Posts 438

    Quote: from The Market Man on 6:34 pm on July 28, 2006[br]Sorry but for me this is an extremely poor and boring King George.

    <br>Wouldn’t go that far; of course it’s disappointing that there are only six runners and two of those have no chance (Maraahel will acquit himself with credit but shouldn’t be good enough to trouble the three market leaders) and it’s even more depressing that not a single three-year-old is taking on the established stars this year. However, no race featuring the Arc winner, the close second in the Japan Cup (who has twice beaten Ouija Board, last time most comprehensively) and a dual Group One winner from Godolphin could ever be called "poor."

    #73829
    Avatar photoPurwell
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1615

    Of course it’s a poor race, 6 runners FFS!

    I've stumbled on the side of twelve misty mountains
    I've walked and I crawled on six crooked highways
    #74190
    stevedvg
    Member
    • Total Posts 1137

    I was glad to see the front 3 in the betting all running well.

    Hopefully the good run from Hearts Cry will encourage them to bring him back for the Arc.

    (and encourage Deep Impact’s connections to bring him too)

    Steve

    #74191
    Avatar photoRacing Daily
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1416

    With doubts over a couple of the big three, I plumped for Enforcer to place.  Ran a good race for a 50/1 shot, beating Maraahel home and finishing well.<br>Hope no-one layed HR.  It was not a good option.

    #74192
    Luis Martin
    Member
    • Total Posts 15

    I don´t think Electro has any problem staying 12f.<br>I think he would improve with the addiction of blinkers though.

    #73830
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Total Posts 438

    Well, that was rubbish, wasn’t it?

    #74193
    Avatar photoRacing Daily
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1416

    Quote: from EC on 5:20 pm on July 29, 2006[br]electro definately a play though at 9/2<br>

    Definately.  Even an e/w bet would have been a bet to nothing at those odds.  However, I couldn’t have predicted 9/2.  If you don’t mind backing drifters, then it was good value.

    #73831
    The Market Man
    Member
    • Total Posts 396

    Quote: from yquem21 on 6:53 pm on July 29, 2006[br]Well, that was rubbish, wasn’t it?

    <br>It was fairly predictable to be honest. A stronger gallop and slightly softer surface and Hurricane Run would’ve won a bit more easily, he’s got a bit in hand of the likes of Electrocutionist and Hearts Cry over a mile and a half.

    I wouldn’t put Hurricane Run on a par with the best horses in history but he’s very good and his 133 RPR is deserved. I don’t always think these ratings are accurate when you look at Sir Percy’s 121 and the most ludicrous rating ever a few years back when Celtic Swing was awarded a Timeform rating of 138 as a two year old (whoever gave that rating should’ve been sacked its so ridiculous) but I think Hurricane Runs is accurate enough give or take a pound or two. Electrocutionist and Hearts Cry are good group one performers but nothing out of this world, should be rated somewhere in the mid to late 120’s IMO.

    (Edited by The Market Man at 10:05 pm on July 29, 2006)

    #73832
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Total Posts 438

    Quote: from The Market Man on 10:01 pm on July 29, 2006[br]It was fairly predictable to be honest.

    <br>Predictable it may have been but it was an exciting finish contested by three very good horses. A poor race? I don’t think so.

    #73833
    schumi
    Member
    • Total Posts 166

    i don’t know what some of you people want in a race but that was great, i think Frankie could have rode a better race but i fully believe there was no hard luck story. HR was beaten like a dog and came back to give CS his first winner in Ascot. What a finish, someday i’ll back a winner!!!!!!

    #73834
    guskennedy
    Member
    • Total Posts 759

    Quote: from The Market Man on 10:01 pm on July 29, 2006[br]the most ludicrous rating ever a few years back when Celtic Swing was awarded a Timeform rating of 138 as a two year old (whoever gave that rating should’ve been sacked its so ridiculous)

    Would you care to elaborate?

    #73835
    Avatar photoMaxilon 5
    Member
    • Total Posts 2432

    Really enjoyable race contested by three top throughbreds – and the Hurricane was beaten a furlong out. We all knew it.

    Suddenly, he fought back. And won. The mark of a true racehorse. This is a top quality animal and the Arc is going to be a race to savour.

    #73836
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Total Posts 438

    Quote: from Maxilon 5 on 1:26 am on July 30, 2006[br]The mark of a true racehorse.

    <br>While nothing should detract from the winner’s performance, the race analysis in the Racing Post notes that Heart’s Cry came to win his race but then flattened out, as though short of peak fitness. I had thought the same thing watching the race and it’s nice to get some professional agreement, for once.

    #73837
    The Market Man
    Member
    • Total Posts 396

    Quote: from guskennedy on 1:02 am on July 30, 2006[br]

    Quote: from The Market Man on 10:01 pm on July 29, 2006[br]the most ludicrous rating ever a few years back when Celtic Swing was awarded a Timeform rating of 138 as a two year old (whoever gave that rating should’ve been sacked its so ridiculous)

    Would you care to elaborate?<br>

    <br>Elaborate how? Timeform gave Celtic Swing a rating of 138 as a two year old how much elaboration do you want? Put into perspective thats merely 2 pounds behind Dancing Brave and Shergar. If that’s not ridiculous I don’t know what is.

Viewing 17 posts - 35 through 51 (of 93 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.