- This topic has 106 replies, 28 voices, and was last updated 18 years ago by
.
- Posts
I am convinced, from what I saw on TV and, from what the local residents have told us, that the ground at Ascot was very WET. I leave the description of the going for others to argue over.
Now, until it can be proven that the unusual times stem from inaccurate race distances, I shall assume that those horses that managed to run well on wet ground, when others seemed to flounder, had some sort of natural advantage in the conditions.
In other words, the "fast" horses were able to find their feet. Now, unless this is a purely physical attribute of the horses in question, I shall suggest again that we look at the actual make-up of the track material for clues.Can some animals find a good solid purchase under the wet top, while others cannot?
Certainly, on the AW, we find that some horses can cope and others don’t.Finally, I think that training methods could be another important factor in this. Sometimes, we see an animal that appears to romp through everything and anything. Just one of those things? You tell me.
Sean Rua.
I have little doubt that plenty of horses didn’t act on the ground, whatever the time based going was…
There is every chance that all bar Tamarinbleu ran way below form in the Chandler imo and rating the winner in the 170s on the back of this looks an overraction. I think Timeform’s 165 with a big ? next to it looks a reasonable conclusion.
Reet
Hardly unusual for a horse of any quality to need some driving to the finish at Sandown. In fact its almost a prerequisite
But it seems to be true that TM’s best performances have been at the minimum distance on flattish tracks
I think the yardstick here is Hoo la Baloo. Hes a pretty consistent animal yet ran an absolute stinker. Hes coped ok with official soft going before (but still better on good ) but hes never raced on heavy in this country and ran poorly in that going in france
Ascot and to a lesser degree York remind me very much of what used to happen at Happy Valley in HK when it was very wet.
There they race on sandmesh which can cope with astonishing amounts of rainfall and still on times ride far faster than expected or jockeys report.The other feature was despite the good times the distances first to last was massive and they finished strung out like it was a bog.
This puzzled me a lot and after speaking to ground staff and jockeys the conclusion I came to was that in these conditions the ground became very shifty underfoot.
For some reason , physical or mental, many horses completely failed to handle it and hence were beaten from an early stage and a long way at the finish.
Those that did cope could run good time but they finsihed physically very tired and always needed to be proven stayers at the trip, presumably as the physical exertion of pushing off such ground was quite great.It strikes me that Ascot and to a lesser degree York seem to replicate these conditions in wet weather so I must surmise they have a higher than average sand content in the soil.
It means front runners doing well is explained by the fact that so many horses completely fail to that only a small sample are left who by definition as they are not struggling in the ground appear to race handily.
Just a thought to throw into the mix.
P.S In HK they seldom reproduced level of form back on conventional going.
Would not Sandown come in to that category?
Where Twist Magic won the Tingle Creek on softish ground.I think it might be more to do with the surface not bedded down propperly yet, on a new course.
The front runners were surely horses known to like racing up with the pace, not horses that just found themselves there. Lough Derg, Tamarinbleu, Labelthou, even the two that went too fast, Marodima and Mahogany Blaze. All known to be prominent runners.
York does give a similar effect, though there too prominent runners seem to have an advantage especially up to a mile.
Value Is EverythingI have made this point on other threads, but the distance between Twist Magic and Hoo La Baloo was about what you would expect on official ratings.
Also, take Tamarinbleu out of the race and we wouldn’t be debating the race at all – everyone would be claiming Twist Magic only has to turn up at Cheltenham to win the QM.
I think Paul Nicholls rather unsportingly refused to acknowledge Tamarinbleu’s achievement (unlike Alan King accepting defeat graciously in the Tingle Creek).
Yes the field finished strung out, but that is often the case when a proven staying front runner runs his rivals "ragged". Rememebr Carvills Hill’s demolition jobs for instance.
It is so often the case that when a "talking horse" from a top yard gets turned over at odds on, the media and public alike look for excuses. One could argue Twist Magic’s fall in the Arkle was because he was starting to empty. I know it didn’t look like that, but on Saturday’s evidence, in a truly run race on a stiff track he was found wanting.
With all the respect in the world Richard, I think you are looking far too deeply into this. Personally Twist Magic is a cast iron lay for the QM now, and if the ground were to be testing, a place lay to boot!
- Total Posts 17716
I doubt anyone could ever convince me that any racing surface which remains constant throughout the race confers advantage on front runners or otherwise. Fair enough, kickback can make a difference, as can course configuration, but both have logical foundations, whereas I have yet to see any sensible argument that shows a solid reason for the so called ‘York effect’.
Nor could I accept that, whatever the ground and however patchy it was at at Ascot, it wasn’t the same for all the horses, no matter whereabouts they were positioned in their races. It just does not make sense!Dont think Sandown has any of the ‘shifty’ ground characteristcs on the chase course at all.
Is a fair point about the front runners but could argue Marodima was beaten so far he out he was one who failed to handle it.
Point about shifty ground is some horses fail to handle it period.
As long as the ground shifts then some horses just do not seem to run any sort of race, and several of those that do fail to reproduce the run when back on conventional surface.
Marodima is a notoriously hard puller and not for the first time he let his supporters down.
Twist Magic cruised into contention approaching the home straight simply to empty when oustayed by a better horse on the day.
I think it is dangerous to dismiss the Victor Chandler form. I didnt hear the same sources who are arguing Twist Magic was unlucky at Ascot (as a result of treacherous ground conditions) saying Voy Por Ustedes had excuses at Sandown (Cheltenham seasonal debut having taken a worse toll than connections realised).
Until Twist Magic wins the QM, the undecided among punters would do well to take the VC form at face value, especilally considering the finishing positions of Mansony and Hoo La Baloo in relation to Twist Magic.
I would combine Richards point about the shifty ground and the ground definitely was shifty, with the fact that Tamarinbleu has never been beaten when he has ran in January, the horses outstanding record at Ascot (3 wins from 4, only defeat coming after a race ending blunder) and Tom Scudamores outstanding record at Ascot (5 wins from 12 rides since 2007). Ascot suits front runners and the race was run to suit Pipes horse, all said it was a good performance and he jumped brilliantly.
Come the month of March and the Cheltenham festival I would certainly be siding with Twist Magic to beat Tamarinbleu and comfortably reverse the form.
But surely if the ground inconvenienced Twist Magic how did he manage to travel into the race like a winner appraoching the home straight?
Granted, on better ground he may well be able to conserve more energy but even on a sound surface anything putting his stamina to the test at Cheltenham will seriously test his mettle.
With no such concerns about VPU staying the trip or acting on the track, I think his chances of reversing Sandown form with TM are as valid as TM reversing Ascot form with the Pipe horse.
On the day I will be backing VPU to win and Tamarinbleu as a place banker/saver. I will lay Twist for a win and also a place if the ground is soft.
Personally always had doubts about Twist Magic getting home at Cheltenham so Tingle Creek was an expensive surprise.
I am not a particluar fan of his but would have big suspicionc about Tamarinbleu’s ability to reproduce the form espcially as liekly to be harried far more for the lead.
If he were mine I would definitely be going for the RyanAir and rightly or wrongly would be looking to lay him in QM even in a year where the division looks weak.
I don’t disagree Tamarinbleu’s lead will be uncontested at Cheltenham. However I wouldn’t want to take him on just because he might not be improving at the fast rate of knots his Ascot voctory implies.
Looking down the card Another Promise at 33/1 is a forgotten horse and could be capable of springing a surprise for E/W and place players!
- Total Posts 17716
Richard
At this stage the RyanAir looks to have a strength in depth second only to the Gold Cup itself, and looks likely to take more winning than the Champion Chase.
If Tamarinbleu were mine, and the ground was anything like soft, there would be no hesitation in running him in the 2 miler, and with a favourite’s chance, imo.I wouldn’t be going out of my way to lay him at 10’s for the Champion Chase. Even a 165 run puts him bang there and arguably ahead of Twist Magic and Voy Por Ustedes.
Any news on Andreas yet?
Opinions are what it is all about and the Ascot race has certainly livened up this division.
I very much hope Tamarinbleu does go for the two limer as sadly as dj has pointed out at the moment the uncertainty as to which race he goes for is making him too big to lay for the QM.
Personally reckon ground at Cheltenham certain to be more like Sandown than Ascot.
Stll not convinced Twist would see it out but reckon those conditions would see Tamarinbleu comfortably beaten.As I say good fun to have opinions and stick your neck out !
An interesting thread and lets see how it looks as the evidence grows over time.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.