- This topic has 200 replies, 27 voices, and was last updated 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Hoping that Ballyburn goes here. Was confident he’d be a good one when I put him up last year, but he’s turned out better than I hoped for.
Annoyed that he’s not a big bet (took an early few quid last March, but didn’t top up, instead also bet him for AB), and I’ve also laid my stake back tonight, but still, I’d be delighted if he can do that.
Ballyburn 16’s (Laid back stake)
“LOL
GaG,
Compared to Cheltenham the course of Leopardstown is fairly level with a slight uphill finish.”From this article:
“The effect of the Cheltenham hill – the steep climb to the finishing line up the home straight – has been the source of much debate down the years.
At ten metres over the course of around three furlongs it is not the stiffest finish in Britain or Ireland and the rise is not as great as at Leopardstown, a course many first-time visitors assume is relatively flat.”
Track walk video with Bryan Cooper:
I may have “slightly” misjudged Leopardstown, GaG. Thanks for putting me right, it may help me in my future betting at the course.
I did however say “Compared to Cheltenham”, and those words are important.
Compared to Cheltenham Leopardstown is not as stamina sapping. It’s uphill finish may or may not have a steeper gradient than Cheltenham, but I doubt it lasts as long as Cheltenham’s uphill finish… So compared to Cheltenham it is “slight”… And even if it is as long, it is what comes before the straight that makes Cheltenham so stamina sapping. Fact is the rest of Leopardstown is fairly flat compared to Cheltenham.Therefore I stand by my reasoning that Leopardstown’s 2 1/2m is (in regards stamina) an intermediate trip…
And Cheltenham’s 2m5f is between an intermediate and staying trip – on very soft ground probably a staying trip.I suspect Towcester was before its closure the stiffest stamina course in Britain. We do have other stamina sapping courses, but one of the reasons why I believe Irish horses do so well at Cheltenham is their best horses do get used to undulating, stamina sapping courses. Ireland seems to have more of them. Whereas Cheltenham is the only real undulating top racecourse in the country, with the possible exception of Sandown, but that seems really more or less just the home straight.
Value Is EverythingNot a big fan of Kealy, but I think this is a reasonable summation:-
The disappointing aspect is the lack of criticism. No surprise though, it just doesn’t happen, unless perhaps you are a foreign jock on the other side of the planet. So much of this could so easily have been avoided. The Ballyburn saga does nobody any favours. You could have nominated his target berfore the season started. If you couldn’t do it then it shouldn’t have been difficult after the Tullyhill win. If Ballyburn is the best novice by a margin you just go Ballymore with him, and then pretty much everything falls into place.
Anyone got the standard times for Leopardstown and Cheltenham? Might be helpful given the above discussion.
You got up hill for longer at leopardstown
The Cheltenham Hill has a steeper stamina sapping gradient at the end
Pretty sure I saw an article about it last year
Don’t know how many watch Road To Cheltenham (I don’t), but as leading advocates of Ballyburn going to the Supreme it will interesting how they answer the question ‘if Tullyhill and Mystical Power go Supreme then why on earth would you take those on in a Supreme when you are likely going to doddle up in a weak, small-field Ballymore?’
Given the ego’s at play, and thinking back to the ‘surely it’s the Supreme’ comment, I think the chances of either of them waving a white flag are about zero. I wonder what they will cobble together.
I did make a special effort and recorded Road To Cheltenham. Gary O’Brien subbed in for Hislop, and did his usual acting as Walsh’s puppet routine. Daryl Jacob was on board, but added virtually nothing. For some strange reason the Tullyhill performance was left right until the end. O’Brien did ask if Ballyburn, Tullyhill, and Mystical Power could all run in the same race to which Walsh replied (with zero conviction) that they are all different owners, so ‘yes’. He said that after trying extremely hard to rubbish Tullyhill’s jumping. I wonder why? No positives about the performance whatsoever. He seemed to be pushing the idea of Tullyhill not running. At that point I might have been inclined to ask what was the last Mullins novice that bolted up in a Graded race prior to Cheltenham, and didn’t run at the Festival. Looking at the three most recent performances at two miles, I think the most obvious difference is the way Mystical Power and Tullyhill (how far would he have won had he jumped well?) are running away from the opposition through the line and the strongest stayer, Ballyburn, isn’t. I think that just confirms they are by a way the more natural two-milers. For the record O’Brien did throw in that David Casey favours going Ballymore with Ballyburn. What a sensible chap.
I think Walsh and Hislop have backed Slade Steel for the BB and Ballyburn for the Supreme
Confirmation bias ( we’re all guilty of it )Who knows, both in my view are terrible punters (Walsh shouldn’t really have had that much practice), but they do have a platform to try and influence opinion. I can do the best I can, wherever I can, but that’s far more about making me feel better rather than having any influence whatsoever. I really struggle with the idea that anyone (unless they have backed Ballyburn for the Supreme) could think the shorter race is a better fit, and affords a better chance of winning than the longer race.
Walsh tipped Slade Steel for the Baring Bingham on the Road to Cheltenham show a few weeks ago.
“For some strange reason the Tullyhill performance was left right until the end. O’Brien did ask if Ballyburn, Tullyhill, and Mystical Power could all run in the same race to which Walsh replied (with zero conviction) that they are all different owners, so ‘yes’. He said that after trying extremely hard to rubbish Tullyhill’s jumping. I wonder why”?
——————————————You may not agree with Walsh, but surely you can see why someone might have such an opinion, Stilvi?… And it’s not “rubbishing”. There are of course positives too, but Walsh is right to point out the negatives from his jumping analysis stats reveal, that some may have missed. There are also other negatives as there are with most horses… If Walsh was to hear you talking about Ballyburn am sure he’d say “I wonder why you are “rubbishing” him, Stilvi? Wonder if he’d suggest it is only because you’ve backed Ballyburn for the Bingham?
Tullyhill won his race well in that he came away from his rivals. Can’t take that away from him. But he did have the run of the race. The first three home were in the first three throughout. Of course there is a question mark about Tullyhill’s jumping because he’s made obvious errors in his previous two hurdle starts… And although better this time, the jumping stats used on The Road To Cheltenham pretty much prove he was still losing ground at his obstacles… He did mention it could be Tullyhill will be better left handed at Cheltenham (a positive). However – given those previous mistakes – it is also possible Tullyhill’s improved (although still not good) round of jumping was something to do with getting an uncontested lead. So there is also a question whether he will jump as well if taken on in front at Cheltenham? He seems to have a markedly rounded action too, which may not be as effective away from very soft ground. Looking at the betting, Mystical Power is 8.2 compared to Tullyhill 6.4… But remember Tullyhill’s only entry is the Supreme and that is taken into consideration in his price. If they both run in the Supreme I would not be surprised if MP starts shorter than T. As well as Ballyburn, Mystical Power has taken a hold in his races too. So although it would mean JP having his two best novices in the same race – if Mystical Power is also showing that same exuberance at home (which Mullins comment to Matt Chapman seems to suggest he is) – the best race for Mystical Power could still be the Supreme.
And why not have three horses in the Supreme when Mullins has multiple horses high up in the betting for all the other novices anyway?
Currently Mullins has the three shortest priced horse in the betting on betfair for the Albert Bartlett… Dancing City, High Class Hero and (in their list third favourite) Readin Tommy Wrong.
In the Bingham Mullins has four of the first five in the betting…
Ballyburn favourite, with third favourite Ile Atlantique as well as Mystical Power and Readin Tommy Wrong.In the Supreme Mullins has the three favourites, Ballyburn, Tullyhill and Mystical Power.
…And the reason Mullins does not announce now where they all go is nothing to do with putting punters away… It’s because it just takes one of the above horses not to make it to Cheltenham for targets potentially to change… And if a second comes out things will change again… And also, if an injury happens to a rival it could change who goes where too. Just as where Mullins puts his horses will change their plans… Just what you get when trainers have so many options.
Value Is EverythingWhy? Like it, or not, it’s the biggest topic surrounding the Festival. Nobody forces anyone to read any thread. It’s not that difficult to avoid.
Yes, everyone knows something may curtail a plan, but it doesn’t mean you don’t form a Plan A, or indeed a Plan B, in the first place. Everyone just wants to know what Plan A is? It’s ridiculous to think he hasn’t got one.
As I said there was no balance to what Walsh said. All he did was rubbish the jumping.
If you have a horse that is likely to bolt up in a Ballymore you only need one runner in the race. All his other entries may as well go elsewhere.
As to my thoughts they would be exactly the same if I hadn’t backed Ballyburn. I think I have already said there are several other horses who would give me a better return, much better in some cases. I viewed Ballyburn as the most promising horse at the start of the season, and despite the messed up campaign, I still do. He should win a Festival race, and I don’t want to see the trainer prevent that happening by bungling the entry.
For Plan A to actually come to pass, then every entry of Mullins (and main rivals) for all the novice hurdles have to get there, and that is unlikely.
So:
If Mullins were to announce Plan A now, and then punters lump on…
Then something happens for Mullins to change to Plan B, so punters lump on that instead…
Then something else happens for Mullins to change to Plan C… and punters say “F… you Willie”!…And that is just for one race. So imagine what punters would say if that happens again and again at the Festival…
Punters would be accusing Mullins of constantly putting them away.
Value Is EverythingThey already do that now, so no change. The benefit of being honest and open, outweighs the negative by a considerable margin.
I don’t think Mullins is too bothered about the reaction of anyone.
Taking your extreme version no trainer would tell anyone anything. I always feel that you are deliberately trying to play devil’s advocate, but if not it sounds like you want to take racing back to the 19th century.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.