- This topic has 26 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 10 months ago by
.
- Posts
I wrote elsewhere:<br>"I seem to be at odds with most ratings compilers regarding Finsceal Beo, whom they believe to have posted deteriorating figures in her three Guineas runs. If they are right, she’s entitled to come back to her best form about now, in which case the others might as well not bother turning up. I’m of the opinion that the Irish 1000 Guineas was a hot race and even though to my eyes she won with something in hand, she couldn’t exactly have had an easy race and could therefore be vulnerable with only three weeks’ recovery time. For that reason, I’m going with Arch Swing each-way at 14/1 to take advantage or at least pay better than a win bet on the favourite."
The matter is clearly still open to debate and rate myself very unlucky not to have collected on the place portion. I’m MJK’s biggest critic, I reckon, but Arch Wing’s troubled passage was down to bad luck as much anything else. He tried to make his manoeuvres at the right time but events conspired against him, pretty much like Ramona Chase (for a different jockey) in the Chesham.
Also, fillies are less consistent generally than colts, and generally I tend to avoid races restricted to fillies and mares bar the big G1s. Finsceal Beo is starting to remind me of Haafhd, who won the 2000G in style before disappointing in a few big race but stormed back to form after a midsummer break. I reckon it’s a brave person who writes off Finsceal Beo at this stage.
As for the title question, it has to be Indian Ink on her form the other day. She probably put up the highest rating for a 3yo filly since Cape Verdi in her Guineas.
Which brings me on to the value of ratings…
The true worth of compiling ratings is two-fold. Firstly, accurate ratings allow us to compare performances and draw conclusions about ability. If you can work out the best horse in the race you’re halfway to finding the winner. If you can reject the horse for a good reason you reduce the chances of error.
Secondly, they allow us to see where the value in the market lies. You can’t make money long term from punting if you’re not finding value.
The difficulty with meetings like Royal Ascot is that sometimes the ability of a horse has been kept from the public but that’s part of the game. <br>
I can’t have Indian Ink’s win the other day as the best we’ve seen so far this season, and will be treating it pretty much the same as any other dubious soft ground outcome.
Imho, Finsceal Beo’s Guineas win is the best miling fillies’ form we’ve seen so far this season. Her subsequent runs have suffered, imho again, because of the way she has been campaigned.
I think Maurice makes a couple of good points about ratings. I use them extensively and find them a valuable tool, although they have certain limitations.
They standardise a horse’s performance on a particular day under a unique and never to be exactly repeated set of conditions. What we tend to do is take that rating and try to apply it in a different set of conditions and therein lies the problem.
If Ascot this week has taught us anything, it is that ratings by themselves are only a rough map of the terrain that lies in front of us. As Maurice says, they only get you half-way: you have to do a lot of extra studying to get the whole picture.
Ratings help most of the time, but they would not have enabled anyone to pick out most of the Ascot winners including Indian Ink. Some of the winners found nearly a stone of improvement on previous ratings and others improved significantly. You need either inside knowledge or a keen perception of a horse’s possibilities to identify these improvers. I don’t think that there is any great deception in most cases.
Indian Ink was a real surprise. She beat a very good field easily in a fast time – arguably too fast a time to indicate soft ground. There may have been a few excuses behind her, but on this day she was worth a rating of at least 122+, which could turn out to be the best of the season for a 3yo filly.
In reply to ClintM’s comment, I rated Finsceal Beo the best 1000 Guineas winner since Cape Verdi. However, I think Indian Ink beat a stronger field the other day. I accept she may have been helped considerably by the prevailing conditions but Finsceal Beo went to Newmarket hard trained for that day against opponents with smart 2yo form and a winter off. Even allowing for FB to have run below form, Indian Ink dished out an impressive beating to G1 winner Darjina (conqueror of FB), 9 length G1 winner and favourtie Mi Emma, and G1 placed Arch Swing.
The rematch will be even more exciting than Soviet Song Vs Attraction.
Maurice, I know exactly what you are saying, but I can’t help thinking that Friday’s rain deluge played a huge part in the Coronation. And also I think Darjina got lucky meeting FB so soon – no, too soon – after Newmarket.It is interesting to note that nearly all 3-Y-O winners at Ascot went to the meet fresh(ish) horses/fillies, and off proper rest periods – many of the failures were being asked another searching question. Just my two cents.
Whatever, the good bit is that we still have plenty of the season left to see these fillies again ,  and I can’t wait to see Indian Ink return to fast ground.
(Edited by ClintM at 4:27 pm on June 24, 2007)<br>
(Edited by ClintM at 4:28 pm on June 24, 2007)
- Total Posts 17716
Quote: from Artemis on 3:07 pm on June 24, 2007[br]<br>Indian Ink was a real surprise.
Really?<br>Her record on soft ground reads;
2nd in the gp2 Lowther, btn half a length.<br>Easy 3l winner of the Watership Down sales race worth 136k.<br>Nk winner of the gp1 Cheveley Park Stakes.<br>Yesterday, on her next outing on soft ground, she wins the Coronation Stakes.<br> <br>No, I didn’t back her, but I am amazed that anyone should find it surprising?:o
To put 6 lengths between herself and the best of her sex and age was quite remarkable on ground that was probably just on the soft side of good. If we are to believe the official ratings, RPR, and Timeform etc., she was not entitled even on her very best form, to dismiss her opposition in the manner she did. There didn’t appear to be any real excuses for those she beat, except perhaps the ground, but it wasn’t soft enough to cause the others to run up and down on the spot.
I cannot see the BHB handicappers, RPR and Timeform rating this performance any lower than about 122+, which is quite a few pounds better than anything she has previously achieved. So, yes I am surprised by it because such things don’t happen very often.
Even if you forget about ratings, she ran right away from the best of her age and sex as if she was in a completely different league. Unless the shape of the race and the softening ground scuppered her opponents – and I don’t believe that this was the case -Indian Ink ran much better than she has done before. It would be interesting to hear what connections thought about the race. She was well backed, so maybe a big run wasn’t such a surprise to them.
- Total Posts 17716
Artemis
Given the times of the other races on the round course on Friday, and that the field elected to take the ‘Bahri’ route in 2 of those 3 races, I would also be surprised if the ground wasn’t a piece softer than the RP’s g/s description – which certainly made a significant difference to those shorter in the betting than the winner.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.