- This topic has 53 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
I’m sure this is an old chestnut, but why’s a horse beaten 5 lengths in a Warwick Class 6 off 53 last time out running in the sport’s Blue Riband event??
I’m sure it’s a nice day out for the owners but surely it makes a mockery of the race.
This was the horses 3rd trainer in it’s short career as well suggesting the owner "might have his own ideas about the game," including running a plating class horse in the Derby. He wasn’t last though.
Grand Larceny on course though, this horse was 1000/1 in places this morning and went off at only 150/1
Not really, it costs a lot of money to run in the race and there were only 13 runners anyway. Think these races are always better with one or two no hopers in especially if you own one of the favs.
Someone must have fancied the beast, it was backed from 250 to 125 on track
What happens next year if 20 no hopers want to run instead of 2, how do they decide which horses make the cut?
They just leave the worst ones out andrew, if there had been 20 better than Castlemorris entered in the race he wouldn’t have got a run.
Both rank outsiders should not have been allowed to run. They could only get in the way as they beat a retreat. And that is exactly what they did. Luckily it did not effect the result this time, may not be so lucky another year.
there should be a minimum rating to achieve. It may have been only 125/1, but it’s true chance wasn’t even 2000/1.
Before anyone says about Terimon’s second at 500/1 in 1989: It just means Clive Brittain would’ve had to run him in a better race (not a maiden) in his previous race, to show his ability.
It might also mean trials are more tuly run, with those in danger of being eliminated trying to show their worth. Don’t get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with 100/1 outsiders. It’s just Castlemorris King and Marhaba Malyoom weren’t truly that. Only silly once a year racegoers; who see 500/1 and think "what value", forcing them in to "half respectable" odds.
Value Is EverythingBoth rank outsiders should not have been allowed to run. They could only get in the way as they beat a retreat. And that is exactly what they did. Luckily it did not effect the result this time, may not be so lucky another year.
there should be a minimum rating to achieve. It may have been only 125/1, but it’s true chance wasn’t even 2000/1.
Before anyone says about Terimon’s second at 500/1 in 1989: It just means Clive Brittain would’ve had to run him in a better race (not a maiden) in his previous race, to show his ability.
It might also mean trials are more tuly run, with those in danger of being eliminated trying to show their worth. Don’t get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with 100/1 outsiders. It’s just Castlemorris King and Marhaba Malyoom weren’t truly that. Only silly once a year racegoers; who see 500/1 and think "what value", forcing them in to "half respectable" odds.
What would you do with pacemakers? Ban them as well as they get in the way when making their hasty retreat?
It’s amazing the number of hypothetical situations that never happen, people worry about.
Wonder if they’d be happy with 4 runner Derbys?
- Total Posts 17716
What would you do with pacemakers? Ban them as well as they get in the way when making their hasty retreat?
It’s amazing the number of hypothetical situations that never happen, people worry about.
Wonder if they’d be happy with 4 runner Derbys?Well put! Showing the dexterity to cope with horses falling back through the field is one of the tests the Derby offers to high class colts. People seem to want a "perfection" or "level playing field" which in fact would reduce the race (or Racing in general) to something insufferably bland and anodyne.
The Castlemorris Kings add to the flavour and "narrative value" of the great race. Ryan Moore’s response was understandable (he can only see the race from his point of view, after all) but wrong.
What would you do with pacemakers? Ban them as well as they get in the way when making their hasty retreat?
It’s amazing the number of hypothetical situations that never happen, people worry about.
Wonder if they’d be happy with 4 runner Derbys?"Hypothetical"? So a jockey has to be brought down / possibly injured before anything is done? Does a horse need to cost another the Derby before anything is done?
"4 runner Derbys". Don’t talk daft, nobody is talking about bringing down the Derby / Cheltenham Gold Cup fields by more than one or two. This only happens with a handful of runners throughout the whole year.
Horses of the calibre of Castlemorris King make bad pacemakers anyway, just as well not run them. Because they are ignored, as has happened in the past. Even twenty lengths clear in the Derby, they still wouldn’t win. On Timeform ratings Castlemorris King was
67 lbs
(
4 stone 11 lbs
) below top rated; Marhaba Malyoon 39 lbs. A rule like this would not stop pacemakers from running.
Pacemakers who are within say two stones of the average placed horse:
(A) Can not be ignored as easily.
(B) Unlike Castlemorris King and Mahaba Malyoon they should be able to keep going at a reasonable rate, allowing rivals to avoid them reasonably easily.I am NOT against outsiders, I’ve backed 100/1 outsiders myself. It would not get rid of outsiders, just the ones with 0.00000000000000000000000001% chance of winning.
Value Is EverythingWell put! Showing the dexterity to cope with horses falling back through the field is one of the tests the Derby offers to high class colts. People seem to want a "perfection" or "level playing field" which in fact would reduce the race (or Racing in general) to something insufferably bland and anodyne.
The Castlemorris Kings add to the flavour and "narrative value" of the great race. Ryan Moore’s response was understandable (he can only see the race from his point of view, after all) but wrong.
Agreed, having the dexterity to cope with things is part the test. But nobody is looking for "perfection" or "a level playing field", which indeed would reduce the race to a "bland and anodyne" occasion.
However, horses like Castlemorris King add no "narrative" and absolutely nothing to the occasion. My points should be separated from Ryan Moore’s "excuses". It made no difference to who won and who finished third this year; but it could another year.
Running horses in a race for the sake of it, in a grade which is infinitely too high is against their own horses interests and health.
Value Is Everything"Hypothetical"? So a jockey has to be brought down / possibly injured before anything is done? Does a horse need to cost another the Derby before anything is done?
Don’t talk daft, maidens and handicaps are run nearly every day of the week with no hopers in the races, what if another horse gets brought down in one of them? or are you saying this hypothetical situation only matters in "Derbys"?
It’s quite simple if 20 horses better than Castlemorris are entered he will not get a run, as has been said there is nothing wrong with the current situation, these no hopers add a bit of romance."Hypothetical"? So a jockey has to be brought down / possibly injured before anything is done? Does a horse need to cost another the Derby before anything is done?
Don’t talk daft, maidens and handicaps are run nearly every day of the week with no hopers in the races, what if another horse gets brought down in one of them? or are you saying this hypothetical situation only matters in "Derbys"?
It’s quite simple if 20 horses better than Castlemorris are entered he will not get a run, as has been said there is nothing wrong with the current situation, these no hopers add a bit of romance.No, horses who are 67 lbs out of the handicap do not happen "nearly every day". When was the last horse to run in a handicap from 67 lbs below minimum weight?
Value Is EverythingNo, horses who are 67 lbs out of the handicap do not happen "nearly every day". When was the last horse to run in a handicap from 67 lbs below minimum weight?
But a horse doesn’t have to be 67lbs "wrong" to be classed as a no hoper and not allowed to run on your criteria, as you also had Marhaba Malyoon (39lbs). Where would you draw the line? 2st? That does happen nearly every day of the week, so would you be having wholesale withdrawals due to insufficient rating in maidens, handicaps and even claimers where there can be several stones difference between the runners.
Or does accident & injury only matter in big races?No, horses who are 67 lbs out of the handicap do not happen "nearly every day". When was the last horse to run in a handicap from 67 lbs below minimum weight?
But a horse doesn’t have to be 67lbs "wrong" to be classed as a no hoper and not allowed to run on your criteria, as you also had Marhaba Malyoon (39lbs). Where would you draw the line? 2st? That does happen nearly every day of the week, so would you be having wholesale withdrawals due to insufficient rating in maidens, handicaps and even claimers were there can be several stones difference between the runners.
Or does accident & injury only matter in big races?Maidens and claimers are totally different. Derbys are normally competitive fields. With primarily horses of similar merit coming in to the race, there is little room to maneuver. In maidens the whole field is of differing merit and there is a lot more room, so the problem does not exist.
Have not gone in to it in detail Edddie, but to give you some idea:
In Class 5, 4, 3 and 2 handicaps I’d have a rating of around 2 stones "wrong". Not that in practice this rule would apply to big handicaps these days, as most bottom weights seem to be within 21 lbs of top.What is the point in running in Class 5 to 2 handicaps with more than 2 stones out of the handicap anyway? When running in a lower grade would infinitely improve your horse’s chance of winning. EDIT: Actually, in handicaps I’d be in favour of just 1 stone "worse".
Please can you give "nearly every day" examples how this rule imposes "wholesale withdrawls"?
Horses who run from way out of the handicap can still run. It does not keep them in their stable. They’d just add to the competitiveness of another race; instead of adding very little to the one in question. All that trainers need to do is enter the horse in a race it would stand a reasonable chance of winning.
In Group 1’s I’d have around a 2 stones (may be 2 st 7 lbs) less than average 3rd placed horse in that race. With a proviso that anyone could appeal to a panel/ handicapper.
Shaamit for example, Unraced at three, he came in to the 1996 Derby with only two runs in maidens to his name. Timeform Racahorse of 1995 "only" had him on 90p, but the write up states: "Big, rangy colt, plenty of scope…. won 23 runner maiden at Doncaster impressively by 3 1/2 lengths… plenty to do 3f out… powering clear… Will be able to hold his own in stronger company, and is one to follow".
Value Is EverythingNot really, it costs a lot of money to run in the race and there were only 13 runners anyway. Think these races are always better with one or two no hopers in especially if you own one of the favs.
Someone must have fancied the beast, it was backed from 250 to 125 on trackProbably after Wiltshire recommended putting a tenner on it on the BBC and buying a car with the winnings. May as well have torn their tenners up and made a campfire out of them
Why do people throw their money away like that? Morons.Please can you give "nearly every day" examples how this rule imposes "wholesale withdrawls"?
Gingertipster, You need to do more homework and good reasoning if you hope to change the BHA on this issue rather than produce a mish mash of this and that.
I would put this "issue" on a par with all these doom mongers who keep predicting a death or major disaster from dangerous riding through lenient stewarding of riding incidents.
Both are hypothetical nonsense.You will find examples most days of horses running out of their depth, just had a quick look for you for a couple.
June 2nd H 2.40 Old Firm
June 2nd S 3.30 The Blind Side
June 3rd G 8.25 AB CelebrationYou will find most of them trading at 1000 on Betfair before the race, just look at all of those and you will find plenty that are running out of their depth every week.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.