- This topic has 22 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 1 year ago by
.
- Posts
Thought that Lazy Griff ran a great race (unlike the plainly undercooked Square Dalboni) and given that Johnston said he’d missed work before the race, being beaten only a length or so by a horse who’s shortened to 14s in places and who had already had a run this season, he seemed worth a little ew at 100-1 for Epsom
I doubt Square Dalboni’s poor showing was all about fitness, Oscar. Suspect he needs to at least race prominently if not lead. He’s led for his last three starts / all victories. Today there were other front runners on his inner and Crouch couldn’t get a position the horse liked. That said, I do think Crouch should have ensured Ryan raced three wide on Lambourn. Had he done so Lazy Griff just might have won.
Wouldn’t put me off backing Square Dalboni next time if in a race without any competition for the lead.
Value Is EverythingWould’ve thought at this stage there would be some entry conditions stipulations to prevent a horse like Faire La Nouba being entered in a race like this. Rated 50? All for owners having a day out but he’s up against horses that might be worth millions at stud and he was nothing more than a hazard.
I take your point GT but the paddock watchers seemed very unimpressed with his coat and general appearance beforehand, which probably accounted for his alarming drift in the market.
I too would give him another chance but I’d want at least to see him in the ring beforehand.Totally agree Teetonmill.
I would not have backed Faire had he been 10000/1 yesterday.
I don’t mind outsiders, even rank outsiders of 500/1. But this horse running was bloody ridiculous. I don’t mind if they have some hope of improving but “Faire”‘s form was so exposed too, had no chance of improving.
I suppose the trouble is how to identify those to be banned. I do remember Terimon being placed in The Derby @ 500/1 way back – was it 1989? But if I remember rightly he did have a Timeform “p”. Owners should be persuaded against running.
Maybe a panel of experts could make the banning decision on a case by case basis, based on both rating and likelihood of improvement.
If no ban, they should at least make it a rule that it’s drawn widest – out of the way.Value Is Everything
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.