- This topic has 7 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
As the flat turf season approaches there will be the usual discussions about whether horses that have shown good form on the AW over the winter can carry that form over to the turf.
Over the years it’s proven a sound strategy to ignore AW form in turf races but I wondered whether anyone has been able to detect whether this is true for all AW form on all turf going or whether certain AW form can convert to certain going on turf (eg Southwell form being reproduced on soft turf going)?
- Total Posts 17716
If this is a matter of speed conversion then "blues brother" can solve it.
But maybe it is n’t.
If some horses like synthetic surface but don’t like grass and vice versa then it is an idividual property of the horse. In the absence of history you have to look at the progeny for a clue.The sprinters may also be unfavoured by grass.
I heard that some type of synthetic surface they used in the East coast, in the USA, disadvantaged sprinters too much because it was too thick close to the gates. Baffert was the trainer who disliked it most. Could it be that grass does the same thing to spinter types ?- Total Posts 17716
This thread normally pops up quite a bit, I have an excellent link written by David Johnson or someone similar about the conversion of AW form onto Truf – I did have it bookmarked on the old PC but that went bust so give me 10-15 minutes to find you it (Very good topic on this lurking in the archives tbh)
There was a lot of talk about AW form partically Kempton transfering profitably at Ascot and Doncaster, a good bit of statistics given aswell.
From my own experience of running horses on the AW, I reckon the configuration of the tracks is just as important as the surface in explaining differences in form.
Apart from the 5F at Southwell, AW sprint races include turns, whereas the majority of 5F/6F races on turf are run straight or wih just an elbow, not a full turn. Greenwood simply never ran to form at Wolverhampton over 6F or 7F and I finally realised that was because the home turn came at just the point in straight course races where he was picking up from the rear. Round a bend, he couldn’t go as fast and often ended up racing four or five wide as well. He had to drop to 0-60 class and get a race run at a furious pace so that the leaders were stopping, before he managed to win on an AW track.
Salute loved Kempton and Wolverhampton because he wanted a dead flat track to produce his best. Any hint of a downhill run would affect his ability to show his best, despite which his idiot owner persisted in running him at Goodwood. So it wasn’t the surface that made the difference to him, because he was hopeless round Lingfield by comparison. On turf, his best run for me was at Windsor, also a dead flat course.
In theory horses that like Wolverhampton should do well at Chester, but it’s hard to tell as they attract different classes of animal!
AP
This year may be atypical because it has been such a dry and, since December, relatively benign winter. I think that means non-AW horses will be further forward and will be confronted with better ground than is often the case at this time of year.
Conversely, I think this will allow form from Lingfield and Kempton to translate better to grass surfaces which are showing good or faster. After a normal wet winter, the opening turf meetings are held on soft or heavy ground and Polytrack form simply doesn’t translate under these conditions.
This year, it will be different but then I expect horses in general to be further forward than last year.
Salute loved Kempton and Wolverhampton because he wanted a dead flat track to produce his best. Any hint of a downhill run would affect his ability to show his best, despite which his idiot owner persisted in running him at Goodwood. So it wasn’t the surface that made the difference to him, because he was hopeless round Lingfield by comparison.
I think Lingfield has a downhill section of track along the side before the home turn !
From my own experience of running horses on the AW, I reckon the configuration of the tracks is just as important as the surface in explaining differences in form.
Apart from the 5F at Southwell, AW sprint races include turns, whereas the majority of 5F/6F races on turf are run straight or wih just an elbow, not a full turn. Greenwood simply never ran to form at Wolverhampton over 6F or 7F and I finally realised that was because the home turn came at just the point in straight course races where he was picking up from the rear. Round a bend, he couldn’t go as fast and often ended up racing four or five wide as well. He had to drop to 0-60 class and get a race run at a furious pace so that the leaders were stopping, before he managed to win on an AW track.
Salute loved Kempton and Wolverhampton because he wanted a dead flat track to produce his best. Any hint of a downhill run would affect his ability to show his best, despite which his idiot owner persisted in running him at Goodwood. So it wasn’t the surface that made the difference to him, because he was hopeless round Lingfield by comparison. On turf, his best run for me was at Windsor, also a dead flat course.
In theory horses that like Wolverhampton should do well at Chester, but it’s hard to tell as they attract different classes of animal!
AP
Interesting thoughts, AP. So it might be reasonable to expect, say, Wolverhampton form to translate to Musselburgh?
Heavy Black Type
is another anomaly that
yankee man cannot get
his head around to turn
him away from racing
to the far easier
jackpot machines
that all run on the
same surfacesFit AW horses
like Amenable
was the first in
a sequence of
artificial horses
that destroyed the
complex history of
the grasscutters
Lincoln.
Tear your tickets up
boys the artos are entered
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.