- This topic has 115 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 22 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I dont particularly fanyc Ned Kelly for the Champion but I think your being a little unfair on him Escorial.In his bumper run at Cheltenham the horse was only a 4 year old and seeing as we all see him as a future chaser he was a very weak horse.Also you can look up but in all his bumper runs the horse was very keen throughout his races and pulled very hard.But since going novice hurdling he has relaxed alot.The simple fast is we dont know who effective he is on very fast ground because he has never been tried on it since he has matured.My own opinion is he will be most effective on anything other than extremely heavy or extremely fast ground.<br> I would be interested Escorial what you mean by the horse not having the pace for a Champion Hurdle.Do you mean finishing speed or the ability to travel?Certainly in all his races his most impressive attribute is his high cruising speed so I dont think that is an issue but you might be right about his basic finishing speed but on a course like Cheltenham that isnt the most important always.Either way I wouldnt strongly fancy him(or anything else) to beat Istabraq.
There are question marks about how Ned Kelly will act on quick ground; about how he will cope with the track; and about what he can find in a battling finish.
There is absolutely no question mark about his pace; he travels ominously well and has all the tactical speed you could possibly hope for. Why base an argument about the horse’s pace on a wacky generalisation about bumper horses, when you can base it on the evidence of the horse’s own performances over timber?<br>
not a lot esc, but some and given that LL is now the bigger price i’ll gladly take the chance he wont do it :)
oh right, so by pace you mean the business end of the race; and we’re also talking about good ground here.
I thought I said Ned Kelly had some serious questions to answer on both these fronts.
After referring to bumper horses as chasing types, we’ve moved on to the relative merits of Flat/NF bred horses. Yes, the stats are there and the recent ones certainly support your statement about "good" Flat horses and "very good" jumps horses.
But Escorial, before I concede your point I need the full picture. You know what stats are like; I wouldn’t like to think they’re being used on an unduly selective basis. I don’t follow these stats so closely, so can you give me the overall numbers on Champion Hurdle Flat v NF bred winners? I’m probably wrong, but I read somewhere (was it John Randall?) that they’re about equal. <br>
Cheers Escorial; appreciate your efforts.
No need for me to dig out the thick black pen though. I won’t be having a bet in the race, even though I believe Istabraq will win.
Well Esc, I’m aware of all the negatives against the champ, which is why his price is so unappealing, but no-one (not even your esteemed self) is going to convince me that Valiramix is going to beat a geriatric Istabraq in his own backyard.
<br>sea pigeon was flat bred and had run as a 2 year old
see you then came second in the express hurdle and had won the italian equivalant
here are some more stats which may be of interest
the longest run of winning favorites is 4
only i horse has won at its third attempt salmon spray
only i horse has won at its fourth attempt
only i horse described as black has won
only 4 greys have won kribensis being the last 2 pre war and 2 post war
only 2 horses bred in france have won claire soleil being the last (this horse was also the highest rated horse to win a stayers hurdle i believe)
only 1 american bred has won
only 4 winners have made all make a stand being the last since night nurse in 1976
no horse has won 5 times on the trot at cheltenham arkle and istrabeq holding the record on 4 a piece
winning margins istrabeq is joint record holder on 12l and three horses have won by a head claire soleil being the last
another flash and birds nest at 10 were the oldest placed horses!
3 horses hold the record for being most times in the first 3 – 4 times
The stats you quote as being against Isty Esc are pretty much irrelevant. The first two no horse has won 4 CH’s and no horse has won at 5 festivals are obviously very limited in stats as you first have to win 3 ch’s or at 4 festivals in a row. I would suggest if Isty manages it the 5 festival wins in row will have a 1-1 record for 100% !!
The 10 year old stat is more valid somebody put up the sucess rates for the various ages somewhere and again if Isty wins 10 year olds will in fact suddenly have the best strike rate in the race. As I also pointed out in that thread any 10 year old that has not already shown CH form is unlikely to suddenly develop it at that age but of course Isty has already shown CH winning form 3 times so I’d say that isn’t against him either.
<br>jjumps
it was me who put the other stat for 10 year olds 1/11 for all 2m hurdles 0/9 handicaps 1/2 for conditions races but this is for all chelt meetings and the festival stats differ on many things so i find its best to seperate them
anyway it might all be irrelevant if the rp this morning is correct about the weather it may well be soft going which wouldnt suit isty even if he was 7 years old.
O my God, Escorial – you’ve missed out the very important point that statistics are only useful if they are not actually TOTAL CRAP!  Your list of ‘flat-bred’ winners of the Champion Hurdle gave me the biggest laugh in ages! :laugh:
Celtic Shot – Am I reading this right? did you count him as flat-bred? Celtic Cone was one of the most prominent N.H. sires around and his dam, a hurdle winner, is half-sister to 2 Cheltenham winners (inc. Clayside, winner of the Arkle). ÂÂÂ
Beech Road – related distantly to a Derby winner, therefore flat-bred?  As you would say, Sheesh! His dam has produced 8 winners – ALL over jumps.  Nearly A Hand’s best produce?  McGregor The Third, What A Hand, Nearly An Eye.
Flakey Dove – is NON-THOROUGHBRED! She’s by Oats (yes, sire of Master Oats, remember him?). Yes she won 2 flat races, but only after winning a bumper and 11 races over hurdles.
The french breds you mention – Hors La Loi III, Geos and Blue Royal are all French N.H. bred.
And to go back the full 20 years, Dawn Run, Gaye Brief and For Auction were all N.H. bred.
I’m not disputing any of the rest of your figures – you’ve obviously put alot of work in – but next time you start on breeding you had better know what you’re talking about.  <br>:wave:
Esc. Irellevant wasn’t really the right word I suppose I meant misinterpretted. Your stats on the CH winners ages are irrelevent though it is the strike rate for each agre group that matters not the number of winners. I take your point about the prevailing ground being generally better in the recent pact but Istabraq hardly lacks for a bit of pace on Firm ground !!!!!!!
Finally ‘To beat the top class horses, five seasons in succession, would appear to be impossible’ sorry Esc but that statement is the biggest load of $$**!! I think I have ever seen for all we know Istabraq could be going for 6 not 5 this year and has already done it 4 times its not like someone is suggesting he will win at the next 5 festivals. You state something is impossible when all that has to happen is undoubtedly the best hurdler to be seen over the last 5 years has to win one race to make it come true !!!
:wave:
Oh I see Esc – in your list to
show the recent trend towards flat bred horses, and how important it is, when it comes to winning the big one
you show us a list of 8 horses, of whom 5 are about as N.H. bred as you can get?  And to illustrate the difference between flat and jump breds you mark some (but not all) of the N.H. breds in red? And also to make it clear you say
In effect we`ve only a handful of horses not flat bred, since 1980
and mention the very definitely not flat bred French placed horses from recent years…..
Very logical.  It’s no use (particularly on this forum) backing up a theory with half-educated stats – as you well know :biggrin:
Here endeth the wrist-slapping…;)
(Oh, and err, thanks rm, bigamy….never really considered that before… :laugh:)
It’s been said before Isty is an exceptional horse, so why should stats refer to him when he is quite obviously a once in a lifetime thing ..
They said in 1950 no one would ever run a mile in under four minutes ..
They said they’d never run 100metres under 10 seconds,
These things happen, life isn’t regulated by stats.
Isty will win if he is better than the opposition. Valiramix is a joke at his current price, a sick joke. Landing Light is worthy opposition, and Ned Kelly hasn’t really blotted his copybook yet. He can win,
That said, if isty is at his best he will beat all of these. If he isn’t, the one most likely to capitalise is Hors La Loi because at his best he got within four lengths of Isty. None of these others would have got within that distance of Isty ..
Ah sheeeeesh Escorial,
Are you saying you weren’t manipulating all those stats to support your argument? And to think you emphasised some of your discoveries in red highlighter too.
Do you know – I think Sal’s on to something.
The trick is to consider all the available stats, maybe even reflect for a moment, and then settle on a logical conclusion. You really shouldn’t blunder upon some pre-conceived fancy and rub salt in by blatantly cherry-picking the statistics for support.
Get a grip man. After all, you are the voice of reason.
:wave:
No, Esc, absolutely no more hide chasing, wrist slapping or even beating with diddly sticks :o going on here.
Although you make a valid point about recent flat-bred winners (mainly due to the Isty domination), your initial post was both inaccurate and misleading.  Like you :biggrin:, if you see something factually wrong in another post on this forum, I am keen to put records straight. ÂÂÂ
It’s also worth pointing out, if part of your CH equation involves ruling out N.H. breds (a reasonable enough theory if the ground is good), that your selection criteria between flat and N.H. bred is flawed. ÂÂÂ
Hi Esc :wave:
Wasn’t really wanting to carry on with this, but…
You use the stat ‘winners of 11 of the last 16 Champion Hurdles have been flat bred’.  You could equally use the stat ‘8 of the last 16 Champion Hurdle winners have been N.H. bred’  I don’t call that ‘a handful’.  I call that half.  Stats can be manipulated in this way.
You also say on a later post ‘Since 1990, only two winners have been National Hunt bred horses’, when in fact there have been three.  This reinforces the impression from your initial post that you do not count Flakey Dove as N.H. bred.  I’m sorry Esc, the later backtracking doesn’t wash.  Stats are only useful when they are correct.
I’m not making a big argument about how well N.H. breds do in the CH – flat-bred and ex-flat bred horses have always had a good record – just making a point that you appeared (I’m sure unintentionally) to be steam-rollering the facts to provide ballast to a theory.
Although the last six years have swung towards flat-breds I think the overall trend doesn’t yet exclude a more traditionally bred hurdler from winning.
The ‘flawed’ comment was a suggestion that if you are not sure of how to distinguish between flat and n.h. breds, then it might be difficult to eliminate n.h. breds from your CH calculations.  You mentioned Beech Road is related to a Derby winner – an interesting but ultimately useless piece of information in this context, as mostly racehorses today can be traced back to a classic winner somewhere in their bloodlines.  It’s a bit like saying George Bush is British because his ancestor was a pilgrim. ÂÂÂ
I hope I have explained where my disagreement with your post has come from – I imagine you would feel the same way if someone was mangling some form lines in defence of an argument.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.