- This topic has 188 replies, 27 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 9 months ago by
.
- Posts
After this result, is Phil Smith’s desire to compress the Weight for Age scale justified? If the best 3 year old colt of his generation (debatable) can’t slug it out to beat a middling ability 4 year old given 10lbs, imagine what would’ve happened if this lot had met Ribchester over a mile with compressed weights.
Fair enough Ulysses has no doubt improved significantly this season, and he may well prove to be a proper Group 1 competitor, but if he can beat the best 3 year olds conceding 10lbs I see no reason to compress the weights.
You’re going to use one falsely-run race in one season to make that conclusion?
I have been lobbying for the compression for years and hope it comes. The overall balance of the last decade of G1s suggests that older horses are getting a raw deal.
After this result, is Phil Smith’s desire to compress the Weight for Age scale justified? If the best 3 year old colt of his generation (debatable) can’t slug it out to beat a middling ability 4 year old given 10lbs, imagine what would’ve happened if this lot had met Ribchester over a mile with compressed weights.
Fair enough Ulysses has no doubt improved significantly this season, and he may well prove to be a proper Group 1 competitor, but if he can beat the best 3 year olds conceding 10lbs I see no reason to compress the weights.
You’re going to use one falsely-run race in one season to make that conclusion?
I have been lobbying for the compression for years and hope it comes. The overall balance of the last decade of G1s suggests that older horses are getting a raw deal.
5 of the last 7 winners of the Eclipse have been older horses, that’s as far back as I went but I imagine the 3 year olds’ record in the race gets no better.
Maybe later on in the season there is scope to compress the weights, but at this relatively early stage 3 year olds just don’t seem up to the task. Bearing in mind most 3 year olds will have had much tougher seasons than their older counterparts by the time the Eclipse comes around, competing in Classics etc.
Just to say, I wasn’t revelling in Eminent’s failure. It’s simply a case of having put the work into studying the race and making him my lay for several reasons, you then get told your effort is bollocks and that the horse holds a good chance. It’s nice to know that you were not talking as much bollocks as was inferred.
It seems some people want to give Eminent another chance and that is their prerogative.
We have had:- Too short, too long and too fizzy now. It sound like a drink that just isn’t hitting the palate right. It seem like the going is the next avenue to explore for fans of the horse.
It’s been a bit like Goldilocks and the Three Bears with Eminent, apart from the fact that the third bed wasn’t comfy either in this story. Maybe Mummy and Daddy Bear have had a second kid with a softer bed still and that this will be the one where Eminent get’s it “Just Right”. On the other hand, perhaps Baby Bear MK2 will walk in afterwards and state “Who’s been crapping in my bed?”
Oh, not this “bollocks” again, Stevie boy.
Please stop thinking anyone disagreeing with you is in some way making a personal comment. Even the very best judges disagree about a horse/race.Well done with Ulysees.
Value Is EverythingI fully realise we are all wrong more often than correct. What I don’t like is people who infer that my thinking is illogical and then trot out yet more excuses when a horse gets turned over yet again. I have never labelled you as someone who does that, you are honest enough to admit that we are all wrong plenty of the time and give credit where it is due. I still haven’t forgotten that you handed me a lesson in the Oaks!
If one TRFer disagrees with another TRFer, then part of that discussion is to point out where he/she believes the other person has got it wrong.
Whether you agree or disagree with it making any difference on the result; isn’t taking a very strong hold in the early stages an excuse worthy of making?
Often seems as though you yourself can criticise and disagree with people’s opinions all you like; and yet others aren’t allowed to do the same with your posts.
I do enjoy reading your posts and respect your knowledge and opinions, Steve. Am sorry it’s not reciprocated.
Value Is EverythingAnother 1-2 (of sorts) for Galileo in these big Group 1 races. He never fails to impress, the void will be insatiable when he’s gone.
Insatiable may be pushing it. 50% of his foals win, the other half never get their head in front. An awful lot of expensive losers out there.
74% of his runners have indeed got their head in front. Of the ones who haven’t, many of the beautifully bred fillies will go on to be successful broodmares. After all, he is also proving to be an exceptional broodmare sire.
67% winners (74% is the number that have run), which is pretty good (though but not standout in terms of Flat stallions). As a broodmare sire, he has a strike rate of 31% foals/58% runners. Total flop Generous (100th the fee perhaps) is at 46%/64%. Both are 3% black type (to foals). I’m not knocking him, but he is not irreplaceable (except to Magnier’s pocket perhaps).
Yes, I managed to pick up the wrong statistic, but 67% is still considerably higher than the 50% previously quoted. Though breeders are not looking for winners from Galileo, they are looking for good stakes winners, and G1 runners. Unlike Generous, Galileo is still a young broodmare sire, his oldest runners are just turning 9 this year which means that his 2yos, 3yos, 4yos, 5yos, etc make up a considerable proportion of his runners and they are still running. They may still win a race/stakes race, and some of them haven’t even had a chance to progress as yet to win a race yet, let alone contest a stakes race. Even for his existing base of runners, his results will continue to improve.
He already has 11 G1 winners as a broodmare sire.Contrast that with Dubawi who had his first stakes winner as a broodmare sire yesterday, his oldest runners are 5yos.
I can’t get enthused about people who pick half the field in any given race. Sorry if that doesn’t meet with some people’s expectations.
If anyone picks one horse at decent odds then I am happy to give them credit for that selection.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
In reply to Sunspangled (not going to quote the whole post again), 50% is still correct. Exactly half his foals of racing age have not won any kind of a race, stakes or otherwise.
I can’t get enthused about people who pick half the field in any given race. Sorry if that doesn’t meet with some people’s expectations.
If anyone picks one horse at decent odds then I am happy to give them credit for that selection.
Shots fired. If you took 4/1 Barney Roy and the Betfair SP for Ulysses (wasn’t it 15.5 or something crazy?) you value-owned the race in two spots. The 16/1 ‘first 3’ hero play on Desert Encounter would also deserve credit. I know a few people who got two out of those three wins AND place-laid Cliffs or Eminent, which is surely better than taking one dart and shutting your eyes until the off.
GT finds two or three spots of value in a single race quite often and deserves credit…imo.
…although I take the point that one can be guilty of Fancy Play Syndrome. If you’re wrong about your perceived value in one spot and then compound your mistake by taking more back/lay positions in that same race, then you’re just soulcrushing yourself.
In reply to Sunspangled (not going to quote the whole post again), 50% is still correct. Exactly half his foals of racing age have not won any kind of a race, stakes or otherwise.
Yes, he is indeed a simply exceptional sire.
I can’t get enthused about people who pick half the field in any given race. Sorry if that doesn’t meet with some people’s expectations.
If anyone picks one horse at decent odds then I am happy to give them credit for that selection.
Shots fired. If you took 4/1 Barney Roy and the Betfair SP for Ulysses (wasn’t it 15.5 or something crazy?) you value-owned the race in two spots. The 16/1 ‘first 3’ hero play on Desert Encounter would also deserve credit. I know a few people who got two out of those three wins AND place-laid Cliffs or Eminent, which is surely better than taking one dart and shutting your eyes until the off.
GT finds two or three spots of value in a single race quite often and deserves credit…imo.
…although I take the point that one can be guilty of Fancy Play Syndrome. If you’re wrong about your perceived value in one spot and then compound your mistake by taking more back/lay positions in that same race, then you’re just soulcrushing yourself.
However anyone plays the race is up to themselves and if they make a profit then good luck to them.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
I can’t get enthused about people who pick half the field in any given race. Sorry if that doesn’t meet with some people’s expectations.
If anyone picks one horse at decent odds then I am happy to give them credit for that selection.
Shots fired. If you took 4/1 Barney Roy and the Betfair SP for Ulysses (wasn’t it 15.5 or something crazy?) you value-owned the race in two spots. The 16/1 ‘first 3’ hero play on Desert Encounter would also deserve credit. I know a few people who got two out of those three wins AND place-laid Cliffs or Eminent, which is surely better than taking one dart and shutting your eyes until the off.
GT finds two or three spots of value in a single race quite often and deserves credit…imo.
…although I take the point that one can be guilty of Fancy Play Syndrome. If you’re wrong about your perceived value in one spot and then compound your mistake by taking more back/lay positions in that same race, then you’re just soulcrushing yourself.
I tend to only play 1 or 2 (often play something antepost for the big races) but I have to say, that’s a cracking post.
Well said indeed
I can’t get enthused about people who pick half the field in any given race. Sorry if that doesn’t meet with some people’s expectations.
If anyone picks one horse at decent odds then I am happy to give them credit for that selection.
I don’t expect any “credit” at any time… and certainly not if one of my savers win. I agree, giving credit for saver winners is like giving credit for someone who didn’t have a bet in the race (breaking even)! Eminent 5/1 (16.7%) and Salouen 64/1 (1.5%) were only savers for me.
I backed Barney Roy @ 4/1 and 7/2 and Taj Mahal @ 119/1 and 109/1. The two together adding up to taking a combined price of only around 7/2 (22.2%). Almost double the price for your combined bets.
You backed Ulysees @ 10/1 and Cliffs Of Moher @ 2/1, taking a combined price of around 11/8.
10/1 + 2/1 = 9.1% + 33.3% = 42.4%, shade shorter than 11/8.Even if I had backed all four horses as main bets, Barney Roy, Taj Mahal and both Eminent and Salouen; their combined price would’ve been bigger odds than your 11/8 combined price. 22 + 16.7 + 1.5 = 40.2 (6/4)
Are you not giving yourself any credit for backing the winner, Stevie?
Don’t give yourself so much grief.
Just because you tipped two horses including the 2/1 favourite, imo still means you should be given credit for having the winner.Value Is EverythingHang on a mo’!
I have taken a shot on Ribchester at 14/1 for the Eclipse.
Scrub that “11/8”.
The combined price you took Stevie Boy was 49%, around 21/20.
…And you criticise me for backing too many horses!
Value Is EverythingSad to read LS3 delighting in a Frankel not running well. I’ll never understand folk.
Am old enough to remember a lot of people dismissing Saddlers Wells as a “soft ground sire” in his early years as a stallion, Joni. Still very early for people to be concluding anything about Frankel.
Value Is EverythingThe Eminent puzzle has been solved, well partly.
Trainer Martyn Meade reckons that the issue in the Eclipse was:-
1. The ground was too fast.
2. The horse was hampered
3. The horse pulled too hard
4. The horse has had a hard season.
5. The horse is too immature
6. The horse won’t be brilliant until he turns 4YOThat’s that sorted then, I don’t suppose there is any chance that the horse just isn’t quite as good as the trainer felt?
It all sounds a bit Walter Mitty to me and I reckon I’ll be paying zero attention to Martyn “Mr Excuse” Meade going forward.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
You forgot to add “but I think a couple of others were interfered with more than we were and at the end of the day we were beaten.” But that wouldn’t fit the tone of your post I guess! ;)
Can’t blame a small trainer for still hoping can we? He actually said “I think he’ll be a brilliant 4 year old.”
But yes he has it all to prove now….
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
Everything Martyn Meade said was true and just stating fact.. Eminent could have done with a bit more cut in the ground and yes he did pull
too hard in the early stages of the race, SDS was having nightmare first ride.
Decorated Knight tried to take his space and Eminent lunged at him..his mind was not on the job, it’s an issue that needs addressing as he could have lost the race in the Stewards Room because of it.
Eminent HAS had a hard season, much more so than his sire because expectations from the owner and trainer have taken a toll on this talented young horse, he has the potential to be a better four year old but he needs to take a break and get some of those behavioural matters addressed.
I remember Sir Henry bringing Frankel to Newmarket with Noble Mission and another horse for a pre race gallop down the Rowley Mile prior to his win in The Champion Stakes..he was fully kitted out in Khalid Abdullahs colours and he was walked around the parade ring to give him the idea that he was in a real race, Henry Cecil was there and of course the crowd went potty as he cruised home in first place thinking he had won yet another race..it was all part of the mind games that Sir Henry used with Frankel to re-assure the horse and keep him well in mind and body.
Martyn Meade needs to employ similar tactics with Eminent who obviously thinks himself King of the castle back at the yard but on the track he boils over and is meeting his match against talented Group horses where he is not top dog and has to fight for prime position in his race.
As a 2yo Eminent was looked after just winning his maiden race and tucked away until winning the Craven as a 3yo. Since then he has had 3 tough Group.1 races and has not progressed.
I would like to see him have a much needed break and then dropped back to Group 3 again to boost his confidence with a win towards the end of the season then see what his future as a 4yo has to offer next year.
Martyn Meade has decisions to make and Eminent is wilful I hope he gives the horse some time to recover from a tough campaign and we see him back winning races very soon.. JacThings turn out best for those who make the best of how things turn out...
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.