- This topic has 84 replies, 28 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Just to clear up Yorkhill. He did win the JLT in good style. My point is that he has still to prove he can be rated higher than his 166 RPR and 164 OR, which are the figures he lies on now. It’s not guaranteed that a horse can improve his rating by proxy of horses who HAVE improved since.
Yorkhill was bitterly disappointing last time and is being dropped a full mile for Cheltenham. That level of tinkering with a horse’s target is something I am uncomfortable with myself. Maybe he’ll get there at Cheltenham but maybe not. I would be cautious with him until he is settled into a distance he can stick to.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
you do like to take these individual lines out and quote them dont you ginger.
care to address the issue of the constant lies they tell everyone as to the horses well-being?
and his “very next start”, which was 5 months later, as they horse clearly couldn’t come back after the run at Haydock.
anyone who can defend the position of running that particular horse in that particular betfair chase, needs their head testing. so many people harp back to him winning a gold cup as a novice, doesn’t mean every decision after is therefor right or acceptable.
Whole point of my post is pointing out it is you who’s picking out one run in a whole career, mate; not I.
You’ve got to take in to account a horse’s whole career to realise why a horse runs in any particular race. Describing what the Bradstocks say as “constant lies”, shows your ignorance of what sort of horse Coneygree is…As I’ve said, the horse is fragile, difficult to keep sound and yet also doesn’t take much getting fit (witness a good record fresh). Media and punters alike must understand that particular combination makes it impossible for any trainer giving reports on the horse’s wellbeing. ie Obviously horses of that type will often be going well at home one day and badly the next.
Yes, there was a big gap between the Betfair Chase and Punchestown Gold Cup; but as I said; take a look at the horse’s overall record: It’s of a horse difficult to keep sound. Had they not run Coneygree in the Betfair he’d probably have got an injury anyway. Most of the horse’s injuries have been sustained at home – just as the previous year when unseen after a Sandown Intermediate Chase reappearance.
Over Coneygree’s career the Bradstock’s attacking policy of going for big races has paid off. Going for the Denman as a novice instead of a normal novice prep and then the Gold Cup itself… And it wasn’t as if he was an outsiter for the Betfair either – disputing favouritism. Am sure whenever a horse comes back injured connections wish they hadn’t run, but that’s all hindsight. Am sure had Coneygree been unplaced or worse (think Gloria Vectis) in the Gold Cup people (including connections) would’ve wished they hadn’t run (and regarded it as a “piss poor decision”)… But that also would’ve been in hindsight. Coneygree ran in the Gold Cup – and won! In hindsight a wonderful decision… Point is without the Bradstocks attacking attitude of going for the big races – that you criticise – that wonderful Cheltenham performance would not have happened.
Value Is EverythingIf you are that ignorant that you believe they tell you the truth when saying the horse is better than ever, then withdrawing it a day later, then there is no helping you.
Quick scan of your response and it sums up exactly what i was saying, so il leave it here as i am sure we all get tired of these essay responses.
Where are the lies, am I missing something?
Thought they pulled him out of this race on ground concerns and are heading to Newbury in a few weeks for the Denman?
What if he’d run in the Cotswold and finished really tired like at Haydock, would you have laid in to them for that?
I’ve had my frustrations concerning this horse, who I love by the way! Think the Bradstocks have given everything though and done wonders with him!
If you are that ignorant that you believe they tell you the truth when saying the horse is better than ever, then withdrawing it a day later, then there is no helping you.
Oh Tommy,
Only thing we can expect is for trainers, jockeys and owners to tell us what they think of their horse at that particular time. Bradstocks are only giving their opinion, so it’s not about telling “the truth”, or telling (as you claim) “lies”. Everyone knows the Bradstocks are eternal optimists and… After their very small stable has won races like the Hennessey and Gold Cup with horses some good judges thought had no/litle chance – why shouldn’t they be optimists? tbh Am glad they are because – with by far their best horse they’ve had (or will ever have) such an unsound animal… If they weren’t optimists would probably drive them mad. Psychologically understandable many trainers in their position are prone to looking on the bright-side, seeing things they want to see…Seeing things they want to see is not the same as “telling lies”, they’re just so proud and too close to their child to give an unbiased opinion. Us punters can easily make allowance for their optimism – as indeed you clearly have by not believing their opinion of the horse. Might get frustrating for you that it’s happening so often, but for me it just makes the Bradstocks characters. Good everyone isn’t the same; good luck to the Bradstocks and Coneygree. I’d be very happy to see them prove us both wrong.
Oops, have I written another “essay response”? Sorry for trying to explain myself again, TN.
Value Is EverythingThe Official Handicapper saw the need to drop Bristol De Mai another 2lbs for his latest effort. That’s a fairly swift retreat he’s now seen from his Betfair Chase win at his beloved Haydock. Quite a sharp and slightly embarrassing U-turn for the Official Handicapper.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
To be fair to Smith, Steve, he said after the Betfair that rating it was little more than guesswork. He then made a bit of a balls of that by making his length calculations “at five eighths of a pound”, which obviously sounded more scientific and less guessy than half a pound.
Still, in cases like these he’s in the unfortunate position of having to put a figure on it – an impossible task as is now being shown.
Picture this scenario: post Betfair trainer announces Bristol De Mai will be rested and looked after and won’t run again until the Gold Cup.
Blaklion and Def Red come out and frank the hell out of their Wetherby form and T4two gets placed in the King George. That original 173 would look light and Bristol De Mai would have gone up three or four pounds standing in his box.
Ironic too that the Betfair run is the controversial one, the race which has got him branded a Haydock Heavy specialist who isn’t really much good elsewhere, when his Wetherby form in giving 6lbs to Blaklion and 2 to DR is arguably the best staying chase form of the season.
I think you are missing my point Joe.
That Betfair looked a freak race with the margin of victory being what it was. It is surely just common sense to be cautious about putting too high a figure on it. If the horse runs next time and does something similar, there is always time to put him up then.
Jamie Lynch of Timeform was patting himself/themselves on the back for taking a less excitable view on Bristol De Mai in the Betfair and circumventing awarding him an inflated figure. Mind you he then went on to give pretty high rises to Frodon and Definitly Red for winning races in gutters, so it will be interesting to see how those new marks pan out.
Simon Rowlands was a bit less enthusiastic about Definitly Red’s prospects in the Gold Cup.
Nobody can say handicapping is easy and trainers will be disgusted by how a mark their horse gets and then insulted by how lowly it gets rated by the same token.
One thing seems obvious though, if a result looks freakish, it is usually freakish. It’s always more likely that the rest of the field under-performed badly, than it is that the wide margin winner suddenly improved out of all recognition.
Everyone in life will occasionally “Drop a bollock” and there is no harm in pointing out when that has happened. Is there supposed to be some Pope-like infallibility about certain figures in the racing world? Why can’t it just be accepted that all people make mistakes?
There is no point whatever in speculating “What if this?” and “What if that?” because we saw what “What DID happen” and so the hypothetical is nothing but clutching at straws.
Nobody is correct anything like all the time in Horse Racing but while it is nice to spot a future star, it is also the case that people who kept a cooler and more sceptical stance, should be respected for their viewpoint.
They seem unsure where to go with Bristol De Mai now, he’s been under rated, over rated and an enigma in general. Quite a lot of excuses have come forth and are wearing a bit thin now. I thought the horse had a big future but he let me down the first time I backed him over hurdles and ended up fairly early being one I felt I could trust implicitly. He’s 9/25 in his career and you would wonder why he wouldn’t have a better strike rate than that?
You can only have so many excuses and then have to turn to the notion that he is either wildly inconsistent, or is putting up performances on occasions where everything else has been unable to run anything like their mark due to adverse conditions.
You would think a very experienced professional handicapper would be able to leave bumping a horse too far up on one showing and wait until something else was achieved in a similar vein to warrant the big leap upwards.
That’s my feeling anyway and I’ve said enough on it now to rest my case until the horse proves otherwise, when I will duly give him credit where it is due.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
TommyNag, GingerTipster was just trying to point out in a kindly way that you don’t know your rump from your knee.
To be fair to Smith, Steve, he said after the Betfair that rating it was little more than guesswork. He then made a bit of a balls of that by making his length calculations “at five eighths of a pound”, which obviously sounded more scientific and less guessy than half a pound.
Still, in cases like these he’s in the unfortunate position of having to put a figure on it – an impossible task as is now being shown.
Picture this scenario: post Betfair trainer announces Bristol De Mai will be rested and looked after and won’t run again until the Gold Cup.
Blaklion and Def Red come out and frank the hell out of their Wetherby form and T4two gets placed in the King George. That original 173 would look light and Bristol De Mai would have gone up three or four pounds standing in his box.
Ironic too that the Betfair run is the controversial one, the race which has got him branded a Haydock Heavy specialist who isn’t really much good elsewhere, when his Wetherby form in giving 6lbs to Blaklion and 2 to DR is arguably the best staying chase form of the season.
Definitely Red didn’t run anywhere near his best in the Charlie Hall, Joe; 23 lengths behind Blaklion and Bristol De Mai… And although turning for home in the Betfair Chase going second best; Tea For Two weakened badly in the home straight. Heavy ground places a much greater emphasis on stamina and TFT palpably didn’t stay 3m1f125yrds in conditions; clambering over the last and out on his feet by the end. So it’s simply not true either of them “franked the form” at all. Definitely Red has only come back to/improved form since Wetherby and TFT came back to form at his beloved Kempton back on ground/trip he likes and disappointed at Cheltenham in conditions where he’s disappointed before.
Wetherby form is good, but it’s not that good. Blaklion had already been a good second off a mark of 152 in the Haydock Grand National Trial, some 18 lengths clear of the pack. Then, although 9 lengths 4th at Aintree, value for a rating a lot better than that placing suggests. ie Had he not pulled/been asked too early/failed to stay – in all probability would’ve put up a far better placing – 9 lengths better? Either winning or forcing One For Arthur to pull out all the stops. Therefore, over almost a mile shorter trip (less of a stamina test) and on just a lb higher mark… Blaklion looked a exceptionally well handicapped in the Becher solely on his Grand National effort. ie Given what happened in the National itself it’s not surprising he won the Becher that easily.
Bristol De Mai isn’t a Haydock heavy ground specialist, he’s a flat track very soft/heavy ground specialist (effective at Wetherby too). Face it, there are good reasons to believe all his Betfair rivals under-performed – I even made a comment about it beforehand. Jury is now out to consider whether he’s improved much at all since last year’s Peter Marsh.
tbh Definitely Red has been a progressive sort for a while now and a bit more improvement could well see him in with a chance at Cheltenham in an open year. Wouldn’t rule out Frodon figuring in the Ryanair either.
Value Is EverythingPutting Bristol De Mai a stone for Wetherby & Haydock seems fair enough to me although he should have gone up more for Wetherby and less for Haydock. If that had happened doubt anyone would have been complaining about a 7lb rise for Haydock.
He’s not run as well since so has come down, which again seems fair enough.
There is a saying by a famous American Football coach ‘You are what your record says you are’ and we have plenty of supporting evidence to the fact that BDM needs a certain set of conditions – generally a flat course (although he has won at Chepstow & Sandown in the past) with soft/heavy ground that he handles but more often than not really inconveniences his rivals.
When he faces the same type of rivals on a better surface he seems to be found out every time (not withstanding the fact there always tends to be a reason/excuse for the below par performance) – for me in the early stages of the Cotswold race he was a little keen but that was soon negated by a somewhat slapdash round of jumping and whilst he loomed upsides the leaders turning for home he found little off the bridle and was outstayed by American (who he passed going to the 2nd last) for 2nd place.
People talking about a tilt at the National after were obviously watching a different races to me unless they are simply looking at the fact that he is unlikely to cut much ice in the Gold Cup so why not try the National – he patently wont stay the trip and I would have serious doubts as to him getting round either.
He is a good horse (thats happens to excel in hock deep ground) but nothing more than that – the rating he was given off the Betfair run was to me equivalent to the ‘pinning the tail on the donkey’ game and it may just be that he ran to his normal rating whilst T4T & Cue Card woefully underperformed on what we know they are capable of.
Maybe the ratings system should be able to use a prefix of qc (questionable conditions) that can be attached to a big performance on extreme going where you can’t really correlate the overall form of the race.
‘You are what your record says you are’ and we have plenty of supporting evidence to the fact that BDM needs a certain set of conditions – generally a flat course (although he has won at Chepstow & Sandown in the past) with soft/heavy ground that he handles but more often than not really inconveniences his rivals.”
He had a flat course and soft ground at Kempton – what happened there? Right handed, many will say. Okay, a year ago he had a flat course and soft ground at Newbury, what happened there?
He’s an odd horse in that the more he runs the less we know. Perfectly understandable to assume he wants hock-deep, flat tracks, but watch his Gold Cup run again on good ground on the most undulating track in the country in supposedly the season’s best steeplechase. He jumped just a handful of fences properly being either not fluent or less than economical at the others (he has an odd way of trying to rebalance himself midflight by throwing his head up and sideways). Yet he was never worse than fourth until getting outpaced after three out and being relegated to 7th/8th before rallying again to be challenging for 4th approaching the last, where he all but failed to take off, almost losing his jockey and losing any chance of placing. Given the way he jumped, he ran a remarkable race in supposedly his worst set of conditions.
He had run a fine race the year before to be 2nd in the JLT on good ground, his jumping again letting him down.
For me, those runs suggest two things: he acts perfectly well on good ground at undulating tracks, and he has a big enough engine to keep him in the firing line in Grade Ones, despite indifferent jumping. The latter might well be the secret to him. One notable factor in his Haydock runs is not so much flawless jumping (he still corrects at times with that head carriage), but a lack of errors. No errors must help with an ever-growing confidence throughout a race and, more importantly, allows that big engine to get into a rhythm. He is one-paced but that pace is strong and remorseless and one that would serve him very well in the National if the fences did not get in the way.
Still, it’s all speculation. He should act well in conditions where he has not acted well and he should be below form in the opposite conditions when he has run above expectations. All that can be said about him with certainty is that he’s inconsistent. Whatever happens, I’ll go to my grave believing he has/had the talent to win a good ground Gold Cup on a day when the stars aligned.
If memory serves, I believe there were reasons put forward for him underperforming in the Denman Chase at Newbury (knocked a joint) and the King George at Kempton (treated for stomach ulcers after).
Yes he has run respectable races on better ground but the key thing you mentioned (in both the JLT & Gold Cup particularly) was that he made several jumping errors, which you could easily say was because he had less time to organise himself at his fences because they were going that much faster on better ground.
As I said I do believe he is a good horse (that one fence in the Cotswold when it looked like he was about to breast it and he was somehow able to put himself right shows he has talent) but on good ground I believe he just falls short of the the top tier – maybe a slightly less consistent chasing version of TNO.
I fully respect your belief about him having the talent to win a Gold Cup on good ground, but I just don’t think that even with the stars aligned there wouldn’t be a couple of horses that would find him out.
I just think that the Betfair (given the near 100% certainty that it will always be run on at least soft ground and more often heavy) will end up being his Gold Cup race – and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
He had a flat course and soft ground at Kempton – what happened there? Right handed, many will say. Okay, a year ago he had a flat course and soft ground at Newbury, what happened there?
Kempton could’ve been for the reason given afterwards by the trainer, could also have been – yes – right-handed, on race times wasn’t as soft, taken on by Mite Bite and didn’t jump as well (latter could well have been because of a combination of the former trio). Not surprising BDM below form.
Newbury could’ve been due to a “knocked joint”, but given Newbury wasn’t as soft either, came just three weeks after winning the Peter Marsh on very soft ground (may not have fully recovered) and with Native River in the field different (hold up) tactics employed – not surprising below form. On very soft ground suspect BDM will be fully effective at Newbury another day.
Value Is EverythingHe’s an odd horse in that the more he runs the less we know. Perfectly understandable to assume he wants hock-deep, flat tracks, but watch his Gold Cup run again on good ground on the most undulating track in the country in supposedly the season’s best steeplechase. He jumped just a handful of fences properly being either not fluent or less than economical at the others (he has an odd way of trying to rebalance himself midflight by throwing his head up and sideways). Yet he was never worse than fourth until getting outpaced after three out and being relegated to 7th/8th before rallying again to be challenging for 4th approaching the last, where he all but failed to take off, almost losing his jockey and losing any chance of placing. Given the way he jumped, he ran a remarkable race in supposedly his worst set of conditions.
He had run a fine race the year before to be 2nd in the JLT on good ground, his jumping again letting him down.
For me, those runs suggest two things: he acts perfectly well on good ground at undulating tracks, and he has a big enough engine to keep him in the firing line in Grade Ones, despite indifferent jumping. The latter might well be the secret to him. One notable factor in his Haydock runs is not so much flawless jumping (he still corrects at times with that head carriage), but a lack of errors. No errors must help with an ever-growing confidence throughout a race and, more importantly, allows that big engine to get into a rhythm. He is one-paced but that pace is strong and remorseless and one that would serve him very well in the National if the fences did not get in the way.
Still, it’s all speculation. He should act well in conditions where he has not acted well and he should be below form in the opposite conditions when he has run above expectations. All that can be said about him with certainty is that he’s inconsistent. Whatever happens, I’ll go to my grave believing he has/had the talent to win a good ground Gold Cup on a day when the stars aligned.
No, BDM did not run a “remarkable race” in the Gold Cup; Joe. Fact he didn’t jump well is in all probability to do with not being comfortable with conditions – conditions not allowing him to show his best. No, BDM did not run a “fine race” in the JLT; it’s a long way below the triumvirate. BDM’s Cheltenham/goodish ground form is well below the three soft/heavy ground flat left-handed track runs (Peter Marsh, Charlie Hall and Betfair Chase) where he’d raced prominently, jumped better and been impressive.
imo Evidence suggests in all probability BDM will always be best when able to race prominently on soft/heavy ground flat left-handed tracks.
Might have the talent to win a Gold Cup – if the Gold Cup was postponed and then run instead at Haydock in Winter.
Although personally think his ability at Haydock and Wetherby has been greatly exaggerated in some quarters.Value Is Everything
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.