- This topic has 39 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 17 years ago by
.
- Posts
It was a surprising error by Balldoyle but ONLY with the benefit of hindsight. I wouldn’t say Ballydoyle were
getting it in the neck
in the same sense they do when people criticise them for sacrificing a good horse’s chance of victory as I believe AOB honestly thought RVW and co had all moves covered beforehand off any pace. He was wrong.
Indeed, any such levels of criticism could only be pocket talking from punters who may have backed the only other horse that was making ground on STS – Masterofthehorse (me), especially as he was stone last for much of the way!
I’m not sure Golden Sword ran to his true merit, he would be more suited to a fast pace, the slow pace he set seemed to me that he was given set tactic by Aiden O’Brien, either that or Colm O’Donoghue got it badly wrong, the horse is very good and I see this horse winning the St. Leger.
Was it really a slow pace, to my eye it was a pace that gave every horse, wether up contesting the pace or back in the field their chance to win IF they were good enough ?
Perhaps, just perhaps the very best horse in the race won the race ?
Obviously the best horse did win a faster pace would have settled Sea The Stars even more, that doesn’t keep away from the fact how appalingly slow the pace was the first 5f, it certainly doesn’t give every horse an equal chance.
Like Seamie Heffernan said today, I don’t think The Irish Derby will be played the same way The Epsom one was, that said I wouldnt fancy laying Sea The Stars, I would want to be with the colt till he is beaten, I do think Fame And Glory will give him a tougher time however and O’Brien won’t waste Fame And Glory like he did at Epsom.
Will the Irish Derby be run in manner that allows those on the speed to be in the finish ?
Do Ballydoyle realise just how badly they cocked this race up?
Maybe tdk…but repeat it enough times in each post and they might just get it.
Funnily enough I would have thought you would have been happy to see all their runners run on their merits….Golden Sword and Age Of Aquarius certainly were given rides to maximise their chances…pinching the following from another forum but:
"Ballydoyle got it in the neck for supposedly sacrificing decent horses as pacemakers in order to help their chosen one win (Scorpion in Dylan Thomas’ King George).
Ballydoyle got it in the neck for supposedly using pacemakers to screw with the pace of a race to disadvantage another runner (Authorized in the Eclipse).
Now, Ballydoyle are getting it in the neck for not sacrificing Golden Sword’s chance in favour of other, more fancied runners, and not screwing with the pace in order to disadvantage Sea The Stars. "
Were you not the one giving out about Scorpion and Dylan Thomas in the King George? And now you actually slate O’Brien for not doing the same thing in the Epsom Derby i.e ruin the chances of a perfectly sound contender in his own right for the sake of another preferable winner?
One or the other tdk…one or the other…
I don’t accept Golden Sword or Age Of Aquarius were suited by the way the race was run – both were highly unlikely to be able to outspeed STS even if they had pinched an advantage. Age Of Aquarius would have been much better suited by them all going way too fast early and picking off tired horses late on.
Look – all the races you mention have one thing in common – Ballydoyle using unconvetional and unpredictable race tactics in an attempt to gain the result "they" want.
They clearly tried to set the race up for Rip Van Winkle and in doing so totally compromised the chances of the favourite (!) Fame And Glory and all of their other runners – that is unprecedented imo.
It was a surprising error by Balldoyle but ONLY with the benefit of hindsight. !
Kieren Fallon was quoted in Saturday’s RP – "If they don’t make it a test, STS
will
win. "
I’m sure he wasn’t the only person who had worked that out – it was pretty obvious?
Agreed that no hindsight whatsoever was needed to suggest that STS would be more likely to be vulnerable off a fast run race than a slowly run one.
Also agreed that Ballydoyle do sometimes use unconventional and unpredictable race tactics in an attempt to gain the result "they" want. Nothing wrong with that though and it has probably worked for them more often than it has failed.Doesn’t mean we can’t discuss/debate and have differing views though Aidan.
I just couldn’t see what they were thinking. STS had shown at Newmarket that he had the legs of Rip Van Winkle so, unless they knew the colt had sprouted wings in the interim, taking the Guineas winner on for speed seemed a very high risk strategy against the alternative option of trying to grind him down by setting a scorching pace throughout the race.
I think people’s issue with Ballydoyle is that the public perception, right or wrong, is that they can appear to be dismissive of the racing public, the racecourses, the authorities, the media and their opponents in their quest to build stallions.
Do Ballydoyle realise just how badly they cocked this race up?
Maybe tdk…but repeat it enough times in each post and they might just get it.
Funnily enough I would have thought you would have been happy to see all their runners run on their merits….Golden Sword and Age Of Aquarius certainly were given rides to maximise their chances…pinching the following from another forum but:
"Ballydoyle got it in the neck for supposedly sacrificing decent horses as pacemakers in order to help their chosen one win (Scorpion in Dylan Thomas’ King George).
Ballydoyle got it in the neck for supposedly using pacemakers to screw with the pace of a race to disadvantage another runner (Authorized in the Eclipse).
Now, Ballydoyle are getting it in the neck for not sacrificing Golden Sword’s chance in favour of other, more fancied runners, and not screwing with the pace in order to disadvantage Sea The Stars. "
Were you not the one giving out about Scorpion and Dylan Thomas in the King George? And now you actually slate O’Brien for not doing the same thing in the Epsom Derby i.e ruin the chances of a perfectly sound contender in his own right for the sake of another preferable winner?
One or the other tdk…one or the other…
I don’t accept Golden Sword or Age Of Aquarius were suited by the way the race was run – both were highly unlikely to be able to outspeed STS even if they had pinched an advantage. Age Of Aquarius would have been much better suited by them all going way too fast early and picking off tired horses late on.
Look – all the races you mention have one thing in common – Ballydoyle using unconvetional and unpredictable race tactics in an attempt to gain the result "they" want.
They clearly tried to set the race up for Rip Van Winkle and in doing so totally compromised the chances of the favourite (!) Fame And Glory and all of their other runners – that is unprecedented imo.
Golden Sword gets within 2 lengths of winning and a nose of second place and you are trying to say he did not obtain his best possible placing? Please…
But you are missing the point, you are on here saying how Coolmore/Ballydoyle have completely messed up their tactics i.e they did not send their horses on quickly enough to set it up for the likes of Fame And Glory…yet you are the very same person who slates them in for sacrificing horses for the sake of others….
Think at Chester Golden Sword was ran quite differently regarding the pace he was setting no?
Yet crawls at Epsom, although that said I think we should point how well Mick Kinane did by then dictacting what was happening with the rest of the bunch in what was a great ride even if it was a easy armchaie ride on the colt. Fast pace or slow pace Golden Sword would have been up there no matter what.
I dont want to knock Sea The Stars here, cause even if the tactics were changed in my mind there was only one result as the horse is that good.
That said Ballydoyle cocked up big and it there was no reason why they should have went that slow, the time of the race for that going was bad, there is no two ways about it.
I’m sure he wasn’t the only person who had worked that out – it was pretty obvious?
This was Coolmore’s fault. I think most punters believed Sea The Stars could win the Derby with his acceleration off a slow tempo, but did not expect it at all.
We were led to believe Fame And Glory was Aidan O’Brien’s key player in the Derby, and the markets reflected that.
So most of us expected a strong gallop and a stern test on the Epsom straight, in which Fame And Glory would probably prove to be the superior horse. I think ATR’s online speed expert predicted a good-to-fast pace.
Just out of curiosity – where does New Approach finish on Saturday?
Just out of curiosity – where does New Approach finish on Saturday?
Its an interesting question, would he have settled well enough to play apart ?
I’d have him amongst the ballydoyle mob.
They would have rid New Approach differently if Sea The Stars was in the field as they’d have ridden him upfront along with Sea The Stars, they held him back last year cause Tartan Bearer was in the field and didn’t want to be a sitting duck for him, if he ran in this years he’d have maybe even settled as we know he pulls nehind a wall of horses so that was a testement to the class he had.
Just boils down if he would have been quicker than Sea The Stars, I would have doubted it.
Aidan – a front runner doesn’t necessarily have to be "sacrificed" to ensure a decent gallop. To compare Scorpion with Golden Sword is ludicrous anyway.
Scorpion wasnt even a front runner yet he was sent off in front at a fast pace to set the race up for Dylan.
GS set a slow tempo in an attempt to set the race up for Rip Van Winkle… There is a pattern developing here…
Scorpion wasnt even a front runner yet he was sent off in front at a fast pace to set the race up for Dylan.
Suggest you have a look at the Irish Derby, Grand Prix De Paris and the Legers at Doncaster and The Curragh….each of which were his best performances.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.