- This topic has 125 replies, 34 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 6 months ago by
.
- Posts
The big problem I have is that we have to accept that BOTH Mendelssohn and Threeandfourpence have made huge leaps in form of 31 lbs and 23 lbs respectively.
But weren’t you making the same arguments last season Steve with Lancaster bomber and that form ended up being held up when Churchill went on to win the guineas in similar fashion?
I think some horses just improve and also you have to take into account their ratings can go up on account of running in much better contests.
Lancaster Bomber has been runner up in 4 Group 1 races despite being a maiden winner. The times he has got his ground he performed way above expectations. When he got soft ground he underperformed massively, that is beyond dispute now. It is not a fluke anymore
Same this weekend with US Navy Flag, Threeandfourpence, Seahenge and Mendelssohn, they are all certainly much better horses on fast ground than the soft ground they have run on all year.
I’m sure I’ve just not being paying attention but what was the reason Expert Eye hadn’t seen a racecourse between Goodwood and Newmarket? A 74 day break in which time U S Navy Flag ran 3 times.
As I referenced at the start of the thread, there was also a press release saying Expert Eye had suffered “a setback” and would be put away until the new season. That was rubbed down within a day and became “scoped dirty”. A few days later, the Dewhurst dream was alive again and it wasn’t long until people were scrambling to get on at any price and writing posts about the ‘strong confidence’ that was building up. All quite understandable with his speed figures and collateral form working out nicely and apparently bullish vibes coming from the yard.
In hindsight, there is something a bit smelly about the press releases though. Was the truth a bit more sinister than ‘scoped dirty’?
I suppose the point about not writing a horse off after one run makes some sense. If Jordan Spieth shoots 4 over in a tournament, do people write him off, say he was never any good in the first place and say he’ll never win a major? Only idiots will do so. So horses can always have bad days too.
I guess the difference is unlike golfers or tennis players etc, they don’t run every week so when they do appear we expect them to be trained to the minute and produce their absolute best. And horses are also fragile. Once they have a bad run, they can remember that, and never be the same again.
So the jury is still out on Expert Eye. I expect he will bounce back next season, but not quite be the amazing superstar we hoped he was after his first two runs. The truth lies somewhere between two stools, in the words of Brian’s mother, “he’s not the messiah, he’s just a bloody good racehorse!”
The big problem I have is that we have to accept that BOTH Mendelssohn and Threeandfourpence have made huge leaps in form of 31 lbs and 23 lbs respectively.
But weren’t you making the same arguments last season Steve with Lancaster bomber and that form ended up being held up when Churchill went on to win the guineas in similar fashion?
I think some horses just improve and also you have to take into account their ratings can go up on account of running in much better contests.
Churchill ended his 2yo season rated 121 and was able to win the 2000 Guineas by running to just 1 lb higher on 122. He got beaten by Barney Roy in the St James Palace and he’s hardly been the punter’s pal at SP, going off odds on 8 times out of 11 and being beaten favourite four times.
Lancaster Bomber is still a maiden winner and always went off at prices which suggested nobody really ever bought into the idea he was group 1 class. He was seen as a pacemaker primarily and Aidan was missing a trick if he really had a proper Group 1 colt and kept putting him into races where another runner was the one they wanted to win.
Lancaster Bomber was given a 19 lb rise for being runner-up in the Dewhurst but this year we are talking about TWO runners and rises of 31 lbs and 23 lbs. That is much stronger cause for concern when questioning the form.
People are asking if Expert Eye can bounce back. The first thing to wonder is how badly he ran. A rating of 94 is well below his previous run but not a total flop. If he had been seriously injured you would surely have expected him to be tailed off.
If you want to look at a horse who ran a total stinker and then bounced back, you only need to consider Mendelssohn.
On his previous start Mendelssohn ran a total shocker when beaten 34 lengths by Seahenge. Mendelssohn earned a Racing Post rating of 26 for that last of seven in the Champagne Stakes. He has now run 89 lbs higher in the Dewhurst and turned the form round with Seahenge to the tune of 36 and a half lengths from Doncaster.
I don’t know anyone can say with any certainty at all that Seahenge ran to his mark with that change around in the form.
More to the point, why did Mendelssohn run as desperately as the did last time and isn’t anyone at all wondering how a horse runs 89 lbs differently in the space of four weeks?
It’s no wonder some people feel that skulduggery goes on and that the game is bent.
Anyway, I am not trusting this form.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
Apparently they are now saying he trotted up fine and wasn’t lame. Perhaps something else will come to light but I agree the form of the race looks suspect albeit the winner is clearly improving from race to race.
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
More to the point, why did Mendelssohn run as desperately as the did last time and isn’t anyone at all wondering how a horse runs 89 lbs differently in the space of four weeks?
It’s no wonder some people feel that skulduggery goes on and that the game is bent.
Magic polos?
Magic polos?
Tunes, surely?
Need to be of a certain age to “get” that one, Gladiateur. :lol:
Value Is EverythingI backed Expert Eye @ 7/1 for the Guineas immediately after Goodwood. Settling well and going clear in a matter of strides and the form worked out well too. To put up a performance of that standard that early in the season. Horse with bags of scope. Really good looking sort from a yard known for progressing with age. Every reason to think he’d be better come next May. So what went wrong?
After a set back, 4/1 for the Guineas looked poor value and long odds-on for the Dewhurst, crazy. I backed Seahenge each way. At Goodwood I remember he sweated a little and played up a bit beforehand. Only greeness I thought. On Saturday wasn’t surprised Stoutey had a stable lad down walking him around at the start. Still sweated up and this time got pretty upset in stalls. At one point possibly trying to get under the gate. Too exitable when they opened and free early. Andrea did his best to get in behind the winner/leader; but as Ryan found the rail Expert Eye was caught without cover. Raced with tongue hanging out and lost ground in the final furlong when his rider accepted the inevitable. Reported by the racecourse vet to have finished lame. It’s not unusual for some lameness to clear up quickly. Suspect it was something to do with what happened at the start.
Hopefully, Stoute can get to work over the coming months on stalls training and temperament. Atmosphere of a Classic is going to be a big test. Although by Acclamation, dam’s side of pedigree suggests will stay a mile and the way he first relaxed and then finnished the 7f race at Goodwood also suggests he’ll get a mile well next year. However, if remaining exitable as last weekend we might even see him emulate Sir Michael’s last Dewhurst winner Ajdal… and revert to sprinting. All depends on which way he goes; had valid excuses and the scope for further improvement remains. Now 10/1, that looks a complete over-reaction to me, but sometimes a physical problem comes to light a few days after a disappointment (eg chipped bone). So I’ll wait a week before going in again. Newmarket is likely to be awash with sparkling gallop reports come April 2008.
Value Is EverythingAs for the winner:
U S Navy Flag has had an awful lot of racing as a two year old. That said, he’s not a small horse so should train on from two to three. Fact he’s had 10 races, that’s as much as most horses have at the end of their second season. I’d be surprised if there’s more than a pound or two improvement in him – if that. However, form shown puts him top of the two year old colts and could win an average Guineas without improving (if we believe the form). Then again, will he stay?By War Front and dam won the Irish Guineas and stayed even further, winning the Irish Pretty Polly. I backed U S Navy Flag’s sister, Roly Poly for this year’s Guineas and she stays a mile well after racing primarily over 6f at two, had a full campaign (if not quite that full) at two. … And she races to the fore too. But there’s something about how this colt races that suggests to me he’s only 50/50 to get a mile; a little over enthusiastic perhaps?
I do have doubts about the form, even though – on the face of it – it’s up to standard for a Dewhurst. It’s not about the horses he beat, just where they raced. First and second came immediately up the rail, fourth came one off the rail. Only third Seahenge in third – who imo can be marked up – raced wide. Rail seemed an advantage pretty much all weekend. U S Navy Flag is a good horse, just nagging doubts he’s quite as good as the run of the race made him look.
Value Is EverythingThere are echoes of Chief Singer in Expert Eye’s performances. On one hand, he’s looked a beast in his two victories but on the other, threw his race away by being unruly. He leaves the impression as being the moody type who’ll only race like a superstar when he feels like it. Has Jekyll and Hide written all over him IMO.
U S Navy Flag doesn’t strike me as the 2000 Guineas winner of 2018. Yes, he’s a warrior of a horse but a smallish one. I feel there’ll be a bigger warrior waiting in the shadows to mug him.
I think it’d be unwise to underestimate US Navy Flag but too many Q’s over the form IMO, particularly the rails advantage. Seahenge interests me greatly but I feel he’s going to be one that pops up (maybe in a Guineas) when we don’t expect it, a bit like he did at Doncaster. At Doncaster I thought Mendelssohn looked like a real racehorse but he ran really poorly there, he’ll need to keep improving but may well do so. Bit of a muddy look to the two year old colts division, not much doubt about that.
As for the winner:
U S Navy Flag has had an awful lot of racing as a two year old. That said, he’s not a small horse so should train on from two to three. Fact he’s had 10 races, that’s as much as most horses have at the end of their second season. I’d be surprised if there’s more than a pound or two improvement in him – if that. However, form shown puts him top of the two year old colts and could win an average Guineas without improving (if we believe the form). Then again, will he stay?By War Front and dam won the Irish Guineas and stayed even further, winning the Irish Pretty Polly. I backed U S Navy Flag’s sister, Roly Poly for this year’s Guineas and she stays a mile well after racing primarily over 6f at two, had a full campaign (if not quite that full) at two. … And she races to the fore too. But there’s something about how this colt races that suggests to me he’s only 50/50 to get a mile; a little over enthusiastic perhaps?
I do have doubts about the form, even though – on the face of it – it’s up to standard for a Dewhurst. It’s not about the horses he beat, just where they raced. First and second came immediately up the rail, fourth came one off the rail. Only third Seahenge in third – who imo can be marked up – raced wide. Rail seemed an advantage pretty much all weekend. U S Navy Flag is a good horse, just nagging doubts he’s quite as good as the run of the race made him look.
Because he’s a big horse and September is a small filly, you think the former will train on but the latter won’t?
Strange
As for the winner:
U S Navy Flag has had an awful lot of racing as a two year old. That said, he’s not a small horse so should train on from two to three. Fact he’s had 10 races, that’s as much as most horses have at the end of their second season. I’d be surprised if there’s more than a pound or two improvement in him – if that. However, form shown puts him top of the two year old colts and could win an average Guineas without improving (if we believe the form). Then again, will he stay?By War Front and dam won the Irish Guineas and stayed even further, winning the Irish Pretty Polly. I backed U S Navy Flag’s sister, Roly Poly for this year’s Guineas and she stays a mile well after racing primarily over 6f at two, had a full campaign (if not quite that full) at two. … And she races to the fore too. But there’s something about how this colt races that suggests to me he’s only 50/50 to get a mile; a little over enthusiastic perhaps?
I do have doubts about the form, even though – on the face of it – it’s up to standard for a Dewhurst. It’s not about the horses he beat, just where they raced. First and second came immediately up the rail, fourth came one off the rail. Only third Seahenge in third – who imo can be marked up – raced wide. Rail seemed an advantage pretty much all weekend. U S Navy Flag is a good horse, just nagging doubts he’s quite as good as the run of the race made him look.
Because he’s a big horse and September is a small filly, you think the former will train on but the latter won’t?
Strange
Is that sarcasm, because surely it’s basic stuff that a bigger horse has more scope for physical (and hence performance) improvement?
As for the winner:
U S Navy Flag has had an awful lot of racing as a two year old. That said, he’s not a small horse so should train on from two to three. Fact he’s had 10 races, that’s as much as most horses have at the end of their second season. I’d be surprised if there’s more than a pound or two improvement in him – if that. However, form shown puts him top of the two year old colts and could win an average Guineas without improving (if we believe the form). Then again, will he stay?Because he’s a big horse and September is a small filly, you think the former will train on but the latter won’t?
Strange
Where did I say U S Navy Flag is a “big horse”, MOM? It’s not that he’s big, and certainly not the good topped sort that improve quite a bit from two to three. He’s just not “small”, so will probably train on.
Lot of punters like to have a definite opinion – either horse x will or won’t train on – I don’t. For me it’s all about probabilities. Am not saying that September definitely won’t train on. But fact is the smaller a two year old is the more chance there is of it not training on… And that’s got to be allowed for when I calculate whether she is currently a value price ante-post. That’s all.
You have a big September price for the Oaks, MOM. You’ve done well, if it’s the price I remember then you’ve got a good value bet and I envy you. ie imo Price you’ve got is imo well worth having now, even if she is small.
Value Is EverythingHorses with talent are horses with talent whatever their size. I suspect the ‘small ones don’t train on’ might be difficult to back up with balanced evidence mainly because small horses are comparatively rare. Can anybody nominate half a dozen, or even three or four, high class small 2-y-olds who did not train on?
Maybe someone with Raceform or Proform could do a search to try to find the percentage of horses described as ‘small’ or ‘light-framed’ or ‘compact’.
Given two horses of equal talent at 2, one of whom has not yet filled his or her frame, I accept that there is an argument that the bigger horse might well improve at a faster rate than the smaller horse but I don’t accept that the smaller horse will not ‘train on’. Just because one gets better it doesn’t automatically follow that the other gets worse.
They say a good big ‘un will always beat a good little ‘un. I suspect that’s because the pool from which large horses are drawn is much, much deeper than that from which its rival came and therefore it is more likely that it’s simply a better horse rather than a bigger one.
All of the above just my opinion based on general impressions over the years. Am happy to be put right by anyone with evidence.
Can anybody nominate half a dozen, or even three or four, high class small 2-y-olds who did not train on?
One of my favourite horses was lyric fantasy, “the pocket rocket” and although she won as a three year old and was fourth in the 1000 guineas, it was a pale shadow of her two year old career.
Tiggy wiggy and risky are other two year olds who didn’t do much after that. And that’s just from the same trainer.
But I’m not sure I’d put september in the same category- I mean i didn’t even notice she was small until some on here mentioned it
and unlike those brilliantly quick two year olds I just mentioned, all she does seem to do is stay, so she should improve in theory next year when she’ll be able to run over middle distances.
and unlike those brilliantly quick two year olds I just mentioned, all she does seem to do is stay, so she should improve in theory next year when she’ll be able to run over middle distances.- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.