Dirt Racing

[The Tatling Cheekily]

Thinking about Gleneagles in the Classic –

Do horses with a preference for firm or softer turf going generally have a better chance of transferring their form to a Dirt surface? Or are tge two surfaces just not related at all?

I have always thought mudlarks in general might have a better chance of running well on dirt, but it’s occured to me whilst I considered Gleneagles that I base this opinion on next to nowt, Sakhee going close years ago.

Anyone more knowledgeable care to elaborate?

BUY THE SUN

[LD73]

Unlike turf the dirt can be easily manipulated by harrowing the track to make it faster or slower – I think it depends on how deep a covering of dirt they have over the actual base and how they harrow the actual surface itself that dictates fast times (also what determines the levels of horses breaking down – i.e. the closer to the base the dirt is the harder and less give there is in it).

Not a dirt fan myself but you do hear commentators talk about tracks having a speed bias i.e. suiting front runners over hold up horses. I have also seen races where the dirt has turned sloppy/muddy with heavy rain yet race times have still been fast because they have harrowed the surface closer to the base.

Re Sakhee, he won his Arc on soft ground and had a noticeably high knee action so you would assume dirt wouldn’t have suited him but he surprisingly coped well with the dirt so who really knows.

My gut instinct says the dirt will be fast but whether Gleneagles can cope with it is a massive doubt, personally I don’t think he is good enough in the Americans backyard even if he gets a quick surface and 10F won’t help much either.

Apologies if this has not been of any help to you

[The Tatling Cheekily]

Thanks for the response, very interesting.

Actually (me) describing Sakhee as a mudlark is grossly unfair. Although his best performance was probably the Arc on Heavy, he did had also (among others) win the Juddmonte on Good ground by 7L, and the Dante on Firm ground by 1.25L.

The other ‘Turf’ horse to go close on dirt in the Classic was Giants Causeway, a horse that was extremely versatile regarding the turf going.

Perhaps a horse having versatility regarding the turf going, makes them more likely to adapt to dirt too. Makes sense to me.

EDIT – My curiosity is generic, I agree regarding Gleneagles and wouldn’t personally fancy him whatsoever for the Classic.

BUY THE SUN

[SeaBirdII]

LD73 wrote:

My gut instinct says the dirt will be fast but whether Gleneagles can cope with it is a massive doubt, personally I don’t think he is good enough in the Americans backyard even if he gets a quick surface and 10F won’t help much either.

To be honest, US horses aren’t all that nowadays. Toast of New York beating a near-Triple Crown winner, Declaration Of War going close the year before. Both were nice horses but hardly superstars. I find it very hard to get excited about US racing nowadays. Gleneagles in my opinion is much better than the two above. I think a lot depends on the horses’ adaptation to the dirt surface. There’s no real middle ground with European horses, they either completely flop or run stormers. However, if I’m not mistaken, Toast Of New York and Declaration Of War are pure-US bred, so that may help.

[The Tatling Cheekily]

Declaration of War – winner of Pattern races on official going ranging between Soft and Good to Firm. He had that versatility too.

Toast of New York – an unusual one for a European Raider, only tried turf twice so best treated as a bit of a special case IMO.

BUY THE SUN

[LD73]

US racing leaves me cold as it usually consists of the following:
– a couple of horse going off as if the hounds of hell are chasing after them
– one or two horses are dropped out so far behind that they don’t fit on the TV screen (even on the wide camera shot)
– up the home straight the leaders are usually absolutely legless from going to fast too early and are drunkenly wandering all over the place with their jockeys whipping the bejesus out of them
– the one or two that were originally dropped out in most cases then run on through the beaten horses to finish placed or 4th (with the odd ones getting up on the line and mugging the poor leader)
– throw in the odd fatal breakdown or two
– turf races being regularly transferred onto the dirt when they get any rain

Sorry that type of racing doesn’t and will never appeal to me in the slightest, but I digress.

Gleneagles being by Galileo (who finished unplaced in the Classic in his year) is less likely to be suited by a fast dirt course over 10F and even when the US doesn’t have a decent performer the Europeans (barring the odd cases) always struggle to make an impact – this year they have a Triple Crown winner who , his last run aside, is being touted as a pretty special horse.

For me he should be in the mile (no brainer really) as without Wise Dan it may not take as much winning this year, Ballydoyle’s reason for withdrawing him all year long has been because they were doing what was best for the horse. However, they go against that belief at Ascot and predictabily got burned accordingly so now we are led to believe that running him in a different country on an alien surface over a trip that he has never tried before is what’s best for him over a race run at his preferred trip and on ground that is likely to be what he has been waiting for since Royal Ascot.

Ladies and gentlemen, common sense has now officially left the building.

[Author]

Posts