- This topic has 322 replies, 71 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 12 months ago by
.
- Posts
I must admit that the nobbling thing did cross my mind too, but only for a fleeting moment, given the early race antics of Dawn Approach – but I quickly realised that Manning was mostly to blame.
Yeah, that’ll be it.
Mike
Yeah, that’ll be it.
Mike
Very droll ( NOT !
).Rather than play the old negative, sarcastic card, why not give us your thoughts on the matter instead. The horse settled well enough when allowed to go no, did he not ?
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
Dawn Approach does not stay a mile and a half. No ifs, no buts.
I agree H, "No ifs, no buts, Dawn Approach does
not
stay a mile and a half" BECAUSE he does
NOT settle
.
The reason for Dawn Approach
NOT settling
is mere conjecture.
Value Is EverythingDawn Approach does not stay a mile and a half. No ifs, no buts.
I agree H, "No ifs, no buts, Dawn Approach does not stay a mile and a half" BECAUSE he does NOT settle.
Nor stay !
As Mr Jim Bolger is well aware, Ginge, CC types DO NOT STAY The Derby distance. Fact !
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
Yeah, that’ll be it.
Mike
Very droll ( NOT !
).Rather than play the old negative, sarcastic card, why not give us your thoughts on the matter instead.
No that’s OK, I’ll leave it thanks.
Manning lost the Derby. Or Dawn Approach was nobbled. I get it now.
Mike
Dawn Approach does not stay a mile and a half. No ifs, no buts.
I agree H, "No ifs, no buts, Dawn Approach does not stay a mile and a half" BECAUSE he does NOT settle.
Nor stay !
As Mr Jim Bolger is well aware, Ginge, CC types DO NOT STAY The Derby distance. Fact !
Bolger did not KNOW Dawn Approach would "NOT STAY the Derby distance" H. From what I knew about the horse beforehand I considered it a 60/40 chance. Fair enough I might have over-estimated it, you might have thought he had less or even far less chance of staying. But to call it a "fact" (ie 100% known) is non-factual.
Value Is EverythingManning lost the Derby. Or Dawn Approach was nobbled. I get it now.
Mike
Maybe if you read the whole thread, rather than cherry-picking, you might really "get it."
I backed Ruler Of The World, so I wanted Dawn Approach to lose. My Manning argument does not imply that he was the sole reason for Dawn Approach losing The Derby: rather that, for longer than was necessary, he needlessly resisted the horses natural urges to go faster. Kevin Manning was fighting a fight he could not win, so should have let the horse get on with it.
Only recently, Ruby Walsh ( of all people ) said that it is pointless trying to restrain any racehorse that refuses to settle in the early stages – for longer than is necessary – flat or jumps. He said that it is much better just to let the horse get on with it and then it has a much better chance of settling and finishing its race.
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
Bolger did not KNOW Dawn Approach would "NOT STAY the Derby distance" H. From what I knew about the horse beforehand I considered it a 60/40 chance. Fair enough I might have over-estimated it, you might have thought he had less or even far less chance of staying. But to call it a "fact" (ie 100% known) is non-factual.
Ginge, again, you are misinterpreting what I said.
I said Bolger knew it wouldn’t stay based on the evidence of Dawn Approach being a CC type. The FACT ( in this case ) being that he knew his horse’s CC type beforehand – and therefore, being a keen advocate of the science, he must have taken this FACT on board – the fact which said that of all the CC types tested NONE had ever won over 1 mile 3 furlongs – and only 5% of all tested had won beyond a mile.
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
Steeplechaser I made the same observation on another thread about the Derby and was treated like an old fool. I guess we must be from the same generation.
As tempting as it is to agree with your self opinions
…..you are not fools at all but I do think you have overlooked something important. Before we start talking about conspiracy theories it is surely worth taking a moment to see if there are any other perhaps more rational explanations for what happened.Yes it was out of character for DA to behave like he did but he had always been running over a much shorter distance at a much stronger pace. Without exception his 7 races up til now have been run at a decent lick. Jim has even used a pacemaker since stepping him up to 7f and a mile. Suddenly this horse was being asked to do something completely alien to him. Is it any wonder that he found it difficult to adjust? If you add the fact that he took a knock coming out of the stalls which set him alight, you have a perfectly simple and reasonable explanation with no trace of skulduggery.
As for the CC’s BC’s argument – well it is a moot point isnt it? He will never tackle a mile and a half again so we will never know if a more tractable DA would have got the trip but we can guess he probably wouldn’t have based on his breeding. Does it matter though?
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
Jim Bolger is a wonderful trainer. Seems that the owner like many owners wanted his horse to race in the Derby. Perhaps he would not take no for an answer. The traditional conflict and power play between owners who pay the bills and trainers who want to act like owners, but of courser don’t pay the bills. When your owner has been good to you i.e. spent a fortune in your yard; the least you can do is let him play with his toys.
Come on Andy – surely we are talking about owners acting like trainers NOT the other way round?!!! An owner sends a horse to a trainer to train the horse. The trainer sees that horse every day – in JB’s case since the day he was born. Is it not sensible to let him make the decisions?
The decision Sheikh Mo made means that they will not now be able to play with that particular toy for some time.
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
Bolger did not KNOW Dawn Approach would "NOT STAY the Derby distance" H. From what I knew about the horse beforehand I considered it a 60/40 chance. Fair enough I might have over-estimated it, you might have thought he had less or even far less chance of staying. But to call it a "fact" (ie 100% known) is non-factual.
Ginge, again, you are misinterpreting what I said.
I said Bolger knew it wouldn’t stay based on the evidence of Dawn Approach being a CC type. The FACT ( in this case ) being that he knew his horse’s CC type beforehand –
Not "misinterpreting" at all H, just judging on what was written.
"As Mr Jim Bolger is well aware, Ginge, CC types DO NOT STAY The Derby distance. Fact"!
What you say you meant is totally different to what’s written.
Not that it makes any difference, if you are saying it is a fact that CC types do not stay the Derby distance – then you are saying it was
known
Dawn Approach would not stay (ie fact).
Value Is EverythingJonibake if the owner was making good decisions he would not be in the trouble he is in. See the interview with his trainer after the St.Leger. If you are an owner you know that the minute you hand a horse over to a trainer you cease to be in effect the owner. Try telling a trainer where or when you want your horse to run and you will find out who is the real owner. I have tried to convince myself that I am an owner to no avail.
Jonibake if the owner was making good decisions he would not be in the trouble he is in. See the interview with his trainer after the St.Leger. If you are an owner you know that the minute you hand a horse over to a trainer you cease to be in effect the owner. Try telling a trainer where or when you want your horse to run and you will find out who is the real owner. I have tried to convince myself that I am an owner to no avail.
I am sorry I honestly don’t get this Andy. From the minute you buy a horse you are handing it over to someone. Unless you have it living at your home. 99% of owners buy a racehorse knowing full well that they will hand it over immediately to the trainer of their choice. That doesn’t mean they don’t own it just that they don’t train it. Why do we hand it over? Because they will probably do a better job training it than you. Why should the trainer make the decisions? Because they know the horse, they live with the horse, they work the horse and so they are likely to have a better opinion than you.
Now what I WILL say is we know how hands-on Sheihk Mo is (apart from when it comes to his horse’s mediaction of course) and how he often makes decisions on the Godolphin horses. Some he gets right, as in the St Leger, others he does not. We all know that Godolphin have had their share of downs as well as ups. This was one he got wrong – fair enough. But Jim has been handling this horse since birth and didn’t give him even an entry in the Derby. Sheikh Mo has come in and said "let’s run him in this". Poor decision. Jim will wish he was firmer.
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
Do any of you "DOES NOT STAY 1.5M FACT" merchants fancy laying me 999/1 for The Arc?
Jonibake if the owner was making good decisions he would not be in the trouble he is in. See the interview with his trainer after the St.Leger. If you are an owner you know that the minute you hand a horse over to a trainer you cease to be in effect the owner. Try telling a trainer where or when you want your horse to run and you will find out who is the real owner. I have tried to convince myself that I am an owner to no avail.
I am sorry I honestly don’t get this Andy. From the minute you buy a horse you are handing it over to someone. Unless you have it living at your home. 99% of owners buy a racehorse knowing full well that they will hand it over immediately to the trainer of their choice. That doesn’t mean they don’t own it just that they don’t train it. Why do we hand it over? Because they will probably do a better job training it than you. Why should the trainer make the decisions? Because they know the horse, they live with the horse, they work the horse and so they are likely to have a better opinion than you.
Now what I WILL say is we know how hands-on Sheihk Mo is (apart from when it comes to his horse’s mediaction of course) and how he often makes decisions on the Godolphin horses. Some he gets right, as in the St Leger, others he does not. We all know that Godolphin have had their share of downs as well as ups. This was one he got wrong – fair enough. But Jim has been handling this horse since birth and didn’t give him even an entry in the Derby. Sheikh Mo has come in and said "let’s run him in this". Poor decision. Jim will wish he was firmer.
And "Jim" will be pleased "Sheik Mo" was "firmer" when New Approach won at Epsom I would imagine.
Just to keep the discussion going.Small owners want fun. When the trainer takes your horse and shuts the door behind you he does not want to see you again, just your check.He has maybe a hundred horses in his yard. Some or maybe a few are owned by millionaires.They will give him horses for years to come, if he gets winners for them.If he does not get a winner for you no big deal.You are small fry with a small check book.No fun there.You want to go racing at the seaside but he can’t be bothered.That has been my experience when I lived in the BI.I had a horse running once.There was another owner in the yard with a horse in the race.He arrived in a helicopter.Do I have to say more? Over forty years, I could fill a book.
Just in case it has escaped some on here Jim Bolger owns 49% of Dawn Approach so he is hardly an innocent bystander in terms of where he runs unless of course the money he got for selling a majority share deprived him of any say in the matter. If it did and he was that bothered he shouldn’t have taken the money or at least voiced his concerns ahead of the Derby which he didn’t.
).
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.