- This topic has 139 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Here you go GT – you’re not Simon Rowlands in disguise are you!
http://betting.betfair.com/horse-racing/timeform-features/handicappers-corner-frankel-set-to-prove-himself-a-true-020511.html
GT –
If I thought the performance in itself is worth 137, yet I believe Frankel’s run suggests he is capable of 142, why would I rate the horse 137 for his next race? Doing so would not be giving my truthful opinion of his merit.
You give it 137 with a p, a P or a +, or whatever, to indicate that you think may be capable of better than it has already achieved. I wouldn’t rate him as though he’s already achieved it unless there were very opaque reasons why.
What if a horse is 10 lengths up going in to the last furlong, yet heavily eased and gets home by just a length. Do you rate the horse on a one length victory?
I agree, you wouldn’t. You might also ‘up’ a rating if a horse was clearly baulked or interfered with. But neither of these scenarios was the case. Frankel was ridden out (pretty vigourously, including a few cracks of the whip) from two out to withion 30/50 yards of the line.
But in this case Frankel went many, many lengths clear still going well; and had the race won two out (or even before that) with all bar possibly Native Khan all out. If Frankel did as I suspect, and went an exceptionally strong early pace (I am obviously presuming I am right about the sectional times); anyone with this information can easily assume Frankel is better than the official 6 lengths win indicates. Therefore is perfectly entitled to up the rating. Instead of the word “guesswork”, I’d rather call it “informed opinion”.
What you are assuming here, illogically, is that if the race had been run differently he’d have won by further. How can anyone possibly tell how a differently run race would have suited the others? Frankel has already shown that he is tricky to settle (Dewhurst) so informed opinion might suggest that the way he ran on Saturday was the only way he was going to win by as much as six lengths and rate him LOWER, which, I agree, would be as nonsensical as doing the opposite.
Yes, slower earlier fractions may have helped Frankel lodge a faster overall time (and this is purely hypothetical as we don’t have the splits) but it would have altered how the others ran their race and they could easily have managed a better performance. You even say this yourself –
But because many of his rivals went too quick early, they will be able to run better races another day
I get where you are coming from GT, and I agree he ‘might’ be value for more, but no one has any way of knowing. I don’t think we can be particularly informed about the ‘what-ifs’. He won by five lengths (not six btw) and did so under a strong-ish drive last two furlongs in a race which appeared to be run at a pace which suited him much better than the others leading me to believe that, if anything, he might have been slightly flattered by the winning margin.
Not saying he couldn’t do it again though, if he ran in a similar fashion (unlikley at Ascot with the bend to contend with) which disadvantaged his rivals to a similar extent while playing to the key strength he exhibited Saturday, namely the ability to keep up a blistering gallop for an extended distance.
So, give him the 137 for the 6 lengths (I’d say 135 for 5 lengths), and give him a p if you will, but don’t guess that he is a 142 when he hasn’t proved it yet.
Corm,
In most races I would agree with you, putting a p,P or + would suffice. But in this case there are mitigating circumstances. In effect (or is it affect?) Frankel has already shown the 142 rating (as I said my rating is 140) because he wasso far clear coming in to the final furlong
. I believe it is this distance that is the true worth of Frankel’s ability; before the excertions of an overly strong pace told on him. That overly strong pace told on the front runner more than any other horse. You agree he "might be value for more". I say he is probably (almost certainly) value for more, so feel it is wise (at this point in time) to up the rating. My reading of the race is that it is "illogical" not to do so.
Value Is Everything
Posted that last one before I saw the Timeform write up Corm.Gizza job Simon!
Value Is Everything- Total Posts 17716
allowing a horse who couldn’t even win a Woodcote Stakes to grab 2nd place
.
I’m not sure of the intent of that comment, other than giving the handicapper a black eye, given that Dubawi Gold has won twice at the same level ( albeit on the all weather ) since the Woodcote defeat. You haven’t looked to take that fact into account let alone made any allowance for the possibilty that Dubawi Gold may have improved in the hands of Richard Hannon.
BluesBrother thanks for taking the time to put things into context. Your rating makes a lot more sense now.
I don’t know why anyone is comparing the times of Frankel and Sea The Stars. Different days, different ground, different wind. You can never come up with anything quantative or useful from that analysis.
The price analysis of the placegetters is correct. Every price in the race other than Frankel was over inflated by the presence of the winner. The 16/1 about Native Khan could have been halved in many normal years. I see no reason why he can’t win a Gr1.
Native Khan’s only real failure was at Doncaster where the trainer freely admits he shouldn’t have run and the race tactics were too negative. There’s more to come there. He was the only horse, barring the winner of course, to race anywhere near the leader speed on Saturday and finish the race off.
And here from another of racing’s thinkers (James Willoughby)…
http://thefiguresneverlie.blogspot.com/
There is some fascinating discussion on, and illustrations of, the effect of pace on that blog.
In there somewhere (in the article ‘This is the story of the Hurricane…’) you’ll see the following quote –
It was this which led me to believe that the ability to withstand early pace was the nearest single approximation to the ethereal notion of ‘class’ in the racehorse.
And that, in my view, is what seperated Frankel from the rest of them on Saturday. He was the only one able to ‘go’ the early pace (which he set) but was also capable of sustaining enough pace/speed in the latter stages (despite that early pace) to see off those that were running faster than he in the second half of the race. That is a rare combination of assets.
If you look at the article ‘Pace the Final Frontier I’ on that blog you’ll also see some discussion of Secreteriat’s astounding sectionals in his Belmost. Possibly the supreme example of a horse withstanding early pace, slowing up (relatively) in the latter part of the race, yet still managing to return a very, very fast overall time.
Perhaps the most amazing example of a great horse withstanding the effects of early pace comes from the 1973 Belmont Stakes in New York. If only we had sectional times in Europe, we would probably have been aware of several comparable feats by some of our great horses.
Unfortunately we don’t (and it is a damning indictment of the foresight and ambition of UK racing that we are nearly 40 years on from that Belmost and still don’t have sectional times for our major races), but I’d suggest that it is likely that Frankel achieved exactly that
type
of performance (if not to the same degree), returning a fast overall time despite blistering early pace. Withstanding early pace to devastating effect, in other words.
I’m not sure that his superiority would have been illustrated any more clearly (in terms of lengths won by) had they gone a more even pace, as seems to be the suggestion underpinning the extra two lengths Timeform have allocated by means of assessing his superiority.
In fact, I’d be of the opinion that the way the race unfolded on Saturday was perhaps the perfect scenario for Frankel to maximise his superiority (in terms of lengths won-by). Any other pace combination might not have exploited that crucial ability to withstand that early pace, nor might any other pace combination have so emphatically exploited the failure of his rivals to do so.
Good article by James there, but can’t have Frankel at Epsom. It was not as if Queally made his mount run that pace. Frankel wanted to go. Can’t see them being able to restrain him even in front. Though do agree the best place for Frankel is in front at any distance, to use the most beautiful stride I have ever seen. Being restrained behind horses inhibits that long stride and more’s to the point, Frankel doesn’t like it. We’ve seen in other races, Royal Lodge, Dewhurst, Greenham, he fights for his head when behind. However, in front he’ll want to go too fast early on to stay 1m4f, even if a pacemaker (spoiler) does not take him on.
I’ve laid 5/1 for the Derby, partly because I don’t think they’ll take the chance. Though might back Frankel to win it if he gets any bigger than 20/1.
Value Is EverythingThe price analysis of the placegetters is correct. Every price in the race other than Frankel was over inflated by the presence of the winner. The 16/1 about Native Khan could have been halved in many normal years.
Sea The Star’s price was 8/1 when he won the Guineas (half of Native Khan’s) and both horses were sixth favourite.
So, perhaps 2009 was a ‘normal’ year because the 2YO form was patchy whereas Frankel’s 2YO form was exceptional?
The price analysis of the placegetters is correct. Every price in the race other than Frankel was over inflated by the presence of the winner. The 16/1 about Native Khan could have been halved in many normal years. I see no reason why he can’t win a Gr1.
I agree to a point, but odds are not necessarily a pointer to how good a horse is or can be. Look at Wharf, the 2nd fav behind Zafonic in his 2000. Had Zafonic not been odds on Wharf would have traded at as little as 9/2, but what did Wharf ever do?
surprised at some of the knockers of Frankel on this thread.
There were detractors before the race and appears there are still some left despite an astonishing win.
Amazed at the comments that the horse has "temperament" and won’t go on. Pretty clear that the horse has a very docile temperament, easy to handle, and only gets lit up on the racecourse because he wants to show how good he is. Saturday was the first chance he’s been given to stride on at his own pace and not be restrained to that of mere mortals ….. and we all saw the result.
Am a great fan of Goldikova and Canford Cliffs. But they will be obliterated should they meet Frankel.
Fwiw, have given Frankel the highest rating (133+) given to a horse in 8-9 years of trying to do time figures.
Imperious performance though it was, a horse that gets an unchallenged lead is often overrated (particularly by Timeform), and as with such as Hawk Wing and Cape Blanco, Frankel is unlikely ever to reproduce a similarly rated performance.
That’s not to say he isn’t a very high class colt, and he should win plenty more races, but whereas anything above a 135 was a very special achievement at one time, they now seem to conferred like confetti.Frankel’s lead was ‘unchallenged’
because none of the others were anywhere near good enough to get to him
.
The visual impression was sensational, the overall time was very very strong indeed and on this occasion, I think Timeform were fully justified in making Frankel a couple of lengths better than the result.
Unlike previous debates that have been had re Timeform overrating horses (Harbinger being the most obvious overreaction by Timeform imo), this horse has looked freakishly good on at least three occasions. As long as he stays sound, I think there is every chance we will see repeat performances in terms of sky high ratings and times.
Imperious performance though it was, a horse that gets an unchallenged lead is often overrated (particularly by Timeform), and as with such as Hawk Wing and Cape Blanco, Frankel is unlikely ever to reproduce a similarly rated performance.
That’s not to say he isn’t a very high class colt, and he should win plenty more races, but whereas anything above a 135 was a very special achievement at one time, they now seem to conferred like confetti.Frankel’s lead was ‘unchallenged’
because none of the others were anywhere near good enough to get to him
.
The visual impression was sensational, the overall time was very very strong indeed and on this occasion, I think Timeform were fully justified in making Frankel a couple of lengths better than the result.
Unlike previous debates that have been had re Timeform overrating horses (Harbinger being the most obvious overreaction by Timeform imo), this horse has looked freakishly good on at least three occasions. As long as he stays sound, I think there is every chance we will see repeat performances in terms of sky high ratings and times.
Sorry, but Harbinger obliterates a later Arc winner by 17L and G1 Irish Champion winner by 11L, after trotting up in a John Porter, an Ormonde and a Hardwicke and is overrated? Yet Frankel bombs home in a virtual walk over against no-marks and is ‘Pegasus’? I would counter that if Harbinger had not hit a flat spot as a 3yo, he could easily have been horse of the decade.
I hate it when pundits refuse to believe their own eyes, Harbinger’s KG win is one of the most sensational things we will ever see. We should savour it, not crap on it as a fluke.
We are yet to see Frankel’s best, and I hope the horse does beat all put before it, but his 2000 win isn’t a crowning moment.- Total Posts 17716
Frankel’s lead was ‘unchallenged’
because none of the others were anywhere near good enough to get to him
.
Yes TDK, but it’s those challenges, and consequent changes of pace, that use up a horse’s energy, and the form book is littered with horses who’ve set fast times unharried, but been unable to replicate them when taken on by horses of similar calibre.
Frankel is clearly a very good colt, may even be the freak some hold him to be, but I’d bet good money he won’t treat such as Canford Cliffs (OR 127) and Goldikova (125) with such disdain, nor will there be any 142’s flying about afterwards (in the real world – at least).agree that Harbinger was a sensational performance in the King George, and rated it accordingly.
But at WFA, Frankel’s run on Saturday still comes out superior by 8lbs.Goldikova I have awarded some of the best figures by a miler in the last few years, but were she to take on Frankel in say the Sussex Stakes, she would have to give him 3lbs. Even her best speed figure when beating Aqlaam 6 lengths in the 2009 Jacques Le Marois will leave her 4-5 lengths off Frankel giving him 3lbs.
Personally think Frankel has nothing to prove now over a mile against the 3yos, and may as well take in the Derby to see if he can join the immortal group of Sea Bird et al. If it doesn’t work out, can have a break until an autumn campaign over a mile against Canford Cliffs and Goldikova.
Whilst you can only beat what’s in front of you, when essentially outsiders finish 2nd, 3rd & 4th there are doubts about the validity of the form. I think thats true for a group1 or a class 5 handicap.
That combimed with the style of the win is making difficult to get a handle on it.
I looked at the closing 1m race to and saw that a OR89 horse won it by a short head in the same time as the fourth placed horse which is 101. There is the doubt what did the placed horse run to.
I feel that Frankel is around the mid 130’s with potential to go higher.
Timeform had Zilzal, Mark of Esteem and El Gran Sensor rated at 137/136 at the end of their careers so for Frankel is be rated the same at the start of his 3-y-o career is quite a compliment.
- Total Posts 17716
RPR have Frankel on 133 – their highest ever rating for a Guinea’s winner. They have him as running his best previous race in the Dewhurst (127), which indicates he improved an entirely credible 6lb in the interim. To my eyes, that is much more sensible and fitting than any 142.
Fwiw, it might also indicate that he’ll be better over 7f, not inconceivable given the way he was running on fumes at he end of the classic, (I don’t buy into this ‘idling’ business, else why didn’t he idle when he was 15l clear?).RPRs and Timeform ratings are not directly comparable – so you aren’t comparing like for like.
I don’t agree re not being able to reproduce the rating against better horses either
If you go out in front and run a Timeform 136 speedfigure (or whatever – they aren’t the only ones who have the time as exceptional) and never see another horse, it doesn’t really matter what you are running against.
…….I looked at the closing 1m race to and saw that a OR89 horse won it by a short head in the same time as the fourth placed horse which is 101. There is the doubt what did the placed horse run to. ……
An interesting comparison, finnesko, but you are making the assumption that both Slim Shadey ran to a mark of 101 and the closing handicap winner ran to a mark of 87 (carrying 9-01).
I would venture that in reality, Slim Shadey is very badly treated off a mark of 101 (never earned a timefigure better than 82 as a 2yo from me), so cannot possibly be competitive off that mark ….. whereas Bahceli ran 1lb above his mark on timefigures, though will almost certainly get a bigger rise than that for winning a warm little handicap.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.