- This topic has 753 replies, 126 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Am I being dim here and reading into this something that’s nothing, as neither the RP nor anyone on here seems at all concerned that what appears to be the awarding of an arbitrary ‘high’ rating just to please a retiring grandee is surely a very questionable act, at best
Questionable? I couldn’t disagree more. This is precisely how ratings should be prescribed!
I’d heard that during the 19th century it was common practice to award very low handicap marks to the horses of the biggest landowners whilst they were racing, then reverse that policy immediately when said nags went off to stud.
A sterling practice in my view. Keeps the riff-raff out.
Stop whining.
Mike
Do you think Nathaniel/Danedream would have beaten Frankel in the KG then Gord?
And for the last time The Brave has not been dropped just "recalibrated" – get over it.
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
[quote="Jonibake"
And for the last time The Brave has not been dropped just "recalibrated" – get over it.This is spot on. All they have done is recalibrate the rating in line with the way it is done now. In todays RP even Geoffery Gibbs who was part of the handicapping panel in those days said the ratings in those days were too high. He first said this way back in 1997.
I said months ago that I was clueless as to how the BHA figures can differ so greatly from RPR and Timeform and I am still just as clueless now.
All people who form ratings will differ in their opinion to some degree. The reason TF ratings differ so much with the official ratings is down to the slippage in official ratings. When the official rankings were first done in 1977 they used the same scale as Timeform. Hence the rating for Dancing Brave was pretty similar. TF 140 Official 141. The difference is that Timeform have remained consistent and not allowed slippage and still rate to the same scale.
I said months ago that I was clueless as to how the BHA figures can differ so greatly from RPR and Timeform and I am still just as clueless now.
All people who form ratings will differ in their opinion to some degree. The reason TF ratings differ so much with the official ratings is down to the slippage in official ratings. When the official rankings were first done in 1977 they used the same scale as Timeform. Hence the rating for Dancing Brave was pretty similar. TF 140 Official 141. The difference is that Timeform have remained consistent and not allowed slippage and still rate to the same scale.
Thanks for the explanation Ken!
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
Just a bit further on my last post. They are saying that the official figures were about 7 lb higher in 1977 down to about 1 lb higher in 1991. Therefore if Frankel’s figure was done in 1977 he would have been rated around 147, the same as timeform.
Never mind – perhaps your Dawn Approach will come along and trump the lot.
PS why do you always put Frankel in commas?
I’ll put you in a bloody ‘Comma’ next time I see you,ya Cheeky little Munchkin!
And for the last time The Brave has not been dropped just "recalibrated" – get over it.
Pure Coincidence then is it!
Being a Traditionalist Joni and one who appreciates History,particularly regarding Horseracing I would have liked to have seen Frankel
tested over the true Champions trip of 11/2m.History has shown time and time again there is a pattern to our horses racing careers,they start off in a Maiden and progress to a listed and Group 3,if they are of Classic Potential they will then run in the 2000gns this race soon sorts out who’s who and from it we’ll get Group 1 Sprinters,Milers and Middle distance sorts.From the 2000gns we’ll see the ocassional Derby winner,from that it was always a King george then onto the Arc.If these types stay in training at 4yo then its Coronation Cup,the POW,the Eclipse,the Juddmonte,the Irish Champion etc.These are historically renowned races for recognising Champions of the past.Your
Frankel
has taken a totally different route to Superstardom,one that is certainly not recognised by me,King of foresight and naturally gifted assessor of young horses and certainly not one who fits the criteria of ‘Greatest Horse Ever’ title.
Being a Traditionalist Joni and one who appreciates History,particularly regarding Horseracing I would have liked to have seen
Frankel
tested over the true Champions trip of 11/2m.
Frankel
has taken a totally different route to Superstardom,one that is certainly not recognised by me,King of foresight
So with you it is purely the name of the race not the actual horses that he beats or the way he beats them. He thrashed an Irish Derby winner and Epsom runner up. He thrashed an Eclipse winner, he thrashed a Juddmonte winner, he thrashed a King George winner. This counts for nothing in your book because it wasn’t in your special list of races.
You talk about DB’s Arc. Yes what a race that was. Ask 100 racing experts and they would all agree it was his defining performance. Performance.
What was Frankel’s defining performance? His Royal Lodge? His Guineas? His Sussex? His Queen Anne? His Juddmonte? Ask 100 racing experts and you would get 5 different answers. THAT is what makes him exceptional. THAT is what makes him unique. THAT is what makes him, in the opinion of me, Dancing Braves’s owner and ALL three handicappers the greatest of all time.
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
Am I being dim here and reading into this something that’s nothing, as neither the RP nor anyone on here seems at all concerned that what appears to be the awarding of an arbitrary ‘high’ rating just to please a retiring grandee is surely a very questionable act, at best
Questionable? I couldn’t disagree more. This is precisely how ratings should be prescribed!
I’d heard that during the 19th century it was common practice to award very low handicap marks to the horses of the biggest landowners whilst they were racing, then reverse that policy immediately when said nags went off to stud.
Silly me
I made the schoolboy error of forgetting that Racing observes the Swannellian calendar not the Gregorian: it is of course 1913Which wraps things up nicely, congratulations to both the ‘Major’ and Dancing Brave
I find it quite funny ( with due respect and deference to your good self, TAPK.. naturally
) that the self proclaimed " king of foresight " didn’t have the foresight to see how brilliant a horse Frankel would turn out to be. Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
I find it quite funny ( with due respect and deference to your good self, TAPK.. naturally
) that the self proclaimed " king of foresight " didn’t have the foresight to see how brilliant a horse Frankel would turn out to be. When you have your head stuck up your backside for most of the day I suppose it’s forgivable to miss a thing or two.
Silly me
I made the schoolboy error of forgetting that Racing observes the Swannellian calendar not the Gregorian: it is of course 1913Which wraps things up nicely, congratulations to both the ‘Major’ and Dancing Brave
Indeed; fragrant people, salt of the earth etc.
Regarding Dancing Brave’s Lance Armstong-esque retrospective downgrading, Teddy Grimthorpe came up with the worst anaolgy since
shots rang out as shots are wont to do
courtesy of:
"I think the great thing is that everyone’s got an opinion. Just because someone says that the Leeds United team of 1970 is the greatest ever, it doesn’t mean to say they’re totally right."
No Teddy, they may not be y’know,
totally
right…
Mike
I’m surprised they’ve dropped Shergar in the ratings. I know Sea The Stars won an Arc but i’m surprised the two can be rated as they have been
Great points by Steve and Ginge as usual.
I would beg to differ just slightly with you Ginge. Whilst I completely agree that Frankel was not at his best on the
very
soft ground he encountered at Ascot, he still produced two jaw dropping performances on good to soft. The Royal Lodge and Queen Anne were both run on good to soft and we know what happened there.
Anyway the main point I want to make is that he achieved his joint best performance on softish ground so I would say he was equally adept on that as he was on quick ground. It was just the heavy stuff that slowed him down…….a touch.
Just because the official going is good-soft Joni, doesn’t mean it is a correct assessment.
On Royal Lodge day Poets Voice won the QEII in a Racing Post time beating standard, fast by 0.24 seconds. Even with Group 1 horses such a time is in my opinion impossible on good-soft.
On Queen Anne day racing started on officially "good-soft", but it was soon changed (I believe it was after just two races) to Good. In Race 2 Bated Breath and Sole Power ran well for second and third in the Kings Stand. Both horses need a sound surface to show their best. Did the ground suddenly firm up in the space of half an hour?
Timeform give their assessment of the going on both Royal Lodge and Queen Anne days as good.
However, even if we do say Frankel was fully adept on good-soft Joni. There is very little doubt in my mind he was NOT AS effevtive on soft and heavy.
Value Is EverythingI find it quite funny ( with due respect and deference to your good self, TAPK.. naturally
) that the self proclaimed " king of foresight " didn’t have the foresight to see how brilliant a horse Frankel would turn out to be. You’ve answered your own question H.
"Self proclaimed".As Joni so rightly says, those more interested in the name of race won than ability of performance – will never believe Frankel was "The Best".
If the Derby, King George and Arc were contested solely by Seller winners and one horse happened to win all three – TAPK’d think it was outstanding form.
Value Is Everything"MoleHorse":3374dj64 wrote:
When you have your head stuck up your backside for most of the day I suppose it’s forgivable to miss a thing or two.
Nath,I’ve narrowed this Prick down to 2 previous contributors,both who were banned and both who had nothing whatsoever worth contributing worthy of debate,being a Mass-debator myself I can spot a Tosser a mile off! I dont suppose you’d like to come and remove my head from my Backside though Moley would you??
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.