- This topic has 861 replies, 151 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 11 months ago by
.
- Posts
A good argument by you folks but Im not buying it.
I dont agree with very much of that….practically none. If all these horses fail to beat anything over the rest of the season and into the next season, I wont be calling it a good guineas.
If on a wild shot, the first 6 all win top group ones, well then I will look back and say it was proabably a good guineas. You make reference to what Misu Bond did, so what if he were to win the first of the group 1’s :biggrin: Would your argument still hold.
GW is potentially a superstar and I dont think we can know for sometime if that is to be the case.
SHL
- Total Posts 438
Quote: from SirHarryLewis on 10:11 am on May 9, 2006[br]You make reference to what Misu Bond did, so what if he were to win the first of the group 1’s  :biggrin:  Would your argument still hold.<br>
<br>Of course it would: all that Misu Bond winning a Group One would confirm is that it was an exceptionally weak renewal of whatever race it is that he won or that he has improved considerably as the season has progressed. At the time of the 2,000 Guineas, he was not a Group One horse.
[ it is that he won or that he has improved considerably as the season has progressed. At the time of the 2,000 Guineas, he was not a Group One horse]
How do you know???? Lets take a more realistic example….Sir Percy. I dont know if he is a group one horse but what if he already is…you dont know that yet?? I think your grasping for straws with your argument but lets just agree to disagree with this one. Ill make no assessment of the 2000 guineas for a while yet.<br>
SHL
- Total Posts 438
Quote: from SirHarryLewis on 1:48 pm on May 9, 2006[br]How do you know????
<br>By looking at the form book, which is the fundamental guide to assessing any race. Winning a handicap off 100 and then finishing fifth, behind two horses who have won maidens but been beaten in better company, does not make Misu Bond a Group One horse at this stage in his development.
Surely that’s obvious enough?
Sir Percy is a Gr1 horse, unless winning Europe’s premier 2 year old Group 1 contest somehow disqualfies him from that category.
I think that, apart from the winner, the race wasn’t up to much.
There are 3 reasons why:
(1) The second looks like he needs a lot further
(2) The 3rd and 4th don’t look up to much.
(3) The 3rd favourite was unfit and looks like he will need another couple of furlongs.
So, apart from GW, I can’t see what other horse should have been expected to have put up a g1 performance on Saturday.
And, if GW sticks to a mile, he’ll probably not come up against SP and HN again.
So, until he runs against older horses, he should just be beating the same horses he’s already beaten easily.
Even the older horses aren’t up to much so, if he’s truly special, he should be beating them too.
I’m hoping he’s tried in the Eclipse so we get to judge him against good horses, but there must be a temptation at Coolmore to take the easier route and collect the G1’s.<br> <br>Steve
[By looking at the form book, which is the fundamental guide to assessing any race. Winning a handicap off 100 and then finishing fifth, behind two horses who have won maidens but been beaten in better company, does not make Misu Bond a Group One horse at this stage in his development.
Surely that’s obvious enough?]
<br>So you feel that subsequent races can never reflect back.  Surely if your talking about a horses development, you have to look at the races after the race in question to get a grasp of the development of the horse. ÂÂÂ
Also, if you believe your argument, then studying the form of a horse could never involve studying what the the horses he beat subsequently did.  I think this is ludicrous….  Whatever happended to form working out or not working out.
To be frank, I dont really think you believe your own arguments.  But thanks for the debate. :)
(Edited by SirHarryLewis at 3:13 pm on May 9, 2006)
SHL
[/quoteI think that, apart from the winner, the race wasn’t up to much]
Im inclined to agree with you Stevie at this stage but surely its obvious to state that we might actually be wrong yet.
SHL
- Total Posts 438
Quote: from EC on 2:26 pm on May 9, 2006[br]you don’t think much to AOB do you Yquiem?<br>
<br>I think that he’s a perfectly competent trainer, although there are many others who could do what he does granted the raw materials he is sent. What I don’t like about Coolmore in general is their hype machine, which is sadly inevitable when a stable is run as a business.
"then studying the form of a horse could never involve studying what the the horses he beat subsequently did. I think this is ludicrous…. Whatever happended to form working out or not working out."
The strength of any race can only be judged by what its protagonists have achieved up to that point in time. If a race works out well, then in all probablility those who have run in it were either not at their peak or were taking on weaker opposition subsequently. One only has to look through the form book to see how official ratings (or RPRs, for those so inclined) tend to increase as the season goes on, reflecting the fact that most horses progress as they mature and take on stronger opposition. Look at George Washington himself: he returned an RPR of 86 on each of his first two runs, then 105, 121, 113 and most recently a 127. What do these figures tell us? That he was too immature to do himself justice early in his carrer, or that conditions were wrong for him, and has subsequently progressed in better company and with natural development.
Should we go back and elevate League Champion and Northern Empire, the horses who beat the Guineas winner into third at Newmarket last May, to champion status because of who they beat?
<br>
If a maiden yields subsequently six winners from the first seven home, we will look back on it as a good maiden. If this years novice hurdle at cheltenham all get hammerd by the older brigade when they step up, we will all look back on it as a substandard novice hurdle…..if the opposite happens, then we will say the opposite. Maybe you wont but alot of us will.
I take your point and perhaps its time to move on. I can see Im not going to change your mind on this ;) <br>
SHL
still not convinced about GW though because of the way the race was run,
Personnally I think George Washington won inspite of the way the run. Hitting the front, big open space of Newmarket, slow early pace all did not suit in my opinion. In a strongly run race, his come from behind tactics would have suited him even better. I personally think the opposition was flattered to get so close to him last Saturday.
- Total Posts 438
Quote: from EC on 5:32 pm on May 9, 2006[br]I’m not really sure what you are saying..if the field contains very few good ones from last year = poor form..if it contains all the best ones from last year = poor form?
<br>You have forgotten to factor in any historical aspect. Yes, this year’s Guineas field featured most of the leading two year olds from last season, but what strength in depth was there amongst that crop? Were there any Arazis, Celtic Swings, Dieses or Storm Birds? Many people judge a race purely on its status; the standard of championship races can fluctuate just as much, on a year to year basis, as that of any other race.
I just don’t believe that last season’s juveniles were any good and George Washington, in beating them so comprehensively, has done nothing more than he ought to have done.
Edit: don’t know why this has come out in bold print.
:( <br>(Edited by yquem21 at 8:05 pm on May 9, 2006)<br>
(Edited by yquem21 at 8:06 pm on May 9, 2006)
OH …and how can you tell whether they are Arazis or storm birds or welll….George Washingtons til later. And as for that point, surely GW performed the equivalent tasks as those horses with his 11 lenght win at the curragh.
SHL
- Total Posts 438
Quote: from SirHarryLewis on 8:46 pm on May 9, 2006[br]OH …and how can you tell whether they are Arazis or storm birds or welll….George Washingtons til later.
<br>Once again, you miss (I would hope deliberately) the basic element of my theory: that any horse’s form as it stands at the time of the race is the only true indication of how that race can be judged.
Maybe Olympian Odyssey will go on to prove himself the new Sea Bird but on 6th May 2006 there was absolutely no way that he was that.
Quote: from yquem21 on 12:22 am on May 10, 2006[br]
Quote: from SirHarryLewis on 8:46 pm on May 9, 2006[br]OH …and how can you tell whether they are Arazis or storm birds or welll….George Washingtons til later.
<br>Once again, you miss (I would hope deliberately) the basic element of my theory: that any horse’s form as it stands at the time of the race is the only true indication of how that race can be judged.
.<br>Maybe Olympian Odyssey will go on to prove himself the new Sea Bird but on 6th May 2006 there was absolutely no way that he was that.  Perhaps we all here
FIRST OF ALL, I THINK THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE YOU TALK TO ARE ACTUALLY WAITING TO MAKE AN ASSESMENT OF HOW GOOD THIS GUINEAS WAS AND WILL BE INFLUENCED BY WHAT HAPPENS OVER THE COMING MONTHS…..SO DONT BE SO PATRONISING.  MOST PEOPLE WILL NOT LOOK BACK AT THIS GUINEAS AS A GOOD RACE IF ALL THOSE HORSES INCLUDING THE WINNER  FAIL TO DO ANYTHING. YOU ARE BY AND LARGE, IN A MINORITY.  SO NO, I DIDNT MISUNDERSTAND YOU….IM REALLY THAT THICK!!  :)
(Edited by SirHarryLewis at 9:16 am on May 10, 2006)
SHL
Anyhow, we will agree to differ on this. Everybody has there own way. Does anyone whats the story with AOB or Goldophin and the French Guineas. What have they got.
SHL
Prophetic words, EC. I strongly suspect that Aidan O’Brien was trying to do punters a favour by mentioning that Horatio was backward – though most of us, I suspect had backed him A.P.
He knew he had a world-beater in GW and preferred to save Horatio for another bigee. Why have him race his guts out trying to match his nibs? It should have been read as a tip, particularly in the light of EC’s stated rumour that Aidan thought he was the best he’d trained. Maybe if I’d been more financial, I’d have had a saver on him, but at that price I couldn’t have rustled up enough to make it worthwhile hazarding.
I remember newspaper reports before El Gran Senor’s Derby about the time he’d returned in a previous race, and the belief by some that the filming was out of synch, giving a false reading.
And don’t forget Hawk Wing’s breaking of the all-age record of 6, I think, at the Curragh, when he was only a 2-year old.
<br>
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.