- This topic has 156 replies, 35 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 11 months ago by
.
- Posts
If you are not going to bring anything other than a number to attempt to prove your point, the matter is closed as far as I am concerned.
It is precisely because you cannot bring a number to the table that defines your inability to correctly guage whether War Command flopped or not.
A very narrow minded view and I leave you to it.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
If you are not going to bring anything other than a number to attempt to prove your point, the matter is closed as far as I am concerned.
It is precisely because you cannot bring a number to the table that defines your inability to correctly guage whether War Command flopped or not.
A very narrow minded view and I leave you to it.
Timeform have this race the highest of the year (juveniles). One length behind the highest rated horse of the year to date does not a flop make.
I don’t think War Command flopped. A bit reminiscent of Canford Cliffs … won the Coventry by 6 lengths and then finished a close 3rd in his next race (beaten a length).
For a horse to flop, it has to be beaten a good number of lengths IMO.
Review the results of the Railway Stakes and how much the first two horses won by here. A decent O’Brien 2yr old was beaten 4l on that occasion, with the rest no where. Also don’t think War Command was at his best yesterday, didn’t stand out in the parade ring and was being pushed early. Wouldn’t give up on him yet.
I don’t think War Command flopped. A bit reminiscent of Canford Cliffs … won the Coventry by 6 lengths and then finished a close 3rd in his next race (beaten a length).
For a horse to flop, it has to be beaten a good number of lengths IMO.
Canford Cliffs went into the Coventry as a hot favourite, whereas War Command was an outsider. I do not believe that Canford Cliffs was pushed out to 16/1 after his defeat in France, so I think it is a different scenario.
The question originally asked was whether the latter’s win might be a fluke. Gingertipster has stated that he thought 7/1 may underestimate War Command’s chance of winning the 2000 Guineas and that he probably only needed to make a little improvement to win an average Guineas. Sunday’s defeat must be considered a knife into the heart of that opinion and if the stopwatch boys are maintaining that War Command ran near to his best then we have to accept that he has a lot of trouble on his hands with two other horses now on the bandwagon.
If you backed War Command on Sunday you didn’t get paid, regardless of the distance involved, and if you have an ante-post voucher with a price on it lower than 16/1 it has lost possibly a good bit of its sheen now. In regards to those points War Command HAS flopped.
War Command
could
still win the Guineas but I don’t fancy him and, for the record, Canford Cliffs didn’t win it either.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
I did state in my first post that a part of me thought that War Command’s Coventry was a flash-in-the-pan performance. However, in general, I thought he was a decent enough horse but didn’t see him as the next superstar that some folk were making him out to be. Maybe he’ll be one of those enigmatic types that’ll perform very well when conditions and circumstances suit him perfectly.
I don’t believe War Command will win next year’s 2000. So far, the 2YOs that appeal to me most for that classic are Berkshire and Kingman … the latter being my fave.
I don’t think War Command flopped. A bit reminiscent of Canford Cliffs … won the Coventry by 6 lengths and then finished a close 3rd in his next race (beaten a length).
For a horse to flop, it has to be beaten a good number of lengths IMO.
Canford Cliffs went into the Coventry as a hot favourite, whereas War Command was an outsider. I do not believe that Canford Cliffs was pushed out to 16/1 after his defeat in France, so I think it is a different scenario.
The question originally asked was whether the latter’s win might be a fluke. Gingertipster has stated that he thought 7/1 may underestimate War Command’s chance of winning the 2000 Guineas and that he probably only needed to make a little improvement to win an average Guineas. Sunday’s defeat must be considered a knife into the heart of that opinion and if the stopwatch boys are maintaining that War Command ran near to his best then we have to accept that he has a lot of trouble on his hands with two other horses now on the bandwagon.
If you backed War Command on Sunday you didn’t get paid, regardless of the distance involved, and if you have an ante-post voucher with a price on it lower than 16/1 it has lost possibly a good bit of its sheen now. In regards to those points War Command HAS flopped.
War Command
could
still win the Guineas but I don’t fancy him and, for the record, Canford Cliffs didn’t win it either.
Steve,
As I believe I said at the time. There was always a possibility War Command was flattered by the relation he beat theprominently
ridden horses at Ascot. He came from some way back in a strongly run race. But still came
6 lengths
clear of Parbold, who was
also
dropped out early. Parbold then finished third, around 1 3/4 lengths behind of Toormore (thought at this point to be Hannon’s best two year old) in Goodwood’s Group 2 Champagne Stakes; Parbold never nearer. That’s
6 lengths
compared to
1 3/4 lengths
. Horses don’t need to win a race to "frank" the form. The fourth Thunder Strike
7 1/4 lengths
behind War Command ran a terrible race for whatever reason at Newbury next time; but then only beaten around
2 1/2 lengths
by Saayerr in the Group 2 Richmond.
"Form" has worked out well I thought Steve. On
form
War Command is considerably better than both of Goodwood’s best 2 year old winners. Of course Toormore will probably improve along with horses like Kingman.
As I believe I also said at the time, War Command’s performance at Ascot was of one who’s going to be much better suited by a mile than 6 furlongs. Surprised Coolmore kept the horse at 6 furlongs and the Curragh SP ridiculous. At this stage 6 furlongs on fast ground is probably now too short a distance for him, bred to get 1m2f. Considering the conditions, not a "flop". Winner Sudirman is also obviously a very good two year old, one that looks a top class two year old. It may be by season’s end – going down by 1 length (in a race not now his best distance) may look a good performance. Second Big Time also looks a good sprinter.
Yes, I have to be a little disappointed having backed him at 10/1. If not already on would go in for 16’s even with a question mark about War Command’s main owner. An American who’s best three year old this season was trained for a tilt at the Kentucky Derby. Might end up running elsewhere on Guineas day; particularly if Coolmore can find another good Newmarket prospect. In my opinion War Command
still
only needs to improve 7 lbs on his
best
form to win an average Guineas.
Value Is EverythingSteve,
As I believe I said at the time. There was always a possibility War Command was flattered by the relation he beat theprominently
ridden horses at Ascot.
Come off it now Ginger, you also said:-
But nothing to suggest the 6 lengths to Parbold is anything but a genuine reflection of superiority.
It has to be one opinion or the other, not both!!
I wouldn’t read much into Parbold’s runs behind War Command and Toormore, it’s just one of many formlines in the race.
I actually wrote a long examination of some formlines regarding the Coventry and the Phoenix stakes but this site logged me out and I lost it all.
In summary, because I am not typing it again:-
Sir John Hawkins has form with both War Command and Sudirman.
Sir John Hawkins beat Sudirman on his debut along with Jim Bolger’s Intensified. Intensified ran behind War Command on his next start. Sir John Hawkins was third behind War Command in the Coventry. Sir John Hawkins has been well held twice since, including being beaten behind a horse Sudirman defeated by four lengths. Intensified was beaten twice since racing behind War Command, losing at 1/5 in a maiden and then beaten 24 lengths in last behind Exogenesis.
Sudirman was last of five behind Big Time on his debut but in his 4th race turned that around to win half a length, which was exactly the same margin as he did when the two finished ahead of War Command on Sunday.
You can check it out in more depth yourself but I consider this to be the best evidence in assessing the Coventry against the Phoenix and it shows some seemingly deteriorating yardsticks in Sir John Hawkins and Intensified and an improver in Sudirman who seems to have settled into a consistent margin over his three time rival Big Time. It doesn’t scream small improvement from War Command to win the Guineas in my opinion and I don’t think he made any headway on the front two late in Sunday’s race, if anything they seemed to creep slightly further ahead. However, if you are happy with the way the form is working out then all the best with your wager.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
Steve,
As I believe I said at the time. There was always a possibility War Command was flattered by the relation he beat theprominently
ridden horses at Ascot.
Come off it now Ginger, you also said:-
But nothing to suggest the 6 lengths to Parbold is anything but a genuine reflection of superiority.
It has to be one opinion or the other, not both!!
I wouldn’t read much into Parbold’s runs behind War Command and Toormore, it’s just one of many formlines in the race.
Why not both Steve?
Both War Command and Parbold came from the rear (if you pardon the expression). And War Command slaughtered Parbold.
Those ridden prominently might have been at a disadvantage by their early positioning at Ascot,
not
Parbold.
Value Is EverythingIn summary, because I am not typing it again:-
Sir John Hawkins has form with both War Command and Sudirman.
Sir John Hawkins beat Sudirman on his debut along with Jim Bolger’s
Intensified
.
Intensified
ran behind War Command on his next start. Sir John Hawkins was third behind War Command in the Coventry. Sir John Hawkins has been well held twice since, including being beaten behind a horse Sudirman defeated by four lengths.
Intensified
was beaten twice since racing behind War Command, losing at 1/5 in a maiden and then beaten 24 lengths in last behind Exogenesis.
Sudirman was last of five behind Big Time on his debut but in his 4th race turned that around to win half a length, which was exactly the same margin as he did when the two finished ahead of War Command on Sunday.
You can check it out in more depth yourself but I consider this to be the best evidence in assessing the Coventry against the Phoenix and it shows some seemingly deteriorating yardsticks in Sir John Hawkins and Intensified and an improver in Sudirman who seems to have settled into a consistent margin over his three time rival Big Time. It doesn’t scream small improvement from War Command to win the Guineas in my opinion and I don’t think he made any headway on the front two late in Sunday’s race, if anything they seemed to creep slightly further ahead. However, if you are happy with the way the form is working out then all the best with your wager.
"Come off it" Steve.
I find that an unbelievable form line to base War Command / the Coventry.War Command improved greatly to win the Coventry. Therefore, nothing he did before it should be taken in to consideration. The basis of your assessment of War Command as a horse is a form line around a horse called Intensified, who he beat narrowly on debut/maiden. Was that form as good as Ascot Steve? Intensified never even ran in the Coventry.
Do you really believe Intensified ran to form with just a 5 day break when beaten "24 lengths"? If not it has nothing do do with any reliable form line.You say Sir John Hawkins has been "well held since" his third to War Command Steve. If you want to judge War Command by Sir John Hawkins then…
War Command
beat Sir John Hawkins
6 3/4 lengths
in the Coventry.
Anjaal
beat Sir John Hawkins around
1 1/4 lengths
in the July Stakes.
Exogenesis
beat Sir John Hawkins
1 3/4 lengths
in the Tyros where the O’Brien horse wore blinkers; suggesting he wasn’t showing up well at home (unreliable form line).
Judging WC on the two subsequent runs of SJH, War Command is a
5 1/2 lengths better horse
than the Group 2 winning performance of Anjaal and (if you really want to) a
5 lengths better horse
than the Group 3 winning performance of Exogenesis.
You are also (conveniently it seems to me) completely excluding the form lines of both the Coventry 2nd Parbold and 4th Thunder Strike; which seem to suggest War Command considerably better than both Goodwood Group 2 winners.
There is no arguement from me about Sudirman Steve, he’s improved in to a very good two year old. The form line with Sir John Hawkins, Intensified and Sudirman is (like War Command and Intensified) from a maiden, this time even further back – in May. Another unreliable form line where SJH and S have progressed since, latter by a considerable margin.
Value Is EverythingI give up. The site logged me out and I lost the entire post again.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
I give up. The site logged me out and I lost the entire post again.
Compose in Word or whatever your preferred word processor is then Save, Copy and Paste
You shouldn’t rely on crappy websites – of which TRF is one despite its recent shake-up – and let Microsoft hold your words of wisdom
I give up. The site logged me out and I lost the entire post again.
Compose in Word or whatever your preferred word processor is then Save, Copy and Paste
You shouldn’t rely on crappy websites – of which TRF is one despite its recent shake-up – and let Microsoft hold your words of wisdom
I don’t even have to do that Drone.
I believe the site must automatically log you off after a certain time if no activity is detected. So when submitting a long post it will probably come up as the "log in" box …So
log in again
.
If your lost piece was with a "quote" it will just show the "quote without your "lost" work. But the work isNOT
lost.
Press your BACK button!
This takes you back once more to the "log in" box. Don’t write anything! Just
press your BACK button again
.
This retrievesALL
your
LOST
work.
Press submit and it should go through, no problem
.
So basically all that you need to do when it logs you out Steve is…
Log back in again, press your back button twice, press submit.
Value Is EverythingMay I suggest a solution.
Keep your posts brief.
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
My trf.docx file is approaching a Ream, at 493 pages
I save Word copies of all my internet postings, including emails. About 1350 pages in all and it’s quite interesting/amusing/embarrassing to flick back through them from time to time as they’re soon forgotten
very good
dear oh dear
brilliant
berk
did I really write that?
Drone’s way is much better than Gingers and way quicker as by the time Ginger types in his mega unbreakable non hack password again which is –
The betting odds percentage table provides an important part in understanding the relationship between what the odds mean in terms of what the betting public view as a particular chance of a horse winning and what you yourself estimate as the chance of success.
As an example the odds of a selection you are interested in backing is 2/1. From the betting percentage table we know that the chance of winning according to the betting market is 33.3%.
The bookmakers build in a profit margin when framing prices for a race and a useful tip is to account for this by multiplying the actual price by 0.95, so 33.3 x 0.95 = 31.6%. This takes account of the bookmaker’s profit margin. If you haven’t got a calculator to hand just take off 2%
In our example the odds of our selections chance is 31.6% (allowing for the bookies profit margin) but you have estimated your selections chance of winning as 40%. Or to put it another way, if the race were to be run in identical circumstances 10 times, your estimate would be that your selection would win the race 4 times, 4 divided by 10 = 0.4. If you were successful backing this selection 100 times and winning on 40 occasions you would win 80 points, 60 bets were losers which would leave you 20 points to the good.
Drone has been back on ‘word’ and made another post.
Gaelic Warrior Gold Cup Winner 2026
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.