- This topic has 156 replies, 21 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 10 months ago by
.
- Posts
Just one more thing: bring Emily Upjohn into the equation and you’ll see why Paddington’s run wasn’t below par. No way she would have finished ahead of Nashwa or anywhere near Mostahdaf, rather a length or two behind the O’ Brien horse.
There is nothing wrong with a three year old finishing behind two four year olds in a truly run Group 1.
“Another point is that if Mostahdaf’s connections were that confident they were superior why did they make the running with him and not run his usual stalking style? It’s because they wanted to properly test if Paddington had run one race too many and the tactics were spot on”.
Hmmm…
It shows no such thing.
Facts are:
Paddington is effective at a mile to a mile and a quarter (has plenty of speed at the 10f trip).
Mostahdaf is a pure mile and a quarter horse and showed at Ascot (by far his best race prior to this week) that he goes very well in a truly run mile and a quarter (has plenty of stamina at the trip).
Conclusion:
Had Mostahdaf’s connections not made the running at a good pace then Paddington would’ve been able to set a slow pace which would’ve suited a horse with superior speed – especially with a positional advantage for the sprint for home.Value Is EverythingEverybody sees things differently. The one thing we don’t know is what Paddington best distance is. Running so many quick races means he never really could post a high rating. I’m confident he will go on to better things ratings wise. Time will tell but he’s already achieved more than many so called top notchers so getting beat at York where many top horses have been beaten isn’t a slight on him. The bear will roar back.
“Nashwa probably ran a career best because Paddington didn’t run to his A1 yesterday”.
Hmmm…
A career best rating is a career best rating. Paddington not being in A1 form would not make any difference to whether Nashwa ran a career best rating. ie Take Paddington out of the race result and her “form” is the same because the distance between winner and second is 1 length with or without Paddington..
Value Is Everything“Yes, it is possible the number of races has caught up with him; but Paddington’s record shows that he’s thrived on racing three weeks apart. If there is one horse you’d be confident of running to form and even improving with races close together it would be Paddington.”
He’d been thriving but the last race was on testing ground and he had to work hard to get through it. There is only so far you can keep racing them before the ‘elastic band breaks’.
5 runs from 1st May including that Goodwood effort is a lot of racing going into an Eclipse. It was credit to the horse that he was beat just a length and a quarter in the end.
Yes, I’d agree that Paddington was more likely to run below form three weeks after a race on soft. Fact remains though, Paddington’s form shows it is far less likely to affect him than the vast majority of horses.
Value Is Everything“Running so many quick races means he never really could post a high rating”.
Hmmm…
Why?
You don’y half come out with some strange statements, Mike.
The more races a horse has surely the more chances it has of putting up a high rating.
Paddington is just one of those horses that thrives on racing.Unless of course you mean there is no room between races to give a horse performance enhancing drugs without it disappearing through its system before the drugs test.
You’re not suggesting AOB would do such a thing?
Value Is Everythingtbh I do think Paddington may well improve again. Possibly in the Autumn or next year. Although he’s had plenty of racing this season his racing career on the track is still less than a year old. I would be a touch more enthusiastic about his chances given some give underfoot… Especially if running against Mostahdaf agan.
Mostahdaf has a seldom seen beautiful long pointing toe stride which is always likely to be at its best on a sound if not quick surface. He’s also turned over a new leaf in his last two races. Prior to which he’d not found that much under pressure. Be interesting to see if he can remain as genuine.
Value Is EverythingIf he had won by 1/2 a length or a length nobody would be saying he has run below form and was feeling the effects of so many races etc……it would have been more of the he just thrives on his racing or (as Aidan might say: he is an abnormal/special/freakish/talented/different kind of horse than we have had before), now its on to Leopardstown next.
Interesting to note that York officially was his first run on good to firm ground and in the latter stages apart from his standard unusual head carriage when Moore got stuck into him he notably hung left in behind Mostahdaf (either through tiredness or not enjoying the ground) – although I don’t recall much being said about that in the aftermath as it was much more about maybe going to the well one too many times with him.
I think ultimately Paddington is one of those horses that is never going to be visually impressive with winning distances, as he will only just do enough and as such the lower rated horses are finishing much closer to him than ratings suggest they should so it will make him hard to be rated any higher (Sea The Stars was to a much lesser extent the same with his performances). That constitution of not fully exerting himself may be part and parcel of why he was able to reel off running in all those amount of races in quick successsion.
It is a difference kind of brilliance for sure as apart from Sea The Stars and Giant’s Causeway it is very rare to see horses campaigned and actually thrive in that way at G1 level in a single season.
Coolmore will always try to find another excuse for their good colts LD. Never mentioning a possibility of the good-firm ground being too firm, because they’d see saying such a thing as reducing stallion value.
I can’t really think that Paddington “will only just do enough”. Horses that will only just do enough are invariably those that don’t like leading. Paddington has shown by being happy to make the running that he doesn’t mind being in front. Albeit for some it’s the sound of the crowd that puts them off rather than being in front, that’s “idling” and I haven’t noticed Paddington do that either. Or those that don’t want to be headed.In Giant’s Causeway’s case he’d always find a little bit more because he didn’t like being headed. Again, nothing like Paddington as his winning distances are too large.
True that horses where their head comes up in the latter stages can be a sign they won’t go clear. But Paddington’s high head carriage is visible whether in front or in behind horses.
Value Is EverythingThe ‘will only just do enough’ comment is more in the vein that when he is sitting in behind and hits the front, he doesn’t put distance into his rivals…he kind of just hits the front and then maintains a gap almost as if he is waiting for something to come to him.
It was also evident in the Eclipse and Sussex Stakes that when challenged he kept finding a bit more rather than drawing away from his rivals.
“I don’t agree with that Ian I’m afraid.”
No worries, Mike, opinions make the game – and the market – if everyone always agreed with me I’d never be able to get a value bet on!
“if Mostahdaf’s connections were that confident they were superior why did they make the running with him and not run his usual stalking style?”
Err, because if they gifted Paddington a soft lead, their horse might not run to his mark.
My only doubt about Mostahdaf before this race was that it was only his last run that made him the form horse.
But he’s not only reproduced it, he’s reproduced it with completely different tactics – that’s a good horse.
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"Paddington was over-hyped, but fair dues to Coolmore for actually running him so often; the more a horse runs, the more likely he is to be beaten, they aren’t machines. No love for Coolmore, or for high end flat racing, where the tail of breeding wags the racing dog, and they may have had their own commercially-driven motivation for trying him so highly
Nothing strange in my comments just opinions based on 45 years of watching top horses. Had Paddington been brought along steadily its easy to see him posting a far higher rating. Coolmore for once got caught up in the media hype around him and went to the well too quickly. Very few horses have the constitution of giants causeway. Put it this way on a soft ground champion stakes who do you back. I know I’d back the bear to the hilt.
“The ‘will only just do enough’ comment is more in the vein that when he is sitting in behind and hits the front, he doesn’t put distance into his rivals…he kind of just hits the front and then maintains a gap almost as if he is waiting for something to come to him.
———————————————
Possible LD – it’s a game of opinions – but imo if giving that sort of credit to Paddington you’d have to each year give thousands of other winners the same and many won’t be capable of the upgrade. It is surely best to judge a horse’s ability by the form it actually shows unless there is clear evidence. eg Having been eased down. Even with other factors like clear idling – or a Giant’s Causeway will to keep in front – I still wouldn’t add a specific amount to the rating. Just rate the horse with a “+”.
I believe Paddington may well prove capable of better than shown in the International, but more because imo he has more scope for improvement than anything else.
Value Is Everything
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.