- This topic has 576 replies, 69 voices, and was last updated 1 week, 2 days ago by
.
- Posts
As CAS has said Astralcharmer I doubt very much Mullins would be interested in changing his MO just to possibly win the British trainers championship.
I also doubt there would be any appetite from the main protagonists for a points based system. Best to keep these things simple imo.As RTB says, I thought it was a very odd comment from Ed Chamberlin when he said about Willie Mullins “I really want to hate him but I can’t”
It was followed by a longish silence and I can only think one of the production team prompted him to say it. They do have scriptwriters.Mullins likes a challenge and if the format was changed I still believe he’ll take it on. When his son takes over the reins it’ll be no surprise if more horses are campaigned this side of the Irish Sea away from the Spring Festivals. There isn’t much else to achieve in Ireland. That kingdom has long been conquered.
Is prize money a simple system? Try explaining to a layman that finishing a distant 10th in a Grand National might help win a title!
My points based system would be very easy to explain and makes every race relevant and more equitable. As I said in an earlier post having to win over 125 Class 5 events to match one Grand National win is unjustifiable and plain wrong.
The prize money system only came about following the unedifying sight of watching horses being run into the ground chasing the trainers title. We weren’t far off watching that again this year. The title rules need changing.
And I’ll ask this. Dancing City ran in both Spring Festival’s. Would he have run in the Bet365 yesterday if Mullins had not been chasing the title? I think we all know the answer to that and witnessed the dire consequences for the horse in making that decision.
Here’s the breakdown of runners – winners. C1 broken down by grade
Mullins
C1 154 – 23 / Gr1 70 – 13 / Gr2 28 – 3 / L 11 – 2 / PH 45 – 5
C2 30 – 4
C3 15 – 11
C4 3 – 0
C5 2 – 0Skelton
C1 130 – 18 / Gr1 24 – 3 / Gr2 34 – 7 / L 27 – 8 / PH 45 – 0
C2 153 – 18
C3 196 – 40
C4 311 – 58
C5 206 – 45
C6 1 – 0“ And I’ll ask this. Dancing City ran in both Spring Festival’s. Would he have run in the Bet365 yesterday if Mullins had not been chasing the title? I think we all know the answer to that and witnessed the dire consequences for the horse in making that decision”.
Apart, obviously, from feeling terribly sad for the horse and his connections that was my first thought, too. He had fallen lot, too, which I hadn’t realised.Thanks for those stats Zanybody. So on a points based system (if giving 8 points for PHs as with Grade 1s) Skelton would have scored 474 points and Mullins 226.
It says it all because Mullins doesn’t bother with anything below Class 3 but Skelton won 103 races in Class 4/5 races. I wonder how much those races won?
What is interesting is that Skelton & Mullins both had 18 graded winners each. It’s the sheer number of horses in-behind that works in Mullins favour.
Mullins was perfectly entitled to run Dancing City yesterday. His loss was due to a fall which could have happened at any time on any track. There is not a shred of evidence it was caused by the horse having run at Cheltenham and Aintree.
Pipe, Nicholls and Skelton have all given some horses multiple runs when in pursuit of the title. Mullins is not unique in that regard.
Using Dancing City to make a point against Mullins when the horse’s owners and groom are likely to be very upset strikes me as inappropriate and unfair.
I think that keeping half the horses from running within the handicap is unfair,too, and I’d say that whoever the trainer was or where they came from. There’s always something, going back many years, unsavoury about these end of season battles.
I expect if we looked back through the record books we would find Mullins is not the first to run a highly rated horse to keep others out of the handicap either. Why wouldn’t you maximise your own chances of winning while staying within the rules?
Have a read of this, Moehat. Of course he was typically ‘surprised’ that anyone had a problem with his actions: https://www.racingpost.com/news/festivals/grand-national-festival/mystified-willie-mullins-disappointed-by-inquiry-into-galway-plate-non-runner-arEDe0E8goP8/
I did smile when Patrick’s Park was beaten.The Galway incident was not against the rules but it was sneaky. It is not the same thing as running Grangeclare West yesterday.
Mullins wasn’t the first to pull that stunt at Galway either, as the article makes clear. Again it is the system at fault. Don’t be surprised when people try to game it.
“Using Dancing City to make a point against Mullins when the horse’s owners and groom are likely to be very upset strikes me as inappropriate and unfair”
The fact remains he wouldn’t have been seen within 400 miles of Esher but for Mullins trying to win the title.
It was only 3 weeks ago he took a bad fall at Aintree and that was 3 weeks after finishing last in the Brown Advisory where again his jumping let him down.
He is then asked to run in a 19 runner highly competitive handicap when he had never run in a chase with more than 9 runners before. And as Mullins admitted himself he doesn’t like to school his horses.
I’ve no doubt those who care for him were very upset by yesterday’s events but he there were enough warning signs he shouldn’t have been asked to be one of the ten. The jockey booking itself was enough to worry me before the race was even run. I wouldn’t have backed him for that alone.
Incidentally that’s the 18th horse fatality involving O’Neill since 2020. I don’t know how many times his mounts fall but perhaps somebody else can supply that figure.
I agree regarding O’Neill’s merits as a jockey. But I still don’t believe it was unreasonable for Mullins to run Dancing City.
I really don’t like Jonjo jr. and in fact I NEVER back him. Dancing City was a much better hurdler than a chaser and I still don’t know how he could have been rated 152 over fences. Winning a rather underwhelming Naas G3 didn’t make him a top drawer novice. I thought Willie would have much better handicapped horses for the race that also can jump better compared to him. But apparently he doesn’t….
Even Grangeclare West and Minella Cocooner were beaten a lot further than at Aintree.What really wonders me was Threeunderthrufive’s participation after such a tough race in the National. There was no need for that.
As with a lot of things, there is more to it than a binary is it good or not.
Mullins is setting the standard and it’s a good thing for UK racing that he is bringing horses over for the big meetings, and it’s not like he’s winning everything with odds on shots.
He’s also free to enter horses wherever he likes, but I can sort of understand the frustration of trainers that aren’t trying to compete with him when he rocks up at the lower grade tracks. On the other side of that complaint he’s bringing quality horses that wouldn’t usually be seen at such venues, and it’s not as if the UK big hitters aren’t also turning up.
I’m in agreement with Moehat re the entry of Grangeclare West, it’s within the rules but has a feel of gamesmanship for me. I’d say the same for the multiple entries in the big Handicap Chases.
Anyway, it’s done now.
Will we be having the same debate this time next year?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.