- This topic has 20 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I find it annoying that john oxx isnt letting sts run tomorrow.the horse has run 5 times winning 4,im not sure why he thinks the horse wont handle soft grd.If i recall he handled easier going when he won the beresford stakes last autumn. He has already ruled the horse out of the KG ,so if it comes up soft at york which over the last few yrs the grd has been good to soft is he not going to run,Which only leaves the arc and the irish champion stakes where the chances are the going will be on easy side again.I doubt he will go for the champion stakes at newmarket,so it means we might not see the horse run again after the eclipse next week.At the end of day he should of justlet the horse run.Ballydoyle have had many horses over the yrs who have been top of grd horese but they
have let them take there chances even when the grd has gone against them,and i reckon john oxx should of done the same.It is ‘should have’ NOT ‘should of’! Argggh!
(acknowledges subsequent correction and dismounts from high horse!)
Regardless of that, John Oxx is the trainer and it’s a decision for him and the bill paying owner as to where and when their horse should run. If you don’t like that then tough, because that’s the way things are.
Rob
It is a shame. I remember Brigadier Gerard running at least three times on unsuitably soft ground and he just about got away with it. In this instance it is probably the combination of the ground and distance that has led to his absence, perhaps over 10f they might have taken the risk.
Maybe John Oxx thinks the Eclipse is an easier race for his horse to win.
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
It looks as though the trainer thinks 1m 4f is the absolute limit for the horse – attempting the distance in easy going will probably test his stamia too far – in which case why risk souring the horse.
Yes he has proven form on even softer going, however that was over 7f – 8f so not comparing like with like.
It strikes me as being the right decision – connections have more to lose by running him than by not running him.
Makes perfect sense to me. There is far more to gain by beating older horses over his optimum trip. Why expose him to a potential slog over 12f against horses he has already beaten?
The correct decision imo. The Eclipse, The International, The Irish and UK Champion stakes may well be his program now.
I’m kinda thinking that maybe it dosen’t matter that the horse can handle the conditions(if that’s the case),it’s more to do with him wanting the very best conditions because they want this horse to only run at his very best. He’s obviously top class, and they want the maximum out of him before selling for breeding purposes ?
Or there’s the alternative view that i could be be talking out of my arse.
If coolmore started treating their horses with kid gloves there would be uproar.They would be accused of racing straight into the breeding barn.But when Aidan suggests running them over every distance he is accused of doing what Oxx is doing right now racing for the stud value not for racing sake.If sts cannot handle the soft ground at the Curragh over the derby distance the breeders should know it in the interest of full disclosure before sending a mare to him.If J. Magnier owned sts you can imagine the outcry if he did not run. In fact I cannot imagine Magnier allowing him to skip the derby He insists on running his horses in the derby if at all possible.
same old same old really,now that hes won the derby they are scared stiff of running him incase he gets beat.thats why jumping is far more popular nowadays as opposed to years ago when it was flat racing that was king.
oh for the days when the top flat horses took each other on in the top races time and time again.Have I been reading from my own imagination, or was it mentioned somewhere that either John Oxx or Christopher Tsui endeavoured to maintain the horse’s undefeated streak?
If so, makes sense that they’ll dodge races if warranted. And in this case it’s the right call.
- Total Posts 17716
I don’t think it’s the right call at all; he’s a dual Classic-winning half-brother to Galileo and has very little to lose by not winning a soft-ground Irish Derby. Twelve furlongs on slow ground may test his stamina – I still don’t think he’d have any problem with it myself – but if he’s never actually tested then questions will follow him around forever.
John Oxx has disappointed me since Epsom, if only for the fact that I’ve never heard anyone sound so bloody miserable with a horse like Sea The Stars in their care.
If connections want things to be any more perfect for the horse perhaps they should consider sending him to Henrietta Knight.
I’m far from sure he’d have beaten the winner today- F and G improved a lot from Epsom and looks a stronger stayer than the Derby winner to me.
Galileo ran Epsom 3.5 seconds faster than Sea The Stars on similar ground.
On worse ground, Galileo ran the Curragh 3.7 seconds faster than Fame and Glory.
Mick Kinane, riding both Galileo and Sea The Stars – and Mourayan three times behind Fame and Glory – has to be best placed to assess their relative merits, if he can be persuaded to give a public assessment.
Galileo lost twice at 10f (including at 4/11 in the Irish Champion) after his Epsom – Curragh – King George victories at 12f, and was then retired.
I suspect the closer racing plan for Sea The Stars – with due variation for the difference in sex and breeding value – will be in the path taken by Ouija Board, who was the reason Ling Tsui took Urban Sea to Cape Cross in the first place.
Ouija Board ran the Oaks at the Curragh on GF and all her 12f races were on nothing worse than G. Her only two runs on Yielding were in the Breeders Cup Filly & Mare Turf, with a win at Lone Star over 11f and a second at Belmont over 10f.
Personally I think Sea The Stars would again beat Fame and Glory over 12f, whatever the pace manipulation, but on yielding it would be at a cost to both of them in what it would take out of them.
But at the moment Sea The Stars simply has bigger fish to fry over 10f, the distance that has always been the greater focus for the owners.
Personally I think
Sea The Stars would again beat Fame and Glory over 12f, whatever the pace manipulation,
but on yielding it would be at a cost to both of them in what it would take out of them.
Agree with this 100%.
I can’t understand the many people who believe that Fame And Glory would have beaten Sea The Stars if they’d have gone quicker at Espom. If anything, Sea The Stars would have beaten him further. The horse raced out of Mick’s hands for the first half mile because they weren’t going quick enough for him. If there’d been an end to end gallop he would have settled much better.
I think many people made up their minds after the Guineas that the horse wouldn’t stay 1m4 and they are unwilling to change their opinion now despite the evidence of the Epsom Derby (similar to Kauto Star and a truly run Cheltenham Gold Cup). I doubt Sea The Stars will ever run over twelve furlongs again in his future career, but if he does the only thing I can see beating him is soft ground.
Galileo ran Epsom 3.5 seconds faster than Sea The Stars on similar ground.
Well, it was turf on both occasions, I grant you!
A great American trainer said that race times, in the great horse racing scheme of things, means "sh** all", and that good horses should be judged (above all else ) by the class of the opposition they beat .
I agree.
Anyhow, I digress –
For the Eclipse, I fancy Sea The Stars ( big time) this time round.
Sorry Fist, Conduit just won’t see which way he goes.
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.