- This topic has 101 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 8 months ago by
.
- Posts
I would be concerned for Frankel running in the Arc.It’s too easy to end up last into the straight if you get the wrong draw.Tom Queally is not experienced enough to ride the Arc.The last Arc winner has yet to be found out.If she got a perfect passage and he got a Sea the Stars passage I would be worried for him.Although with a Dancing Brave ride he should be alright.The above are just my opinion.
Frankel wasn’t ready to go further than a mile until he learnt to settle better Ivanjica. Had connections run the horse at 1m2f+ before today it may well have had a detrimental effect, both on the day (pulling hard) and in his future career. ie Once pulling hard once a horse may well do so again, learning bad tricks. And if doing so once and beaten once, then he’s never seen at the trip again.
Am sure Sir Henry would’ve liked to up Frankel before now, but was cautious. Caution that seems to have paid dividends.
Hurrah!! to that Ginge.
Sir Henry has gone through hell from the media, forums and punters alike or keeping Frankel to a mile and just look at the end result.
He has made a fantastic job of training the horse no if’s and buts about it.
It would be easy to say had he run in the likes of the Derby he would have one but he could just as easily burned himself out he was such an exuberant horse way back then.
Much of the credit must go to his work rider Shane Fetherstonhaugh for teaching him to relax and making Tom Queally’s job much easier.
Sir Henry must be chuffed to bits with yesterday outcome and all those who doubted him or Frankel must be finding it extremely difficult to see through the egg on their faces.
Interestingly according to Graham Cunningham (RUK) Teddy Beckett said "There’s a race called the Prix De l’Arc de Triomphe. He’s not entered in it yet". When asked about the BC he said "It’s Bobby’s (Frankel’s) hometown, and emotional ties would be too fantastic, but its dirt. On pro-ride we would have been there".
I hope he takes in the Arc, but I have gone off the idea of the BC Classic. When you consider poor old George Washington’s fate on the dirt, you would hate to think anything would happen to this extraordinary racehorse prior to beginning his happy retirement.
First of all, his action and running style fits dirt quite well.
He’d win in a romp, there’s nobody really to challenge him here.
Ron The Greek, Fort Larned, Paynter, Nates Mineshaft et al. are just plain slow. I would say just put him in the BC Turf if the dirt is a concern, but Little Mike
might
challenge him as a front-runner.
I you are correct and the USA horses are much inferior there is no reason, other than to show respect to Bobby Frankel, for Sir Henry to send him.
Anyway it’s not whether Frankel could perform on dirt or not it’s whether Sir Henry is well enough to travel. I can’t see anyway they will even be considering the Breeders and it’s a clear cut choice between the Arc and the Champion Stakes.
Interestingly according to Graham Cunningham (RUK) Teddy Beckett said "There’s a race called the Prix De l’Arc de Triomphe. He’s not entered in it yet". When asked about the BC he said "It’s Bobby’s (Frankel’s) hometown, and emotional ties would be too fantastic, but its dirt. On pro-ride we would have been there".
I hope he takes in the Arc, but I have gone off the idea of the BC Classic. When you consider poor old George Washington’s fate on the dirt, you would hate to think anything would happen to this extraordinary racehorse prior to beginning his happy retirement.
First of all, his action and running style fits dirt quite well.
He’d win in a romp, there’s nobody really to challenge him here.
Ron The Greek, Fort Larned, Paynter, Nates Mineshaft et al. are just plain slow. I would say just put him in the BC Turf if the dirt is a concern, but Little Mike
might
challenge him as a front-runner.
I you are correct and the USA horses are much inferior there is no reason, other than to show respect to Bobby Frankel, for Sir Henry to send him.
Anyway it’s not whether Frankel could perform on dirt or not it’s whether Sir Henry is well enough to travel. I can’t see anyway they will even be considering the Breeders and it’s a clear cut choice between the Arc and the Champion Stakes.
But your argument also holds true for the Champion Stakes; who would he be beating there? I would love to see him in the Arc as well, he’d be following in the hoofprints of so many legendary racehorses.
All this talk of Frankel running in the Arc or Breeders’ Cup is just wishful thinking.
The path for Frankel was clearly mapped out by connections at the beginning of the season. His next and final race will be in the Champion Stakes.
Eclipse First, chiding Frankel for only beating Farrh 7 lenghts smacks of churlishness on your part. I get the impression from your protracted questioning of the great horse that you would rather hope he might lose, if only to say, told you so.
In all my years, only four European trained horses could be considered good enough to have given Frankel a real test – and I think even then they would have found it difficult to crack Sir Henry’s freak. Those horses are, Sea-Bird, Brigadier Gerard, Nijinsky ( at his best )and Mill Reef : all superstars of their day.
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
All this talk of Frankel running in the Arc or Breeders’ Cup is just wishful thinking.
The path for Frankel was clearly mapped out by connections at the beginning of the season. His next and final race will be in the Champion Stakes.
Eclipse First, chiding Frankel for only beating Farrh 7 lenghts smacks of churlishness on your part. I get the impression from your protracted questioning of the great horse that you would rather hope he might lose, if only to say, told you so.
In all my years, only four European trained horses could be considered good enough to have given Frankel a real test – and I think even then they would have found it difficult to crack Sir Henry’s freak. Those horses are, Sea-Bird, Brigadier Gerard, Nijinsky ( at his best )and Mill Reef : all superstars of their day.
Well I am afraid your impression is woefully misguided.
My contention is against the merit of Farhh, he is a 10f specialist summarily dismissed by a hitherto miler and only just able to beat a 12f horse despite the fact that he was ridden for 2nd place whereas the 12f horse was ridden to win the race and paid the penalty. I still do not think he will ever win a group 1 in this country, largely because I suspect he will be trained for the Dubai World Cup next spring and will subsequently be ruined for racing on turf.
EF – why do you think Farrh was ridden for second place? Watch the replay. He was produced at the same time as SNA and Frankel. Wrong again I’m afraid.
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
Ivanjica – did you see that interview recently on ATR when Sir Henry was asked about the St James’?
He said he had never before been so angry after a race.
Of course it is a measure of the man that he did not blame TQ publicly at the time AND he retained him after. We all make mistakes and he got away with it but I think that race was pivotal in deciding the rest of his 2011 campaign. By then he had had three races, two of which were pretty tough, and had been on the go since February. Once the decision had been made to keep him in training as a 4 year old I think it became a bit of a no brainer. As you say they had Midday and TO for the Juddmonte anyway so why rush Frankel now when he can mop up perfectly decent Group 1 mile races? We can wait til next year to step him up.
Probably the hardest decision of his 3 year old campaign was whether to run him in the Derby. That decision became an easy one to make after the Guineas. "He showed a lot of speed today" was TQ’s answer to the question posed immediately after the Guineas by Nick Luck. I think Ginge is right that it would have been too much for a horse that had not yet learnt to settle.
I think you are right that he settled perfectly well in the St James and probably could have handled the step up after that but again with the decision to miss the Derby made why bother stepping him up when he can win Group 1’s over a mile?
Over the winter there was much talk about when he would be stepped up and connections said they would start with the Lockinge then decide whether to go QA or POW. The Eclipse was muted as being the most likely race for it to happen.
Then he got injured.
How much did this influence their decision?
"What are we trying to prove?" was another HRAC quote when asked about when it would happen. As long as he did it at some point what would it matter? In 50 years time nobody will be asking why he waited an extra month to try 10f – they will just know that he did try it and still won.
Personally I thought the Sussex was a bit of a non event and I would have liked to see him run in the Eclipse but who cares about what I think? In a couple of years time I won’t care about what I thought either!
I was there yesterday and it was the most special of my eight sightings of this mighty horse. I drove a 10 hour round trip and left after he had won. I tried to savour every moment knowing that it was the second last time I will see him. For all the talk I think we all know that the Champion will be his last run. I don’t think Henry is too bothered with the Arc and I don’t think it is his favourite race. As Fely himself said "don’t send him to France". The draw, the ground, the tactics. He has more to lose than gain and wouldnt it be nice if he remained unbeaten? So many of the greats were beaten eventually weren’t they? Most importantly and most selfishly I want him to have his last run down the road from me in Ascot. I want to take my two children so they can say in (hopefully) 100 years time "I saw him."
For now this special horse has once again got me floating this morning and I can only thank him for that.
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
It would be easy to say had he run in the likes of the Derby he would have one but he could just as easily burned himself out he was such an exuberant horse way back then.
As I have said before the performance in the 2,000 Guineas was extraordinary, not only because of the winning distance but because of the manner in which he had burnt off his rivals at halfway. It left the immpression that he must have taken a lot out of himself, the way he had been set alight and maintained the gallop. Many wondered if he would be able to ever run to that level again.
Royal Ascot proved that not only was he able to bounce back from an apparently attritional race at Newmarket, but he was able to be ridden with restraint. I have absoultely no doubt that the staff at Warren Place have done a wonderful job in bringing Frankel to the races physically and mentally at the top of his game. In my opinion the mental side of it had been successfully dealt with by the time of Royal Ascot, with no sign of exuberance in either the preliminaries or the race.
I would ask you to give examples of top class animals who you think went to Epsom via the 2,000 Guineas and ended up "burnt out"? Tudor Minstrel’s 2,000 Guineas was as impressive as Frankel’s and he was sent to Epsom where he pulled his chances away. He returned to a mile to maintain his reputation as a horse of the highest order, without having "burnt out".
Whilst before yesterday some argued that Frankel’s ability to stay the trip would have been an added negative factor (although many a Guineas winner has gone to Epsom with a significant stamina doubt) we now know that he will stay 12f doing handsprings. So the lingering question about the Derby hinges on whether you believe he would have performed in a Newmarket style (lit up and seemingly unable to be restrained from the saddle) or like Royal Ascot. Given the latter race proved Newmarket was a one off which could have been attribuited to the jockey’s actions in the initial stages of the race, I am inclined to think he could have been ridden with restraint, settled like he did at Royal Ascot and indeed York, and won with his head in his chest.
I was intrigued to read Jonibake’s quote about Cecil being never more angry after a race than at Royal Ascot. My father and I both thought he had the look of a less than happy trainer in the post race scrum, considering he had just won a Group 1. As I mentioned before Willie Carson and Aussie Jim McGrath but commented on why Queally had gone for home so early, and that he would have been better off waiting until the home straight.
Tom Queally’s part in making the horse appear to be more headstrong on the course than may necessarily have been the case should not be underestimated. But Frankel was the first truly top class horse he had been associated with, and as the winning sequence extended, one can understand the pressure he was under, and even forgive him for not always getting it right. But his trainer can then only draw conclusions based upon the visual evidence of the track and what his jockey tells him.
If Queally sets the horse alight when the stalls open at Newmarket and wins by half of Newmarket High Street and then tells the boss he has too much speed to stay 10f let alone 12f then what is the boss meant to do? Ignore him? If the horse then settles perfectly at Royal Ascot only to be set alight once again after 2f, and then appear to just hold on in the dying strides against a palpably inferior opponent, only for the jockey to say he wasn’t tired he was idling (thereby seeming to legitimise his questionable ride) then what is the boss to do?
I was told by a friend who attended a social/charity function at which Tom Queally was present earlier this year that Tom told him in no unncertain terms that Frankel would "just about get 10f" but would never get 12f because he simply had "too much speed". He also asked what is there to gain by stepping him up in trip. In the light of yesterday’s race is it unreasonable to conclude somebody got it wrong?
I think much of that is spot on Ivanjica. It was the most surreal atmosphere at Ascot that day. We all turned up to see a procession but we ended up watching what appeared to be a desperate scramble for the line. There was hardly any cheering or clapping. He had just WON and yet we were all shell shocked. He had come so close to losing. He WAS mortal after all. I went home actually feeling disappointed!!!
I always struggled to believe the "idling" story and I do think he was (understandably) running out of gas but watching the replay of that race is interesting. If you pause the action about half a furlong out it looks for all the world as though he is going to be overhauled by Zoffany. But the horse finds something extra. Of course it may have been that Zoffany was himself tiring late on as he was a doubtful stayer who was ridden out the back for place money but if you watch it, Frankel is holding on in the last 100 yards. Interestingly NOTHING overtakes him after the line and it STILL takes TQ an age to pull him up. I think the horse showed tremendous guts that day. The way he was ridden he should have lost. (SYT was beaten in similar circumstances the next day having been given an arguably less worse ride)
I think it is fair to say that the Epsom Derby does take it out of some horses no? (Workforce would be a recent example) But if you are looking for a specific example of a horse that might have swayed Henry’s thinking look at the stables own Wollow in 1976.
An unbeaten superstar who had won the Dewhurst and The Guineas and was sent off 11-10 fav for the Derby. He didn’t stay and trailed in 5th. He then also got beat in the Eclipse before winning the Sussex back over a mile. He eventually did win at 10f but Henry has quoted him several times over the last couple of years and he is a trainer who does not forget these things. I think if he could have had his time again he would not have run Wollow in the Derby but the lesson was learnt. (I would urge you to order his soon to be released biography which will go into more detail on this).
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
I must be reading it wrong then..
I would ask you to give examples of top class animals who you think went to Epsom via the 2,000 Guineas and ended up "burnt out"?
Without even thinking about it Sir Henry Cecil’s Wollow who went off fav fits that bill perfectly and as they say once bitten twice shy.
I really don’t know where you are coming from here……..Frankel was a complete fire cracker as a 3 year old and needed no help from Tom Queally to take off as he liked
Cast your mind back to June 2011 and think where Frankel was while the brilliant Pour Moi was winning the Derby. A week later Frankel, who took of like a rocket 3 furlongs out was scraping home against the mediocre Zoffany.
The Frankel of yesterday settling the way he does now would have won that race by a furlong. The fact is, his exuberance combined with Tom Queally making a bit of a balls of thing almost cost him the race. The former was the very reason Sir Henry decided not to go to Epsom. He may or may not have been too pleased with the ride but considering he went hell for leather from the word go in the Guineas doing you wouldn’t expect him doing it for 3 furlongs would stop him. The fact is Tom’s fault or not Frankel young and exuberant was in control and could easily have done the same thing at Epsom
As Tom Queally pointed out yesterday it’s easy to pick up a race card and say they’ll win, but it takes a lot of preparation and training to get them there to do so.
I would think Sir Henry, The Prince and Tom Queally were very relieved after what happened at Ascot thy never went to Epsom.
As I said in an earlier post Sir Henry has done a fantastic job with Frankel and proved to everyone his way is best.I’m sorry but or anyone to even think they know better than such an experienced trainer, who is hands on and knows the horse like the back of his hand is beyond me.
As is often the case, not just in racing, band-wagon jumpers are plentiful when something controversial happens. I’ve always thought TQ was unfairly condemned by the majority for that Ascot ride.
Armchair jockeys don’t need to make split-second decisions as TQ had to that day. His pacemaker went off too fast, leaving him, effectively without one and at the mercy of whatever tactics the others might care to employ.
In early danger of finding himself boxed in TQ urged Frankel through the closing gap on the rail then found he had set the horse alight. What to do? Try and settle him again and end up in an energy-burning battle with the horse, or make the best of the momentum?
In making that decision TQ has the knowledge that Frankel, in his previous race, has maintained an astonishing pace to win the Guineas. Which jockey, finding himself in that position at Ascot would act differently from TQ?
As he passed the post I recall posting on twitter that I thought he was idling. TQ later said he had been and, if memory serves, Sir Henry said the same. I had not heard about the ATR interview – did the trainer say he was specifically angry with TQ?
Anyway, as has been mentioned by some here, the horse is a freak. In trying to evaluate what he has done and where he should go the only solid reference points we have are other horses, but it’s seems obvious now that these comparators won’t do. Frankel is beyond comparison.
As to The Arc, why wouldn’t Sir Henry want to add that to his trophy cabinet? Frankel now looks like he will stay and even if he doesn’t stay he will win.
Bookmakers offer just 1/4 with a run.
Joe
Well just ano stroll for Frankel as would be the Arc which I hope they go for and a win there would surely see him become the highest ever rated horse.
Frankel wasn’t ready to go further than a mile until he learnt to settle better Ivanjica. Had connections run the horse at 1m2f+ before today it may well have had a detrimental effect, both on the day (pulling hard) and in his future career. ie Once pulling hard once a horse may well do so again, learning bad tricks. And if doing so once and beaten once, then he’s never seen at the trip again.
Am sure Sir Henry would’ve liked to up Frankel before now, but was cautious. Caution that seems to have paid dividends.
I don’t agree with your view. I have debated this at length and once again point to the St James’s Palace Stakes where proof was provided the horse could be settled behind a number of horses (in 5th), and would have remained there, settling perfectly, had Queally not kicked for home when he did. Immediately after the race the BBC commentary team queried Queally’s ride, suggesting that by holding on to him longer he would have won more impressively (it was suggested the crown of the bend, which Cecil later confirmed had been the instructions to Queally, ie. the same as the Royal Lodge).
Cecil made it very obvious in post race interviews that the race had taught him a lot: "he was very, very settled","he had to ask him to take it up", "he was getting idle at the end which means I can ride a normal race on him", "I can settle him in now and I don’t have to make so much use of him". The final quote was the most telling, and he even went on to mention the Juddmonte International (2011) as a possible target.
Don’t be so naive Ivanjica. The St James’s was run at a
very fast pace
. Even a sprinter would’ve had no trouble settling in behind on that day.
Horses find it difficult to settle when they’re running at a
slower pace than they’re used to
. Just take a look at yesterday’s Voltigeur at Noble Mission, Thomas Chippendale and Energiser. It stands to reason that in a race with an
overly strong pace
at a mile Frankel was never going to have any problem
settling
.
To think the St James’s was "proof" he’d have settled behind horses if upped in trip (at a much slower pace) is ridiculous.
Now one can only guess why Frankel was not aimed at the Juddmonte International in 2011, but his subsequent run in the Sussex Stakes merely confirmed the Royal Ascot evidence that the horse was very tactically adaptable, being asked to make all and settling perfectly on the front end.
Frankel was allowed to run at his
own
pace in the 2011 Sussex. Had there been another horse bustling Frankel up early on (neck and neck) it is by no means certain he’d have been so amenable. Although he was learning, settling better than in the 2000 Guineas and Greenham. So whatever Sir Henry was doing worked.
Whilst you can speculate about how a run in the Derby might have panned out, that is basically your opinion which is unsupported by the visual evidence of the St James’s Palace Stakes.
See Above
.
You may be of the opinion that the slower pace of the opening stages of a Derby would have led to him pulling his chances away, but who is to say his vastly superior ability and now proven stamina reserves would not have overcome this?
But it wasn’t "unsupported" was it? Anyone with race reading skills can see from watching the 2000 Guineas romp, Frankel was too free to stay half as far again (at least at that time). 2000 Guineas evidence suggests at 1m4f he’d have been rank.
Few expected Frankel to be dropped out today in the manner he was,
Really? Going up in trip, when he’d in the past been free at lesser trips, it was always likely he’d be settled behind horses.
…his jockey apparently deliberately missing a beat as the gates opened. When the question was asked of him, ie. could he settle behind horses over a longer trip without "racing too freely" he did so perfectly. Given the aforementioned comments from his trainer over a year ago I think it is clear he could have been stepped up in trip at least by August 2011 if not earlier, however the Juddmonte International was already an obvious target for Midday and Twice Over so it was decided to keep Frankel to a mile in order to provide his two older stable companions with a 10f campaign that took in the York race and the Champion Stakes.
What Sir Henry and his team have done over the last two years has enabled Frankel to settle much better.
As events unfolded this year, one can understand them not wanting Frankel to be asked to have his first test over 10f at Ascot or Sandown, where the emphasis is far more on stamina than York. Now of course they know stamina is not an issue (as his breeding had always suggested it wouldn’t be)
Ignoring the dam again I see. Not getting in to that arguement again.
…the sky really would be the limit, however they have run out of time somewhat, unless of course a change of heart occurs. Though to be fair I imagine that maybe unlikely given Sir Henry’s obvious poor health. I am sure he wants to see his masterpiece end his career with the unbeaten record secure.
Sir Henry’s team have done such a wonderful job at settling Frankel that 1m4f now looks a possibility (possibility and not probability). Whether his trainer thinks a plane trip and travelling will still be too much for Frankel, I don’t know. Ardross came close to winning the Arc, am sure he’d love to win it if he thought Frankel capable. From what the owner said yesterday, it might not be the trainer standing in his way.
Value Is EverythingJoe I think you are right in much of what you say and TQ has done a fantastic job with this horse. He is the perfect jockey for him as he is so calm and cool and he transmits this to Frankel. Look at the calm way he travels down to post.
I am not trying to be an Armchair jockey at all and have nothing but the highest admiration for what they do. Especially TQ being so young and dealing with so much pressure.
Of course we all watch this sport, we all love this sport and we are all entitled to opinions even though they hardly matter in the grand scheme of things. TQ has ridden many wonderful races on Frankel but in my opinion the St James was not one of them. I agree that he probably thought he was on a horse that was super equine and if he managed 8 flat out furlongs at Newmarket surely he could manage 5 here, but the horse found it difficult to be out in front for so long. Whether it was idiling or tiring is not really improtant, the fact is he almost got caught and was given a much harder race than he probably should have. Henry was angry but the horse had won so kind of no harm done but he had a few words with Tom after. A young jockey who panicked slightly at seeing his pacemaker so far out in front and, as you say, boxed in. If he rode the race today, knowing what he knows, do you think he would have made the same move?
It is history and he got away with it. And he has more than made up for it since anyway.
BTW this is what Sir Henry said about the St James'(apologies – it was an interview in the Guardian)
Cecil has made a priority of teaching Frankel to settle in his races, so it was with chagrin that he watched the horse at last year’s Royal meeting, when his jockey, Tom Queally, fired him up in mid-race, though only the pacemaker was ahead of him.
"I don’t think I’ve ever been so annoyed in my life," the trainer recalls. "To me, it was an absolute disaster. I hate even thinking about it; I want to forget. The horse did very well to get through it."
Frankel passed his pacemaker around the home turn but had been used up prematurely and was drunk with fatigue in the final furlong, winning by less than a length instead of his usual four or five. Did the famously urbane Cecil direct any harsh words at his jockey?
"I explained that we’d have to do something different in future. The damage was done. It was not very funny.
"But it’s almost forgotten and Tom has got to know the horse and is riding very well now. He rides beautifully, he’s got his confidence in every way. It’s just one of those things. We all make mistakes. I’ve made hundreds in my life."
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
That’s fair comment Jonibake. Sir Henry seems characteristically generous.
And yes, I think TQ would ride it differently given the chance though the fact remains, imo, that the critical domino that set the rest tumbling was his move to get through that gap before it closed.
What might we have been saying had the field boxed him in as happened a few years back with a very good Irish filly of Oxx’s whose name I can’t recall? I think it was at Goodwood. She was a short price and the others effectively just kept her in. By the time she escaped it was much too late. Now
that
was a poor ride.
Anyway, doubtless we could go through all sorts of permutations but suffice to say that if Sir H thought it was a bad ride, I shall argue no further!
I must be reading it wrong then..
I would ask you to give examples of top class animals who you think went to Epsom via the 2,000 Guineas and ended up "burnt out"?
Without even thinking about it Sir Henry Cecil’s Wollow who went off fav fits that bill perfectly and as they say once bitten twice shy.
Wollow didn’t "burn out". Cecil concedes "Wollow was really a miler, and was never beaten over that distance". He came back in the Eclipse and was awarded the race on the disqualification of Trepan who was found to have traces of theobromine in his blood. Writing in 1983 Cecil asserted that older horses are favoured by races like the Eclipse at that time of year (which is why he regretted the decision to run Reference Point in the race 11 years later) and doesn’t believe Wollow would have won anyway.
Wollow then won the Sussex Stakes, and when stepped back up in trip was also victorious in the Benson and Hedges Gold Cup gaining his revenge on Trepan, and denying the classy stayer Crow. Hardly the performances of a horse who was “burnt out”.
His defeat in the Champion Stake was attributed to being over the top and unsuited by the rain softened ground.
Cecil concluded that they were probably guilty of “trying to put what would have been the main races of his four-year-old career into his three-year-old campaign.I really don’t know where you are coming from here……..Frankel was a complete fire cracker as a 3 year old and needed no help from Tom Queally to take off as he liked
I disagree. If you watch the start of the 2,000 Guineas Queally can be seen low in the saddle and pushing his mount for the first 10 strides or so, after which the horse is clearly set alight. Compare that with the St James’s Palace Stakes where he allowed his mount to settle form the off. However as soon as he got low again and pushed (just after the 6f pole) Frankel is was set alight. Surely if Frankel was “a head case” Queally would have been seen trying to restrain him, and the horse throwing his head about completely refusing to settle.
Cast your mind back to June 2011 and think where Frankel was while the brilliant Pour Moi was winning the Derby. A week later Frankel, who took of like a rocket 3 furlongs out was scraping home against the mediocre Zoffany.
As mentioned above, Frankel only “took off like a rocket” when Queally decided the pacemaker was in danger of going beyond recall, and it was more like 5.5f from home, certainly not 3f.
I’m sorry but or anyone to even think they know better than such an experienced trainer, who is hands on and knows the horse like the back of his hand is beyond me.
I am not saying I know better than Henry Cecil, I simply suggested that the riding style could have been be as much to do with the visual impression of Frankel being too headstrong to stay 12f as the horse’s temperament. I have put forward the examples of horses like Tudor Minstrel and latterly Wollow, who were given the opportunity to try to win the Derby, failed but were still able to win at the highest level during the remainder of their 3-y-o campaigns.
…- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.