March 24, 2002 at 12:55 #4171tootingMember
- Total Posts 379
Dandy Nicholls ran 8 (non-triers) in the one race at Doncaster this week.
Pipe’s always filling fields up with multiple entries.
We’re nearly at that time of year when AOB saddles every runner in valuable 2 year old races. And Godolphin throw in a couple of pacemakers in every Group race, for good luck.
Am I the only one who thinks this isn’t particularly healthy for the sport?
I’d like to see a limit on the number of runners a trainer (and owner) can have in one race.
Limiting it to only one may be too harsh (especially in the big races), but why not limit it to two?
It could:<br>1. Help reduce some of the game-playing – weight manipulation and the like.<br>2. Maybe stop the big owners (eg JP) from just buying up all the best horses.<br>3. Maybe give the smaller trainers a chance to get some decent horses.<br>4. Make the sport a bit more damned interesting.
I’m sure there’s a million reasons why this is a dumb idea. Such as?<br>March 25, 2002 at 11:36 #98902TiberettaMember
- Total Posts 3
My sentiments too, Toot;)March 25, 2002 at 11:41 #98903AidanMember
- Total Posts 1198
If this was the case there would have been only 5 runners in the Dewhurst………..only 4 in the Racingpost Trophy etc etc If other trainers aint going to run in the races why shouldnt Ballydoyle and Godolphin take the prize money and at least provide a spectacle to the public rather than having 3-5 runners in the top races etc.March 25, 2002 at 11:45 #98905
Aidan – i’m not sure there would have been 4 runners in the RP Trophy or only 5 in the Dewhurst. I think the reason not many other stables (other than O’Brien/Godolphin) entered runners was because of the mass of entries coming from the two top flat set ups.
If O’Brien was limited to two runners only in the 2 year old group races last season, we would have seen more runners from the other British yards and more interesting races.March 25, 2002 at 12:52 #98907roryParticipant
- Total Posts 2685
Why not limit the number of good horses in Group races?
Perhaps if the Dewhurst was a nursery, it would attract bigger fields?
This has been debated before and I think if trainers are frightened of running group horses in group races because Aidan O’Brien has 2 runners, they should be taken out and shot (in a figurative sense).
I realise this wasn’t exactly Tooting’s original point, but a similar argument applies – if Dandy Nicholls is pulling his horses (he isn’t, incidentally) then let the JC catch him. If owners choose to send horses to Dandy Nicholls and trainers like him who will have multiple runners in sprint races, then that’s their choice -it’s a self regulating system.March 25, 2002 at 13:29 #98910
What would be interesting about O’Briens two horses slautering any other trainers horses in a 2-y-o race. I f the other trainers thought they had a horse to be placed they would run it.March 25, 2002 at 13:40 #98913
Bahamian Pirate wasn’t exactly all out on Saturday.
It isn’t bigger fields some people want, it is having competitive racing rather than certain stables dominating races.
Aidan O’Brien doesn’t have two entries in Group races does he? He has lots and lots.
I can’t blame any trainer who doesn’t feel he/she can compete with the power of Ballydoyle or Godolphin.March 25, 2002 at 14:42 #98914
Number of O’Brien Runners last season-
2000 Guineas – Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â 2 <br>1000 Guineas – Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â 1<br>English Derby – Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â 1<br>King George Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â – Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â 2<br>Middle Park Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â – Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â 2<br>Dewhurst Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â – Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â 4<br>Racing Post T – Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â 3
The fact is that last year if I am correct he won all but one of the 2-y-o Group 1. Other trainers raised the white flag as O’Brien had too much ammo last year. However your statement that he does not enter two but lots and lots Rob is blatantly not true.<br>
(Edited by Gearoid VI at 2:45 pm on Mar. 25, 2002)March 25, 2002 at 15:09 #98917
But how many entries did he have in those races?
Not runners but entries. He had lots and enough to deter other trainers from putting their horses in those races for 2yo’s.March 25, 2002 at 15:22 #98920
Rob make up your mind . I have proved you wrong on your first argument. Everyone knows he cannot run them all . The jockey fees would be more than the prize money :biggrin: . The fact is he usually has 2 runners at the most in some cases only one. Last year was a fluke in that the standard of 2-y-o was average and O’Brien had an excellent few namely Rock of Gibraltor , Hawk Wing and of course Johannesburg. Like I keep saying if trainers think there horse has a chance of coure they are going to run him but they had nothing to beat O’Brien’s 2-y-o last year.March 25, 2002 at 17:17 #98921Scottish JamieParticipant
- Total Posts 123
Tooting, I’m not a fan of this idea at all. I don’t see that it matters who owns/trains the horses as long as they’re prepared to race them against each other. If AOB and Godolphin have the best horses the so what if they have 2 or 3 each in the top races. I’d rather have that than have them keeping their best horses apart and still mopping up the big races with an individual entry. This is HORSE racing not trainer racing, its the quality of horses in a race that counts not who trains them.March 25, 2002 at 17:48 #98922SalMember
- Total Posts 562
Barry Hills had 4 runners in the Derby….
I agree, I would rather see the best horses taking each other on (as far as owners will allow), no matter who trains them. Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â I’m sure some smaller trainers are put off entering their horses in races where they would come up against hotpots from the big yards, but surely this is more a problem in the smaller conditions races, which seldom have multiple entries? Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â I can’t imagine a trainer saying – well I won’t enter my best 3yo in the Derby in case it runs up against three of Aidan O’Brien’s – can you?
The issue of ‘coupling’ runners in the same ownership for betting purposes might be worth mentioning at this point?
:wave:March 25, 2002 at 19:53 #98923AidanMember
- Total Posts 1198
So rob is now you think there should be a limit on the number of entries at the very start?So take the Derby then.Entries are already made for next years……….should there be a limit on Aidan O’Brien’s runners at this stage?Next stage?Which one?March 25, 2002 at 19:56 #98925DaylightMember
- Total Posts 369
Rob,<br>Dandy Nicholls is badly out of form and it has carried over since the second half of last season.March 26, 2002 at 10:05 #98927
Daylight – out of form or not, it seems that a couple of Nicholls horses weren’t really trying anyway according to another forumite.
My point is slightly confused and it is a personal point really:
I don’t like seeing all the best horses come from Godolphin and Ballydoyle. I, personally, find it boring having the top stables win everything. I don’t like seeing Godolphin and Ballydoyle running pacemakers and i think that some Group races are becoming battles between the two top set ups with the best horses coming from those set ups as they seem to have the most money to play with.
I find flat racing is dominated by those who can afford to buy the best bred horse and, whilst i prefer watching flat racing to jump racing, i recognise that jump racing provides more chances for the smaller time owner and not the owner who can buy the most well bred horses.
Gearoid – my argument wasn’t the amount of runners O’Brien had in races, it was the amount of entries he had which may well have worried people out of ruining there horses for next season (not in races like the Derby, King George but the 2yo Group races).
I just don’t find the same people winning things very interesting, that’s all.
I find pacemakers frustrating as well. They are meant to be there to ensure a "true" pace. I don’t understand this really – Galileo was hyped up to the extreme throughout his career as being able to win over a mile, 10f, 12f: so why did he need a pacemaker in the Irish Champion stakes or any other race?
He didn’t need a pacemaker at all. Galileo was a good racehorse who didn’t need help from a pacemaker to make sure everything went right for him. He won the Derby without one.
I think pacemakers are used in the wrong way (Irish Champion for example) and can sometimes go wrong (Eclipse).
Sal – coupling runners might not be popular. It would mean that a horse who should be 8/1 may have to be bet at 2/5 because it is owned by the same person. When two horses are run in a race by the same owner it doesn’t neccessarily mean one is going to make the pace for the other – they could both be trying to win.
One more question – are pacemakers non-triers? They don’t go out to win races do they? They go out to ensure a "true" pace. Sometimes they pop up and win, but let’s be honest, they aren’t going out there (in the first place) to win the race are they?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.