- This topic has 56 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 12 months ago by
.
- Posts
14 runners. A course wide enough to cope with the Charge of the Light Brigade. Guess what? The field splits.
Doesn’t always happen, but if they had a movable running rail that could have been used to narrow the first four or five furlongs, it might have helped.
One of the great things about British racing is the variety of the tracks, but somehow, today’s 2,000gns would have been better off being run at Chester. No chance of the field splitting in two there!!Totally agree.
Absolutely ridiculous that the result of a group one race could potentially be affected by one race becoming two. It is 2014 now and it simply isn’t good enough.
Watering to ensure the participation of one horse isn’t right either. The going today was on the slow side of good according to the times – again it is just not on there was no need to water at all.
Unless Newmarket start getting their act together who could possibly complain if the Guineas were moved to Ascot like the Champion Stakes has been?
They can’t win.
As someone who had 16/1 and stood to win a large sum if Six Perfections had won the Guineas, I’d rather they keep stalls in the middle.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElZb3pMsp8g
Having 20+ runners on a straight track snuggling up to the rail is asking for trouble.
Is it best to have the horses split?
Or would you rather a lot more runners getting blocked in their run?Value Is EverythingAlthough I do agree with Insomniac…
Some time ago I e-mailed the Clerk, suggesting they have a false rail until 2 out. Then widen out to the whole track. They didn’t have enough false rail for 1m2f.
Value Is EverythingThey can’t win.
As someone who had 16/1 and stood to win a large sum if Six Perfections had won the Guineas, I’d rather they keep stalls in the middle.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElZb3pMsp8g
Having 20+ runners on a straight track snuggling up to the rail is asking for trouble.
Is it best to have the horses split?
Or would you rather a lot more runners getting blocked in their run?Personally I’d rather have the odd hard luck story about a hold up horse than have it as it is now.
It is an awful spectacle.
It is partly the course, partly the jocks.
I think if Hughes hadn’t veered off they would probably have stayed middle.
Even with 7 runners in the last they managed to split, with two of the day’s best backed horses getting stuffed in the process. Presumably, bookmakers struggled to get their winnings off the track.
Where are the stalls tomorrow? Can we expect another potential disaster?
Where are the stalls tomorrow? Can we expect another potential disaster?
Could be even worse Stilvi.
Although there are plenty of runners, no guaranteed pace in the race.
Value Is EverythingI don’t really understand why everyone is crabbing the form/course/tactics here…
If you take Night Of Thunder out of the race, the favourite Kingman shot clear and held on from Aidan O’Brien’s extremely highly-regarded Australia, with the rest 2 1/4 or more lengths back.
If they had all run together in the middle, what would have been different? There were no hard-luck stories. No-one got boxed-in. No-one can complain that they anyone go first run on them and stole a length…
To me, it was a very pure test of horse and jockey. The best horse won on the day.
In fact, if you want to look at the whole "2 groups" thing, Night of Thunder won both! And came from behind on both.
Kingman and Australia are both on record as being among the best ever trained for this by Gosden and O’Brien respectively… and NOT was also very highly touted by the Hannon stable.
Look back at the last Kingman/NOT race and its not hard to see how the form was reversed with a faster pace, longer trip, stiffer track…
I think Night Of Thunder is simply very good!
I don’t really understand why everyone is crabbing the form/course/tactics here…
If you take Night Of Thunder out of the race, the favourite Kingman shot clear and held on from Aidan O’Brien’s extremely highly-regarded Australia, with the rest 2 1/4 or more lengths back.
If they had all run together in the middle, what would have been different? There were no hard-luck stories. No-one got boxed-in. No-one can complain that they anyone go first run on them and stole a length…
To me, it was a very pure test of horse and jockey. The best horse won on the day.
In fact, if you want to look at the whole "2 groups" thing, Night of Thunder won both! And came from behind on both.
Kingman and Australia are both on record as being among the best ever trained for this by Gosden and O’Brien respectively… and NOT was also very highly touted by the Hannon stable.
Look back at the last Kingman/NOT race and its not hard to see how the form was reversed with a faster pace, longer trip, stiffer track…
I think Night Of Thunder is simply very good!
I don’t really understand why everyone is crabbing the form/course/tactics here…
If you take Night Of Thunder out of the race, the favourite Kingman shot clear and held on from Aidan O’Brien’s extremely highly-regarded Australia, with the rest 2 1/4 or more lengths back.
If they had all run together in the middle, what would have been different? There were no hard-luck stories. No-one got boxed-in. No-one can complain that they anyone go first run on them and stole a length…
To me, it was a very pure test of horse and jockey. The best horse won on the day.
How can it be a pure test when 99/100 races are not run in that manner? Why would you want one of your major races to be the 1/100?
Do you really think that if they had raced as one Doyle would have decided to get no cover and make his move as early? Do you think that settling a horse and sustaining a burst of speed for a shorter period makes no difference? That appears to be what you saying. You could only suggest that there were no hard luck stories if it were obvious that the result would have been unchanged if the field had raced as one. Personally, unless you have a bias I don’t think you can.
Yesterday the race wasn’t about getting first run, in fact it was the exact opposite. With no obvious planning, as he was boxed in, Fallon made his move from behind Kingman and consequently finished his race off better. That on the day decided the issue.
Even with 7 runners in the last they managed to split, with two of the day’s best backed horses getting stuffed in the process. Presumably, bookmakers struggled to get their winnings off the track.
Just because punters decide to back runners it doesn’t mean they will win. Looking at the race yesterday, John Gosden’s Cloudscape had a fair amount of improvement needed to win the race and several of his stablemates who won first time up this year have been beaten at short odds on their next start. Postponed had been third in The Greenham but that effort looked a lot less of an achievement after poor efforts from Toormore and The Grey Gatsby in the 2000 Guineas and in retrospect it was probably a leap of faith to raise him 8lbs from 96 to 104 on the back of the Craven run.
Newmarket is far from unique in seeing well backed horses fail to deliver the goods for backers.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
With half a furlong left to run, the two market rivals were leading their respective sides. How certain attitudes to the result would have changed if Night Of Thunder had missed the race! We would be debating who would have won if Australia and Kingman had eye-balled each other!
It’s not the greatest spectacle when the field splits and I would much rather have the stalls on either rail, but the previous five winners were Dawn Approach, Camelot, Frankel, Makfi and Sea The Stars.
You would have to say, on that evidence, that if a colt is good enough he can win the race. Some quality sorts are beaten out of sight, but I put that down to the time of year when some colts are more forward, physcially and / or mentally, than others. It’s a big occasion for them so early in their sophomore season.
The recent history is not exactly a fortuitous list of winners and a top class colt generally lands the spoils.
It’s a fair, yet unique test.
People are mistaken in looking for excuses for Kingman by citing the split. He was beaten by a horse who ran on the same side and was essentially given the same ride (held up). Night Of Thunder just saw it out that little bit better.
The thing that may have been against Kingman was the ground and that will be a problem for him all year if we have a dry summer I suspect.
Excellent article (as per) from Rowleyfile (our very own Prufrock) on https://www.timeform.com/Racing/Articles/2%2c000_Guineas_Debrief_Newmarket_May_4 shows that Kingman and Night Of Thunder raced the last four furlongs in the same time, but the crucial difference occurred in the final quarter where Night Of Thunder covered the 440 yds 0.4 seconds faster. The sectionals and overall time describe a race that was a fair test and it is very hard to knock the winner on the evidence of the clock.
All the subjective if-ing and but-ting about the effect the split had on the race is just that. Of course, had they raced in the centre the result may have been different, for a host of reasons. But that doesn’t mean that the result that did occur somehow wasn’t ‘right’.
The thing that may have been against Kingman was the ground and that will be a problem for him all year if we have a
dry
summer I suspect.
I appreciate you might have become as bewildered as I’ve become after having ploughed through the posts on the ‘Watering’ thread but the above words seem to imply you’re confident that the going was fast at Newmarket yesterday; or did you mean to write
wet
summer?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.