- This topic has 17 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 8 months ago by
.
- Posts
Whilst appreciating the achievement of notching up a big-priced winner I think it is also worth considering the rather large dose of luck involved in finding a winner like Evens And Odds.
The winner, who has a very poor win-to-run ratio or even place-to-run ratio could hardly have been picked out as an improving sort and presumably was selected primarily on the basis of his run last year. I suspect a few people used the same criteria to select Genki. What happens? Evens And Odds wins, Genki runs a shocker and we get the pathetic mystery excuse about loose ground, despite having won on officially soft last year.
Add to Genki we have equally shocking performances from the well-supported Enact and Palace Moon.
Pricewise also put up Enact and Johannes (earlier in the week), so you would imagine that Evens And Odds was the weakest of his three.
To top it all without the rain Jonny Mudball would almost certainly have lasted home.
Potentially the worst thread ever started on any of the big forums.
Quite an accolade
Stilvi, you’ve got me stumped with this one … I also picked Evens and Odds out (see Goodwood comp thread for verification) and yes, of course it was partly based on his performance last year … it was also because "in my judgement" he was primed to run another big race, had a perfect central draw, a good 5lb claimer (even though I had stated on another thread that it was not a race for apprentices) and his ideal ground conditions.
I always thought "using our judgement" was what it was all about … and sure, sometimes we need fortune to go our way.
If you’re suggesting Pricewise was just lucky, then I wish I had half his luck … I’d love to know the stats but the guy must put most, if not all, premium rate phone line tipsters to shame … and he does it all in the glare of the industry’s daily racing publication.
I think the point of the thread was that Pricewise was lucky, but I think the OP misses the point of picking big-priced winners, as there is a certain amount of fuzziness to it and one can never feel as sure as someone who is picking short-priced selections.
Stilvi’s got previous for Pricewise knocking. When he displays the same level of sustained brilliance tipping as Mr Seagull I may start taking him seriously…
Anyone know where Segal’s stats can be found? He seems to have had a few good winners lately, but often has multiple selections in a race which obviously reduces the profits somewhat.
Do we really want half of his column taken up with the perceived bad luck he had with the likes of Tiddliwinks? No mention whatsoever of the huge dose of good fortune associated to the victory of Forte Dei Marmi. I have come to the conclusion that you are almost never unlucky if you back Spencer – you take on board all the garbage that comes with him. There was no need to hold Tiddliwinks right out the back yesterday but absolute no surprise that he did and made a complete mess of things again.
Tiddliwinks is best used as a hold up runner, he has an outstanding turn of foot, he’s been made more use of over the turf this year and failed to score so no surprise in the change of tactics, given the run of the winner in the gold cup it wasn’t the worst tactical idea. If you haven’t you should watch the ride Spencer gave him at Wolver in the winter to win, that’s Tiddliwinks used to his best. There is always going to be a chance of not getting the break at the right time when riding horses in this way but hey, that’s racing!
Do we really want half of his column taken up with the perceived bad luck he had with the likes of Tiddliwinks? No mention whatsoever of the huge dose of
good fortune associated to the victory of Forte Dei Marmi
. I have come to the conclusion that you are almost never unlucky if you back Spencer – you take on board all the garbage that comes with him. There was
no need to hold Tiddliwinks right out the back yesterday
but absolute no surprise that he did and made a complete mess of things again.
Forte had luck to get through the gaps, yet had he not got through would’ve been very unlucky. Much the best horse / handicapped horse in the race. It paid off to drop this horse "out the back" in what looked a strongly run race.
Tou say there was "no need to hold tiddliwinks right out the back". Yet Redford was right out the back on the rail in the Gold Gup, trusted to luck, got through and won. It looks bad when it does not pay off and the ride gets castigated. Yet we forget when this type of ride pays off.
Value Is Everything
- Total Posts 17716
Difference with Frankie was he sussed the sitation went across the back of them looking for a gap to pop opened slowly building up momentum as he went. Frankie would have gone round them all if he had to and still gave the horse a chance.
What did Spencer do? Nothing!; His mount was swinging of the bridle he failed to notice those on the far side were a fair bit in front. If he had he could easily have taken the route that was open to him a few yards before the 2f marker which would have put him in a much better position. When he did decide to move the other side were so far in front any chance he had of winning were gone anyway and to top it all he ran straight into the back of a wall off horses with no effort to go round anything.
Nothing to do with bad luck, it was a shocking ride.
Difference with Frankie was he sussed the sitation went across the back of them looking for a gap to pop opened slowly building up momentum as he went. Frankie would have gone round them all if he had to and still gave the horse a chance.
What did Spencer do? Nothing!; His mount was swinging of the bridle he failed to notice those on the far side were a fair bit in front. If he had he could easily have taken the route that was open to him a few yards before the 2f marker which would have put him in a much better position. When he did decide to move the other side were so far in front any chance he had of winning were gone anyway and to top it all he ran straight into the back of a wall off horses with no effort to go round anything.
Nothing to do with bad luck, it was a shocking ride.
Spot on Fist. Frankie’s ride was excellent and not dissimilar to his winning ride in the race last year, albeit on the other side of the track. Spencer’s hold up rides are often embarrassingly inept and that was definitely the case with Tiddliwinks.
Regarding the original post – I look forward to Stilvi’s next "Tom Segal, what a good judge" thread.
I’m not normally a contributor to the "good ride/bad ride" threads but can’t see how anyone can defend Jamie Spencer for an ever increasing back catalogue of rides like the Tiddlywinks one … swinging away on the bridle and taken left and right on numerous occasions before finishing absolutely full of running after being forced to apply the brakes yet again half a furlong out … I find it amazing that trainers continue to give him opportunities when his style on hold up horses seems to be based on gaps appearing by luck rather than judgement … for those making it, the contrast with the Dettori ride on Redford is that Frankie had clear line of sight to his passage through and made the right choices at the right times … I know Richard Hughes often takes criticism for similar tactics … Cumulus Nimbus yesterday anyone ?
… however, the difference is that Hughes, unlike Spencer, appears to recognise when he needs to be just a length or two closer to the pace before making his final surge … witness how many times Hughes has got the Hannon two year olds up to win by narrow margins this season … many of them come from off the pace and have just one short, surging run in them … so the judgement of Hughes in how close he sits to the pace is vital and he seems to get it right more often than not.I have a new comment for my notes on RPost.com:
"Spencered" last time out.
Oldjoesaid on 8th Sept at Doncaster was one of the latest recipients.
I’d need to think I was getting a huge price to back him on a holdup sprinter nowadays.
… however, the difference is that Hughes, unlike Spencer, appears to recognise when he needs to be just a length or two closer to the pace before making his final surge … witness how many times Hughes has got the Hannon two year olds up to win by narrow margins this season … many of them come from off the pace and have just one short, surging run in them … so the judgement of Hughes in how close he sits to the pace is vital and he seems to get it right more often than not.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.