- This topic has 350 replies, 76 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Its a shame that just because Danedream is not English or Irish trained that people have not given her the credit she deserves. Winning in such an emphatic fashion, her 3rd all aged group one on a variety of going, she has to be regarded as the best middle distance horse in Europe.
I felt the same when Timeform gave Zenyatta a mere 125 rating when she was obviously one of the most amazing horses ever seen on a racecourse.
Where do you get the 125 from?
Zenyatta was rated 131 in 2009 and 129 in 2010.
She ran in many races against vastly inferior rivals, so her form can not be rated higher. Only twice did she take on horses of her own quality, in the two Breeders Cup Classics.If a English or French horse had won the Arc like Danedream did they’d be comparing him/her to Sea Bird II.
The German filly Danedream won the Arc by 5 lengths and given a Timeform rating of 132. Add the 3 lbs sex allowance 135. The British four year old Sakhee won the Arc by 6 lengths and given a Timeform rating of just 1 lb better, 136.
She has absolutely hosed in and treated the opposition with exactly the same contempt as she has done in 4 of her last 5 races. No idea what went wrong at Saint-cloud.
So just 1 lb less than the best ever rating given to a three year old – not good enough for you!
The biggest joke is they have given her the same rating as Rewilding ?? but that’s because they’ve overrated So You Think to start with and they can’t bend the figures round that. There just isn’t enough room to fit them all in when you consider the likes of Deacon Blues is 130+ and Frankel is 142. In reality you couldn’t fit them into the same handicap if the 2 raced at the same trip.
Add the sex allowance to the rating of females to get the true comparrison. 3 lbs better than Rewilding is an excellent rating.
It’s all fine and well saying it wasn’t a great Arc now but she’s made a top class field look useless.
She looks an exceptional horse and she’s probably as good as Zarkava was and the ratings are pretty meaningless and Britsh
It was rated an exceptional performance, she is rated just 1 lb below Zarkava, who I believe is rated the best ever three year old filly! No British three year old filly has been rated higher by Timeform!
What do you expect Hurdy?
Value Is EverythingThe point is that Dream Ahead was rated higher than Danedream on the day,no need for all the comparisons. Who was the most devastaing on the day? Too easy, Danedream.Black Caviar has won 6 straight group 1’s and sits 7 points behind Frankel? If it had of been Frankel instead of Danedream winning in the same fashion i would be willing to suggest Frankel would have received probably higher than his current 142! As for SYT being rated higher than he should,he has won 8 Group 1’s in his last 14 starts in 3 different countries.
SYT the best in decades? Plenty would disagree Presto and Glass Harmonium has raced and been placed in group races every run here, he has improved markedly,there has been plenty of English imports fail here so it always comes back to the ‘lower class’ of racing when a horse is improved here.At his last start in HK Glass Harmonium was beaten about 30 lengths,so lets not forget how consistent he has been here,instead of cherry picking one run in a group 3 beating Redwood.
You can disagree with that quote if you want, I’ve heard many call him the best since Kingston Town. But THE POINT is that Australian middle-distance G1s are not as good as English/French G1s. There’s a reason Dato Tan Chin Nam said that SYT would have to conquer Europe to become "the tiger of racing". There’s a reason Hong Kong owners have in recent years gone to Europe despite the higher prices for middle distance horses. Australian sprinting is stronger than European sprinting, but Europe has the advantage in middle distance races.
SYT unbeatable over there, and found several around if not above his level in Europe, though Danedream might be one to put above him. Glass Harmonium is good enough to be very competitive in G1s over there, was a few lengths shy of the best G1s in Europe. Seems to match up just about perfectly.On Glass Harmonium:
Firstly, a lot of horses fail in Hong Kong including Youmzain, Dylan Thomas, and more, because the track is very fast, the pace is often very slow, and it is a loud bustling city. And if you actually look at the race, he was beaten 4L behind Snow Fairy and actually ran alright, similarly to Sri Putra. And he was consistent in Europe.I don’t like talking about ratings, but I’ll say that if you ask anybody who knows both Australian and European racing who the most dominant horse in the world is, it would be a close vote between Black Caviar and Frankel. I go marginally for Black Caviar myself because she’s won every race on the bridle. But at the same time she hasn’t met an accomplished Canford Cliffs-type challenger (would probably be Rocket Man in the sprints). And both Frankel and BC are likely to step up in distance at some point which is particularly exciting.
And as I’ve said I think Danedream’s the best middle distance horse based on the Arc run. She stretched away from the closers Snow Fairy and So You Think despite the closers having the advantage of being held up off a strong pace. The ground played havoc with the results but even though it helped those on the speed stick on, the chasers still had the chance to show their ability by closing off hard, and Danedream outsprinted them.
Yes beaten 4.3 lengths in HK was a typo on my account,whilst Glass Harmonium was the best of the 3 over there, i believe he has improved a bit here, though obviously not as much as My Kingdom Of Fife and December Draw. Timeform ratings here are an occasionlly used tool nothing more,none of this ‘he raced 8lbs below his best rubbish’ according to timeform! Obviously it can be a useful tool,people though tend to rely too heavily upon it,watching race replays will do you more good.Well Presto i suppose it is whoever is going around in the Australian Group 1’s if it is So You Think,Kingston Town and quite a few others i would rate the aussie group 1 as good as the english group1. After all though the ratings expert from timeform generally are close to the mark i am sure most would agree that at times in the past they appear to be off the mark.That said if a horse then goes out and runs so many lbs below his previous rating,that can make for a false rating.Also ask yourself this if Frankel had won all his races in the same fashion in Australia and Black Caviar Had won all her starts in England who do you think timeform would have on top?
Its a shame that just because Danedream is not English or Irish trained that people have not given her the credit she deserves. Winning in such an emphatic fashion, her 3rd all aged group one on a variety of going, she has to be regarded as the best middle distance horse in Europe.
I felt the same when Timeform gave Zenyatta a mere 125 rating when she was obviously one of the most amazing horses ever seen on a racecourse.
Where do you get the 125 from?
Zenyatta was rated 131 in 2009 and 129 in 2010.
She ran in many races against vastly inferior rivals, so her form can not be rated higher. Only twice did she take on horses of her own quality, in the two Breeders Cup Classics.If a English or French horse had won the Arc like Danedream did they’d be comparing him/her to Sea Bird II.
The German filly Danedream won the Arc by 5 lengths and given a Timeform rating of 132. Add the 3 lbs sex allowance 135. The British four year old Sakhee won the Arc by 6 lengths and given a Timeform rating of just 1 lb better, 136.
She has absolutely hosed in and treated the opposition with exactly the same contempt as she has done in 4 of her last 5 races. No idea what went wrong at Saint-cloud.
So just 1 lb less than the best ever rating given to a three year old – not good enough for you!
The biggest joke is they have given her the same rating as Rewilding ?? but that’s because they’ve overrated So You Think to start with and they can’t bend the figures round that. There just isn’t enough room to fit them all in when you consider the likes of Deacon Blues is 130+ and Frankel is 142. In reality you couldn’t fit them into the same handicap if the 2 raced at the same trip.
Add the sex allowance to the rating of females to get the true comparrison. 3 lbs better than Rewilding is an excellent rating.
It’s all fine and well saying it wasn’t a great Arc now but she’s made a top class field look useless.
She looks an exceptional horse and she’s probably as good as Zarkava was and the ratings are pretty meaningless and Britsh
It was rated an exceptional performance, she is rated just 1 lb below Zarkava, who I believe is rated the best ever three year old filly! No British three year old filly has been rated higher by Timeform!
What do you expect Hurdy?
A bigger spread Ginger Timeform time after time excuse the pun mess up completely when they overrate one horse and others end up going through the roof. I believe Zenyatta got her rating after winning the big one in 2009 I was talking beforehand mind you I got 5-6/1 about her thanks to them underestimating her ability at the time.
When you get a horse like Cavarlryman rated next door to Zenyatta there has to be something wrong. You could argue on his Arc run he deserved his rating but no way on this planet did he achieve half of what she did poor opposition or now.
A classic example of how they tie themselves up in knotts was Duke Of Marmalade. He won some of the poorly contested Group 1 races imaginable and was given the title of best in the world and a rating of 133. A few weeks later up pops Zarkava and absolutely slaughters him and everything else and she gets a 132.
Then when Sea the Stars wins the Arc they find the form is so closely linked with Zarkava who won easier than he did against the same horses they say he ran his worst race when it was clearly the best performance of his racing life.
They manipulate figures to suit and very often even they don’t agree with the ratings they give but are forced to fit them in as best they can.
Getting into a debate about Timeform and ratings is a never ending battle that no one can win as you can do anything you want with numbers to suit your own argument.
It all falls down when you have a horse like See The Stars being rated too closely to great horses like Dancing Brave, Nijinsky, Mill Reef etc. There just isn’t the room to fit them all in and be realistic at the same time a problem there probably is no answer to.
It is certainly a "never ending battle getting in to a debate about Timeform", with someone who misquotes their ratings as much as you do Hurdy.
You criticise the rating for Cavalryman for being too high. Yet Timeform dropped his rating once it was clear the change of stable made a big difference 2009 rating (after Arc) 130, 2010 rating 121. Arc being the last time trained by Andre Fabre, possibly the best trainer in Europe. Although for a time afterwards Cavalryman had to be rated on the Arc performance, the change of yard made a question mark on the rating for everyone with a brain. Your comparisson of Cavalryman and Zenyatta is no doubt trying to say Timeform believed they had equal attributes, that is either mischievous or very naive. There are many things to take in to account when assessing a horse, rating is only one of them. eg consistency and liklyhood to run to its best.
You question why Cavalryman was given as big a rating, and then say Sea The Stars Arc was "clearly the best performance of his life". Yet cavalryman was beaten only 2 lengths and a head in to third there. You can’t have it both ways. If you want Timeform to UP the performance rating they gave Sea The Stars for the Arc, then you’d have to UP Cavalryman’s rating. You could drive an English double decker bus through your arguements sir.
You clearly know nothing about handicapping.
Value Is EverythingI believe a horse should be rated on their best performance.If they move to another barn or get sick and die that should be irrelevant to their best performance.If a horse is given a high rating they should never lose it. They may get a lower rating but it cannot displace the highest rating a horse ever gets.If you ask me how good a horse is you don’t mean how good is he if trained by so and so or as a tyo.(Secretariate and Arazzi and Franklin were the best I ever saw based on one performance from each.)You don’t mean his average rating either.You mean HOW GOOD IS HE? At his best how does he compare with others at their best? There may not be an objective way to do this.We do the best we can.
I believe a horse should be rated on their best performance.If they move to another barn or get sick and die that should be irrelevant to their best performance.If a horse is given a high rating they should never lose it. They may get a lower rating but it cannot displace the highest rating a horse ever gets.If you ask me how good a horse is you don’t mean how good is he if trained by so and so or as a tyo.(Secretariate and Arazzi and Franklin were the best I ever saw based on one performance from each.)You don’t mean his average rating either.You mean HOW GOOD IS HE? At his best how does he compare with others at their best? There may not be an objective way to do this.We do the best we can.
Exactly Andyod, with one proviso, if it has been proven since that the rating originally given either flattered the horse or subsequent form showed it wrong. Sometimes a race is difficult to assess, it might be rated 10 lbs above what subsequent events show. It would be wrong not to change it.
In the case of Cavalryman, his 2009 rating was correct at the time. the fact he’s never been as good since does not change what he was capable of on 2009 Arc day. When retired a horse is given back his best rating.
Value Is EverythingIt is certainly a "never ending battle getting in to a debate about Timeform", with someone who misquotes their ratings as much as you do Hurdy.
You criticise the rating for Cavalryman for being too high. Yet Timeform dropped his rating once it was clear the change of stable made a big difference 2009 rating (after Arc) 130, 2010 rating 121. Arc being the last time trained by Andre Fabre, possibly the best trainer in Europe. Although for a time afterwards Cavalryman had to be rated on the Arc performance, the change of yard made a question mark on the rating for everyone with a brain. Your comparisson of Cavalryman and Zenyatta is no doubt trying to say Timeform believed they had equal attributes, that is either mischievous or very naive. There are many things to take in to account when assessing a horse, rating is only one of them. eg consistency and liklyhood to run to its best.
You question why Cavalryman was given as big a rating, and then say Sea The Stars Arc was "clearly the best performance of his life". Yet cavalryman was beaten only 2 lengths and a head in to third there. You can’t have it both ways. If you want Timeform to UP the performance rating they gave Sea The Stars for the Arc, then you’d have to UP Cavalryman’s rating. You could drive an English double decker bus through your arguements sir.
You clearly know nothing about handicapping.
Why would I have to up Cavalryman’s rating. Are you saying that he was superior to Fame and Glory or Conduit? I wouldn’t have put it up there in the first place. The way he has not been backed and ran since no one else bar you seem to think it was justified.
Your talking rubbish about the change of yards Godolphin bought a wrong un and ain’t that the truth.
Going by the book you would have to pit his rating up if you were to increase STS but going by the book is the fastest way to the punters graveyard, The horse was clearly flattered on the day, something we see every day of the week and it had very little bearing on Sea the Stars performance. His rating was a bit low IMO and Zarkava’s was an insult. Fine and well saying it was the highest since way back when but it wasn’t way back when she won the Arc.
She deserved a much higher rating than the horses of the time had gained Like Duke of Marmalade who wouldn’t have got within 4 lengths of her.
I suggest you jump in your bus and drive it to a race course and learn how to read a race and stop trying to convince the forum you’re something, clearly you are not.
You can do anything you like with figures something reading your posts you seem to do all the time to convince yourself there’s value. Value my friend is the 2nd fastest way to the punters graveyard and even those who said they made fortunes were lying through their teeth with a view to making money from unsuspecting punters. There’s an old saying among the real pro punters: If you want to become a millionaire using value start with 3 million.
Timeform manipulate a lot of ratings to cover their mistakes. They are not God but then neither are you but with all those
you’re showering about the place it would seem you seem to think you are.Thankfully there’s not a lot of others with your attitude on here so I think I’ll stay a while and noise you up a bit
It is certainly a "never ending battle getting in to a debate about Timeform", with someone who misquotes their ratings as much as you do Hurdy.
You criticise the rating for Cavalryman for being too high. Yet Timeform dropped his rating once it was clear the change of stable made a big difference 2009 rating (after Arc) 130, 2010 rating 121. Arc being the last time trained by Andre Fabre, possibly the best trainer in Europe. Although for a time afterwards Cavalryman had to be rated on the Arc performance, the change of yard made a question mark on the rating for everyone with a brain. Your comparisson of Cavalryman and Zenyatta is no doubt trying to say Timeform believed they had equal attributes, that is either mischievous or very naive. There are many things to take in to account when assessing a horse, rating is only one of them. eg consistency and liklyhood to run to its best.
You question why Cavalryman was given as big a rating, and then say Sea The Stars Arc was "clearly the best performance of his life". Yet cavalryman was beaten only 2 lengths and a head in to third there. You can’t have it both ways. If you want Timeform to UP the performance rating they gave Sea The Stars for the Arc, then you’d have to UP Cavalryman’s rating. You could drive an English double decker bus through your arguements sir.
You clearly know nothing about handicapping.
Why would I have to up Cavalryman’s rating. Are you saying that he was superior to Fame and Glory or Conduit? I wouldn’t have put it up there in the first place. The way he has not been backed and ran since no one else bar you seem to think it was justified.
If you think the Arc is "clearly the best performance" of Sea The Stars career, then to rate Sea The Stars Arc performance any better you have to up his rating AND every other horse in the race. If you believe Cavalryman was flattered then you have to give a reason for being flattered"? Of those who raced in a similar position to him, only Dar Re Me ran anything like as well. Dar Re Me herself franked the form (along with Conduit) in no uncertain terms in the Breeders Cup Turf and Sheema Classic. So a filly who ran a similar race to Cavalryman wasn’t flattered.
You like to note Cavalryman’s form after the Arc, yet don’t say anything about earlier form. Very progressive, winning his last three races including Group 1 Grand Prix De Paris and one of the best Arc trials Prix Niel. Cavalryman didn’t run to the form of those two races afterwards, let alone the Arc.Your talking rubbish about the change of yards Godolphin bought a wrong un and ain’t that the truth.
"Rubbish" is something people say when they can not explain their opinion. Why is it "rubbish"?
Why is it so difficult to think Cavalryman was not the same horse for Bin Surror? The Arc was also Cavalryman’s last race in 2009. Is it so surprising a horse doesn’t train on when coming back another year, and doesn’t show the same form for an inferior trainer? Going by the book you would have to pit his rating up if you were to increase STS but going by the book is the fastest way to the punters graveyard, The horse was clearly flattered on the day, something we see every day of the week and it had very little bearing on Sea the Stars performance. His rating was a bit low IMO and Zarkava’s was an insult. Fine and well saying it was the highest since way back when but it wasn’t way back when she won the Arc.
So what you are saying Hurdy is: From looking at the Arc race
at the time
… Timeform should’ve known that Cavalryman was the
only
horse who was flattered and should’ve
known
he had
no
chance of running to that form afterwards.
You do realise that when it became clear Cavalryman was no longer capable of his Arc form, Timeform changed the rating?
How the castlemane four x can a horse rated the best three year old before or since, be called an "insult"? That’s crazy.
She deserved a much higher rating than the horses of the time had gained Like Duke of Marmalade who wouldn’t have got within 4 lengths of her.
That is your opinion which is fair enough Hurdy. Can you justify that opinion?
Again, I think you are forgetting the sex allowance. In a race Duke Of Marmalade (a five time Group 1 winner) would be rated 4 lbs inferior to Zarkava. It is quite noticeable that most of the criticism in this thread directed at Timeform is for females. I say again, the sex allowance needs to be added to a rating for a fair comparrison to be made.I suggest you jump in your bus and drive it to a race course and learn how to read a race and stop trying to convince the forum you’re something, clearly you are not.
Not trying to convince anybody of anything Hurdy. It wasn’t me who started criticising; i’m just defending "someone/thing" else who may not be on this forum to defend themselves.
You can do anything you like with figures something reading your posts you seem to do all the time to convince yourself there’s value. Value my friend is the 2nd fastest way to the punters graveyard and even those who said they made fortunes were lying through their teeth with a view to making money from unsuspecting punters. There’s an old saying among the real pro punters: If you want to become a millionaire using value start with 3 million.
And that my friend is something punters who are incapable of finding value (and so profit) say. I’m doing more than ok with my value approach Hurdy, thanks very much. Don’t think I’d better enlarge on the value debate, otherwise Reet would kill me.
Timeform manipulate a lot of ratings to cover their mistakes. They are not God but then neither are you but with all those
you’re showering about the place it would seem you seem to think you are.Timeform make mistakes like the rest of us Hurdy. For example I myself don’t rate Kicking King as highly as they do. Just an opinion. But I find their over all ability to rate/rationalie things excellent.
Thankfully there’s not a lot of others with your attitude on here so I think I’ll stay a while and noise you up a bit
Sorry to be such a disappointment to you; Not!
Glad there are others on the forum you do like.All the best.
Ginge
Value Is Everything
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.