- This topic has 180 replies, 27 voices, and was last updated 19 years, 8 months ago by
.
- Posts
Id give george 129+, as he was just waiting for a gap to open and as soon as the gap opened a furlong out he treated group1 winners with contempt (fair enough they werent greats in behind but i think 129+ is a fair rating for such a performance against such opposition).
125 would make him a very average QE2 winner which he definitely is not. The racing post have rated the performance 131+ which i think might be a bit on the high side but it was a great performance, even if it looks like he could better it.
Lets face it, if you were to talk about horses who might be able to beat an in form george washington, you have to look back through the history of great milers so 129+ is defitely not unrealistic. He is a special horse.
Bulwark, I think you are just getting a little carried away with your enthusiasm over the style in which George won on Saturday. The way he ambled through the race and cantered into the lead was visually impressive, but he only actually beat Araafa 1 1/4 lengths.
Again he was impressive in the Guineas, but, if you take Sir Percy out of that race (and it possibly can be assumed that that horse didn’t run up to his best on ground that was too firm for him), what did he beat?
In between,  two defeats, for which there were acceptable excuses.
I am a fan of George Washington and have backed him in almost every race since his debut, but we have to keep our feet on the ground.
He may well be "a special horse" but there is no proof in the form book, yet.
Colin
(Edited by seabird at 8:35 am on Sep. 25, 2006)<br>
(Edited by seabird at 8:36 am on Sep. 25, 2006)
- Total Posts 17716
It is no certainty that there is much more in the locker, either.<br> As Kelly Marks pointed out on the Beeb, the horse has hung away from the whip every time it has been applied, noticeably in the Guineas and the Celebration Mile, which could just be temperament, but could also be that he had already given his all.<br> Whichever, the jockey was very careful to avoid its use on Saturday.
In fairness, there was never a need for Kinane to even think of going for the "persuader".
Colin
Quote: from cormack15 on 8:39 pm on Sep. 24, 2006[br]<br>Was GW’s performance really 5lb worse than that of Mark of Esteem?<br>
Time will tell
Mark of Esteem was given a TF rating of 139 and the second (Bosra Sham) 133.
There were those then that questioned MOE’s rating as BS appeared to improve by a stone or so on her Gunieas form but in the event franked the form in no uncertain terms by beating Halling (in receipt of wfa + mares allowance admittedly), and returning a similar 130+ rating, in the Champion Stakes.
MOE’s QE11 win was similalr to George Washington’s in that he was held up travelling strongly and was produced at 2f to win comfortably.
Personally, like others, I would award GW a high 120s+ rating and treat Araafa’s rise with a little scepticism until he runs again, though no reason at all to doubt he’s capable of improved form: only a 3yo after all.
As a reliable ‘yardstick’ at this stage I’d be inclined to use the 6yo Court Masterpiece
Immense performance.. I’ll be accused of aftertiming but when I saw that GW was behaving the way he was I couldn’t resist the 5/2 that was available… Still had a saver on CM who ran well.. <br>
Quote: from EC on 10:37 pm on Sep. 24, 2006[br]<br>are these TF speed figures by the way?
Yep they’re the timefigures. One and the same??
Suspected yours would approximate to TF’s as – while I’m in no position to question Topspeed having never used them and not knowing his MO – on occasions such as these when I’ve tried to compare like for like I’ve never been able to make head nor tail of them.
At least your hard work saves you the monkey per annum it costs to access Timeforms.
Thanks for taking the time
I must disagree with anyone who says that george does not merit a rating of 129+.
I thought the guineas field he beat looked good enough to me, araafa is another good horse (who in georges absence would probably clean up), but ran a stinker in the sussex.
On Saturday, in a time 1.24 seconds fast on good to soft, whilst everything else looked one paced by comparison george (despite being a horse who ran 6f faster than a group sprinter in last years phoenix stakes) was always travelling and when a late gap opened in the last furlong he put daylight between himself and the rest of this years milers, and won cosily.
Fair enough, you can say that araafa was 1 and a quarter lengths back and hes no good, but that is just complete rubbish, and that sort of thinking will inevitably cost money. Araafa is a very good miler. But george is an exceptional one.
129+ looks more than reasonable for george, thats not enthusiasm thats just being realistic, if i was being enthusiastic and was to rate him on the scope of the performance id give him 135+.
If you compare time and ground with horses like falbrav, mark of esteem, dubai millenium, and bear in mind georges final furlong acceleration you have to put georges performance up with those.
Im confident that on saturday i witnessed a great miler destroy a QE2 field the way a great miler should, a 10 length romp wasnt really necessary for a good rating.
The only reason ive went as low as 129+ is that the gap opened so late and who knows what the winning margin may have been if it had opened sooner.
I am a person who loves to see a great performance when it occurs and in a season of largely poor performances, i am not going to devalue what has undoubtably been the performance of the season so far.
When you bet against george washington your betting that he doesnt show up, not thast your horse can actually beat him on merit. I cannot help but feel that anything less than 129+ is an insult to a horse who easily rates with the greats.
Quote: from Aidan on 3:09 pm on Sep. 25, 2006[br]Timeform have given him 132.<br>
That’s a form rating, not a time rating. Timeform do not publsih speed figures for Ascot at the moment because of the relaid track.
The racing post have upped both horses by about 5lbs, which is pretty fair really.
Killybegs is not a consistant horse however and so a rating for him is almost useless, however his previous form had suggeested he was on his way back to form and i wouldnt have expected him to clock as good a timeas he did so fair play to him
Araafa though is a consistantly improving horse (sussex aside) and whilst he was moving away from the rest of the field george was moving away from him, so i think theratings look pretty honest to me.
I would think that if george was to retire this year and araafa was to stay in training he could more than hold his own next year. (Although realistically he will probably be bought up by godolphin by the end of the season and his racing career will be over.)
Sorry to go on, but how can you compile a rating without the use of time?
Collaterall form lines ain’t worth a carrot, as the reversed positions of Court masterpiece and Araafa show
Collaterall form lines ain’t worth a carrot, as the reversed positions of Court masterpiece and Araafa show
Absolutely literal interpretations of collateral form, you mean, as anyone analysing the Sussex should have been able to realise that the way it was run meant that Araafa’s performance was not indicitave of how good he is.
It was always obvious to me like most others that araafa had run a bad race in the sussex for reason x,y or z. <br>However, he has always looked like a better horse than court masterpiece and i was more shocked when court masterpiece won the sussex than when araafa returned to form and put CM in his place.
Time and ground are always worth assessing but you must be able to realise when a horse throws in a bad performance, otherwise its useless. On saturday i bet on George Washington with a little safety bet on Araafa because of the ground (should really have done a forecast, but hey ), they always stood out to me as being the two smartest horse in the field.
They both ran as expected, i think its those who honestly thought court masterpiece and librettist were the ones to beat that now believe the ratings are dodgy.
Gareth
But not everybody does, otherwise CM wouldn’t have been rated 128
They would know he beneffitted from a pace implode, therefore the running of Araafa/Echo of Light should be taken with a pinch of salt.
The other horses also benefitted from the pace implode, Soviet Song (bless her) is not the force she was, no longer a 122/124 horse
the FORM was overrated, a 124 performance and no better imhaho
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.