- This topic has 44 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
Really lovely posts in my opinion Pinza and cormack15.
I agree that the cream certainly rises to the top, and those 2 are certainly among the cream of trainers
- Total Posts 17716
Really lovely posts in my opinion Pinza and cormack15.
I agree that the cream certainly rises to the top, and those 2 are certainly among the cream of trainersAgreed, I love posts like this! just makes you love the horse even more and proud of the animal and how trainers connect them them on a personal level.
- Total Posts 17716
I’m afraid I’m not privy to the apparently endless gallop reports Fist seems to receive, so am perhaps not qualified to comment on Sariska’s general attitude earlier in the season. But I don’t think it’s a coincidence that she made all in the Middleton on ground that Jamie Spencer wasn’t really happy with and has refused to race twice since.
I’m more than willing to lay the blame at the feet of Michael Bell and would have no hesitaton in sending Sariska to Henry Cecil on the condition that she doesn’t race again until 2011.
Wrong decision; wrong (and undeservedly fortunate) trainer.
"Fist wrote:
Going by memory I’d say you are way off the mark! Bellotto was a hold up horse and when they did try and ride him handy in the King George in the same year he finished miles behind Mtoto,Reference Point and some French filly.
My bet is you lost your school dinner money and have never forgiven him
Your Memorys usually good Fist but the race you refer to was the 87 Coral Eclipse where Reference Point went off like a scolded cat and was reeled in by Mtoto with the French filly Triptych running on well for 3rd! Bellotto was ridden handier but failed miserably! I lost a jar full of 2p"s on Bellotto that day at 5/1,i had filled an old sweet jar with coppers and put the lot on Bellotto to a total of £40
That’s a pretty harsh assessment of a Derby winning trainer (and of our own Fist) Armchair Jockey.
Sariska’s gallops shennanigans were in the public domain as I recall and it has also been well documented that Sariska’s family contains its share of reluctant animals. Bell has shown himself time and again to be a trainer of great talent, throughly deserving of a filly of Sariska’s quality.
In fact, given her current recalcitrant attitude, you might well argue (and, for all we know it may be the case) that he performed miracles to keep her sweet as long as he did. I remember her being described as a strong-willed ‘character’ before her Oaks win last year.
I’d say if Sariska had any latent quirks, then running her on unsuitable ground wouldn’t have helped keep them in check.
If Bell knew she was ‘strong willed’ before the Oaks, why would he ask her repeatedly to race on unsuitable ground? From what I’ve read, it seems that was asking for trouble.
I wonder if he has any regrets…
He may have regrets (the Middleton) but only those which are apparent through hindsight and he shouldn’t admonish himself.
Arguably, before her temperament took over, you could make a case that he had maximised her career and performed a marketing job about her ability which Coolmore would have been proud of.
The Yorkshire Oaks of 2009 indicated she wasn’t the best filly/mare in England and last years Champions Stakes pegged her as below the best against the boys.
In addition, she was very lucky to keep the Epsom Oaks as she disadvantaged or endangered nearly every other runner in the field.
Excellent in the Musidora and awesome at the Curragh against her own age and sex, she is being lauded as one of the best fillies of the last decade and great loss to the Arc field…well done Michael Bell.Can’t see that Sariska did anything (under our rules) to warrent disqualification in the Oaks. Winner on merit. Interference was slight and unintentional.
Also, don’t see all this talk of her being any better on a soft surface. Sure, earlier in her career it looked that way, but subsequant events suggest it not to be the case. Impressive though the Irish Oaks Oaks was, the form has not worked out. In the Yorkshire Oaks (good-firm), Sariska did not seem to run to form at the time. Yet Dar Re Mi’s form in the Vermeille, Arc and Sheema Classic; and Sariska’s win in the Middleton suggests to me she is equally effective on good-firm (Musidora also good-firm).
So you could argue her trainer missed winning opportunities by not running her on a firm surface often enough. I’d say myself Michael Bell did a pretty good job.
Value Is EverythingCan’t see that Sariska did anything (under our rules) to warrent disqualification in the Oaks. Winner on merit. Interference was slight and unintentional.
Have to disagree on that one Ginger’, in my view the interference was both deliberate and significant and meant it was impossible to judge whether she was the winner on merit.
Even under our rules I thought it was a lousy decision.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.