- This topic has 52 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 8 months ago by
.
- Posts
A very hard race to analyse…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam’s_razor
The popular interpretation of this principle is that the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. Simplest is not defined by the time or number of words it takes to express the theory; "[simplest] is really referring to the theory with the fewest new assumptions."
I use this principle, it saves on a lot of form evaluation headaches
I feel sure the original writer would gladly discuss this matter further. On the comments section of his blog.
Rory,
Can understand not timing parts of races (as in "sectional times"); but doesn’t "pace" come in to your calculations?I think you’ll find I was being mischievous, sir. The point I was attempting to make is that dismissing a methodology you don’t understand as nonsense, is a bit like claiming that foreign languages are just funny noises because you are unable to speak them. I shall refrain from such obtuse humour forthwith.
Sorry Rory, failed my irony degree.
Some of us need a instead of a to point us in the right direction. I’ll blame my low blood sugar levels.
Value Is EverythingI feel sure the original writer would gladly discuss this matter further. On the comments section of his blog.
We’d far rather discuss it with you, Prufrock.
Like much else on this thread, Rory, that went completely over Gingertipster’s head.
Doesn’t matter whether it’s an uncontested lead, indeed.Although things can go shooting over the top.
At least I’ve got something between my ears.
"Like much else on this thread", seems you think Rory is agreeing with your opinion Reet?
Hitting my head against a brick wall takes it’s toll.Taking something out of context again I see.
An uncontested lead does not matter if the front runner goes an overly strong early pace. ie A pace he’d likely go if taken on for the lead.Why does a horse need to be taken on in front (be encouraged to go faster) when he’s going too fast anyway?
Value Is EverythingI feel sure the original writer would gladly discuss this matter further. On the comments section of his blog.
We’d far rather discuss it with you, Prufrock.
How about you discuss it with me AND with the original writer? On the comments section of his blog.
Would the blog’s author, whosoever that may be care to enlighten those on this forum whether he has sectionals on the Voltigeur and if so if he can confirm or debunk the popular view that Midas Touch chased too fast a pace and hence has a chance of revenge on Rewilding on Saturday?
I have spoken to the blog’s author and he says that he found it impossible to take sectionals for most of the races at York, due to the camerawork, and especially impossible to take them for that race as he was in the bar at the time.
- Total Posts 17716
Sounds like an unreliable, incompetent drunk to me.
It wasn’t me, i think?
PMSL at the cleverness.
Tell you what, I’ll stack my chips on Luca Cumani’s side.
And you time boys can busy yourselves with all that you need to mount a defense.
I understand it fine, Rory, although your ignorance knows no bounds, it seems.
But, as ever, I’m happy for a strong opinion to pay off. It has for years now.
Times are useless. Flat or jumps. See it or not. But I’m laughing either way, and, it seems, you don’t get it at all.
But then why would you?
- Total Posts 17716
Aidan O’Brien has trained more Group 1 winners than Luca Cumani and is 20 years younger, some older trainers are living in the past and refuse to break out of their routine and why should Luca Cumani do that if what he does clearly works? but sometimes if you want to be the best in the world you need the whole armory which unfortunatly for you Big Bucks includes times and the same goes for any punter.
- Total Posts 17716
Forgetting sectionals and time and Sea the Stars look at the race.
I’m near certain if you asked Johnny Murtagh or Tom Queally "what would have happened if you had ridden your mount closer to the pace?" they’d both give you the same answer:- "I’d have been beaten further"
Had it been a mile Rip could have been up there and seen out the trip as we seen last season but 1m2f? Watching him falter behind Zenyatta and now again behind Cape Blanco would seem the only way he’s truly affective over 1m2f is when the pace suits.
Cast your minds back to Sandown when Sea the Stars threw down the guantlet. At the mile marker Rip was cantering all over Sea the Stars (go look) but when push came to shove what did he do? He hung like a gate in behind Sea the Stars and for all the world looked like a horse who didn’t see out the trip.
This time round he wasn’t picking off your normal front runner. This was a horse who ran like a pacemaker but wasn’t. His class brought stamina to the fore and that’s exactly what Rip doesn’t want in a Group1 where it takes more than class to see you through IMO…always has been my opinion and as most would agree Beethoven wouldn’t blow wind up Rip’s backside at a mile is only further eveidence to support what I’m saying.
If anyone thinks I’m wrong then take a look at the Breeders betting and tell me where you think AOB intends running Rip and why?.
Alot of what you say makes sense Fist, except the paraghraph regarding the Eclipse 2nd to Sea The Stars.
Cantering all over him 2f out? The reason he appeared to be going much better was he had nowhere to go. When Murtagh pulled him out just before the 2 pole he was after Rip just as much as Kinane on Sea The Stars.
That doesn’t really matter anyway. What my main point is, is that Rip Van Winkle puts an extra 2 lengths between himself and Conduit in the last furlong. He certainly stayed that day.
PMSL at the cleverness.
Tell you what, I’ll stack my chips on Luca Cumani’s side.
And you time boys can busy yourselves with all that you need to mount a defense.
I understand it fine, Rory, although your ignorance knows no bounds, it seems.
But, as ever, I’m happy for a strong opinion to pay off. It has for years now.
Times are useless. Flat or jumps. See it or not. But I’m laughing either way, and, it seems, you don’t get it at all.
But then why would you?
I’m struggling to find anything in the above post, or indeed any previous post of yours, which demonstrates any knowledge of the subject. Of course it’s not an approach which needs to be taken to make a living out of punting, but it’s considered bad form to rubbish someone’s area of expertise without at least pointing out why you believe it to be lacking merit. Perhaps you’ve written about this elsewhere and I’ve missed it?
Tell you what, I’ll stack my chips on Luca Cumani’s side.
It is beautifully ironic that Cumani has bought some of his best horses of late specifically on the back of good timefigures and good sectionals.
I think I would rather judge his attitude to times on that than on a tongue-in-cheek soundbite he gave in an interview however many moons ago.
instead of a 
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.