- This topic has 158 replies, 30 voices, and was last updated 19 years, 10 months ago by
.
- Posts
It’s "obliged" isn’t it! Compass protactors, oblique angles, all a bit too much like a maths lesson to me..
With respect Clive, I have neither the time nor the will to go to lengths explaining my views on the intricacies of pace and speed, especially to someone who stubbornly dismisses the importance of such factors as you have. May I suggest you read a book or two on the subject[/quote
copyright Stav
When it comes to condescending…
Ill leave out the moron bit
for now…
Mordin’s headline was:
"SLOW EARLY PACE CASTS DOUBT ON DERBY FORM"
which I think is reasonable enough.
I find that slowly run races tend to produce form that is less "reliable".
For example, in the Jockey-Club 2 years ago, they went a crawl and then sprinted.
Bleu Canari won a blanket finish from Prospect park and Valixir.
But few people believed that meant he’d be likely to beat them again over 12 in a true run race.
And, the only time he’s finished in the first 3 since (in 7 races) was when he was 3rd in an egg-and-spoon race a couple of months ago.
Now, Saturday’s race wasn’t as bad as Bleu Canari’s race, but it was a blanket finish with a maiden in 2nd place.
I think time will tell how good Sir Percy actually is. As people say, a slow winning speed figure doesn’t mean the horse is slow.
For me, the jury is still out and, like Mordin, I think that, in his next race, he’ll be going off at odds that assume the Derby form is rock solid.
So, I’ll probably be looking to oppose him.
Steve
(Edited by stevedvg at 5:17 pm on June 6, 2006)
I have to say I really cannot understand the lack of recognition Sir Percy is getting right across the racing spectrum. Nick Mordin’s comments I find ludicrous from someone that should know better. Lets leave alone nit-picking for a while and look at facts.
Sir Percy has won two Group 1’s so far, a Group 2 and finished second in the Guineas to George Washington a horse that O’Brien and Fallon rate as the best they’ve been associated with. That means they rate him higher than Rock Of Gibraltar, Hawk Wing, High Chaparal and the rest (at least O’Brien has been associated with ALL of them). Sir Percy now has won the Derby yet has been given I beleve a RPR of 121 (hopefully someone will confirm) which is a lower rating than the likes of High Rise and Benny The Dip and (I think) 8 lbs below Motivator. What planet are these people on? Would High Rise, Benny The Dip or Motivator have had the speed to finish second in even an ordinary Guineas? What’s more, did any of those horses ever win again? Motivator beat Walk In The Park who cannot win a race. I really don’t get this at all to be honest.
Time figures have their place of course they do but you can’t judge everything by them. Was every single Mil Reef or Nijinsky or Sea Bird victory fantastic on the clock?
Ths years Derby wasn’t run at the crawl Mordin seems to be implying, it was run at a steady pace which the leaders quickened around Tattenham Corner. The leaders weren’t stopping at the end of the race (proven as they finished second and third) yet Sir Percy made up incredible ground ff a steady pace. If the race was run at Mordins’s crawl then Sir Percy’s performance would’ve been evenmore astonishing as you can’t realistically give horses such a start off a slow pace. The slower the pace the handier you lie.
If Sir Percy was Godolphin trained or O’Brien trained he’d probably be talked of as a mega star by now with a huge over rating (rather like Dubai Millennium), but being from a comparatively "unfashionable" yard it seems he’s dismissed as eternally lucky.
Racing is about winning not world record times, time will tell how good Sir Percy is but I’m sorry anyone that rates the likes of High Rise as superior to Sir Percy cannot surely expect their views to be taken seriously nor can those who put everything blindly down to luck.
Perfectly put MM but Steve, the "jury may still be out" on the derby form but surely previous form is pretty good too? what more do you want FFS? He had best form before race and now best form after it…
As for Blue Canari example…can agree that slowly run races are deceptive but BC did not ( I recall ) scythe through the field from such an unpromising position. Quite simply PC showed a greater turn of foot and bigger heart than any other derby runner in final 2 furlongs. Persoanlly…I like that :)
I sense that people are looking at the horses price tag when judging the form. Cheap horses undermime the established order somewhat… If that is the case, no wonder some prefer NH racing :angry:
lets hope sir percy manages to at least win another race.<br>apart from 2000,01,02 all the derby winners since 96 never won another race,an amazing stat seeing as the derby is ment to be flat racings biggest race.<br>after the triumph hurdle rough race we had this year and the sad loss of horatio nelson,connections of top horses may avoid the race all together
Quote: from runandskip on 5:45 pm on June 6, 2006[br]<br>apart from 2000,01,02 all the derby winners since 96 never won another race,<br>
Absolutely, the reason is we’ve had a run of mediocre middle distance three year olds over the last decade or so, the three year olds have been average and the older horses better.
The fact that there have only been three or four what I would call top class middle distance three year old colts makes the ratings of some of them compared with Sir Percy’s even more baffling. A dual Group 1 winner and Guineas runner up, beaten only once by an incredibly talented miler rated below the likes of High Rise, Oath and Benny The Dip????? Come on, something’s wrong somewhere.
The best horse (possibly with the exception of HN) at shorter distances has stayed a mile and a half around epsom and therefore was always going to be too good for other horses. I didnt think he would stay despite breeding suggesting he should so I was obviously wrong.
Those who think Hala Bek was unlucky are wrong. That wasnt bad luck, it was inexperience.
The speed debate is interesting and Im not dismissing the relevant points about it. I have always been led to believe that in a slowly run race, its much better to be near the front?? Something which the second, third and fourth all managed to fulfill. So the winner has managed to come from off the pace in a slow run race.
Perhaps he will not win at the curragh if he did go. Perhaps he wont stay but I saw nothing the other day that suggests he wont. Perhaps Halabek will be a better horse in the long run. Either way, the best horse in the Derby last saturday won the derby and showed good acceleration and tonnes of courage to do it.
SHL
It reads as if Mordin has not even bothered to watch the races that he is pontificating about. If he had, he would know that the runners in the Derby went through the first half mile quicker than did the runners in the Oaks and much quicker than did the runners in the Coronation Cup.
He would also realise that the extensive dolling out in the middle section on Oaks’ day affected the overall race times and the apparent going allowances that could be derived from them. The going on Derby day was probably only fractionally quicker than on the Friday.
Still, why let the facts get in the way of a piece of myopic prejudice?
Steve, the "jury may still be out" on the derby form but surely previous form is pretty good too? what more do you want FFS?
I’ve explained before why I don’t rate the Dewhurst form and why I believe the best horse didn’t win that race.
SP was well beaten in a slow run guineas. 2nd, but a well beaten 2nd. But, if he’s a 12f horse, he did well to get even that close.
If he’s not a 12f horse, then I would suspect that a stonger run Derby would have found him out.
There’s a lot of "if’s" about the horse right now.
As I said the jury is still out and time will tell.
Steve
Stav
What do habitually poor speed figures in french group races tell us about their horses?
If i re-phrase the question…maybe i will get an answer!
And should Seb coe be stripped of his olympic golds for not getting near the world record?
I keep trying with my condescending moronic questions!
When four horses cross the line with barely a gnat’s whisker between them doesn’t that simply say that if the four were to meet again next week, with varying conditions of track and ground, the outcome would probably be different? If Sir P is that great then so are the other three.
(Edited by Longchamp Lad at 9:23 pm on June 6, 2006)
Quote: from SirHarryLewis on 5:53 pm on June 6, 2006[br]Those who think Hala Bek was unlucky are wrong. That wasnt bad luck, it was inexperience.
Robinson’s post-race comments about Hala Bek’s swerve being due to "inexperience" seem to have been accepted at face value. I’m inclined to think there was a bit of special pleading here and that his (mis)use of the whip caused the problem.
Quote: from guskennedy on 10:03 pm on June 6, 2006[br]
Quote: from SirHarryLewis on 5:53 pm on June 6, 2006[br]Those who think Hala Bek was unlucky are wrong.  That wasnt bad luck, it was inexperience.
Robinson’s post-race comments about Hala Bek’s swerve being due to "inexperience" seem to have been accepted at face value. I’m inclined to think there was a bit of special pleading here and that his (mis)use of the whip caused the problem.<br>
DIdnt hear the post race interview. My eyes tell me it was inexperience and incorrect whip use as you call it certainly does not cause a swerve like that. Its not as if he was just drifting.
SHL
I don’t want to get in the way of  some interesting exchanges, but the whole thing seems to start from the premise that Sir Percy produced a moderate speed rating in the Derby. He did no such thing. The time was very good, well up to standard considering the winner had to be switched in the last two furlongs. The first race on the card, a competitive handicap produced a time 1.3 seconds slower, equivalent to about 11lb less than Sir Percy allowing for weight differences, distance and weight for age. I think Topspeed’s rating of 115, which is actually better than his Guineas second(106) compares quite well with his RPR of 121. Granted a clear run, it could have been 5lbs better which would equal his Dewhirst rating of 120.
This is not the first time that Nick Mordin has come up with dubious speed ratings. I’ve read a few of his books, which are excellent, so I wonder if he’s changed his ratings methods or just trying to be controversial. I’m puzzled.
I agree with those who are saying that slow races do not help with form analysis. Basically, they tell us very little, especially when the race develops into a 2f sprint after a dawdle. In such races, which used to be typical in France, accelerating while at the same time obtaining a clear run, means that the fastest horse doesn’t always win – ask those who backed Home Affairs on Saturday.
Much more useful for drawing conclusions(and I don’t think anyone is disagreeing) is a race run in a relatively fast time. The winner of such a race has proved that on the day and under the conditions, they are unarguably up to the standard of the race.  So, Sir Percy is without any room for doubt, a worthy Derby winner and definitely stays 12f – he couldn’t have won if he wasn’t up to standard or didn’t stay.   <br>[*]
(Edited by Artemis at 11:48 am on June 7, 2006)
The Split Second (Raceform) rating is a modest — on his scale — 113. That seems more plausible than Topspeed’s. But I have hopes that Sir Percy, if he stays sound (and if the jarring-up after the Guineas was not a portent), will turn out to be an above-average Derby winner. I agree with his supporters: his form looks good. And I agree with those who say that he still has a lot to prove.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.