- This topic has 211 replies, 34 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 4 months ago by
.
- Posts
No,
By "done it" I meant a "great" performance on form.
Workforce’s Epsom win was exceptional for a twice raced 3 year old. One that promised a better one (possibly a great one) which was why Timeform rated Workforce with a "p" afterwards for further improvement likely. But he has not produced a great performance yet. By "great", I mean the Timeform definition of 140 or more.
Harbinger has produced a Great form performance.
Value Is Everything"Gingertipster" wrote: By "great", I mean the Timeform definition of 140 or more.
Surely that’s just the Timeform guy’s opinions though?!
- Total Posts 17716
No,
By "done it" I meant a "great" performance on form.
Workforce’s Epsom win was exceptional for a twice raced 3 year old. One that promised a better one (possibly a great one) which was why Timeform rated Workforce with a "p" afterwards for further improvement likely. But he has not produced a great performance yet. By "great", I mean the Timeform definition of 140 or more.
Harbinger has produced a Great form performance.
My point was that we haven’t seen Harbinger frank his time yet and nothing has run from the King George so you can’t assume it’s a great race because in theory Workforce should of come 2nd with his "P" or maybe would have won which would make Harbingers win the finished article and untill then for me there are still question marks, add the winning margin and a horse producing an uncharacteristic time on his both runs at Ascot with the Hardwick 2nd Duncan flopping next time out it just smells of unreliablity and something needs to come out to frank The King George which was admittedly visually breathtaking
By "great", I mean the Timeform definition of 140 or more.
Surely that’s just the Timeform guy’s opinions though?!
Everything is opinion THM.
Timeform’s opinion over the years has proved accurate though and is a recognised authority on such things.
Value Is EverythingOh I know everything is opinions GT, but I’d rather back my own opinion (rightly or wrongly) than some guys I don’t even know, however reliable they may seem to be!
- Total Posts 17716
I presume anyone looking to lay him in the Arc will also be laying him if running in the Juddmonte.
More questions to answer in the Juddmonte than in the Arc for me…
My point was that we haven’t seen Harbinger frank his time yet and nothing has run from the King George so you can’t assume it’s a great race because in theory Workforce should of come 2nd with his "P" or maybe would have won which would make Harbingers win the finished article and untill then for me there are still question marks, add the winning margin and a horse producing an uncharacteristic time on his both runs at Ascot with the Hardwick 2nd Duncan flopping next time out it just smells of unreliablity and something needs to come out to frank The King George which was admittedly visually breathtaking
What about the other runners in the Hardwicke?
Sans Frontiers and Redwood were well beaten in the Hardwicke. Yet finished first and second, well ahead of the others, in the Princess Of Wales. Barshiba went on to win the Lancashire Oaks. Duncan may not have franked the form, but he was going ominously easily before hampered. And the winner was Redwood who again franked the Hardwicke form. Hardly "unreliable".
When you take the facts in to consideration: Harbinger pulled 11 lengths away from Cape Blanco (Irish Derby winner). Youmzain and Daryakana seemed to run very close to their Saint Cloud form. Those two’s placings would correspond well with their Timeform ratings beforehand. then there’s the time that was unbelievably quick compared to any other time at the meeting.
Value Is EverythingOh I know everything is opinions GT, but I’d rather back my own opinion (rightly or wrongly) than some guys I don’t even know, however reliable they may seem to be!
Have you attempted to work out the form yourself THM?
Not seen it.What did you rate each horse’s performance?
I did my own workings out (before Timeform, though using their ratings on the Saturday as a guide) and came to a rating of at least 138, possibly 139 and if you add a pound or two for ease of victory 140.
Value Is EverythingAll I said was that the same huffing and puffing went to Workforce after the Derby as has gone to Harbinger after the KG.Now the next time will tell us if Harbinger is another Workforce or the real thing.Incidentally I am not writing off Workforce just yet!
…the next time will tell us if Harbinger is another Workforce or the real thing.
It must be nice to have the luxury of waiting for confirmation. I suspect you do not have many bets if that is your approach. Neither bookmakers nor handicappers are in a position to "sit this one out".
Yes, the future may shed a different light on what Harbinger achieved at Ascot. But what I would like to know is WHAT did the horse need to do as a one-off performance to merit a 140-rating if he did not do it the other day?
Nobody questions the rating.Nobody questioned the rating of the Derby winner after the Derby. Just that he failed to live up to that rating on his very next race, that is all.Apparently horses don’t feel the need to justify men.
But what I would like to know is WHAT did the horse need to do as a one-off performance to merit a 140-rating if he did not do it the other day?
Very good question.
I would just say that it is extremely difficult to convince that a "one-off" performance from a 8 times raced 130ish horse is worth 140. That level of form is so rarely achieved and the few opponents he faced so flimsy in terms of being reliable benchmarks.
Maybe Workforce finishing a clear second would have made it look more believable, but I essentially think that what you imply is correct. Almost nothing Harbinger could have done would convince everyone that he had run to 140+ the other day, especially at a track like Ascot.
Now – if he goes and smashes up the Arc field by 7l then maybe we can look back and believe what the algorithms told us at the time. Until then, I will remain deeply sceptical.
Now – if he goes and smashes up the Arc field by 7l then maybe we can look back and believe what the algorithms told us at the time. Until then, I will remain deeply sceptical.
Agree. I understand that for ratings to have any meaning or value they need to be calculated consistently but the one size fits all approach exposes the weakness of the method in certain scenarios and I think that’s the case here.
Simply cant have it that Harbinger is one of the greatest horses of all time given what he’s beaten on the racecourse up to now.
That level of form is so rarely achieved…
Ah, but is it? Or is it that every time a horse gets anywhere near the glass ceiling people are inclined to cast doubt on form that would be accepted in most other circumstances?
Simply cant have it that Harbinger is one of the greatest horses of all time…
The point is that Harbinger’s Ascot win – in which he smashed up a last-time Irish Derby winner, a triple Arc winner, a Hong Kong Vase winner and a last-time Derby winner in a very good time – is being rated as one of the best single performances of all time.
Whether you want to think that defines Harbinger as "one of the greatest horses of all time" is up to you to decide. Greatness obviously can involve considerations other than pure ability.
Whether you want to think that defines Harbinger as "one of the greatest horses of all time" is up to you to decide. Greatness obviously can involve considerations other than pure ability.
Well the compliers of the rating use the blurb…
Timeform ratings are now widely accepted as the definitive measure of racing merit
…so one would have to assume they currently believe Harbinger to be one of the greatest horses of all time considering the definitive measure of racing merit they have awarded him.
Not knocking Timeform, its all about opinions at the end of the day. The main point here for me is that the method has holes in it. If you take the slow pace of the handicap into account Cape Blanco hasn’t run much faster than the 82 rated Yashrid.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.