- This topic has 41 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 11 months ago by
.
- Posts
That wasn’t my intention at all.
It was a thought-provoking OP, but as some others have mentioned the theory is in danger of falling down when the criteria for selecting the horses is examined. If we were to look at this scientifically then we would define ‘hype’ (and that would have to be an objective rather than subjective definition) so that we could include all horses that satisfied the definition.
I’ve a feeling that you may have fallen into the trap of subconsciously selecting those that prove rather than disprove the theory.
Cheers, Tuffers. I put the word
interesting
not
holy grail
at the end of the post. Thought it would be good to stimulate some
discussion
on what has made these seemingly very public horses still such good betting propositions and what if any traits they may share. There was no great claims. If anybody had put up five more horses that have received more commentary than Sea The Stars, Canford Cliffs, Workforce, St Nicholas Abbey and Frankel over the last few years for comparison….
But no, the usual thread hijacking by the utterly tiresome gingerbollox and a few almost as tiresome reactionary aftertiming jibes from someone who’s missed the point entirely.
Cheers, Tuffers. I put the word
interesting
not
holy grail
at the end of the post. Thought it would be good to stimulate some
discussion
on what has made these seemingly very public horses still such good betting propositions and what if any traits they may share. There was no great claims. If anybody had put up five more horses that have received more commentary than Sea The Stars, Canford Cliffs, Workforce, St Nicholas Abbey and Frankel over the last few years for comparison….
But no, the usual thread hijacking by the utterly tiresome gingerbollox and a few almost as tiresome reactionary aftertiming jibes from someone who’s missed the point entirely.
I think the lesson I would take from the kernel of your idea is that an ‘against the crowd’ philosophy is all very well but when confronted with a top class horse at the top of his or her game then opposing them just for the sake of being ‘against the crowd’ is a dangerous approach.
Wasn’t the a few 2 year olds over hyped for the guineas when being top 2 year olds the previous year. Mainly from one trainer. Bolger I think, although not sure of spelling I think you get my meaning.
It has to depend on your definition of "hype" as opposed to just well fancied horses. Over the last few years which category would you put the following in?
Passage Of Time (short price winter fav for Oaks) – Hype?
Rainbow View (short price winter fav for 1,000) – Hype?
Twice Over (Derby) – well fancied?
Delegator (2,000) – well fancied?
Memory (1,000) – well fancied?
Saamid (2,000 fav in Sept 2010) – hype?
Dream Ahead (2,000) – well fancied?
World Domination (Derby) – Definitely hypeI’m sure there are more we could name but difficult to categorise.
Also when does a hype horse just become a very good one?
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
I think the problem with this ‘value in betting the hype horse’ scenario you’ve introduced CR is that the examples you chose (for the most part) all kept winning!; hence it seems to me that no conclusions (for future use) can be drawn either way about whether one should bet them regardless.
Zenyatta for example, prior to her first defeat lto, could have started at 1/100 in all starts and returned a profit, though I very much doubt you, me or anyone would have parted with cash at such odds. And in reality, given the majority of her wins were at longish odds-on, it would only have taken a couple of losses to turn her lifetime LSP into LSL: such is the razor-sharp knife-edge of playing at odds-on
You’ve deleted your list so can only recall from memory, but IMO horses with the profiles of such as Canford Cliffs and St Nicholas Abbey may be of more interest, in that they were hyped after a succession of early-career wins, failed to live upto the hype for a while, and then returned to winning form and were ‘rehyped’. This to me is an example of the fickle nature of hacks, pundits and public who build ’em up far too high, then unnecessarily demolish them to the ground, then hastily rebuild.
And that is where there may be opportunities for those prepared to go ‘against the (fickle) crowd’
Apologies if this is a misinterpretation
Carlton House must come within any definition of ‘hype horse’
Absolutely – although the jury is still out on how good he is.
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
One Cool Cat, wasn’t he the "hyped up" favourite for the 2000 Guineas.
Lateen Sails another.
How many sons of Storm Cat actually won that race? None as far as I know even the mighty Giants Causeway got beat there.There’s probably a number of Guineas hotpots hyped up over the years after a good 2 year old career, all ending in tears.
Nayef, talked up all winter and then failed in the Craven, at least he got better later on.
Jim Bolger had three super two year olds around 2007-8
(1) Finsceal Beo went on to win the One Thousand Guineas (Irish and English)and was second in the French equivalent.
(2) Teofilo was champion tyo in England and Ireland but failed to train on and never ran as a three yo.
(3) New Approach was a champion tyo who went on to win the Derby and the Champion Stakes.
Not bad!I thought Teofilo picked up an injury?
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
Jim Bolger had three super two year olds around 2007-8
(1) Finsceal Beo went on to win the One Thousand Guineas (Irish and English)and was second in the French equivalent.
(2) Teofilo was champion tyo in England and Ireland but failed to train on and never ran as a three yo.
(3) New Approach was a champion tyo who went on to win the Derby and the Champion Stakes.
Not bad!
probably bad examples, then. However lots of over hyped horses lose, and some win too.Carlton House was over hyped probably because of his owner.
Interesting thread – pity it went a bit ‘off-topic’ but sometimes the meandering ways of a TRF thread can work in our favour, not this time though. I think we’ll start a ’round-book’ thread and divert any discussion of prices/percentages to there in future!
Anyway, Cav’s list had been deleted by the time I had a look here but for me the definition of a hype horse is one whose reputation (either by the public or the bookmakers or both) greatly exceeds what he/she has actually achieved on the racecourse.
For example, Carlton House was a good example of a hype horse through the winter. Workforce was another. I’d guess that you could call the hype about those justified.
Henry Cecil has trained his share of them, particularly in the 1980’s when any number of his two year olds were built up into superstars-in-waiting before they’d run. Horses like Thorn Dance.
Vincent O’Brien used to have them, as does AOB also.
But I’m struggling to think of them, they’ll come back to me though…if you hang on.
But I’d agree Jan Vermeer (even allowing for Gr 1 win at 2) was one. One that I fell into the trap with (and I’ve fallen into a few of the hype horse traps over the years, they’re very alluring/persuasive usually which, I guess, explains how the momentum builds).
- Total Posts 17716
I think we’ll start a ’round-book’ thread and divert any discussion of prices/percentages to there in future!
Amen to that – though it’s probably 3 years too late!
Shame you deleted the thread Paul I for one enjoyed reading it. I wouldn’t mind seeing a National Hunt comparison as well.
I for one find it hard to part with my bucks when it comes to the likes mentioned on your list most of the time calculating them too short but also un-willing to back against and left with that feeling, should I have backed it?! Especially Canford Cliffs this year. I’d been cautious with the horse for quite some time and in honesty it wasn’t until he won the Sussex (beating a horse that would have made it onto your list at a loss) that I really began to believe just how good he was.
Likewise Zarkava in the Arc, I was convinced she’s the best horse I’ve ever seen and ever will yet couldn’t bring myself to take the odds, maybe this is a reflection of what suits us best as punters. I think when dealing with the top class it’s not always wise to be too far against, but then for my betting style I very often swerve over cooked group ones.
Though in my examples the horses at that point have probably gone
beyond the point of hype
and are now proven top class so deserve their recognition.
I define hype as something I personally can not explain as I haven’t seen it with my own eyes or the horse hasn’t beaten enough good opposition to be given a gold star yet is heralded as a superstar, for this reason I can never buy into 2yo hype as I just don’t find the form justifiable until they have gone on well into their 3yo careers.
Good thread Cav, I’ve kept it on record before you could take it down
probably bad examples, then. However lots of over hyped horses lose, and some win too.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.