- This topic has 34 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 19 years, 5 months ago by
.
- Posts
In hindsight the 167 BOS got for beating WOA might be a bit high as well. Looks to have gone very one paced where as he was known for his finished turn of foot.
Quote: from Grasshopper on 5:43 pm on Dec. 28, 2006[br]Empty, on his best form (routinely displayed in this race), Beef Or Salmon is a 174 horse  – or thereabouts at least.
If you think he has run to the best of his form here, then you pretty much have to give The Listener a rating around 180.
I think it much more likely that Beef Or Salmon has run near his Haydock rating from earlier in the season (160 imo), than his effort at Down Royal (which I had at 167, if memory serves).
As I said on the other thread, it’s a very difficult race to weigh-up, but imo, it’s much more likely that BoS, WoA and L’Ami have run some way below expectations, than we all of a sudden have another 180 perfomer on our hands in The Listener (and potentially even a further one in Star De Mohaison).
I don’t think BoS ever got into the race, because Alners horse basically took lenghts out of them at every fence. It’s therefore my initial analysis that BoS was not placed to run up to the best of his form.
I could be wrong, but regardless, Kauto Star has not run within an assess roar of 180 at either Sandown or Kempton. On balance, I submit that a rating of 180+ for the horse at Haydock is moody at best, and nigh-on impossible to substantiate given subsequent events.
(Edited by Grasshopper at 5:44 pm on Dec. 28, 2006)<br>
<br>Subsequent events don’t prove a rating though. Past results do because you have something to work against but because a beaten horse is well beaten next time out it doesn’t mean that the form of his previous race is worthless. Horse run below par for many reasons. Sometimes they’re just out of form or running on a track they’re not comfortable on or they don’t like the ground even something as simple as they just don’t feel that well on the day, it’s important to remember that horses are living creatures with feelings, moods like humans they are not machines.
A horse can run up to (for example) 170 on five occasions then throw in a bad one and run to 150. That doesn’t mean a horse given a rating on the basis of that horse’s 170 rating in a previous race has been over-rated.
We KNOW from several lines of evidence what marks Beef Or Salmon and L’Ami can run up to and what they usually do and in what conditions. I see no reason to downgrade Kauto Star’s Haydock rating at all.
Correct Gareth, but we are being told that BoS ran 20lb below those ratings this season
Now i can believe 10lb maybe, because that is what BoS is, a 165 rated horse overall, that is capable of putting in 174 performances when conditions are in his favour
<br>Today conditions favoured him, but he’s met an improving chaser that beat Star De Mahison by 9L on Soft at Exeter, Star is now a 153 on OR’s with an RPR of 160 for his defeat of the Listener, who was on his debut run, and given a tender ride
So here we have a horse that battered a now 160 rated horse last year, coming off a debut run
is it not possible that The Listener could improve 10lb, 15lb, 20lb on that run?
<br>
Quote: from Grasshopper on 6:06 pm on Dec. 28, 2006[br]TMM, you have said on a few threads that you felt BoS ran up to the best of his form at Haydock, which I assume means you have him running to around 174 there (?), and I further assume that this gives you your mid-180 rating about Kauto Star (?).
That’s all fair enough.
But what of L’Ami in that race? You really couldn’t rate him any lower than 172 for the BetFair based on your interpretation, which would have meant improvement of damn near a stone on anything else he has achieved in twenty-odd steeplchase runs. It also makes Ollie Magern a 170 horse, represnting a minimum half-stone improvement on his best ever form in the previous years Charlie Hall.
As for subsequent events not proving a rating, I’m afraid I take issue with that also. Ratings are transient beasts, and should be adjusted after every relevant performance (imo). Otherwise, what is the point of keeping them?
I’m not saying I’m right and you are wrong. Only that, imo, anyone rating Kauto Star in the 180’s needs their bumps felt. :biggrin:
Seriously, it’s only a difference of opinion, and you are perfectly entitled to your view. My view just happens to differ, that’s all.
I’m working from memory now so bare with me I don’t have figures in front of me.
I rated Beef Or Salmon for his Haydock run within I think a pound of his previous run not his overall all time best rating.
L’Ami I rated in line (within a pound or two) of four of his previous five races in similar conditions (I think).
I can’t remember without the figures in front of me exactly what marks I recorded or how I rated Ollie Magern. I just remember it all looked right and made perfect sense.
There are some races that just don’t make proper sense and you have take a rather exagerated and iffy viewpoint on. One that springs to mind is the race won late last flat season by Spinning Queen at Newmarket when she slammed Soviet Song and Alexander Goldrun by 9 lengths. Strictly speaking it is possible to give Spinning Queen a rating of around 130 after that performance if you take it that Soviet Song and Alexander Goldrun both ran to their absolute best. I like most people took a view that neither did but even so I still had to give Spinning Queen 123 / 5 (can’t remember exactly) which is still well in excess of previous best ratings. The point I’m trying to make (probably rather poorly lol) is that you could rate her 130 if you take a particular viewpoint.
The Haydock race unlike that Newmarket race seemed relatively easy to rate taking into account visual evidence, past evidence and the fact that the evidence overall was based on a number of previous similar performances from three horses rather than limited evidence based on a rating from a race where you had to take a view one way or the other.
Hope that makes at least some sort of sense lol.
(Edited by The Market Man at 6:27 pm on Dec. 28, 2006)
Analysed the race now. Again have Beef Or Salmon running similarly to his previous two chase starts (164). Leads me to believe thats probably as good as he is these days possibly not quite as good as he once was maybe lost a bit of speed but nevertheless still a good, consistant high level performer. Race rated around Beef Or Salmon and Southern Vic both ran to a mark therefore that can reasonably been expected whilst L’Ami and War Of Attirition ran below their best.
The Listener Ive awarded 172 which is a good mark. Still nine pounds below Kauto Star on his Haydock running but nevertheless with further improvement likely The Listener is probably capable of bettering his current mark.
Quote: from davidjohnson on 4:38 pm on Dec. 28, 2006[br]Low to mid 160’s in my opinion. No reason for Southern Vic improving. He’s been beaten in a handicap off 147 and was only beaten around 20 lengths.
Obviously they went steady gbut the time doesn’t compare well with the novice chase so I’d be inclined to take a lowish view of the race.
<br>
<br>Bin thinking about this and can understand treating the race with caution, so to speak
<br>Wouldn’t the ground and steady pace explain Southern Vics proximity to the winner, ie: they’ve not gone quick enough in the conditions to really put away Southern Vic, hence he’s not improved any, but just ran his race?
<br>TMM
<br>Interesting you’ve come to roughly the same conclusion as me, a much better explanation though :cool:
I never thought I’d say it but I agree with Grasshopper!:o Beef Or Salmon had conditions to suit today and I expected it to win well. However after seeing the race and watching The Listener win convincing it is still my opinion Beef Or Salmon did run his race today but was just beaten by a horse that i underrated and has improved. It is also my opinion that Beef Or Salmon is no longer capable of running to a RPR of 174. I think it is capable of 165 tops now based on what i have seen this season, and i beleive it has run to that figure of 164/165. I would also have BorS running to that figure in the Betfair which gives me 177 for Kauto Star. As Grassy says i don’t see how you can rate Kauto Star any higher than that.
As for The Listener well it may or may not be coincedence that a change in jockey has suddenly improved the horse but i have it running to around 172. Rating BorS at 165 also imo is validated by l’Ami who is capable of 164 at best and achieved round about that in the Betfair before underperforming a little today. (ground may not have been ideal).
FSL
If you use 1lb per beaten length and say BoS ran to 164 in Betfair, (beaten 17 L) that makes Kauto Star 181
<br>If yer using less then it makes it less, obviously
I’m a little cautious with wide margin successes EW – I tend to look at 1.5l = 1lb with wide margins. (Rightly or wrongly make your own mind up on that)
Quote: from FlatSeasonLover on 11:47 pm on Dec. 28, 2006[br]I’m a little cautious with wide margin successes EW – I tend to look at 1.5l = 1lb with wide margins. (Rightly or wrongly make your own mind up on that)<br>
<br>Everyone has their own way of doing things I think that is fine as long as they’re consistant about the way they do things and it works for them.
The Gold Cup may be interesting now. I have KS at a best of 181 but if he doesn’t run to that mark at 3m 2f at Cheltenham say only runs to around 174 /5 it’s not inconceivable that The Listener could beat him if he improves three of four pounds for going up in trip.
Not saying for a second that that will be the case but its just an indication of how the unique test of the Gold Cup can throw up an unexpected result. 3m2f round Cheltenham is a completely different test altogether to 3m round Haydock or Kempton.
Interesting to see that most people come to a similar conclusion regarding the Lexus Chase.
<br>
(Edited by The Market Man at 11:57 pm on Dec. 28, 2006)
The pound beaten length scale should take into account racing conditions, ie: going, track and racetime,
despite my reading and gleaming info from my teacher (who’s thinking i do not always agree with btw :biggrin: ) and others, it is currently beyond my comprehension/capabilities to figure out what these differences should be at the moment :o
(Edited by empty wallet at 12:13 am on Dec. 29, 2006)
- Total Posts 17716
RPR have accorded BoS 163+ for today’s race, which pretty much ties in with his other recent form.<br>Rising 11, he may not be the horse he once was, but is still remarkably consistent, given the right circumstances, and I see no reason to question the above rating.<br> The Listener is obviously an improving horse, and is rated 171 for today’s win, Congratulations to those who supported him, personally I was suprised at the manner of his victory, but it seems entirely genuine, imo. Whether he can repeat on faster ground remains to be seen.<br> Of the others, L’Ami was never going to get as close to BoS on this heavier ground, Southern Vic is still improving, despite Ted Walsh’s best efforts to disguise it, but the outstanding feature of the race for me was War of Attrition’s run. <br> RPR have him running a 159, but in no way does that take account of the going being entirely against him, and, contrary to the common view, I believe this horse has improved some 7 or 8lbs since last season, a view supported both by his trainer and his (ground adjusted) ratings. <br>If that is the case, and they don’t make a total balls of the Cheltenham going, then it is going to take a truly exceptional horse to beat him come the Festival.
Watching the replay again. I’m not so sure that The Listener was given too much rope. Both War of Attrition and Beef or Salmon were placed to have every chance going to 2 out. Both were considerably closer to the winner there than they were at the line and neither were closing the gap. Unsurprisingly War of Attrition was unable to pick up in the ground and the latter doesn’t look to have the turn of foot this year that he did last.
With the Hennessy the next logical target for all 3, I would expect the placings to be the same then as they were yesterday.
It will be interesting to see if The Listener can reproduce that sort of form on better ground. As we all know, horses who win small field chases on soft ground in Leopardstown don’t necessarily make Gold Cup horses. He’s definitely an interesting runner though.
Personally I think BoS is not necessarily past it, he has thrown in a bad run at LEO before when he was beaten by Rule Supreme in last year’s Irish Hennessy. But I think his last chance to win his tenth Gr1 will be in the 2007 Irish Hennessy and I for one hope he wins it.
I agree a good solid ride from Daryl Jacob surely a promising future beckons for him.. I follow one of the smaller trainers and he has had 4 rides this season for him and got 3 places (including a winner) from two average sorts. I will certainly be following Daryl’s fortunes over the remainder of the season
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.