- This topic has 29 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
No doubt,we all have to respect the timeform handicappers.However I wonder whether some horses over the flat have been blatantly underrated and some over -rated.These are the 7 best examples.
1.Nijinsky ,being rated at 138 below Generous,Reference Point was ridiculuos.Infact Racing Post had to make a correction and adjusted Nijinsky’s rating to 140 ,and gave him a higher ranking than Vaguely Noble and Dancing Brave.
2.Sea the Stars was rated only 136 by Racing Post Ratings well below Dancing Brave and Mill Reef and Timeform rated him at 140,still below Mill Reef.Sea the Stars may well have deserved around 142 ,being arguably the best middle-distance champion after Sea Bird,or en surpassed him.
3.Sir Ivor,who Lester Piggot rated the best horse he had ever ridden is rated at 135 on par with ‘The Minstrel.’ and below ‘Nashwan.’I think the Ivor atleast deserved around 138.
4.Golden Fleece was ranked by trainer Vincent O’Brien with Nijinsky,Sir Ivor and Alleged amongst the best 4 horses he had ever trained.In the Epsom Derby Golden Fleece won like a great champion,possibly even surpassing Nijinsky’s 1970 performance.However he was given only 134.
5.Lammtaara,again was unbeaten in the Derby,King George and Arc but only got 134.
6.Zafonic,the champion miler was only awarded 134 ,who in his era was the best after Brigadier Gerard.
7.Dahlia,arguably the best race-mare ever who vanquished Rhiengold by 6 lengths in the 1973 King George was rated at 135 ,below Rheingold(137) and Allez France.(137)
I think Frankel is probably the best racehorse ever and deserves his 147 rating.However he never raced at a mile and a half like Brigadier Gerard.The point is whether Timeform only asseses natural ability,or it also takes versatility into consideration.For instance Dubai Millenium was arguably the best ever at 10 furlongs ,but came a cropper at the distance of a mile and a half.Sea the Stars was one of the most versatile champions ever.For overall versatlity to me Ribot was the ultimate champion of you consider ground and distance followed.For versatality of distance it would be Nijinsky at the top followed by Sea the Stars.
The last point is whether how we could rank the champions on the basis of timings .Dancing Brave in the 1986 Arc ,Peintre Celebre in the 1997 Arc and Sea the Stars in the 2009 Arc wee progressively faster than Sea Bird in the 1965 Arc.Thus would Sea Bird have beaten Sea the Stars in 2009 or produced a quicker timing?The thorougbreds are getting speedier with succesive generations.Compare Dancing Brave’s Arc Time with Sea Bird’s or Sea the Star’s with Dancing Brave’s.
It would take all the fun away if everyone agreed in their assessment of racehorses.
Timeform’s ratings are what they and it isn’t unusual for people to dispute them or indeed official ratings. It will be interesting to see what final rating Timeform give to Frankel as they rated his win yesterday 8lbs below his best.
Golden Fleece, like Lammtarra, only ran four times in his career. He was retired after The Derby. Lammtarra went onto to win the King George and Arc, so maybe he is slightly underrated.
Golden Fleece certainly had the potential to become one of the greats but to suggest he should be considered thus is just mere conjecture.
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
Timeform type ratings are exaggerated in bad years and undervalued in good competitive years.
About 80% of the top horses get wrongly rated if time is not properly added to the mix of data. That vital information is mostly ignored.
Timeform type ratings always tend to creep upwards as once a "beaten" horse is given a rating the horse that "beats" it "must" be better. It may not be, as it depends on the race make up and pace shape. Pace shape as much as ability determines the result of nearly every "normal" race, which is why trainers are using them in major races even if they don’t fully understand why or how.
Races are run to get to the winning line first – not beat records nor to maximise beaten distances. Any speculation for what might have happened "all out" remains speculation.
Units are rounded up or down so no factional values remain – this matters over a series of races.
The ratings do not allow for flexibility in race distance nor going nor track type. What time of the season it was, as regards race fitness, or most importantly what the horse body weight was which varies by 30 pounds even between races.
Without full sectional time, pace, body weight data being available this vital data cannot be used to compare generations in any meaningful sense.
This year thankfully we have Frankel sectionals. These demonstrate why he wins his races on extraordinary mid-race sustained pace rather than "record" overall times. He has never raced flat out on straight courses against tough competition right to the line, so neither Timeform nor anyone else know exactly what maximum rating Frankel could have achieved.
It may be "fun" for some but "chasing ratings" is pretty futile if you have better ways of spending your time.
I’m forever disputing rating with Timeform but they do have the impossible task of comparing generations.
They very much tie themselves to all Group winners who are beaten by the Nijinsky’ of racing being much the same as a a guide.
You only need to listen them and you here it often enough he won x amount of group racing and beat x amount of group winner.
Too bad if the Group race they won were crap there’s not a lot of room to be playing with.
Rated between 130 and 133 there are 10 horses in Europe currently crammed together.
Going back 40 years and trying to cram that lot in is an impossible task.
It doesn’t really matter to the individual what Timeform think if Nijinsky gave you the buzz that said this horse would have destroyed Sea the Stars and he gort your heart pumping I’d say your probably right.
That is where I dispute Frankel’s right to have ousted Sea-Bird both would have knocked your socks off I simply couldn’t split them but probably for commercial reasons Timeform saw the opportunity and took it. Do they think Frankel in their heart of hearts was the greatest of all time?……some perhaps but not all.
One of the best we’ve ever seen is about the most used phrase by trainers this week very few say he is the greatest of all time.
I’m a Secretariat man: Frankel awesome display in the Guineas 15 lengths clear after 4 furlong made all won by a diminishing 5 lengths clearly running out of petrol in the closing stages
Secretariat in the Belmont Stakes went 15 lengths clear….then 20 then 25 then increased the distance to a staggering 31 lengths and clocked furlong after furlong at top speed.
If Frankel is 147 horse in my book Secretariat was a 151 horse At the end of the day it’s only an opinion and proves nothing.
I’m forever disputing rating with Timeform but they do have the impossible task of comparing generations.
They very much tie themselves to all Group winners who are beaten by the Nijinsky’ of racing being much the same as a a guide.
You only need to listen them and you here it often enough he won x amount of group racing and beat x amount of group winner.
Too bad if the Group race they won were crap there’s not a lot of room to be playing with.
Rated between 130 and 133 there are 10 horses in Europe currently crammed together.
Going back 40 years and trying to cram that lot in is an impossible task.
It doesn’t really matter to the individual what Timeform think if Nijinsky gave you the buzz that said this horse would have destroyed Sea the Stars and he gort your heart pumping I’d say your probably right.
That is where I dispute Frankel’s right to have ousted Sea-Bird both would have knocked your socks off I simply couldn’t split them but probably for commercial reasons Timeform saw the opportunity and took it. Do they think Frankel in their heart of hearts was the greatest of all time?……some perhaps but not all.
One of the best we’ve ever seen is about the most used phrase by trainers this week very few say he is the greatest of all time.
I’m a Secretariat man: Frankel awesome display in the Guineas 15 lengths clear after 4 furlong made all won by a diminishing 5 lengths clearly running out of petrol in the closing stages
Secretariat in the Belmont Stakes went 15 lengths clear….then 20 then 25 then increased the distance to a staggering 31 lengths and clocked furlong after furlong at top speed.
If Frankel is 147 horse in my book Secretariat was a 151 horse At the end of the day it’s only an opinion and proves nothing.
Probably the biggest load of codswallop I have ever witnessed on this forum, it’s so big I even considered leaving the room for 5 minutes to catch my breath.
The following are Jim McGrath’s words, from an interview in 2009 about Sea The Stars. He puts the ratings business into perspective.
"We know for a fact that if we mix a pot of blue paint with a pot of yellow, we’ll definitely get green. Over a matter like this, it’s different.That is where I dispute Frankel’s right to have ousted Sea-Bird both would have knocked your socks off I simply couldn’t split them but
probably for commercial reasons Timeform saw the opportunity and took it.
Do they think Frankel in their heart of hearts was the greatest of all time?……some perhaps but not all.
Fist,
There is absolutely no point in Timeform rating any horse higher than it should be "for commercial reasons". Because it wouldn’t do Timeform’s reputation any good if their rating wasn’t subsequently "franked". I remember having an arguement/discussion immediately after the 2000 Guineas. Because of the pace being too fast, it was evident he would’ve won by further had Queally gone slower in the first 6f. Some on here didn’t believe Frankel deserved their 140. But subsequent events went some way to proving them right. Rated 143 after his three year old careerTo keep Frankel’s rating the same (143) after the Lockinge reappearance – Timeform needed to rate
every
other horse in the race as "below form". Surely not something an organisation does if they want to produce a high rating just "
for commercial reasons
"?
Value Is EverythingIt wouldn’t do Timeform’s reputation any good if their rating wasn’t subsequently "franked".
Mr Ginger ‘Timeform’ Chapman can you explain how the boys from Halifax came out with a 138 rating for
Celtic Swing
then? I say ‘boys’ but its common knowledge that Jimbo Mcgrath came out with that figure and wouldn’t budge!
Pebbles
rated 135 by the same ‘boys’ is laughable too as she would have carried ‘Jimbo’s’ obsession!
I’ll come back to this when I have the time.
Dont forget to come back and answer my question will you Mr ‘Timeform’ obsessed?
Celtic Swing 138
???
I think Frankel is probably the best racehorse ever and deserves his 147 rating.However he never raced at a
mile and a half
like Brigadier Gerard.The point is whether Timeform only asseses natural ability,or it also takes
versatility
into consideration.For instance Dubai Millenium was arguably the best ever at 10 furlongs ,but came a cropper at the distance of a mile and a half.Sea the Stars was one of the most versatile champions ever.For overall versatlity to me Ribot was the ultimate champion of you consider ground and distance followed.For versatality of distance it would be Nijinsky at the top followed by Sea the Stars.
Neither "versatility" or "distance" can come in to ratings. It’s Timeform Master Rating is the rating given for a horse’s optimum conditions. It does not matter if the horse can put up that same rating at many different distances, goings, tracks etc.
If they did add to ratings just because a horse is versatile, then when the horse next runs it would not tell the subscriber how much superior/inferior each horse is thought to be at the weights. ie Some ratings would be exaggerated purely because of versatility. Some would be under-rated purely because they needed certain conditions to replicate their rating – even if it had ideal conditions.
So no, versatility can not come in to it when Timeform rate horses. However, of course their write ups will tell the subscriber all the horse’s attributes, including versatility. As well as a Master Rating – subscribers can also see the Timeform performance rating of every race each horse has had.
Value Is EverythingIt wouldn’t do Timeform’s reputation any good if their rating wasn’t subsequently "franked".
Mr Ginger ‘Timeform’ Chapman can you explain how the boys from Halifax came out with a 138 rating for
Celtic Swing
then? I say ‘boys’ but its common knowledge that Jimbo Mcgrath came out with that figure and wouldn’t budge!
Pebbles
rated 135 by the same ‘boys’ is laughable too as she would have carried ‘Jimbo’s’ obsession!
Come on Ginge,remind us how
Celtic Swing
franked his ridiculously over-hyped Timeform figure of 138 then!……..It certainly didn’t do Timeforms or Jimbo’s lofty reputation any good did it? Your silence speaks volumes!
Jeez’,
Give me a bit of time! Do have some other things to do.It wouldn’t do Timeform’s reputation any good if their rating wasn’t subsequently "franked".
Mr Ginger ‘Timeform’ Chapman can you explain how the boys from Halifax came out with a 138 rating for
Celtic Swing
then? I say ‘boys’ but its common knowledge that Jimbo Mcgrath came out with that figure and wouldn’t budge!
Pebbles
rated 135 by the same ‘boys’ is laughable too as she would have carried ‘Jimbo’s’ obsession!
Celtic Swing only ran once on soft ground in the Racing Post Trophy, winning by 12 lengths from Annus Mirabilis. Every other run on good or good-firm. Was Celtic Swing over-rated? It’s impossible to say, as the only time Celtic Swing had anywhere near his ideal conditions was in the Racing Post Trophy.
Ran in the Greenham where he beat subsequent Group 1 winner Bahri, who also finished third in the Guineas. Pennekamp beat Celtic Swing on a firm surface in the Guineas.
Everyone knows that Frankel has become more settled with age. It also happened to Celtic Swing, although he was already a relaxed individual as a two year old, so became lazy at three. Suspect this was due to being in a small yard where nothing could go with him at home. Lady Herries also announced at the beginning of that season that every horse in her yard would run in a nose band. Seemed to have a higher head carriage at three, in my opinion the trainer knew Celtic Swing wasn’t showing the same vibrance and was trying something to rectify this. The horse believing he’d done enough when getting to the front. Certainly seemed that way in the French Derby, where connections went in search of better ground (it was good). Winning by half a length and a short head from Poliglote and Winged Love.
Celtic Swing then went to the Irish Derby, injured a near fore-knee and wasn’t seen again. The winner there Winged Love (third in French Derby) with the horse Celtic Swing beat by 12 lengths – Annus Mirabilis beaten no more than a length in third.
So although Celtic Swing did not run to 138 again, he did not run as bad as some people make out, with limited opportunities. Just reappearance, Guineas and French Derby; winner, second, winner. All runs being on firmer than optimum ground.
Timeform do get it wrong sometimes and it’s possible this was one of them Gord; but there’s also justifiable excuses to why he wasn’t able to show that two year old brilliance again.
Value Is Everythinghmmm somehow do not think Secretariat was 151 , or 147 , but he was a brilliant horse , and would be 140 plus in my book
I am forever in awe of his brilliant display in Belmont , and unlike most of the guys on this outpost I was there to see it
Dont please rubbish stuff you know nothing about
cheers
Ricky
No doubt,we all have to respect the timeform handicappers.However I wonder whether some horses over the flat have been blatantly underrated and some over -rated.These are the 7 best examples.
1.Nijinsky ,being rated at 138 below Generous,Reference Point was ridiculuos.Infact Racing Post had to make a correction and adjusted Nijinsky’s rating to 140 ,and gave him a higher ranking than Vaguely Noble and Dancing Brave.
2.Sea the Stars was rated only 136 by Racing Post Ratings well below Dancing Brave and Mill Reef and Timeform rated him at 140,still below Mill Reef.Sea the Stars may well have deserved around 142 ,being arguably the best middle-distance champion after Sea Bird,or en surpassed him.
3.Sir Ivor,who Lester Piggot rated the best horse he had ever ridden is rated at 135 on par with ‘The Minstrel.’ and below ‘Nashwan.’I think the Ivor atleast deserved around 138.
4.Golden Fleece was ranked by trainer Vincent O’Brien with Nijinsky,Sir Ivor and Alleged amongst the best 4 horses he had ever trained.In the Epsom Derby Golden Fleece won like a great champion,possibly even surpassing Nijinsky’s 1970 performance.However he was given only 134.
5.Lammtaara,again was unbeaten in the Derby,King George and Arc but only got 134.
6.Zafonic,the champion miler was only awarded 134 ,who in his era was the best after Brigadier Gerard.
7.Dahlia,arguably the best race-mare ever who vanquished Rhiengold by 6 lengths in the 1973 King George was rated at 135 ,below Rheingold(137) and Allez France.(137)
I think Frankel is probably the best racehorse ever and deserves his 147 rating.However he never raced at a mile and a half like Brigadier Gerard.The point is whether Timeform only asseses natural ability,or it also takes versatility into consideration.For instance Dubai Millenium was arguably the best ever at 10 furlongs ,but came a cropper at the distance of a mile and a half.Sea the Stars was one of the most versatile champions ever.For overall versatlity to me Ribot was the ultimate champion of you consider ground and distance followed.For versatality of distance it would be Nijinsky at the top followed by Sea the Stars.
The last point is whether how we could rank the champions on the basis of timings .Dancing Brave in the 1986 Arc ,Peintre Celebre in the 1997 Arc and Sea the Stars in the 2009 Arc wee progressively faster than Sea Bird in the 1965 Arc.Thus would Sea Bird have beaten Sea the Stars in 2009 or produced a quicker timing?The thorougbreds are getting speedier with succesive generations.Compare Dancing Brave’s Arc Time with Sea Bird’s or Sea the Star’s with Dancing Brave’s.
1. Nijinsky looked superb in the summer of 1970. His 2000 Guineas win was impressive but 2nd Yellow God also tasted defeat at the hands of Cambridgeshire winner Prince de Galles, smart German colt Primas and top class filly Humble Duty, he won a Guineas trial and a French G3. Roi Soleil was beated by Dictus and Sparkler who were both well and truly put in their place by Brigadier Gerard. The Derby looks good Gyr, went on to win Prix de St Cloud and 3rd Stintino was a pretty smart colt but got beat by Oake winner Lupe in following years Coronation Cup and was handed out a couple of drubbings by Caro who was slaughtered by Mill Reef in Eclipse and Arc. In the KG Nijinsky won very easily but Blakeney the runner up is regarded as one of the worst post war Derby winners and had been 2nd in the Gold Cup on is previous start. Although both were beaten in the Arc on their final start both Reference Point’s and Generous’ best form of the summer stand up pretty well, Generous beat subsequent Arc winner Suave Dancer 3L at the Curragh and French Derby winner Sanglamore 7L in the KG. Reference Point twice beat Triptych who that season won the Coronation Cup, International Stakes, Phoenix Park Champion and Champion Stakes.
2. Sea The Stars achieved a great feat but didn’t have to brilliant to do it, in the Guineas he beat Delegator a regular whipping boy in lesser company, in the Derby he beat Fame and Glory who won a very weak Irish Derby and went on to be a pretty good stayer, in the Arc he beat Youmzain (never won another race) and Cavalryman took him until this year to win another race. The best horse he beat was Rip Van Winkle who got closer at each attempt, he was exposed the following season as a solid G1 horse similar level to Twice Over over 10F and was humbled by Canford Cliff in the Sussex. Sea The Stars was a very good colt not a TF 140 any day. I simply can’t have him 1lb behind Mill Reef and the equal of Dancing Drave on TF ratings, STS vastly over-rated in my opinion.
3. Sir Ivor, now heres a colt who’s 2000 Guineas form is outstanding he beat Petingo (a tip top miler) and Jimmy Reppin also very high class, his Derby win over Connaught also reads well as Connaught was very talented. Defeats to Royal Palace(probably under-rated by TF), Prince Sao and Ribero bring him down then you have the problem of if Sir Ivor is high 130’s were do you put Vaguely Noble who thrashed him in the Arc.
4. Golden Fleece looked a colt of immense talent when winning the Derby, but runner-up was beaten in his next two starts by Electric, 3rd Silver Hawk was absolutley hammered in Irish Derby by Assert. It’s impossible to rate GF higher although I concede he could well have been capable of getting to 140ish.
5. Lammtarra similar to GF although he was more highly tried a narrow defeat of Pentire in the KG and narrow win over Freedom Cry in Arc is not 140 form, though again he may well have kept on improving has have been rated higher.
6. Zafonic’s reputation rest on 2 year-old form and an outstanding performance in the Guineas but he was beaten on his other 2 starts at 3. The 3.5L deafeat of top class Barathea reads well but Barathea won just 3 of 11 starts over a mile and was probably 130ish at best.
7. Dahlia was indeed a terrific mare was I believe she ran against Allez France 6 times and the score was 6-0 to Allez France. Dahlia may have had some excuses along the way but must have had her conditions at least once so impossible you can rate Dahlia higher than Allez France.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.