- This topic has 55 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 12 years ago by
.
- Posts
Take your point Mo, it did have a tranquil linger-awhile-amidst-its-bosky-charm ambience but that tarred crossing from the saddling boxes was not ideal: from a racegoers point of view the risk of being kicked or felled by a taught TB, and from taught TB’s point of view the risk of slipping on the hard surface, which I saw several times when being led out of the downhill exit from the ring
It’s now got what appear to be temporary ‘corporate boxes’ or some such on it
Must have been one of the best 2000 Guineas ever yesterday, as the winner covered the mile on that overwatered, verging on good to soft ground in a time 0.7 seonds faster than Frankel managed on good to firm.
Going on Guineas day 2013 – Good to Firm – Going stick 9.0
Going yesterday prior to the minimal rain – Good to Firm – Going stick 7.9
Going after minimal rain Good to Firm, good in places – Going stick 7.7
So a going stick reading of 9.0 last year was good to firm and a going stick reading of 7.9 this year is also good to firm
Racing Post today – "The time of the opening contest was 3.55 seconds slower than last year’s race, when the ground was described as good to firm, while the following contest,the Palace House, was the best part of two seconds slower than 12 months ago, suggesting conditions were not that quick".
These times combined with the going stick readings above show the track was overwatered, it’s disgusting the BHA allow it and there is even an attempt at deception by sticking the good in places in brackets after good to firm. It would have been more accurate and honest for Newmarket to describe it as Good (overwatered)
The overwatering probably also contributed to the racing in two groups.Since when did going stick readings of less than 8.0 equate to good to firm ground?
According to the BHA website going stick readings of between 9.0 and 10.9 are required for good to firm ground as it was last year.That seems like selective clock watching to me Eddie. All races are not truly run. You could see as it happened the first race was slowly run, 3.55 seconds slower than last year’s race means nothing. Winner is considered a top-of-the-ground animal, likewise the winner of the second race, Sole Power.
Night Of Thunder’s time only 0.77 seconds slower than 2013’s good-firm and just 0.23 slower than Sky Lantern’s 1000 Guineas. It was even 2.66 secs
faster
than Blue Bunting’s 2011 "good-firm 1000 Guineas and 0.69 faster than Frankel (albeit 2011’s 2000G was in to a head wind).
So to think times yesterday indicate the going to be good is wrong.
EDIT: Beat me to it AP.
Value Is EverythingMust have been one of the best 2000 Guineas ever yesterday, as the winner covered the mile on that overwatered, verging on good to soft ground in a time 0.7 seonds faster than Frankel managed on good to firm.
I wouldn’t go off that, wasn’t it windy when Frankel won and he was hardly ridden to produce the optimum time, would have been a much faster time ridden more efficiently.
Presumably the going stick figures mean something or there’s little point in having them otherwise.
Must have been one of the best 2000 Guineas ever yesterday, as the winner covered the mile on that overwatered, verging on good to soft ground in a time 0.7 seonds faster than Frankel managed on good to firm.
I wouldn’t go off that, wasn’t it windy when Frankel won and he was hardly ridden to produce the optimum time, would have been a much faster time ridden more efficiently.
Presumably the going stick figures mean something or there’s little point in having them otherwise.
Frankel 24kmph headwind. Ground was comfortably g/s yesterday imo.
Must have been one of the best 2000 Guineas ever yesterday, as the winner covered the mile on that overwatered, verging on good to soft ground in a time 0.7 seonds faster than Frankel managed on good to firm.
I wouldn’t go off that, wasn’t it windy when Frankel won and he was hardly ridden to produce the optimum time, would have been a much faster time ridden more efficiently.
Presumably the going stick figures mean something or there’s little point in having them otherwise.
Recent Good-firm Guineas:
Night Of Thunder good-firm 1:36.61
Sea The Stars good-firm 1:35.88
Cockney Rebel good-firm 1:35.28
George Washington good-firm 1:36.86I don’t know if there were any "good" places in the above races… But even if you do not believe Frankel’s comparisson Eddie, others indicate the ground of "Good-firm, good in places" seems to be born out by previous 2000 Guineas.
Night Of Thunder’s time beat George Washington’s.
For one time to be in the vacinity of Night Of thunder’s might be down to pace; but for all four to be within 1.33 seconds it’s highly unlikely STS, CR and GW times were all down to slowly run races.
Evidence suggests no over-watering and the Clerk did a pretty good job in making safe good-firm ground.
Value Is EverythingEvidence suggests no over-watering and the Clerk did a pretty good job in making safe good-firm ground.
What evidence? You’ve chose to ignore all the excellent points made on here and failed to answer any of them eg How do you explain the going stick readings compared to previous years?
apracing may have been making his statement in jest that yesterdays Guineas must have been one of the best ever but that’s exactly what James Willoughby thinks of the race, he’s got it possibly in the top 5 Guineas of all time.
Evidence suggests no over-watering and the Clerk did a pretty good job in making safe good-firm ground.
What evidence? You’ve chose to ignore all the excellent points made on here and failed to answer any of them eg How do you explain the going stick readings compared to previous years?
apracing may have been making his statement in jest that yesterdays Guineas must have been one of the best ever but that’s exactly what James Willoughby thinks of the race, he’s got it possibly in the top 5 Guineas of all time.
"What evidence"?…
The times of four good-firm 2000 Guineas’s being all within 1.33 seconds. How the $%^&* can it be over-watered when the time is well in to the ball park of good-firm? Also indicating that had they not watered it would’ve ran the risk of producing firm, unsafe ground.I couldn’t care less what the pre-racing going sticks readings were. It’s always only been a rough rather than a definitive guide. Times allied to Pace are the best way to judge going.
Willow is a law unto himself. Plenty of what he says is worth listening to, some not so worthy. I’d personally describe it as an
average
Guineas winning performance (that is not meant as at all negative) ie not excellent or poor. However, I do believe the first three have potential to improve in to
above average
Group 1 three year olds… With Australia possibly a
well
above average three year old once given a greater test of stamina.
What "excellent points" have I "ignored" Eddie?
Value Is EverythingMaking time based going arguments on the basis of raw race times is about as useful and informative as the going stick is itself.
Making time based going arguments on the basis of raw race times is about as useful and informative as the going stick is itself.
If it is done by comparing just one or two times Indocine, I’d agree with you. But when many Good-firm times are within 1.33 seconds, it is almost impossible all of them were slowly run. I could give you many more good-firm Guineas winning times if you need them?
Unless you are saying Night Of Thunder, Kingman and Australia all ran a time on good or good-soft – that others could only manage on good-firm?
Are you of the opinion horses can produce times just as quick on heavy as they do firm?
Value Is EverythingOn the 3 e.g.’s you gave STS & GW were both slow, CR wasn’t, but was on ground ~.2s/f faster than yesterday.
I’m out. But really, g/f is not even up for question yesterday imo. It simply wasn’t.
It is quicker today though.
It was almost flat calm in Yorkshire yesterday afternoon, not a frequent occurance anywhere. Was this the case at Newmarket too and if so were any of the times wheeled-out for previous Guineas on this thread run in similar still conditions?
I don’t want to overplay (i.e. I don’t understand
) the empirical significance of wind speed and direction on times, and by extension non-walkingstick going assessments but, as per the 24mph headwind of Frankel’s race reported by Indocine which must surely be significant, it seems a little pointless to base going assessment on raw timesIf your time-to-going correlations are wind adjusted please accept my apologies Ginger
It was almost flat calm in Yorkshire yesterday afternoon, not a frequent occurance anywhere. Was this the case at Newmarket too and if so were any of the times wheeled-out for previous Guineas on this thread run in similar still conditions?
I don’t want to overplay (i.e. I don’t understand
) the empirical significance of wind speed and direction on times, and by extension non-walkingstick going assessments but, as per the 24mph headwind of Frankel’s race reported by Indocine which must surely be significant, it seems a little pointless to base going assessment on raw timesIf your time-to-going correlations are wind adjusted please accept my apologies Ginger
No Drone, all I’ve done is compare Night Of Thunder’s time with a lot of good-firm Guineas races. I did point out myself the comparisson with Frankel’s time is tenuous, because of the headwind…
That seems like selective clock watching to me Eddie. All races are not truly run. You could see as it happened the first race was slowly run, 3.55 seconds slower than last year’s race means nothing. Winner is considered a top-of-the-ground animal, likewise the winner of the second race, Sole Power.
Night Of Thunder’s time only 0.77 seconds slower than 2013’s good-firm and just 0.23 slower than Sky Lantern’s 1000 Guineas. It was even 2.66 secs
faster
than Blue Bunting’s 2011 "good-firm 1000 Guineas
and 0.69 faster than Frankel (albeit 2011’s 2000G was in to a head wind)
.
So to think times yesterday indicate the going to be good is wrong.
EDIT: Beat me to it AP.
…So we agree, comparing Frankel’s headwind time is
"a little pointless"
. But there hasn’t been a headwind for every 2000 Guineas… Therefore, if Night Of Thunder’s time is very similar with most/plenty "good-firm" 2000 Guineas times – we can conclude –
the evidence suggests ground was probably good-firm yesterday and definitely not on the soft side of good
like Indocine claimed.
Frankel 24kmph headwind.
Ground was comfortably g/s yesterday imo.
Value Is EverythingIf your time-to-going correlations are wind adjusted please accept my apologies Ginger
Raw times are not just wind un-adjusted Drone, they are also going un-adjusted, which is why using them to postulate going itself is well…
…So we agree, comparing Frankel’s headwind time is "a little pointless". But there hasn’t been a headwind for every 2000 Guineas… Therefore, if Night Of Thunder’s time is very similar with most/plenty "good-firm" 2000 Guineas times – we can conclude –
the evidence suggests ground was probably good-firm yesterday and definitely not on the soft side of good
.
No we don’t agree. You’ve chosen to misinterpret my words:
the 24mph headwind of Frankel’s race reported by Indocine which must surely be
significant
, it seems a little pointless to base going assessment on raw times
Yep, that headwind was
significant
hence must be taken into account when extrapolating time-to-going calculations; just as wind direction and speed should be accounted for in every race if you’re intent on trying to assess going from racetimes.
The alternative, using raw time alone to assess going assumes all races are run in a flat calm; hence my query about the conditions at Newmarket yesterday compared to those at previous Guineas, of which the stiff headwind of Frankel’s may or may not be the most extreme
To reiterate, I’ve no idea how to empirically correct times for wind direction and speed against the ‘calm standard’ though do recall Prufrock giving it a go once on TRF
Raw times are not just wind un-adjusted Drone, they are also going un-adjusted, which is why using them to postulate going itself is well…
Indeed, perhaps we should therefore use the going-stick and raw time to calibrate the wind
And with that my mistral has blown itself out
) the empirical significance of wind speed and direction on times, and by extension non-walkingstick going assessments but, as per the 24mph headwind of Frankel’s race reported by Indocine which must surely be significant, it seems a little pointless to base going assessment on raw times
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.