- This topic has 47 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
- Total Posts 17716
Every sign we’ve seen the worst of him Reet. Horse is as dodgy as a 4 pound note IMO. Watching him the other day I think the penny dropped after Cheltenham and he simply doesn’t like racing. Not one to trust in the future IMO
Starluck is a classic example of a horse who doesn’t really stay but can still win at the trip. Run him in an ordinary race round Cheltenham and he’ll win but run him in a big race at the Festival when the pace is hectic and he’ll stop like shot as his stamina just lets out.
Pace always has and always will dictate whether doubtful stayers get the trip or not. Run the Champion Hurdle at a crawl and not many would get from the last to the winning post before Starluck.
A very important factor is whether they can settle or not and some do so well they can get trips beyond their breeding. But the pace has to suit because once of the bridle and given their heads they use energy so quickly they hit the wall.
Graham Lee is probably one of the best out there for relaxing horses and judging pace but if that pace is so fast that his mount can’t be relaxed without being tailed off then no way is he going to get the trip. If he has to wake him up to stay in the race and all is lost from there on in.
Your point was understood Reet- of course a good trainer must allow for maturity and refrain from pushing young horses to their limits. He or she will know what a horse is comfortably capable of at each stage in their development and avoid exceeding this too often too soon. Racing is littered with horses who never reach their potential due to going beyond their comfort zone before they were ready for it. I love trainers who have a long term plan and work backwards from there.
The most interesting post on this thread for me was the one "googling obscure theorems".
It’s not really an ‘obscure theorem’, Carv, it’s just lifted straight from what we know about human athletes.
You won’t find any Kenyan sprinters winning at the Olympics and you won’t find any Jamaican 5,000m runners winning either. The fundamental reason for that is the different mix of muscle fibres in the bodies of athletes from those two countries.
The most interesting post on this thread for me was the one "googling obscure theorems".
It makes perfect sense to me that a horse’s physiological makeup (notably the proportion of different slow and fast twitch muscle fibres in the major skeletal muscles), determined by genetics, results in it having both an optimum speed and a limit in time or distance over which this speed can be maintained. Of course this can be influenced by maturity, training, feeding and so on but it stands to reason that some horses can run faster comfortably than others while others can maintain their (perhaps slightly slower) speed over longer distances. The art of training is to allow the horse to express this ability to its maximum and run it under conditions which suit.This is easier than it sounds.As punters we really have to be better than the trainers
(or at least better than the majority) at knowing a horse’s optimum conditions and realising the true story behind the form figures.
I like your confidence,personally speaking,i"ll bow to the Nicholls,Pipes and Cecils,i reckon they know their horses optimum conditions better than us! The skill for us is analysing what you see with your own eyes,unfortunately for me, at the time of assessing a horse like Diamond Harry i never had a clue he would have Type 11A fibres that would allow him to maintain his gallop and jumping but i did have Foresight and that beats Science when it comes to studying horses for betting purposes!
Your point was understood Reet- of course a good trainer must allow for maturity and refrain from pushing young horses to their limits. He or she will know what a horse is comfortably capable of at each stage in their development and avoid exceeding this too often too soon. Racing is littered with horses who never reach their potential due to going beyond their comfort zone before they were ready for it.
I love trainers who have a long term plan and work backwards from there.
I wondered why
Big Bucks
hadn"t won the Gold Cup! I prefer a trainer who has a long term plan and works forward to achieve it myself. Dandys training of
Evens and Odds
springs to mind!
- Total Posts 17716
It’s not really an ‘obscure theorem’, Carv, it’s just lifted straight from what we know about human athletes.
You won’t find any Kenyan sprinters winning at the Olympics and you won’t find any Jamaican 5,000m runners winning either. The fundamental reason for that is the different mix of muscle fibres in the bodies of athletes from those two countries.
And – knowing that – just what does it tell us about Sanctuaire?
And – knowing that – just what does it tell us about Sanctuaire?
Sanctuaire
has to be given another chance imo,he has form in the book for one so young, albeit impressive to the eye,his Fred Winter victory doesn"t amount to much but its enough to suggest a good quality handicap over 2m is within his capabilities. I dont doubt he would get 21/2m in time and can see him jumping fences before too long,not that his build suggests thats where his future lies either and not one for carrying big weights! His hard pulling antics cant just be blamed on the pedestrian like crawl at Exeter either as he has crawled round Taunton and still won,i am totally convinced he would find zilch in a battle but he does travel well and he ran up the hill at Cheltenham but never went through with it at Aintree?? He"s a frustrating character but i can see him winning a decent race when it suits HIM! One Sanctuaire in anybodys yard would be enough! I would imagine he has Type 11 B fibres low oxidation for speed!
Sanctuaire is bred to get further than 2 miles over hurdles. Dam Biblique won at 1 3/4 miles in Belgium, though not many of her progeny stay that far.
Sanctuaire’s great grand-dam is Barbra, who produced the winner of the French 1000 Guineas Beaune. Beaune herself is the the dam of French Derby winner and runner up to Dancing Brave in the Arc, Bering.
Sanctuaire takes after his sir Kendor in not staying as far (for the moment) as his breeding suggests. It is interesting that Timeform Racehorses of 1989 said of French 2000 Guineas winner Kendor:
"That Kendor took such a hold early on in his races raised serious doubts about his effectiveness over middle distances. On breeding the probabilities were that he’d get at least a mile and a quarter, the average distance of races won by the stock of 1978 Marois winner Kenmare. The dam (of Kendor) Belle Macene, the offspring of two middle-distance winners but half sister to useful sprinter Zinbeau, never ran; Kendor is her first foal".
This is also the family of Preakness and Kentucky Derby winner Canonero.
Sanctuaire is apparently a little difficult to train. When Nicholls first had the horse he trained him with other horses, but found he’d bolt up the gallops. Since then he’s reportedly been trained alone. Think Fist has a valid point, it may be Sanctuaire’s temperament is getting the better of him. Hope the Ditheat team can get him to settle well enough to get 2 miles, if not 2 1/2.
Reet, we do seem to agree, you’re saying the same thing, just in a different way.
Value Is Everything- Total Posts 17716
TAPK
He did pull hard, even at Taunton in a race he could hardly have lost, where the only horse to get near him has himself proven to be a 3 miler. As I said earlier, every single piece of his form in this counrry points to him being done for speed, not stamina, on his latest outing.Ginger
Reet, we do seem to agree, you’re saying the same thing, just in a different way.
We do now Ginger, though one of us started by telling a very different story.
And – knowing that – just what does it tell us about Sanctuaire?
My point was made in relation to the OP who posed the question as to whether a horse will stay further because of a slow pace. My view is that a horse’s mix of muscle-types will determine its optimum trip and that will still be its optimum trip irrespective of the pace of the race. A fast or slow pace may benefit one horse rather than another but for different reasons.
Typically a fast pace will suit a horse which is just a relentless galloper with a high cruising speed whereas a slow pace will suit a horse which switches off well and has a good turn of foot.
I’ve never been an advocate of holding up a horse at the back of the field to ‘get the trip’. It doesn’t seem to make any sense at all. A horse should be ridden to suit its natural running style and if it runs in that style will produce its optimum performance over a particular trip.
A horse has a better chance of staying the trip in a slowly run race than he does truly or strongly run.
However, those used to faster pace (at a shorter trip) often pull too hard in a slowly run race over further.
If it does not settle it won’t stay.
Therefore, there are times when a strongER pace gives a "doubtful" stayer a better chance of getting the trip.
As I thought Reet, you did not understand my original post, particularly the bit above.
From my first post, all of the quoted sentences appeared in succession, in one paragraph. You somehow managed to ignore the first three sentences and three words "there are times" in the last paragraph.
Not I who has changed Reet.
Value Is EverythingPersonally I’ve always considered ‘held up to get the trip’is a load of twaddle like many other racing truisms oft quoted by commentators, jockeys and trainers which only goes to show none of them have got a clue.It doesn’t matter how long you hold them up they’ve still got to run the same distance there’s no way it can make it shorter. If I hear any more them telling me non stayers will be OK in the Guineas Derby etc because they settle well I’ll scream.It’s almost as silly as listening to the same lot telling you that there’s an apprentice on board to negate the penalty without noting that the apprentice rode it to win last time so it still carries the same amount of penalty
The most interesting post on this thread for me was the one "googling obscure theorems".
It’s not really an ‘obscure theorem’, Carv, it’s just lifted straight from what we know about human athletes.
You won’t find any Kenyan sprinters winning at the Olympics and you won’t find any Jamaican 5,000m runners winning either. The fundamental reason for that is the different mix of muscle fibres in the bodies of athletes from those two countries.
Says who?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Sang
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Kitur
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Asati
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezahiah_Nyamau
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Ouko_%28athlete%29The most interesting post on this thread for me was the one "googling obscure theorems".
It’s not really an ‘obscure theorem’, Carv, it’s just lifted straight from what we know about human athletes.
You won’t find any Kenyan sprinters winning at the Olympics and you won’t find any Jamaican 5,000m runners winning either. The fundamental reason for that is the different mix of muscle fibres in the bodies of athletes from those two countries.
Says who?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Sang
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Kitur
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Asati
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezahiah_Nyamau
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Ouko_%28athlete%29Good research but my point still stands.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.