- This topic has 104 replies, 27 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Seen a comment on here a few days ago not sure who it was by, but it went something along the lines of it’s a good job Frankel didn’t run in the Derby as what happened to Dawn Approach would have happened to him.
Now despite Frankel never tackling the trip, my personal belief would be he was that special he would have seen it out and won no matter what pace they went and what tactics Ballydoyle used.
Not everyone will agree with me, so i’ll put a question out to anyone who doesn’t, given that if Frankel had have ran the race may well have been run totally different would Pour Moi have still won?
No, Frankel would not have won The Derby – not at that stage of his career. He still hadn’t learned to settle properly.
Sir Henry Cecil has said many times over that Frankel would not stay a mile and a half and was not a Derby horse.
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
All guesswork of course. My guess is as follows; He would have won the Derby pulling a cart.
No, Frankel would not have won The Derby – not at that stage of his career. He still hadn’t learned to settle properly.
Sir Henry Cecil has said many times over that Frankel would not stay a mile and a half and was not a Derby horse.
Frankel had too big an engine at that time, too many CC’s.
We agree on Frankel H.
Value Is EverythingFrankel had too big an engine at that time, too many CC’s.
We agree on Frankel H.
He did, Ginge.
Had Frankel run in the Arc ,even allowing for the fact that he was more settled during his races by that stage, he would still have lost. I’d have staked my album collection on it.
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
My view is that he probably would have done.
However the key point there is the word ‘probably’. Whereas over a mile and a half the greatest flat trainer of all time obviously believed he was possibly beatable, over a mile (And probably a mile and a quarter.) he clearly wasn’t.
For me personally his record of retiring unbeaten means everything. I’m glad Sir Henry chose not to risk that.
Of course, like most other spectators, I’ll go to my grave wondering if he would have.
My view is that he probably would have done.
However the key point there is the word ‘probably’. Whereas over a mile and a half the greatest flat trainer of all time obviously believed he was possibly beatable, over a mile (And probably a mile and a quarter.) he clearly wasn’t.
For me personally his record of retiring unbeaten means everything. I’m glad Sir Henry chose not to risk that.
Of course, like most other spectators, I’ll go to my grave wondering if he would have.
As PC says it is guesswork and there are arguments for and against.
A strong argument FOR is just to look at the horses that ran that year – Treasure Beech finished 2nd just touched off. TB was not in the same league as Frankel and was beaten 11 lengths by him in the Royal Lodge. But also look who filled the next places – Carlton House, Memphis Tennessee, Native Khan, Recital. None of them turned out to be much good. It is not hard to envisage Frankel having too much class to beat that lot.
BUT……we said the same about Dawn Approach.
The argument AGAINST is, for me, even stronger. Frankel didn’t run in the Derby but look what happened in the race he DID run in next. The St James Palace Stakes was by far his worst performance. We can blame Tom Queally for some of it (although to be fair he rode him impeccably on every other occassion) but I always thought the SJP showed that the Guineas had left it’s mark. He scrambled home from a horse that wasn’t fit to polish his hooves. I dread to think what might have happened at Epsom given similar tactics.
Above all of that though Ginge and Himself are right. Whether he would have won or not, he simply was not mature enough or ready enough to be stepping up in trip. Sir Henry knew it and thankfully his owner listened to him rather than try and persuade him otherwise as with Sheikh Mo. Even if Frankel HAD won the Derby what might that have done to his long term prospects? What might that race have taken out of him. Would he have continued to progress race by race?
If DA’s horror show taught us anything it taught us that there IS a ceiling with all horses and that you can’t just run them over any distance and expect them to win. They are not machines. There are many on here who would argue that we should at least have been given the chance to see if he would. It is, after all, The Derby and there is only one Derby. But there are also many on here who think Sir H got it absolutely right and that we priveliged to see 14 magnificent displays.
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
My view is that he probably would have done.
However the key point there is the word ‘probably’. Whereas over a mile and a half the greatest flat trainer of all time obviously believed he was possibly beatable, over a mile (And probably a mile and a quarter.) he clearly wasn’t.
For me personally his record of retiring unbeaten means everything. I’m glad Sir Henry chose not to risk that.
Of course, like most other spectators, I’ll go to my grave wondering if he would have.
As PC says it is guesswork and there are arguments for and against.
A strong argument FOR is just to look at the horses that ran that year – Treasure Beech finished 2nd just touched off. TB was not in the same league as Frankel and was beaten 11 lengths by him in the Royal Lodge. But also look who filled the next places – Carlton House, Memphis Tennessee, Native Khan, Recital. None of them turned out to be much good. It is not hard to envisage Frankel having too much class to beat that lot.
BUT……we said the same about Dawn Approach.
The argument AGAINST is, for me, even stronger. Frankel didn’t run in the Derby but look what happened in the race he DID run in next. The St James Palace Stakes was by far his worst performance. We can blame Tom Queally for some of it (although to be fair he rode him impeccably on every other occassion) but I always thought the SJP showed that the Guineas had left it’s mark. He scrambled home from a horse that wasn’t fit to polish his hooves. I dread to think what might have happened at Epsom given similar tactics.
Above all of that though Ginge and Himself are right. Whether he would have won or not, he simply was not mature enough or ready enough to be stepping up in trip. Sir Henry knew it and thankfully his owner listened to him rather than try and persuade him otherwise as with Sheikh Mo. Even if Frankel HAD won the Derby what might that have done to his long term prospects? What might that race have taken out of him. Would he have continued to progress race by race?
If DA’s horror show taught us anything it taught us that there IS a ceiling with all horses and that you can’t just run them over any distance and expect them to win. They are not machines. There are many on here who would argue that we should at least have been given the chance to see if he would. It is, after all, The Derby and there is only one Derby. But there are also many on here who think Sir H got it absolutely right and that we priveliged to see 14 magnificent displays.
You won’t find me criticising Sir Henry’s handling of Frankel Joni. For my money it ranks as one of the greatest feats of training in history.
I’m not convinced by the St James Palace argument though. I’m certain the horse was idling through lack of competition and too long in front, but I’m just as certain he would not have been passed if his pursuers had got up alongside of him.
I’m not convinced by the St James Palace argument though. I’m certain the horse was idling through lack of competition and too long in front, but I’m just as certain he would not have been passed if his pursuers had got up alongside of him.
Following his super blitz in the 2000 Guineas, I felt as though the Frankel learned from his exertions rather than suffered the effects of the race. The first signs of a calmer mind looked apparent when he ran in the St James Palace. After all, he did settle well in it. I’ve watched the SJP countless times now and, during the last two furlongs, Frankel looks as though he’s gradually switching off and having a bit of a doss. I too think he’d have hit Zoffany on a counter attack.
My take is if Frankel would’ve ran in the Derby and settled like he did during the first three furlongs of the St James Palace and sustained it to Tattenham Corner, there’s a niggling likelihood that he’d have triumphed.
Looking back in hindsight though, Sir Henry Cecil was one step ahead of all of us. The path he chosen for Frankel was the correct one.
Surely Aidan’s feat last year in winning all the classics must range with the best of modern times.I ignore the St.Leger because of the drug scandal.Has anyone come close? I hope the Sheikh had the guts to apologize to big John.
Frankel would almost certainly have won the Irish Derby as the track more suited him. He would most likley have wone the Epsom Derby as what he lost on the undulations he would have easily made up in the straight – he was so superior to anything else. There was little credible opposition at Epsom last year and for one of the best horses of recent times not to even be tested at Epsom is something his connections should be ashamed of.
Who knows but I can’t criticize connections for not running him in it. However I do feel they should have found out just how versatile he was and stepped him up earlier at 3 and ran him in the KG at 4.
Yep he’d have won on sheer class. Ability wise he had so much in hand he’d have won comfortably.
He reminds me a little bit of El Gran Senor who came so close to winning on class alone in 1984, only Frankel had even more class.
Watch Frankel’s maiden race again. A little keen, but hardly a tearaway. At Doncaster, he settled in behind Diamond Geezer. In the Royal Lodge, he’s dropped out last. Ditto in the Dewhurst, although he does pull fairly hard. In the Greenham, he is again keen early but eventually settles in quite nicely behind Picture Editor.
All of these races can be found on YouTube and they portray a horse who is keen but by no means intractable. It’s understandable that Frankel pulled in his races- nothing could go fast enough for him- but he wasn’t the headstrong animal some imply.
I defer to nobody in my appreciation of Sir Henry Cecil’s training ability but remain firmly of the opinion that the decision to let Frankel blitz his Guineas field was deliberately designed to give connections a ready-made excuse to avoid the Derby. Had Frankel been ridden from behind (as he had been in all of his previous races) at Newmarket and won going away, the world and his wife would have been clamouring for the horse to tackle Epsom. By making all in the first classic of the season, connections knew that the media would be saying that there would be no chance of the horse lasting the Derby trip.
Having made the trip down from Scotland to Ascot to witness the great horse himself in his last ever race, I feel that I can offer a little first hand perspective on this issue.
The ground was very soft that day, so a stamina sapping 10f.
Frankel cruised to the front, but his speed was blunted slightly by the mud. He cruised past Cirrus but then as soon as Queally asked for more he came off the bridle for the first time. By the line he was close to running on empty. He did not have much in reserve, and had this race been over 12f Cirrus would have stayed on and beaten him I reckon.
Having said all that, the Derby was not run on soft ground, but on firm. And it did not have a horse the calibre of Cirrus. Personally having seen him run a soft ground 10f I doubt he had the class to compensate for a lack of stamina over 12f. Over a mile the horse was great, but lets not pretend he could have been great over a distance he never tried, and for good reason.
Just my observations
I defer to nobody in my appreciation of Sir Henry Cecil’s training ability but remain firmly of the opinion that the decision to let Frankel blitz his Guineas field was deliberately designed to give connections a ready-made excuse to avoid the Derby.
What a bizarre comment Gladiateur. Why would anyone want a ready made excuse to avoid the Derby? Don’t you think they would like to have a horse that could win it? I’m sorry but this is absurd.
Similar comments apply to the idiot who calls it a "shame" that he didn’t run. A senseless comment from someone with absolutely no understanding of the sport. What a pitifully stupid comment.
Did Dawn Approach’s spectacular fall from grace teach you nothing?
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.