- This topic has 104 replies, 27 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I never doubted Frankel’s ability. I think he was a great horse over a mile, a very good one over 10f. But I don’t think he would have stayed 12f in the likes of a big bargy race like the Arc, usually run on less than good ground. He was wrapped in cotton wool by the trainer and never even taken overseas once. I can’t help but be left feeling underwhelmed.
Frankel never did anything that suggested anything other than a mile was his best trip, and in the race that tested his stamina most he looked ordinary by his own imperious standards.
Why are you ignoring the 10f International at York when he recorded his equal highest RPR (143). Presumably because it doesn’t fit in with your theory?
I think it is more sensible to compare two Dewhurst winners who were blessed with lots of speed than a horse who achieved by far his best ratings over further.
STS never raced over a mile following his Guineas win. It is hardly fair to imply he could not have matched his 10f and 12f ratings had connections elected to return to a mile.
As regards Tom Queally in the St James’s Palace Stakes, he obviously panicked when going after the pacemaker so far from home, and almost contrived to get the horse beaten. He hadn’t the good grace at the time to admit his mistake. Sir Henry Cecil did not publicly rebuke his jockey at the time, although his body language on the day spoke volumes.
In the following months it became clear that Sir Henry was not of the opinion that Queally had not carried out instructions in the Royal Ascot race.
Anybody remotely connected to Warren Place will be of the opinion that Queally is not a reliable stable jockey when it comes to gambling on fancied horses.
Frankel is quite possibly the greatest racehorse of all time.
Sir Henry Cecil is quite possibly one of the most gifted trainers of all time.
Khalid Abdulla’s Juddmonte Farms is one of the most successful breeding operatons in the world.
Tom Queally is an
average
jockey at best who seriously lucked out when becoming the stable jockey at Warren Place, at a time when the yard was in the process of climbing out of the doldrums. Unlike Cauthen, Eddery, Mercer and Piggott, Queally is anything but a "go to" jockey for other stables.
It is absurd to defend his riding of Frankel in the St James’s Palace Stakes in order to support the the theory that the son of Kind would not have won the 2011 Derby.
Frankel never did anything that suggested anything other than a mile was his best trip, and in the race that tested his stamina most he looked ordinary by his own imperious standards.
Why are you ignoring the 10f International at York when he recorded his equal highest RPR (143). Presumably because it doesn’t fit in with your theory?
That’s a bit of a childish assertion. We all know that he ran twice over the distance, once looking brilliant and the other fairly ordinary by his own standards. By your logic I am supposed to accept that the Juddmonte proved he was better over 1m 2f than he was as at a mile. If he had only ever run at the trip on the first occasion I would see the logic in arguing that he was perhaps better for the step up in trip but the latter race argues against that.
If you want to look a bit deeper into it, the ground at York for the International was Good to Firm and that was the first time Frankel had run on going that fast since the 2000 Guineas. That probably allowed him to put in a better performance in relation and it would have been interesting to have seen what he could have done pushed out over a mile, on the same faster surface, as an older horse.
I maintain that it is a big ask for a horse to have changed his style of running to cope with the Derby trip. If anyone remembers the channel 4 broadcast of Frankel’s 2000 Guineas they may well recall that pundit Jim McGrath stated that although the performance was amazing, the style of running narrowed Frankels options with regards to the trips he could run over.
Above all, I respect the trainer’s skill as a master of his craft and will go to my grave knowing that Sir Henry didn’t suddenly shove his head up his ass regarding the path The King would take.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
Steve – I don’t think we should ignore the fact that the Juddmonte is over an additional half furlong.
Steve – I don’t think we should ignore the fact that the Juddmonte is over an additional half furlong.
Well, if we are going to be picky, it is actually 88 yards longer and the Derby trip is actually 10 yards in excess of 1 and a half miles, so we have 78 yards nett extra stamina to argue a case with.
78 yards on fast ground, a year older, and probably as near to 100% as he ever was, knowing this was his penultimate race, doesn’t make much of a case in my mind for the Derby, particularly straight after the Guineas and the way he ran to win it.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
Ok so Frankel is my favourite subject in the whole wide world so I hope you don’t mind if I indulge myself and REALLY try to answer the question posed by the OP. Would Frankel have won the Derby?
Before I answer the question I would like you to think about the decision the connections made in two ways and I want to try to stick to facts not hypothesis.
Firstly as of the 6th June 2013
with
the benefit of hindsight-
The eventual winner, Pour Moi, ran to an RPR of 121 and won in the shadow of the post from Treasure Beech whom Frankel had thrashed by 11 lengths in the Royal Lodge with Carlton House, who only won one more race – a Group 3 – back in third.
Seems pretty obvious that with hindsight Frankel SHOULD have been able to beat that lot.
HOWEVER – Pour Moi ran to an RPR of 121 that day. Frankel, in HIS next race (The SJP) ran to 122. Just 1lb higher YET over his ideal trip – FOUR furlongs shorter.
Well hang on Treasure Beech was right there next to Pour Moi and Frankel beat him 11 lengths! But that was also over 4 furlongs shorter and nine months earlier. Just by way of a modern day comparison, by how much do we think DA would beat Ruler of The World if they had both run over a mile in the Guineas? (sorry that is hypothesis).
For whatever reason Frankel did not run anywhere near his best
over a mile
on his next start after the Guineas. Would he have run much better two weeks earlier over a much longer trip? That is a big question and I am not sure anyone could answer yes he definitely would.
Ok second scenario – same question just after the Guineas, "would Frankel win the Derby?" but this time WITHOUT the benefit of hindsight.
He has just won the Guineas from the front with a display of raw power and speed that noone has ever seen before. He has raced that way because of the way he pulled in the Greenham and Dewhurst which made the trainer think they should just let him use his stride. They have a month to turn Mr Tearaway into Mr Tractable.
The current favourite for the Derby is a horse called World Domination. He is trained by Henry Cecil who trains Frankel and is owned by Prince Khaled who owns Frankel. He is due to run in the Dante against a highly regarded colt of Her Majesty’s called Carlton House and the runner up in the Racing Post, Seville. Three strapping middle distance colts, one with the same connections as Frankel.
Frankel’s full brother, Bullet Train, has run in the Derby the year before and his trainer is adamant that he has not got home.
They decide at this point that they will not run Frankel in the Derby.
Let’s go back to shortly after the Guineas. Jonibake creeps into Henry’s room (he was still just plain old "Henry" in those days), puts a gun to his head and says "Henry me old mate – either you run Frankel in the Derby or I shoot you." A bit extreme but go with me.
Henry replies "well I suppose I should then – don’t you think?"
Would Frankel have won?
In my opinion no. He would have pulled too hard and he would not have seen out the trip at that stage in his career. Am I definite? Absolutely not. Frankel continued to defy logic throughout his career and he may well have been able to pull it off simply because he is probably by some way the best horse of all time. But the question I would also add is – if he HAD run in the Derby and won, what would it have taken out of him? Would he have gone on to win 14 races in a row? Would he have got better and better? Or would his form have plateaued? Would the effort of winning over that distance have taken too much out of him? Who knows.
Would it have been better for him to win the Derby and then flop or not run in the Derby and win 14 races? I know what my answer is.
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
Frankel was a great horse, possibly the greatest, but his legend was undermined by an unambitious racing programme. Never conetested the great races, never travelled, to France, Ireland, US. Being unbeaten counts for little; if you don’t race you won’t be beaten.
Never conetested the great races
What utter nonsense.
The Dewhurst, 2,000 Guineas, St James’s Palace Stakes, Sussex Stakes (twice), Queen Elizabeth II Stakes, Queen Anne Stakes, Juddmonte International Stakes and Champion Stakes are all prestigious group one races. They were made great by the mere presence of Frankel.
The 2012 Juddmonte International was a "greater" race than any Derby I’ve ever witnessed, given that Frankel thrashed group one horses like Farhh and St Nicholas Abbey without getting out of second gear.
All the great races are run in England. There is no need to go overseas to make your reputation. Really great horses come to England to cement their reputation. Just look at the entries to the Epsom Derby. Horses came from France and Germany and Ireland. The best 3yo’s running to find the champion. How many horses traveled to Kentucky? Just one. Three (not including the Irish) at Epsom and none (not including the Irish) at Kentucky. So the Epsom Derby is three times as important as Kentucky based on runners. It is as simple as that(not including the Irish).How many English horses went to France for the French Derby? I don’t know,that shows how unimportant the French Derby is.
Frankel didn’t run in The Derby for the same reason Brigadier Gerard didn’t run. Both trainers and owners of both those champions were adamant that their horse wouldn’t stay at that stage of their careers.
Had both been allowed to take their chance at Epsom, then it is feasible to suggest that Frankel and Brigadier Gerard would not have turned into two of the greatest racehorses the world has ever seen.
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
Ok so Frankel is my favourite subject in the whole wide world so I hope you don’t mind if I indulge myself and REALLY try to answer the question posed by the OP. Would Frankel have won the Derby?
Before I answer the question I would like you to think about the decision the connections made in two ways and I want to try to stick to facts not hypothesis.
Firstly as of the 6th June 2013
with
the benefit of hindsight-
The eventual winner, Pour Moi, ran to an RPR of 121 and won in the shadow of the post from Treasure Beech whom Frankel had thrashed by 11 lengths in the Royal Lodge with Carlton House, who only won one more race – a Group 3 – back in third.
Seems pretty obvious that with hindsight Frankel SHOULD have been able to beat that lot.
HOWEVER – Pour Moi ran to an RPR of 121 that day. Frankel, in HIS next race (The SJP) ran to 122. Just 1lb higher YET over his ideal trip – FOUR furlongs shorter.
Well hang on Treasure Beech was right there next to Pour Moi and Frankel beat him 11 lengths! But that was also over 4 furlongs shorter and nine months earlier. Just by way of a modern day comparison, by how much do we think DA would beat Ruler of The World if they had both run over a mile in the Guineas? (sorry that is hypothesis).
For whatever reason Frankel did not run anywhere near his best
over a mile
on his next start after the Guineas. Would he have run much better two weeks earlier over a much longer trip? That is a big question and I am not sure anyone could answer yes he definitely would.
Ok second scenario – same question just after the Guineas, "would Frankel win the Derby?" but this time WITHOUT the benefit of hindsight.
He has just won the Guineas from the front with a display of raw power and speed that noone has ever seen before. He has raced that way because of the way he pulled in the Greenham and Dewhurst which made the trainer think they should just let him use his stride. They have a month to turn Mr Tearaway into Mr Tractable.
The current favourite for the Derby is a horse called World Domination. He is trained by Henry Cecil who trains Frankel and is owned by Prince Khaled who owns Frankel. He is due to run in the Dante against a highly regarded colt of Her Majesty’s called Carlton House and the runner up in the Racing Post, Seville. Three strapping middle distance colts, one with the same connections as Frankel.
Frankel’s full brother, Bullet Train, has run in the Derby the year before and his trainer is adamant that he has not got home.
They decide at this point that they will not run Frankel in the Derby.
Let’s go back to shortly after the Guineas. Jonibake creeps into Henry’s room (he was still just plain old "Henry" in those days), puts a gun to his head and says "Henry me old mate – either you run Frankel in the Derby or I shoot you." A bit extreme but go with me.
Henry replies "well I suppose I should then – don’t you think?"
Would Frankel have won?
In my opinion no. He would have pulled too hard and he would not have seen out the trip at that stage in his career. Am I definite? Absolutely not. Frankel continued to defy logic throughout his career and he may well have been able to pull it off simply because he is probably by some way the best horse of all time. But the question I would also add is – if he HAD run in the Derby and won, what would it have taken out of him? Would he have gone on to win 14 races in a row? Would he have got better and better? Or would his form have plateaued? Would the effort of winning over that distance have taken too much out of him? Who knows.
Would it have been better for him to win the Derby and then flop or not run in the Derby and win 14 races? I know what my answer is.
Top analysis and reasoning there Joni.
It would be amazing if we could be able to know what will be going on inside Dawn Approach’s mind the next time he enters the starting stalls. Connections will hope he has amnesia regarding Epsom.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
Ok so Frankel is my favourite subject in the whole wide world so I hope you don’t mind if I indulge myself and REALLY try to answer the question posed by the OP. Would Frankel have won the Derby?
Before I answer the question I would like you to think about the decision the connections made in two ways and I want to try to stick to facts not hypothesis.
Firstly as of the 6th June 2013
with
the benefit of hindsight-
The eventual winner, Pour Moi, ran to an RPR of 121 and won in the shadow of the post from Treasure Beech whom Frankel had thrashed by 11 lengths in the Royal Lodge with Carlton House, who only won one more race – a Group 3 – back in third.
Seems pretty obvious that with hindsight Frankel SHOULD have been able to beat that lot.
HOWEVER – Pour Moi ran to an RPR of 121 that day. Frankel, in HIS next race (The SJP) ran to 122. Just 1lb higher YET over his ideal trip – FOUR furlongs shorter.
Well hang on Treasure Beech was right there next to Pour Moi and Frankel beat him 11 lengths! But that was also over 4 furlongs shorter and nine months earlier. Just by way of a modern day comparison, by how much do we think DA would beat Ruler of The World if they had both run over a mile in the Guineas? (sorry that is hypothesis).
For whatever reason Frankel did not run anywhere near his best
over a mile
on his next start after the Guineas. Would he have run much better two weeks earlier over a much longer trip? That is a big question and I am not sure anyone could answer yes he definitely would.
Ok second scenario – same question just after the Guineas, "would Frankel win the Derby?" but this time WITHOUT the benefit of hindsight.
He has just won the Guineas from the front with a display of raw power and speed that noone has ever seen before. He has raced that way because of the way he pulled in the Greenham and Dewhurst which made the trainer think they should just let him use his stride. They have a month to turn Mr Tearaway into Mr Tractable.
The current favourite for the Derby is a horse called World Domination. He is trained by Henry Cecil who trains Frankel and is owned by Prince Khaled who owns Frankel. He is due to run in the Dante against a highly regarded colt of Her Majesty’s called Carlton House and the runner up in the Racing Post, Seville. Three strapping middle distance colts, one with the same connections as Frankel.
Frankel’s full brother, Bullet Train, has run in the Derby the year before and his trainer is adamant that he has not got home.
They decide at this point that they will not run Frankel in the Derby.
Let’s go back to shortly after the Guineas. Jonibake creeps into Henry’s room (he was still just plain old "Henry" in those days), puts a gun to his head and says "Henry me old mate – either you run Frankel in the Derby or I shoot you." A bit extreme but go with me.
Henry replies "well I suppose I should then – don’t you think?"
Would Frankel have won?
In my opinion no. He would have pulled too hard and he would not have seen out the trip at that stage in his career. Am I definite? Absolutely not. Frankel continued to defy logic throughout his career and he may well have been able to pull it off simply because he is probably by some way the best horse of all time. But the question I would also add is – if he HAD run in the Derby and won, what would it have taken out of him? Would he have gone on to win 14 races in a row? Would he have got better and better? Or would his form have plateaued? Would the effort of winning over that distance have taken too much out of him? Who knows.
Would it have been better for him to win the Derby and then flop or not run in the Derby and win 14 races? I know what my answer is.
Great Post, with regards to the last part if he’d have won the Derby surely he’d have been retired at the end of his 3 year old campaign maybe only running one or two more races. So in hindsight we were all lucky he never ran.
Back to the opening question you say you don’t think he’d win, then were does he finish? Is he placed? or does he end up last like Dawn Approach walking past the post? Native Khan was a close 5th in the race, Frankel was well ahead of him in the Guineas would the further trip see Frankel finish behind him?
Although his Guineas win was as spectacular a race as i have ever seen, the winning distance understates his dominance over that field. If Frankel had been ridden like he was later in his 3 yr old season and 4 yr old season, he’d have demolished that field by 10+ lengths. Over a mile Native Khan wouldn’t get within 5 lengths of Frankel ; simply the unique way that race was run actually flatters everything but Frankel.
In the end, who cares if he would have won the Derby. He didn’t run and it’s not a decision you can criticise. Perhaps he would have annilihated the field, perhaps he would have been beaten. Perhaps it would have had a negative impact on his future career (and no 4 yr old career), perhaps it would have led to an Arc campaign. Doesn’t really matter. We got 14 races over 3 years from an absolutely fantastic race horse. The best horse of all time is a title we cannot quantify, but he’s the by far the most exciting horse i’ve ever watched. My favourite racehorse who brought significant pleasure to me as a racing fan. That is all that should matter.
Instead people predictably argue over the most minute details using logic that Staci, the mother of six with a tattoo on her face and a recent Jeremy Kyle appearance, would be proud of. He didn’t run in the best races? Entire nonsense. Races aren’t rated and ranked by the horses that run in them specifically that year, not whatever prestige or history that is attached to it. He murdered the bets horses around. It is nonsense that he wasn’t tested.
Tom Queally is an
average
jockey at best who seriously lucked out when becoming the stable jockey at Warren Place, at a time when the yard was in the process of climbing out of the doldrums. Unlike Cauthen, Eddery, Mercer and Piggott, Queally is anything but a "go to" jockey for other stables.
Have to confess that I thought Tom Queally’s riding style (arms flapping about like bird’s wings) seemed to make Frankel look like hard work when the horse clearly wasn’t.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.