Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Hi Ali, thanks for that….it was all getting very confusing for me.
The answers; in my very humble opinion.
1. Not true, the Irish support was coming anyway!<br>2. The first half mile of the CH is run in front of the stands…if he was injured, where else were they to pull him up?<br>3. Sent over in the hope he still had the ability, or one big race left in him. Not trained to his peak, in case he went wrong before he got there.<br>4. Definitely injured, don’t forget he won lto, he didn’t even reproduce that.<br>5. I find that one scandalous, can’t believe it.<br>6-7. Can’t see how that type of money would get on, if there was any truth in it, or the betting markets got a sniff of it, the CH market would have been in turmoil, almost to the point of suspension. Instead the Irish, with two winners up already, were piling tens of thousands on to Istabraq. Now they may be blindly loyal on occasions, but not stupid, methinks. <br>8. He’d be taking a big risk, if he did, & it got out, his credibility would take a severe knock, I’m guessing that would be more important to him than money.<br>9. No comment.
(Edited by Colin Little at 7:15 pm on Mar. 19, 2002)
HI Esc….re the HLL question. I think the front four in the betting will finish ahead of him. He’ll probably be scrapping for 5th or 6th place, that’s assuming all the market leaders turn up & reproduce their form. If a couple of them don’t fire, I suppose HLL could just sneak into a place. I do worry for him a little though, he reached his plateau a couple of years ago & although he’s consistent, he doesn’t seem to have any more improvement in him over hurdles, unlike a few others in the field. What else could finish ahead of him? Apart from Bilboa, I can’t see a great deal.
If we are scratching around for long shots who could run well, Brother Joe (will relish decent ground & Mel Collier’s tipped him. I’m personally not sure he’s quick enough for 2m in a CH, but time has proved MC to be a better judge than me!) I’ve almost given up trying to work out how P.Nicholls horses are going to run, but if any of the excuses for Azertyuiop’s bad runs are valid, he could run better than a 33/1 shot, he not got the form in the book, but when a Nicholls run well, it tends to run very well! (if that makes sense). My problem with his horses is they don’t seem to run two races alike, unless they are bad ones! For me though, there are too many good horses at the front of the market to spend too much time working on the outsiders. It’s not saying a lot, but to me the CH winner will be either Landing Light, Ned Kelly & Valiramix, I’m not sure which one though!
The Wincanton race on Thursday could tell us a lot more. I normally miss the midweek racing, but I’m going to make an effort to sneak out & watch that one.
Hi RM…. I read your comments about M.Fitzgerald’s book with great interest. Someone else, I think it was A.Potts, wrote something similar recently, suggesting some courses that are assumed to be tight for example, are in fact not, & vice versa. (I’m not sure if he mentioned Cheltenham.) I’m always open to ideas, I can see where they are coming from, but I’m not sure if I totally agree. As an example, a small flat-bred horse, may be able to scoot around a flat track like Kempton or Fakenham to win a hurdle race, but I’m not sure I would be confident he/she would get home at Cheltenham. I suppose if you divide the Cheltenham course up into quarters. There’s one quarter, it would be the third one, where the field quickly turn left, drop down a the hill, jump a hurdle & then turn towards the home straight; where a nimble, fleet of foot horse would be much more comfortable than a big galloping type, but whether that advantage would be negated by the stiff uphill finish….I’m not sure? I do accept you need a horse that can travel well in a race, particularly over 2m. I would think you do need a horse that does have an element of stamina as well though, & a bit of tactical speed…….a bit like Istabraq in fact!
BTW, what did you think of M.Fitzgerald’s book? I haven’t read it yet, as I normally struggle with autobiographies.
(Edited by Colin Little at 11:56 am on Feb. 17, 2002)
Hi Rob,
My opinion, for what it’s worth, is that the Kempton Christmas Hurdle form is about as good as Hors La Loi III is. That’s at least 3l behind Landing Light,  & just ½l behind Bilboa.
Considering the best bookmaker prices (haven’t checked Betfair) are Bilboa 14/1 & HLL 33/1, I suppose he can be looked upon as value. The problem is both of them just may not be good enough to make the frame, although I can see them both running their races. ÂÂÂ
PR…..I see you had already made the point about HLL coming from France. I did the same thing when the other day when repeating LLT’s Cheltenham record for about the third time. It comes from rushing to try & read everything during my lunch hour. Sorry about that!
BTW, the Elite Racing Club will be after you for calling the Triumph Hurdle the Express :o
I would have though the stable confidence behind Valiramix was significant, especially considering how highly the other two are now rated. On a slightly different note, I still think they were a bit surprised about Copeland, when that stable fancy a horse it’s normally supported.
You could possibly be right about the Cheltenham course being a problem for Valiramix, it’s an uncertainty, isn’t it.  I had it in my mind that he would be OK on a course like Cheltenham, it’s not as though he’s had recent leg problems or anything. I thought a fast race on a tight track may be more of problem to him.
I can understand why people have not got total confidence in that Newbury race, but in the horses defence the time was good, & he seemed to win with a lot in hand. It would have been nice to see him come out and win again, it would have given his form a more solid, reliable look, a bit like Landing Light’s, I do accept that.
<br>
Even though I don’t back him very often, I do put myself up as a bit of a HLL anorak. He is actually a very consistant horse, given the right conditions. All you need to do is look back at his form since Cheltenham 1999, & concentrate on races where the going was genuinely good or better. Thats gives you a record of 11124223, all in Gde A races, & consistantly running to OR’s in the 150-160 region. When he hasn’t had those conditions, his record is 37PPP3. He seemed to develop an inability to handle soft groung half way though his career! (since he originally came over from France in fact). Some people throw up the fact that he won the 1999 Supreme Novices at Cheltenham on GS, but that may be a bit of a red herring. That race was run 4.7s inside standard time, that suggests the going was not GS. His other GS win came in a weakish Aintree race, where the ground may not have been that bad. If it is just about GS, he may be able to get away with it, but not genuine soft.
He could not run well, or run to his mark, in Valiramix’s Newbury race because of the prevailing ground.
The thing that interests me about Valiramix, is the stable confidence. They have Rodock & Copeland, but talk about Valiramix as though he’s in a different league. I wouldn’t have a worry about the course for him, but if the ground come up quick, we’re into unkown territory. You could argue that’s why he finished so far back in the 2000 Triumph hurdle, he does come from a family of soft ground specialists.
It’s on record how buzzy & close to the edge Isty can get when fully wound up, maybe AOB is just a bit nervous about bringing him to that peak. They certainly wouldn’t want him at that level until as close to CH day as possible. I don’t think we can read anything into it at the moment. The day of judgment will come when they start to try & put some serious work into him.
I got the time to re-read Micheal Clower’s book "The Legend of Istabraq" a few weeks ago. Worth a read if you haven’t done so already, some poignant passages in there about John Durkan, some nice colour pics as well. I’m loathe to say buy it, because I assume it will be updated when the great one retires. Maybe try & borrow it!
Rob, I’m not sure if he’d make it in that sort of class, but he does look very nicely handicapped (OR 132). I would think a decent fast ground handicap is what they have got in mind for him.
If you look back to the 2000 Triumph Hurdle, he was 2nd, but there were horses who finished down the field in that race, who have since run & won off far higher marks. (including Valiramix, but he is probably not the best example). If RE can find that sort of form again, & he hasn’t had the ground conditions or fitness level to do so yet, he could be very well in.
Re handicap marks, Raceform Update (out today) tells you who’s gone up & down over the last week or so.
<br>
I’m with PR & Esc on this one, not the greatest TGT ever seen, Copeland has definately improved though. If you take a line through Rooster Booster (who had been aimed at this all year, almost to the point of being not off at Cheltenham on his previous run). Imo he can be used as a solid target horse.
In 2001   Copeland gave RB 5lb & finished 9l behind him<br>This year  Copeland gave RB 11lb & finished 6l in front of him.
…..I see RB got raised 6lb for his troubles as well.
I still think Regal Exit has got a decent race in him on good ground. I got the impression he was just not quite ready for the TGT, & that combined with unfavourable ground gave him little chance.
There is another horse in the race with a 100% record at Cheltenham.
3 runs (all in Gde A chases over 3m+) and 3 wins (by dist, dist & 5l).
<br>
DL, if the aim of this thread was to highlight the normally bad value of the place portion of an e/w bet, I totally agree. If I haven’t acknowledged that, is simply because I know you’re correct, it’s been “taken as readâ€ÂÂ
Oops, seem to have rattled the master’s cage. :argue:
DL, This thread is entitled “Is each way betting a waste of time?â€ÂÂ
Jjimps, I’m sorry but I think you’re making a horrible mistake there.
I think you may be confusing something that is only a statistical probability….with a mathematical certainty.
I’ve got to work now, so I’ll try to pop back lunchtime & add to this.
Seem to have missed most of this debate; I’m one of those who use EW & WP place bets on quite a regular basis. I’ll concede it’s not the most efficient way to win money, but I honestly don’t see the problem, providing you understand what you’re doing, & why you’re doing it.
About 50% of my bets have some sort of place portion. I run a win only model alongside my actual bets to monitor the difference, & my figures come out eerily similar to those of Pixo. In 2001, I totalled 64 bets, & if I had placed them on a win only basis, my profits would have been 28% higher. I think DL said in a different context, would you be happy to knowingly give an extra percentage to bookies? Where I differ, is that my answer to that question is; Yes I would. I’m happy to concede some extra profit, if it allows me greater control in managing & turning over my capital, & provides me with a more acceptable (lower) level of risk. This also allows me to enjoy horseracing & maintains my confidence at a decent level. If you wish to call it “a comfort zone for people who can’t handle losing runsâ€ÂÂ
I think my choice is more about anticipation than quality,<br>but for me it’s the Supreme Novices Hurdle, the first race on the first day.
Whether you are there, or just watching on TV (as I will be this year), the atmosphere leading up to, & during that first race is really something.
