Forum Replies Created
- Posts
This year’s attendance was 28,741. Mr Street’s original target for the first Champions Day at Ascot was 30,000 – he conveniently reduced that to 25,000 nearer the event. Champions Day at Ascot hasn’t reached Street’s original attendance target in three out of the four years.
Mr Street also had a "long-term" target of 40,000 for 2016.
Sheikh Fahad thought that it was the best day’s racing of the year. As long as he thinks it, I guess that’s all that matters… because three races this year (Champion, QEII, F&M) certainly weren’t better than they were prior to the changes.
Just on the subject of the Middle Park/Dewhurst clash I doubt very much if sparating them would have led to significant increase in either field size or quality. I think the Middle Park was pretty much representitive of what is currently around and the Dewhurst invariably attracts a small field with most the supposed ‘big-guns’ avoiding each year. This year the likes of Kingman and Berkshire were never likely to run so other than Toormore I am not sure what we were missing?
Dewhurst field sizes from 2000 to 2010: 5, 10, 8, 16, 12, 9, 8, 15, 10, 13, 15, 6.
Small? Maybe if we were in Japan where they routinely get capacity G1 fields, but not in Britain. As we all know, the 6 runner race included the Middle Park winner.
Tidal bay running off 162
This is ludicrous stuff,no wonder people don’t have faith in the system! It’s unacceptable.
7. To favour the majority at the expense of the minority. If one horse is rated too highly, then that one horse may not have an equal chance of success on its next start. If one horse is rated too low, however, then every horse it races against may not have an equal chance of success on their next start.
Those words above are in the BHA "A guide to handicapping" document. I’m looking forward to a new version with a section that explains the highest rating minus 9 formula for the Grand National in detail.
This has been hailed by the eternal optimists via other mediums, but as Presto mentions, if prize money was the relevant factor, it’s a paltry offer in comparison to Group 1’s in Asia.
Re clashes – Rachel Alexandra meeting Zenyatta at Oaklawn Park would have had a $5m/£3.2m prize fund. Yet Sheik Fahad offers an additional £700k? You could say it’s a good job Lord Grimthorpe has already said that the additional money won’t change anything they do with Frankel.
Watching the finishes on Saturday certainly suggested the ground was much more testing than good.
I’d agree, visually it looked slower than good ground. The Lincoln winner just squeezed inside the Racing Post standard, and most big handicap winners are thought to perform anywhere up to 10lbs better than their pre-race rating.
I know when I looked at the BHA going page (think it was Thursday) that it said 5mm was applied and they’d continue to water as necessary. I’d personally call it unsatisfactory, but I’m sure if queried Doncaster would say they did it because it was a 2 day meeting.
We’re going well so far with the Good (watered) description at Doncaster on Saturday…..
Underfoot conditions were also blamed for the defeat of Edinburgh Knight whose trainer Paul d’Arcy said: "I am thrilled with Edinburgh Knight’s great run under top weight. Pat Smullen is convinced over-watered ground did not help."
The myth that a sponsored column – be it with the Racing Post or Betfair – was ever anything more than an attempt at positive PR for P F Nicholls should be over.
When you decide to publish such information in this style in your name, you can’t tell the truth some of the time.
An end to these ridiculous columns would be most welcome. They serve absolutely no purpose.
Chapman’s commentary efforts are best reserved for the Stateside programme to brighten up the evening if/when they have a technical fault. And I say that in the best meaning way possible.
He steps down at the height of his powers. An absolute legend.
I’m saddened that Richard won’t fulfil the prediction you made after Entifaadha won the Acomb of sweeping the classics in 2012.
Then again, I see the same animal is entered for the Meydan Classic on Thursday, so maybe "classic" glory awaits him at least one more time before retirement.
Dysphonia didn’t fly the flag too well at Meydan the other day, she has formlines with Atlantic Jewel and Mosheen. I hope it’s not a portent of things to come – some people won’t be happy bunnies.
Lonhro’s yet to sire a winner of a Group race beyond 1600 metres – 14 individual Group winners.
Remains to be seen as to what Dysphonia will achieve with Godolphin.
…6f on a stiff track – I don’t think it really compares. Perhaps you could tell us the first 200 metres of Tangerine Trees Prix de l’Abbaye win, [55.53 at the finish] for a better idea.
I’m dubious over the exact distances of both the Prix de l’Abbaye and Prix de la Foret as it is. But, for factual purposes, the Prix de l’Abbaye’s first "400m" took 22.35.
For comparison, 3 International Group 1 class sprints from 2011.
Hong Kong Sprint – 1200m – first 400m in 23.61. Take off a "standard" 10.5 and the first 200m is approximately 13.11
Al Quoz Sprint – 1000m – first 200m in 14.11
Dubai Golden Shaheen – 1200m – first 200m in 13.65
Nick Mordin is on record with a standing start being worth 1.5 seconds. I’m not saying Black Caviar’s first 200m was record breaking with a standing start, but it is easily explained.
It’s not suprising that she managed 9.98??? Name any horse anywhere that has…
It seems that Racing Victoria’s chief handicapper needs this question answered as well.
Definitely Ready, Caulfield, 20th March 2010. 9.96.
http://www.racingnetwork.com.au/betfair … fault.aspx
He also had a 9.52 on the Sandown Hillside track but that’s not really relevant.
….You omit to mention that the first 200 metres [that’s metres not furlongs – or have you momentarily forgotten which country you are supposed to be in..?] was run in a rather modest 13.54 – almost 14 seconds, the second 200 in a better 10.21. It’s not really surprising that she managed a 9.98 for the 3rd period, fading to an 11.40 in the last 200.
The same’s true of the British Champions Day Sprint – 14.23 was the quickest opening furlong. America might disregard "true" opening splits via run-ups; Australia doesn’t.
Perhaps one of these recent Euro million mega-richers, would like to do something more useful and put up £5 million to the winner, £3 million to the second for the upcoming Lockinge at Newbury in May. A race confirmed for Frankel and I see no reason, with that incentive, that she couldn’t be rerouted prior to Ascot.
I don’t put the same emphasis on a potential clash as many others do, but this is certainly the race Black Caviar’s connections can point to meet Frankel if they desire. Elvstroem ran in the Lockinge after Dubai AND Hong Kong, so it’s even possible for Black Caviar to take in Dubai as planned.
Subtract the January and December weather boosted figures, take into account the free racing month and attendances rose by 0.66%.
Cynical outlook aside, I’m pleased to read this is the third year in a row attendances are up. In other words, Rod Street, back in your box, sir.
Haven’t seen the ride today and the ban was for hitting the horse in the wrong place so this doesn’t apply, but the point still exists.
First post wasn’t clear in haste. 2 days for hitting the horse in the wrong place, 5 days for frequency, plus loss of prize money for the two offences combined.
Could have been cautioned under the old rules, but it really isn’t a new rules issue. For once.
The question has to be asked as a wider point.
The already demonstrable behavioural change must continue, with the penalties introduced on 10th October being reinstated at the end of the Jumps season (or, as the BHA reserves the right, at any other point) should trends and attitudes reverse.
When will the High Holborn lunatics use their trigger as of the 10th November? If the Grand National is remotely close, chalk up bans in double figures for 2 or more jockeys.
Haven’t seen the ride today and the ban was for hitting the horse in the wrong place so this doesn’t apply, but the point still exists.
First post wasn’t clear in haste. 2 days for hitting the horse in the wrong place, 5 days for frequency, plus loss of prize money for the two offences combined.
Could have been cautioned under the old rules, but it really isn’t a new rules issue. For once.
The question has to be asked as a wider point.
The already demonstrable behavioural change must continue, with the penalties introduced on 10th October being reinstated at the end of the Jumps season (or, as the BHA reserves the right, at any other point) should trends and attitudes reverse.
When will the High Holborn lunatics use their trigger as of the 10th November? If the Grand National is remotely close, chalk up bans in double figures for 2 or more jockeys.
Personally to me "racing" is anyone working in the racing industry be it jockeys, trainers, breeders, owner, betting shop staff, bookmakers other staff – CS staff, odds-compilers, traders, on-course bookmakers, those who run the catering vans, safety stewards etc.
There is no "personally" option. I have to remind you of the rules.
http://www.thehorsemensgroup.com/
http://www.britishracecourses.org/
They are called stakeholders – as defined by Roy, Dixon and Barlow. The stakeholders, according to the stakeholders, are racing.
You might qualify as a stakeholder in the P2P field.
I, however, am definitely not part of racing.
http://www.hkjc.com/english/racing/hors … rseno=M228
http://www.hkjc.com/english/pp_formsheet/fse_M228.pdf
The RP database is always hopelessly out of date for HK racing, as they’ve yet to re-name him, but those above links confirm he has run. 5 starts, yet to win in Hong Kong.
This is ludicrous stuff,no wonder people don’t have faith in the system! 
