Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Just out of interest I was looking up what Timeform Racehorses of 1975 had to say about Wollow, since Henry Cecil had been making comparisons between him and Frankel. Timeform did not seem particularly impressed:
“Admittedly his rating of 127 entitles him to be regarded as the best two-year-old to have raced in this country in 1975, but it is not a rating of classic quality”
“But we must say from every point of view – appearance, form, pace – we prefer the French champion Manado.”
“Should Wollow beat Manado and win the 2000 Guineas, the Derby, barring accidents will be as good as over. For Wollow will be much more of an effective force over a mile and a half.”
For those who don’t know, Manado ran eight times as a three-year-old without winning. Wollow won the Greenham, the 2000 Guineas (beating Manado into ninth), the Sussex, the International (now Juddmonte), the Eclipse (on the disqualification of Trepan, but after having lost four or five lengths at the start), but finished only fifth in the Derby.
A further point of interest is that Timeform ranked Manado’s two-year-old form three pounds superior to Wollow’s, but the first five home in the Grand Criterium, Manado’s best race, could muster only one win between them as three-year-olds.
Experts are not always right, are they?
Because listening to trainer quotes gets you everywhere in horse racing coggy…
Some trainers say things to please their owners, to make themselves look good in the media, to mask a horse’s true ability for handicap reasons, to have a dig at another trainer, etc. Some are very careful but speak only what they know to be true. Some trainers have had over forty years of watching 50 to 100 two-year-olds every year develop from yearling to mature horse. You cannot lump trainers together and say either: “Don’t believe a word they say” or “Trust them implicitly”. You have to be selective about which ones you trust and which ones you don’t.
One thing that should concern anyone thinking of backing Frankel for next yrs guineas is the amount of top class 2yrs that Cecil has trained over the yrs and to my mind only Reference Point and Bosra Sham where the only 2 that seemed to train on. We’ve seen it before with horses like Arazi,Celtic Swing even Johannesburg all expectational 2yr olds who in all there races put up outstanding performances Yet 7 months down the line they didn’t make as much improvement so there dominance was no longer there.
I’m not sure that it’s a good idea to use Arazi and Celtic Swing as examples of horses who did not make normal improvement from two to three.
Arazi had operations on both of his knees at the end of his two-year-old career to remove bone chips. The operations themselves may have caused lasting difficulties, and you have to ask yourself if a horse who is having bits breaking off his knee bones is ever going to be a long term racing propostion in terms of soundness.
Cetlic Swing made what seems normal enough progress between two and three. He beat Bahri in the Greenham, and Bahri went on that season to win two Group Ones, finish second in another two Group Ones, and third in another two. Celtic Swing then lost the 2000 Gns by a head to Pennekamp. Pennekamp was easily the best French 2yo of his year winning both the Salamadre and the Dewhurst and went unbeaten throughout his career until he was injured in the Derby and never ran again. Celtic Swing then won the French Derby with three of the next four home each winning two Group One races within the same season. That was a class field. Celtic Swing then ran in the Irish Derby finishing behind several horses he had easily beaten earlier in the season. The injury he suffered that day ended his career. If I had owned him, I would have called that a successful progression from two to three.
Timeform have Dream Ahead rated BETTER than Frankel ahead of Saturday’s Dewhurst.
I have to say, the more I watch their respective last performances, the more that demolition of Strong Suit impresses.
Can’t wait for what is surely the most eagerly awaited two year old race in a generation.
I’m with Timeform in the Dream Ahead corner. How about you?
Did anyone ever establish from people in the know at Timeform how they rated Dream Ahead’s Middle Park form with FOGHORN LEGHORN within one-and-a-half lengths of Strong Suit, Approve and Irish Field? That looks as though all three did not run within 20 pounds of their best rating, never mind the horses that finished behind the fairly ordinary nursery winner. What did they base their rating on? – Foghorn Leghorn improving by 20 pounds between his eighth and ninth races of the year?
An admirable win for Twice Over. But how should the admiration be apportioned? How much to Henry Cecil for having the horse better than ever after a couple of very tough defeats. How much to Tom Queally for easily the best tactical ride from any of the jockeys in the race, and for learning from his mistake in the Prince of Wales earlier in the year. (We all make mistakes, it is what we learn from them that matters most). How much to the horse himself for making the absolute most of his ability by being tough, honest and versatile?
Maybe I should have looked at this more closely long before the Dewhurst was run. There seems to be a view that Frankel’s win should not be rated too highly because Dream Ahead did not run to his best form. If that is the case, why did the Official Handicapper, Timeform, Racing Post and others not take the same view about Dream Ahead’s win in the Middle Park? He beat Strong Suit and Approve by nine lengths, but they finished only one-and-a-half lengths in front of Foghorn Leghorn whose best form was to win a Nursery off a mark of 85, and then get beaten 9 lengths off a mark of 90. It seems obvious that neither Strong Suit nor Approve ran anywhere near their best, but Dream Ahead’s rating has been calculated as if they did. Maybe a more reliable form line is with two French races: Dream Ahead beating beating Tin Horse by one-and-a-half lengths in the Prix Morny, and Wootton Bassett beating Tin Horse by two-and-a-half lengths in the Prix Jean-Luc Lagardere. That would mean Dream Ahead’s official rating would be about 117 rather than 128, assuming he and Tin Horse progressed at the same rate in the six weeks between the two races. Wherever Dream Ahead’s true rating is I fancy it is closer to the 117 (his rating after the Prix Morny) than the 128.
It looks as though several ratings experts let themselves get carried away by one run where the other good horses did not run to their previous form. It is nice to know that experts sometimes act like novices. It teaches us all to trust our own opinions.
Got a bump from both sides at the start. That stopped him settling and he ran too freely. A couple of commentators said he ran like he was not comfortable on the loose ground. But still made ground from the back very easily, pushed out hands and heels to win by over two lengths. In a faster time than the older horses in the first race, carrying the same weight. Regardless of the performances of Dream Ahead or Saamid, the other horses (Glor Na Mara and Waiters Dream especially) are good enough yardsticks to say that Frankel’s performace was excellent.
Only six left in it now – Frankel, Dream Ahead, Saamid, Glor Na Mara, Roderic O’Connor & Waiter’s Dream.
Might be interesting tactically, but Frankel looks the sort to be able to cope with any tactics. At some stage of the race Queally will say: "Off you go", give him a nudge and it will all be over.
He’s a horse not a motorcycle. Maybe you’re right and Queally would end this by pressing the nitro button located in Frankel’s behind and lead the fav into fulfilling everyone’s expectations.
But I very much doubt it.
This one is a tough race where everything can happen, so come up with some logical reasons as of why Frankel is more likely to win than Dream Ahead or Saamid.
I like your bit about the motor bike and the nitro button – very unhorsey.
To make logical deductions one needs facts. No-one has enough facts to make logical deductions about Frankel beating Dream Ahead and the others on Saturday. One would need accurate answers to thousands of questions, like: what is the ratio of Strong Suit’s performance in the Middle Park against that in the Coventry and the Phoenix; the same for Approve against his Champagne run; how much performance progress have all the contestants made since their last run; will they all be as mentally and physically sound as in their best run to date; etc, etc.
If logic played a significant role in deciding the outcome of horse races, then betting would be impossible. All the professors of Aristotudian logic and multiple system syllogisms would be taking the bookies to the cleaners in every race. If horse racing is akin to any scientific discipline it is more likely to be Chaos Theory than Logic, and there are just too many variables to populate and compute to make choices based on that.
Racing isn’t all about dry as dust logic. There has to be excitement, anticipation, fun and trepidation as well. You’re not an actuary by any chance, are you?
Why Frankel? I want him to win because he is one of the most exciting racehorses I’ve seen since 1962. I think he has the ability to win easily. I think he has exceptional acceleration. He runs for fun. Henry Cecil says that he is a very good two year old. Sorry that they are all subjective comments and lack any logic.
Only six left in it now – Frankel, Dream Ahead, Saamid, Glor Na Mara, Roderic O’Connor & Waiter’s Dream.
Might be interesting tactically, but Frankel looks the sort to be able to cope with any tactics. At some stage of the race Queally will say: "Off you go", give him a nudge and it will all be over.
Can I temporarily change the thread title to: “What DO you think”
We all have a brain that play tricks on us from time to time. It sorts things out for us, without our knowing, and that includes producing our opinions for us. Our eyes and ears take in information, and then our brain meshes it with all our accumumulated experience and “Bingo!” – we have an opinion.
My opinion is that Frankel will turn out to be one of the best racehorses of the past fifty years, if he stays healthy.
He looks to have the ability to run fast enough, and in his last two races I have seen that he “loves” to run fast. In the last three furlongs of his last two races his demeanour shouts: “Look at me. Look how fast I can run. Isn’t running fast really brilliant”. I just hope he can hang on to that exhilaration for as long as possible.
I want Frankel to be a champion for his own sake, and because I am a great admirer of Henry Cecil. He and F T Winter have been my two heroes, for all their diverse characteristics, since I became interested in racing and breeding in the early 1960s.
There is not much objective evidence that Frankel will turn out to be a champion and we can talk about that eveidence until the cows come home and not reach any agreement. But if we were all objective then: trainers would be chief executives of small/medium sized busnesses earning £100,000 a year instead suffering the angst of injured horses and demanding owners; stable staff would be selling mobile phones or food or beauty products instead of mucking out at 5:30 in the morning; and owners would be investing their money at a 5% profit instead of at an 80% loss.
I love that when I am betting I can employ rational analysis to aid the enjoyment of horse racing. But I am not going to be betting on Frankel. And really, the best bits of racing are the thrill, the excitement, the completely irrational, the wholly emotional thoughts like: “I want Frankel to be a champion”.
Frankel was wildly impressive yesterday, but it wasn’t a strong race by any stretch of the imagination and there has to be a doubt that he’ll train on. Rainbow View was similarly dominant as a juvenile and ultimately proved disappointing; it would be a shame to see this chap go the same way.
As 2yo, Rainbow View won a Group 2 by 2L from a filly that won one race in her next sixteen, albeit a Listed race. She won a Group 1 race by 2L (and a bit) from a filly that went on to win a Group 3 and a Listed race from her seven subsequent starts. Pretty decent form, but no “Wow” factor. Rainbow View ran in eight Group/Grade One races in the next year- she won one and was beaten 1L by Goldikova and 2L by Midday, etc. She has now won over One Million Dollars at today’s exchange rate. Not exactly disappointing I would have thought.
Now, I’ve read a little about properly reading form to get a selection, and heard it’s the only real way to pick some good winners.
I’ve probably posted this in the wrong section but if any of the users who do ‘read form’ could give me a few pointers, or any help to start me off in trying to read form I would very much appreciate it.
Particularly any online help would be good, so I can start reading up straight away.
Thanks in advance.
What is form and how does one “read” it?
You say you have done a little reading, so you will know that there is a little bit of calculation and a lot of subjective adjustment.
You will know that the calculations involve (for each horse and race you consider):
For the horse: age, gender, weight, draw, going preferences, distance preferences, pace preferences, gaps between races, time of the year,etc, etc.
For the race: distance, going, course configuration (right/left, tight/galloping, undulating/flat, etc.) pace of the race, draw bias, etc, etc.
Add the subjective adjustment about the effects of: first run of the season?, using the race as a prep for something else, getting a good handicap mark, only running at that track because the owner lives nearby, etc, etc.
Put them all into your own computer (brain) and calculate the relative merits of the horses in the race you are considering. Back the highest rated – for the best chance to win today. Back the best value (odds available in relation to your rating) – for longer term betting profit.
Bit of a doddle, isn’t it !!!
Except that many of the things that the calculations are based on change over time, eg draw bias, going descriptions, etc. Never mind all the subjective things that change.
Even if you could work it all out, you would still be surprised by the many “forces of nature” in the game, such as Sir Mark Prescott sending a seemingly untalented horse to Hamilton, to start at unbackabley short odds giving no value at all and beating your highest rated by several lengths.
The alternative to reading and understanding form is to immerse yourself as best you can in in the game as a whole. Read the Racing Post online or on paper, go to the races and look at the horses, watch races. We all have our own way of trying to win against the odds, mine is to find out what trainers actually do and see the patterns that emerge and use them. Over the years that has included Michael Roberts riding for Richard Hannon on once-raced, and unplaced, two year olds: John Dunlop three-year-olds running in twelve furlong handicaps after three OK runs at seven to ten furlongs. All this changes every year. If you keep in touch every day you have a chance of spotting the patterns other people have yet to see.
Sorry about the long response. I just got carried away a bit.
Best of luck.
Re: Twice Over
When I compiled the list I was not aware of your method of inluding only races that the subject won. Even though all the Twice Over races were Group 1 (Champion Stakes, Breeders Cup Classic, Dubai World Cup, Prince of Wales Stakes), he only won the first of those.
I would be interested to know what you meant by “At another request …”. If it was to back up the notion that Sea The Stars was a great champion, I am not sure that it adds anything. By coincidence, before this year’s Eclipse Stakes I totted up the number of of Group 1 winners Twice Over had beaten since his win in last year’s Champion Stakes, to counter an argument that he was ordinary. It turned out that he had beaten 19 Group 1 winners since last October, and in his two subsequent races he has added another four. I can’t quite see Twice Over in the same class as Sea The Stars. If it seems that form lines are sometimes contradictatory, then statistics are even more puzzling.
I agree with you about Paddy O’Prado and Wigmore Hall in the Secretariat. Wigmore Hall looked to be a fast improving horse in his last race. He could improve again to give PO’P a tough race.
Rainbow View looks to be a class above the others in the Beverly D, if she has finally acclimatized back to USA conditions after three years in The UK.
Gio Ponti has the Arlington Million at his mercy if he is on good form. Tazeez will be the best of the Europeans, beaten just over a length by Byword and Twice Over in a Group 1 at Royal Ascot, with those two going on to be second and third in the International at York. That’s top class form at 10 furlongs. Tazeez’s most recent run can be ignored, it was his first at 12 furlongs and he didn’t stay the trip.
Form, facts and relevance. It was heavy in the Irish Oaks when Sariska easily beat Midday. It will not be heavy at York today, so ignore that result. It was good at Epsom over 12 furlongs when Sariska beat Midday by a head at level weights. It was good-to-firm at York over 10 furlongs when Sariska beat Midday one-and-three-quarter lengths when receiving five pounds. On today’s ground, over today’s trip, the form says there will be hardly anything between them.
There is no direct line of form between this years Oaks fillies and last years. Snow Fairy has done this year what Sariska did last year, but the fillies she beat in the Epsom Oaks have not gone on to frank the form. She might be as good as Sariska, but it doesn’t look so yet. Her price is too short on what we know at present.
Midday and Sariska should be within a head of each other today. I would take the one at the longer price.
For my first post on the forum I was going to try to live up to my name by posting the following on the day of the race, but I registered too late and my authorisation to post got lost. Now, several weeks later it is no longer of “Marginal” Value but no value at all. But now that I am allowed to post here I cannot let a good statistic go to waste: – In his four races before the Eclipse, Twice Over finished in front of nineteen individual Group One winners. I guess some of those were out of form or running over the wrong distance, but if so why were they running in such big races as the Breeders Cup Classic and the Dubai World Cup? But beating an average of nearly five Group One winners per race, it could mean that although some have called the Eclipse an egg and spoon race perhaps Twice Over is not an unworthy winner.
