Forum Replies Created
- Posts
I haven’t so far done any figures for the Oaks but I’m not sure I’ll need to.
The best trial for the race is always the 1000 Guineas, won this year by a filly who, on breeding, should really only be starting to run at 10f.
Her dosage profile ( DP = 4-3-18-7-2 (34) DI = 0.89 CD = 0.00) screams 12f+ and anything achieved until now is just a preamble to better things.
I think she is a good thing. She’d be odds-on in my book.
I haven’t been keeping up with this thread (or indeed this forum) for some time so apologies if I’m repeating anything.
If there’s one ‘aspect’ of form study I can’t quite get my head around it’s the ‘stats’ approach. Most of the time they are (un)fortunate coincidences. Often you’ll hear the ‘stats’ people say something like “8 of the last 10 winners have…”, etc.
So what? It means two of them (one in five) haven’t. And what kind of solid basis is 10 years?
Here are some stats that matter, in my opinion.
The Derby is nearly always won by the best horse at the trip and on the going on the day.
Some horses that ultimately prove better at shorter can still win the Derby if their superiority is sufficient to offset a slight inconvenience at the trip.
I reckon those are the only two stats that matter.
As I said earlier, I’ve got Hans Holbein ew at 66/1. I laid off the win portion at 11/1. If I can lay off the place portion at about evens I’ll do that. I’m happy with that bet but it doesn’t mean HH will win. What he will do is stay. The question for me is how many better horses will be in the race and will stay?
Golden Horn? Better, yes. Stay, might but can’t see it myself. Might just be superior enough to beat HH but I’m doubtful.
Zawraq? Ditto.
Giovanni Canaletto? Not so far and not so sure but I took longer odds a couple of weeks back. If Moore opts for him his price will collapse and I can lay him off.
Jack Hobbs? Almost certainly and certainly. I was very taken by the video footage of his racecourse gallop. He looked to have grown up mentally for his race at York. Right now he strikes me as the most likely winner.
Elm Park? Doubtful and doubtful.
I see no reason why Storm The Stars or Best Of Times should reverse Chester form with HH.
The dark hose is Epicuris, who is probably overpriced at the moment. I suspect the French form is quite good but stamina evidence is inconclusive. However, he is trained by a genius who might well have more insight into his form and stamina and it’s hard to imagine her bypassing Chantilly for this without solid reason. I might take some of the 25/1 but that’s down to faith in the trainer rather than in the horse.
At this point, I do think Jack Hobbs – declared doubtful after the Dante so off the radar since then – is the most likely winner but it is as poor a renewal as I can remember.
I’ve decided to allay my fears by backing Giovanni Canaletto for the Derby. Took 12/1 this evening.
Doesn’t look as strong a stamina prospect as far as the Leger is concerned [as Hans Holbein] but the Derby should be just about okay for it.
Giovanni Canaletto is the one I fear the most – in case it turns out he’s the O’Brien No 1.
I thought I saw 10/1 this morning and might go in at that price if it’s still available before he runs at the weekend.
I’ve also taken 16/1 Hans Holbein for the St Leger. I was tempted to wait until nearer the Derby but if anything happens to GC it’s hard to imagine a better St Leger prospect at this stage.
RR, that’s the beauty of forums, for me. I’d much rather read strong opinions well argued, than fence-sitting stuff. We all set ourselves up for a fall, but at least if you land on what at the time was a viable theory, it doesn’t hurt quite so much
Indeed, that is the beauty of forums.
The ugly side of them is when strong opinions are belittled because, regardless of how well-founded they are in research and empirical evidence, they differ from those with the loudest mouths.
Now that I’ve had a chance to analyse the times of the day, the Dante is working out better than my immediate instinct had it. With Elm Park probably needing the race and perhaps already over-rated, Jack Hobbs having taken a handicap off 85 last time, and everything else running dreadfully, I wasn’t sure the race took much winning. I also have stamina doubts about Elm Park. Nevertheless a rating of 119p for the winner Golden Horn would be entirely acceptable as a Derby trial. I’m firmly in the ‘won’t stay’ camp, though, and Tom Segal compares him with Carlton House who looked very strong at the end of the Dante but weak in the last half-furlong at Espom.
Hans Holbein … then got lucky to win at Chester.
In what way would you say he got lucky, Zarkava?
It’s silly season isn’t it? “it’s a rubbish year” “they’re all duffers” “they’re slow” – We have a lovely, unbeaten colt as fav and some fast improving contenders. How about we give them a chance?
I have to admit I don’t like it when people jump to similar conclusions but I also don’t like it when people go OTT with praise for moderateness. As a ratings compiler, I like to think my opinion is measured according to the evidence. Admittedly it all boils down to my interpretation of the evidence so ultimately it can be argued that it’s just my opinion.
I read this afternoon that the BHA handicapper charged with the Guineas assessment rates the race above average but then he offers his evidence which all points to most recent renewals being nowhere near as good as I have them so it’s important to contextualise these assessments.
In the same way, the figures presented on The Morning Line by Jamie Lynch of Timeform for Golden Horn’s Dante suggested that most Derbies in the last 10 years were some way short of the G1 norm of 126. So it’s the likes of Timeform that are saying they’re all duff etc after giving them the chance.
The Derby is a race I look forward to every year because I want to see a genuine superstar emerge. At the moment, I’m not really seeing one anywhere. If it turns out it’s Golden Horn, that will be brilliant.
Are people honestly talking this much about Hans Holbein’s chances? Jesus wept…
I haven’t been following the full thread so am not sure how many people beyond me are talking about Hans Holbein but if offering an opinion results in this kind of reply I won’t be hanging around for the end.
For the record, I’m talking up his chances in the absences of what I consider to be proper Derby horses. We’ve just had one of the poorest Guineas for some years and the Derby is shaping up as a lot worse so it is within that context and the price taken (66/1) that HH can be fancied.
I also said:
All in all it’s shaping up as the worst Derby in modern times so I wonder if there’s a Shaamit lurking and smirking, ready to win on its seasonal debut.
I agree with a lot of that, Steve, but there are a number of points worth making.
I understand anyone’s lack of enthusiasm about Hans Holbein but would you be dismissing him so readily if he was still 66/1 after what he did at Chester? The price is part of the reason for my enthusiasm. I think his soft ground form is purely coincidental. Being a Montjeu/Shirley Heights there’s no reason for him to require soft although I wouldn’t want it too firm.
I agree the Chester race may have fallen apart but I expected it to and I expected him to take advantage of it, which he did. My rating for him for the race is only 110+ but I think there’s more to be read into him given O’Brien’s record in it and the subsequent form of his winners. He only sends G1 horses for it. They might not be Epsom G1s but they win G1s.
The point about taking that win away is irrelevant. Take Jack Hobbs’s Sandown win away and he’d have been 50/1 for the Dante. You can’t take it away. It’s there in the form book.
As for Golden Horn, John Gosden and Rab Havlin have now both stated publicly that Golden Horn wasn’t even on the Derby radar until last Friday, three weeks before the race. They thought he had a future, with the French Derby as the right target for it but both men have cited a piece of work done last Friday as making them sit up and take notice. And as for his stamina, the furlong and a half difference is huge when you’re running out of energy. Make no mistake, Coolmore will ensure the guts are run out of any non-stayers. Golden Horn might be good enough to recoup the supplement by being placed but I still wouldn’t be surprised if they opted for France nearer the time.
You might be right in saying it’s not just Timeform’s big rating that is behind his position and price in the market but it’s a major player in it. The visual impression in the Dante, the fact that the highly-rated Elm Park and the previously impressive Jack Hobbs will be factors, but they’re factored into Timeform’s rating. I think wrongly.
I think Simon Holt is right about Elm Park being over-rated and Andrew Balding has said he wasn’t fully fit the other day. Jack Hobbs remained an unknown quantity in this company and the others ran so badly that they’ve been taken out of the Derby altogether. So what has Golden Horn really done that makes him worthy of such a short price for the biggest race in the world for 3yos?
Like I say, on the other hand it looks like a really duff crop of 3yos and it may be that he ends up the best of them, which might also account in part for his price, but if there is a couple of lengths either way between him and Hans Holbein one and a half out at Epsom I know which one I’d rather be with.
Looking ahead to Epsom now that the trials are all but over, I can’t help but feel more and more pleased about my 66/1 Hans Holbein. I’ll get a closer look at the Dante form during the week but it looks like Timeform’s huge 124p for Golden Horn is based on their high rating for Elm Park whose ability was downplayed quite a bit by Simon Holt in the Weekender. With contenders dropping out like bunnies on cheap batteries in a Duracell advert, Hans Holbein looks sure to make the frame and if the stable decide to make it a proper stamina test he might end up out on his own, with the rest out on their feet, at the end.
Before I backed Hans Holbein I’d looked among those around the same price for Jack Hobbs. When I didn’t see him I presumed he wasn’t entered. Then I noticed him sitting at 8/1. After winning a handicap off 85?? OK he won incredibly impressively but all the same… I suspect that Golden Horn is about on a par with Hans Holbein and with doubts about stamina I’m not too concerned that he’s being supplemented and the current best price of 2/1 (‘LMFAO’, I understand, is the expression we’re looking for) is based on Timeform’s rating and nothing else.
Next in the betting is Zawraq (6/1) who is as likely to stay as Gleneagles or Golden Horn and who beat horses rated 95 and 94 in the Guineas Trial. Then Elm Park and Jack Hobbs at around 8/1 and the latter will probably miss the race. Then Hans Holbein (14/1) who is a guaranteed stayer and who has won one of the premier trials. And that’s about it.
All in all it’s shaping up as the worst Derby in modern times so I wonder if there’s a Shaamit lurking and smirking, ready to win on its seasonal debut.
Any time analysts among you?
I have Muharaar (Estidhkaar) running 18lbs faster than Ayaar who impressed in the Spring Cup. The other 3yo times were fast on the day so it may be that we have a pretty decent classic crop coming through this season.
Actually, the Greenham time is so fast it is worrying me. It might take the principals some time to get over that race!
Would I back Estidhkaar now at 8/1?
Probably not. I’d want to see what turns up on the day and have another deep look at the form.
However, as I’ve said, I took the 25/1 last summer because the time he’d put up was on a par with previous Guineas winners at a similar stage and I took the 25/1 again before Saturday’s race in the expectation that he would win and more than halve in price. He’s more than halved in price despite not winning so I’m happy enough with my position. I can now think about laying off all or part of the bets to ensure a very tidy profit regardless.
How’s that for value?
Win or lose, I think Estidhkaar is too short at 8/1.
What should be shorter than it?
By the way, I tried to watch the C4 programme at on-demand. What a disaster area that is!
First I had to register just to view then it took an age to load, then I had to suffer adverts that I could not skip, then when I tried to move the programme on a bit it just kept taking me to adverts that were due to last anything up to five minutes.
I fired an email off to C4 but don’t imagine I’ll get much satisfaction.
Their reply:
Tough titty – you need to watch the adverts.
