Forum Replies Created
- Posts
"The wonders of the web has only touched your writing when the sun had set, the ink was dry, and we were all addicts.
Why exactly was that ?" – Gamble’s question.
I consider myself to be Gamble’s unofficial translator and have studied his works extensively.
<br>"Les prodiges de la toile ont touché seulement votre écriture quand le soleil avait réglé, l’encre était sèche, et nous étions tous intoxiqués.
Exactement était pourquoi cela?"
Any clearer now? No, me neither…maybe it makes more sense in Spanish…
<br>
<br>Yep, the Best Mate/Arkle comparisons are a bit of a waste of time. Timeform ratings of the 60’s may now not be relevant in the present. Racetimes may too not be relevant given that Arkle tended to canter to the line.
As Irish Stamp said, these are two different horses in size and shape. I wish the Racing Post hadn’t made an ordered 100 top horses list. It would have been much better to just make a list of 100 top horses in history in no specific order. That way we would have had a series of articles on really good horses and some great one’s and it could have been a good read.
Of course Best Mate is a very good horse. It’s pretty easy to analyse his three Gold Cup wins and find problems with the form. I’ve looked at them and questioned them and I think it is right to because, as a punter, I want to find a time to oppose him.
If people want to compare horses, compare Best Mate with the top horses of the 80’s and 90’s. I would think the ratings are more reliable and relevant to the present.
I read Alan Potts’ book The Inside Track and he said the horse was not one to bet on after one of his bets beat Challenger De Luc into second in a tight finish. For the punter, this was good advice.
These are the horses I really like though because they have these different instincts. Must have been exciting and infuriating for the people involved closely with him. I bet he brought them some enjoyment! <br>
<br>It wasn’t just a fast diminishing head against Jardines Lookout. It’s the fact that Persian Punch regained the lead after being headed…something he’s done in the past. It was a brilliant finish…really exciting.
Anyone whose ever read my words in a debate knows how much I take form seriously in the top races. I don’t regard Persian Punch as a great in the sense that he is pushing 140 in the ratings and beats everything in his way. He doesn’t do that…he isn’t the classiest stayer there’s ever been.
But he’s so tough…a really hard horse to beat in a finish. Personally, I find it special to be able to watch any horse at any level pushing and fighting to keep its head in front of its rivals. They run for our benefit after at all. And for once, I don’t actually believe the media have gone completely mad when talking about a horse. It isn’t often that I hear Persian Punch described as a wonder horse, a great, a best ever etc… that kind of comment is saved for horses like Hawk Wing.
Persian Punch deserves to be commended for entertaining so many people so often. Racing is there for more than just form study.
<br>The ground is a hugely important factor in the race. Nimello had shown that he didn’t like running on fast ground and that it may even cause him physical (as well as mental) harm.
If Nimello had such a good chance why did the bookies make the horse a 12/1 chance?
Nimello has declined significantly and the form of his two wins at Wolverhampton wasn’t good enough for him to win the claimer at Salisbury.
I will say what I’ve said already – the most suspicious thing about this whole race is that the horse was run on ground that he clearly didn’t like. That is the part that concerns me most. I do not understand it. On two of his last three starts on fast ground, Nimello has been reported lame. This isn’t just a case of a horse not liking the ground, it’s a case of a horse finding it physically painful to run on a type of ground.
Legal Set – weird tactics. It certainly looks dodgy. Do Betfair know who is laying the horses? Is it possible for them to know for sure?
<br>There’s an awful lot of understandable specualtion here. Nimello’s price drifted dramatically on the exchanges.
I’m not convinced though that this was a plot to make money. What surprises me is that connections persist in running the horse on ground that the horse doesn’t like. It does put the horse at risk unneccessarily.
I persist in my view that the horse wasn’t going to win owing to the ground. You could have offered me 500/1 and I wouldn’t have placed a win or each-way bet on him. The last two races he’d won before the Salisbury claimer were on the sand at Wolves. Very different to fast ground on turf.
The Royal Insult case is sad. Whether or not any wrongdoing has taken place is unclear. Royal Insult had his career ended in the worst way possible.
Could anyone tell me how often horses drift massively in price on the exchanges?
<br>
Pre-Salisbury, Nimello’s overall fast ground (gf/frm) record was:
  150049904
Again pre-Salisbury, Nimello had finished 4th (btn 8.25l’s) at Hamilton on g/f grnd and 11th at Musselburgh (beaten 80+l’s). He was rated 74 on the day of the Salisbury race. There were 5 other horses rated 70 or higher.
Given that he was very likely to under perform on the g/f ground, it’s was understandable that people laid the horse to finish out of the top three.
Incidently, Mamore Gap was the only horse rated 70 or higher that made the top three. These higher-rated horses running in claimers so often have problems (physically or mentally in Naviasky’s case). There must be a few people who like to lay them.
One question I raise though is why Nimello’s connections ran the horse on ground he doesn’t like. He’d reportedly been hurt at Musselburgh so what does the trainer do? Run him on fast ground next time at Hamilton and, after two sand wins, run the horse on fast ground at Salisbury.
I question the thinking of anyone who backed Nimello at Salisbury (win and/or place) and the thinking of the trainer/owners for running the horse in that race.
Hi PR – The team involved with Where Or When displayed lots of confidence. It almost inspired me to select him as the winner! I didn’t though (skipped the race entirely) because of one thing in particular: Juding on last year’s form, Where Or When isn’t going to be at his best until later this season (perhaps late August onwards). Even if he was 100% physically fit (which he wasn’t, although obviously he can’t have been far short because he’d not race otherwise) the horse certainly wasn’t mentally right. Where Or When could win next time out but I really don’t think he’ll be an all round 100% until later this season. Hawk Win unquestionably had a difficult season in 2002. Where Or When didn’t have it easy though did he? The Derby was a very hard race for him as well as Hawk Wing (despite the difference in finishing positions). Seperating them though is simple, Where Or When had a break before a listed win at Goodwood.
Olden Times and the other horses behind him were all below form. It’s unlikely any of them would be good enough to reverse form with Hawk Wing over one-mile. I hold out hope for Where Or When reversing form although I’m not convinced it’ll be in the Queen Anne at Ascot. In fact, if I trained him, the horse would probably not run at Ascot.
It’s not a myth PR, I use a viable line of form (Aramram) to come to the conclusion. But the fact is, I do not know for sure either way. I don’t know that Hawk Wing wouldn’t have romped in if drawn next to Rock Of Gibraltar. I do know that Rock Of Gibraltar would keep battling if Hawk Wing moved up next to him – watching and listening to the commentry of those two in duel would be thrilling. Unfortunately, that’s not gonna happen.
Yes, I’d rate Hawk Wing in the mid 130’s (and that is exceptional) but I would not trust the rating. It’s weird that Dominic Gardner-Hill (the Official Handicapper who rated Hawk Wing) considered that the 11-lengths Hawk Wing won by shouldn’t be considered a "full" 11-lengths. He didn’t considered the winning distance as being worth 18lbs rather than about 20lbs. Oddly, he regards the distance between first and second as being worth 8-9 lengths.
Aidan, I don’t know if Hawk Wing was 100% fit. I apologise – compared to Where Or When though (from my own judgement) he was a fitter horse. Hawk Wing’s last furlong time was quite slow – maybe that was marginally down to fitness. I do think it was more to do with him using most of his energy in the middle of the race and tiring late on.
<br>MH – ‘Would it cross you mind Rob that WOW ran the last furlong so slow because of the efforts put in the previous 7f. Every other horse must have ran well below form for HW to be just "above-average". I suppose its possible, but unlikely. My idea was that they simply couldnt go his pace.’
Hawk Wing didn’t go at a very fast pace. It was when he quickened that the others were outpaced (as happens in so many races when one front-runner gets its own way). Where Or When’s last furlong time happened because he was lacking fitness and drifted behind a fully fit horse. PR: I don’t know the exact figures of how far all the others ran below form but it was a long way. I’ll give you my reasons why for Where Or When:
He probably won’t be at his best until mid-August. He was in no way 100% fit. Hawk Wing reversed form with Where Or When by 13 lengths. On face value, that’s improvement of about 26lbs. Given the way Where Or When ran, I don’t believe that. The hard part is to work out how far below form he actually was. As for Olden Times and the others – they were quite simply stuffed. I’m sure there are a combination of factors that connections will use to describe their horses runs but I can’t explain it.
This is certain: Hawk Wing did not quicken in the final furlong. His last furlong time was indicative of a lone front-runner – controlling the pace, quickening some way out before slowing up again.
PR,"to beat a good grp2 horse by upwards of 19l is still some achievement." If that G2 horse ran to his form, Hawk Wing would have put in one of the greatest performances that any racehorse anywhere has ever managed. Let’s say that a G2 horse is rated 117, a conservative analysis of Hawk Wing’s rating would be 152. I’d give Hawk Wing a mid-130’s rating maximum for his Lockinge win. The form’s unreliable, making it hard to be certain about a mid-130’s rating anyhow. It remains to be seen if he can perform to that again.
Aidan, at no point could a struggling for fitness QEII winner and completely below form BC Mile winner keep up with Hawk Wing – that’s my take on it.
I’ve written stuff on the 2002 2000 Guineas before. Subsequent formlines show that if Hawk Wing ran on the same side of the track as Rock Of Gibraltar he would have been beaten about the same distance as he actually was. This might surprise you – last year (for the fourth time in succession) my Dad and I backed the second placed horse in the Derby. I was uneasy about going against High Chapparal as a selection but I thought that Hawk Wing’s 2000 Guineas performance was extraordinary. I actually gave him a higher rating than Rock Of Gibraltar. I was wrong (and still regret the way I rated the 2000 Guineas). Incidently, Moon Ballad was shattered over the Derby distance on sticky ground.
Right (this is a long post…sorry!) now to give some praise to Hawk Wing. He’s been second over 1m and 1m4f in Group One Classics. He was also second in the Irish Champion stakes over 10f. Adding to that, he was a very good winner of the G1 National stakes when two-years-olds and now a G1 winner of a mile race at four. Overall, a versatile horse with a mix of speed and stamina. Undoutedly Group One quality.
(Like with all short-priced favourites, I’ll be looking for the time to go against him. Maybe it’ll come, maybe it won’t. If the chance is there, I’ll take it.)
<br>It’s hard to be 100% (given funny camera angles) but I reckon Where Or When ran at least 13.5s for the final furlong in the Lockinge. That’s slow – he didn’t move in a straight line (Kevin Darley said something about the horses wheels having a problem…). Hawk Wing ran the last furlong in (appox.) 12.9s. He definately slowed up. Kinane rode a clever race and Hawk Wing’s speed was utilised in the middle part of the race.
The 11-lengths came about partly because Where Or When was struggling (Darley didn’t actually whip the horse once and wasn’t working at 100%).
Domedriver ran a bad race. He won the BC Mile although he’s probably a good G2 horse. An unlucky Rock Of Gibraltar at Arlington…he really should have finished the season unbeaten. Both Domedriver and Olden Times were miles down on their form (John Dunlop runners are struggling at the moment). It’s hard to guess at how far behind their better form Where Or When, Olden Times and Domedriver were – makes handicapping Hawk Wing’s performance difficult.
<br>I really don’t understand the bad feeling sand racing gets – it’s as good a quality as the midweek racing on turf. It’s just on a different surface.
Don’t understand why Thornton, Maguire and Marston were banned 10 days. They made a simple mistake, there not exactly throwing a race are they! Marston barely took the wrong course, just ran wide a bit. Thornton went well wide but looked as if he’d got confused…easy mistake to make. They ban people less for riding that could cause injury, this was just a simple mistake.
As for the cross country race. It’s ok, it’s probably, in part, a show to get people to come racing. Don’t really want them everyday and i’m not convinced about the form but they’re decent enough races.
<br>The Pardubice race seems a little crazy. I think the Cross Country chase run today is a safer race (although I don’t have stats) but it’s not of much value to anyone except those taking part in the race and their connections.
Perhaps it’s viewed as a spectacle to bring in new racegoers.
On the extra day festival thing – seems odd to have another day. What sort of races do you have? A two-and-a-half mile Championship race doesn’t sound like a good idea. It could be made for one horse – Florida Pearl. But in all honesty, the Champion chase is not exactly an easy two-miler.
<br>Van Nistelrooy broke much better than Tomahawk and Hold That Tiger – I apologise though, as he didn’t break level. The main point i want to make though is that he broke better with the help of the American jockey, i would say it’d be odds on he’d have been slower away with Kinane/Fallon riding.
Aidan, Godolphin didn’t have a winner because they didn’t have the horses. Kazzia’s good, but she’d had a foot absess before the race. She was given a good ride and ran well, but she didn’t look 100% when she was seriously ridden. Imperial Gesture and E Dubai weren’t good enough. The former had a good chance but Azeri was much to good for her.
I agree that the stalls are a problem, but i’d sooner have an American jockey anyway because they know the courses better and the best US jockeys riding in America can judge a race better than the best UK/Ire jockeys riding in America. Jamie Spencer is going to be an exception.
<br>The American horses were certainly quick out of the gate compared to most of the European horses. The American horses would have been used to the stalls and the bell more than the European horses…but that’s about 5% of why some European horses were slow away.
The Juvenile was a good example – Tomahawk and Hold That Tiger both broke slowly. Van Nistelrooy broke level. The first two were ridden by Euro jockeys, the other by a US jockey.
Islington was slow out, so were Rock Of Gibraltar and Hawk Wing. All ridden by Euro jockeys.
Gossamer was an exception. She broke well. Jamie Spencer gave her a good ride but she could last out.
Personally, I think the American jockeys were better than the Euro’s in their home enviroment. They were smarter with the tactics – overall – and when breaking from the stalls.
Golan’s form this year – in Britain/Ire – was at Ascot and York. Compare that course to Arlington. Golan had to be pulled up in training because he couldn’t handle the track. He looked unhappy when going into the stalls, predictably broke slowly and was never moving that well.
<br>I would think Aidan O’Brien sometimes has to run horses where he doesn’t want to run them because of the commerical element.
If you were training Galileo, would you have gone for the Arc or the Breeders’ Cup Classic?
Although Coolmore may claim otherwise, I think most people agree that Galileo was run in the Classic for commercial purposes. They certainly hoped he’d win but I severely doubt O’Brien thought Galileo would win.
What about today’s Newmarket card?
This is insulting to connections of older horses who can’t get a run. FIVE two-year-old races on a six race card. The other race being a classified stakes worth nearly £12k to the winner and with just four runners.
Classified stakes frequently have small fields and are hardly inspiring to people coming racing for the first time.
Now take a look at Beverley. There’s lots of opportunity for smaller owners and plenty of runners around too.
Venusian, would you rather watch the 3:30 at Beverley  (16-runner 7f 100yd h’cap) or the 3:40 at Newmarket (4-runner, 7f stks)?
(Edited by robgomm at 9:56 am on Sep. 24, 2002)
<br>Venusian,
People will watch average horses race. A lot of people aren’t interested in what kind of horse they watch, as long as it provides them with some entertainment.
Look at the success of evening racing at Wolverhampton. People can go there to watch some racing, eat in a restaurent and watch some tribute band or win "best dressed lady" (not for me that last one…).
Racing is a popular sport for the social aspect as much as the racing itself. Royal Ascot shows that.
The problem with rated stakes is the possibility of plenty of small field races. Prize Winner won one of these races not so long ago at Ascot. The pace was steady and it was not worth watching as a spectacle.
Venusian, i certainly don’t want to watch countless claimers run over 6 – 8 furlongs. It’s not very interesting and it’s purely for the betting man. I don’t believe British racing will go that way because we have a different attitude to America. We want people to come racing, the Americans seem to prefer to just race and bet at the smaller meetings.
If the only place to bet is with the Tote, i can promise you that racing in this country will go down hill. Which is why we need on course bookmakers…they bring people racing.
