Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Richard Pitman to this day still blames himself for Crisp’s defeat !
Andy Pandy went on to win the Whitbread Gold Cup Chase easily barely 3 weeks later and his jockey is adamant he would have won the 1977 Grand National also…watch the race again if you have any doubts…and he carried on riderless and had plenty left in the tank !
No-one let alone me has any reason to "big" Arkle up….everyone is quite aware of how phenomenal he was !
So what a Pitman says overrides what is plain to see, don’t be silly. Listening to jockey talk after races is for the naive.
Again, what a jockey says is taken over what has been done many times before, a horse going too fast early in a National either stops as though shot or falls. Winning a few weeks later has nothing to do with staying the National trip after going too fast early, they are two separate dissimilar events.
You are clearly trying to run down the achievements of another a great horse. I’m surprised no one on here has pulled you up except me, you are talking complete nonsense about Red Rum’s achievements.
Stick to Arkle, not dissing other great horses.
Rummy was a truly great Grand National horse even though he was rather fortunate that Richard Pitman panicked on Crisp and hit him at the elbow which caused him to wander off a straight line and tired up the long run-in conceding 19lbs,whilst Andy Pandy would surely have won in 1977 but for, unfortunately ,slipping on landing at Bechers second time round when ten lengths clear and going strongly.
Was he hell lucky.
Crisp lost because he was absolutely knackered.
Why would Andy Pandy have surely won? Being 10 lengths clear that far from home means nothing in the National, you can lose 10 lengths easily just on the run in.
I’d just stick to bigging Arkle up rather than demeaning other great horses with nonsense like this.
Orfevre’s fast sectional was on a the downhill section in the Arc, which is a lot easier to achieve than running uphill from Swinley bottom. So i wouldn’t get carried away comparing one track with another tbh.
Racing could spend its money better like the injured jockeys association.
Sectional times are pointless, they’ve been brought in on the back of a hype generation of speed punters who use flawed approaches in betting.
I’ve never known a speed better to become a rich person all talk no substance yet they claim to know so much and want sectionals to make their knowledge greater.
Means nothing, horse a runs 40mph at the 2f pole and horse b runs 34mph at the 1f pole – who cares? really a stupid waste of money.
I would have a look at a chap called Gigilo’s thread on the Talking Horses Forum if i were you before you decide someone cannot make money using times.
In fact I would say he is the only person I’ve come across on Racing fora that does make it pay and proves it on a daily basis.
I wouldn’t be so quick to dismiss something because you can’t do it, it doesn’t mean its not possible.
It seemed to me that the dolling out information was misleading with how it was described in the Racing Post. It gave the impression that after Thursday the round course races were 27 yards shorter. In fact they were the correct distances and those on Wednesday & Thursday were actually 27 yards longer than the official distances.
The going descriptions also seemed inaccurate.
On Wednesday the times did back up the official going description of G/F good in places. I would have said completely spot on.
On Thursday the same going was given to start with which was fair enough although it was just a bit faster on times especially when looking at Trade Storm’s time, they could have called it proper G/F no problem. Especially as Trade Storm was also racing the extra 27 yards and still ran 97.47 wich is only a couple of seconds shy of the true 8f course record. It then rained but as the ground had got faster from Wednesday it didn’t damage the ground enough to make it Good as officially given for the later races. Dutch Rose’s time showed it was in fact similar to Wednesday’s going. Dutch Rose won on G/F ground but now its win is described as Good in the form book.
On Friday the official going was Good. Kirthill & Dubai Prince’s races were both run in times suggesting the ground was similar to Dutch Rose’s race at the end of Thursday which was similar to Wednesday’s ground. Dubai Prince for instance ran the 3rd fastest Strensall since 1988. Both of those races point to G/F ground to be fair.
On Saturday the official going was G/S good in places, yet before it rained Guarantee ran a solid Good ground time in the Melrose.
Earlier in the thread its mentioned that Frankel’s speed figure couldn’t be mid 130’s as it was held down by sprint. Normally that would be correct but as they went 27 yards extra in the Juddmonte due to the dolling out an extra 1.6 seconds needs adding to the standard time to reflect that.
0.2 isn’t a length over 5f though.
If a 5f trip takes 55 seconds and one length = 9 feet then you would have 3300 feet/9 = 367 lengths. 55.00/366 = 0.15 seconds per length
If you call a length 10 feet which some may argue it is its 0.166 per length
I’d split the difference and call 1 length at that 5f trip as being 0.16
I think Raceforms is too low Blues Brothers. Which distance are they for as well?
I did a fair bit of study purely trying to find what poundage regarding speed figures is truly representative for each month. These are my estimations which i’ve found work out pretty well over the course of a season.
These are
per mile
figures and are in seconds that I feel 2yo’s are shy of maturity based purely on the clock.
Mar 2.30
April 2.10
May 1.90
June 1.70
July 1.50
August 1.30
September 1.10
October 0.90
November 0.80
December 0.70I’ve done a fair bit of time comparisons to get these figures and I think they are pretty fair.
I don’t add WFA to my figures but the downside to that is that each month your figures get higher and a 2yo that records an 80 in May doesn’t look so special by July. If that 80 rated 2yo does improve by the expected poundage, that an average 2yo could be expected to, then he may actually be an 8/10lb better horse by July. This would mean you are underestimating the horse purely due to not adding WFA.
Swings & Roundabouts.
I don’t think CC had that hard a race against G Lastword tbh, watch him in the last 10 yrds, Hughes eases off. Just a normal, show me the leader and i will pass him/her race for CC.
I’ve not checked your links, this is probably one of them. It shows the rivalry bewteen Damacus and DF, it also demonstrates how pace can kill any animal off when they put the hare in against him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8frxLao … re=related
I agree, DF is some animal, they had to "cheat" to beat him.
I’m loving watching these battles between these superb horses.
Eric was the man when with Cream, those were the days
In fact 1968 when some of those races took place was quite a year
but you are biased Lastword
just by saying that CC is over the top tells me that, is he b*ll*cks and you know it.
Dr Fager had rather more of a racing career than Frankel has at this moment in time, so again you are comparing a complete career against a horse that has not yet completed his 3rd year.
Lets see where Frankel sits when he has finished his career.
Just out of interest, has anyone tried to back dated a Beyer figure onto Dr Fager do you know?
He looked some animal judged by his record and teh youtube clips
Lastword
i’ve read a lot of this thread so i don’t know if this has been mentioned
CC was not spotting 8lb to Frankel, its called weight for age, because Frankel is not yet a fully grown horse. If we didn’t have wfa then most of these clashes would not take place as trainers would never run their 3yo against mature horses
CC is hardly "over the top" is he? that was just his 3rd run of the season
To suggest CC is over the top when you bang on about our horses being lightly raced is a bit silly
The fact that you are saying over the top about CC shows me you have a negative bias against Frankel, that makes your arguments a little lightweight/slanted tbh.
Frankel is only 3, and at his stage of career he has done all and more that can be expected of a really good horse. You talk as if he has done all his running, he still has many race days to prove his full worth, which we haven’t seen yet. We got a glimpse of what he is really capable of at Goodwood, where for once, his energy was distributed in a more sensible way.
You appear to rate Goldoikova, well CC won with head in chest against her, and Frankel hammered CC. So again your criticism of Frankel looks slanted. If you rate G, then you must rate Frankel.
Get Zippy
The Curragh isn’t a flat galloping track, its a very stiff uphill climb before the slope down to the straight
Prufrock
I’ve read forums over the years and "know" quite a lot of you as well as you can by the written word.
I’ve read Rober99 on a number of forums and his style never changes. He spouts many words but at no point does he ever actually say anything that is even remotely likely to educate anyone in regard to understanding pace or any other aspect of horse racing. He’s a self serving person who has an air of superiority but nothing backs up the high opinion he has of himself.
You on the other hand offer much forward and forums such as TRF and elsewhere need your input.
Please rethink about posting in general on forums. Most people can tell what agenda’s some have and ignore people who just post for their own gratification. Leave Robert to his own agenda and don’t assume that people can’t read between the lines.
You are very adept at argueing your corner when you need, so just keep posting.
the whole point is that it makes no difference if he knew it would win..the story was he made his selections in a similar fashion..his strike rate is 50%+.
therefore anything above evens is value on HIS past selection method
thats his value, it matters not what happened in one race, he’s getting 50% strike rate using the SAME selection method.
its not as complicated as some of the posts here are suggesting.
the old man isn’t very astute though
he gets around 50% winners on a regular basis but has set his "back" price at 7/2, thats absolutely brainless. his back price should be based on his strike rate, therefore he should be backing at 6/4 or greater
if he did that he is quids in, which means backing to value. ie his view of value, is a clear winner
