Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Peter Scudamore has to be THE worst presenter anywhere. I can’t actually think of an appropriate word to describe how bad he is.
I like Willie Carson, OK fair do’s he’s not very natural and he doesn’t put things across very well but some of what he says is quite intelligent and he makes me laugh.
(Edited by The Market Man at 11:12 pm on Jan. 5, 2007)
Tanya is getting some very unfair criticism IMO. I like her.
Clare Balding – superb.
Simon Hoult – Best commentator there is.
Get rid of both Jim McGrath’s. The Timeform one who seemingly makes a mint from betting can barely ever pick a winner on TV, usually goes along with the favourite.
The commentaor one – deary, deary me, he is absolutely dreadful.
Quote: from seabird on 9:31 am on Jan. 5, 2007[br]Does "working-class Britain" exist any more?
Does this Andrew Franklin live in an ivory tower, he can’t read many horse-racing forums?!
It is difficult to believe that there is an audience out there that appreciates McCririck, Thompson, Persad, Spencer and Fox-Pitt but this chap Franklin seems to!!
Colin<br>
<br>Hey hang on I appreciate Emma Spencer. OK its sod all to do with her racing knowledge but hey allow me some pleasure please.
I think there’s a place for Big Mac – Yes the bloke is a fool but he’s also a very intelligent guy and probably the most famous of all racing presenters.
The others mention flippin heck bring back Playschool, stick them on there just get them off racing coverage for gods sake. Add Lesley "Grinner" Graham to the list as well she’s so false she makes my skin crawl.
If there is extra terrestrial life out there – PLEASE ABDUCT THOMMO and don’t bring him back.
Quote: from FlatSeasonLover on 11:47 pm on Dec. 28, 2006[br]I’m a little cautious with wide margin successes EW – I tend to look at 1.5l = 1lb with wide margins. (Rightly or wrongly make your own mind up on that)<br>
<br>Everyone has their own way of doing things I think that is fine as long as they’re consistant about the way they do things and it works for them.
The Gold Cup may be interesting now. I have KS at a best of 181 but if he doesn’t run to that mark at 3m 2f at Cheltenham say only runs to around 174 /5 it’s not inconceivable that The Listener could beat him if he improves three of four pounds for going up in trip.
Not saying for a second that that will be the case but its just an indication of how the unique test of the Gold Cup can throw up an unexpected result. 3m2f round Cheltenham is a completely different test altogether to 3m round Haydock or Kempton.
Interesting to see that most people come to a similar conclusion regarding the Lexus Chase.
<br>
(Edited by The Market Man at 11:57 pm on Dec. 28, 2006)
Analysed the race now. Again have Beef Or Salmon running similarly to his previous two chase starts (164). Leads me to believe thats probably as good as he is these days possibly not quite as good as he once was maybe lost a bit of speed but nevertheless still a good, consistant high level performer. Race rated around Beef Or Salmon and Southern Vic both ran to a mark therefore that can reasonably been expected whilst L’Ami and War Of Attirition ran below their best.
The Listener Ive awarded 172 which is a good mark. Still nine pounds below Kauto Star on his Haydock running but nevertheless with further improvement likely The Listener is probably capable of bettering his current mark.
The owner pays the bills it’s his / her horse so basically what the owner says goes. Who the owner decides to consult / leave decisions to it up to themselves.
Ideally there should be discussions involving certainly the trainer and possibly the jockey in some cases and I’m sure in most cases there are. However if the owner insists they run at Newbury on Saturday then they run at Newbury on Saturday.
Quote: from Zorro on 8:58 pm on Dec. 28, 2006[br] Watch the Arima Kinen. Then work out what he beat, and how he beat them. <br>
<br>A 128 performance. If you really push it you may have a case for making it 130. Still puts him way below the greats.
Quote: from Grasshopper on 6:06 pm on Dec. 28, 2006[br]TMM, you have said on a few threads that you felt BoS ran up to the best of his form at Haydock, which I assume means you have him running to around 174 there (?), and I further assume that this gives you your mid-180 rating about Kauto Star (?).
That’s all fair enough.
But what of L’Ami in that race? You really couldn’t rate him any lower than 172 for the BetFair based on your interpretation, which would have meant improvement of damn near a stone on anything else he has achieved in twenty-odd steeplchase runs. It also makes Ollie Magern a 170 horse, represnting a minimum half-stone improvement on his best ever form in the previous years Charlie Hall.
As for subsequent events not proving a rating, I’m afraid I take issue with that also. Ratings are transient beasts, and should be adjusted after every relevant performance (imo). Otherwise, what is the point of keeping them?
I’m not saying I’m right and you are wrong. Only that, imo, anyone rating Kauto Star in the 180’s needs their bumps felt. :biggrin:
Seriously, it’s only a difference of opinion, and you are perfectly entitled to your view. My view just happens to differ, that’s all.
I’m working from memory now so bare with me I don’t have figures in front of me.
I rated Beef Or Salmon for his Haydock run within I think a pound of his previous run not his overall all time best rating.
L’Ami I rated in line (within a pound or two) of four of his previous five races in similar conditions (I think).
I can’t remember without the figures in front of me exactly what marks I recorded or how I rated Ollie Magern. I just remember it all looked right and made perfect sense.
There are some races that just don’t make proper sense and you have take a rather exagerated and iffy viewpoint on. One that springs to mind is the race won late last flat season by Spinning Queen at Newmarket when she slammed Soviet Song and Alexander Goldrun by 9 lengths. Strictly speaking it is possible to give Spinning Queen a rating of around 130 after that performance if you take it that Soviet Song and Alexander Goldrun both ran to their absolute best. I like most people took a view that neither did but even so I still had to give Spinning Queen 123 / 5 (can’t remember exactly) which is still well in excess of previous best ratings. The point I’m trying to make (probably rather poorly lol) is that you could rate her 130 if you take a particular viewpoint.
The Haydock race unlike that Newmarket race seemed relatively easy to rate taking into account visual evidence, past evidence and the fact that the evidence overall was based on a number of previous similar performances from three horses rather than limited evidence based on a rating from a race where you had to take a view one way or the other.
Hope that makes at least some sort of sense lol.
(Edited by The Market Man at 6:27 pm on Dec. 28, 2006)
Quote: from Zorro on 5:50 pm on Dec. 28, 2006[br]Murray Bell is an Australian in his 40s and would therefore not have seen most of those horses, Market Man.<br>But criticise me by all means if you like, because I’d put him up there with those mentioned.
<br>His comment was that Deep Impact was the best horse he’s seen in "35 years". That would include all of those horses I mentioned.
I just don’t understand this train of thought Deep Impact is not even a 130 horse on any line of form anywhere however you look at it. He’s not even beaten the best of the Europeans. How the hell can anyone rate this horse among the greats?
Quote: from Grasshopper on 5:43 pm on Dec. 28, 2006[br]Empty, on his best form (routinely displayed in this race), Beef Or Salmon is a 174 horse  – or thereabouts at least.
If you think he has run to the best of his form here, then you pretty much have to give The Listener a rating around 180.
I think it much more likely that Beef Or Salmon has run near his Haydock rating from earlier in the season (160 imo), than his effort at Down Royal (which I had at 167, if memory serves).
As I said on the other thread, it’s a very difficult race to weigh-up, but imo, it’s much more likely that BoS, WoA and L’Ami have run some way below expectations, than we all of a sudden have another 180 perfomer on our hands in The Listener (and potentially even a further one in Star De Mohaison).
I don’t think BoS ever got into the race, because Alners horse basically took lenghts out of them at every fence. It’s therefore my initial analysis that BoS was not placed to run up to the best of his form.
I could be wrong, but regardless, Kauto Star has not run within an assess roar of 180 at either Sandown or Kempton. On balance, I submit that a rating of 180+ for the horse at Haydock is moody at best, and nigh-on impossible to substantiate given subsequent events.
(Edited by Grasshopper at 5:44 pm on Dec. 28, 2006)<br>
<br>Subsequent events don’t prove a rating though. Past results do because you have something to work against but because a beaten horse is well beaten next time out it doesn’t mean that the form of his previous race is worthless. Horse run below par for many reasons. Sometimes they’re just out of form or running on a track they’re not comfortable on or they don’t like the ground even something as simple as they just don’t feel that well on the day, it’s important to remember that horses are living creatures with feelings, moods like humans they are not machines.
A horse can run up to (for example) 170 on five occasions then throw in a bad one and run to 150. That doesn’t mean a horse given a rating on the basis of that horse’s 170 rating in a previous race has been over-rated.
We KNOW from several lines of evidence what marks Beef Or Salmon and L’Ami can run up to and what they usually do and in what conditions. I see no reason to downgrade Kauto Star’s Haydock rating at all.
Quote: from wit on 6:55 am on Dec. 28, 2006[br]Interestingly, Murray Bell, one of the chief racing writers on the South China Morning Post, is of a mind with Zorro:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Deep Impact is the best turf horse I’ve seen in 35 years of following the sport.
(Edited by wit at 7:07 am on Dec. 28, 2006)<br>
<br>He’s talking absolute nonsense. He’s entitled to his opinion of course but his assessment puts Deep Impact above the Brigadier, Mill Reef, Dancing Brave, Shergar, Montjeu, Pentre Celebere, El Gran Senor etc etc.
Complete and utter balony.
Quote: from Salselon on 4:20 pm on Dec. 28, 2006[br]EW,
What I’m asking is people assume L’Ami ran to form at Haydock ass they wanted to go crazy on KS. However, The Listener is clearly not as much of a hype horse, so lets then all agree L’Ami didn’t run to form today as how else could we then see KS as the second coming of Arkle??
;) <br>
<br>I came to the conclusion that L’Ami ran up to his usual form at Haydock not just based on him but also based on performances through Ollie Magern and Beef Or Salmon who ran IMO to the same level as he had done previously in Ireland (within a pound from memory). Through form lines of others it tied in almost perfectly for L’Ami to have run up to form. It’s not just a case of plucking out any old number.
I haven’t analysed todays race yet but even without doing that its clear that L’Ami didn’t run to his last mark. I’m certain that’ll be confirmed through other lines when I do get round to looking at the race.
Quote: from Racing Daily on 7:29 pm on Dec. 27, 2006[br]I do think that ED has improved on past performances.  I still couldn’t have him any higher than 162.  It is true that he could improve to bely a mark of 170, but i’d be rather sceptical of such a rating.<br>If we say that KS didn’t run as well as he did at Hay and Ain, I think that you could rate KS’s run at a fair 170, alongside the Tingle Creek performance.  This would make the 162 for ED look reasonable.
I wouldn’t entirely disagree with that theory although I haven’t yet analysed the race so I don’t know what mark I have any of them running to. I don’t think a sharp track like Kempton is really up Kauto’s street I think he’s much better on a more gallopping track. I know he’s run well at Kempton and Aintree but lets face it he’s good enough that he’ll run well anywhere.
(Edited by The Market Man at 7:34 pm on Dec. 27, 2006)
Quote: from Racing Daily on 7:12 pm on Dec. 27, 2006[br]What did Exotic Dancer do in the KG?  Beat Racing Demon just over a length.  Would you rate Racing Demon at 169?<br>I wouldn’t.  Racing Demon is around the 160 mark, which makes ED around 162.  Hardly 170+ LOL
<br>Both horses were tackling three miles for the first time though so its not quite as straight forward as adding a pound or two to Exotic Dancer’s rating.
You have to take a view of whether or not you think either horse / both horses have improved for the step up in trip. Racing Demon has looked like a horse that would appreciate an easy three miles and Exotic Dancer has finished second in a Grade 1 whereas before he’d only been winning handicaps so I think it’s prefectly plausible to take a view that both horses have improved for the extra distance if you care to take that view.
(Edited by The Market Man at 7:20 pm on Dec. 27, 2006)
Kauto Star is easily capable of 185 IMO. The King George wasn’t his best performance and he still won easily. He’s already run to 176 at Haydock and he couldn’t possibly have won easier.
War Of Attirition isn’t even a good Gold Cup winner. Do you seriously think Kauto Star isn’t capable of beating Hedgehunter by a couple of lengths?
All things equal and suitable and War Of Attrition won’t see which way Kauto Star goes.
That’s my opinion and I don’t have the slightest doubt about it.
It doesn’t matter what any horse does there will always be someone to find a flaw or knock his achievements in some way.
As I see it the Kauto Star thing is quite simple – He is the best chaser since Desert Orchid ability wise and if his jumping holds up and he stays he’ll destroy War Of Attrition in the Gold Cup Kauto Star is a completely different league on another level altogether.
Now I don’t expect everybody to just merrily go along with that but provided he does jump round and stay don’t say I didn’t tell you so when Kauto wins the Gold Cup easily. ;)
Of course if / when he does someone will find a way of undervaluing the performance.
