Forum Replies Created
- Posts
quote:
This was a commercial decision first – a welfare decision second (at best).All due respect Beeswing, I could not disagree more. While it was undoubtedly a step in to the unknown, to suggest that connections flippantly disregarded the welfare of the horse (a horse that clearly meant so much to them) is well wide of the mark IMO.
Don’t understand the argument that some seem to be making that connections somehow knew George Washington wouldn’t handle the surface..
Handled the surface well at Churchill Downs last year IMO (travelled well for a long way) and, of course it was a guessing game as to how he would react to such a sloppy surface.. however, I imagine that applied to many of the runners in the field (though they were of course far more familiar to the surface)..
It’s easy to say with the benefit of hindsight that "it was a clear he wouldn’t handle the surface"/"he had no chance" but it would be dead wrong to point the finger of blame at connections..
While Coolmore is of course a commercial operation, anybody who suggests that the welfare of the horse was not put first is talking utter bollocks IMO.. just one of those unfortunate incidents..
Think the RP headline was slightly misleading, was it not?
Kinane hardly slammed the race conditions; in fact, he merely confirmed what any punter with a working set of eyes could already see for themselves (the kickback was horrible).. not much the Monmouth staff could do about that given the race conditions..
A touch sensationalist on the RP’s part IMO (although Cecil did give ’em a right bollocking!).
The track, while certainly not vissually appealing, was perfectly raceable IMO..
That said, I do think Beeswing has a point when he states that George Washington probably was at a disadvantage in that he was unfamiliar with the surface (only one run before)..
Was quite taken with him again today.. would agree that the form is certainly nothing spectacular, though the first two could turn out to be very smart IMO..
Hard not to have stamina worries given his pedigree, but he certainly shaped (at least to the eye) that he wouldn’t have any problems getting the mile.. that said, it certainly wasn’t run at a hectic pace and lacked any sort of strength in depth..
Strange as it will sound, i thought he ran well below form in the arc…and as much as anything, yesterday might have been a case of a season catching up with him. Understandable
You have to take into account the ground and pace though as well Clive.. seems pretty clear that the ground was genuinely soft yesterday and the pace was vritually the polar opposite to that of the Arc (believe they went a mile in 1:19 or so yesterday)..
Not saying that you are wrong btw, as he was certainly under pressure a long way out..
As for those who say he shouldn’t have ran because of the ground, that comment could apply to most of the field before the race.. indeed, even English Channel’s connections wern’t sure he would handle the ground!
Exactly Aidan.. Excellent Art’s value lies in his pedigree.. represents a significant inroad to a highly fashionable sire (that Darley have a large stake in as well)..
Wonder how much he’ll start off at.. wouldn’t be a stallion that I would be particularly attracted to myself.. not an outstanding physical specimen nor does he boast a particularly strong pedigree..
My particular concern is to why he lugged in at the 2 f pole when Murtagh was really trying to get to work on him?
Looked to me like he just got slightly unbalanced around the bend, which is obviously very sharp.. remember, he wasn’t ideally suited by Goodwood either (at least IMO) earlier in the year..
Thought he ran a good race myself from a shite draw.. probably would have been ideally suited by better ground as well..
Absolutely gutted.. such a shame that it had to end like this, but it’s ridiculous to start pointing the finger at either the jockey or connections, as this was just one of those things..
Sesamoid injuries are always more likely to occur during the latter stages of a race, simply because of fatigue..
The comment about Dylan Thomas being ‘lucky to be alive’ is ridiculous quite frankly.. how is he more ‘lucky to be alive’ than any of the other horses that ran yesterday?
Considering Epsom’s contours and the atmosphere of the Derby, I would agree with that Gareth.
Nothing to do with the trip though.
[Name me one Derby winner in the last 10 years that hadn’t shown better acceleration as a 2yo than New Attraction?
While he would probably gallop them into the ground in the Guineas, he is very unlikely to do so at Epsom.Kris Kin surely RH?
Must admit I don’t follow your logic either. Why would a horse with a lack of acceleration be more vulnerable in a race over 12 furlongs than one over 8 furlongs?
I actually thought New Approach showed a decent turn of foot, as well as remarkable toughness, when he warmed to his task yesterday. Could be a result of his home work, which, according to Bolger, was very much slower work aimed at getting him settled.. perhaps that is the reason he was off the snaff so early yesterday?
"North Light
in touch, pushed along after 2f and again over 3f out, quickened approaching final furlong, strong run under hand driving inside final furlong, just failed"Beaten a short head by a horse not from the same yard, doesn’t seem comparable to me.
Why not Col? It seems to me that Madman’s issue with the Psalm ride is that the filly wasn’t given every possible opportunity to win. Surely the same premise applies here; by not going for the whip, the jockey (not going to say who, but you can probably guess
) did not give the horse every opportunity to win.. hope I’m not putting words in your mouth MM, and correct me if I’m wrong!I don’t agree with the above I might add, as I didn’t have an issue with the ride. I was merely proving why the two cases are relevant, according to MM’s logic, as far as I understand it.
Show me a Stoute 2 year old that got beat a neck by it’s stablemate, when ‘arguably’ given an easier ride – and then I will answer the question on Clive’s behalf
Personally I don’t buy the stablemate argument- don’t think it matters if it was a stablemate or not- the filly was merely there for a nice introduction.
As for a Stoute 2yo who could have won first time out under a more vigorous ride, look no further than subsequent Derby winner North Light’s first run at Sandown.
Ground probably won’t be ideal for Rio De La Plata tommorrow, but the ground at Longchamp was genuinely good at best (just a touch on the slow side of good perhaps?) and he certainly wasn’t inconvenienced by the ground then..
I certainly reckon he’ll give New Approach more to think about tommorrow ridden closer to the pace..
Madman Marz, would you consider most Sir Michael Stoute 2yo’s to be "subtle non-triers" first time out?
Classic field lacks the quality of last year’s renewal, but I certainly wouldn’t be calling it a weak renewal either.
George Washington certainly has a right chance and I wouldn’t doubt his ability to act on dirt given the way he travelled for much of the race last year… still not convinced he stays ten furlongs though…
) did not give the horse every opportunity to win.. hope I’m not putting words in your mouth MM, and correct me if I’m wrong!