Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Zoso
I think the problem with low grade racing is that the runners tend to be more inconsistent than better class horses making the form more unreliable.
I’ve been trying (without success <!– s:wink: –>
<!– s:wink: –> ) to stimulate some debate on this topic. What are members views on the going stick reading as opposed to the official going? IMHO the going is the most important variable and for a serious punter accurate information in this respect is essential. I have undertaken some informal research which leads me to believe that the going stick reading agrees with Timeform’s post meeting assessment of the going more often than the official going but I’m interested to hear whether anyone has looked at this scientifically.The problem with so-called ‘Championship’ NH races is that only races at the festival are thought of in that way.
On the flat, there are Championship races at a number of the major courses (Newmarket, Epsom, Ascot, Doncaster, Sandown, Goodwood, York, Newbury). As a result there is a real pattern to the flat season with each of the G1s being given the prominence they are due.
There is nothing worse IMHO than watching the Charlie Hall chase and hearing it referred to as a stepping stone to the Gold Cup. All roads shouldn’t have to lead to Cheltenham.
So to answer the OP’s question, whether 2m4f is a ‘Championship’ distance is not the point, particularly as the question is posed on the basis that to be a ‘Championship’ race it has to be run at Cheltenham. As long as there are G1 races over a variety of trips and tracks that are contested by the top horses throughout the NH season, all have an opportunity to prove themselves top class.
He does very well with what at the end of the day are pretty modest horses.
Elopement was one that springs to mind who racked up a sequence of victories last season.Lottie was one of ours
She is now sunning herself as a broodmare in Australia.
What Mark seems to do well is to keep the horses in tip top physical and mental shape. They all spend time in the field and I know that he buys the most expensive feed available even though his training fees are modest compared to many.
I remember a couple of seasons ago he was touted as the next big thing, but things went quiet after that. It’s nice to see he has stuck at it and results are starting to go his way again.
He’s one of those trainers who will only appeal to certain owners as all the money is spent on the horses rather than making the place look pretty.
He had previously specialised in the bargain basement but has realised that the horses at the very bottom are being pushed out of racing so he is trying to slowly improve the quality of the horses he buys. Unfortunately that requires owners with deeper pockets but if his success is publicised I’m sure he will attract them.
I love these races – inevitably they are a mix of handicappers trying to step up in grade, classy horses with question marks and the odd dark horse.
You’ll all probably think I’m insane but I’m going for Faasel. I know he’s been called a few names but he requires good ground (which he has according to turftrax) and I think the trip will suit him. He was only just short of top class over hurdles and finished 4th in the Arkle. I’ll be looking to burgle some stupid prices on Betfair
I appreciate the thread has moved on to some very interesting discussions about the state of Ascot’s soil but on a general note does anyone else rely on the turftrax going stick reading rather than the official going?
Tony McCoy allegedly said of Fallon that if he was in a room with 1,000 people he’d end up sat next to the bad ‘un.
That probably says it all really
I’m still waiting to hear anything from Warwick. They didn’t even write to owners with runners that day to apologise. I contacted the ROA as one of its council memebers also had a runner but I haven’t heard how he got on either.
I’m caught between anger at Warwick and a wish to boycott the place in future and an acknowledgement that it is our local course (so most convenient for syndicate members to attend) and also a very happy hunting ground for our trainer.
In true British fashion I shall probably end up putting up with the whole thing.
http://www.turftrax.com/html/courseconditions/conditions.asp?raceid=97569&id=2
So it was Soft, Heavy in places. That explains it.
And the race distance was 2m +/- 110 yards
I’m afraid you’ve fallen into the trap that I believe many fall into. The racecourse map and going description on the Turftrax site merely show the ‘official’ going. The Going Stick reading however shows what Turftrax believe the going to be. Frequently the Going Stick reading will completely contradict the official going and that racecourse map
If anyone can tell me what the going stick figure was for Ascot, I’ll tell you what the going was
3 to 4.9 is soft so it was bang in the middle of soft
If anyone can tell me what the going stick figure was for Ascot, I’ll tell you what the going was
I stopped taking any notice whatsoever of the official going half way through this season when I realised how accurate the readings were from the Turftrax Going Stick.
The official going is quite simply a joke at the majority of racecourses. The only course where I have had a runner which consistently gave accurate going reports is Great Yarmouth. The official going descriptions at Warwick, Haydock and Ascot should be ignored – they have no basis in reality.
I have been fortunate enough to obtain verification from our jockey of the accuracy of the Going Stick reading. Timeform tend to back up the Going Stick reading as well rather than the official description.
At last year’s festival I spoke to the guy from Turftrax before racing on the first day. He confirmed to me that the going was good all the way round. I felt this gave me a real edge and I was lucky enough to capitalise on this by backing Joes Edge – a horse who requires good ground.
Our filly was in the Watership Down Stud race, she went through the ring as a buy-back in 2005 and we pulled her out of the race in June. They always state how much you can win in them but they don’t tell you it cost £2,000 to keep the horse in possibly before it’s even run.
You can check out the terms of the sales races on the racing admin site. This year the entry fees for the Watership Down race are £300 plus further payments of £300 on May 6th, July 1st and September 20th. The final two payments are refunded if you are ballotted out at the Declaration stage.
<!– s:wink: –> ) to stimulate some debate on this topic. What are members views on the going stick reading as opposed to the official going? IMHO the going is the most important variable and for a serious punter accurate information in this respect is essential. I have undertaken some informal research which leads me to believe that the going stick reading agrees with Timeform’s post meeting assessment of the going more often than the official going but I’m interested to hear whether anyone has looked at this scientifically.
