Cheltenham Course Form Is Not Important

Garde Champetre

Already have learnt this...in the hardest possible way!

I do now agree, I think some horses are best suited to certain tracks, but I don't think many are so unsuited to a track enough for it to hamper them if they're good enough to win their respective race!

As daft as it might sound id offer the same advice for ground! This Festival has taught me that just because something has only performed well in soft ground it doesn't mean it can't handle firm ground; some horses just have the natural ability to run on any surface! Denman in the Gold Cup being the prime example!

I appreciate that a horse may act marginally better in one surface than another, but I certainly wouldn't rule a horse out in future unless it has show a complete dislike to it's immediate conditions, i.e. it's form figures read PPP!!

I agree CV and tried to make a similiar point on one of the Hurricane Fly threads. Far too much is made out of getting up the hill too! If percentages were put on the finishing gradient of each course, I don't doubt that most would be within plus or minus five per cent of each other.

I remember defending Binocular at the beginning of last season when people said he didn't get up the hill, he made 2 damn lengths on Punjabi up the hill in 09. 

There are hills at other tracks too. While also anything can get up the hill if they run slow enough. People point to course form, but the majority of a horses form at the track will be in far poorer races than there are at festivals.

Also Cheltenham is in England so less Irish runners will have course form. Yet we did alright this year, most of our winners hadn't run there before.

Try focus on a horses talent on what it's beat, and not worry about hyped up myths.

Oh and never back heavily in the Supreme [;)]

Haha, no way...Cheltenain!? I'll be napping him up everywhere in 6 months time!!

I still find Irish form hard to get a handle on I must be honest, I think that's why I underestimate it so much of the time, and it's proving costly to say the least!!

tbf you're at a disadvantage in England. We watch all of your racing as much as our own, but reams of info over here never makes it out and lots of info will make it in print but never online. I read the racing section of 3 Irish papers in work every day almost none of that ever makes it online.

We've had 7+ winners at the festival since it went 4 days. I focus on getting the best of ours onside antepost in January and then I'll usually have a good chance of having a good few winners.

Oh and Cheltenain will go for Neptune or AB trainer said. Bumper horses have a good record in those races.

Weapon's Amnesty classic Cheltenham horse, never achieved anything of the like away from Prestbury Park (spare me the Panslowrama form)

Rather than course form,more relevant for me would be Festival form.There is a huge difference for example winning a Pillar Chase in January on soft going against say 7 rivals,and winning a Gold Cup on good ground.

Yes but as I said festival form is simply a pointer to which horses are actually good. Fly had no festival form but if you asked yourself what would he have done had he run in the Supreme you get your answer.

Good horses win at the Festival, previous form at the festival shows you who are good horses.

Go Native luckiest Supreme winner ever!

My point is, had half the Irish horses won at the festival? Nope but they had won grade 1's over here at Leopardstown or Punchestown festivals.

Lots of our best chasers don't bother going to Cheltenham in their hurdling days.

CV, couple of questions; firstly what constitutes a good maiden hurdle in Ireland? The RP simply print 'Maiden Hurdle' followed by the prize, what prize figure signals a competitive race?

Secondly, are there any online resources for Irish racing, regards news, race reports etc?

Cheers

Actually i think its you that needs to learn a lesson,and that lesson is that course or even more importantly Festival form can indeed be very important.
Supreme Novice hurdle.Al ferof 10/1(2nd in 2010 champion bumper)
Arkle Challenge Trophy Chase.Captain Chris 6/1 (won the Gloucestershire Trainers Championship Novices' Hurdle in April 2010,on good)
Champion Hurdle Challenge Trophy Grade.Hurricane fly(when fit won all his races in Ireland doing handsprings,made hard work of this one though,lack of course experience?)
Stewart Family Spinal Research Handicap Chase.Bensalem 5/1 (Cruising in this race when falling in 2010)
Glenfarclas Handicap Chase.Sizing Australia 13/2 (this was the same race report in 2010,tracked leaders, hit 6 out, driven 2 out, in touch when hampered and squeezed out bend between last 2, not recover)
David Nicholson Mares' Hurdle.Quevega 5/6 (won the same race in 2009 and 2010)
Centenary Novices' Handicap Chase.Divers 10/1 (was 2nd in the Victor Chandler 08000 78 78 78 Handicap Hurdle over 2 miles 1 furlong at Cheltenham to Ashkazar)
Cheltenham Gold Cup.Long Run(3rd in the 2010 sun alliance chase as a 5 year old,to 2 older horses,beaten 4 3/4 lengths in the paddy power,giving 12 lb to the winner and 16 lb to the 2nd,as a 5 year old)
That was day 1 and the gold cup!!!are you sure about that comment?,or should i send you 2 slices of bread and a tin of alphabet spagetti,so you can have EAT MY WORDS ON TOAST,[;)]

Off on a slight tangent, course where winners had their prep run before winning @ Festival is informative.

Last 5 years

Leopardstown 14 winners
Newbury 13
Cheltenham 12
Punchestown 9
Haydock 8
Ascot 7
Sandown 7
Donny 5
Warwick 5
Navan 4
Naas 3
Chepstow 2
Fairyhouse 2
Musselburgh 2
Taunton 2
Uttoxeter 2
Wincanton 2
Several others 1

Missed Kempton

Also 12

I take your point CV and I agree with the majority of what you say.The point I was trying to make(not very well) was that the Cheltenham festival provides a set on conditions which are very rarely repeated throughout the year ie

1.Race ran at fast pace
2.Good ground
3.Large(ish) fields

Of course the majority of the best horses will act in these conditions,and prove their worth.However there are some who will not.The prime example which springs to mind in the last few years would be Beef or Salmon.

In the Handicaps I feel the 'Festival Factor' is vastly more pronounced.Horses such as Buena Vista regularly produce their best performance of the season at the Festival,as it is the only time they encounter the said conditions(I accept the handbrake coming off could be a factor aswell).

Course form is very important, several big priced winners eg. Buena Vista, Albertas Run etc have had poor seasons but won in spite of this.

Em 247, baffled how you put fly's champion hurdle win in as a counter point.

Also what about the rest of the irish horses who won without ever being to the track before. Never mind ones who were unplaced last year like noble prince.

Quevega is a great point, she'd never been to the track before she won her first mares. Close form wouldn't matter to her at all,  she'd win the mares every time regardless of the track.

The point is most good horses run at the festival and the best do well. But you're foolish if you use lack of close form against a horse who hasn't run there.

AS mullins said, most of his winners at cheltenham over the years hadn't won at the track before.

Oh and the montjeu stat was always for the foolish. He's never sired a grade one winner before hurricane fly won 7 prior to going to cheltenham. I'm going to rip into anyone who brings up a horses sire stat in future. Always has been nonsense with relation to a track.

I agree with Hemsby, in that it's festival form that is key as the circumstances he describes are virtually never repeated elsewhere. I would throw into that the general hullaballoo and jockey anxiety, which can have an effect on horses of a nervous disposition. Plus, they're all trying, aren't they Mr O'Neill....
Of course no theory fits all races and Hurricane Fly is an example of a horse that would win anywhere, down to sheer talent. But plenty of horses ran really well last week, despite seeming bang out of form, that had placed or better at the festival before, particularly in the handicaps. The first thing I look at is if they've placed before, then the weight, you don't need too many Buena Vistas or Faasels (in a forecast with the shortpriced fav - 74/1 [;)] ) to make it pay.
I'm sure if you had two to pick from CV and couldn't make your mind up, you would pick the one that had proved it could handle Cheltenham in March?

Well yes I like horses who  at least placed at the festival but that is not because they have course form. It's because they have  run well in the most competitive races of the year and the ground at cheltenham is almost always the same year after year.

But if horse hasn't run at the festival I do not ever consider that a negative. Most irish winners have not raced there before but we have many winners every year. We have very few flat tracks, we have two with steeper hills steeper than at cheltenham and we gave a very good trial track in leopardstown. As the stat below still inform of.

Basically there is nothing special or magical about the course or hill. It's always over done and i'm glad I usually ignore it.

Bensalem - fell at last years festival
Fly had never been there
Quevega had, but she'd won the  race before on her first festival
Divers - never been to the festival, ferdy wanted to give him another year
First Lieutenant - never been there
Sizing Europe - ok won an arkle but people used his champion hurdle injury to knock him that year
Big Buck's - ok
Bob's Worth - ok
Long Run - knocked for his two defeats at the track
Sir Des Champs - never been to the festival.

Very glad I don't put stock in the course form lark. Unless a horse chalky doesn't like the track.

I think CV's line that 'the cream comes to the top' in the major Festival races, regardless of whether the horses in question have previous course/Feiitval form or not, is probably right in general. I thought the winners of the big four races this time were in each case the best horse in their respective race. SE and BB had previous winning course/Festival form, while HF and Long Run didn't.

It is with lesser horses (the handicappers particularly) that course/Festival form possibly becomes more important as a factor when making selections. Horses at that level lack the class advantage to overcome any problems they may have handling the characteristics of the course at Cheltenham or the conditions typical of the Festival.

Probably also worth adding though that many of the horses that have a good record at the Festival have a good record in the Spring generally (or simply thrive on better ground). Albertas Run might be in this category. Weapon's Amnesty and Sizing Europe seem to be several pounds better on better ground.

One further point to throw in is that race conditions at the Festival can vary greatly, which is another factor making generalisations tricky. Not only is there the difference between the old and the new course to factor in, but also this time particularly there were some quite significant differences in race times between the different races. The Topspeed ratings, for example, range from a quite low figure for races like the Champion Hurdle and the World Hurdle (about 119, I believe) to a respectably high 155 plus for some of the other races. It would almost be like comparing apples and pears to draw comparisons between the form of races that are run at such contrasting tempo.

With the better ground, the steep uphill finish was less of an obstacle for the horses this time. That was particularly the case in those races where the times were a bit below what might be expected for that type of race at the Festival. Those races became a bit more of a test of speed than a test of the ability of the horses to handle an end-to-end gallop on a steeply undulating track. Those conditions (good ground and a fairly moderate early and mid-race pace) also, of course, favoured horses that could be ridden handily.

When you get a bit more cut in the ground at Cheltenham and the pace through a race is strong throughout, the type of form a horse needs to show in order to win under those conditions can be very different to the type of form needed to win when the going is good and it happens that there hasn't been enough early pace on to prevent the race developing into something of a sprint finish.

The tactically astute (and those brave enough to have a real cut at their races) were the biggest winners of the week, overall, this time, I think. There were some blistering performances from the front, not least Sizing Europe and Buena Vista for a long way. There were also some brilliant examples of astute timing and positioning through a race (from Walsh most definitely). It was a Festival where knowing the jockeys and assessing the tactical opportunities with the different horses/trainers was a fairly important factor in sorting out the winners.

I have just had a quick check of the TS ratings for the winners from last week. There were seven winners who were awarded TS ratings over 150:

Captain Chris 158
Long Run      157
Albertas Run  157
Oiseau De Nuit156
Al Ferof      155
Noble Prince  153
Junior        152

These were obviously the faster run races that put the more emphasis on stamina. By contrast, Big Buck's TS of 119 reflected, among other things, the slower early pace in the World Hurdle. Quevega's TS was 108, again highlighting some quite sharp contrasts between the tempo and times in the different races last week.

Oiseau De Nuit would have been one of the harder ones to pick last week. Interesting that, taking account of the weights on the day, he had just about the best TS rating in the field going into last week's Grand Annual. Given the big field and decent ground, there was always likely to be a fairly brisk pace for the Grand Annual. The TS ratings would certainly have highlighted him as one to be shortlisted for the race.

Hurricane Fly and Long Run proved the point?

So with a sample size of 2 (of the most talented horses in training I might add) we should throw all course form out of the window from now on? Thought id read you had a degree in statistics! What a ridiculous assertion

I have felt that top speed marks are bad for using to guide graded betting decisions. Many horses have no influence on the pace of a race and so may never  have a chance to post a high mark. This is part of my opinion you can't knock a horse for something he hasn't had a  chance to do.

But if a  fancied horse fails when a race is won by a horse posting a high top speed mark then I'll take note.

But as we see with nonsense like woolcomb folly, some people get too caught up in times posted.

Its clearly important in Cheltenham.Its not the be all and end all,it is not the most important factor and many horses will win there with no previous form, but its silly to imply that the fact that a horse has previous good form  makes no difference. There must always be a doubt that a previously untried horse wont act on the track.

Yes there is a very slim and negligible chance that a horse who had acted on every other track he has raced may not act at cheltenham. But until a horse shows a dislike for a track or a preference for racing right handed or for flat tracks it's wise to ignore the "will he act at cheltenham" stuff.

I see what you are saying CVB, but I disagree. I think previous course and festival form is very important. There will always be horses who dont like the undulations and make up of the track. HF is a bad example as he had never run there before, clearly he likes it.

Long Run also had obvious excuses for his bad runs.

As i pointed out earlier previous cheltenham festival form is a guide to good horses. It's not a negative for horses like Fly who had never been there. Obviously horses who flopped at previous festivals without an excuse would not be ones I'd back either. But similarly form away from estivals but at Cheltenham isn't a guide to much imo.

Nonsense, Cheltenham form stands up, ask One Man

agree with most of the points here ,festival or course form is usefull and must be regarded as a plus but it is not essential and a horse cannot be overlooked on this basis  ,another stat that i highlighted on another thread before this years festival , regarding the r.s.a chase is chasing experience,is very usefull   i noted that a good percentage of r.s.a winners in the last 10 years had at least 3 runs over fences and that 4 or more chase runs  was even more of an advantage last year if i am correct it was weapons amnesty 5 runs  and i think but i may be wrong long run qualified ,this year it was bostons ange  l 4or 5chase runs  and jessies dream 3 runs this year and 1 last season  who stood out on this basis well worth remembering for next year i may not be 100 % correct on this as it is from memory and i dont have the time to go thro my form books .

also another point mabee stating the obvious but it is often overlooked  that as the festival races especially the champoinships, ie arkle gold cup champion chase are   always fiercely competetive any horse that has had even a slight  setback( prep races missed ect,) are nearly always exposed (cooldine last year imperial commander ,time for rupert this year  to name a few ) worth bearing in mind next year . it may be just coincidence that these horses dissapointed but imo a  horse  needs to be 110% going into these races. we need to keep these threads going with veiws from posters as they are very usefull for future reference ..good luck all .

Best athletes go well at the Olympics.

Pretty much every Gold Cup winner runs in either the King George or Lexus Chase that season.

Long Run - King George - 1st
Imperial Commander - King George - 5th
Kauto Star - King George - 1st
Denman - Lexus - 1st
Kauto Star - King George - 1st
War of Attrition - Lexus - 2nd
Kicking King - King George - 1st
Best Mate - Lexus - 1st
Best Mate - King George - 1st
Best Mate - King George - 2nd

Looks Like Trouble and See More Business ran in King George

......It probably goes on further.

Just back the winner of both post race and you've got 7 of the last 10 winners. The other 3 were, Best Mate had a bad ride, War of Attrition needs good ground and IC hit the 2nd fence hard and lost his chance.

Well read all this thread and learnt nothing i already knew years ago.

Course form is always important,but without talent it wont matter.

I have no doubt some if not most horses prefer flatter tracks,but when they are a good one they can win on all sorts of tracks.

Every single horse i backed at Cheltenham and always have,i have never as far as i can remember used the Cheltenham factor as a reason to back the horse,or indeed not to back a horse.Just ground and form(wherever they run).

Well i know your wrong with some of the comments you have made CV,and im going to prove it.
Do you know why god doesnt share his infinite wisdom with mankind CV ?Its because mankind would become BAFFLED if they knew they truth.
But seeing as im having a good day,im going to share my wisdom with you,and i presume the Montjeu jibe was yet another attempt at trying to prove that your actually smarter than what you actually are [;)],stick to the thread.
Firstly Charwel made a very good point,"Course form is very important, several big priced winners eg. Buena Vista, Albertas Run etc have had poor seasons but won in spite of this."
But you chose to ignore his comment.
Then Far from trouble made another very good comment,Weapon's Amnesty classic Cheltenham horse, never achieved anything of the like away from Prestbury Park.
And its funny how you chose to ignore that as well,in fact it seems unless someone winds you up like myself with the spaghetti comment,then you ignore anyone making points that rubbish your comment.
Some horses simply act on all tracks. "Cheltenham" and "the Hill", think if it's completely ignored will not be to the detriment of a selection. Ever.
If that is indeed true,then explain to me why Mad max was 4 1/2 lengths behind Somersby at Cheltenham,but beat the same horse Aintree 23 days by 9 lengths,both level weights races,fact is Mad max has never won at Cheltenham in 5 attempts.
2010 gold cup winner Imperial commander was 30 lengths ahead of Carruthers at Cheltenham,but was running like a crab at Aintree 20 days later when unseating rider, Carruthers finished 2nd in that race.
And then we have 2010 Fred winter 3rd Orsippus,receiving 2 lb from Sancuire gets absolutely mullered by 10 1/2 lengths,yet 22 days later on 2 lb better turns,somehow manages to turn the form around to the tune of 16 1/2 lengths.
I suppose you'll find some reason to explain that non of these cases were anything to do with running on a different track.
And before you mention it,the ground was similar at both meetings.
Ide like you to explain what CLOSE form is,is it where a horse is never more than 2 or 3 lenghths off the lead?
As for the Hurricane fly comment,the point i was making,was that whatever he met in Ireland got disposed of with the minimum of fuss when he was fit,but he had to work harder at Cheltenham,would he have beaten Binocular ?,its debatable.
You used the term EVER,and its that one comment that has stuffed you,i said,CAN indeed be very important,big difference,and as someone else said,you base your findings on 2 examples !!!.
Are you at this point googling for that tee shirt that says "please god,help me to keep my big mouth shut until i know what im talking about".[:x]
We all make comments on here we regret,but admitting you were wrong to say EVER,is better than trying to argue that you were right,that ones a lost cause.[;)]
Cheltenham is about speed and stamina,the greatest test in the UK or Ireland for any horse,but some horses that cannot win there,somehow turn the form around at Aintree(praise the lord,its a miracle),or is it that course form can indeed be a pointer to picking winners at the festival?.
[;)]  [;)]
   [;)]
[;)]  [;)]

Drunken post if ever I've seen one. ^

I've no idea who you are I can't remember ever seeing you post on the run up to cheltenham so i'm going to not waste much time here.

Albertas Run and Weapons Amnesty are good ground horses. Not cheltenham specific.

I'm talking about graded races not handicaps

This thread and none of it's posts are about you, it's about all those who I actually had plenty of discussion with on the run up to the festival, people who put too much stock in course form and not enough stock in  simply form. Menorah and Hurricane Fly for example.

Also I will not  be replying to your further posts. Good day.

Theres a reason you never see me making posts in the run up to the festival,its bacause im spending most of my time p**sing myself laughing at some of the threads on here.
But i now have no doubt that i along with others  have emphatically rubbished your EVER comment.
This thread has been condemned to to the rubbish bin as a load of old bo***cks,but it was fun PROVING you were 100% wrong.
Cheltenham" and "the Hill", think if it's completely ignored will not be to the detriment of a selection. Ever.
Utterly and totally wrong,Cheltenham and the hill can be very important to some horses in regards to their chances of winning,just as the flatter contours of Aintree are to some of the horses unable to cope with Cheltenham.
THOSE ARGUEING AGAINST YOU HAVE BEEN TOTALLY VINDICATED IN THEIR REMARKS,AND I HAVE 100% PROVEN THAT.
WE WIN,END OF THREAD.
XXXXXXX MERRY CHRISTMAS,HAPPY NEW YEAR,HAVE NICE DAY [;)] [smiley:crazy]
                                                         
                                                     [:D]   [;)]

You can't beat CVByrne; he'll walk away dignity in tact, always does! You end up looking like the fool for trying to tempt him back into a reply!

I think you lack the basic level of intelligence required for even a simple debate.

Is that the opinion of someone who said EVER and just cant admit hes wrong?.[;)]

time for the 'wont get up the hill' merchants again

this year they seem to have their sights set on Sprinter Sacre and Simonsig