My point exactly cyclops, if they pushed UDS towards the CH as a lot on here wanted he may not be the horse he is today. It's about the bigger picture, we all have views and it doesn't make that right. I believe WM had UDS best interests in mind with the slowly slowly approach, I'm big enough to admit I maybe wrong, but at least consider it! Also MS you aren't ignorant maybe arrogant thinking you know better than WM but I maybe wrong At the end of the day have the owners of UDS complained? Answer no, maybe some food for thought.

Good point GAZO it's giving trainers more options and they are taking them, it's logical and much as people don't like it most will continue to do so.

How do you know what WPM was thinking some may have blind faith and believe that the only reason UDS didnt run in CH was to protect him, many similalrly arrogant or ignorant people like myself believe it was to protect HF not UDS. Unless WPM takes a lie detector test we are all left with our experience of everything surrounding the decision at the time - there is a lot of evidence - all circumstantial - that lead all of us to fall one way or another. For me there was a huge amount of talk at the time about HF legacy, the mullins camp and RW were getting edgier and edgier having to provide what they felt was unnecessary justification of his greatness - every time they were interviewed they were reminding us how many G1s he had won. It felt to me that they were getting incredibly frustrated with anyone doubting exactly how good HF was. With this backdrop, everything i have learned about human nature tells me it would have been almost impossible for them to send one of their own horses to chelt along with HF that had the potential to beat him. Can you imagine the irony of that with people saying he is not even the best hurdler in your yard willie. IMO there was no way in the world he would have run that risk no matter what. He ran him against Faugheen because of his age and all of us knew including him that he was past his prime and that was never going to damage his legacy the same as istabraqs last hurrah.

Every time RW was interviewed after he won he reiterated how even though how keen he was in his races that he always had plenty left - he talked about him as a freak, a one off and as a horse that broke the hearts of anything that tried to match him. At the time there were expert after expert that felt he should run in the CH, the debates were endless. The irony is the most tired i ever saw him was running over nearly 2 4 in france in testing conditions - and then less than a month later they sent him there again to run on even more testing conditions - i appreciate it was against gemix but you were never going to have an easy time beating that horse in his own back yard over that trip - so i find it incredibly difficult to believe that being soft on the horse was the main reason for running those two races in france rather than the CH - if that makes me arrogant or ignorant ten so be it, youve got me bang to rights


Cyclops you quote the rp - let me remind you of rp comments after his Gowran Park victory 15 feb 2014 - 'it wouldnt be at all surprising should walsh have a few nightmares about this horse putting it up to Hurricane Fly at Cheltenham, and the prospect of his going out in front and maintaining a gallop at Cheltenham, something he looks well capable of' .... I for one believe that to have been spot on

Milton will you name these so called expert's,I have had an A/P bet on UN DE for the CH when I also thought it's where it should have ran,not nrnb but I got over it,and to suggest anything wasn't done in the interest of the horse and to protect the status of HF is ridiculous,WPM is in a better position than anyone to know what's best not cause he is so much better than A.N.OTHER trainer but because it's in his care TAM BOYD wouldn't get anymore  special treatment than EDDIE O'CONNELL would

Like the Pertemps.

I've read some guff, but this UDS conspiracy theory is right up there.
Mullins is a professional trainer whose job it is to get the best out of all his horses. Of course, with his strength, there are balls to be juggled, particularly concerning horses in the same ownership.
The thought that he would "protect" one of his horses in a Championship race for legacy reasons and not run one with the best chance is just plain barking.
The thought that Ruby would be part of it is even more extreme.
For Mullins to be lectured by anyone about placing his horses; does that not strike anyone as the supreme irony?

*intermediate distance

Next season I'd like WPM to run Douvan against the likes of UDS in the Champion Chase (possibly Vautour), Min (if victorious in the Supreme) against Faugheen in the Champion Hurdle ie horses from the same stable, otherwise another 'uncompetitive' Championship races at Cheltenham 2017 beckons.

I don't think that is ridiculous cos in Athletics as in most other sports that i know of the defending champion doesn't have to qualify to defend his/her title. It could be a good idea actually, something for racing authorities to think about going forwards if they really think and want to promote the fez as the 'olympics of national hunt horse racing' as the media is starting to do on their own back foot. Maybe it not be just the defending champion (winner) of the grade 1s, but perhaps the first 3 home or those that finish within the placings or prize money structure. As qualifying races will be non handicap hurdles events throughout the winter with prize money on paying the first three home they would also be the cleanest of all types of race (grade ones aside) with all runners 'trying' and none out the back with the handbrake applied 'trying to claim a handicap mark' or worse cos connections are eyeing up a punt further down the horses career.

Though with that lies the how you then instigate the most important thing, the entry fee. And owners with horses not good enough but like to have a 'owners day out' of which run at bookmakers prices of 200/1+.


Good debate this though lads, woke up to over 40 posts on my own thread, this is something of a miracle for me

Non-one can seriously swallow the UDS being protected and his best interests were at heart cr&p...jeez, what do they think would have happened in the CH ffs, a nervous breakdown!!! it was all HF end of. Guess what, if UDS had run in the CH, he'd be the exact same horse as he is now!

If HF had not made the CH that year, would Mullins have left the race go by because UDS was suffering from some form of ADHD.

We are guilty of contradicting ourselves if on one hand we moan about the lack of competitiveness but on the other hand buy into the mullins ballshit

stj

Didn't mean you, I was generalizing as the competiveness is the main topic of the theme.

All I want is the best horses running in the same prestigious races at the Cheltenham Festival eg the Champion Hurdle, Champion Chase and Gold Cup, ie Vautour/Djakadam (GC), Vautour/UDS (CC) and Douvan/Faugheen (CH); these horses are not novices in their own field and the owner and/or trainer should not be allowed to 'separate' them in order to maximise their chance of winning more races at Cheltenham.

Why shouldn't they be allowed to separate them? To make you happy?

It's not personal STS, it's caricaturing the over protection of the horse!!

It is ridiculous, STS, I'm afraid (going back to qualification).  You are comparing apples with oranges.  Race horses are fragile creatures, far more fragile than athletes.  Some bright marketing spark was trying to do similar a few years ago. He was using the analogy of F1 and how it was so great that everyone knew when the races were and who'd turn up etc etc.  The obvious difference is that if Lewis smashes into a wall in qualifying and needs a new wing they put one on there.  You can't do that with Faugheen.

The authorities did have a look at it.  Sensibly, it never made it past first base.

no worries duffy

Cheers STS.

What I'm saying duffy is that its out of order to protest about "Mullins bullsh1t" when he hasn't said anything!