Annie Power question

The rules are there for all to see and of course any owner should be allowed to avail of that route. Also I smile to myself when key-board warriors on an anonymous forum tell multi-millionaires to grow a pair.

DHB Annie Power has been re-instated in the betting and previous bets have now been resurrected.

As a few others have said I think it is beyond ridiculous that people are suggesting Annie Power shouldn't be allowed to be supplemented at this stage. The race will be much richer for having her there, and, along with providing people with the option to run a sudden improver, I'd say the supplementary rules are there for situations just like this.

Am I missing something yesterday AP was evens to beat a bunch of poor mares and today she's 2/1 to win a champion hurdle.

BaN the greedy ones are on a roll after todays news and now they want whats left

Feb 17, 2016 -- 11:54AM, baNjackst wrote:

Am I missing something yesterday AP was evens to beat a bunch of poor mares and today she's 2/1 to win a champion hurdle.

The evs for Annie power wasn't just for her to win mares hurdle, there was chance of a move to world hurdle which was factored into price.

'I'd rather run her in the Champion Hurdle than the World Hurdle'

The mind boggles. Perhaps someone could explain why when she didn't go chasing with the express intention of running in a Champion Hurdle two years ago she actually ran in the World Hurdle given what Mullins has to say?

tomdeane
17 Feb 16 17:51
Joined: 29 Jul 04
| Topic/replies: 1,534 | Blogger: tomdeane's blog
As a few others have said I think it is beyond ridiculous that people are suggesting Annie Power shouldn't be allowed to be supplemented at this stage. The race will be much richer for having her there, and, along with providing people with the option to run a sudden improver, I'd say the supplementary rules are there for situations just like this.

I'm sure if Alan King had a change of heart and supplemented Yanworth in for this year, in order to avoid Faugheen next year, those who are balls deep on him in the Neptune would cause a massive uproar, saying how wrong the rules are etc.

I think the reason why there hasn't been such a big reaction this time is because not that many people will have backed Annie Power antepost due to the uncertainty of her target.

tomdeane
17 Feb 16 17:51
Joined: 29 Jul 04
| Topic/replies: 1,534 | Blogger: tomdeane's blog
As a few others have said I think it is beyond ridiculous that people are suggesting Annie Power shouldn't be allowed to be supplemented at this stage. The race will be much richer for having her there, and, along with providing people with the option to run a sudden improver, I'd say the supplementary rules are there for situations just like this.

I'm sure if Alan King had a change of heart and supplemented Yanworth in for this year, in order to avoid Faugheen next year, those who are balls deep on him in the Neptune would cause a massive uproar, saying how wrong the rules are etc.

I think the reason why there hasn't been such a big reaction this time is because not that many people will have backed Annie Power antepost due to the uncertainty of her target.

100% going to take on Annie Power in the Champion Hurdle. Terrible reactionary fav totally vulnerable.

I'm sorry to say if you bet ante post it's full of pitfalls, we all want the big price but this comes with a risk. Any trainer can take advantage of the supplementary stage and it's another added risk. We can all have opinions on where a horse should run but at the end of the day if I was the sole owner of a horse I'd want a big say in where and can honestly say I wouldn't care about ante post punters, I'd run my horse where I thought it had the best chance of winning. Selfish? yes but I'm the man paying the bills.

I've backed Yanworth for the Neptune but if they did decide to go CH I'd have to take it on the chin, it's all part and parcel. Lads when we place a bet ante post if you take can the lows then maybe we should decide ante post bettings not for us. Backing horses is a tough game on the day of the race, betting ante post is a mixture of greed, bravery and stupidity but if you can't do the time don't do the crime and for goodness sake don't blame the trainers or owners for not running a horse in a certain race just because it doesn't suit you.

^ 100% agree about this.

It's one thing for backers to get the hump when a trainer/owner outright says a horse is going to run somewhere only for them to change their mind when the situation has otherwise not changed. But the day when owners and trainers are asked to factor in ante-post punters when deciding which race to run in is hopefully one we'll never see.

I am pretty sure AP will run in the CH but I'm unconvinced that she will win it. She hasn't contested a competitive race at this trip over hurdles in her life and will definitely not have been prepared for it. If the ground dries out, I think she could be in trouble. Thne again, if the ground dries out they may opt for the WH!....

dont forget the 7 pounds she will get (v. handy)

Not to mention coming to such a competitive race off the back of just one prep run less than 4 weeks before the race. Annie is just bad value and it's beyond easy to oppose her.

shes also very talented.

finishes 2nd to Artic Fire

Arctic Fire would be fav in my book. I just have this nagging feeling he's not a 2 miler though. Which is my worry. Plenty to pick over in the coming weeks anyway. Bookies are offering shocking value in the race at the moment priced it up to a terrible book at best priced from them all.

Need to wait until the Tuesday morning to make the play

No trainer has to take punters interests into account though they'd be wise to respect the fact that it is punters who keep the show on the road. Our supposed representatives through the racing media do need to ask them the questions which need to be asked though. What's different? Two years ago Mullins did everything he could to keep Annie out of the Champion despite her being given a better prep for that race. Now he wants her in the Champion.

He needs to be held to account.

will be interesting to see what Ruby rides - personally don't think it's cut and dried he rides AP in CH - especially given Mullins comments about his other contenders being race fit and wishing he could get another run into AP (today was no more than a glorified schooling session)

Eeternal......spot on.

Different two years ago?  Hurricane Fly.

We all knew it at the time and this time the Champion wasn't her race to the extent she wasn't even entered.

Apparently ruby isn't that sure about dropping Annie back in trip for the champion so it's far from cut and dry! I think since they need to wait to March the 9th to enter her it gives them plenty time to think it over and Ricci loves any winners at Cheltenham and a grade 1 is a Grade 1 so I still think she will go mares as they could cut there nose off by putting her in the champion hurdle just because faugheen is out now! You can think all sorts of things right after some big news and races but after 3 weeks of thinking it over I think they will just bite the bullet and go for the easier win!

It's a good point, why give away 2 Grade 1 wins when youve only missed out on one. He has Sempre Medici who can run in the Champion, not that he has a good chance of winning. But still

[[Eeternal youve spent ages on here moaning about owners/trainers. You say WM needs to be held to account - you need to read that again and think about it. Buy a few horses if you want to make decisions re where they run.

Arkle, there is nothing wrong in having an opinion on where someone thinks a horse should run.

It's the same as debating a transfer for a football club, hiring a manager, who should play up front - you don't own the club, you don't have one share, so who are you to tell the CEO of the football club to sack the manager?

Racing is a unique sport as it is funded almost purely by gambling and punters.  If you alienate them and they walk away, you have no sport - simple as that.

Other sports rely on TV money, sponsorship, transfer fees, corporate events etc - racing doesn't have that luxury.

Yes I did Arkle and I stand by my comment. It isn't my job to do so here although I will share my opinion despite you taking your cheap shots. I do expect racing journalists who are paid to do a job to hold people to account and if they want they can use the logic of my posts to form their questions.

You're clearly incapable of challenging my logic and so fall back on the old nonsense about me not being able to hold a legitimate view because I don't directly pay the bills. As wellchief points out without punters there is no sport as we recognise it. With people with your attitude it is little wonder how punter unfriendly most trainers are.

This situation is an absolute travesty. Not for me. I have no financial interest in this but it is for those who do and indeed for the horse. They should run in races which best showcase their talent.

WC you honestly believe punters will walk away over something like this? A few may but a high percentage will carry on regardless. Of course everyone has a right to an opinion but so say we all backed your horse when he returns fit and well hopefully, for this example in the PP at the Cheltenham open meeting but PN said he thought there was a better target for him somewhere else, you honestly telling me you would all take in account our bets?

Anybody with any detailed knowledge of this would be helpful but I think the anecdotal evidence suggests that ante post falls away year on year. Is that in any way surprising?

Picked up on this post while reading posts from earlier on this thread ...

"Supplementing horses this close to the event should be banned anyway.

How can you have faith in ante post if someone can be added at the last minute.

Vautor or douvan would probably win the champion hurdle if they were now suddenly rerouted, not that they would be. But you bet knowing what the entries are."

Those last words, "YOU BET KNOWING WHAT THE ENTRIES ARE" ... no you don't? There's actually ante post markets available for Cheltenham 2017, are the entries out for that yet? No. When the majority of ante post markets open for next year a day after this years festival are the entries open then? No. The title "ante post" caters for a whole load of different meanings, not just the ones you want it to I'm afraid. Ps I have lost money on Faugheen but I'm man enough to take it on the chin.

Picked up on this post while reading posts from earlier on this thread ...

"Supplementing horses this close to the event should be banned anyway.

How can you have faith in ante post if someone can be added at the last minute.

Vautor or douvan would probably win the champion hurdle if they were now suddenly rerouted, not that they would be. But you bet knowing what the entries are."

Those last words, "YOU BET KNOWING WHAT THE ENTRIES ARE" ... no you don't? There's actually ante post markets available for Cheltenham 2017, are the entries out for that yet? No. When the majority of ante post markets open for next year a day after this years festival are the entries open then? No. The title "ante post" caters for a whole load of different meanings, not just the ones you want it to I'm afraid. Ps I have lost money on Faugheen but I'm man enough to take it on the chin.

Picked up on this post while reading posts from earlier on this thread ...

"Supplementing horses this close to the event should be banned anyway.

How can you have faith in ante post if someone can be added at the last minute.

Vautor or douvan would probably win the champion hurdle if they were now suddenly rerouted, not that they would be. But you bet knowing what the entries are."

Those last words, "YOU BET KNOWING WHAT THE ENTRIES ARE" ... no you don't? There's actually ante post markets available for Cheltenham 2017, are the entries out for that yet? No. When the majority of ante post markets open for next year a day after this years festival are the entries open then? No. The title "ante post" caters for a whole load of different meanings, not just the ones you want it to I'm afraid. Ps I have lost money on Faugheen but I'm man enough to take it on the chin.

No STJ, they wouldn't walk away over something like this, not at all; I'm talking more generally about a sport/industry where you need to look after your customers.  You can gamble on pretty much everything now, so there are plenty of alternatives to have a bet on if you always feel you need a bet.

The industry will be ok, as long as there are big Saturday crowds etc; but on a normal weekend the Saturday crowd is more once a year people out with their mates to get hammered.  Not being a snob because I've done that myself, and races are great social occasions, but I wouldn't want people who genuinely love the sport to stop liking it as much, to be replaced by people who back horses based on the colour of the jockeys silks.

The Sound Investment scenario; I think Paul Nicholls operates a different way to Willie, or at least their strategies are different.  PFN tends to have one long term target for a horse set out at the start of the year, and puts everything towards that target (unless someone like Saphir or Ptit Zig clearly isn't liking fences, and then he says so).

I don't know anything about training, but I think that is better because you can tailor your training regime with that race in mind.

I have no idea if you train a 2m hurdler any different from a 3m hurdler, but with the Mullins ones, you know they have been trained for one festival, but not all roads have lead to the particular race they have been entered into ie Would Wille have trained Annie any  differently this year if he ever thought she would be CH bound?

Suppose I haven't answered your last question.

There are literally hundreds of people with a small share in Sound Investment, so we are Johnstones Paint Trophy owners whereas Rich Ricci is in the Champions League.

If we were told he was being targeted for the Paddy Power but then an easier, but just as valuable race came up, I think we would still go for the Paddy Power because of the prestige of the race, and a day out at Cheltenham; but for us, just to have a runner at a big meeting means the world, so its like comparing apples and pears.

The whole Annie Power thing to me screams of Willie not having faith in Nichols Canyon, Arctic Fire or Sempre Medici.  I think if he thought one of those was a really good one, he'd say, "Well we have x for that race, so we'll keep Annie here".  I know NC and AF are different ownership but that doesn't normally stop him.

Ante post is not for the faint hearted, that feeling of emptiness when you see the headline;

'[your torpedoed selection] is out of Cheltenham'

I still dabble small at big/huge odds but the heart break is too much to get overly involved.

No fair enough WC but essentially at the end of the day you can never please everyone, so a decision that pleases you will disgruntle someone else and vice versa,it's swings and roundabouts.

The training part, I would not have a clue but obviously they wanted Faugheen to run the CH but they are lucky enough to have AP as a possible deputy. Just say for argument sake they decide to stay safe and run AP in the mares, some people will be up in arms. WPM has a thankless task if he wants to please people.

But I have to say a lot of major races flat and jumps have supplementary late entries, part and parcel and if you're cribbing about it more likely because you didn't know about it but to be blunt that's your own fault for not researching the topic.

Everyone knows horses can be supplemented.  Don't watch the flat nonsense, but Coneygree was going to be supplemented for the King George - no one had an issue with that because it was a simple error.  I think this one is worse because there was no intention of running Annie.

I know you can't please everyone, but that's the same will all sports and all walks of life.  Everyone knows the risks of antepost, sometimes it works for you, sometimes against you; I get that.

Just doesn't sit well with me that a rich owner can throw £20,000 down like it's bog roll and pay the supplementary fee, whilst a lot of people may have lost money at the same time.  Also makes it hard for small owners when a rich one can come in at the last second and instantly have the favourite for a Championship race.

Don't think I'll say any more because I'll end up going round and round in circles.

....although I have been pretty p'sd off since the news broke, I have enjoyed the little debates on here over the subject, rather than will Vautour stay, Don Cossack has failed twice at the Festival etc etc...

Having  been on here a number of years and conversed with chief on countless occasions, I have no doubt he knows all about this game.
Maybe you should thing about retracting that last sentence slower.

Seems to me a few missing the point,and thinking some of us don't understand the perils of ante post........quiet laughable some of the cr&p I read on here sometimes!!

Cheers Budd

My last sentence wasn't aimed at WC or anyone in particular and I won't retract because in some cases it's true. Ok budd

Well that's how it looked to me.
Apologies for misunderstanding.

No worries

Well Chief used to ridicule my quiz on here. He is a wrong un of that I have little doubt.

I have waited 18 months for that, jok#ing of course, nice fela

I used to love Howdi's fact of the day. Brought a bit of fun to the forum

I doubt AP will be supplemented, for one sole reason, it wasn't WPM or RR who brought it up, it was the ATR interviewer post AP race today and WPM merely said "We would definitely have to have a look at it and talk it over" at which point bookmakers were quick to instal AP antepost fav! Baldys even re-introduced her at a measily 6/4!!

The very fact she is out to as big as 5.4 on here says it all to me, especially after being briefly and rather strongly a solid 11/4 shot after the market settled. I laid her at 3.9 earlier on this afternoon and i intend to not green for at least the next week or two just want to see how the market is after MTOY's run on Saturday and of course then there is the P&C wind op too, which of course wont effect the market in a big way but if he were to suddenly work much better it will send small ripples through it.

Why would it not be supplemented? Great chance to win, would be madness not to.

Not that it would matter to connections, but how much is it to supplement for champion hurdle?

wellchief • February 17, 2016 10:34 PM GMT
Laugh I used to love Howdi's fact of the day. Brought a bit of fun to the forum............if you are listening maam , may i recommend a knighthood

buddeliea 17 Feb 16 21:20 Joined: 19 Mar 04 | Topic/replies: 12,467 | Blogger: buddeliea's blog
Having  been on here a number of years and conversed with chief on countless occasions, I have no doubt he knows all about this game.
Maybe you should thing about retracting that last sentence slower.

Seems to me a few missing the point,and thinking some of us don't understand the perils of ante post........quiet laughable some of the cr&p I read on here sometimes!!
Rate reply:
| report block user
i have never read a bigger load of crxp on here(not directed at you budd)relating to A/P rules  i know it's a kick in the teeth when youre on a n/r but the risk is there b4 the bet has been placed,we might not be up to speed on the rules and the extra'hidden gems of supplementary but it's like as in bookie's T&C do we all read them,probably not but there there to keep both parties right,as i said budd this not aimed at you but so many say this is right or this is wrong,i think you all know what is right just will realize this when the smarting pain dies down a bit,but to think WM OR ANYONE should be held to account,account for what ffs,the owner/trainer owes us nothing and for journo's to use this forum opinion's in questioning anybody relating to where AP may end up

Chief I dont see why you should be upset because a rich person can splash out £20K whenever he wishes - thats the way it is in the real world and applies across the board in every other aspect of life and it is racing after all which is a rich mans sport. If one cant splash out £20K I dont believe one should be in horse ownership anyway.

Its a bit like ante-post - if one cant handle the downsides then one shouldnt get involved. Faugheens withdrawl today cost me bigtime but I'll have to get over it and I will and he owes me nothing. Tomorrow is a new day.

* withdrawal

Couldn't resist a bit of paddy's 15/8 on her to win any race! Not a great price if she rocks up in the champion as I don't think she will be good enough to win it... But least I would have a run for my cash! But I still think she will end up in the mares when they have time to think it over so that price will look great if I'm right lol

I think people have a right to question the morals of adding a horse to a race, when it has been quiet clear all season it was not its target,not even mentioned in passing.
You back a horse antepost trying to get what you think is a nice price and it gets injured,yep we take it on the chin,even when you back a horse that's lame at the time of placing the bet(Ar Mad). As we all know...that's antepost.
But the effect Faugheen has had is another matter.

Because of his withdrawal,his connections decide to mull over the possibility of putting AP in a race that as said,has not even remotely been suggested. The aftermath of that possibility actually happening is huge for antepost backers,and although its allowed and connections have a right to contest any race with a horse its allowed to run in, for me (and apparently others)it leaves a bit of a sour taste,and I would expect a reaction from those people.......rightly or wrongly.
I don't think it unreasonable to try and avoid this happening again by suggesting some sort of change in the supplement system,entries etc.
I am sure we are all understanding folk on here.....well I would like to think so anyway.And can sympathise with those affected financially.

I sympathize with you entirely Budd I'm sure you're gut wrenched from the past cupla day's,not arguing with you but was the Derby WINNER last year not supplemented Golden Horn and probably went on to dent a few other vouchers,not even suggesting the ante on that race is any where near the amounts invested at the  festival,but just that the rule/clause is there to bite you regardless of who owns it,it would be similar to anyone that has the 2nd in the  CH if ANNIE were to be supplemented and go on to win sure they would probably want to call foul also

The only reason Annie Power would be running in the Champion Hurdle is the owner's greed. What credentials does she have for winning the race? Her two defeats in a fifteen race career were both at Cheltenham. She has never beaten a single horse of note over two miles. The only horse she's beaten who had a sniff of the CH was Zarkandar and he wasn't good enough to place in the race. Two years ago she wasn't considered up to taking on The Fly and he finished fourth behind The New One ffs. She's 7/4 with some firms and that's just another example of rubbish ante-post odds in a season that has been characterized by garbage ante-post markets. Anyone backing her at that price is an idiot.

Look, I know the rules, I know the risks, I've had plenty of non runners in the past. Annie changing her target does not effect me in any way shape or form betting wise. Faugheen did, but all that's done is make my MTOY bet more realistic now.

I'm just talking about the general feel of what's going on and I don't particularly like it. Being able to put a horse who was not entered into a race less than a month before shouldn't be allowed imo. It's like a club signing a player outside of the transfer window because their star striker has got injured before the FA Cup final.

I know it happens a lot more in flat racing, but flat racing has no character imo, it's all about 3yo for one season to then try and get as much stud fee for them, hence why they supplement a lot more, because the stud fee they can earn is huge, and I see flat racing as much more of a business.

If Annie had been left in the Champion and had been trading at 1000 on here, at least she would have been left in. When a horse is not given an entry you can normally assume she won't be running, like Smad Place now taken out of the Ryanair.

All I've said is after a bad few weeks antepost for me, this is the incident that has tipped me to stop doing it anymore, not this one incident alone; I'm not that dramatic.  In the last 14 days we have lost Faugheen, Ar Mad, Killultagh Vic, Simonsig, Sound Investment and Traffic Fluide. Now with VVM and Annie likely to be non runners in their original targets I've now decided that the risk isn't worth the reward anymore, so I'll wait til the day of the race and wait for bookies offers.

I think there's a horse welfare issue as well. Throughout her career (she's already 8) she has not been prepared for a Champion Hurdle. Her preparation this year is particularly risible with the two other jockeys at Punchestown deciding before the start that they'd stick to a private race between themselves. AP has not been tested at Champion Hurdle pace. She fell in the egg and spoon race last year and there's an increased chance she'll fall again in a faster run race though this time she may not be so lucky.

Without wishing to stray off topic, I think being able to supplement a 3 y.o colt, who may not even have run as a 2 y.o, for what would be the biggest race of its career, 10 weeks into its classic season, is completely different to supplementing a horse which has been around a number of years and who has a level of ability that is pretty much known. Especially when connections have gone out of their way to swerve the race in years gone by for varying reasons.

As mentioned previously, my ante post on the CH was Peace & Co and this particular event doesn't impact on my pocket, but I just feel they could have had her entered under the proviso that it would be an option in the event of anything happening to Faugheen. I know they don't have to and that supplementing is within the rules and is something you have to consider when backing ante post, but it just won't sit easily with me if they do it and she runs, having previously dismissed the idea of running in it at all costs.

Having thought about it, I'm sceptical over whether she will take up the option and suspect they might stick with the mares race. If they do, blackballed has a nice wager on his hands. Good luck

Here's the thing, in the past when Walsh and Co has been questioned on why AP isn't in the CH especially with many of us thinking that it was purely to look after HF, the response has been, " hey, the mares is there for the taking, why not run her in the race that gives the best chance for her to win", they may have been eyeing up the WH this time but if they were asked the same question last week you would have gotten the same answer as a couple of years back, well the consideration now about putting her in the CH proves conclusively that all the previous was indeed cr&p as we all knew anyhow.

I think this is one of the most bizarre threads I've seen on here, and that's not something easily said!

Annie Power is perfectly entitled to run in the Champion, and if connections want to run her then they should. Ante-post players have nothing at all to be upset about. We are all grown men and women and (should) understand the risks.

The feeling that Mullins and Ricci should be thinking of ante-post punters here seems to be dissipating (thankfully) but now people are questioning whether Annie Power should "morally" be allowed to run in the Champion because connections have previously intimated that other targets are more suitable. This is absolute nonsense! She is being considered for the race in light of a change in circumstance (e.g. superstar penalty-kick Faugheen is not running now). She may not win it even if running, but she has a very real chance based on the pick of her form in what is a very winnable race. Connections of course also have Vroum Vroum Mag, who would have a favourite's chance in the Mares Hurdle. I realise everyone knows this but I'm just pointing out that an Annie Power switch is an entirely logical, legal thing to do, and that connections have every moral right to make that switch.

*PUTS ON FLAMEPROOF JACKET*

APower may not been the one supplemented for the CH, it appears Mullins has plenty of Supreme candidates and, well, just saying, Min could move there.

Spot on tomdeane. Some very confused and wayward thinking on here.

Firstly, this Champion Hurdle now looks extraordinarily weak and the fact that the Mullins camp have not seen Annie Power as a Champion Hurdler before does not mean they shouldn't look at it now. With My Tent or Yours around 6/1, virtually any hurdler with pretensions to class is in with a chance. Would anyone blame the Thistlecrack camp if they decided to have a go?

Secondly, the normally sound buddeliea says "I think people have a right to question the morals of adding a horse to a race, when it has been quiet clear all season it was not its target, not even mentioned in passing". Well, budd, it wasn't but now it is. The fact that so many, including the bookies, have assumed she will now go for the race, says it all. Mullins hasn't committed to it yet and Walsh seems unsure.
Why would you not consider running a horse in one of the two biggest races of the jumps season if she will start favourite if she turns up?

And for those that subscribe to the Hurricane Fly protection theory (and who probably think the Duke of Edinburgh killed Diana as well), you then have to believe that Ricci acted morally to forego his chance of winning the big one, but immorally if he now wants to win it. (Unless, you think it was immoral of him to protect someone else's horses' reputation? God, I'm getting confused).

If there was no supplementary stage then Annie Power would've been entered for the champion hurdle just in case anyway.

from Chris Cook in The Guardian (bold bits by yours truly)



Annie Power is the new favourite for the Champion Hurdle at next month’s Cheltenham Festival, a race for which she was not even being considered on Wednesday morning, following the news that the reigning champion, Faugheen, is out for the season. The pair are stablemates at the enormously powerful yard of Willie Mullins, who somehow kept his composure and even his sense of humour at Punchestown , despite the ill-timed injury to one of his best horses.

“I would rather run her in the Champion Hurdle than I would the World Hurdle,” Mullins said. “I’ve just had a word with the owner and it looks like she will be supplemented. But we have to see what happens between now and then. The same owner has Vroum Vroum Mag, who could be a real good option for the Mares’ Hurdle.

“As we see, with horses you don’t know what injuries are coming down the road. Come the week in Cheltenham, we’ll see what we have but she would have a good few options anyway.”

The Irishman is well placed to cope with isolated bits of bad news; although Faugheen, a winner at the last two Festivals, is now on the sidelines with a damaged suspensory ligament, Mullins still has the first three in the betting for the big race on the opening day of the Festival on 15 March. He was a little surprised by the identity of those three, however.
Faugheen Champion Hurdle win sets new record for Willie Mullins
Read more

“Arctic Fire, Nichols Canyon … is that what the betting suggests?” he asked the press corps in the winner’s enclosure here. Someone mumbled that, in fact, Annie Power had now shot to the top of the betting lists and was no bigger than 9-4. “Go away!” replied the stunned Mullins.

The chestnut mare is not even entered for the Champion Hurdle, though she can be added to the race five days beforehand at a cost of £20,000.

Not seen in public since April, Annie Power was supposedly running here in order to help connections decide whether she should make a second attempt on Cheltenham’s Mares’ Hurdle, in which her late fall last year saved bookmakers millions of pounds, or go for a more ambitious tilt at the World Hurdle, in which she was beaten two years ago. But an hour after her success and after conferring with her owner, Rich Ricci, Mullins indicated that the Champion was now her most likely target.

Annie Power’s position at the head of betting lists for the Champion Hurdle is a dramatic change to the status of a horse who was in danger of becoming one of this winter’s forgotten stars. She had raced just twice in the past 21 months and seemed destined for the relative backwater of the Mares’ Hurdle, a race she ought to win easily, which many of her fans regard as being rather beneath her.

Instead, she will be the cynosure of all eyes when Cheltenham’s annual jamboree begins and will undoubtedly be combined in thousands of bets with other Mullins horses expected to win on day one, like Min, Douvan, Black Hercules and Vroum Vroum Mag. Her trainer was pleased with the way she pulled clear of two inferior rivals here, though he still feels she is short of time before the Festival, a consequence of a minor injury she suffered in the autumn.

“It was little more than a schooling session for her, which is probably what she needs, rather than a really competitive race, to be honest. We can step up her work with an eye for Cheltenham. Arctic Fire and Nichols Canyon and Sempre Medici, they’re racing fit and Annie Power is not, I wouldn’t have said. You’d love to get another run in. But there isn’t time.”

Arctic Fire and Nichols Canyon are next in the Champion Hurdle betting at 7-2 and 5-1 respectively. No British-trained runner in the race is shorter than 10-1.
Faugheen puts up ‘electrifying’ show to land the Irish Champion Hurdle
Read more

As for Faugheen, Mullins expects the eight-year-old will be back in action in November. He said it reminded him of an injury Hurricane Fly had early in his career, from which he recovered to win two Champion Hurdles.

“Faugheen will hopefully come back 100% next season. We have a very good record, I think, with putting that type of injury back.

“It can always recur, of course it can, but from what we can see on a scanner, it’s very slight. It’s not a bad injury, it’s just the wrong time.”

He also had good news of Djakadam, a Gold Cup contender who needed stitches to his chest after falling at Cheltenham last month but returned to fast work on Wednesday. “I think we’ve enough time to get all the work we need to get into him. I just don’t want any setback between now and then, no more than I would with any horse.”

So people can make up their own scenarios about AP not being supplemented, or other horses being supplemented but, as of yesterday it's pretty clear what the plan is - even though her own trainer seems to think she is a false favourite. A great opportunity for punters to oppose her if she is supplemented surely.

I don't think it's immoral or anything like that and I don't care one way or the other all I'm commenting on is that I don't believe the best race stuff they come out with, I believe that if asked last week what would happen if Faugheen got injured, I don't believe they'd say that AP would be supplemented, just as I don't believe they'd have said that for HF either.

On the subject of her now looking like running in the CH, would a horse that had been aimed at longer races have been trained in a completely differently to one that had been targeted at a more speed contest, we know she's had setbacks but her prep such as it has been must now look to have been even more ideal in relation to the race she's actually going to run in....or are they all trained the same way?

not ideal...should say

I'm no trainer but I think we sometimes worry too much about how horses are trained for specific races - I think class normally comes to the fore, so as long as you are fully fit and on good terms with yourself, I doubt it would be that big a deal. I'm sure plenty would disagree though...

dan hardcore
         dan hardcore 
Date Joined:   26 Nov 00 
Add contact | Send message
  18 Feb 16 11:34 
Joined:   26 Nov 00      | Topic/replies: 2,767  | Blogger: dan hardcore's blog
If there was no supplementary stage then Annie Power would've been entered for the champion hurdle just in case anyway.



Maybe that's where the answer lies,just don't bother with a supplementary stage. Connections just enter a horse in every race it can possibly run in. At least that way their can be no complaints when that horse runs in its race and all backers and bookies know the score all season.

I don't have any hassle with the trainer and owners picking any race they want that was the chance I took and except even though it is and will be a kick in the stones! But like I have already said I think come the cold light of day and the dust has settled they will stick to the mares! As its a definite easy grade 1 so why risk it... But they might the only slight upside for me yesterday was I have a good eway bet on nichols canyon and have artic fire in a eway lucky 15 so not all bad! But I must say this is the 1st year I have had a good few antepost bets and think it will be my last... Or least not bet so much early and just accept the prices on the day. But that's the chance and choice we all have to make. I just can't wait to get on with it now and get the action started :)

Some people need to dig themselves out of the dark ages. The supplementary entry idea is universally agreed to be a big success for racing as a whole. Golden Horn was supplemented for both the Epsom derby and the Prix de l'Arc. Not sure I heard anything about morals then. The rules on ante-post are well known and anyone who doesnt understand them should get another past-time. Likewise wrt the rules on supplementing runners. You all sound like a crowd of old women crying over spilt milk. People pontificating about morals and greed - on a horse-betting forum - as they say on here you couldnt make it up. You all should be made reread the carp you write. You all know the one about the heat and the kitchen.

On a personal note it has affected some of my early accas before nrnb, but generally I think I have got off not too bad,ive had no big single bets on Faugheen or Annie Power or VVM.
Losing Faugheen has helped me in that respect having backed Identity Thief and MTOY at nice odds.
Also have Nicholls Canyon in some nice multiples which I had virtually given up on.

Do feel for those that may have fared a lot worse though, and as I said earlier I don't blame them one bit for having questions.

Calm down Arkle, as many have said we do understand ante post!!
All I am doing is calmly talking about possible ways of improving antepost, I don't expect all to agree,probably not many will,but at the same time I don't expect responses like that, or maybe I should.

And what on earth is wrong about talking about morals and greed? Just cos its a horse racing forum does not mean people cannot have a discussion with those things involved.

Got to say I'm with you Budd, but each to their own.  My bets on TNO and Nichols Canyon are much better and lost nothing on Annie, but it still seems wrong that she's entered in 2 races and going to run in a race she's not entered for.

Yeh, absolutely each to their own Shock.

That's what the rules of entry allow mate, as been saying, I see nowt wrong with questioning said rules myself.
Rules are not untouchable, and can be changed if its decided that the sport can improve for such changes.
If not, leave things as they are.

I think this is an interesting topic, but if people prefer, we can just regurgitate the same conversations that we've been having for months about Vautour, Don Cossack etc where they've gone round and round in circles.

Also, those who disagree are coming across as quite condescending by the way; making out people don't know what they're talking about when all you're doing is putting up an alternative opinion.

Here's a question:

If Annie Power wins this years champion hurdle, will we get Annie Power vs Vautour in march 2017?

Budd I dont have a problem with what you said at all but it annoys me when people on an anonymous forum point fingers at others. I think owners should be encouraged as much as possible because it sure aint a way to make money and we should be delighted when rich owners decide to invest their money in the game - I'd suggest waste as a more appropriate word.

My understanding is that the supplementary stage was introduced in 1999 in UK/Ire. Most years horses are supplemented for the Epsom derby. In fact the derby winners of 2000 2001 and 2003 were all supplemented and of course that includes none other than Gallileo himself - not a bad coup for British racing. The aim of the idea was to have the best horses running in the race and to increase prize-money and it has achieved those aims. One downside to the idea was demonstrated in 2003 when a Brendan Duke trained horse who had gone through the normal entry route from the beginning was not allowed to run because 3 other horses, including the eventual winner, were supplemented. No doubt the horse, Skelligs Rock, would not have won the race but the connections were denied a run which is quite a bit worse than having a non-runner in a small ante-post yankee.

I'll also add that many people on here and elsewhere have backed horses in the Cheltenham handicaps long ago even though the entries are not due out for some time. We know that you may say but we know horses may get injured and others may be supplemented.

Apologies if I have been one of those coming across as being condescending but I am honestly struggling to see what people can possibly be upset/angry/disillusioned with here.

For most of the past two or three seasons all we have had is how gutless/boring the Ricci/Mullins/Walsh powerhouse has been at times in preventing us from seeing some of the match-ups we crave as lovers of the jumps game, and now, following the gutting news that Ricci/Mullins/Walsh have had to bear that their leading light will miss Cheltenham, they are seemingly (although it is not a Faugh-gone conclusion) going to roll the dice and unleash AP in the Champion.

How can anyone honestly say that wouldn't make the Champion Hurdle a much bigger spectacle, whether or not you are with Annie Power?

I think circumstances like this are exactly why the supplementary rules are in existence and why they should remain as they are. Let's not forget that Faugheen's injury has caused the landscape to change. Connections are merely re-shuffling their deck in the wake of that, and as far as I can see it, we're all going to enjoy a richer race because of it.

Bud - I know the scenario is different but you have never got over the fact that they didn't let Un De Sceaux run in the Champion. Would you rather Annie Power mopped up the Mares instead of running in the Champion now?

Arkle, I think the comparison with the Derby isn't the same though.  I may be way off, because I don't follow flat racing, but I think it must be a lot harder to gauge whether your unraced 2yo etc, or one with a light 2yo campaign will be good enough to win the crown jewels of flat racing a year later; so supplemented horses will normally be higher because you might not have known what you had in the first place.

As I said earlier too, flat racing to me is all about, how can we get as much stud fee as possible once a horse is retired.  Therefore, their rich Sheik owners will supplement horses all over the place, to try and get that elusive Group 1 next to their name, as it increases their stallion potential massively, and then they get their money back later on down the line several times over.

I see National Hunt as a completely different game.  We have known about Annie's ability for about three years now, and my view is, well if you didn't enter her in the first place then it is tough s**t, the deadline has passed and you missed it.  I don’t like the way you can just buy yourself back in to a race, it’s like buying more chips in poker when you’ve just been knocked out of a tournament.

For me, this is not anti Willie Mullins or anti Rich Ricci – far from it; I’d feel this way no matter who it was, and like Budd and Shocks, this decision doesn’t effect me financially.  I know it is in the rules that you can do it, but I would prefer it if the rules were there for instances like Coneygree, when it was an admin error, when they forgot to send the email or whatever it was.  I think there should be a rule for extenuating circumstances only, based on that horse for that race why it wasn’t entered, not related to any other horse dropping out.

Tom,
Absolutely want the best chance for any horse to run in the top races if I think they merit it.
Annie Power merits it, should have run in it two years ago imo along with UDS. But that year they were both entered during the season. We all knew it was touch and go for both.

That is not really the point I am making here though. More about the system that exists, and can it be changed for improvement sake. Its merely a discussion point mate for me now.
If it cant be improved then so be it.
My ol dad used to tell me....no such word as cant!!

budd, it exists because there's money to be made for the BHA. It's rarely used in NH racing for obvious reasons.
Agree that it is not the best way for it to be run and would much prefer the system whereby if you don't enter, you don't run.

But to go from criticising the rule to casting moral doubts on those that play by the rules takes the discussion into a completely different and, for me, ridiculous dimension.

If she did win it, she'd surely deserve the chance to defend it next year wouldn't she?

Some things some of you denigrating those of us who are voicing concerns need to understand:

Some of us are not engaged ante post on the race.

Some of us have no bet on Annie Power at all.

Some of us want to see the best and most exciting races.

Some of us want to see consistency.

Two years ago many of us argued that Annie Power running in the Champion Hurdle would have added a dimension to the race which would have seen interest in the race reach a new peak. This year the race was going to be a Faugheen procession according to most people. Had connections said that they wanted to give the racing pubic the best races they could have entered Annie in the Champion with a view to her taking on Faugheen and that would once again have raised interest in the race exponentially even if most would have thought Faugheen would still have won. At least they would have been walking her through the front door instead of waiting to see if a window had been left open and then possibly squeezing her through it. What is racing if it isn't the thrill of the best taking on the best?

So please no more lectures about pocket talking and all the rest.

The aim of the idea was to get the best horses in the race and to improve prize money. The same applies for both flat and NH. A  3yo suddenly strikes form and wins the Dante and connections suddenly realise they possibly have a derby winner on their hands is not unlike the scenario wrt to Faugheens withdrawal in that horses who had very little chance of winning the race now have a much better chance - nearly anything could win it now. I couldnt buy the I forgot argument as ever being a valid excuse for anything.

Tbh I'll be very surprised AP runs in the CH but it is the owner and trainers right to enter and run her if they so wish.

Of course that is their right Arkle and it is our right to question why they weren't prepared to take on Faugheen or Hurricane Fly before him?

Eet I have no argument with our/your right to question but thats about as far as it goes. The connections have broken no laws or rules whatsoever  and have the right not to reply also. Cyclops says it all in a few words.

I'm not aware of anybody claiming they have broken any laws or rules Arkle.

Eeternal, do you really think that Ricci, with the Champion his for the taking, would put another horse in the race if she has the option of winning either the stayers' or the mares' just for the good of the race?

He'd be a very strange man if he did. None of us would.

Flyingbolt would have taken on Arkle in the Gold Cup had he not been trained by the same man. Instead, he had to make do with winning the Champion Chase and being runner up in the Champion Hurdle. And he had a different owner; top stables want to win as many big pots as they can.

I'm certainly not denigrating you, but it seems a very odd argument and wholly unrealistic to me.

Just as matter of interest Supplementaries were introduced initially for flat race group ones and 3 years later they were introduced specifically for the main races at Cheltenham to ensure the leading horses run in those races. Supplementaries are used throughout Europe and are not going away. It may surprise some people on here that the main arguments against them is that the fees are too high! - I'm only the messenger here so everyone please hold your fire!

I thought the posts from yesterday afternoon were offbeat, but then i read the last 50 and they're in another dimension altogether.

@Arkle - except for your posts. Nice job.

cyclops

Eeternal, do you really think that Ricci, with the Champion his for the taking, would put another horse in the race if she has the option of winning either the stayers' or the mares' just for the good of the race?

He'd be a very strange man if he did. None of us would.


You can speak for you and I can speak for me. Neither of us can say what other people would do. If I was a billionaire who chose to put my money into racing it would be because I love racing. I wouldn't need the prize money. I'd love to win the biggest prizes. That and promoting the best of the sport would be my personal priority. Beyond that I'd like to think I'd be seen as consistent and do what was in the best interests of my horses. I thought it in the best interest of the sport and arguably the horse to go for the Champion against Hurricane Fly. It didn't happen. I'd have celebrated them taking on Faugheen to generate interest in the sport as long as she was fit and ready.

This belated scrambling around for baubles now Faugheen is out is inconsistent, doesn't help some of the sports biggest fans (ante post punters) and a little unseemly in my view. But like I said I can only speak for my own view which as I've said is principled rather than pocket generated.

Thanks Maelduin

it come will come down to if ruby wants to ride her in the champion ? she wont be supplemented if ruby chooses AF or NC

Personally thought it could have been a good discussion, in parts it was.
But there yer go.
Still,nice to see posters whose comments on here I have respected over the years understanding my points and seeing where I was coming from.

FF,been thinking about that,and to be honest I could see reasons to choose all 3,and reasons to choose none of them!!

i don't understand the problem... willie has said if annie power preps the world hurdle would be an option

personally i think faugheen has been lame for a while judging by the betting and they knew they couldn't go to the champion hurdle without prepping annie power, hence she was suddenly entered up to give them options...i have no doubt that if all was well with the good horse they would of just gone straight to the mares race

should she run in the champion hurdle? up to them and she certainly wouldn't be out of place, although i have always seen her as a 2m4f horse so if she were mine she would go to the mares race then to aintree over the same distance

no vested interest but i'd like her to go for the champion as she will make the market as i'm not that keen on her winning over the distance and we can take this vroum vroum mare on in the mares race of which the books have put her in ridiculously short for what she has actually achieved

PP - What Race will Annie Power Run in at the Cheltenham Festival?

CH 1/3
MH 11/4
WH 5/1