Classics 2016
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Havent got ime to check if this is posted elsewhere . As reported today in the American racing press :
Duel at the Downs? Decimation at the Downs is more like it.
I had the pleasure of watching the race live via simulcast from Saratoga racecourse itself, the scene of so many of Frankel’s namesake’s big wins. I watched with a good crew of folks including Scott Finley, the foreign racing guru who runs NYRA’s UK simulcasting operation, Katie Bo Williams of The Saratoga Special, racing author Jonathan Silverman, and Ryan and Jack Clancy (for the record, I was the only one drinking).
I’d normally consider it bad form to point out that I was right in presuming that Frankel had even more to give than he’d shown so far, but sometimes it’s just too fun being right not to revel in it just a little bit. Frankel’s received enough plaudits that I feel no obligation to add to the list. Let’s just have a look at the data.
The first four furlongs (plus 5 yards, as the Clerk of the Course added a few feet to prtect the ground) went in 51.8. This number accounts for a run-up time. If that seems slow, remember both the extra five yards and that the 4F comes at the end of a bend.
And that, friends, is where the real running started. For the last 4F Frankel *averaged* sub 11 seconds a furlong. From 4F out to 1F out he ran 33.2, and he covered his final furlong in 10.7
There were some other sectionals floating around twitter but trust me, these are right as they are from the great Rob Dove, done through video editing software and double-checked.
What to make of this? We can start with the redundant and obvious: this is a freakishly fast miler. The way he relaxed early in the Sussex suggests two things to me 1) he could have gone faster and 2) he sure seems like he’ll stretch out to me, at least to 10F.
As for Canford Cliffs, his supporters can cite the eight pounds, seeming pace advantage that Frankel had, and the fact that he doesn’t seem to like to run downhill. But I think it’s likely that the slow pace early is the only reason CC was as close to Frankel as he was at the finish yesterday. It would be fascinating to see them clash again at closer weight, with a full cast signed on, but make no mistake, it’s tough to see Canford Cliffs ever being Frankel as long as the latter is ridden properly.
It seems like the plan for Frankel this year is to appear just once more on the Champions Day card at Ascot. Sorry American racing fans, book your tickets now. But the good news is that there’s also talk Frankel may come back as a 4-year old.
I stand amongst the many who can’t wait to see what he does next.
For a link to the video (a must if you haven’t already seen it), click here.
Duel at the Downs? Decimation at the Downs is more like it.
I had the pleasure of watching the race live via simulcast from Saratoga racecourse itself, the scene of so many of Frankel’s namesake’s big wins. I watched with a good crew of folks including Scott Finley, the foreign racing guru who runs NYRA’s UK simulcasting operation, Katie Bo Williams of The Saratoga Special, racing author Jonathan Silverman, and Ryan and Jack Clancy (for the record, I was the only one drinking).
I’d normally consider it bad form to point out that I was right in presuming that Frankel had even more to give than he’d shown so far, but sometimes it’s just too fun being right not to revel in it just a little bit. Frankel’s received enough plaudits that I feel no obligation to add to the list. Let’s just have a look at the data.
The first four furlongs (plus 5 yards, as the Clerk of the Course added a few feet to prtect the ground) went in 51.8. This number accounts for a run-up time. If that seems slow, remember both the extra five yards and that the 4F comes at the end of a bend.
And that, friends, is where the real running started. For the last 4F Frankel *averaged* sub 11 seconds a furlong. From 4F out to 1F out he ran 33.2, and he covered his final furlong in 10.7
There were some other sectionals floating around twitter but trust me, these are right as they are from the great Rob Dove, done through video editing software and double-checked.
What to make of this? We can start with the redundant and obvious: this is a freakishly fast miler. The way he relaxed early in the Sussex suggests two things to me 1) he could have gone faster and 2) he sure seems like he’ll stretch out to me, at least to 10F.
As for Canford Cliffs, his supporters can cite the eight pounds, seeming pace advantage that Frankel had, and the fact that he doesn’t seem to like to run downhill. But I think it’s likely that the slow pace early is the only reason CC was as close to Frankel as he was at the finish yesterday. It would be fascinating to see them clash again at closer weight, with a full cast signed on, but make no mistake, it’s tough to see Canford Cliffs ever being Frankel as long as the latter is ridden properly.
It seems like the plan for Frankel this year is to appear just once more on the Champions Day card at Ascot. Sorry American racing fans, book your tickets now. But the good news is that there’s also talk Frankel may come back as a 4-year old.
I stand amongst the many who can’t wait to see what he does next.
For a link to the video (a must if you haven’t already seen it), click here.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 17
|
By:
considering CC ran over to other rail i think being bit too harsh on it,
WFA another consideration, frankels speed was too much for CC, cracked under the pressure.imo |
|
By:
As soon as they'd gone through the first furlong, at a crawl, and turned the race into a 7 furlong sprint, the writing was on the wall for Canford Cliffs.
Canford is a true miler, almost to the yard, Frankel seems to like 7 to me. Don't get me wrong I still think he's a "freak" (maybe I would be a "freak" if my grandad was also my great grandad!!) and one of the all time greatest, I just don't think he's unbeatable over a mile. |
|
By:
Baxta - Frankel hardly crawled the whole mile when it's won other races has it?
|
|
By:
one of the all time greatest, I just don't think he's unbeatable over a mile.
Warning: contains contradictory statements |
|
By:
well practically all the 'all time greats' have been beaten so i thinks his statement if fine personally.
|
|
By:
Let's keep Mike Smith out of this LOL
|
|
By:
Brigadier Gerrard
Nijinsky Mill Reef Shergar Dancing Brave Sea The Stars all time greats but all got beat @ 1 time or other during their career. |
|
By:
I cannot have the reference to weight for age as an excuse for beaten horses.
The reason there is weight for age is so that the 3yo's have the same chance as the 4yo's according to their ability. If you had a 15 year old lad running against a 26 year old man, the man, given equal running ability the man would win. So with horses, the weight difference is to compensate for maturity. If both stay in training 1 more year, I have little doubt that Frankel will confirm or even show an increased superiority over Canford Cliffs even though they will be off level weights as he has the scope to mature and improve considerably yet. |
|
By:
COT
The point, though, is that some 3yos are very precocious, meaning that as a 3yo they have a tremendous advantage on wfa terms, which they may never be able to replicate as a 4yo. This means that they are celebrated as a champion at 3, but then packed off to stud without ever having to prove themselves as a fully mature horse without wfa in their favour. It seems to me that most people readily accept the aspect of precocity in a 2yo but not in a 3yo. If a 2yo sprinter wins the Nunthorpe, a la Kingsgate Native, nobody would crown him a true champion because he hasn't proved himself as a mature racehorse and rightly so. Yet many people seem to take it for granted that a good 3yo would automatically improve in line with the wfa scale. |
|
By:
They've had a long time to get the WFA scale right though Figgis and although it's not perfect it's the probably best solution, given that it's presumably impossible to measure a horses precocity.
That said, with the best (and following your argument in many cases, most precocious) 3yo increasingly being packed off to stud, it's conceivable that increasingly precocity is being bred into the modern thoroughbred and perhaps the scale should be reviewed. I'll admit ignorance as to how long it has been since this last happened. It could encourage connections to run a few of their better ones at 4 or 5, which would be no bad thing. Although I suspect that it would mean a bit more jiggery-pokery further down the grades as trainers find it harder to place 3yo to telling effect. |
|
By:
Desmond
Fair argument. I'm not completely against wfa, I just feel that it encourages us to crown horses as champions too early and leads to shorter careers. I also think that when you get a very good or precocious 3yo it is virtually impossible to concede it wfa if it runs to form in a truly run race. I'll exclude Frankel for argument's sake as he could be classed as exceptionally fast. Using Sea the Stars as an example, he ran some solid times but nothing as spectacular as Frankel, but I've yet to clock a 4yo that could concede the 11lbs that would've been needed in his Eclipse. What I'm saying is maybe the average 3yo does improve by that much (I think Timeform disagreed with the official scale though last time I looked), but if the 3yo is well above average that weight difference can be insurmountable for any older horse, given a fast run race. |
|
By:
An easier way of me putting it would've been to say, some 3yos are already as good, or pretty close to as good as a top class 4yo. Which means that the 4yo would have to be some kind of super freak to concede the mid summer wfa allowance to them.
|
|
By:
handicap system has been around for long time, pretty much every angle has been fine tuned, WFA was a major factor in CC getting beat like he did and running over to far rail, could argue that on level weights CC, running to form and straight could of just pipped frankel, as said in other posts, its better for the game to have these superstars. hence the WFA, benefits horseracing. trainer did point out CC didnt like type of track.
|
|
By:
WFA was very little do with CC getting beat, he wasn't beaten through getting tired, he was beaten because he couldn't run any faster. Frankel took lengths out of CC in a few strides and less weight on CC's back wouldn't have changed that a jot. If Queally wanted to exploit the WFA fully, he'd have set a faster pace so that they both were getting tired at the end but he didn't do this as CC's running style is suited to that sort of race and therefore the tactical approach far outweighed that.
|
|
By:
Yes totally agree that wfa had minimal effect on the result of the Sussex. It was partly down to CC being a bit below par, even though I think he's been a bit overrated I still think he's better than that. But it was largely due to Frankel simply being a superior horse. In fact I'd say most races I've seen that produced spectacular performances have been a combination of a top class winning effort and the beaten horses running below form to some extent.
|
|
By:
we see in the rematch, how closer it is,little things that make all the difference. imagine frankel carried 8lbs more than CC, do you think that would of made a difference??
|
|
By:
would have made a difference to the distance he won by but not to the result.
|