Horse Antepost
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 142 comments are related to the topic:
The Arc - what the sectionals show
The Arc - what the sectionals show
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 142
|
By:
anyone who thinks the ground was soft at longchamp on sunday is living in cloud cuckoo land the good ground performers were winning all day goldikova wooton bassett misty for me etc there was no rain at all from about 2 in the morning the night before and it was windy from about 8am onwards on top of that the sun was scorching all day and by the time the arc was ran it must have been about 70 degrees
as the other lad said check wooton bassetts time . |
|
By:
A_T 06 Oct 10 22:01
I've never really taken to Goldikova. A lot of the Group 1s she's won have been weak affairs - races only promoted to G1 status in recent years - and that she's never been run in the Sussex or QEII is disappointing. Still they've found a away to keep winning races with her and her consistency over 3 seasons has been remarkable. So true. I've found the constant references to the amount of G1's she's won as slightly ridiculous. Many of them aren't G1 races still. Falmouth Stakes and the re-named Prix Rothschild? I don't rate US Turf form, but at least that is "open" company in the context of a G1 record some are hyping up. |
|
By:
a bit late for a fishing trip is it not.
|
|
By:
Well I backed the winner of this year's QE2, a race I think most people would accept as being a genuine Group 1, I'm quite sure I wouldn't have collected though if Goldikova had been in opposition.
|
|
By:
It's not "fishing." Everything I've put is true. Fillies and mares step up in class (obviously) when they step out of their own confined G1 races, regardless of the weight allowance. It's an easy fact to grasp. Who would back Music Show in open wfa company at G1 level? No one. The record hype is farcical - that is my point.
And the 1400m course at Longchamp according to Nick Mordin is not 1400m. The times on that course are always seemingly that much quicker than anywhere else on the course, regardless of if that is true. Paco Boy ran 1:19 and something with mud flying a couple of years back. |
|
By:
I think TLP was referring to comparing the 7f time to a standard time, not the other times, although I'd still maintain that it was probably good to soft on that part of the course, unless there was major rail movement.
|
|
By:
we will split the difference figg ill give you the slow side of good.
 |
|
By:
Ok TLP, don't you think the rest of the round course was a little bit softer?
|
|
By:
not much look at the way they were all finishing .
|
|
By:
You might be right, possibly some extreme rail moving had taken place.
|
|
By:
i think its one of the fastest drying tracks ever thats why a lot of people get caught out every year when the forecast is for torrential rain they assume the going will be soft but it hardly ever is and this was no exception.
|
|
By:
Sandown 06 Oct 10 19:09
My pre-race views were: Workforce did not show a great turn of foot; neither did he at Epsom. Really surprised at this view, Sandown, especially as on the overhead shot, Workforce looked to take many lengths out of the field in the space of 100 yards 4f out in the Derby when Moore went after the leader - that looked like serious acceleration to me, even if the others were not up to Grp 1 standard. And in the Arc, he looked to quicken through gaps, a race in which only Sarafina appeared to match his turn of foot when getting clear on the outside. Yes, a few suffered interference, but none, including Behkabad could match his speed when they did get in the clear themselves. Hence surprised at your comment, Sandown, that you still think Behkabad got more toe than Workforce, just needs longer to wind it up. That makes Behkabad sound like a galloper to me, not a speed horse. TLP, given all the race times, think the ground must have been riding good to soft at least,if not softer, especially given that the rail is normally sited on the innermost configuration on Arc day (isn't it?) to save the ground, distances must have been on the short side. Goldikova's race was not strongly run and irrespective of how you work out standard times, going allowances etc, just comparing that time with Wootton Bassett alone suggests the latter won one of the weakest 2yo Group 1's of the season, and a good 4-5 lengths off the likes of Frankel, Dream Ahead etc |
|
By:
Pedrobob, Goldikova's time was nearly a second faster, you must use a very low pound per sec scale over 7f.
|
|
By:
Sorry meant high scale. It's unfair to compare Wootton Bassett to Dream Ahead and Frankel, as they've both run exceptional times. WB's time was perfectly good for a Group 1 2yo 7f race, he ran a big speed figure at York too but it's not that unusual in 2yo 6f races.
|
|
By:
only using the standard 5 lengths per second, Figgis. WB's time was 0.9 secs slower = 4 1/2 lengths slower than Goldikova
I had Goldikova running good 5-6 lengths below her best, hence the ordinary rating in turn awarded to WB. I had WB improving on his York run by 6-7 lbs (taking change in distance into account), but whilst York was decent time, didn't put it in the Group 1/2 bracket. WB was getting 5lbs from Galtymore Lad who has no pretensions to Group 1/2 level and is entered in a York listed on Saturday. Presumably you have awarded decent rating to WB on Sunday? |
|
By:
Pedrobob, the allowance I used for the 7f course on Sunday gives him the exact same rating I had him on at York (his subsequent Doncaster run was nearly a stone worse), which makes Goldikova's run 6lbs below her very best, with Paco Boy and Dick Turpin running right up to their best, so it's an allowance I can be pretty confident about. I know this makes Galtymore Lad's rating quite high too but it's not unusual for Channon 2yos to run very big figures then go downhill. Both WB and GL ran below their best at Doncaster (they had so much in hand of the field that they still finished ahead) but that's hardly surprising given the hard race they both had at York. WB bounced back to his best on Sunday , unfortunately I didn't back him and I wouldn't like to bet on GL doing the same.
|
|
By:
Cheers Figgis for your thoughts, found Longchamp Sunday difficult to rate.
Interesting that you think Paco Boy/Dick Turpin ran to their best. Confess to being deceived on the eye often when trying to judge the pace, but had thought they didn't go that quick in the Foret, only really raced from around 3 out when Regal Parade went on, and the less than average pace enabled the front 3 to finish close up when normally would have been separated by a bit further than heads and nks with a strong gallop. |
|
By:
i don't think i've ever read as much crap as been written on this thread. workforce unlucky? he won on merit. bekhabad unlucky? he had a chance to run through a gap between cape blanco and lope de vega, but didn't take it. he was hardly running on like a train, and most likely bounced after his prix niel run.
sarafina? she was about 2 furlongs out of her ground when the leaders quickened. she'd have had to been dancing brave mark 2 to have won from there. quite why there was even a stewards enquiry is beyond me. oh no wait, theres a stewards for every race in france. as for the idea that goldikova is overrated, that is so laughable as not to even be worth replying to. |
|
By:
should read "workforce lucky?"
|
|
By:
oops. just watched the replay and noticed sarafina was nearly brought down. stand by what i say about bekhabad though.
|
|
By:
Sandown Joined: 06 Dec 01
Replies: 515 04 Oct 10 16:19 Senor E.B I worked out the maths on this once for myself, in very simlpe terms.Roughly speaking, for every 10% faster you need 20% more energy i'd be intrigued to know how you come by these equations. |
|
By:
Sandown - You're wasting your time, everything you've written has been accurate but many people suffer with the blinkers when it comes to horse racing. The race turned into a farce, nobody knows what would've happened had all the blockages happened(i blame Murtagh for ruining his own, and other other, horses race)
|
|
By:
Mythical Prince
I'll try, if I can remember.I'm also not a physicist so if there any on here please correct me. E=MC squared where E = energy, m= mass and C = speed of light. Substitute speed for speed of light. So, a horse weighing 1200 lb travelling at 40mph = 1200 x 40 x 40 = 1,920,000 units of energy. At 44mph (10% faster)1200 x 44 x 44 = 2,323,200 units or +21% more units of energy PS I note that you made your comments BEFORE watching a replay.I hope you gave it more than a glance. I have watched it a dozen times and had the digital stop watch on most of the contenders so I think I have it "taped" |
|
By:
think MP showed himself up a bit there but make a statement before even watching the replay. Sorry, MP.
Anyone see Mark Johnsons interview on ATR earlier this season .. and his views about getting from A to B in the quickest possible time .. it is basically best to keep up a constant speed and not to slow down and then accelerate as it wastes too much energy .. in his opinion. |
|
By:
requestingflyby
Thanks for your support . There are quite a few others who have a similar view. For others, like Mythical Prince a horse will not run "like a train" through a non-existant gap for the obvious reason that it will most likely fall. When a gap appeared for Bekhabad it was so late on that he would have had to have found about 6l in 150 yds an impossibility even for Sea Bird or Dancing Brave which he is most certainly not.Ther is no evidanced whatsoever that he bounced - you don't finish 4th in the Arc if you have bounced, you finished out the back. pedrobob Finishing speed is related to overall pace obiously but there are horses which can quicken by virtue of their ability to actually do that i.e. take more strided per sec and those that lengthen i.e extend their stride. Bekhabd and WF are of the latter variety and they are at their best when they are unimpeded.They need longer to get to full speed. Sarafina can actually quicken in a shorter space - smaller lighter horses usually can. Judging speed with aid of a stopwatch is useless or even worse. Every thing is relative. Sit in a car going at 60mph and watch car going at 100 mph - you seem to be at a standstill. Sit in a car doing 20mph and watch one go by at 60mph and it will seem faster than the one doing 100 in the first scenario. Its all relative. WF finished in 25.64 (slow by prev Arc winners ) and at Epsom it was 23.48 which was fast but the ground was fast. Fortuni over the same C&D finished in 23.51 and he was rated 85. |
|
By:
Have to agree with Sandown, the effects of backing up altered the whole dynamics of the race meaning ones near the front of the fields momentum was nowhere near the strength of those coming from behind.
Under those circumstances it was always going to be the horses that got the best passage from the back who were going to be involved in the finish. As i say, ive no axe to grind as i didn't have a bet in the race. |
|
By:
If they were to run this race again, at a proper gallop and no slowing down with 5 furlongs to go resulting in a bunched pack, then in all likelihood Workforce would have won bu further. He stays this trip standing on his head and a much stonger run race would have suited him perfectly.
|
|
By:
* by further
|
|
By:
with a stopwatch = without
|
|
By:
sintonian
Apart from "might have won" replacing "would have run" I don't necessarily diagree with you. It would have suited WF more as it would others, BUT what we are discussing is the Arc as run on Sunday. If WF had been impeded as badly as others the result "might" well have been different because so many were badly affected. That's all you have to concede. |
|
By:
won=run
|
|
By:
Sandown Joined: 06 Dec 01
Replies: 520 07 Oct 10 10:17 Ther is no evidanced whatsoever that he bounced - you don't finish 4th in the Arc if you have bounced, you finished out the back. Sandown, many people don't believe in the "bounce", however, I do as I had noticed it (after losing money) before I'd even read anything about the subject. What I don't believe in though is this "bounce to the moon" prediction stuff, when a horse regresses it's not possible to judge if it'll be by 10lbs or more than 2 stones etc. |
|
By:
Figgis
I believe that Len Ragowitz was the first person to write about the "bounce theory" in his book "The Odds Must Be Crazy" based on his decades of reading speed figures.He devotes a chapter to it "Reading between the lines." I'm sure you must have read it.He refers to horses coming off "peaks" and running "bad races" and I use "bounce" in the same way. A minor regression is neither here nor there given that on turf 9 out of 10 races are not run at a true pace. I re-state my view - there is no indication that Bekhabad bounced. His trial race was not run in an excessively fast time, there was 3 weeks to recover, as a 3 yr old he would have faster powers of recuperation - where is the case for "bouncing"? |
|
By:
I've only just updated my figures for the meeting after putting in the times for the last race over C&D which was a lowly h/c run just 3.2 secs slower than the Arc and in which the winner was given a RPR of 89. If that is near right then the Arc was much more slowly run than I thought and the TS figure of 107 now looks correct. My projected figure comes out at 109 which must make WF the slowest winning time of any Arc that I have figures for. That bears out the view that in such circumstances anything can win and almost did. WF got lucky, that's all there is to it . On his Epsom figures he was still the best horse in the race - but who belkived he would repeat it after Ascot - and he might well go on to show it. But equally you can not write down any of the other horses either. They will have other opportunities to prove what they are capable of.
|
|
By:
It's all very fine saying Workforce was lucky, didn't get stopped in running etc.
But all the supposedly unlucky horses such as Behkabad, Fame And Glory, Sarafina etc were ridden more prominently than Workforce ie nearer the front. If their jockeys believed they were good enough in what some are arguing was a moderately run race, hence all the trouble, they would have kicked on earlier 3 or 4f out ..... booted clear in the straight and avoided all the scrimmaging. But their jockeys presumably didn't believe in their mounts enough to do so? This would suggest that maybe the best horse still won? Sandown, interesting sectional comparison of the Derby to Fortuni. Do you have a furlong by furlong split of the the 2 races for the final 3 to 4 furlongs up the finishing straight, would be very useful to see these? Also, how would you price up Behkabad, Workforce, Sarafina, Nesta, Fame and Glory if they were to meet again? |
|
By:
Sandown
Yes I've got the book, Ragozin wants to sell his "sheets" so understandably he doesn't give everything away but there's a lot of sensible stuff there. Even though I don't recognise all the patterns he refers to and I think some of it is taken a bit too far, there are undoubtedly patterns in horse's speed figures and while they can't be accurately predicted 100% of the time, they can be often enough to make it worthwhile. I find it odd that you believe as many as 9 out of 10 turf races aren't run at a true pace. I quoted John Whitley before and I remember him saying something like 5 out of 6 weren't. I agree with some things he has said but I always thought that was an extraordinary thing to believe for somebody who's supposed to know about race times. I think like a lot of people with an academic background, including some American writers, the theories aren't always what happens in reality. That statistic might be true if you're taking a "true pace" to mean perfectly even fractions. However, while I'm aware that there are many falsely run races that don't give true final time figures, I know there are much more than 1 out of 10 run at a good enough pace to give an accurate reflection of the horses' capabilities. |
|
By:
pedrobob
zilzal1 summed it up neatly the effects of backing up altered the whole dynamics of the race meaning ones near the front of the fields momentum was nowhere near the strength of those coming from behind.I don't suppose the jocks foresaw that happening. Hypothetical, but assuming 12f on good ground I would go 2/1 WF, 3/1 Behk, 7/2 Sara, 7/1 NF,12/1 F&G |
|
By:
Figgis
I use 9 out of 10 as a figure of speech not as a statistical fact. A true pace does mean perfectly even fractions. If you don't get them then you don't get a true run race by definition. The more uneven the more likely an unreliable figure results, whether a time figure or a collateral figure. |
|
By:
Sandown
I would be absolutely lumping on WF at that price. I laid Behkabad bigger than 3/1 on Sunday, I'd give you more than twice that now [;)] |
|
By:
Figgis
That's what makes markets |