Horse Antepost
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 229 comments are related to the topic:
International at York - soldieroffortune
International at York - soldieroffortune
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 229
|
By:
I don't buy the RP any more, haven't for a few years now.
|
|
By:
I think it was a good point in his column as he's saying at York because the cut shorter there isn't that cushion of the grass that you get at other tracks.
|
|
By:
Figgis. He's just saying that at York they cut the grass shorter and the grass is also finer. But at other courses the grass tends to be longer or heavier and the horses don't connect withg the ground the same way.
|
|
By:
Stevie, so no real bearing on comparative time performances then?
|
|
By:
no talk about time at all really except headline reads 'fine grass leads to very quick going on the knavesmire' but for me the article is more about how the horse is feeling the ground rather than it leading to fast times.
|
|
By:
Probably what he's saying is true but can't say I've noticed any difference in results being different than expected outcomes at any other grade 1 course, I like the track.
|
|
By:
Fine grass leads to quick going at Knavesmire.
At York they like to cut its grass short, and that's how it was this week, but becase the ground conditions were fast the length of the grass was even more influential. The grass at York is not only short but fine, so when a horse makes a contact with the turf it very easily breaks into the ground underneath, which is why you often see sand kicking up. At other courses the grass tends to be longer or heavier and the horses don't connect with the ground in the same way. Goodwood provides a fabulous cover of dense turf, but it doesn't take much rain for it to ride slow because when the grass becomes wet it also becomes heavy and harder to get through than would be the case at York, where when the tack dries out it rides quicker and with less cushion than other courses. When it gets quick it gets very quick. That is the gist of it Figgis. I have long maintained the course works at Ascot and the drainage works at York and Doncaster are the reasons for the improvement in times. As far as your theory about Al Kazeem and the ground that seems to be borne out here. |
|
By:
The first time the course was used after the new drainage works Sea the Stars broke the course record do it could not be a direct comparison with previous record holders.
|
|
By:
*so
|
|
By:
Brigust, track speed is accounted for when analysing the times. It could be like lightning today compared with an Ebor run on a bog years ago, it makes no difference at all to the ratings, the faster time would not be automatically rated better than the slower time.
|
|
By:
Record times are not used by anybody seriously comparing race times.
|
|
By:
I understand that but the only link with horses of the past are race times. I have long said that racecourse management has had a lot to do with it and with the 3 courses I mentioned having high profile works done with obvious improvements in times has backed up that view imo.
|
|
By:
Brigust, race time performances are the link, not the actual times.
|
|
By:
Also there is far far more watering these days, so the argument could be turned around, but as I said it has no real relevance anyway.
|
|
By:
Providing good means good and firm means firm then all that is left is the grass covering. True they water more now but in my day they let the grass grow to provide the cushion and I'm sure running through longer grass must make a comparable difference. Anyway that's my opinion.
|
|
By:
Brig, but the time ratings are reached by comparing with other times on the day. As the length of the grass will be the same for all it makes no difference. Except in cases that Sandown refers to, where a particular strip of grass is faster on a section of the course. That's not something I've noticed much of though in the best races.
|
|
By:
I've seen research and video demonstrating how "spring" in the track helps to increase "actual" times. Too firm and the horse gets no help from the track so times can actually be slower. Now this was USA research and referred to dirt/polytrack but the principle is the same. The horse gets more kinetic energy when its given spring. I've noticed in the past that a spot of rain on firm can actually help to speed up a track (turf)- getting "bounce" back - and this must be due to the soil/grass mix. Think that cricketers experience the same phenomenon as do tennis players. Of course, when making performance/merit ratings, its the same for all.
|
|
By:
Thanks Sandown. Very interesting.
I know it doesn't affect your rating Fig it was just something I have been discussing in the past. Course improvements are not a bad thing because York would probably be a quagmire today without the new improvements. |
|
By:
I remember one year at the cheltenham festival when officially it was good and they were describing the grass as springy. I think a few course records went that year.
|
|
By:
Sandown
I'm sure that's true. Firm ground times can also be affected as often jockeys reign in their horses, sometimes because they're mindful of the horse's well being, but often because they can't gauge the speed of the track and assume they're going faster that they really are, relatively speaking. For me, rain doesn't have a uniform effect on polytrack, I've seen days when it's quickened up the surface and days when it's slowed it down. Going back to the wind effect, even though Kempton, Lingfield and Wolverhampton have no separate straight course they are just as influenced by wind as a round turf track. I think the assumption that figures recorded on such courses are more reliable is a complete fallacy. |
|
By:
*faster than they really are
|
|
By:
How does everybody else rate the Gimcrack field? Just listening to James Willoughby say he rates Astaire to have run fastest, I don't see that myself, I have him joint 5th best. Just goes to show the differences there can be between time based opinions and the silliness of the statement that the clock never lies. Having said that I have only 5lbs between the highest (My Catch) and the lowest (Saayerr) in the field and it's a race I wouldn't touch with a barge pole.
|
|
By:
Willoughby "talks the talk" but doesn't "walk the walk."He is not a player. His comments can be of general interest but never of specific interest for me, so I take no notice of him. Sound off often.The ground change at York is a game changer and as most of 2 yr old form has been on top of the ground, I wouldn't get involved for that reason. Parbold is of interest because of his Coventry run.
|
|
By:
I think he's ok when he's interested in the topic. I often disagree with his conclusions but that isn't the point. I would much rather hear him than the offerings of many of the others on there. Which usually amount to stating the bleedin' obvious, robotic listings of official handicap marks, confident predictions of what horses will do next time after a race, only for that confidence to vanish when they're trying to predict the outcome of its next race and sickening brown nosing of anyone involved in the racing game.
|
|
By:
I seem to have Wilshere Boulevard top just ahead of Cable Bay and then Saayyer. But I think it will depend on who goes on the ground best
|
|
By:
I think that Wilshere B rating may be wrong though. I'm going to look into it.
|
|
By:
No it seems ok. Not a race i'm betting in though
|
|
By:
I'm sick of Machin's puns as they cross the line
|
|
By:
Well done Willo
 |
|
By:
Yes, Stevie, almost as annoying as some of Johnson's commentaries, that was terrible at Windsor.
|