We want to share an important update with our Betfair Community users.
Over the coming months, the Betfair Community platform will be winding down. The final active day for the platform will be December 21st. From December 22nd, users will no longer be able to access the platform.
Your discussions, insights, engagement, and, most importantly, feedback have helped shape the platform and guided innovation. Your feedback continues to be important to us, and we will continue to listen via our dedicated feedback channels, as well as through product testing and innovations.
To share your feedback and experience, visit: https://support.betfair.com/app/home
Horse Antepost
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 852 comments are related to the topic:
War Command
War Command
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 852
|
By:
Ped, also my pounds per length scale is wider than the official one.
|
|
By:
just because it doesn't work for them.
What are you on about ???? |
|
By:
generally I find the time difference averages at only around 3lbs
Figgis, you can't think much of the WFA scale then? A 7f Dewhurst winner would be getting 23lbs from a 4yo in the first half of October compared to 13lbs for a Guineas winner from a 4yo in early May, a difference of 10lbs? |
|
By:
Ped, also my pounds per length scale is wider than the official one.
if that is true, surely you would have an even bigger variance than the official 10lbs improvement from the Dewhurst to the Guineas? If you only have 3lbs, then you must be saying that a Guineas winner improves his time figure less than a length in the previous 6-7 months? |
|
By:
Don't think prior ratings are a good guide.They are not.
I would take from that statement that the prior ratings you use don't work for you, that doesn't mean they aren't a good guide for everybody. Some people may use breeding as a predictor, I don't, but I wouldn't say that it isn't a good guide as some people are probably using it with success. |
|
By:
Pedro, I recall the forumite The Headmaster picking out Makfi early on one year. I must admit I can't see anything apart those already mentioned and out of those I suppose it would have to be between Be Ready and Shifting Power that could step up most on what they've done.
|
|
By:
I would take from that statement that the prior ratings you use don't work for you,
How do you work that out? I use RPR's because they are readily available for everyone to look at, unlike yours, so people can make up their own mind from looking back using the RP site. Using that data its clear that big improvements are made.I would have thought that was worth knowing. You are not the be all when it comes to ratings.Unlike you, i not only have my own time figures but i consider what collateral figures have to say and RPR's are freely available. Please drop the attitude bytheway. |
|
By:
Ped, well I'm not alone in thinking that 2yos are given too generous an allowance and it's very surprising that it hasn't been taken more advantage of. I also think the early season allowance for 3yos is too generous. Yes I know it probably averages out across the board, but taking a good Guineas winning performance like Sea The Stars, for example, for a 4yo to give 13lbs to that kind of performance is an extremely difficult task.
|
|
By:
I have said on here that all ratings are different, so to suggest I'm saying mine are the be all is being deliberately ignorant. If I was claiming mine are definitive I would probably be saying 'don't do ...'
|
|
By:
There is a difference in what the BHA use and what timeform and Rscing post use for WFA as well. Racing Post use 9lb for the guineas
|
|
By:
have worked out an estimated rating of 83+ for Golan way back in 2000 on debut.
Looking at database for 80+ timefigures for 2yo colts on debut since July who have had no more than one more start: 85 - Indy , David Barron 84 - Night Of Thunder, Hannon 84 - Mushir, Varian 83 - Be Ready, bin Suroor (also have Botti's 87-Our Generation, but he's a gelding  ) |
|
By:
Comparing Frankel's Dewhurst to the Guineas mine are more in line with Stevie's, I have 5lbs difference.
|
|
By:
I also think the early season allowance for 3yos is too generous.
not saying it is right as don't have empirical evidence, yet the perceived wisdom is that 3yos shouldn't take on their elders in the first half of the season, certainly in handicaps? Choosing an example like Sea The Stars is maybe unfortunate as obviously a horse like him could probably beat elders at level weights as they simply weren't as good as him, though I get your point. Most Guineas winners by their nature would be pretty forward and more mature than fellow 3yos, so they probably wouldn't need the full WFA to beat a 4yo of similar ability. |
|
By:
deliberately ignorant.
OK I'm giving up on you Figgis and your snide remarks.You apparently don't like what I have to say and the way that i say it. You are the most tiresome person I have ever come across on here and that's saying something. I'll leave you to live in your own little world where you and your ratings reign supreme. You are now officially off my Christmas card list.  |
|
By:
I was wondering how long it wold be before you spat the dummy again, have a good Christmas
 |
|
By:
*would
|
|
By:
slightly off the subject but did anyone get a big figure for Toast of new york at Wolves on 1st Nov? as I got a 110 which is pretty high.
|
|
By:
spat the dummy again
Can't help it, can you? At least you proved my point. Thanks for that. |
|
By:
97, Stevie, massive for the AW. Think he may be headed for Dubai
|
|
By:
Stevie, for me it was one of those cards where the surface slowed considerably after the first race. The usual way of rating it will either result in a huge figure for Toast or the other races being woefully slow. I know people say that the a/w offers a more reliable surface for speed figures but I've found that to be a myth. There is a narrower band of difference between allowances but the surface still varies and sometimes between races.
|
|
By:
Can't help it, can you? At least you proved my point. Thanks for that.
You are the most tiresome person I have ever come across on here and that's saying something. I'll leave you to live in your own little world Oh yeah, where are my manners, thanks for that too  |
|
By:
yes I have had it slowing down after first race before, I think Haadeth won at a wolves meet recently and I did the same. I also did the same here otherwise it would have been 117. the 110 still has the 2nd and 3rd running below best. I'll keep an eye out for him on the dubai races then pedro. cheers.
|
|
By:
Going back to Mark of Esteem and Golan, I didn't back Mark of Esteem but I'd say both of those Guineas were a bit below average, I know MoE improved his rating later. I think it would've been difficult for them to make the improvement required in a good year. Plus it was more of a trend in those days to keep classic prospects lightly raced.
|
|
By:
No actually I had changed the allowance for the whole meeting, I remember now I did originally have it slowing down but the 5f nursery came out quite high but then when the form of that race didn't work out I changed the allowance for whole meeting.
|
|
By:
King of Kings is one that surprises me with the improvement he made on RPRs, as he didn't look to improve much throughout his 2yo career. Perhaps could be the same with War Command?
|
|
By:
Stevie, I can only aftertime and say I backed King of Kings as he'd already run a good time figure as a 2yo, he didn't need to improve much at all, imo.
|
|
By:
Stevie G
king of Kings had a tall reputaion. He signalled his potential for improvment at the Curragh with a great turn of foot. His final split indicated that he was much better than his bare form and today, if you had the figures, you would have to mark him up considerably. On top of that he loved soft gound. he was a decent EW bet against Xaar. |
|
By:
Looking back at some of these figures you can see that the Topspeeds are sometimes higher than the RPRs, that rarely happens now. I wonder if it was willo back then.
|
|
By:
Just my opinion, but I thought it was a moderate Guineas that King of Kings won. He'd run a good figure in defeat in the Anglesey giving weight to the winner, Roche was noticeably easy on him as well, I'm sure he'd have won with more effort but he was obviously mindful of looking after him for the future. Also, even if you rated Xaar highly, he hardly enhanced his reputation when scrambling home in the Craven.
|
|
By:
I had just posted that I noticed the topspeeds were sometimes bigger than the RPRs but rarely does that happen now but the post was not accepted because I mentioned someones name who may have been doing them back then.
|
|
By:
Stevie
KOK went into the Gns with a PB RPR of 107. Xaar had 127. I'll leave it to you to judge wehther KOK made marginal or considerable improvment on the day. His TS went from 111 to 123. NB Of course, if you have magic speed ratings then you won't think he improved at all.And everyone else's ratings are all rubbish, naturally.TF,Official, RP included. Poor s o d s those maths graduates/Ph d's at the Jockey Club, TF etc ..don't know a thing. |
|
By:
I can remember Xaar destroying the Dewhurst field, I don't recall many of KOK's races, I'm not sure if I had the racing channel back then. May have only got to see the ch4 and bbc ones.
|
|
By:
Or you could be so good at sectional time analysis that the only tip you've ever put forward on here was that Darwin is a Gp1 horse, then when he's beaten in a Gp3 blame events instead of your own analysis
|
|
By:
Xaar was best on fast ground despite winning at with soft in the descrption. he was also a miler bas became clear subsequently when he ran 4 times over 10f(2 ' G1 level) not being beaten more than 7L in total. As he won 2 G1's and rated 127 he was pretty good. Nothing average about the Gns that year.
|
|
By:
You are pathetic Figgis.
|
|
By:
Maybe I am, but at least I don't have sly digs and then cry like a baby when I receive them in return
 |
|
By:
what about Mister Baileys surely no one picked that one out? Now I know it wasn't a strong guineas that year but it was difficult to predict that one improving as hadn't looked anything special as a 2yo and didn't seem particularly progressive. So that shows that there could be something exposed that could step up but would need it to be a weak year.
|
|
By:
Conclusion. Don't think prior ratings are a good guide.They are not.The winner will be the one who improves the most for the trip, the ground and is the fittest on the day.
Anyway as for Sandown's statement, I kind of agree with it but I feel prior ratings are the best starting point and then try to estimate the improvement for each runner but you do need accurate ratings to start off with. If I have a horse 6/7 lb clear and he's only had 3 runs and is bred to be suited by the trip and is 3rd in the betting then that is the one I will go with. |
|
By:
I can't really say about Mister Baileys as I wasn't entirely relying on my own ratings that year, plus methods have been tweaked over the years. I could try to rate him now but there's the possibility of backfitting after the event. All I know is I backed Grand Lodge that year, beaten a short head
 |
|
By:
I'm not going to aftertime but that 6/1 in the SJP was decent value about GL as Turtle Island won the irish guineas in a complete bog.
|