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
|
By:
on ratings, Figgis, still have War Command, Kingman and Berkshire the ones to be with. Particularly Kingman as clocked it on debut. Willoughby can overcomplicate things but he is certainly right in commenting that we have seen plenty of fast time debut winners disappear into the dust, that would be a worry though at least Kingman had a good break since.
O'Brien had a fair few winning 2yos recently, but none of them within 10lbs of War Command with me. Though that based on decent time at Ascot - which you and others seem to think was not so good, so I might be right out there.... Which are the 2yos you like right now? |
|
By:
Kiyoshi is the fastest 2yo, colt or filly, that I've clocked all year. I can't recall a filly running so fast at that stage of the season before, certainly not in recent years anyway. It was also the manner she achieved it. I had to keep checking to make sure I'd not cocked up, but it was obviously a strong card and pretty easy to rate, far less chance of a mistake with that type of card so I'm confident about it. I'm not a big backer of 2yos, I like a bit of extra value where they're concerned as I think the inconsistency factor is higher with them on the whole, but I wished they'd gone for the Phoenix with her as I'd have had a good bet. I don't know about her long term prospects, I'm always wary when one does something freakishly fast early on, it depends how she'll stand up to that kind of performance physically but her next run will be very interesting.
As for the colts, I was reasonably impressed with Shifting Power's time over 7f. He looked a little awkward but it was probably just greenness. It wasn't good enough to suggest he's Gp1 material yet but he should be capable of a Gp2 if he goes on from that. |
|
By:
I agree about Kingman as far as debuts go, it just depends how much improvement he makes on that. With a Gosden 2yo you'd expect significant improvement next time but that's not always the case, again his next run will be very interesting.
|
|
By:
I rate Kingman highly and agree that he is a horse with G1 potential - must be on 2000 gns short-list
|
|
By:
Ped, I'm sure the reason that Kiyoshi's time performance has been overlooked is the final race on the card over 7f holds it down, in fact it makes it look very poor indeed. However, take the final race out of the equation and one allowance fits perfectly with the rest of the card, straight and round course. This has Sandiva running close to her Naas mark (slightly below it), the Cecil filly improving and the rest doing nothing they hadn't done before. To take the alternative view and lump the race in with Lightning Cloud, then we have to believe they crawled early (didn't happen), they all performed poorly on the day (not in my view) or they all fell in a hole bar the winner late on, which also didn't happen. Apart from sectionals it's usually possible to tell when they've gone too fast and hit a brick wall just by viewing the race, the final race on Shergar Cup day was such an example, imo. It's not unusual for the track to speed up in hot weather, particularly Ascot. Besides that, I know it's wrong to judge a whole card on one fast time race when it doesn't fit with all the other logic of race reading, it either leads to the one race being overrated or the rest being underrated.
|
|
By:
think you right with Kiyoshi, comfortably the best 2yo filly with me, 2lbs behind Kingman / Berkshire, but 4-6lbs ahead of Rizeena / Sandiva / Beldale Memory.
Hopefully she has even more to come |
|
By:
You have Kingman higher than me, it was very good for a debut, as we can't expect as much on debut, if he makes expected improvement then he could well be Gp1 material. But as the time stands on its own without allowing for improvement (which isn't guaranteed), don't you think it's held down by the Gp3 time? I couldn't have it above Listed class as it stands.
|
|
By:
I'm with you on the Grp 3 Criterion, about listed class.
I've included a healthy 30+lb WFA allowance for Kingman - which could be excessive. As you and Sandown said earlier, all about what improvement left in the locker. I have the runner up to Kingman, Adwhaa, rating 3 and 2lbs lower next two starts, so hopeful that Kingman's lofty debut figure not too far wrong |
|
By:
Sorry, I meant Kingman's time as it stands wouldn't be any better than Listed, I thought the Gp3 was up to scratch.
|
|
By:
then I guess my 30lb+ WFA allowance is a lot bigger than yours? Totally accept WFA scale a pretty flaky meter to apply uniformly to different horses
|
|
By:
I think officially a uniform wfa scale has to be used (although I think wfa distorts what a real champion is), an average has to be accepted, but for personal ratings I prefer to rate things exactly as they are as it's a better indicator of real improvement.
|
|
By:
Another thing about Kingman is he's likely to be overbet next time, like Telescope was, maybe Kiyoshi will be too but I certainly won't be opposing her.
|
|
By:
sandown apologies for late reply to busy in the form at present for the forum...have no wish to tie my money up for 9 months for such small gains just pointless when there are edges on day to day basis...
we will see what war command turns up next time and maybe it was the trip or ground but the facts remain that his form isn't standing up the coventry just looking an average affair and his maiden win also doesn't stand up much either although it was his debut...i would say although they were some nice 2 year olds he was beaten by in the phoenix they will be found out in better company just my opinion we will see good luck with your wagering |
|
By:
his form isn't standing up the coventry just looking an average affair....
Harry, have seen that comment made a number of times now. Yet..... 2nd Parbold, beaten 2 lengths by Toormore in Group 2 Vintage Stks after slowly away - beaten 6 lengths by War Command 3rd Sir John Hawkins beaten 1 1/4 and 1 3/4 lengths in Grp 2 / Grp 3's since - beaten 6 3/4 lengths by War Command 4th Thunder Strike beaten 2 3/4 lengths in Grp 2 Richmond - beaten 7 1/4 lengths by War Command 5th Jallota, beaten 1/2, 2 1/2 and 3 1/4 lengths in Grp 2 / Grp 3 / Grp 2 since - beaten 8 1/2 lengths by War Command 6th, 7th and 8th unraced since 9th Rossa Corsa beaten 4 3/4 lengths by Toormore in Grp 2 Vintage - beaten 10 1/4 lengths by War Command Irrespective of his defeat on Sunday, I'm a little confused as to how anyone cannot rate War Command's Coventry win the outstanding 2yo performance of the season. Surely it's been franked by every horse to have run since, not denigrated? |
|
By:
Ped, for my part I've never said that War Command was a poor horse, just that he's slightly below average, we're only talking a couple of pounds. The reason I'm against him is the Coventry win led him to be regarded as an above average winner and in my view flattered him greatly. In any Coventry you would expect the cream of the more precocious 2yos. That some of the beaten horses have come out to run well is no surprise. On the day I had many of the beaten horses below what they had previously achieved. My argument, was, and still is, that War Command is not really a 6 lengths better colt than the rest of the field. The Phoenix result, while being of a decent standard, is not exceptional, although it seems that some people have elevated it in line with their belief that War Command was as good as he looked in the Coventry. If that's the case then we'd have to believe that without WC Sudirman would've thrashed that field by 7 lengths if he'd ran, likewise Big Time 6 1/2 lengths. Not for me.
|
|
By:
Agree with you on the Phoenix, Figgis, was just a fair Group 2 time (course record yes, but track riding very fast) and will be surprised if front pair turn out to be genuine Group 1 types.
Amazed that some think War Command ran up to his Coventry form on Sunday (I had him 13-14lbs below par). Maybe the Coventry form will turn out to be his zenith, but difficult not to rate it the outstanding single piece of 2yo form this season |
|
By:
When I said below average I should've said below average for a Coventry winner.
|
|
By:
Yes, I think for those that still think WC is a bit special then it's more sensible to believe he was below par on Sunday, I don't share the view but it's possible. I'm not saying the Coventry runners were a poor lot but for me the form is very suspect and I think a false representation of the merits of the runners, WC probably was the best horse in the race but I don't believe he's really that much better.
|
|
By:
if you think the Coventry is below par, would you not also have to conclude that the Coventry 2nd to 9th who have run since, all collectively improved significantly on their next starts in Group company to finish as close as they did to the respective winners....
...or that they repeated their Coventry form, and the winners of their respective Group races are worse (by several lengths) than War Command? |
|
By:
Ped, regardless of what they did afterwards I had the second to the eighth all running slower in the Coventry than they had previously, even though they were all obviously lightly raced beforehand.
|
|
By:
.... and you have them all improving or matching their pre-Coventry figures again since?
|
|
By:
Of those first 8, I have those that have run since all running faster before, then faster again since, except WC who equalled his Coventry figure and Thunder Strike, who peaked at Epsom and declined since.
|
|
By:
war command was explosive at the end of the race in the coventry, visually impressive, now next year will WC be able to
finish in that same style over the longer distances, if the horse can, then you have a horse more than capable. what will be interesting will be the final rating for this year RPR, which of the top rated 2yos this year will go onto win a classic. |
|
By:
Well in the first discussions on War Command I likened him to Three Valleys, who was the last horse I'd seen win impressively in this race but who I thought was severely flattered. Funnily enough he also went on to finish an odds on third in the Phoenix. He did go on to win a weak Middle Park (subsequently disqualified) and second in a poor Dewhurst. I couldn't rule out WC doing something similar, it depends how strong this year's renewals are. Three Valleys wasn't up to winning a classic though and I'll be very surprised if WC is, unless he improves significantly.
|
|
By:
It's a game of opinions and mine is that WC achieved exactly the same rating from me as did Dawn Approach the previous year (in the Coventry)albeit that DA was a little closer to even pace throughout than was WC. However, in terms of final time rating and projected rating based on sectionals (which this year are from Turftrax) I have them the same.As I have already said, WC runs like he needs 7f and probably 8f now. I continue to believe that this is a G1 horse in waiting. He has size and the physique which will allow for above average muscle development with further training and conditioning. O'Brien has a similar horse type with Darwin and it will be interesting to see how he handles and places them bearing in mind their size .
|
|
By:
I have WC only 2lbs behind DA at the same stage last year, a small but significant amount when we're talking about classic prospects. When Dawn Approach went into the Coventry last year I had him top rated, although I didn't bet in the race. For me, at that stage he was an up to scratch winner, decent but not outstanding. I've seen similar good winners who never really go on from the race. I had him really improving on that when he was rested and brought back for the VOB Stakes. It's possible that WC could also make big improvement, as you say he has the scope. As I've said before I'm only against him as I believe expectations are higher than I think is deserved. Added to that, the connections have never seemed as bullish as you'd normally expect when they've got a half decent prospect. Do you not think DA improved significantly after the Coventry, Sandown?
|
|
By:
Figgis
Did DA improve significantly after Ascot? Yes he did, but after the Coventry I had him projecting to 126-129 whereas the RPR at the time was 114 so he improved no more than I anticipated. Will WC similarly improve? Can't answer that, it depends. My opinion is that he has the potential to become a 126 horse but whether he achieves it or not, as we know, depends on many factors. At 15.0 he is worth backing for the 2000 imo but not when he was single figures.As for connections opinions, well that's a very subjective take. Maybe he did take them by surprise, it happens often, even at Coolmore,no doubt. |
|
By:
Re the Coventry's track record, in the past it maybe didn't have the |Classic runners as R Ascot comes early and the Classic types debut later in the year. DA was campaigned early however and has a different profile. WC has entries over 6,7,8f. If they run him again at 6f it would be a mistake imo.
|
|
By:
I'm sure it does happen at Coolmore, although usually it's more with the later developing types that need a trip, don't think it's happened much with an early season type. Of course that doesn't mean it can't happen and if I rated one of theirs highly it wouldn't put me off if it seemed a surprise to them. If WC proves to be a bit special then I won't be clinging on to the Coventry rating I've given him and, likewise, if he doesn't then I trust his fans will accept he was overrated. On the evidence of the Phoenix he still has it to prove.
|
|
By:
Figgis
My interest is mainly in the betting potential for a horse that has displayed once the sort of profile that from experience I know shouts "serious." Having an early opinion has risks but it pays in the long run. When the conventional handicappers get to them the prices have gone. What can happen is that a horse may not show the full potential in a satisfactory ever upwards projectory, and may indeed go backwards. But, my view is that if they did it once, they can always do it again. Kingman will be a case in point. Favourite for the 2000 Gns off as maiden win is a bit of a joke this far out, but the horse has serious potential. I wouldn't back him yet though for a Classic in early May at less than double figs. |
|
By:
"trajectory" even
|
|
By:
Yes, agree about Kingman with the potential. The trouble is he's being priced up as though the potential is guaranteed to be fulfilled. For a debut win it was good, often a Gosden 2yo will improve something around 10lbs+ (I'd say he's got to improve 13lbs to win even an ordinary Guineas), if that happens then he's going to have classic potential. His 2yos don't always improve that much from debut, though, plus in reality the better the debut the less room for improvement. At one time you would've got anything between 16/1 and 25/1 after such a debut, and yes the bets would've been taken for reasonable sums. 8/1 is indeed a joke.
|
|
By:
Figgis
I have WC only 2lbs behind DA at the same stage last year, a small but significant amount when we're talking about classic prospects. Don't you think that 2 lb is easily within possible error range given the number of variables and assumptions made? And the potential for improvement is surely of much greater importance, let alone the impact of future changes in fitness levels, going and distance? After all, 2lb is what about 0.12 secs on final time at 6f? |
|
By:
Sandown
Possibly, but with a strong card like the RA one I'm pretty confident I can usually rate it to the pound. The main point is that even though I thought DA was good I didn't rate him as a bit special at that stage (I know you did). I raised my opinion of him later. I might also raise my opinion of WC in future, but I've seen many horses run as well as WC did in the Coventry, and a bit better, if I'd rated them on what they might do in future and backed them accordingly I'd have lost. |
|
By:
Sandown, I'm also confident about the Ascot rating as I have him matching that exactly in the Phoenix, that is without any manipulation of the allowance to suit any preconceived ideas, everything else fits, including Slade Power to the pound. Now maybe my Ascot rating was wrong and he was below that at the Curragh, but at the moment I believe my original assessment of him was right.
|
|
By:
Figgis
Sudirman was 0.02 secs slower than Slade Power (OR 115) carrying 7lb less but as WFA (TF's) is 21 lb do you rate Sudirman 14lb higher than SP? If SP ran to his mark does that mean you rate Sudirman on 129, if as you say everything fits to the pound? Surely not. I rated Sudirman on final time rating as 116 putting WC on 112. But both should be higher given their pace profile. By way of comparison, I made WC 121 at Ascot projecting to 126. |
|
By:
Sandown
As I explained to Pedrobob, I think trying to put speed/time figures on an equal footing to the official scale is bollocks, the time differences simply do not equate to the differences on the official scale, they are some way off. I also do not use wfa to rate times. It is one of the many reasons I think people frown on the use of speed figures, many of them are just doing it wrong. Of course they're not the answer to everything, but when done correctly they are far more reliable than commercially available ones. |
|
By:
Sandown
If you look at some of the commercial figures, the time ratings are nearly always lower than the form ratings. I'm fully aware that final times are influenced by the pace makeup of a race and that final times will not always reflect the true ability of the horses involved, I'm not a novice to this. However, we see many horses have careers for years and not once does their best speed figure match their best form figure. We are expected to believe that all their races were run in a non optimal way, that final times aren't just influenced by pace, that a minute degree change in pace has affected all these final times by many pounds. I'm not having any of that. The truth is that the scales don't really match up in reality and there are also flaws in the calculation of the speed figures. I know that many in form horses go on to repeat their speed figures to the pound. |
|
By:
Figgis
This might interest you. I once did a study where my aim was to try and identify the effect of weight by looking at a single horse running over the same course and distance where the going effect was kept to a minimum. I chose Southwell A/W (OK I know that going allowances can vary but bear with me.) I looked at a horse called Dado Mush and between Dec 12 2007 and May 20 2008 he ran 7 times over 8f at Southwell. He was a 4yr and for the first of those runs his OR was 50. By May 20 he was rated OR 79. He won 5 and was placed twice. Had he improved 29 lbs? I decided to rate his races keeping the going the same i.e. no going allowance. What I discovered was that his speed figure didn't change by more than 0.2 secs either way and yet his weight carried from 112lbs to 131 lbs so his rating with weight adjusted also varied with his weight therefore. I concluded there and then that the horse had not improved 29 lbs, opposed him as fav in that last run and duly collected when he was beaten into second by the second fav at 9/2.I've just looked at his last rating Jan 2012 and it was 34. Food for thought there Figgis. What do you think? |
|
By:
Sandown
Interesting. I didn't do winter figures that year so have no comparison. I did do them in later years but gave it a miss again last year. I read all the Mordin type observations years ago concerning weight and thought there was possibly something in them. I kept them in mind when doing my own figures but I've always found to the contrary, that weight does matter and can (on the whole) be factored in. I think a lot of the weight arguments come from America, where they don't have such big differences in weight carried. I think another reason is that, even though weight matters, it is overrated over here, certainly on the official scale anyway. Another thing is that, imo, the official scale stretches out the real differences between average horses and good ones, using times correctly the real difference is more compressed. Talking of Southwell, I always used to believe the argument that speed figures were probably easier to use in America because of the tracks and surface, etc. However, my experience of Southwell has made me doubt that. I found that the surface speed can alter markedly between races, probably due to track harrowing, I found it could alter as much as a turf track being rained on. How have you found it? |