Only two races on 7f track and I think there was rain after the first, hence difficult to produce a time figure for War Command other than on what expected from the 2nd, 3rd and 4th before the race.

Disagree with Figgis that he won with little or nothing in hand. Rider barely touched him with the stick, if at all, and he's breezed by off a decent pace to win comfortably from Mustajeeb who has all the big 2yo backend entries and 3rd Exogenesis who clocked a decent time couple of starts back before winning slow run Grp 3.

The Coventry 2nd and 4th have run well at York this week to frank the Ascot form yet again. Virtually every subsequent runner out of that race confirms War Command the best 2yo of the season (despite win to runs being paltry 1-21) and how anyone can not call him a Grp 1 2yo at the very least remains completely beyond me.

O'Brien confirmed he was not ready for the Phoenix and given that has him lined up for the National Stakes speaks volumes. True he normally goes there mob handed, (6-40 in last 12 years alone), but his winners in that period include Hawk Wing and subsequent Guineas scorers in George Washington, Mastercraftsman and Power.

Right back on track and merely confirmed today that the large Coventry time figure not a fluke.

Several points I disagree with there Pedrobob.

His 20/1, 3rd AOB choice win in the Coventry to start with followed by his defeat by the only 2 horses in the Pheonix who could beat him. Today's race was a gimmee against a Gr3 winner, a nursery winner and 2 maiden winners. 
And I'm not convinced the Coventry was any cop.
He could go on from here but I would be hugely surprised if he is proper Gr1 horse.

How much more would you say horses find for the whip compared to being firmly ridden, as War Command was today? It might sometimes make horses knuckle down more in a finish but we're certainly not talking lengths and pounds differences, not from comparisons I've seen anyway.

In general, I would be with you on that view, Figgis. I would also have to counter that if he had been faced by a stronger gallop today, suspect War Command would still only have to be "firmly ridden" to score by 3 lengths or more, so would have made no difference ..... except to produce an even quicker timefigure.

Ped, didn't you think the pace was already strong enough? If the pacemaker had gone much quicker they'd have had to ignore him or get dragged into going too fast early themselves.

Ped, didn't you think the pace was already strong enough?

Figgis, yes you may be right, I guess it's whether we are seeing a horse with plenty left in the tank (or not) which will determine whether they could handle a stronger gallop....

Again accept dangerous to compare race times on different days.... but does it not concern you (and Stevie) that War Command did a 0.96 sec faster time than Kiyoshi and carried 3lbs more on officially shade slower ground (going stick 9.1 compared to Kiyoshi 9.3) .... yet you have a faster timefigure for Kiyoshi?

116 War Command
110 Kingman
110 Berkshire
109 Extortionist
108 Kiyoshi
108 Supplicant
107 No Nay Never
107 Anticipated

down to Sudirman (105) and Big Time (103)

I usually check the met office site after racing and it had 14mph headwind for ascot at start and it went down to 9mph by last race.
But perhaps that is not very accurate if raceform have it as nil although there did look to some while i was watching.
Interesting we both have same difference between WC and Kingman though.
I have ended up downgrading the Windsor castle as I think the ground quickened up by that race and I now have  Extortionist only 104.

I'm also sure the ground slowed even more by the time of the Corporal Maddox race and onwards. The question is did it slow between the Valado race (a poor affair) and War Command's race? I won't pretend there's an easy definitive answer to that and it's all about personal judgement and experience. The race didn't look particularly strong beforehand and there's also reason to believe it turned out to be even weaker than first thought. I have no doubt that Friendship's chances were sacrificed the way he was ridden and his finishing performance was less than it could've been, he was also running after winning only two days previously. I thought there was a big chance Exogenesis had been bottomed before the race and the way he struggled to pass Friendship late on, bearing in mind how that horse was ridden, I thought he looked a bit flat. I can't say I was impressed with the way Mustajeeb also had to work to get past Friendship. I think it was an ordinary race and considering how it was run I would've expected a proper Gp1 horse to run much faster than WC did, I think he has to be opposed when facing better rivals.

Pedro I think you should look at the times since the new course was laid on the straight course. It is a completely new course since 2006. If you want me to post the improvement details I can.

Think you are bending over backwards to downgrade War Command.

Masterminded

As I have had no financial interest in his races so far why would I want to do that?

As the OP and most frequent poster on this thread maybe that's a question you should ask yourself. Think your original post stated something along the lines of him not being a good Coventry winner and you are trying very hard to back it up. I think it's great we have differing opinions and that's what the forum is for but you are making statements like "another horse whose performances were elevated beyond their true merit" based on a fair bit of guesswork. I still think his Coventry win is the standout 2yo performance of the season and that was achieved in conditions which apart from the track wouldn't favour him. Yesterday was nothing more than a gallop around to get him back on track and he did it with a fair bit of authority.

Master as a punter I cannot go along with everything and back everything I have to make choices.

War Command was 20/1 in the Coventry and 3rd choice by the stable. The stable first choice has run since but the race he won before the Coventry the horse he beat has run several times and been beaten. The stable 2nd choice has also run and been beaten. Now I know from experience that horses don't always show how good they are at home but that is disappointing and a huge negative to me. Now add to that WC is a short price in his races so, because t cannot be as a result if home work it must be his form on the raceourse. That is why he is judged.
I don't think his form is that good. I don't even think the 2 horses that beat him in the Pheonix will go a great deal further so why wouldn't I be against him? Both Sudirman and Big Time have formed their own lines so it will be interesting when they meet something else.
Of course as a punter I am wrong more often than not, we will have to see. I judge each race in it's merits on the day but I will be opposing WC in a strongly contested Group 1 race in the future.

Masterminded

I said I thought he was a slightly below average Coventry winner who because of the undoubted visual impression of the performance was going to be classed as an exceptional one. I'm always open to changing my mind about a horse, which I have stated in the thread. I have no interest in making arguments just to back up earlier opinions if the later evidence proves me wrong, it's getting it right going forwards that matters to me. I don't share Sandown's and Ped's opinions that WC is a Gp1 miler in waiting, but I wouldn't dream of thinking they had some hidden agenda, I find it strange that someone would take that line with somebody who had an opposing opinion, instead of just giving their own reasons why they differ.

It's nothing personal I enjoy reading the posts as I said though just feel you are trying quite hard to downgrade his performances. My opinion on him as I have said is he is still yet to face optimum conditions but has still arguably still put up the best 2yo performance this season. I'm not judging him as a sprint 2yo though I wouldn't expect him to go on and do well in these type of races. He needs fast ground and a mile & I'm sure he will win G1's. It does depend on how he is trained though if he's over raced this season I'd be less keen on his prospects for next season.

Differences of opinion are to be expected daily in this game so it doesn't surprise me that various experienced people differ over this colt.

I am a believer in time ratings as everyone who has read anything I have to say on the subject should know. I also believe that ratings based on final times alone are inadequate and that "how" a race is run is every bit as important.

However, there is more to this game than just time ratings especially when discussing young inexperienced horses.I see that some have questioned both the trainer and the jockey in this assessment which I have to admit puts the bar at an impossible level given the record of the O'Briens.

Trainers do not run young horses to break records or achieve fast times. They are training these expensive 2yr olds to be Classic winning 3 yr olds. Along the way they will try to win top juvenile races as and when possible.

WC is a big strong colt who looks like he needs work. O'Briens reasoning that he didn't put enough into him last time is entirely plausible. Plus, the ground was much faster for his defeat and to my eye this is a horse better suited by good gound or even slower. Plus, its quite clear that he runs like a mi;ler and his breeding says 10f as a 3yr old.

He quickened up nicely yesterday, received a good educational ride and won comfortably from a highly regarded Weld runner. What's not to like?

My rating for yesterday backs up his Coventry rating which I rate as good as Dawn Approach's Coventry last year.If this is not a G1 winner then I've not learned anything in nearly 40 years following and backing horses.

I respect others opinions on this but the gist of the "not that good" argument is based around his final time ratings, which I would not agree with in any event. This horse looks like and runs like a G1 horse when he gets his trip and his ground. If he doesn't win a G1 as a 2yr old that will still not be a  major concern providing he runs well. He will mature better than the WFA scale allows and he will be at his peak next year.

At the prices, he is imo the most likely 2000 gns winner at this stage. That said, there will be other good horses in the wings but he has already reached a porven high level.

Just to make a comparison about the use of the clock, Flintshire is an example of a horse who's yet to record a decent time. I doubt anybody that uses the clock would say he's not good enough to win an Arc, if they did they'd be foolish, as it's quite obvious he hasn't had the opportunity. I just wouldn't back him as I like more proof. War Command had the opportunity to run a fast time in the Phoenix, he did okay but it wasn't that great. It was argued that 6f was too sharp, which I could accept if he was a future middle distance prospect but find it hard to accept about a potential Guineas winner. Nevertheless, maybe we could say he wasn't at his best that day. We'll just have to see if he had as much in hand yesterday as some people think, I couldn't see it.

Yes, of course at the present time, but we have to make a judgement on the usual level required at this stage in order to make the grade in the Guineas, in my view WC is lower than I'd usually expect. We can't just back 2yos on their potential, otherwise we'd have to back half the Ballydoyle stable. Of those you mentioned that were good enough to win the Guineas I had both Rock and George higher. It depends on how you view the past, I use it to make judgements on what's likely to happen in future.

Figgis

We can agree to disagree. No harm in that.

Sandown

We can agree to disagree. No harm in that.

There certainly isn't. Contrary to what some may think I won't mind too much if I'm wrong (unless I lay WC for a wedge), it's a hazard of the job and I'm used to it by now . I'll leave it there until his next race.