2000 GUINEAS (2014)

Anyway MJ I'm off out for a bit, must catch up on some shopping and today is not a betting day for me so have a good day.

Have a goodun

I agree with Geoff that it doesn't make for a good viewing spectacle. As to the result, as in most Classics when people make excuses for beaten horses I go with my eyes, and for me the best horse won on the day. O'Brien had Australia cherry ripe and he just didn't have the pace to compete with the better milers, as many suspected before the race. It was certainly worth a shot, it could've been a year similar to when Camelot won and Coolmore would be eyeing up the triple crown again, nevertheless he's lost nothing in defeat as a potential middle distance champion. Toormore ran a regressive race from his Craven run, but even so, I realise I overrated him last year and I have no excuses. Possibly he will regain his form in the short term but you never know, Hannon's Trumpet Major finished last in the Irish 2000 after winning the Craven then running a bit below that in the Guineas.

I have Kingman running very slightly (2lbs) below his Greenham win, but that sometimes happens when winning a fast trial and I wouldn't make any excuses for him because of draw or ground. On his best I have him 1lb ahead of Night of Thunder but 1lb is negligible and I wouldn't have any strong opinions about who would come out best if they meet again in the near future, much will depend on who comes out of the Guineas in the best physical shape. In my view the Guineas contained 2 decent but not great milers and 1 very good middle distance horse and the form should be taken at face value on the day.

Much of that is right Figgis even if the way you got there differs from mine. The fact I never feared Toormore before the race I cannot rush to defend him now. Apparently Hughes had him as his Guineas horse before the Greenham but couldn't get off a 7/1 shot to ride a 40/1 shot, his words not mine.
The fact you have Kingman and NOT so close I think is more to the fact that Kingman, in my view, isn't as good at a mile as 7 furlongs so I cannot rush to Kingman's defence either. How would you rate them at 7 furlongs?
Your view on Australia being cherry ripe I think even AOB would disagree with. He was fit to run his race but there will be improvement there so cherry ripe would be the wrong analogy imo.
It was a 3 horse race and with Australia unlikely to meet the other two we will have to accept that. The milers however will meet again so there could be more meat to add to the bones of this race.
I would still like to know why Hughes and Soumillon never raced down the middle of the course.

I haven't seen the Sunday races except the 1000 Gns so can anyone tell me if the other races were run down the centre as well?

So Australia will improve for fitness but WC ? Can't have that tbh.

Did I say War Command wouldn't improve for fitness? I said he would struggle to win a Group 1 that's all. Although I do think this was his main target whereas it certainly wouldn't have been Australia's. You must have that?

Nope, not in the slightest, for me. Aus was more trained for the Guineas than WC was.

Hughes had him as his Guineas horse before the Greenham but couldn't get off a 7/1 shot to ride a 40/1 shot, his words not mine.

So aftertiming isn't confined to punters then.

How would you rate them at 7 furlongs?

Brig, I'd rate them the same as at a mile. I've seen nothing from Kingman to make me think he doesn't get the mile really well, including his latter sectionals. I remember the same excuses made about Delegator but he was no better over shorter when given the chance. Tbh I'm not particularly interested in backing either horse next time. Maybe one will be a value price and tempt me into a bet but I don't think any of them are outstanding milers and I'm not too sure how they'll come out of the race. I think the winner might've had a hard race there and I wouldn't be keen on backing Kingman if he makes another quick appearance.

Your view on Australia being cherry ripe I think even AOB would disagree with.

Well he would wouldn't he

there will be improvement

Possibly, but in my view he doesn't need to in order to win an average Derby, he just needs to stay, which he should.

Seems like you will have to hope he was. Best of luck with that project Sin.

How on this earth can you go by sectionals Fig when ALL of the other races came down the middle. Does that not show exactly what a farce that this sectional craze is?

Sectionals can and do reveal what camera angles may hide,you need to combine eyesight and then make judgement,no madness in sectionals for a guide in how much energy may have been used up early,,they are not speed figures(but can be), when enough information and history is known.

MJ I thought sectionals told you how fast the horses travelled from one section to another etc. These were then compared with other sectionals in other races on the same course and same day to give a reasonable idea how other hoses of a certain age and quality covered similar distances etc. Is that not what they are?

Brig, sectionals don't play a big part in my analysis, although I know other people concentrate on them and use them with success. I'm actually looking forward to them being used more, as a lot of the stuff I've seen on tv uses them in combination with flawed final time analysis and creates betting market 'noise'. However, some sectional analysis is obvious and basic and in the case of Kingman it just gives substance to the visual evidence that he stays.

yes and no,remember the information within the solitary race is enough of a guide to distances between runners at those sectional markers,you can see the exact margins,not guesswork reliant on vision and poor angle? If you look on equibase results the information without the time is most valuable combined with video,Imagine looking at the Rp with exact detail of distances between runners at different sectionals,plus in running comments,and we have an advancement in the way we perceive the given comments.

As you know Fig I know very little and am not at all interested in times such are the vagaries of this method in my opinion. But if Horse A travels the first 2 furlongs in 25 secs on one side of the track and Horse B travels the first 2 furlongs in 25.5 secs does that tell you Horse A is travelling faster or is in fact on faster ground?

How many lengths did Dancing brave make up in the final four furlongs in the Derby?,sectionals would have informed us.

Brig, I'm not talking about comparing the horse's sectionals with others in the race, I'm talking about comparing its own sectionals with its other sectionals in the race, Kingman couldn't have run as he did in the latter part of the race if he didn't stay the trip.

We can then hcp different stages of those races not just finishing distances.I was never a fan of the finishing speed figures,stopwatch ,bayer etc,but I am a major fan of sectionals.

Sectional analysis isn't worth a huge deal without accurate final time analysis, the Beyer stuff isn't accurate.

We have to learn to use our eyes,this can be a lengthy process without asking the right questions and varied questions,to discuss which side had advantage is interesting,to understand how the individual horse used energy is sometimes not visible,sectionals engage the eyes and visa versa.

I can understand that may be possible MJ though on its own would be pointless. He may have been on better ground, the other horses may have been stopping and in the end any knowledge would be pretty pointless in my opinion. Not many people I know thought he should have won without that information.
I can see how you may somehow derive some clue on an individual basis Fig but surely without other important information such as going and direct comparisons these can be fairly pointless, can't they?
About Kingman staying the trip of course he did. If he ran over 12f he would stay the trip and if the opposition is weak enough he may not need to stay the trip. These are all subjective.

I said to a friend before the race, he had backed Kingman, that I didn't think he would stay. He thinks that, even though Kingman was beaten by a horse he had already easily beaten before over a shorter distance, that he obviously stayed. I think he didn't stay and I'm sure if he comes out in the St James Palace Stakes and gets beaten they will say it isn't because he doesn't stay it's because he is regressing. Moonlight Cloud won 2 Group 1's over a mile by the minimum of margins and I think it is because she did not truly stay a mile at the highest level. At 7f she would bolt up.

Anyway I do see where you are coming from to a point but will sick to using my eyes as you obviously do as well.

In beyers defense,he captured generations of horse watchers imagination,but sectionals reveal much more information for interpretation.

If it helps then it helps. It just isn't for me. If it works for you then go for it. It is fascinating but its late so I'm toodling off to bed. G'night guys.

see ya brigust

I have Kingman running only 2lbs worse than his Greenham win, for me 2lbs is within the normal parameters of running to form, I don't expect them to run to the exact pound every time. He couldn't have done that if he hadn't stayed. I can't always get it right, as Toormore demonstrated, but I believe I was right about Kingman, he's good but not the superstar some were claiming him to be. If you think he performed below par in the Guineas because he didn't stay then you must believe he's an absolute top class 6/7f horse? I don't.

If they run within 5 lbs that is probably within reasonable expectation.

Metro John, I like Beyer's books and enjoy reading his articles, but his speed figure stuff is often talked of as pioneering, maybe in America it was, but it was being done (better) years earlier over here by the likes of Bull and Hussey.

yes but without explanation,.Beyer revealed more.

And thus we respect him for that.

Goodnight figgis,the eyes closing,will discuss tomorrow night(after work)

Bull didn't publicly explain his methods but Hussey did, apart from arriving at a going allowance, but that's mainly because it can't be fully explained in print, which is better than Beyer's simple but flawed alternative.

would be interested in reading hussey if you can find me a link,cheers!

MJ, there isn't much out there, especially not online, most of it was in old Raceform publications.

how many lengths would separate the different class's IYO lets say from class 6 to 5 ect (have you got a standard) this might sound like a stupid question.

Roadrunner, no it's not a stupid question but it's not easy to answer as I don't factor in allowances for age or increases in distance, they are just speed figures adjusted for weight carried. The numbers are standardised up to a point, so a 60 over 5f equals a 60 over 6f, etc, however the numbers do gradually begin to slide with increases in distance, which I believe is how it should be. A good Guineas winner will generally have a higher figure than a good Derby winner, a good Nunthorpe winner will have a higher figure than an Ascot Gold Cup winner (even a well run Ascot Gold Cup), etc, but I'd still regard both as top class over their respective trips. Probably not much help but that's all I can say.

understand, always check the results page and thats where will usually find lots of my notebooks, horses that im interested
in for future races, so sometimes when see a horse has won by 3 lengths, take this as a good sign. normally would count 3 lengths per class, basically thats 3 lengths can be equal to a horse moving up from class 6 to winning a class 5. not any real evidence to
support my theory. just something came up with myself. would be unable to do the speed figures, find it to be quiet daunting
from a beginners perspective, and seeing as dont normally watch racing, would be impossible. thanks for answer.

roadrunner,you could use minimum class pars for a starters,not got time now but will post some tonight for you.

if Horse A travels the first 2 furlongs in 25 secs on one side of the track and Horse B travels the first 2 furlongs in 25.5 secs does that tell you Horse A is travelling faster or is in fact on faster ground?

Brig, as you say, if they are wide apart on ground with a bias, who knows the answer. But more normally, sectionals can tell you if they went fast or slow at the beginning... accelerated or decelerated at the finish.

They have debunked one of the biggest myths in racing that horses "quicken" at the finish. Sandown would know better and obviously have to account for the uphill nature of the final furlong at plenty of race tracks, but would estimate that 90%+ of winners (let alone the beaten rags) are slowing down in the final furlong, not "quickening" or accelerating.

Analysed correctly, sectionals (and correctly produced final time figures) can give you a vastly different understanding of two races full of 2yo newcomers at different tracks run on the same day.

Some may have thought Telescope produced a Group 1 winning timefigure when winning at Leicester by 24 lengths. It was actually no more than Group 3 level at best, but you could understand how easily it might be to be misled on "form". Or when another Stoute inmate, Radiator, won by 15 lengths at Lingfield last Sept with Cumani / Gosden / Hannon / Johnston fillies back in the places, the first reaction was she must be Group 1 class too (and made 11/10 fav next time against Miss France). The actual timefigure was nothing more than Listed / Grp 3 at best that day. I think both went short in future antepost markets including the Arc and 1000 Guineas when in fact they still had plenty to prove.

In contrast, when Kingman won by 7 lengths on debut, he produced a timefigure that showed he was already Group 1 class even though he had only run in a maiden against unproven or unknown opposition.

So timefigures can indeed sort the wheat from the chaff, which is sometimes just not possible with the naked eye.

c

Ped my point about the sectionals in the 2000 Gns was because there were no other races on that part of the course to compare them with.
You suggest it tells where the speed was used but it doesn't tell you how much speed only by comparison with other horses in the race so  no external comparison can support that.

Your point about horses running slower at the end of the race far from proven imo. The reasons being a) the horse may have already won the race by then and b) as herd animals horses often refuse to run away from the herd something relayed as looking around when in front and c) as you said lots of racecourses have uphill finishes. I think the point is far from proven.

And my point about Kingman is that had he a known stamina problem (something not as yet proven) then his defeat in the Guineas would immediately have been for that reason but as it is assumed he stays then the winner has improved when indeed he may not have actually improved at all.

brig, think far too much has been made of the split in the Guineas and running on different ground.

Many are saying they were racing on faster ground on far side. Gosden is complaining that the slowest ground was over there - which the Going Stick seemed to suggest.

The going stick seemed faster in the centre. Where as you say they raced  all day, but the jocks and trainers for some reason decided to ignore.

Think it was all pretty marginal, the sectionals suggested they ran an even and strong gallop all the way. The race produced the fastest time against standard (also taking into account grade) on the card. The best horse won on the day and nobody had bad luck in running because they went a strong pace and had plenty of room.

The split into two groups merely a red herring and anyone complaining just sour grapes imo. If they ran next week, would happily bet Night Of Thunder to beat the 2nd and 3rd.

It seems like you are biased by your pre-Guineas bet/view on Aus, Brigust. There will be improvement for Aus, because he's special, but none for WC. . As I said 3 weeks before the race when you wrote-off every other horse in the race other than Aus & Kingman, I can't take your opinion seriously. It is too entrenched and ravelled up with the AOB's quotes. Good luck with that project!!

I never saw the going stick readings, what were they? All I know is the fastest ground was down th middle and the nearside half of the track was avoided like the plague.
I have little doubt the best 3 horses finished in the first three but when you consider the next three home were Shifting Power (Compton Place 6.6f), Charm School (Invincible Spirit 7.1f) and the Spanish horse who is now going for the July Cup then it looks like a sprint in anything but name. In fact if you take out the winner who s bred to be at least a miler and Australia then Kingman beat three sprinters home.

Sin my views aren't entrenched ffs. Look where Australia is in the Derby betting. If anyone has entrenched views it is clearly you. You just cannot accept that War Command is only borderline Group 1 material. Wise up ffs. I never said he (WC) wasn't fit or that he wouldn't improve for the run I simply said I thought he would struggle to win an average Group 1 race from now on. I have as yet seen nothing to change my mind.
The only 'quote' I listened to from AOB was what convinced me Australia WOULD RUN IN TH 2000 Gns. He did run so end of story.

GOING: GOOD TO FIRM (Good in places; Overall 7.9, Stands' side 7.9, Centre 8.0, Far Side 7.7). Weather conditions: light cloud, bright spells, dry.
STALLS: Centre

I'd say if you took the winner and third out of most runnings of the 2000 Guineas (apart from it being a bit of an absurd thing to do) then hardly any of them would look up to much.

Brig, as you say, if they are wide apart on ground with a bias, who knows the answer. But more normally, sectionals can tell you if they went fast or slow at the beginning... accelerated or decelerated at the finish.

They have debunked one of the biggest myths in racing that horses "quicken" at the finish. Sandown would know better and obviously have to account for the uphill nature of the final furlong at plenty of race tracks, but would estimate that 90%+ of winners (let alone the beaten rags) are slowing down in the final furlong, not "quickening" or accelerating.



people should take note of this

never a truer word said and this is found more especially in races well run and horses are tiring late...when viewing this race imo the speed horses payed for the pace ie noozah and toormore...toormore who i believe should get a lot more credit than some are giving him for trying to lay up with a decent grade sprinter on the far side...yes he wasn't good enough as i thought but was just taken out of his comfort zone and payed for that late, he deserves extra credit and at least a chance in future...i now like him more than i did before he lined up in the race

i'm not sure of the bias but what i am sure of as they went a decent pace and toormore payed for the pace he was being forced to go by a decent sprinter on the far side...yes he is a sprinter but carried the speed for along time before his stamina gave way

american racing on dirt point to tiring race horses late in races as american racing is generally run at speed which leads to horses slowing rapidly late on...sometimes though decent times are produced thus leading to people knowing they are dealing with class

anyway pedro a very good point for people in regards horses tiring late and are not quickening and final times analysis...i like the american view on speed biases and certainly track biases in which we over here have to deal with everyday...

anyway pedro a point i understand and a very good point for those that didn't know already...i tip my hat

wc will prob go on and win an average irish 2000

Thanks for that Pedro, lets see how that works out over the weeks ahead.

Fig it may seem absurd but breaking things down often leads to answers. It may be that the stamina horses ran as follows Night of Thunder benefited from a prep run, Australia didn't benefit, Kingston Hill didn't benefit and Toormore ran to form. You will put your spin on things Fig and mine may be different. Currently I think the race was sprint as opposed to stamina based and those having had a prep run benefited from it.

I therefore totally disagree with Harry's race description saying the speed horses paid the price when in actual fact the speed horses finished 2nd, 4th, 5th and 6th and the stamina hoses finished 1st, 3rd and 7th.

I therefore totally disagree with Harry's race description saying the speed horses paid the price when in actual fact the speed horses finished 2nd, 4th, 5th and 6th and the stamina hoses finished 1st, 3rd and 7th.


sorry not on the same hymn sheet...

when i was talking of the speed horses brigust i was talking of the horses that put the speed/pace to the race ie noozah and toormore

when talking in terms of speed horses i was talking of pace in the race...the horses you are talking about were held up

will let you get on brigust...the race was certainly not a sprint

You will put your spin on things Fig

I'm putting no spin on it at all, as I said I'm taking it at face value.

toormore had no chance making his own running on that side, knew your fate as soon the jockey took the horse over to the rail.
will see how gets on this season, champion 2yo only in name, just not going to be top class horse at group 1 level IMO. NOT
no doubt was the dark horse in the race on paper. the hannons knew which was the better horse all along. the fact that hughsie
went over to that rail is very dodgy IMO.

Sorry I misunderstood your 'speed' angle. And sorry to you Fig I didn't mean 'spin' in a derogatory way just something we all do about our opinion and how we present it.

You may not think it was a sprint Harry but with Kingman (July Cup entry), Shifting Power (won last time narrowly beating Mushir who next runs over 6f at Newbury) and Charm School (July Cup entry) and Nooz Can (July Cup entry) it makes you think it wasn't run for stamina.

you will always get sprint types in the guineas brigust as you know...but it doesn't mean the race was falsely run which for me this race was not...with the sprinter leading and toormore trying to keep pace with him, both sides had speed to run at and the race was well run, it just wasn't a great race class wise as i thought pre-race however i do believe it to be a competitive renewal but with the class thing in my head the right horses back this up in regards to the winning distances and the amount of middling 115 horses finishing close up

australia was hardly hitting the line running on late and fast to say the race was sprint, he was flattening out imo and was not beaten by the lack of pace in the race, as i think he isn't short of speed, in fact i have reservations about him above 1m2f as think he isn't short of pace...of course he should get it on breeding but his run style says he isn't slow but i think he ran to his potential in the race

I couldn't disagree with any of that Harry as your point of view. In fact in a few weeks my point of view may look completely silly but it is my point of view an I see not point waiing until after the event to proffer it.  If the 'sprinters' end up in the July Cup or simply plying their trade sprinting and Night of Thunder goes on at a mile and Australia does the same at further then a look back at this race in the future may well say the 2000 Gns of 2014 was run to suit the sprinters who, in fact, look as if they filled 4 of the first 6 places. I know sprinters run in the 2000 Gns but how many times are they so dominant in numbers at the finishing end?

I know sprinters run in the 2000 Gns but how many times are they so dominant in numbers at the finishing end?

in regards the numbers could we not put this down to no outstanding colts in the race(bar kingman) and the improved winner?? that is where i am at until they prove me otherwise anyway

fair point in regards dominance but kingman isn't really a sprinter ie 6 furlong horse and the others were proven at 7 furlongs as well so not really sprinters as such...but they could prove to be sprinters in time, certainly the spanish horse anyway but not enough to conclude it was a sprint type race just for me lacked the quality in regards group 1 horses and proven ones in regards form

If you take away AOB comments on Australia,and our belief in his breeding,be honest could you see any of the guineas field running to 130?

I can't.

I have just had a tiny speculative bet on next years 2000, Is it true that Coolmore keep a list of special names for special horses? If that is true I don't think there will be many more special to the Irish than JFK.

Toormore flopped.
War Command flopped.
Australia disappointing.

Poor race for all the hype beforehand.

Australia disappointing.

Hoss runs best race of its life and you reckon thats dissapointing?
What did you expect it to.A Frankel?

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/racing/aidan-o-brien-believes-australia-to-b...

Owners tweet after the Dante result, The Great Gatsby.

Tom Palin ‏@tpalin  4m
Further confirmation if we ever needed it that Toormore didn't run his race in the Guineas.

War Command wearing blinkers next time.

He didn't ^^^. Nothing new that some of the gd ones don't run up to scratch in the 1st Classic`s. Personally I don't like the Craven being so close to the 2000gns, Toronado did the same last year after the Craven. Craven meeting needs moving back a wk imo.

With Australia and Kingston Hill dominating the Derby and The Grey Gatsby winning in France this looks like a very good Guineas.

And Charm Spirit has just won at Chantilly.

I've seen quite a few better Guineas winning performances but it was certainly deeper than some.

Don`t forget the non-stayer Kingman.

One swallow does not make a summer Felt. If he beats NOT in the St James Palace I may reconsider but not until then. Beating Shifting Power in a slowly run race in Ireland does not a stayer make imo.

The Guineas was a terrific race,and it is indeed working out fantastically,I suppose it's worth pointing out the pitfalls of figure handicapping in such a good year,the ratings can be low because many of similar ability, The Brigadiers year was possibly similar,some good uns behind.

I would love to see Australia go on and win the Eclipse and the Arc and stay in training and Kingman and NOT to contest the top mile races. Proper classic form lines in championship races you cannot beat it.
And I hope CDA meets Australia along the way either in the Eclipse or in Ireland but I guess he will go to St Cloud and Deauville for the 4 year old restricted races but he may go to Ascot for the King George and meet Kingston Hill and then the Champion Stakes against NOT. Sadly Farrh has gone to stud. Interesting times ahead I think.

~hello brigust,I hope so,terrific stuff

Hi MJ. I had a great day today. Recouped my losses on this race and some. I have a 20/1 double for the Arc plus 8/1 and 10/1 singles. It's been a slow season that has just got faster. How about you?

No fancy prices but a good day,have withheld bets  from the Arc,but that 10/1 plus you got earlier looks magnificent right now,and all the best.

pretty sure I heard correctly, Aidan O'Brien on RUK said Australia hasn't done a single gallop on the grass at Ballydoyle all year due to the ground being too soft. That was his single worry going into the Derby.

So the talk about sparkling gallops in the spring.... if they ever actually took place,  were all on artifical surfaces?

Aidan also confirmed that the cough spread through his yard very quickly and affected every horse. Amazing this was never fed back into the antepost market with the same PR as the "gallop work"

Ped, wasn't it 6 weeks before the race, though? I doubt just a cough would've put people off with so long to go.

I guess it's ok if you'd got over it.
O'Brien saying that many are still affected and he has no idea how they are going to run even now, including Australia back in the Guineas

You sticking with Kingman in the SJP, ped?

The problem with the cough is that you don't know when they get it how long they will have it or how badly they will be affected. They go on the easy list until you think they are clear. Even then it's only when the exercise increases that you know for sure they are clear otherwise you have to stop exercise. Had he had a bad cough 6 weeks before the Guineas he shouldn't really have run. I've known horses not recover their form because they ran too soon. It's the not knowing how bad it is until it's gone that's the problem.

great race on Tuesday, Figgis.

Don't understand why Kingman fav as had no excuses at Newmarket as far as I was concerned. Beaten by a better horse on the day and Ireland was a non-event which didn't prove anything other than what we already knew, a very good horse.

Can only assume people think Night Of Thunder fluked his Newmarket win or they think Kingman underperformed. Given Good to Firm ground, difficult to see how Kingman can be a better horse given his trainer's reservations and last year's Sandown win where he moved poorly on quick ground?

From a value point of view, personally would have to go with War Command, though guess you obviously don't think he's anywhere near this level?

Ped, I don't think it necessarily has to be considered NoT's win was a fluke to have doubts that it would be repeated. I think he won fair and square on the day but I would have far more faith in Kingman putting up a repeat showing. I think the only way War Command will finish close is if both the front 2 underperform or there's no pace on and we get a compressed finish.

I will be staggered if it turns into a sprint. I think the only way to beat Kingman is on stamina he looks too fast to outsprint. So the important thing is that RH doesn't go too strong too soon and kill his mount early then, if stamina is an issue for Kingman something else could win by default.

Ped, AOB said 2 weeks before the Derby Australia had the cough for 7-10 days and he was well over it ( at time of quotes ). If it was as bad as it sounds, re his yard, then he would not be having the winners he has had. When you look at other yards who get bugs, viruses etc some of them have to completely close down. I think folks have to remember AOB does put out a lot of PR lines, his bosses are big breeders afterall!!

Twas too early to knock the Greenham form (anti-Kingmans ;) ) Master Carpenter wins a Group 3 yesterday.

Anyone recall the last time(prior to 2014) the 2000 guineas had the English /Irish & French Derby winners in the field?

I think this coughing set-back for Aus has been proven to be b0llocks by virtue of the fact AOB pulled out Geoffrey Chaucer from the Irish Derby for coughing yet he declared/supplemented him for the German Derby 36 hrs later. This mob will use any old excuse. Wakey wakey.

It's all about the breeding ££££'s.

Not doubting that Aus had a cough, but am doubting the seriousness and significance of it, in light of Geoffrey Chaucer and the fact it was 8 weeks before the Guineas. Basically they took the Guineas defeat badly but if they really want to prove it wrong they could run him in the Sussex Stakes. Simple.

GC ran really well for a horse who coughed a week ago. On that running the fact he coughed must have been untrue. Goodness I wonder where he would have finished had he really coughed.

For future reference it would be good to know why AOB supplemented a horse into a race 36hrs after a cough. I don't know why that would happen. Any vets around? I know Mick Fitzgerald was similarly dumbfounded and confused when asked the question on ATR on the morning of the race. But then I would not expect a TV personality to rock the boat. Naivety does not pay the bills.

Geoffrey Chaucer actually ran 26 lengths better in Germany than at Epsom. I love evidence. Will always see you right in the long-term.

Horses cough. Fact. Why do they cough? That has to be determined by other evidence. Often evidence there isn't time to gather when close to a race. Had they run at the Curragh and got stuffed then reported afterwards that he shouldn't have run because he coughed what do you think the punters would have said? The evidence gathered over the next couple of days may have said the cough wasn't due to well being. So why not run again. They may now think there is something wrong with the horses well being. He has run very poorly the last twice suggesting something is wrong with him. Time will tell.

Evidence rules. None of this backfitting nonsense.

The evidence shows he, GC, should have finished in front of Orchestra and Pinzolo in the Derby. There is clearly something wrong with the horse. That is what the evidence shows.

To be retired afterwards ?

Meanwhile, Aidan O’Brien reported his dual Derby winner Australia to be in fine form following his Curragh romp a couple of weeks ago. “Australia has been in terrific form since landing the Dubai Duty Free Irish Derby and he will now be trained for a tilt at the Juddmonte International Stakes at York and the Irish Champion Stakes at Leopardstown.”

No-one really agreed that Coolmore could possibly be bad for racing yet many continually slaughter AOB at every turn.

The evidence shows that GC is very very ordinary.