The same cannot be said of Toormore standside(or can it?)

They should stop watering these tracks.

Hughes travelled less distance to the rails but only marginally and kept track on the far side horses. He thinks that by watching each other gives a truly run race whereas I think it is anything but because by following each other they could be going slowly or quickly. If Hughes was pacing himself against the far side he was going their pace and possibly not his pace. Similarly if he was on slower ground it was taking more out of his horse to go the same pace as horses on possibly quicker ground.

Someone did suggest putting a running rail  20 -30 metres in to narrow the chance of have two separate races going on in future guineas,,that is a workable suggestion,what do you recon brigust?

Does that track need to be so wide?

With the Cambridgeshire etc I suppose it does. They may consider bringing the rails in if the fields are smaller but the other races had more runners so their hands were tied.

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.

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.

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

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

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

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.

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.

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?

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.