Horse Antepost
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 661 comments are related to the topic:
King George IV & Queen Anne Stakes 26th July
King George IV & Queen Anne Stakes 26th July
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 661
|
By:
You compare a 4 year old giving weight and a massive beating to classic 3 year olds with classic 3 year olds getting weight and giving a reasonable beating to their elders and their contemporaries? Treve and Danedream from evidence before the race and since proved that off that weight and under those conditions their win wasn't extraordinary. Unlike Harbinger whose win was distinctly extraordinary. What on this earth this has to do with historic Arc winners beats me.
|
|
By:
What on this earth this has to do with historic Arc winners beats me.
I have said before that Ascot has had a few slightly surprising wide margin wins since the course was relaid. It has to do with the notion that Ascot has more surprising wide margin winners than other courses. You compare a 4 year old giving weight and a massive beating to classic 3 year olds with classic 3 year olds getting weight and giving a reasonable beating to their elders and their contemporaries? But the weight allowance is given for expected maturity. Are you therefore implying that the wfa allowance is too generous and 3yos are overrated due to receiving too much weight? If not then why are you making a point about weight? |
|
By:
Ffs Figgis you would start an argument in an empty room.
|
|
By:
Impossible to rate these horses with any accuracy or confidence,suspect the lbs per lengths greatly inflated,when we have wide margin winners(but that is the method we choose). Sometimes a result just is,and our own misconception that we can judge the chaos, very misguided.
|
|
By:
From you post Figgis that can only be the suggestion. That person thinks the weight allowance is too much.
|
|
By:
*your
|
|
By:
I presume you are referring to me Sin? Well I think nothing of the sort but you would have had to have been living in a bubble not to think that there is a possibility the top 3 years olds are slightly advantaged by the wfa scale from now until the end of the season. I have no cast iron evidence of it but certainly don't see it as a problem while knowing it is there.
|
|
By:
I agree, only the situation was worse in the 80s and before. The 3yos received only 8lbs from The Fugue, in the 80s they received 10lbs from a mare such as Triptych. In most people's calculations 2lbs is roughly a length over 10f. A not inconsiderable amount when ratings are being argued over.
|
|
By:
I'm not going to get into the historic position. I remember that being an issue when BG had to give the 3 year olds 11lbs in the Juddmonte as opposed to the 8lbs now. A stone in the King George, 22lbs in the Lockinge and gave the Irish Derby winner 19lbs and a 5 length beating in the POW.
|
|
By:
The important point is that the tinkering would have made no difference to the top class wide margin winners of any decade.
|
|
By:
Well, taking the Eclipse as an example it would've made a difference to the tune of rating 3yos 2lbs higher than they'd be rated now, a significant amount when arguing over the fine margins at the higher end of the scale. It would also have a knock on effect of overrating by 2lbs any older horse who then ran against that 3yo. As to wide margin winners, if people can make excuses for every horse that ran behind Harbinger in the KG I'm sure the same reasoning could be applied to certain races of yesteryear.
|
|
By:
Not at all. Something happened in Harbinger's race that was inexplicable. He could have proved himself to be a superstar but sadly never backed it up. The favourite seemed to not run to form and confirmed that view next tim while the others didn't exactly frank the form.
The 2nd was clearly a better 10f horse so the distance could have been exaggerated by that fact. The 3rd was well beaten next time and the 4th was well beaten next time in a Group 2. Make of that what you will. All pretty unsatisfactory if you ask me. Hopefully the German horse will continue to race and show the true worth of his 11 length win. |
|
By:
Most ratings compilers already factored in that the others underperformed to some degree.
Make of that what you will. All pretty unsatisfactory if you ask me. Nothing unusual at all. I don't see the same scrutiny applied to the horses who Triptych beat in her Gp1 wins when the phrase multi Gp1 winning mare gets trotted out. |
|
By:
Telescope will not win this race & comparisons with Harbinger are a complete joke. Regardless of what the clock says, Harbinger achieved an awful lot more. He beat an Irish Derby & Irish Champion Stakes winner, an Epsom Derby & Arc winner and a dual Group 1 winner who was 2nd in 2 Arcs. If Pethers Moon & Hillstar even run in the Arc I'll eat my hat...
|
|
By:
Deadmurph5, I wouldn't go as far as he won't win. I think Telescope is as good as Conduit and he won the race in a year without a strong opponent. With him having an ideal prep he's the one to beat but I wouldn't say he was a good thing at the price.
|
|
By:
I dare say the phrase 'multiple Group 1 winner' was and is much more widely used nowadays with horses like Wise Dan, Cirrus des Aigles and Excelebration without the same scrutiny.
|
|
By:
Well if more in the 70s and 80s, like Triptych, had been given the opportunity to stick around to the age of 6, 7 and 8, like Wise Dan and CDA then I'm sure it would've been used just as much. The difference was most of them were scuttled off to the breeding sheds. I see it as a boon to racing that such horses are kept in training, rather than bitching that they haven't beat anything.
|
|
By:
But you were just doing that about Triptych!! That's why I reminded you about the others.
|
|
By:
But you were just doing that about Triptych!!
I don't see the same scrutiny applied to the horses who Triptych beat in her Gp1 wins when the phrase multi Gp1 winning mare gets trotted out. Doing just what exactly? I have merely said you don't go over the same past performances with the fine toothcomb you use for recent winners. When discussing the past it's a simple case of "A beat B who won this and that", when discussing the present it's "Well yes but the horse he beat wasn't at its best for whatever reason and the third horse never won again, Ascot gives strange results, I saw his main opponent taking a dump just before the race, etc, etc, ad nauseam. |
|
By:
I think the ad nauseam bit is you continually referring to the 70's and 80's and Triptych in particular. What that has to do with the price of fish I don't know. If it isn't true then say it isn't true and if it is true what on earth are you going on about? I'm not saying horse a or horse b is better or worse than Triptych. I think I was just saying the form of the King George won by Harbinger was a bit questionable and that he could have been a superstar had he stayed in training. I never mentioned other years or Triptych that was your take on things.
What you have to try to remember is that this is a conversation not a confrontation. |
|
By:
deadmurph5 08 Jul 14 14:32 Joined: 20 Feb 12 | Topic/replies: 12 | Blogger: deadmurph5's blog Telescope will not win this race & comparisons with Harbinger are a complete joke. Regardless of what the clock says, Harbinger achieved an awful lot more. He beat an Irish Derby & Irish Champion Stakes winner, an Epsom Derby & Arc winner and a dual Group 1 winner who was 2nd in 2 Arcs. If Pethers Moon & Hillstar even run in the Arc I'll eat my hat... You are comparing Harbinger after he had run in the Group1 King George not after his victory at Royal Ascot. Telescope hasn't run in the George yet!!!!!!!!!! |
|
By:
Brigust, in just the last few days on threads posted with a view to betting on forthcoming races you've slipped in that CDA has beaten horses that haven't won since and "how can that be rated". You've said because the best horse in the Eclipse was supposed to be The Fugue it shows it was a poor standard. Wide margin winners at Ascot are suspect now but not in the past because of the new turf. Strongly hinted that Harbinger was retired due to his KG win being overrated. Said there were "no good horses when Frankel was around".
You have dismissed Telescope, not on his Hardwicke form, but because he was beaten by Noble Mission and you have no idea how he won a Gp1. Well Shardari was beaten by a Rod Simpson horse called Bruno at the same venue, he was also well beaten in a Coronation Cup next time. I don't recall you bringing that up too often when you're talking about the class of '85. |
|
By:
Or even '86
|
|
By:
*Brunico
 |
|
By:
Figgis, I honestly do not know why you bother. Brigust is continually ambiguous and when challenged about things he gets very smug and patronising.
All the talk of these past races is through tinted spectacles. He sounds disenchanted with todays racing as everything he says is a negative. Cannot be taken seriously. |
|
By:
Yes, sint, just about sums it up
 |
|
By:
Brandy - Put it this way, you sure as hell won't be comparing Telescope to Harbinger after the KG
|
|
By:
& if you want a comparison with both their Hardwicke runs, at least Harbinger beat Duncan who went on to win the Prix Foy & ran in the Arc, also had horses who went on to win Lancashire oaks, Irish st legers and American grade 1s. I very much doubt that the horses in behind Telescope will go on to achieve even half of that
|
|
By:
Figgis it is you that continually brings up horses of the past and their ratings. Reference Point and Trempolino ring a bell? I never rated them so why should I be bothered? When I brought up the fact that The Fugue had beaten not a lot and neither had CDA I added 'how can you rate these?'. Why don't you step up to the plate and say how you rate them? Why is it that you can say what you like about horses from the past yet I cannot say anything about the current horses?
And Sint if I have tinted spectacles about horses of the past does that not mean you have tinted spectacles about the current horses? So if it's good enough for you why isn't it good enough for me? This is a forum you guys. I have been around a while and bring certain things to the table. You guys may have not been around for as long but you also bring certain things to the table. How come it's good enough for you but not me? Figgis I never brought up Harbinger. You did. I never brought up the 3 year old allowance. You did. I never brought up that Magician was the likeliest winner. You did. I never brought up the comparison with Telescope. Other did. I never brought up Treve and Danedream. You did. I never brought up the Arc. You did. I never brought up the 70's and 80's. You rid. I never brought up Triptych. You did. I could go on. Ffs take a look at yourself. If don't want a discussion why are you on here? As I said you would start an argument in an empty fooking room. And good old Sint will hold your coat. No wonder this forum is nearly dead. |
|
By:
Figgis it is you that continually brings up horses of the past and their ratings
Why is it that you can say what you like about horses from the past yet I cannot say anything about the current horses? I'm not the one saying that it's a poor era and that horses are being overrated compared to the past. If somebody is saying that at every single opportunity but then starts whining when legitimate comparisons are made, or an explanation is asked for I would have to think the person is unreasonably biased, an idiot, or maybe both. |
|
By:
I never brought up that Magician was the likeliest winner. You did.
Nope  |
|
By:
Harbinger like Telescope won his Hardwick very well and obviously came on for that run , he ran in the Hardwick on g/f
beating Duncan three and a half lengths a very good performance but nothing there to indicate the sensational run to comin the King George. They may have gone a bit quicker in KG than the Hardwick with the three year old colts doing most of the work up front , Saturdays Eclipse tactics in reverse you might say . The race played into his hands no question about that but it should also have been in favour of Youmzain who also sat in the rear but could not quicken up in any real way in the straight even if the 3 year olds went too fast too early , it is the failure of Youmzain a high class twelve furlong Horse to go with Harbinger that seems to stamp his performance as truly exceptional . It has to be said that Youmzain was no match for Duke of Marmalade two years before in teh KG finishing nine and a half lengths behind that winner despite being held up for a run , he was reported to have been somewhat hampered in the Home straight, on the on the hand he was two years younger , so was Harbinger a great Horse I would say he was for sure , but in the KG he was undoubtedly aided by Cape Blanco and Workforce over doing the Donkey work. |
|
By:
Mac, in the Hardwicke I believe that Duncan ran above himself, a bit like Papal Bull did in the KG a couple of years before, the time was very fast when allowances had been made. If you take Duncan out of the race then Harbinger absolutely battered a bunch of decent horses, better than the ones Telescope disposed of, imo.
|
|
By:
You see you cannot keep carrying over points made on other threads. They were dealt with there. I didn't bring up any of your comments on other threads. This is a thread all of it's own and it was you who brought up other issues. You have to move on and simply discuss the issues. And even then if you bring up other points surely you do so for them to be discussed?
The point about Ascot winning distances was discussed by Hoilles and Mellish last year so it isn't just me that thinks there is a possible link. Time will tell. But surely discussion and comparison is what a forum is for? If we all had the same views it would pointless. And I never said horses are being over rated compared with the past. You have this fetish with Dancing Brave and you can't get over it. That's where the Triptych comments came from. Try to move on Figgis and deal with today's points. Like Mac we can add bare comparisons with the past and, as someone who supposedly rates horses, why not add how your ratings compare or separate individual instances? Stop fighting over everything. |
|
By:
Figgis Possibly so , he certainly ran the best race of his life in the Hardwick, also should maybe be noted that Harbinger loved the officially good ground he encountered in the KG
|
|
By:
You have this fetish with Dancing Brave
 coming from someone who wrote to all and sundry about Frankel's rating.The Dancing Brave references are because you said he was the last great horse before Frankel, yet refused to acknowledge there were flaws in his rating using strict handicapping methods, while pointing out what you believed were holes in Frankel's rating. The point about Ascot winning distances was discussed Every rating I've seen of Harbinger acknowledged that the horses behind ran below form, this isn't news. However, even taking that into consideration most people still accept it was a great performance, they don't make snide remarks that he was retired because of any other reason than injury. |
|
By:
^ If I believe in something I see no reason why I shouldn't stand up for what I believe in. It is a great pity more people don't do exactly the same thing in racing. There is too much fear amongst pundits and presenters to question anything from a poor ride to a poor placement. A little backbone in racing circles wouldn't go amiss. And I have some wonderful letters to back that up.
I never stated Dancing Brave was the last great horse before Frankel the Ratings Experts did. My point, and many, many others in racing s the way DB's rating was changed to accommodate Frankel. I don't believe I ever wrote anywhere that Dancing Brave was better than Frankel. I accept what Harbinger did was a great performance. NEVER have I questioned his rating. NEVER. I just think he could have been a superstar had he really been that good and not rushed off to stud. Injured? Maybe? Not sure Coolmore would have gotten away with that one. So why don't you stop trawling over old issues? This is a King George thread why not stick to that? |
|
By:
Figgis, Sir Michael Stoute is on public record as saying Harbinger got inured at home on the gallops. I think it was roughly 2 weeks after the KG.
I remember some folk on here were backing him at 7/4 for the Arc. Unbelievable really. |
|
By:
* got injured
|
|
By:
I accept what Harbinger did was a great performance. NEVER have I questioned his rating. NEVER.
Really? Then what was this about? The favourite seemed to not run to form and confirmed that view next tim while the others didn't exactly frank the form. The 2nd was clearly a better 10f horse so the distance could have been exaggerated by that fact. The 3rd was well beaten next time and the 4th was well beaten next time in a Group 2. Make of that what you will. All pretty unsatisfactory if you ask me. Injured? Maybe? Not sure Coolmore would have gotten away with that one. http://www.racingpost.com/news/horse-racing/harry-herbert-highclere-thorbred-racing-ltd-highclere-thoroughbred-racing-adm-rous-king-george-hero-harbinger-retired/753042/#newsArchiveTabs=last7DaysNews HARBINGER, the world's highest rated racehorse, has been retired from racing. The four-year-old colt, who won the King George VI and Queen Elizabeth Stakes by 11 lengths, suffered a fractured leg on Saturday and underwent surgery at Rossdales Equine Hospital in Newmarket the same day. Harry Herbert, of owners Highclere Thoroughbred Racing, released a statement on Monday afternoon confirming the decision to retire Harbinger. Herbert said: "It is with regret that it has been decided to retire Harbinger from racing. Thanks to the professionalism of the veterinary surgeons - Bruce Bladon of O’Gorman Slater & Main, Andrew Bathe of Rossdale & Partners and Antony Clements of Baker & McVeigh - the operation which was undertaken at Rossdales Hospital in Newmarket has been very successful. But why let any of that get in the way of a good conspiracy theory |