(top 10f G1) - if he can do it then next year they can look at all the 10f races

It's a bigger issue for anyone who has already backed either of Gosden's or is intending to, but it will also impact on the others in the market. Personally I won't be backing any of Gosden's but depending on who he runs it would affect the price I'd be prepared to take on Treve. If the ground came up good to soft and he ran GH instead of JH, as seems likely, I'd be happy to take a shorter price on Treve, as in my view it would be the wrong decision.

Golden Horn would be in there after a hard season, with his two most recent starts being below his very best. It wouldn't be a case of maybe getting away with ground he isn't at his best on against inferior opposition (as it might've been if he'd ran in the KG), he will have to be right on top of his game. I'd say that's unlikely given that scenario and for me they'd have based their decision to run on hopes rather than any sound intelligence and JH would be the one I'd fear more on good to soft ground.

The 'Arc' is bigger than any trainer; whether Gosden runs his duo there or not I shall not be backing either - the home team has sufficient fire power to 'manage' the outsiders I'd imagine.

Sandown - Have already told you about Order Of St George, not that anyone has taken any notice of me other than someone thinking I was a pillock obsessed but today he was cut to 10/1 by PP just after 11.30 and there has been money for him on here?

Order of St. George - for all his demolotion at 1m 6f on awful ground - would never be so effective at 1m,4 - I'm sure the historians can back that up

and btw, when AO'B says "a decision will have to be made about Order of St. George" that's whether to quarantine him this weekend or hold him for the Long Distance Championship at Ascot which was reported as his next probable race by Jockey and Trainer.

I'd like to see OSG at the 'Arc' but I'd be astounded if it turned up; 14f is very different to 12f in a G1 especially so with distance 'specialists' aplenty - OSG does not have the pace for a 12f G1 race, I firmly believe.

What does everyone think about the chances of Karpino? He could be a big surprise if he runs.

He looked impressive but that was as much to do with the testing going as it was the extra 2f, the fields was going backwards by the end.

Agree that JG is doing the wrong thing but not aiming Jack Hobbs at the Arc. He seems to be banking on soft ground at Ascot, which, by the way, JH has not actually raced on before so other than his breeding I guess he's galloped on soft in the mornings??
Eagle Top is bred for soft ground too but he's not effective on it...so we'll have to see how he handles it..

JH should be in the Arc regardless of the ground, he's a much fresher horse than GH. I'm on New Bay at 16/1 and Found 25/1 ew, all posted on here, but have gambled on Jack Hobbs running too despite the fact he may not...8/1 seems worth the risk as if he runs it probably means GH will not.

ffs
Order of St. George - for all his demolotion at 1m 6f on awful ground - would never be so effective at 1m,4 - I'm sure the historians can back that up

These have won one or more Group races (or equivalent) over 14f, 15f ,16f+ before their Arc win.
Comrade (1920), Ksar (1920, 1921), Massine (1924), Priori (1925), Biribi (1926), Ortello (1929),
Motrico (1930, 1932), Crapom (1933), Brantome (1934), Eclair Au Chocolat (1938),
Le Pacha (1941), Verso (1943), Caracalla (1946), Sica Boy (1954), Ribot (1956), Oroso (1957), Ballymoss (1958),
Puissant Chef (1960), Prince Royal (1964), Levmoss (1969),
Sassafras (1970), Gold River (1981), Marienbard (2002)

I am eating a chocolate eclair as I am writing this.

Winning a race does not prevent a horse from winning another race.

Am popping out to Ottolenghi's to get an Eclair Au Chocolat. Speak soon ffs.

Sandown, putting potential improvement to one side and ignoring Treve's 2013 win. Which horses in this field have put up a performance that you consider better than Treve's winning performance last year?

Figgis

, putting potential improvement to one side and ignoring Treve's 2013 win. Which horses in this field have put up a performance that you consider better than Treve's winning performance last year?

Golden Horn's Derby win would match it. His Eclipse win is actualy highest on RPR's but I think that rating is suspect.

But more importantly, it's not reasonable to put improvement to one side from at least one other horse. It's also possible to consider a lower rating from Treve. These things happen as you well know.

I agree that GH would run Treve close on his best, but think we're both in agreement he's less likely to run to that mark at this stage of the season on the likely ground. On proven form the only horse I can see that is rightly a single figure price is Golden Horn but judging by the latest news from the yard and the probable ground it seems he's an unlikely runner. The runner with the most obvious potential for improvement is New Bay. He's priced up so short because he's from a yard with a good track record in the race, he won the trial with the best recent record, he's on a winning streak and still hasn't been bottomed. I think all those factors are relevant and he may well improve greatly on what he's shown. Nevertheless, improvement certainly isn't guaranteed and it you'd have to have some serious faith in potential over proven form to say he's too big of a price currently.

As for Treve, we know she's at least as good as last year, that she goes on any ground and we know she's very effective with cut in the ground and that seems the most likely outcome at the moment. Any horse can be at the mercy of trouble in running but with the way she travels and quickens, both in slowly run and fast run races, she's more capable than most of overcoming such problems.

There may be bit of value further down the betting, particularly for each way bets, but does anyone really think any of the other runners should be a single figure price? Treve might not run her race, which also goes for any of the other runners and while I can perfectly understand anyone who thinks she's too short at evens to back, as we're supposed to be looking for value, not backing at the right price, but for those who think she's the wrong price I'd be interested to know what price they think she should be? (Not what price they'd back her at).

Figgis

As I explained earlier, the only way I arrive at 2.0 for Treve is under the 4 assumptions I listed. Relax any or all of those assumptions and the price lengthens. What her price ought to be, therefore, depends on the assumptions dropped.

feel sorry for the people who
have backed Postponed for this,
clearly aimed at the race,you'd
think Varian would let it take its
chance.

to get to a price of 2.1 for Treve you have to 1. Use Treve's rating from her 2013 Arc win  2. Assume that the field will be in single figures 3. Assume nothing else improves significantly. 4. Ignore the conditions factors that come into play with every race especially pace, ground, draw, fitness, tactics and the chance factors such as luck in running.

I'd have thought if all those factors were considered assumed to be true then she'd be more like 1.1 than 2.1.

Ok, so using those hypothetical factors we're assuming a horse will run to it's best ever rating which is clear of the other runners, the others will not improve past it, it will be a small field where luck in running and conditions are considered a given. If that doesn't constitute a short odds on shot I'd like to know what does?