Harry, I reckon he ran to his previous best in the Tattersalls but I don't know if he could repeat that again. Like you said he may have needed the run last time. It's just a generalisation but I think when a horse gets to the age of 5 (unless it's one of the few that are still improving and I don't believe FR is) and runs to its previous best it's pretty much guesswork if they're going to be able to repeat it soon but I think it's more likely they won't. I can think of some that did but I can think of many more that went on a downward turn. That's the main reason I'm against Postponed, I don't agree with the view he's improved as a 5yo and I have him repeating his best effort last time in quite a hard race. It's a bit different with FR as his peak effort was back in May, he could be refreshed after the break and maybe wasn't quite ready last time. I have my doubts but the price allows for the doubts, assuming he's an intended runner.

Harry, I thought Highland Reel was likely to regress last time after having two hard races. I thought he reached a new peak at Ascot then more or less repeated the run at York. Whether he can come back to form in time I just don't know. All horses are individuals so it's impossible to know. All you can do is compare to runners from the past in similar circumstances. Using that as a guide I'd just say is I think it's more likely he won't bounce back in time.

rogue even

Well harry, just like with Fascinating Rock I think the price allows for any doubts. I have him fourth highest rated, excluding the Japanese runner who I just don't know enough about. I'm sure at least one of my three highest rated won't run to form, so if FR does it gives him a chance of a place. It's basically a bet on him coming back to form or not, if he does he won't be too far from the winner.

Harry, I think Postponed, Makahiki and even Harzand are taking too much of the market share, runners like Fascinating Rock (that's if he is going to run) and Highland Reel are overpriced.

Harry, I don't really agree about the race waning in class. I just think we've been quite lucky in recent years so this year seems a bit underwhelming. When I think back to when I first got into the game there was Dancing Brave's win but this was followed by such as Trempolino (who looked outstanding on the day but wasn't in truth), Tony Bin, Carroll House, Subotica, Urban Sea, Carnegie, nice if you backed them but not exceptional horses.

I've been reading this thread for a long time without commenting, and have found it fascinating.

I am a much better punter over the jumps so am rarely keen to be too pedantic when it comes to Flat betting, but I really think Postponed is different gravy to these and think he wins easily. Ratings might not suggest he is a superstar but the manner of his Group 1 wins suggest to me he's absolutely top-class and I'm not sure that's true of any of the others (especially given Harzand's defeat and imperfect prep since).

Impossible123

Impossible123 your postings are ordinarily impossible but your recent slight and exaggerated critique feels like an inadequate attempt at showmanship.

You state-

The above statements showed the degree a poster will go to in order to cement his views of La Cressionniere and/or dislike for her trainer, Jean-Claude Rouget.

If you are trying to interpret my comments at the very least try not to put words in my mouth, at no time have I intimated I dislike the trainer.


hinted/suggested/implied there was something untoward to her withdrawal other than an injury

hinting/suggesting/implying La Cressonniere was as good as Harbinger and Danedream in a 'stealth' manner was nothing but bunkum, distasteful and despicable, on the part of this poster, in my opinion.

Since you want to use the company of three words to emphasis your meaning, this comes down to subjectivity and trust/ reliance/belief in thoroughbred horse racing/media/bloodstock public relations. Stealth? The trainer makes no secret of the fact that he elevates his filly to the heights of other proven top-class animals with no established basis. Prolific/ irritating/scratching your bol hocks musing posters should really get off their hobby horse and begin to debate properly.

Figgis

I can't see why you think that Harzand may have peaked for the year? He wasn't a Gns horse. He was prepped  with 2 runs for the Derby and then ran in the Irish Derby. Then 70 days off before the Champion Stakes. So 5 runs this year with the summer off.Compare that with Found (7 runs this year) Makahiki (5 runs)HR (6 runs).If Harzand may have peaked why not those 3 as well? No, if he loses its because there is something better than him, but we can only speculate beforehand. Lets see how he works tuesday. If the horse runs flat tomorrow he won't run.

Sandown, but you're comparing his figure with RP figures for horses after they won the race. As i said before when you believe horses nearly always improve to win any given race then it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. If Postponed did win I could almost guarantee the RP will elevate his rating if they can. I've said he's been overrated all year but that's because Timeform rate him 132 which I just can't see. However if the RP are trying to say he's a worse horse than the likes of Marienbard, Subotica and Solemia then I don't understand that either.

Any valid comparisons with RP ratings would need to be made with how they rated runners going into the race, not how they massaged the winning figure afterwards.

5 winners improved a whopping 10lbs plus on the day? That's a huge amount for a runner to improve at the end of a season. I'd guess Danedream was one but I'd say that was because most of us couldn't get a handle on the German form and underrated her, I doubt the RP were any more clued up on her than the rest of us. Who were the other 4 runners?

Figgis

Here's a list of the main changes  as reference points. Not always what you might think.

Improved

+13          Helissio        to 134 in the race
+12          Solemia            124
+12          Peintre Celebre    137
+11          Treve              131
+11          Carnegie           128


+4           Danedream          128
+1           Marienbard         127


Declined
-6           Sea The Stars     132
-5           Golden Horn       127
-5           Treve             126
-4           Dylan Thomas      127

NB Take STS out of the mix (because he ran below his PB by 6lbs and still won easily) and the  average improvement for 3 yr  olds rises to +4.9 lbs

Finally, Solemia accounts for all the average for 4yr olds. Take that of the mix and the average for 4 yr old was zero improvement. Wonderful what you can do with stats when you want to make a point

F ROCK  out according to skybet

Interesting to see Almanzor still engaged in this, he's back in the market at 6's and drifting for the Champion, rerouting?

19 at the 5 day stage.

F.Rock defo out.

Dettori would be a nice booking for the frontrunning Savoir Vivre.

+13          Helissio        to 134 in the race
+12          Solemia            124
+12          Peintre Celebre    137
+11          Treve              131
+11          Carnegie           128

I think a lot of people would do their own ratings would dispute those figures. Helissio went there a strongly fancied favourite with many people thinking he already had the form to win so 123 seems quite a low mark to have him on. He won impressively and I'm sure he improved a few pounds but there was a danger of getting carried away with one race. The time wasn't outstanding and he didn't look so highly rated in his subsequent races. Solemia just got lucky on the ground, very doubtful she improved 12lbs. Peintre Celebre I had as an outstanding winner, he never ran again to prove it but I can accept big improvement there. I'm sure Treve improved too but again people got carried away with one performance and while still very good the first win looked overrated afterwards. I can't see how Carnegie improved that much, he went there well fancied and didn't show a great deal more when winning than he had before.

I don't think these stats tell us anything more than we're already aware of. A 3yo who is on a winning roll and has been winning comfortably will very possibly show more improvement on the day (although I can't agree as many as that showed nearly a stone more). Only a few older runners will improve in comparison. The question is if there are any 3yos that could fit that bill. I only see the Japanese runner and I really don't know how far behind the Europeans he is, my guess is he has some catching up to do but maybe he can. Harzand has to show his last run all wrong but he didn't really look like a progressive horse in the Irish Derby. I'm not convinced improvement will play a big part in this year's race and looking at those RP ratings I'd say they've underrated one or two anyway and will probably elevate them after the race.

Figgis

I think a lot of people would do their own ratings would dispute those figures

I'm sure they would but they are not available to more than one person, are they? I haven't mentioned my own figures because of that. If we want to be able to debate races and horses on an equal footing we have to have some common source available to all. I see no p0int in quibbling over all the individual ratings and trying to explain how and why things could be looked at differently. As it is, there is enough there to give us all some food for thought. Its anyone's free choice to use or ignore the information that they contain.

Backed up with the stats on proportion of races run by age group and proportion of races won by age group, it is clear as daylight that 3 yr olds have an edge  and older horses are  at some kind of disadvantage.

That being so, I've made the decision to save on Makahiki and New Bay and be against Postponed and Found. I win on Harzand, OOSG and HR . As for Alamzor, if he runs, he's a loser too.The rest are losers also.

That's my a/p book anyway. Day of race book is another matter.

Almanzor, whatever.