We want to share an important update with our Betfair Community users.
Over the coming months, the Betfair Community platform will be winding down. The final active day for the platform will be December 21st. From December 22nd, users will no longer be able to access the platform.
Your discussions, insights, engagement, and, most importantly, feedback have helped shape the platform and guided innovation. Your feedback continues to be important to us, and we will continue to listen via our dedicated feedback channels, as well as through product testing and innovations.
To share your feedback and experience, visit: https://support.betfair.com/app/home
Horse Antepost
Epsom Derby 2017
|
By:
The stamina issue, in my opinion, is all about horses being able to get in a breather. And of course, the home straight is part of the 5f sprint course which is supposedly the fastest in the country and is also supposedly downhill all the way. Whereas I think there is a sharp uphill finish.
In 1970 when they had fixed rails and fixed distances the difference between Epsom and Ascot over 12f was 3.53 seconds. Something has changed. |
|
By:
I'm far from convinced that stated race distances are anything other than approximate. How can we be sure that the Derby distance is exactly the same as the King George? This is not athletics.
|
|
By:
In 1970 the Epsom record for a 3 year old carrying 9st was 2.33.8 which now, for the same age and weight, is 2.32.3. At Ascot where they have carried out extensive course works in 1970 it used to be 2.30.17 and is now 2.26.78.
The Epsom difference could involve movement of rails etc but the Ascot difference must be as a result of course changes. |
|
By:
experienced posters here really should know better than believing trainers who claim their 12f horses are best at 10f we all know why they are saying that
|
|
By:
5f sprint course which is supposedly the fastest in the country and is also supposedly downhill all the way
So even though the trip contains the fastest 5f in the country they're still running it nearly 6.5 sec slower. This also argues against the possibility that they're still taking a pull continuing downhill after the bend, which would've seemed very unlikely anyway. Which leaves the explanation that the horses/jockeys are slowing down on the bend far more than they do on other courses with a bend, slowing down by as much as half a furlong. This is not a plausible explanation. |
|
By:
There is only one explanation, which is despite the trip being downhill in part, the uphill sections of the course are so stiff that they far outweigh the easier parts of the course, leading to much slower times.
|
|
By:
I am not doubting the slower times all I am saying is that the times do not represent a stamina test but do represent the nuances of the racecourse.
|
|
By:
But you are left with only one nuance that could possibly make a difference, that is the downhill turn and nothing more than that. We're not talking a half second here or there. If a course takes on average 6.5 sec longer to run than another it has to be because overall it requires more stamina.
|
|
By:
Just more evidence that times can put you away and are ultimately unreliable on their own.
|
|
By:
Just more evidence that times can put you away and are ultimately unreliable on their own
What evidence is this? So far you have only put forward conflicting theories based on your own preconceived opinion. |
|
By:
The main reason I don't really fancy Cracksman is I'm not convinced there is enough stamina in his pedigree to win the Derby.
|
|
By:
So riding around the course, walking the course, taking horses to the course, talking to jockeys and trainers is what you call, from your armchair, preconceived. Got it.
Racecourse description: Left handed and undulating with easy turns and a run in of just under 4f. The 5f course is also undulating and downhill all the ay making it the fastest 5f in the world. So here you have a racecourse where, when running over 12f well over half of it, including the final half, is downhill. That tells me the reason for slow times is the uphill climb in the first half is because they are not racing at this time, this is where the time is lost. |
|
By:
*way
|
|
By:
It is a pity the rain came to Ireland because I wanted to see if the proximity of Lancaster Bomber at Newmarket was reliable. Churchill had beaten him 9 lengths in the past and I hoped an opponent would help decide how reliable the Newmarket form is. Sadly the rain came and although Churchill beat Lancaster Bomber by 12 lengths that is exaggerated by the ground. Will Churchill now head to Epsom?
|
|
By:
The run in is closer to 3.5 furlongs than 4f. The final furlong in the Derby is actually uphill.
This is all still very simplistic however, just uphill, downhill, with no information of how steep the uphill or downhill parts are. That tells me the reason for slow times is the uphill climb in the first half is because they are not racing at this time, this is where the time is lost The first 4f of the 12f course is uphill and they often go too fast in the Derby Sandown takes a different view of that, as do I. |
|
By:
You can have 70 on here Brig if you think so.
|
|
By:
Stranger things have happened Felt. At least it would have been nice if Mick had asked him. I will have to remind him when I see him at swimming next.
|
|
By:
There is nothing wrong with that F. If we all thought the same it would be a strange old world.
|
|
By:
100 now Brig if Churchill runs I`ll eat my pants.
|
|
By:
Gross. AOB couldn't bring himself to say that was definitely the plan to go to Ascot etc. He should have been a politician.
|
|
By:
Have a tenner on to save your Cracksman stake.
|
|
By:
I thought AOB alluded to Royal Ascot next but as usual the boys would decide. However, Churchill could be upped in distance to 10f later on eg The Eclipse (perhaps), with minding out of action.
I'd donate my winning from this race if Churchill runs here instead of the SJPS at Royal Ascot. |
|
By:
Okool probably showed why Crystal Ocean is a non runner.
|
|
By:
Ryan Moore on being asked if CoM will win the Derby "They all have to step up, and they will. Who knows? That's why we race next Saturday, but the winner will be a proper Group1 horse"
|
|
By:
I think he thinks they have something decent up their sleeve, not downplaying what they are giving it.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
although nobody can be sure that Permian hasn't improved since Epsom - I'm pretty confident, just from looking at the build of the horse that he's come on a lot since Epsom.
The collateral form is a good guide for well-established runners, but for horses that are clearly improving it just doesn't hold. That's not to say it's meaningless, but it greatly discounts the confidence you can have in it, and that only compounds the more races you include. Visually, CoM looks the fav. He's a lovely, balanced, quick horse who will get the trip and he found plenty when asked for in the Dee - you could expect 20lbs improvement from him just on his 2yo form alone. Eminent also looks to have all the right attributes, but he'll need to step forward and that's not as guaranteed as w CoM. Permian is the one who is doing everything right, going from strength to strength, a classic Teofilo, and with the Darshaan on the Dam side every chance he'll improve from the Dante. As for Cracksman, doesn't excite me one bit - I can't think of one single positive remark to make about him. Then the others, all have pros and cons - but as pointed out above it is a race where longshots have a poor record. |
|
By:
I've said it would be no surprise to see Cracksman win, just as it wouldn't be a surprise to see any unexposed promising horse win. At the same time it wouldn't be a surprise to see him out with the washing, just like any horse that has plenty still to prove. I've no problem with anyone who's backed Cracksman having hopes he can win and even feeling quite positive in the lack of anything concrete coming out of the trials.
there is a lot of evidence out there now surrounding Cracksman to say he COULD not only win but win by a wide margin there is a growing mountain of evidence that points to the fact Cracksman could win this race very easily The above statements, however, are purely wishful thinking. A mountain of evidence?  |
|
By:
Sometimes it's a bit of poetic licence when you haven't got the actual evidence in front of you. However what he actually said was ' We wanted to get the next run into him and if it hadn't rained we would have. But I've been lucky enough to come here today, have a nice breeze and that has made all the difference. He also had a nice run here and has come on a lot.'
'It's a very open race and he deserves to be up there with three or four others'. Dettori said It was a slowly run race and he had to do a lot of things and he answered every call. He's not Golden Horn yet by any means, but he could be anything and a week on Saturday we will find out'. His owner said ' He did everything right this morning and it was just perfect. Golden Horn was like a rocket in the Dante whereas this horse is so laid back., but Frankie and John are very confident he will stay and he'll be right there at the end'. Hope this helps ffs. Compared with the evidence that any other horse will win it is a veritable mountain F.  |
|
By:
' We wanted to get the next run into him and if it hadn't rained we would have. But I've been lucky enough to come here today, have a nice breeze and that has made all the difference. He also had a nice run here and has come on a lot.'
So then really no more positive than his words on Wings of Desire. |
|
By:
If that is what you think F it is no wonder you are confused about the Epsom racecourse.
|
|
By:
This is the 1st year ever I've held antepost vouchers for six protagonists of this race after the scratching of Yucatan but none for Cracksman until just recently to minimise damage just in case.
I see the bookies are trying to solicit dosh from impulsive probably emotional and aggrieved followers of Churchill who did not get a run for their money here post his Irish 2000G victory earlier today with silly quotes for The Eclipse (10f) on 8th July, and the King George (12f) at the end of the same month; the former might come too soon post the St James's Palace, and no chance for the latter as it is over 12f. Look no further,...one could do worse than backing Eminent, I believe. |
|
By:
Was it you who took the 110 Churchill Brig?
|
|
By:
“Frankie was really happy with him, and is thrilled with way he has come on mentally. This place takes no prisoners,” he said.
“He loved the way he came down the hill, changed his legs nicely in the straight and picked up when he wanted. He’s learned a lot, come on strongly and didn’t blow much after". ' We wanted to get the next run into him and if it hadn't rained we would have. But I've been lucky enough to come here today, have a nice breeze and that has made all the difference. He also had a nice run here and has come on a lot.' So the first statement is meaningless but the second one really means 'improved out of recognition'. Ah right, sorry, I must be struggling to see over the mountain of evidence. |
|
By:
You are scratching around like a demented ferret F why don't you tell me the mountain of evidence and statements you have about Cliffs of Moher. Or are you afraid to show your hand?
|
|
By:
I don't have a mountain of evidence. I have stated why I backed CoM, which was mainly because of his time performance last year. People can question whether it was really that good (I can't be absolutely certain myself but I'm dealing in probabilities and price, not certainties) or they can even disagree how good it was. I don't have any problem with that. I've even said if anyone didn't rate CoM before Chester then there's no reason to take the current price afterwards.
Most people on here give their opinions and whether I agree with them or not they're usually fair and consistent with what they say. It is only an issue for me when some start using trainer quotes to back up their opinion, yet at the same time dismiss other quotes. Or put their own spin on what was actually said and expect everyone to swallow it. Or pick bits and pieces of form to suit their ideas but conveniently ignore bits that don't. Or slate AOB for coming out with ridiculous hype (which is something I'd agree with them on) but then start doing the same about one they've backed. Ya know, general hypocrisy. |
|
By:
^ You are one confused individual F. This is a horse racing forum. The idea is that we proffer our views for discussion. Not to be stripped apart line by line. Pull yourself together man. This is a horse racing forum. Get it? You don't like people putting forward their views and you don't like people after timing. Make your flipping mind up.
|
|
By:
You don't like people putting forward their views
No, I just don't like dumb views. I had no criticism of anything you said about Cracksman before or straight after Epsom. It wasn't a bet I'd have made myself but I could see why you made it. Even after Cracksman was a shade disappointing at Epsom I said it was far too early to dismiss him when someone on here wrote him off. It was only when I started reading rubbish like CoM can't be much good because Stoute has pulled Mirage Dancer from the race. Despite Stoute also pulling Crystal Ocean from the race, a horse who Permian beat only 1 1/4 lengths and Cracksman was only a short head in front of that one. |
|
By:
backed eminent
 |