The Eclipse - Sandown July 6th

Andrew, getting you to separate what she did as a 3yo is proving difficult, so imagine if any other horse had won last year's Arc and this year's Eclipse by exactly the same distances against the exact same opposition, how would you rate those performances? Forget scales, putting them into an historical context would you say they were well above average, average, or below average?

You guys are using a 'criteria' we mere mortals don't understand

Well I could go into times but I would be wasting mine. No, I mean simple criteria such as the obvious knowledge that horses can and do improve at the age of 4 and even older, rather than holding them down by what they did in previous years or trying to average their entire career performances. Recognising that there's a massive difference between simply saying this horse beat that compared to one horse that absolutely pulverised the opposition. Recognising that 3lbs over a mile is so obviously not 2lbs it is 3lbs minimum. Recognising that a horse who doesn't just win a Thirsk Hunt Cup but who wins it effortlessly by 6 lengths while being hammered in the betting by those in the know could indeed go on to be a Gp1 performer. Basic stuff really but only for the unblinkered

* 1 length over a mile

That is exactly my point Figgis. The only horse Frankel met of any note was Canford Cliffs. He always had classic intentions and ran in the 2000 guineas finishing 3rd. Horses like Farhh, Excelebration, Cirrus des Aigles, Zoffany, Dubawi Gold, Klammer etc etc never had classic potential. The reason they succeeded was that there was a mass shortage of class horses at that time. In Frankel's 2000 Guineas the next 5 home never won a Group 1 race throughout their careers. The best older horse came from Australia, the Arc winner was German, the Derby winner retired straight away having only won a Group 3. It happens a bit like this year. Can you see a three year old winning the Arc this year? At least the likely protagonists will have always been thought of a top class horses. The only difference is that Frankel arrived and couldn't believe his luck.

I know from American racing the quickest way to the poor house is following times. But my point is that Frankel never showed those times. Racing is over the distance not in sections. Had Frankel been a fast horse Henry would not have started him over a mile on soft ground. Sea the Stars beat average times on three occasions from his 6 runs and broke the course record once. So it is not impossible or improbable in the current climate. Dancing Brave beat average times and broke course records, so did Nijinsky, Mill Reef and Brigadier Gerard. And so did Secretariat.

like i said class horses have been in decline for years.DANCING BRAVE  broke  course records in a canter, by far the best racehorse ive seen.

That is exactly my point Figgis

Yes, your point being that if horses don't win classics or go close to winning them, they can't be much good after. So if a horse isn't close to a champion early on in its 3yo season then it should never be upgraded later. Which is the point I'm saying is utter garbage.

Look at the ground when those horses ran in the seventies and early eighties. Christ, the clerks would be passing enough urine to drench the course themselves if they saw that ground on a race day.

On a race day nowadays I mean.

nashwan time on heavy was out of this world in the eclipse, 4 secs off sea the stars on firm.

Anyway, back to Enable. For me, the winning performance level in last year's Arc and this year's Eclipse were under average for the race. Whereas her 3yo performances were well above average for her sex and age. Give her back the allowances and she wins as easily as she did as a 3yo. So all I'm saying is she has basically stayed the same level. If she had improved with wfa she would be beating these horses more easily. This has proved good enough so far. There are those who will say she's only done what has been required and will up her game when/if needed. That is where I disagree.

Not horses Figgis, all horses. The majority of classic horses I have seen this year do not look great. You may disagree. So what about the stables other horses not capable of being up to classic potential? How good will they be?
Take Frankel out of the classics and you have Dubawi Gold, Native Khan, Slim Shadey, Fury, Happy Today, Pour Moi, Treasure Beach, Carlton House, Memphis Tennessee, Recital, Dancing Rain, Wonder of Wonders, Izzi Top, Misty For Me, Beatrice Aurora, Blue Bunting, Together, Maquasid, Nova Heat, Barefoot Lass and Havant. These were a cross-section of the best horses around from the top yards. What Frankel met was the best of the rest so imagine how good that was.

Your comment about the ground is rubbish Figgis they watered when Brigadier Gerard was racing. The only difference is that they let the grass grow to provide a safe covering. And they never were able to move the rails or save strips of perfect ground for the best races.

Enough of the pointless my era was better than yours debates. Back to the discussion on future betting, which is what it's all about. Do people see Enable as a value bet for the King George?

Hi Figgis,

I think if Crystal Ocean could repeat last year's King George performance he could beat Enable. This will be his big target of the year and has the exact same prep as last year. Can't really see anything else being good enough.

not at 1/1. yesterday 4/6 against nothing, now i reckon this japan might be the real deal, about time coolmore produced something .

The majority of classic horses I have seen this year do not look great. You may disagree

I don't disagree on that at all. I think I might have said at the time Hermosa was a below average winner of the 1000. In hindsight that was wrong and I was probably hoping to see a really good filly. I'd say she was bang on average and there's nothing wrong with that, they can't all be superstars. For me, Magna Grecia was the worst Guineas winner for years, although it has to be said he didn't even run anywhere his previous level at the Curragh. He's slow but not that slow.

I think the Oaks was bang average, even though Pink Dogwood disappointed last time and it remains to be seen how the winner comes out of it. The Derby, frankly, was terrible. I backed AVD thinking he was capable of more on his best form last year. A lot of that was based on the run against Quorto, who hasn't been seen since, so I may have overrated him that day. Take that out and I would still have backed AVD and I still believe he was the worthy winner on the day, but I wouldn't have had as much on, I got lucky. Despite not running very fast a lot of the runners still appeared to have a hard race that day and on the evidence of the Curragh have gone even further backwards. Couldn't back any of them in future unless improvement is shown.

You think Enable isn't that great because of the horses that are around. And I agree with that. But it was worse with Frankel.

Would you think Enable's classics group of Wings of Eagles, Cliffs of Moher, Cracksman, Eminent. Benbatl, Capri, Churchill, Barney Roy, Al Wukair, Lancaster Bomber, Dream Castle, Rhodedendron, Alluringly, Horseplay, Coronet, Isabel de Urbina, Winter, Daban, Talaayeb, Fair Eca and Unforgatable Filly were a better group than Frankel's group?  I certainly do but I also think they were not a great bunch.

This isn't about my era this is your era, today's era. The quality of horses Frankel ran against were, in my opinion, of a lower quality than Enable's group.

Yet you will be looking at Enable's chance of winning the King George or whether or not there is a three year old good enough to benefit from the allowances.   

There wasn't anything from the 3 year old division capable of benefitting from the allowances last year and if it is the same this year do you upgrade Enable or say she didn't beat much. Just like I am saying about Frankel.

China castle, you know it makes sense

Look, if we were ONLY going to judge horses on who they'd beat then it would be a piss poor state of affairs in the 21st century. It would mean a brilliant horse could come along facing below average opponents but no, he's no good because he beat nobodies. Maybe that applies in other sports but, even for those who don't want to recognise time PERFORMANCES, we can measure how good a horse is by how far they beat the rated opposition. Maybe we might get that wrong on one performance. There is still debate about how good Hawkwing's Locking win was. With Frankel he did it time and again season after season, with the allowances and without them. It's bewildering how anyone can fail to recognise just what an absolutely brilliant racehorse he was when there is just so much evidence to prove it.

Frankel's generation was outstanding. His 3yo peers won nearly all the WFA races worth winning that year - Nathaniel, Danedream. Then they came back the following year and as 4yos beat the 3yos in all the WFA races. Farrh even came back the year after aged 5 to be the champion miler.

Brigust must have an alert set up here to notify him when someone says something positive about Frankel as it's the only time he ever posts - too busy travelling to Brigadier Gerard's grave to lay flowers every day and writing letters of protest to Timeform.


Enable looks like she might do something no horse has ever done - be the best middle distance horse 3 years running. That would be some achievement.

I can only assume the big difference in price between Enable and Crystal Ocean is partly due to that joke race at Kempton last September. Enable set a very slow pace , for the grade of race , which meant Crystal Ocean had little chance of beating her.

Flipping heck Figgis that is exactly the same criteria you are using for Enable. She didn't beat very much by very far.

In my opinion, 'time' performances are as useless as a chocolate teapot. You don't even know where the best ground is for a starter or the proper race distance.
In the Queen Anne apparently, Frankel ran the 5th furlong in a good time and faster than the 5-furlong horses in the Kings Stand. What is overlooked is that Frankel would have been 15 lengths behind the Kings Stand winner at the 5-furlong marker, after running 5 furlongs on the easirt part of the track so how can you possibly compare the two? In America they have fast quarter horses to run 2 furlongs but they are hopeless at 5 furlongs. 

And A_T how unusual for the 3 year olds to win with the allowances. Figgis will answer that one for you. The fact is the 3 year old classic contenders in Frankel's year won 14 Group 1 races whereas in Enable's year they won 25 Group 1 races. And I am not saying that was a great year.

The clues are all there you just have to cut through the hype. In the last 50 years one horse shared Frankel's record for the worst 2000 Guineas and that was Roland Gardens.

It is called 'class'. Some horses have it and some don't. Some have a 'touch of class' and very few are 'top class'. Class horses will always pulverise the rest that is why the likes of Arkle and Desert Orchid could defy the handicapper, class. If Frankel was beating class horses easily that would be different but as Phil Smith, Head of the BHA said in the press and in a letter to me and I quote' It is difficult splitting Frankel and Dancing Brave because one beat lesser horses easily while the other beat better horses narrowly'. You only have to ask any sportsman or woman, or football manager whether it is a better achievement to beat lesser opponents easily or better opponents narrowly and I know what they will say, every time.

She didn't beat very much by very far.

Jesus effing Christ. Are you seriously trying to compare beating Magical and Sea Of Class by less than a length to what Frankel did as a 4yo. I feel sorry for you man

Figgis it was you comparing Enable with Frankel, if you remember.

Your comment was 'Look, if we are only going to judge horses on who they'd beat then it would be a piss poor state of affairs in the 21st Century yet you are still going on about Magical and Sea of Class.

You don't know what rubbish you are churning out from one minute to the next. Must be the new secret criteria.

In my opinion, 'time' performances are as useless as a chocolate teapot

Brig, is that your opinion as a successful punter, or as house refurbisher **** book writer? And by the way, I'm not trying to play Billy Big Bollocks here, a successful punter can be a success on a small level.

Ffs, **** was the censored word.

Ffs, scum without the s, no slur intended

No need to get insulting Figgis.The lowest form of conversation. If you cannot have a sensible, rational conversation then shut up.

Your comment was 'Look, if we are only going to judge horses on who they'd beat then it would be a piss poor state of affairs in the 21st Century yet you are still going on about Magical and Sea of Class.

Yes, and it was followed by

we can measure how good a horse is by how far they beat the rated opposition

Do you also skip sentences when book writing?

No need to get insulting Figgis

Which bit did you find insulting?

A_T
07 Jul 19 19:12

Brigust must have an alert set up here to notify him when someone says something positive about Frankel as it's the only time he ever posts - too busy travelling to Brigadier Gerard's grave to lay flowers every day and writing letters of protest to Timeform.

PMSL.

When you start talking about me personally. It doesn't matter what I do or have done for a living we are discussing horseracing.

Let me take you back to 9.35pm yesterday when you said Enable hasn't yet met a proper Group 1 horse at the peak of its powers primed to run a big race. I know some fools tried to say the same about Frankel but he met better horses (ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE) than she has and, importantly, he thrashed them pointless (ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE). He did so by putting up some tremendous times (ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE). All of these points we have covered this afternoon.

Then you continued with

'Personally, I like a horse to be able to beat another fast horse or at least run very fast while beating inferiors before I consider it an all time great. (ABSOLUTELY UNTRUE).

The conclusion of this conversation is that the evidence proves Frankel has NEVER put up a fast time in his career, his opponents he beat easily have NEVER put up a fast time throughout their careers. He has never met a FAST horse and the evidence of his race times is that he is not a FAST horse himself so your criteria for selecting an all time simply great does not apply to Frankel.

Brigust, your comments about Frankel ultimately undermine anything you say about the game in my view. Excelebration, Farrh, St Nicholas Abbey, Canford Cliffs, Cirrus des Aigles. Stuffed out of sight (bar Cirrus on very soft ground - Nathaniel stuffed though). That'll do me - and there were plenty of others.

Howellsy you are fully entitled to your opinion and I hope I am too. I am simply stating the facts and the form. Don't you find it surprising that Frankel only beat average time on two occasions in his 14 race career? Do you not find it surprising that only two horses on your list beat average time on only one occasion throughout their careers? The total classic form between them all was a third and a 6th to Makfi, a 25/1 shot, in the 2000 Guineas.

Brigust, ok you're right, we've all been rumbled. The time fans were wrong, the form ratings people were wrong and punters everywhere, many of them who never even made a penny on the horse, who still said he was the best they'd seen. I don't know why we did it, we have no connection to the horse. Now maybe it would make more sense if some of us had been, say, his groom or something

Firstly let me say I am a fan of Enable - I think I was the first person to put her up for the Oaks on here and she won me plenty that day - haven't backed her since becuase I'm not a short price backer.

I was actually disappointed, or at least underwhelmed, by her on Saturday. To have everything go perfectly yet have to be ridden right out to beat an overraced Magical 3/4L for the second time in a row, and to have previously been lucky that Sea Of Class was drawn in the car park in the Arc, hardly makes her an equine superstar.
I think she could put up a big figure if she gets softer ground, her best performance for me was the KG two years ago, though like Altior, Best Mate etc she will always struggle to get a massive figure because the opposition are so poor.


Her consistency, like Winx, is very admirable but unless Japan improves massively then the Arc is already a penalty kick for her even if she is only 90%, and of course winning three Arcs, especially with the Frankie Factor, will have the press creaming their pants.

It is called 'class'. Some horses have it and some don't

What is this mystical thing called class when related to a racehorse? Is it undefinable? Or is it the way it looks down its nose at you?

You cannot change the facts Figgis. Sneer as much as you like. Frankel will be the best horse the vast majority of people will have ever seen and I will never question that. It is only when people say he is the faster ever or the best ever that I feel justified in putting forward my opinion. I certainly don't think you are a fool for saying what you do but if I disagree I think I have every right to put forward my point of view.

Ask a trainer about 'class' Figgis. Every buyer looks for it every day and trainers pray for their horses to display it. If you don't understand 'class' then that is your problem.  Any trainer when interviewed will refer to 'class' as the ultimate guideline.

I understand what you are saying Uncle but if you already have Enable at a certain place in your list of great horses will beating a motley bunch in the Arc where she will be hyped to the eyeballs change or enhance your existing view considering how you currently rate the opposition?

I think I was the first person to put her up for the Oaks on here

I remember that uncle, as I saw your post as I was still watching the Chester video for the umpteenth time (once or twice is usually all I bother with) and making up my mind if she could be as good as she looked. She turned out to be even better.

Frankel will be the best horse the vast majority of people will have ever seen and I will never question that

But you have rubbished it when people say he's the best they've seen. I don't think I've read anyone anywhere say he's the best horse ever including those they've never seen. Some people saw Dancing Brave, including me, I say Frankel would've beaten him easily over a mile to 10f and that goes for any horse I've seen since then. I don't expect you to agree and I don't care if you do. I don't expect to change your opinion and you're not going to change other people's opinion. Yet when someone on here says he was the best they've seen you accuse them of falling for hype, or suggest some absurd conspiracy theory.

It would be far more interesting if you gave your view on Enable and translated that to whether you think there is value or lack of it in backing Enable in future? Personally I don't think you ever seem much concerned with the betting aspect, which is what a betting forum is mainly about.

For many years the straight mile record at Ascot was held by Invisible Man, a handicapper. Perhaps you think he would have beaten Frankel in the Queen Anne? Track records are about the right sort of ground, the right pace scenario, and a following wind.

You clearly do not understand what you are saying Figgis. I do not question people if they say he is the best they have seen only if they state that he is the best ever. There is a difference. 

On your Dancing Brave point I think Dancing Brave would murder Frankel. But that is just my opinion. The big difference is that it is a well known concensus that Dancing Brave beat better horses and a fact that he broke course records so the overwhelming likelihood is that he has proved to be better and proved to be faster. Also the BHA had you go back an change their ratings just to put Frankel above Dancing Brave and they then used a ridiculous race to prove their point. Shame on them. Only Frankel was unable to beat Dancing Brave's ratings on the racecourse so they cheated. The rest is up to you but it is only opinion you have. And I do know how often your opinion can be wrong.

But that is just my opinion

Ah but it can't be left there can it? Oh no, it has to be followed with "it is a well known concensus, crap, bull, etc"

he has proved to be better and proved to be faster

Only proved to those who know nothing about time analysis, or even those who proudly proclaim "'time' performances are as useless as a chocolate teapot" yet perversely insist on referring to them.

Like someone once said, opinions are like ****s, and some are more full of sh1t than others

Time analysis? Ha what a load of tosh. I give you a challenge Figgis. Put on here a horse you believe will win because time analysis told you. Not form, time analysis. Any time you like. Come back to this thread and put the details down before the race. As many times as you like. If you really believe it is important give us the evidence. Couldn't be that difficult, could it? I don't want to know how you did just evidence that it works.

A challenge Figgis. Let us see what time analysis is made of. First hand.

I'd say every one of my racing bets these days involves time analysis. Some are confident selections, some are just what I consider value bets. I've posted a few on here, some won, some lost. But most of those I've posted on here have involved time analysis, so you will have already seen them. I remember posting The Fugue on here for the POW, as I considered her a faster horse than Treve. You openly dismissed any suggestion that she could beat Treve, then mysteriously disappeared from the thread after the result

And Brigust, I think anyone cockily throwing down a challenge ought to have the balls to throw their hat into the ring first. In fact I can't remember the last time I saw any kind of bet put up by you. Just loads and loads of waffle about past events that you know can't be proved either way. Seems to be a few on here with lots to say about other people's posts but unprepared to put up anything of note themselves.

So how about you tell me who is the most likely winner of the King George and where the value lies?

I don't really do tips on a horse racing forum where most know as much if not a lot more than me but two come to mind.

A winner : Danedream at 10/1 for the King George

July 19, 2012 6:59 PM BST
Nice race but a bit of a minefield.

The only 2 horses that need to run to form to win are Nathaniel and Danedream.
St Nic through both of the above must improve.
Sea Moon through Dunedin and Red Cadeux and St Nic will have to improve.
Dunedin will have to improve to beat Sea Moon and St Nic.
Reliable Man could be a fly in the ointment through Fahrr. Fahrr was just beaten by Nathaniel and RM ran as good as Farrh in the POW just never had the run of the race. But I'm not sure whether that raises his form or brings down the others. Anyway if he runs the same race as in the POW will be right there next to Nathaniel. It was however Nathaniels first run.

So I think Danedream wins from Nathaniel and Reliable Man.

And a loser: Cracksman for the Derby

October 20, 2016 1:05 PM BST
I think I saw the Derby winner yesterday in Cracksman. Had a bit at 40s with 3 and 6 and 5 then tried to get the same with race and bets but knocked back to 11.16. Both are now 25s. What rubbish. Call themselves bookies. I only came over to back Western Hymn at Newbury on Saturday and instead of an small largely uncompetitive race there are 16 blooming runners including 2 dangerous 3 year olds. Still we can hope

October 22, 2016 11:08 PM BST
As I said earlier Cracksman will win the Derby. And let me assure you that it is not a guess it is based upon solid reasoning. I would go into greater detail but why would I do that? And if you look at the horses currently ahead of him in the list then there is every reason to have confidence. I have never in my three score years and ten ever seen a horse and after seeing him perform one run been blown away. I will continue to back him regularly through the winter provided what I hear is positive and hope that all roads lead to Epsom.
As evidence of my ability Western Hymn, who I have constantly waited eagerly to run over 12f with blinkers, and who I came over to watch run is still being elusive. Never mind I'm sure JG will be true to his word and bring out the headgear. Let's hope it's not in a Group 1 race he cannot win.
Be lucky guys.

• March 28, 2017 11:12 PM BST
Hi Loto. I've backed the beast 21 times over the winter at a high of 40's and a low of 33's and in two doubles with winners. My biggest bet was a ton with the sky and the others are mostly 40s and a few 30s with various others. It will be my biggest win as a single bet on a single horse if it comes off. I'm not a big punter like some on here but it will be interesting.
Apparently the plan is the Dubai Duty Free conditions race at Newbury on 21st April then I will review my position about laying off to cover my stake or waiting for an opportunity to get my money back. At this time of year it is unlikely anything exceptional will have come onto the scene before he runs so if he bolts up I think his price will drop a good bit when you consider the owner and trainers record. Western Hymn took the same route, won the race at Newbury,  and his price dropped dramatically for the Derby in the same way even though Australia was an already strong ante post favourite that year and there is nothing in the race like that this year so I hope my long term plan pays off.


Have a good day folks

This year's King George is 1/3 Enable and Crystal Ocean. And I guess that is about right. A bit too shot for me though.

I don't really do tips on a horse racing forum where most know as much if not a lot more than me

Very strange comment from someone who has the confidence to say he can see what 90% plus of racing fans and punters can't and has spent the last 8 years telling them so.

WOW, 49 posts since i looked yesterday and probably most related to Frankel, not The Eclipse (title of the thread) so i’ll skip them.

Figgis, i will however respond to your feeble and unsuccessful attempt at putting me down,

Figgis 07 Jul 19 13:05   

He (Frankel) never put up a fast time

Andrew, once again you are confusing times with "time performances". If times aren't your thing that's fair enough but if you're going to keep commenting on them then I suggest you do a little reading on the subject first

This was your post i was responding to :

I know some fools tried to say the same about Frankel but he met better horses than she has and, importantly, he thrashed them pointless. He did so by also putting up some tremendous times. Enable hasn't done either yet as an older filly.

You made no mention whatsoever of 'time performances‘ yet decided to move the goalposts after posting to suit your need. I suspect you wanted to deflect the fact I posted evidence that Enable is faster than you give her credit for (07.17) so conveniently thought to overlook it, or perhaps, you simply don’t do any homework before posting.

As for the put down, i’ve been in the game for more years than I care to remember, my first visit to a course was to watch Jacinth in the 1000 guineas who Timeform described as unbeatable. Noel Murless thought otherwise. I was also betting as an underage punter before then and i've seen many of the greats.

There are more knowledgeable posters than me on the forum, but I consider myself to be reasonably well versed with what I need to know, fully conversant BHA figures (OR and performance) Timeform (ex-subscriber) RPR, TS, Bayer, DI to name a few. I also use sectionals far more than race winning times (although the latter do provide guidance) and my collection of racing books and videos would make a mockery of your assertion. I also posted a War and Peace reasoning on my thread why Ten Sovereigns was a good thing to win the Middle Park last year, some of it based on winning times and his superb final 2 furlong sections.

Some of your posts surprise me (and others that have questioned them) but they shouldn’t because the content has been the same since last September as far as Enable is concerned. The game is all about opinions, but you appear to be almost anxiously waiting for the time she gets beaten to prove your points that are primarily based on conjecture. You have failed in this respect so far, but still have 3 races to go, so keep at it. 

I still believe Enable is highly likely to be beaten in the King George

A post made by blind and stubborn hope, albeit without expanding on the by who and why, without knowing the final field, going, draw, pace angle blah x 3. She may get beaten there, who knows, but I have a feeling she won’t. Good luck. 

By the way, BHA use a figure of 2 lbs a length over 7/8f, not 3 lbs. I suggest you do a little reading on the subject first. [:wink:
 
Laurie,

Enable is 4/6 - Crystal Ocean 7/2 generally on Oddschecker and I feel this is nearer reality. I actually like Crystal Ocean and posted he was the primary danger to Enable in the Arc last year (NR) and i think he will be again.

You made no mention whatsoever of 'time performances‘ yet decided to move the goalposts after posting to suit your need. I suspect you wanted to deflect the fact I posted evidence that Enable is faster than you give her credit for (07.17) so conveniently thought to overlook it, or perhaps, you simply don’t do any homework before posting

Andrew, you're far too paranoid. It's simply that when I mention a fast time I take it as read that people know it means a value time, not just some race run on fast ground or with a tailwind. Obviously not everyone realises that. I think you'll find that when most people or companies who rate races on times, Timeform, etc, mention a fast time they're talking about a time that has been evaluated for the conditions, as everyone knows, or at least experienced punters should know that any time on its own is meaningless.

The game is all about opinions, but you appear to be almost anxiously waiting for the time she gets beaten to prove your points that are primarily based on conjecture. You have failed in this respect so far, but still have 3 races to go, so keep at it.

Christ, calm down man. I have opposed a racehorse, not insulted your granny. I am a racing fan. I enjoy watching some racing without any financial interest. But I'm not going to pretend that I would have much interest in this game if it wasn't for the betting. Primarily I am a punter. I think Enable has been great for the game but if I believe I can make money out of her races that is my main objective, not to cheer her on regardless. I made far more out of Enable backing her than I have opposing her, which was only for small stakes on what I thought were value grounds. She won both those races but it may come as a surprise to you but even though I might oppose horses at 4/6 and evens I do so in the knowledge that a fair amount of them are still going to win.

If I thought the way to go in future was to carry on backing her I would do, rather than losing money trying to prove an older opinion right. I have done complete u turns on horses I previously had down as overrated, The Fugue after she won the Yorkshire Oaks, Found after her second in the Irish Champion, Cracksman after the Voltigeur. If I had seen anything in Enable's Eclipse win to reverse my earlier opinion I would not hesitate to change it.

By the way, BHA use a figure of 2 lbs a length over 7/8f, not 3 lbs

I know they do. They are wrong and many others agree they're wrong. I suspect one day the BHA will catch up as they do years later on many other things.

*than I have lost opposing her.

I've found the hype since the race on Saturday way over the top for the performance she produced. Magical was the only real Group 1 horse in opposition and it looked one race too many for her. Danceteria was only beaten 5 lengths and it was a very average time for a Group 1 race.

It's a shame she has only one real opponent in the King George otherwise she could have been one to seriously take on at odds on.

China castle, a voice of reason. There's no taking away her achievements but I don't see how anyone can take their fan specs off and honestly say that the level of performance she has shown since losing the wfa allowance is anything more than average for the grade.

Very strange comment from someone who has the confidence to say he can see what 90% plus of racing fans and punters can't and has spent the last 8 years telling them so.

Typical slur from Figgis. I have not told anyone anything other the facts that are available everywhere.
And when someone comes on here saying, 'Frankel met better horses than Enable' and that 'Personally I like a horse to be able to beat another fast horse or at least run very fast while beating inferiors before I consider it an all-time great'. I would just like to see the evidence of that statement. Nothing wrong with that.

I didn't know it was your little secret Figgis.

Brigust, back to Enable, how would you rate her second Arc win and Eclipse win for the grade? Above average (I think we can safely rule out you saying that one), average or below average?

China,

In part i agree and it was the same last year after the September stakes although she was coming off injury then. I thought the Eclipse performance was workmanlike to good (i wouldn't say exceptional) bearing in mind the lay off, trip and concerns the ground may be too firm. She was the last one off the bridle, skipped a couple clear and only got tired in the 100 metres (as in the 2018 Arc). She travelled well (always does) and 2,5f out there was only one winner.

I also agree that some of the fields have not been so strong (i stated on here she only had Magical to beat) but others have. She's also raced on 12 differents tracks, won on 11 on them at all distances between 8f and 12f on differing ground. Her CV will almost certainly never be bettered by a filly/mare.

Would i back her at 1/3 for the KG with Crystal Ocean in the field, no, but i would be tempted at an industry 8/11 or 4/6 (no UK betfair account). Of course layers are betting odds against so losses are reduced, but when i lay i want valid reasoning, not hope. Good luck.

Hi Andrew. I do follow your laying thread when I can but really have not had much time spare recently. Too busy building and writing.
There are often little baits lying around like 'I know some fools tried to the same about Frankel'. Well, some of those fools were headed by Phil Smith, BHA handicapper. But I fell for the bait like a carp. .

I'm over for a couple of days making preparations for the school holidays when I will be back over for a few weeks. We'll be going away to the Lake District then a couple of days back to France a short visit to friends in Spain and before you know it the holidays will be over.

My next visit racing will be to Brighton where my best friend, who is sadly suffering from the onset of dementia, wants to return to the track where he rode against Lester on Tintagel. He was riding Grey of Falloden, a good horse. My only other racing outing is an already arranged visit to the National Stud and the Jockey Club rooms to see what improvements they have made. Anything else will be spur of the moment stuff.

Figgis, I think I have already mentioned somewhere that Enable hasn't really beaten a lot throughout her career. As a three-year-old she beat Rhodedendron who had problems, the Irish and Yorkshire Oaks were shoe-ins and in the King-George she beat Ulysees and Idaho. In the Arc she beat Cloth of Stars who never won again. Enable's runs as a 4-year-old were good but it is difficult to enthuse too much about any of them. What we really need is a stunning performance against solid opposition but where is that going to come from? All too often the form is lowered by the proximity of lower rated animals. As I said before that is not her fault.

Personally, The Eclipse showed the well-being of Enable, but straightly speaking what did she beat apart from Magical who ran her close in America? Both were running over a trip short of their optimum; the former having her debut this season, the latter a quick turn-out after her Royal Ascot exertion.

Enable will win the King George & QE Stakes, all things being equal. But, 6/4 for The Arc with the youngsters eg Sottsass and Japan in contention? I'd like to see her win nevertheless, not a long term betting proposition,...for her supporters only, I think.

Brigust, I don't need to know the rest, I know you don't rate her very highly. The big difference between my view of her and yours is I did rate her highly as a 3yo. Not the highest 3yo filly I've ever seen but up there. I just think she hasn't improved with age. I want to know would you say the second Arc win and Eclipse were average for the grade or below average? Not comparing her to greats of the past, just relative to the grade, as putting those races in a historical context over, say, the last 10 years?

Hi Andrew ,

As mainly a layer than a backer I was initially keen to lay her for the KG after the performance on Saturday. Looking at the likely field I'm really struggling to find more than one to take her on with. When Defoe , Waldgeist and a disappointing set of Aidan's 3yo are the likely opposition to the big 2 , then it does almost make it a match at this stage.

Enable is 7/10 (after odd boost) for the King George, no doubt be a lot shorter on 27th July esp if Crystal Ocean and/or Japan is a no show.

To me the whole scene is not the greatest. I like Danedream but she had a good draw and the allowances. As a 4 year old she beat Ovambo Queen narrowly and was rated 114 then met Nathaniel and beat him narrowly and was awarded 124. She then met Ovambo Queen again and beat he narrowly only to be given 114 again. Who has the wrong rating Ovambo Queen or Nathaniel?
Golden Horn also was drawn well but he was beaten at York and in the US. Jack Hobbs never seemed to train on possibly.

Nathaniel was OK but that's all the same as St Nicholas Abbey. With so many Group 1 races spread around, a shortage of stayers means that lots of these longer races can be whittled down to just a couple possibles. Is Enable odds on for the King-George because of what she has achieved or because of the shortage of strong enough opposition?

Well it's a lot easier for me. The Arc Solemia won was an odd affair because of the ground and many not acting on it, so excluding that and ignoring what Enable has done before, I'd say last year's Arc winning performance was the lowest in the last 10 years. The Eclipse win would be in the bottom 3, along with Hawkbill and Mukhadram.

Golden Horn also was drawn well but he was beaten at York and in the US

Brigust, don't you ever consider that while some horses are almost machine like in their consistency most of the others have peak performances and lows? A horse can put up a great performance then run 10lbs below the next? Do you expect a horse rated 124 to run to that most times? Have you never seen a 4yo improve to give an oustanding performance, follow it up once, then be finished for the rest of the year? If one horse gave a 124 performance comfortably but another was all out to do so, which then took a physical toll, would you downgrade the one that was all out because it was unable to repeat it?

It's been said by some of the very best trainers that it's usually only possible to get a horse to peak once or twice in a season.

If that is the case Figgis how can anyone bet on horses? I think in the main under the right conditions etc horses run to form. There are variances to take into consideration but largely that is what happens. It is those nuances that make betting interesting. When a horse is fit the distance, the going, the course and the opposition are the variables. I know trainers say different things but they are more to do with how difficult a horse is to train rather than maintaining fitness. If you get my meaning.

Look at Enable and Magical. Three quarters of a length seperated them the last twice and Magical's run in the Arc wasn't straight forward. So would it be fair to say that they are within a length of being the same animal?

After the Eclipse John Gosden said Enable was 85% fit. I don't believe that for one minute. It will be interesting in the King George when Enable meets Crystal Ocean. As Enable has gotten older she may just be doing enough thus the winning margins are contracted alternatively Crystal Ocean may be improving with age. Fascinating and not precise. Frankie got the better race position on Crystal Ocean and Enable (in the US and at Sandown) against Magical so with the margins being short how will he ride Enable aginst Crystal Ocean?

So would it be fair to say that they are within a length of being the same animal?

It would certainly be fair to say that. I would expect that to be the majority view and it's obviously reasonable. I don't agree as I believe Magical has improved since she was a 3yo, whereas Enable hasn't. Although of course that wasn't shown in the Eclipse so I wouldn't expect anyone to agree with me. I did say before the race, however, that I thought there was a strong chance Magical would regress after earlier efforts. She'd already run big at the Curragh and was primed for Ascot, where the money was down. Before the Eclipse O'Brien would only say she "seemed" to be well, which is what he said about Ten Sovereigns.

For me there is no doubt that Magical didn't show the same speed at Sandown as she had at Ascot. Even for those who don't want to bother with times the visual evidence was there. At Ascot she had the same pacemaker and all was well until Moore saw Dettori was going better rounding the turn and then she was having to be pushed. At Sandown she was sweating and in the race had to be pushed just to track the pace in the early stages. It was only when they slowed mid race that she travelled comfortably again. No that just wasn't the same filly, in my view.

O'Brien said beforehand they considered giving her a rest after Ascot, but the temptation must've proved too much. Anyway apparently she'll be given a break now and I know there's a long way to go but IF O'Brien can get her back to earlier form (I have no idea if he can and neither will he until they pick up with her again) then I see her as the most likely winner of the Arc at this stage, if they choose to go there with her. I'm guessing they will if she shows she's back.

After the Eclipse John Gosden said Enable was 85% fit. I don't believe that for one minute

Me neither.

For me there is no doubt that Magical didn't show the same speed at Sandown as she had at Ascot.

What data are you using to arrive at that conclusion?

Frankie got the better race position on Crystal Ocean and Enable (in the US and at Sandown) against Magical

No he was just sat on a faster horse

What data are you using to arrive at that conclusion?

Speed/time figures

Speed/time figures


What's the source of these figures?

Mine

https://www.timeform.com/horse-racing/features/ratings-update/ratings-update-enable-back-with-a-bang-872019

I see Timeform have a similar view about the Eclipse. And no I'm not putting that up as a backup for my viewpoint, just as another reference of opinion. There are many times I disagree with Timeform and from a punting perspective that's the way I prefer it.

It is the sort of figure that trainers throw out without thinking very hard. Does that mean the horse will improve its RPR/OR/race time by 15%? Of course not. She might be capable of improving by 2-3 lengths but that is about it.

I've been looking at Magical to see how she could be ridden to better effect. Against Enable and Crystal Ocean she seemed to lack the tactical speed when it was required so perhaps the answer may be to lead from the outset. I do believe had she been ridden to lead in her last two races the winners would not have stopped her but then with her having the choice of when to quicken Enable and Crystal Ocean may have found it more difficult to pass her just as she did to pass them. It will be interesting to see how they ride her next time. Of course, what is more likely is that she is not as good as the other two.

Well she definitely isn't as good as the first one.

74 new posts, jaysus.

briefly been through a few.

Figgis is never wrong, is the takeaway from it all. must be a nightmare to work with this guy...

I think Magical was ridden to near perfection by Moore in the 2018 Breeders Cup Turf despite lacking tactical speed for the 1st few furlongs, but she was soon in 6th place on the inside just behind her stablemate Hunting Horn (4th) who was serving it to Enable (5th) on his outside; Magical looked the likely winner when Hunting Horn allowed her through on his inside thus pushing Enable 5 wide rounding the final bend.

But, despite both Enable and Magical soon pulling clear of the field Enable just had sufficient in reserve to edge forward again to the line. Thus, I think it was no surprise Magical could not claw back the ground she gave to Enable over 10f - she just could not quicken as well as Enable. And, I cannot envisage Magical beating Enable in the Arc, all things being equal.


However, in the Prince Of Wales I think Magical could have done better had she served it up to Crystal Ocean sooner, and not allowed Dettori and Crystal Ocean dictated the race to suit, assuming Crystal Ocean had not improved from last season.

Figgis is never wrong, is the takeaway from it all. must be a nightmare to work with this guy...

Coming from the man who very rarely has the balls to put up anything of note. Just scrambles around to chip in at the end of threads to bitch at anyone who picked a loser

Reged
06 Jul 19 21:23
Joined: 22 Aug 01 | Topic/replies: 33,644 | Blogger: Reged's blog
.

A traditional big-hitter joins the frame. uptheboro went to Kelly's Dino  to earn a blastiferous 14/1 and rise six to third. He'll be dinoing out on that for a while!

That puts him behind Charlton2005, still banging them in with a hat-trick 11/4 that hitched him up one to second. Another 11/4 winner, youresomean, was up three to 10th.   Apart from that we just had an odds-on from mymumsfinethankyou that left him in sixth.

Best of luck to the Sunday strivers. 

I've put up triple digit winners on here fella, so please, bother someone else.

Well done you. Just a shame you can't put up an alternative selection to impossible123, yet you're always there first out of the traps to stick the boot in when he gets it wrong. Funny that, I wouldn't have thought a successful punter would care

never wrong fella, you really are never wrong.

Oh I'm wrong plenty of times, just like any punter I've known, losers and winners. But at least the losers had the spine to give a selection, and the winners didn't yap like little bitches when someone else got it wrong

If I owned Magical knowing she is not a million miles away I would try to work out a way to beat Enable. They finally worked out how to beat Golden Horn with Found knowing GH didn't enjoy 12f on soft ground so they took advantage when the opportunity arrived.
Enable is different because she clearly stays 12f well and doesn't mind soft ground. But I do think she may be vulnerable over 10f on fast ground and a fast track, like York. JG is leaning towards the Yorkshire Oaks but the owner sponsors the Juddmonte.
Magical is also entered in the Juddmonte. She has also made all twice and won over 7 furlongs. If I owned Magical I would go for the Juddmonte and try to make all. She stays 12f well so stamina is not an issue.

I do know the Juddmonte is over 10.5 furlongs by the way.

Hi Laurie,

Hopefully your're still in UK.

Magical is a good filly, but she’s no Enable, irrespective of how close she got at Churchill Downs and Sandown, and to be honest I doubt she will ever beat her at 10f or 12f.

Enable is always going to be difficult to beat anyway apart from her class, she can win from on or off the pace (although they tend to race her prominently these days) she switches off and travels well (good cruising speed similar to Frankel) and a burst of acceleration 2f out that often takes her 2-3 lengths clear, no matter who the field is. She understandably faded at Sandown, but never looked like losing.

Magical is rated 2 lb below Enable, understandable knowing how they are calculated but it’s crazy and i think you know i’m not an avid fan of form ratings aka Timeform or BHA using weight vs lengths anyway. They’re not overly reliable and occasionally manipulated, but it’s the only equational system of designating form lines we have, so we tend use it.

Enable has never been eyeball to eyeball with another in the final furlong yet, but I sense she will always fine more.

She’s likely to take the KG, Yorkshire Oaks, Arc and Breeders route, but if she wins in France it wouldn’t surprise me if KA called it a day, she will certainly have deserved it.

Good morning Andrew. Yes, I am around for a few days. I have the dentist on Wednesday and with the kids breaking up on Friday arrangements are a little tricky at the moment. 
I don't believe Magical will beat Enable but I was looking at what I would do if I were in AOB's shoes. She is not a forlorn hope in my opinion and if the send Enable to York for the Juddmonte I would give her an outstanding chance.
We both know how good the 3-year-olds can look with the allowances but it often changes when they lose the allowances and Enable hasn't looked as good as a 4 and 5-year-old. I thought Montjeu was the exception but even he couldn't cope with the 3-year-olds in his 2nd Arc.
I agree about the rating's people. They do seem to have completely lost the plot. You know what I think about the F rating and they then continued to confirm my opinion about how much they have lost the plot with the Cracksman rating.

I don't know what you think about this year's 3-year-old colts but what would you say if the beat Enable in the King George? I have never rated Crystal Ocean as a Group 1 horse so it will be an interesting race all round.

*they

Laurie,

This season 8f-12f 3 year olds are much of a muchness with only Japan really holding form up, but hopefully Ten Sovereigns can fly the flag for the sprinters. I can't see them troubling Enable at Ascot and it will be a good pace if Sovereign runs.

The KG is Enables to lose of course and Crystal Ocean is a danger although Japan would have been another, i thought he ran well yesterday even though it may not have look it. Sea of Class obviously won't be there and it's difficult to see who can beat her to be honest, although i'm not suggesting she's a certainty of course.

Sadly i will not get to Ascot as i intimated, i was checking flights at the weekend and realised i'm back in Sweden on 26th (evening) returning 29th (morning). Bad planning, but i book those regular flights early to get the price. Never mind, i've seen her run twice and will see her again in October.

do you know, wouldnt surprise me at all, that japan could well turn up at ascot, for me had an easy race on sunday and  80s on here , i.ll have a few quid on that just in case

The price tells you all you want to know.

"The Arc always has been [in our minds] and after the last day we wanted to give him one more run and so it was nice to come here. He would then have a possibility of the Irish Champion or coming back here for the Niel," said O'Brien.

They'll want to keep the illusion going that he's a proper Gp1 horse for as long as they possibly can. Therefore no danger of him appearing here.

No chance of Japan turning up this saturday given the firepower at the disposal of Coolmore. He's presently on holiday after a few quick runs for a hopefully "fruitful" Autumn campaign.

No chance of Japan turning up this saturday

Correct, the race is Saturday 27th July !