Middle Park Stakes (28th Sept)

Earthlight intended runner according to Fabre. This is a great Middle Park with the two unbeaten  group 1 winners and the massive potential of the Hannon horse. Think Siskin bit overpriced at the moment..would expect it to be closer to co favs on the day. Definitely a race to enjoy..if I had to pick one it would be Earthlight but would love to see Mums tipple blitz them like last time out.

I have Mum's Tipple 5lbs ahead of Earthlight, and from the way Earthlight won last time I see no obvious reason to think he can make up the deficit. The only concern with MT is how much the race took out of him, particularly as Moore rode him right out, which seemed unnecessary. He certainly wouldn't be the first 2yo to regress from such an effort. I still intend to back MT but will wait until pre-race to make sure he shows no obvious negative signs. I have Siskin a further 7lbs behind Earthlight. In his favour I'd say he's the only one of the three that might not have reached a peak yet. Last time out, whether intentional or not, Coolmore set up a falsely run race, so it is the Railway Stakes I rate him on and he was eased down there. So no surprise if he can improve again but improving another 12lbs to match an in form MT is asking a lot. So it's MT for me and even with the doubt he is value, in my view.

Earthlight would be the one for me too with Siskin the main danger if the ground remains good to firm. As for Mums Tipple I'd need another scintillating win to be convinced he's Gp 1 material as the horses he beat have not franked her form; rain is forecast over the next few days.

Before looking at the actual runners I would certainly be a layer of Mum's Tipple if I had to choose between backing and laying. She did look exciting last time and RPR raised her rating by 37, that's a lot for one run considering the 2nd and third in her race have not proved themselves to be anything special as yet. I know they think a lot of her but not sure it is that much and the jump from a sales race to a Group 1 is a big jump. That makes her price too short for me without knowing what will run. We do seem to be going through a stage of wide margin winners of ordinary races have their Group 1 odds being clipped disproportionately in my opinion. Charlton had a wide margin winner the other day of an ordinary conditions race and it's odds were immediately cut for the classics. Pinatubo, on the other hand has been beating proven opponents. The difference between a class horse and an ordinary horse is huge so I do think there has been an over reaction by the bookies to ensure they are not caught out. I am not sure anyone would have actually taken these prices.

RPR raised her rating by 37, that's a lot for one run considering the 2nd and third in her race have not proved themselves to be anything special

I don't use RP ratings but looking at them here the RP haven't done anything unusual by raising him that much. The fact the horses behind are nothing special has already been accounted for. The only horse behind that I can see they've raised was the third, which seems plausible given it was only its second start. They actually lowered the second horse a stone on previous efforts. The fourth horse was lowered 7lbs. So, like most handicappers they were faced with a choice between believing the horses behind ran even further below their best (not a regular occurrence in a massive field like that but certainly not unprecedented), or give MT the benefit of any doubt.

It's only one race and there were showers and a fresh wind, so I would fully admit that the time could be misleading, as could the facile manner of victory, but until further evidence I'm prepared to accept it at face value. I can totally understand anyone who doubts it, they might be proved right, but the handicappers have done their job on the evidence so far, the numbers add up.

Of course he is a he. I must have had quadrilateral on my mind.
It looks like he rated the race through National League although there was no way you could really compare the same ratings he has given him. The 3rd horse, Klopp of the Kop then ran again to give him a guide. However to substantiate his position and to support the rating he gave him in Mum's Tipple race he rated the 5th horse in that race Rapidash to have improved 20lb. Unfortunately then the horse that won that race Cosmic Power ran again and he ran nearly 20lb below his rating next time.
Given the 20lb differentials in one race then that leads me to believe Klopp of the Kop only ran to the rating of his last race, he never improved, and that puts Mum's Tipple on what I think may be a more realistic 107 rating. That makes his rating only being raised a more realistic 25lbs.
Methinks the rating should be treated with some caution until the next run.

Currently persisting down at Newmarket and not forecast to brighten up until the end of the week. Could result in a few defections but probably not Earthlight and Golden Horde who handled heavy ground in France. The latter was easily beaten in France but Fabre has raised concerns about Earthlight handling the track at Newmarket but on soft ground I think he will cope and is a worthy favourite and a win bet with Golden Horde a hopefully double figure each way bet.

I don't know if Mums Tipple would handle soft ground if that's what we get. I remember his sire very well as it was the last time I successfully backed a horse as a 2yo to win the Guineas . In my defence it isn't a bet I've done much since. It was his second start that convinced me and that was run on soft ground so hopefully MT inherits the same ability to handle the ground. Given his style of running I'm less concerned than I would be if he was a horse held up for a telling turn of foot, so I still intend to back him unless it becomes really heavy. The bigger concern for me is still him backing up that big effort, although in my view Earthlight didn't exactly have an easy race last time either.

I don't know about Mum's Tipple either but I am firstly confused about how his rating was calculated, that should be abundantly or, at the very least, pretty clear and as that rating adds to the price he is, I think, that price is suspect. And secondly the fact that he is moving into company he has no experience of. These two factors make this a no bet for me but as the questions are about his ability, were I forced to choose, I would err on the side of a lay. 
We all know bookmakers will give us nothing so it will be interesting what price he reaches on here.

I have Mumms Tipple 1lb ahead of Siskin and 4lb ahead of Earthlight .

multiple runners with group 1/2 winning form in the race and then theirs mums tipple the 2nd highest rated in the race on 116, thats not something you would see very often, charming thought won the race in 2014 on soft ground at 22/1, after winning a novice stakes race, eartlight looks the one to beat, are the ground
descriptions in france accurate, times of those races dont reflect the official goings. wait and see what the grounds like and watch the market on the day of the race. no bet for me goodluck

I see Timeform have the difference between MT and Earthlight even wider as they have MT 7lbs ahead.

those timeform ratings must have potential factored in, not even close to the official ratings, racing post RPR'S do have mums tipple on 119 and earthlight on 118 and the TS'S 124 MT and 119 eartlight, on running styles, MT looks more favourable.

Can anyone tell me which horse they used as a base to work their calculations from? RPR must have used National League.

I know Timeform have stated they don't use one horse to rate a race around, which I, for one, would agree with. I used to read the RP say they'd rated a race around one runner, don't know if they still do. I think the BHA have been moving away from such a limitation, but could be wrong.

I firmly believe a rating allocated based on just one run (no matter how scintillating) is inconclusive and more likely inaccurate given time - in maths it takes two points to plot a straight line. How the so-called "experts" even considered this as credible is beyond my comprehension.

I firmly believe that's bollocks. Of course a rating based on one run is going to be more open to question, particularly when it's a lightly raced 2yo. However the ratings firms have to rate the race on what they consider the most probable interpretation at that time. They could've taken the view that everything in the race ran below previous efforts, nothing apart from the winner improved whatsoever. That is possible of course, but it's also entirely possible that the winner put up a performance as good as it looked. People can quibble about which horses ran to form and which didn't, but they don't know that for a fact any more than the handicapper.

If the handicapper genuinely believes the winner was 'flattered' then fair enough if he's conservative with the rating, but if he's more inclined to take a favourable view of the form it would be ridiculous to hold the horse back 10lbs just in case. If he's proved wrong later he drops the rating. I can't see any problem with that.

Actually Timeform and the BHA have both said on tv that they use a single horse to rate around. But I don't want to get into that I just wondered surely at least one horse must be considered to be running to form around which the ratings could be assessed? What other way is there?

I don't mind getting into it.

They've gone on record a few times being highly critical of the practice

https://www.timeform.com/horse-racing/features/timeform-ratings/handicapping_two-year-olds


There is a common misconception that handicapping involves little more than guessing which horse has “run to form” and basing the entire assessment of a race on that shaky premise.

Handicapping using “yardsticks” like this is questionable at the best of times, and is in many instances downright folly.

Well I am sorry but after the Queen Anne Stakes they stated quite clearly that they rated the race through Indomito and the BHA stated they ran the Juddmonte Stakes through St Nicholas Abbey. And to prove their point Timeform had a huge illustration with the ratings of the significant runners and the rating they used to make their calculations. And if you look at the BHA ratings you will clearly see that the only horse that ran to it's rating is St Nicholas Abbey.
I have the Timeform recordings, on the Morning Line and Racing UK, on my computer.
Perhaps they have subsequently, and following my badgering, seen the light. Too f   ing late though.

Can we not get into this again Figgis. Let's stick to the Middle Park!!!!!

I think you'll find I was entirely sticking to the Middle Park. Almost beyond belief that Frankel gets another mention but then I remember who I'm dealing with.

It all boils down to you wanting to pinpoint which single runner they rated it around to satisfy you. The point is that's not how everyone else has worked the race out. Disagree with it by all means, but no laws of handicapping have been broken. If the RP or Timeform rated MT's performance low going into the Middle Park and he wins easily then they have to raise him afterwards. There would be lots of people believing them to be mugs about as useful as a weather forecaster telling you it's raining when you're soaked to the bone. These ratings firms might all be wrong, of course they might, but as they are commercial outfits then they have some obvious reasons for wanting to get it right, and that's what they've attempted to do.

See Raahy represents Mum's Tipple form in the 4.50 Chelmsford.

I have no problem with any of your points F. But I do think the only way you can ascertain whether they are guessing or not is to find the races where they have relied on the horse or horses that ran to form. You can then decide whether or not you go with them. If no horse has run to form then their rating is a guess.

Brigust, but even that is pointless to anyone looking for an absolute truth. In any race they could perhaps try to justify themselves about a winner's rating by pointing out that they had the 2nd and 3rd horses running exactly to their previous marks. But who's to say that those previous ratings were right in the first place? I'm sure there will always be someone who disagrees.

For instance, (just to use an example without getting into a pointless debate over who is best) I disagree about Timeform having Battaash ahead of Blue Point. For me, Battaash has never run as fast as BP at his best, despite looking more impressive a few times. However I can see how they've got there. Initially I overrated Battaash myself at Goodwood last year, but I went back and altered it. Obviously Timeform still rate him higher, which is fair enough even though I don't agree. As a punter I welcome the differences in opinion.

I totally agree about Blue Point and Battash because there is history between these two and any race they run in together, I know BP has been retired, could be judged by how they performed. For example if they were beaten at the time they ran in the same race and finished within the proximity they were expected to finish then the possibility of the rating the winner achieved being correct is high. In my opinion. Nothing is gold plated I know.

Look at it another way if Enable runs in the Arc but Magical doesn't and she is beaten by Japan then the possibility of her not running to form is clear and the rating given to Japan could be suspect. However if Enable runs in the Arc and finishes next to Magical but they are both beaten by Japan then the possibility of her running to form is greater and the rating given to Japan not suspect.

Latest betting (best available odds at time of writing) on the 13 confirmed entries: 2/1 Earthlight, 5/2 Mums Tipple, 5/1 Siskin, 8/1 Monarch Of Egypt, 12/1 Threat, 16/1 Lope Y Fernandez, 20/1 Golden Horde, 40/1 bar. The Prix Morny form of Earthlight will come under scrutiny when Raffle Prize contests the Cheveley Park Stakes (half an hour prior to the Middle Park). The betting looks about right and I can't see a sensible bet here: Siskin hasn't yet achieved a top-class time figure, and there's not a lot between Earthlight and Mums Tipple; if suited by the drop back to 6f I could see Threat running a big race (I have him on a par with Siskin, so at 12/1 he might represent a bit of e/w value), and by the same token Golden Horde, who beat Threat at Goodwood, looks a mite overpriced at 20/1.

PS I would only consider backing Threat on good or faster ground. I guess the reason he's 12/1 is partly due to the indifferent weather forecast and the likelihood he won't get his favoured ground.

thanks for putting up the possible  runners james

Just light rain today and less rain than anticipated yesterday after the morning downpour. Depending on what happens tomorrow I now think the ground will likely be good or good to soft at worst.

Thought I would never see the day Figgis put up ONE selection before a race. Well done young man.

Earthlight is 11/8 here but 2/1 and 7/4 available with proper bookies; Mums Tipple is 11/4 and Siskin at 4/1 with Monarch Of Egypt (9/1) and and Y Lopez Fernandez and Threat both on 12/1.

It doesn't look like a betting race for me. Fabre is not confident Earthlight will handle the course, I'm not convinced Mum's Tipple is Group 1 yet but there is nothing I like running for me, I don't like any of the Irish runners or Threat.

Nine left in with all the big guns standing their ground so sticking with Earthlight win and Golden Horde each way.

Indirectly Wichita did the Mum's Tipple form no harm today . Monoski did not do the Pinatubo form much good .

With the ground easing with precipitation (good to firm --> good) the chances of Siskin has been marginalised somewhat, and the form of Mums Tipple undermined Earthlight seems to be the logical selection, I think.

Has to be Siskin at the prices for me.

backing ballydoyle herte in decent form and decent prices monarch of egypt not got a lot to find with siskin and progressive and lope y fernandez

a new juvenile course record in the royal lodge stakes at newmarket today, so the ground is perfect, can one of the runners break the juvenile course record
in the middle park stakes, here's hoping.

Hard to see what ran to form there barring the first two. The form of those behind cannot be taken too seriously imo. We will have to wait until another day.

That was a comfortable win for Earthlight. Could he run in The Dewhurst on 12th Ocy? One bookie think so despite trainer saying the horse will go home,...eat and sleep.

We already knew the form of the first two, nothing new there, but the 3rd and 4th make any other form questionable. Plus it did look like the rails was the place to be. Track bias, who would ever believe it?

looking at the middle park stakes wikipedia page, earthlight is the fastest winner of the race in over 40 years, the only other horse's that ran close to that time of 109.31, were oasis dream 109.61 and bushranger 109.56, suppose the going is usually a lot slower this time of year. did have my suspicion that earthlight's race times didnt back up the official going's in france when he was winning those races, disappointed siskin didnt run.

Following wind Roadrunner.

the time of the race is set in stone as far as im concerned, you cant deny that weather conditions can and do play a part, other people can calculate those
things, thats never been a part of my form study and wouldnt know where to start anyway, dont watch a lot of racing either, ive got my own way of doing things,
more akin to how form study was done before doing race video form became the norm.

just seen it now, a new juvenile course record in the middle park stakes earthlight 109.31

Yes, very fast time in both the Cheveley Park and Middle Park Stakes. Strong tailwind clearly a factor, and a strong pace in both races.

brigust1
28 Sep 19 15:26
Joined: 07 Dec 01 | Topic/replies: 11,179 | Blogger: brigust1's blog
We already knew the form of the first two, nothing new there, but the 3rd and 4th make any other form questionable. Plus it did look like the rails was the place to be. Track bias, who would ever believe it?

agree, ignore this race.

FELTFAIR
26 Sep 19 12:57
Joined: 01 Jun 10 | Topic/replies: 6,187 | Blogger: FELTFAIR's blog
Nine left in with all the big guns standing their ground so sticking with Earthlight win and Golden Horde each way.

great stuff

Sep 29, 2019 -- 7:50AM, Charlton2005 wrote:

brigust1 28 Sep 19 15:26 Joined: 07 Dec 01 | Topic/replies: 11,179 | Blogger: brigust1's blog We already knew the form of the first two, nothing new there, but the 3rd and 4th make any other form questionable. Plus it did look like the rails was the place to be. Track bias, who would ever believe it?  agree, ignore this race.

pmslmake up my own mind

To be fair, Mums Tipple was reported lame after the race, which more than likely explains his disappointing performance.

Will that be the end on Mum's Tipple? Given an incredibly high rating unlikely to be matched let alone beaten as a 3 year old. This late in the season stud will beckon.

So what rating did you give it?

I don't do ratings as such but when looking closely at the Middle Park for a bet I thought, as expressed and explained earlier on this thread, that 107 would be about right. And guess what? RPR who rated him 119 before the Middle Park rated him 104 for Saturday. That was more in keeping with his previous run. In my humble opinion of course.

you should of layed mums tipple for a lot of money if that was your reckoning of its rating 107, it would of had no chance of troubling the official top rated on the day, was looking forward to the horse running a big race in line with the professional rating firms expectations, siskin was only rated 113 i think
that was a fair assessment of his form coming into the race, wasnt able to take his chance in the end.

Roadrunner I do understand that ratings are not always to be trusted and would not risk good money simply on ratings alone. And that was the only quibble I had with Mum's Tipple. When I lay a horse or back a horse I look for other reasons to add to positive or negative ratings I do not rely on them alone. In this instance I thought the rating was wrong but actually I still have little evidence that it was. Apparently the horse was found to be lame afterwards so I am not daft enough to think that what happened on Saturday was conclusive evidence one way or the other.

there was 4 new course records at newmarket on saturday, 3 new course records when oasis dream won the middle park stakes and 2 new course records when bushranger won the same race too, you do need the perfect race conditions to beat these records most of the time.

Absolutely correct Roadrunner. There are just so many variables especially on a straight course. On round courses there is rail position to take into consideration and any racecourse that has had major developments to the racecourse itself. There was a lot of hype recently about Battaash beating Dayjur's course record when in actual fact they raced on completely different surfaces.

Brigust, you were proved right to question the form of MT. I ended up backing him in the morning, I was on a break and didn't get to see the race until much later but it was a very poor effort, especially as I reckon Earthlight ran about 10lbs below his previous best. No excuses for my bet as I knew there was a question mark over the form and even if it was as good as it looked there was still the chance he might no follow it up, yet I still considered around 11/4 decent value. Regardless of whether MT turns out to be as good as he looked at York I'm doubtful he ran to form in the Middle Park, but time will tell.

Strange to say Figgis but am of a mind to drop the race  following Summer Sands' performance yesterday . Given that I had to push the winner I agree that Earthlight ran well below his best . I couldn't argue with your 10lb .

And the Mums Tipple figure was right .