2023 coral eclipse

Not an ideal turnout for the great race, and I know many will understandably give the race a swerve at these prices, but I will be involved. I backed Paddington for the SJP where he won nicely, but I don't agree with the RP assessment that it was the best in the race since Kingman. For me, if Paddington had put up that performance in this year's Guineas then he'd have won by around 1 length (I have Chaldean regressing a bit in the SJP). Which would still only make him a moderate to average Guineas winner, as this year's was a poor race. However, if he can replicate that level over this 10f then I reckon that should be comfortably good enough.

I see the RP have Paddington and Emily Upjohn level, Timeform have the filly 3lbs ahead after weight adjustment. I see the race very differently. I know a lot of sectional enthusiasts got very excited indeed about her fast late furlongs in the Coronation Cup, but in my view the performance was nearer Gp2 than genuine Gp1. I have Paddington 3lbs ahead (albeit at a shorter trip) before adjusting for weights due to be carried. Therefore I have him a huge 10lbs ahead on the day. About 5 lengths superior over 10f.

Of course, ratings aren't the be and end all, I just use them as a base to work from. Obviously I'm not betting on the race confidently expecting Paddington to win by 5 lengths. Even if Paddington stays the extra 2f he might not be quite as fast over it while still only a 3yo. I prefer not to make guesses at wfa but he could stay the distance while dropping 2 or 3lbs from his mile form. Possibly EU could improve a couple of pounds if she's really asked for maximum effort. Also, with only the four runners we might get a falsely run race leading to cramped margins and tactics more of an issue. Also in a slowly run race extra weight carried isn't quite as much of a factor.

Some people wouldn't even consider taking a short price with a horse unproven at the trip, which is fair enough. Personally, I think in the long term it pays to take that risk when you think one will stay. All things considered I see Paddington as still a value bet.

EU is a 12f horse so needs to set a good pace to win this - if it's tactical Moore can control from the front and she won't get to him

A_T, the problem for her with the first scenario is the better the pace then the more the extra 7lbs will tell. If you look at her late fractions at Epsom then they show that she'll have no problem with a drop down in trip.

agree Figgis - I know you tend to look at ratings rather than consider optimum trips for horses - which is a good way of looking at things.

I'm looking at this as a 12f horse vs a miler so in my view there needs to be a good pace or Paddington will simply have too much speed.

Yes, if Paddington isn't quite as effective over the extra distance then making it a thorough test would be the best way to try to beat him. Also, if this is coming a bit soon for Paddington then a fast pace would be the best way to exploit that. I think he should be able to take in this race (connections think he's still fresh as well, but you can never be certain) as for me it was only his last race where he ran to full potential. He may well progress again, but whereas I expected some improvement at Ascot I'm not banking on that here.

I do not know the rating accuracy between the 2 principals. If pretty similar I'd prefer the filly given she's won over 10f (she can quicken) unlike Paddington (a new trip). The race will be between the 2 principals unless Paddington does not get the new trip.

Getting involved? No, just a watching brief.

West Wind Blows should take them along today.

Paddington won well at Ascot stamping himself the leading 3 year old so far this season.

Emily UpJohn easily beat a decent field at Epsom on her seasonal bow.

I don't have much between them myself and think the market is a bit unbalanced on this one.

With her proven stamina and bigger price, I have backed EU

Personally, I prefer the filly. But, she's been a bogey horse for me. How she did not win The Oaks was beyond my comprehension. Also, the stable a nemesis too.

Had a shilling on Emily.

Enjoy watching this race, can’t bet at moment, lester piggot would say the 3yo’s have an advantage, enough variables in play to make it an interesting race. Goodluck

Lester piggot knew what he was talking about. WD winners

WD Fig.

Cracking race

in retrospect Buick might well wish he hadn't let moore have first run - but it may not have mattered. EU is a 12f horse and not enough speed for this

WD figgis missed your write up, Emily upjohn has to change its action when speeding up and that was definite disadvantage against a horse like Paddington who’s action stays the same to the winning line, 25/1 for the arc before this race

Figgis
  wd
   GL
Best horse won that today,Emily Upjohn was just not good enough.

Cheers, but a bit too close for comfort towards the end . I allowed for Paddington dropping 2 or 3lbs over the longer trip, but have rated him 4lbs lower. Whether that was just the trip or the quick races I have no idea, but I'd be wary of backing him if turned out quickly again. I allowed for EU improving a couple of pounds but have her up 5lbs on my prior rating. She's no Enable but I have her equal to another Gosden filly, The Fugue, at her best, when I didn't think she was quite that good beforehand. She may also need some recovery time after that effort.

Correct again Figgis never getting to him. RM is in the form of his life and talking plenty thus paying much more attention to his pension, (nominations).

You have that performance 4lb lower than his Ascot run, Figgis?

Well done Figgis (again).  Your ratings do seem to work out better than others (such as topspeed and rp) and I take note of what you say.
By contrast, my approach is a bit chaotic:  Based on fuzzy logic, ever changing views of how classy a race was based on the subsequent performances of runners, pedigrees, trainer comments (and entries)...and other people's speed figures.  I tend to build up an evolving picture of what happened in races and why.  Sometimes I am right but, on other occasions, I am completely wrong by miles!

Brandy, I only rate on weights carried and don't make any separate preset adjustments for wfa. I know that 3yos can be at a disadvantage as they move up in trip against older horses, which is one of the factors incorporated in the wfa scale. It's just that I prefer not to assume one size fits all. Many 3yos will drop a few pounds over the extra distance but I've seen 3yos who have run the exact same time performance at a mile and 10f+. I also don't subscribe to the theory that every 3yo improves at a set rate each month throughout the season. So my approach is just to bear that in mind rather than alter the bare figure.

I'd say on average I half expect a 3yo to drop a couple of pounds between 8f and 10f at this time of year. So taking that into account Paddington was only a pound or two lower than I expected. The main thing I'm taking from the race is, for the first time with his performances this season, I didn't see it as an improvement and to my eyes he was fully tested. I wouldn't be keen to back him if he makes a quick reappearance. On the other hand, I'm not privy to his well being at home, and if O'Brien says he has actually put weight on again then that would have to be a positive.

The point about the weight is interesting to me, as yesterday, when asked for a comparison with Giant's Causeway, O'Brien said that GC was always the same weight. However, I remember really wanting to back GC for the Eclipse (sorry for the aftertiming) but was wavering because I thought the hard race at Ascot had probably taken something out of him. It was only when I read O'Brien say that he had actually put on weight after the SJP that I thought he was probably going to be ok and I decided to bet. That's how I remember it, but maybe O'Brien meant GC had put weight on and was back to the same weight for the Eclipse, whereas Paddington was racing at a heavier weight.

how classy a race was based on the subsequent performances of runners I tend to build up an evolving picture of what happened in races and why

Marksman, there is nothing wrong with any of that. Actually, all of that you mention plays a part when trying to work out speed figures. On some races or whole cards you can be confident, but others you have to go back and reassess after further developments. I'm not a fan of downgrading a race just because a lower rated horse unexpectedly finished prominently, or doing the same when a couple from the race don't go on to frank the form. Nevertheless, when a load of them go on to disappoint then it has to matter.

This year's Newmarket Pretty Polly Stakes being a prime example where I was well wide of the mark. I wasn't sure at the time but largely due to Running Lion at that stage being a big price for the Oaks I took a punt on rating the race positively. I know she didn't go in the stalls at Epsom and ran no race in France so there could be excuses, but that Pretty Polly form has looked absolute garbage since. It's highly likely I lost the plot with that one. Running Lion probably peaked that day in a very mediocre race and has since regressed.

both runners achieved good TS figures for yesterdays race 116-114, first time over 100 for emily upjohn and time of the race was fast, no wonder john gosden was pleased with that performance, only 0.39 slower than enable in 2019, but much faster in comparison to the other races run on the same card, compared to 2019

Weight for age was based on some pretty reliable figures when it was first framed but horses get more precocious on so thre younger ones are probaly well treated up to 10 furlongs and perhaps more. The real stayers seldom mature until 4 or 5yo which makes the recent run of Courage Mon Ami very good even though he was getting 1lb from the 6yo Coltrane who continues to improve. The  5yo allowance in novice chases was far too generous which is why Champleve, Flagship Uberalles, Well Chief and Voy Por Ustedes all won in 8 runnings of the Arkle. Since the wfa scale was modified it has not happened again so it is possible that Admiral Rous was right after all and the 4 winners were all very good horses. A more likely explanation is that the generous 5yo allowance encouraged trainers to put 4/5yos over fences a year early. There is no allowance at all for 5yos over hurdles, even over 3 miles.

Any discussion on ratings, past or projected, WFA, sex allowances etc has to be considered as does speed figures v collateral ratings.

BUT, and its a big but, random factors dominate outcomes to such a degree that I sometimes wonder if its all worth the effort , and I say that as someone who wouldn't bet without them.

These days I have a model that I use where I can introduce random factors, expressed as margin of errors for all the horses in any race, and have found that as little as + or - as little as 2 lbs variance can radically alter the outcome and over a season turn profits into losses. As much as 5lbs either way destroys any hope of consistent success.

No wonder bookmakers like 365 have become so powerful. Modern technology, scores of data analysts, AI, plus the over-round on their side, its hardly a fair fight.

If you can do your own ratings, helps you to frame a horses chances better, all good, always found too complicated to even try and make my own ratings, much easier to judge a horse’s profile, always looking for good form in that record, or horses I know that the horse has been beaten by and class of races, should pay more attention to the top speeds, loads of different things you can take into consideration , racing post can be worth buying on the weekends, so much information can overload your senses sometimes , depends how you’re brain works

Speaking personally, I have never believed that doing my own ratings would give me an edge over the market in the vast majority of races. It's purely a case of being selective, knowing when they do and when to play.

It's purely a case of being selective, knowing when they do and when to play.



That just about sums it up Figgis.

Sandown, or, at least, thinking we know when they do