Homecoming Queen would've been hailed the best ever filly had it have been trained by Stoute or Cecil and had been fav !

I would imagine when i am told this is the best horse ever he would have beat fields that had multi classic winner in it stacks of group1 winners behind you would think

against a horse, sorry

So you suggest it's wise to essentially guess how much a horse had in hand, just because it's possibly beating horses of a better standard but by nothing like so far?

* get carried away

Horses win by a wide margin like Harbinger and Hawk Wing then are immediately dissed. Whereas when Frankel wins by a wide margin that is fine.

No-one is questioning Frankel's superiority over Excelebration. No-one either is saying that is Excelebration's true form. You cannot have both ffs.

If Excelebration ran below form then by how much? Three lengths? That makes Frankel an 8 length winner.

You see Frankel supporters wan't the 11 lengths but they don't want the 'Excelebration form' bit. Because if Excelebration ran true to form he only ran 114. With even Timeform rating system of +29 that makes Frankel 143.
If Excelebration ran 3 lengths below form that makes him 120. Take 6lbs off Frankel that makes, according to Timeform, +23 superior we again reach 143.
But they don't want that, do they?

When Harbinger won he beat Workforce by a long way. Making the form look suspect. Then when Workforce was beaten further in the Arc last season perhaps the form is right? You cannot have both.

Frankel supporters want both and that ain't going to happen.

How many extra pounds has Frankel gained from the Sir Henry Cecil attachment?
How many pounds has Frankel gained from the 'British horses are currently crap' attachment?
How many pounds has Frankel gained from the 'we need a superstar' attachment?
How many pounds has Frankel gained from the 'Racing for Change' attachment.

Add to that the fact that this is definitely not a golden era for British racing and Timeform find the best racehorse ever.

All of these points plus the hype and hysteria affect almost everybody but you can fool some of the people some of the time but not all of the people all of the time.

so Excelebration is only half a length better than Side Glance ?!

Have TIMEFORM announced their TimeFIGURE - NOT Rating - for FRANKEL, on Tuesday, yet? -

AND - does anybody know what TimeFIGURE FRANKEL achieved in the 2000 Guineas?
----------------

I ask because their FRANKEL Rating EXPLANATION article  (Link given above by -danrb - 23 Jun 12 10:29)  - is TOTALLY TIME orientated and BASED ...

Yet their END PRODUCT - a RATING of 147 is being compared against, "Traditional HANDICAPPING,"  (to use THEIR terminology) - which DOES produce RATINGS .... BUT, which, are NOT TIME based.

It would appear, therefore, that TIMEFORM 'want their cake and to eat it
------------ 

MEANWHILE

I am sat here with my copy of PHIL BULL's 'Best Horses of 1947'  -
with the book opened at the TUDOR MINSTREL pages - showing photographs of him winning the 2000 Guineas in identical fashion to FRANKEL  ....

Along with TUDOR MINSTREL's TIMEFIGURE for the race -  Timeform RATINGS did NOT start until the following year, 1948.

Some of the Text says .....

"Never have I seen a Guineas which can bear comparison with it, and I never expect to do so again.
We have all seen races which were a foregone conclusion some way from home, but it was inconceivable that the Two Thousand Guineas should be over and done with before the horses had travelled half a mile.

Yet at the half-way stage the 'quick result' men would have run no risk in telephoning TUDOR MINSTREL as the winner.
The remainder were all stone cold a long way from home, leaving TUDOR MINSTREL with the race at his mercy."
-------------------

Now - Where are those TIMEFIGURES for FRANKEL, please?

^ brigust .

As you know - we are both 'singing from the same Hymn Sheet' there - with so-called 'Speed Figures'

As I posted the other day ...

They are ALL based upon, and consequently calculated from,  somebody's OPINION of the (mostly MYTHICAL) 'Going Allowance' .... that being something that can only be entirely UNQUANTIFIABLE to anything approaching exactness.

Consequently - EVERY Speed Figure for EVERY Horse in EVERY Race simply CANNOT be definitive.

To then 'award' a 'Handicap RATING' - based upon such methodology is, in my book, boith scurrilous. - and entirely UNrespresentative.
---------------------

My query, therefore, - Was to merely compare THEIR TIMEfigures for both TUDOR MINSTREL and FRANKEL - as they have been calculated by THEIR same modus operandi.

And of course The Derby.

Epsom. Derby. 12f. Good. Always there took lead app.Tattenham Corner. Hard ridden. Btn 2 out. 4th. 0.45 fast.

^  Oh and SCEPTRE's FORM BOOK's - Rough Guide to the Turf.

- and the Racing Calendars for every year of the individual Classics.

some of them must be worth a nice few bob onlooker,

where do you live please

- in the British Library. 

Google says you are situated near King's Cross, you have everything at your fingertips imo

or points whatever you call them Newbie here just asking?

On the Morning Line the Timeform chap rated Frankel +29 on Excelebration. That is +19 more than they had originally rated them on 143 and 133. Are you with me Dunc?


yes, 29lb beating on Tuesday....19lb more than prev cos Frankel improved 4lb and Excelebration was 15lb below form.

what Side Glance etc are officially rated has nothing to do with what Timeform rate them and thus how they have arrived at Frankel's rating....only confusing matters

gentlemen, bullet train is the key.

frankel only beat him a few lengths more in the queen anne than he had been previously.

it is a complete waste of talent running this horse against excelebration again and again. as many of u know i have been harping on about it for quite some time. frankel is a worthy champion and i dont for a second question the ability of this horse but excelebration is not a reliable yard stick anymore, that horse is a very average g1 winner imo and his races without frankel prove this. as already mentiond, its frankels high rating that actually keeps his so high because he keeps finishing 2nd to him all the time. if frankel wasnt around they would be saying excelebration is one of the best ever which is too frightening for me to think of.

ratings are just opinion, timefore have been itching to up frankels rating since the beginning, i wouldnt pay them much attention tbh. they are a useful guidline thats all.

frankel needs a new challange now, hes not going to the eclipse from what ive read and will take his place in the sussex, i cant really express how much this saddens and annoys me. quite incredible this horse hasnt been stepped up in trip and i cant for the life of me understand why. just give him the first place for the sussex and be done with it because when he beats excelebration for the 5th or 6th time by a similar distance the press will be even more delerious, quite sad really as others have done what he has but over every trip and only needed one or 2 runs at the same distance to prove they were the best. they can rate frankel what they want, but i think more highly of horses that have won the guineas derbys arcs etc not the feckin sussex and queen anne against the same fookin horse, one horse.

the funny thing u keep hearing he'd beat dancing brave over a mile or nijinsky etc and maybe he would have but he wouldnt know which way they went over 12 so whats the difference? the difference in their achievements however is quite big as when frankel was winning the queen eliz, nijinsky was a triple crown winner, quite remarkable.

i say let him have the highest rating ever, good for him, give him 150 if it will satisfy timeform because i personally will never hold him in the same regard as the horses that have achieved the truly remarkable and i blame henry and the prince for not allowing the horse to really prove his greatness and instead wasted his talent and playing it safe, dont know about anyone else but im gettng pretty tired of hearing the phrase 'he'll tell us what to do'.

Difference between Timeform and BHA is 7 points?

Comparing ratings from this season to last season or next season is futile let alone 40 years apart, the purpose of ratings is for them to be used in the season they're in as the season progresses, anything else is pure opinion and totally subjective as any opinion can neither be preoven nor disproven.