Which Cheltenham Gold Cup winner fell at the first in a Sandown handicap that was won by a future Cheltenham Gold Cup winner?

in 1986 name the peter easterby 2yo that won 3 in a row then was 2nd to midyan in its last race.

Correct but not this answer. This was a chase and it had already won it's CGC.

wd pauli

I'll have to tell you because I'm off out now.

I think it was Little Owl and Burroughhill Lad won it.

Have a jolly evening all.

Rollo - who won the Whitbread when Dawn Run fell at the first?

Beau Ranger

Whitbread sponsored the Aintree race, then. Was actually there that day.

I think I have a tape of that race.  Beau Ranger started at 40/1 as he had been off for a long time with an injury and just come back, maybe having one come back race?  Richard Pitman tipped on the BBC saying it was a ridiculous price given how good the horse was over 2½ miles and Aintree 3m would be no problem AND Dawn Run was not a reliable jumper.  He was proved right in this race and sadly later in the year when they went for the French hurdle with her.

I think you might be right SF

I've changede my mind...I'm back with Dawn Run as Dessie was a few years later

Navel - I am leading you up the garden path I think. I got my Whitbreads muddled up - I knew that Dawn Run fell at the first but got my courses muddled up.   Still ablood y good question though!

Bregawn?

Political Pop?

Not sure what question you guys are trying to answer, but the one I am on is which CGC winner fell at the first in a Sandown Hcap that was won by a subsequent CGC winner. The original poster has posted his solution but he does not seem sure.

yahoo won it when dessie fell

Not sure anyone said it did Rollo - though a question about Gold Cup winners and Sandown Handicaps kind of lends itself in that direction doesn't it.

Re the Little Owl forecast.

At that time the bookies had their own Straight Forecast chart which they had worked out to prevent them getting caught out by large tote dividends.

As usual when bookies came up with something, it made any forecasts involving shorter priced horses so poor that it was hardly worth betting on, while the chart was also set to pay very large dividends in the unlikely event of massive priced horses, that nobody would possibly bet, finishing first and second.

In that 3 horse race, Little Owl went off unreasonably short, while the two others were priced away above what they should have been.

I believe Little Owl pulled up early on and the forecast, which had been bet in quite a few shops, payed out a 3 figure sum.

Naturally the poor bookies cried "Foul" and the Jockey Club had an investigation but could find no wrongdoing.

This was the end of the Chart Forecast and the beginning of the more closely controlled Computer Straight Forecast (CSF) where the bookies had a "scientific formula" to work out the forecast, or as the punters used to say "They worked out what the forecast should be and then halved it"

Mark Coton's account:-

"The 1982 Fulwell Chase at Kempton Park appeared
a mundane contest. True, the Gold Cup winner
Little Owl was in attendance but he faced only
two rivals in Venture To Cognac and Great Dean.

"Venture To Cognac had some useful form to his
credit but had become injury-prone and was
considered to need the run. As for Great Dean,
he had been pulled up at lowly Fontwell and
needed a miracle if he was to win such
a valuable prize.

"Little Owl was sent off the 4-11 favourite,
Venture To Cognac 5-2 with Great Dean appearing
for all the world a lost cause at 66-1.

"As far as winning the race was concerned,
Great Dean was virtually friendless.
On the course and in the betting shops it was
only the odd `just-for-fun' merchant and
habitues of the `outsider-of-three' system who
gave him even a moment's consideration.

"Or so it seemed. But dotted about the country
were a handful of shrewd punters who had spotted
the chance to make a killing on the race.
A chance, that's all. Those shrewdies didn't
_expect_ to pickup but knew exceptional value
when they saw it.

"And what a killing! Not only were these punters
expecting to receive odds of around 150-1 on
their bet, they were also gleefully awaiting
the chance to make fools of the big bookmakers.

"For once, the bookmakers had made a `rick' and
a mighty serious one at that.

"The mistake was in the format for the then
relatively new Computerised Straight Forecast
(CSF), which allowed for inflated dividends should
a long-priced outsider make the frame in a small
field.

"The Fulwell Chase offered an ideal chance to
exploit this loophole. All it needed was for
Little Owl to fail to complete the course (as
he had done at Cheltenham on his previous start)
and this would enable Venture To Cognac to win
with Great Dean hopefully putting in a clear round
to come second.

"The race went entirely to script for these
backers. Little Owl leading and seemingly
going well, swerved and was pulled up by
jockey and part-owner Jim Wilson at the 10th.

"This left Venture To Cognac clear of the already
tailed-off Great Dean. The former sauntered round
to win by a distance and Great Dean, with forecast
backers holding their breath, completed in his own
time to earn a place in the history books.

"Little Owl's bit had reportedly slipped, but
the bookmakers were not happy, especially when
they realised the extent of their liabilities.

"Payment was held back while BOLA and the racing
authorities carried out an investigation into
the race. No evidence of any misdemeanour was
produced and the bookmakers, suitably chastened,
paid out.

"They also called in their computer people to
change the format of the CSF to avoid such inflated
dividends in small fields in the future, and
the result was what is disingenuously referred
to as the `Harmonic formula' for producing CSF
dividends. Today, if Venture To Cognac were to
beat Great Dean in identical circumstances, backers
would receive odds of only 15-1.

"This was a blatant over-correction and the few
punters who were on were crying foul after
after the 1989 Eclipse in which Nashwan at 2-5
beat 200-1 shot Opening Verse. Those that had
the combination were dismayed to receive odds
of only 24-1 (the Tote paid over 50% better at
38-1), which provides a fine indication of
the high level of profit bookmakers build into
the CSF."

these bookies chaps dont like things that are not in their favour