Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
28 Aug 12
19:26
Joined:
Date Joined:
05 Jan 10
http://www.britishhorseracing.com
28th August 2012: FRANKEL - HOW GOOD IS HE?
I have been especially jealous of my colleague Dominic Gardiner-Hill over the last two years as he has had the privilege of assessing the amazing performances of Frankel. Therefore I was so looking forward to my first chance of rating his performance at York last week in the Juddmonte International.
Although I wasn't on duty I decided to go to York as it is not often you get the chance to see live the best horse in the world or indeed the best in the world for the last 26 years. Like everyone else I was stunned. Group 1's are not normally won so easily. Di Clark, the judge, gave it as 7 lengths which over 10 furlongs equates to 12lbs. as we use 1.75lbs. per length over that distance.
My first task was to decide which of the beaten horses had run to his rating. If I chose Farhh on 122 then Frankel had run to an arithmetic 134 not taking into account the ease of his victory (more on that later). Farhh is an improver. He started the season winning the Thirsk Hunt Cup off a mark of 100. Was it therefore reasonable to assume that he had improved again to 124?
This would mean that St Nicholas Abbey who is very consistent had replicated his 124 also. As he has been 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 1st and 3rd in his last five runs this looked reasonable to me and he had recorded a 124 performance in three of those races. It meant that Twice Over had run below form on 114 as he was 6 lengths behind the second and third which also looked fair as he was only just ahead of the "pacemaker" Bullet Train who thus recorded his best ever performance of 113.
Therefore using Farhh and St Nick on 124 this brought Frankel to 136 but what to call the "ease of victory" which of course is the real task of the Handicapper? I decided to add 2.25 lengths on to the winning distance for ease and style of victory = 4lbs. It would have been churlish to say it was anything less, which brought his performance to 140.
As Dominic also had Frankel running to 140 in the Queen Anne it supported his decision and it was difficult to prove that Frankel's Juddmonte win was any better than his Queen Anne victory. As there was bound to be great debate and interest in his rating, I consulted my domestic colleagues who agreed that 140 was an appropriate level for his performance at York.
We have an International system on our computers which enables us to see what our colleagues around the world have calculated for every horse that runs in a Group race anywhere in the world. When I looked on Tuesday morning 8 out of 8 of the International Handicappers who had posted a rating had come up with 140 for Frankel at York.
Of course this isn't the final figure for the son of Galileo as a great deal will happen over the next few months before his final career figure is decided in Hong Kong at our International Conference of the World Thoroughbred Racehorse Rankings. I hope that Farhh and St Nicholas Abbey go onwards and upwards so that we have the opportunity to raise Frankel on collateral form or as trainers call it "for standing in his box".
Alternatively, perhaps he will beat better horses, such as Cirrus Des Aigles (128), as easily as those he encountered at York if he runs on British Champion's Day at Ascot on Saturday 20th October. I KNOW he is the best flat horse I have ever seen and would have loved to have been able to rate him higher. However as it stands the facts make this difficult. I look forward to being able to prove it at the end of the year.
28th August 2012: FRANKEL - HOW GOOD IS HE?
I have been especially jealous of my colleague Dominic Gardiner-Hill over the last two years as he has had the privilege of assessing the amazing performances of Frankel. Therefore I was so looking forward to my first chance of rating his performance at York last week in the Juddmonte International.
Although I wasn't on duty I decided to go to York as it is not often you get the chance to see live the best horse in the world or indeed the best in the world for the last 26 years. Like everyone else I was stunned. Group 1's are not normally won so easily. Di Clark, the judge, gave it as 7 lengths which over 10 furlongs equates to 12lbs. as we use 1.75lbs. per length over that distance.
My first task was to decide which of the beaten horses had run to his rating. If I chose Farhh on 122 then Frankel had run to an arithmetic 134 not taking into account the ease of his victory (more on that later). Farhh is an improver. He started the season winning the Thirsk Hunt Cup off a mark of 100. Was it therefore reasonable to assume that he had improved again to 124?
This would mean that St Nicholas Abbey who is very consistent had replicated his 124 also. As he has been 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 1st and 3rd in his last five runs this looked reasonable to me and he had recorded a 124 performance in three of those races. It meant that Twice Over had run below form on 114 as he was 6 lengths behind the second and third which also looked fair as he was only just ahead of the "pacemaker" Bullet Train who thus recorded his best ever performance of 113.
Therefore using Farhh and St Nick on 124 this brought Frankel to 136 but what to call the "ease of victory" which of course is the real task of the Handicapper? I decided to add 2.25 lengths on to the winning distance for ease and style of victory = 4lbs. It would have been churlish to say it was anything less, which brought his performance to 140.
As Dominic also had Frankel running to 140 in the Queen Anne it supported his decision and it was difficult to prove that Frankel's Juddmonte win was any better than his Queen Anne victory. As there was bound to be great debate and interest in his rating, I consulted my domestic colleagues who agreed that 140 was an appropriate level for his performance at York.
We have an International system on our computers which enables us to see what our colleagues around the world have calculated for every horse that runs in a Group race anywhere in the world. When I looked on Tuesday morning 8 out of 8 of the International Handicappers who had posted a rating had come up with 140 for Frankel at York.
Of course this isn't the final figure for the son of Galileo as a great deal will happen over the next few months before his final career figure is decided in Hong Kong at our International Conference of the World Thoroughbred Racehorse Rankings. I hope that Farhh and St Nicholas Abbey go onwards and upwards so that we have the opportunity to raise Frankel on collateral form or as trainers call it "for standing in his box".
Alternatively, perhaps he will beat better horses, such as Cirrus Des Aigles (128), as easily as those he encountered at York if he runs on British Champion's Day at Ascot on Saturday 20th October. I KNOW he is the best flat horse I have ever seen and would have loved to have been able to rate him higher. However as it stands the facts make this difficult. I look forward to being able to prove it at the end of the year.
Show More
Does anyone have a full list of those 135+ horses from the 80s?
'a larger ponds per length scale'. How ridiculous is that?
Not ridiculous at all, it just says they were wrong all those years ago.
Now the '80s assessments are wrong.
No, they always were, Reference Point showed 139?
Not ridiculous at all, it just says they were wrong all those years ago.
Now the '80s assessments are wrong.
No, they always were, Reference Point showed 139?
The seond best horse in the country is Excelebration. It has won 2 Group 1's. in the first it beat Rio de la Plata. In the second it beat Cityscape. None of them easily. And that is the second best horse in the country
Another way of looking at it is that in 12 races since it it's debut only 2 horses have finished in front of Excelebration.
Another way of looking at it is that in 12 races since it it's debut only 2 horses have finished in front of Excelebration.
brigust1 02 Sep 12 12:34
'a larger ponds per length scale'. How ridiculous is that?
__________________-
Blimey! Brigust - That's what YOU intimated......
Otherwise - YOUR previous posted example (below) is complete Poppycock ...
------------------
brigust1 31 Aug 12 20:47
Where does that come from? My world.
Brigadier Gerard beat Sparkler by 6 lengths giving him 7lbs. According to Tf's own figures one length equals 2.73lbs.
So 6 X 2.73 + 7 = 23.38. Sparkler was rated 129. Therefore 129 + 23.38 = 152.3
My reply ....
onlooker 31 Aug 12 21:31
Brigust - I think that 2.73 lengths (really?) is a far more recent innovation.
In the Brigadier's day - I expect Timeform were using the more 'accepted' 2lbs per length at a Mile.
That, however would mean that the Brigadier (144), likewise, got an 3 extra pounds for the ease of his 6 length victory over Sparkler (129) - in the Queen Elizabeth.
That would tie in with the 5 lengths 3rd horse home - Noel Murless's Redundant (120) - who had won the Britannia Handicap, and then finished a similar 5 lengths behind Home Guard (129) in the Hungerford
'a larger ponds per length scale'. How ridiculous is that?
__________________-
Blimey! Brigust - That's what YOU intimated......
Otherwise - YOUR previous posted example (below) is complete Poppycock ...
------------------
brigust1 31 Aug 12 20:47
Where does that come from? My world.
Brigadier Gerard beat Sparkler by 6 lengths giving him 7lbs. According to Tf's own figures one length equals 2.73lbs.
So 6 X 2.73 + 7 = 23.38. Sparkler was rated 129. Therefore 129 + 23.38 = 152.3
My reply ....
onlooker 31 Aug 12 21:31
Brigust - I think that 2.73 lengths (really?) is a far more recent innovation.
In the Brigadier's day - I expect Timeform were using the more 'accepted' 2lbs per length at a Mile.
That, however would mean that the Brigadier (144), likewise, got an 3 extra pounds for the ease of his 6 length victory over Sparkler (129) - in the Queen Elizabeth.
That would tie in with the 5 lengths 3rd horse home - Noel Murless's Redundant (120) - who had won the Britannia Handicap, and then finished a similar 5 lengths behind Home Guard (129) in the Hungerford
Andrew the words may be wrong but the meaning is the same. Of course Frankel never 'chose' to be around. But it is a good time for a champion racehorse to be around. Every pundit is trying to invent new superlatives to out do the other pundit. There are three channels covering the races. And Frankel is the only horse to talk about.
When BG was racing there were no racing channels. He had to share the limelight with Nijinsky and Mill Reef but at least they added quality to his career. I think the first line in the Timeform racehorses book when assessing BG was something like
'The English language is in such a bad way it can no longer cope with the exceptional. Words have been twisted out of their meanings by over use'.
Another way of looking at is that Cityscape ran 17 times before winning a Group 1 in Meydan. And Rio de la Plata has won 2 Group 1's in Italy.
I did not 'intimate' anything of the kind. A ratings scale must be universal not one for one era and one for another and I can certainly expect Timeform and the BHA to look at it that way as well.
When BG was racing there were no racing channels. He had to share the limelight with Nijinsky and Mill Reef but at least they added quality to his career. I think the first line in the Timeform racehorses book when assessing BG was something like
'The English language is in such a bad way it can no longer cope with the exceptional. Words have been twisted out of their meanings by over use'.
Another way of looking at is that Cityscape ran 17 times before winning a Group 1 in Meydan. And Rio de la Plata has won 2 Group 1's in Italy.
I did not 'intimate' anything of the kind. A ratings scale must be universal not one for one era and one for another and I can certainly expect Timeform and the BHA to look at it that way as well.
And how many Gr1 would Excelebration have won had Frankel not been in opposition? And if Frankel had been in opposition for the other 2 then Excelebration wouldn't have won any Gr1s.
Plus when Excelebration beat Rio de la Plata in the first of those Gr1s, the going was described as Very Soft and this is in September in France too where they often have a bit of cut underfoot but to call it Very Soft is saying something. Rajsaman was 3rd and Dubawi Gold was 4th, beaten 3L by Excelebration and there are plenty of from tie ins there with Frankel, where he beat Dubawi Gold 6L in the 2000gns and has beaten him more on other occasions and Rio de la Plata and Rajsaman were beaten 7½L and 10L by Frankel in his first Sussex Stakes win.
Cityscape won the big 1m1f race at the Dubai World Cup and also ran well for a long way in the Eclipse when trying 10f for the first time too so all of that form looks fairly solid.
Plus when Excelebration beat Rio de la Plata in the first of those Gr1s, the going was described as Very Soft and this is in September in France too where they often have a bit of cut underfoot but to call it Very Soft is saying something. Rajsaman was 3rd and Dubawi Gold was 4th, beaten 3L by Excelebration and there are plenty of from tie ins there with Frankel, where he beat Dubawi Gold 6L in the 2000gns and has beaten him more on other occasions and Rio de la Plata and Rajsaman were beaten 7½L and 10L by Frankel in his first Sussex Stakes win.
Cityscape won the big 1m1f race at the Dubai World Cup and also ran well for a long way in the Eclipse when trying 10f for the first time too so all of that form looks fairly solid.
There are three channels covering the races. And Frankel is the only horse to talk about.
Brig, have you ever considered why ?
Brig, have you ever considered why ?
brigust1 • September 2, 2012 10:29 AM BST
Grendel save your breath and your time. There are more and more races to run in ffs.
brigust, do you actually understand the concept of percentages?
Grendel save your breath and your time. There are more and more races to run in ffs.
brigust, do you actually understand the concept of percentages?
'Fairly good', Ima yes that just about sums up the form of the second best horse in the UK. Can't argue with that.
Of course they only talk about Frankel, that also is obvious.
Grendel I wasn't talking about percentages. Perhaps though, as you are, what is the percentage of only 3 horses rated 135+ in 12 years at a time when there are more horses running (Frankel's era) compared with 28 horses rated 135+ for 10 years (Dancing Brave's era)?
Of course they only talk about Frankel, that also is obvious.
Grendel I wasn't talking about percentages. Perhaps though, as you are, what is the percentage of only 3 horses rated 135+ in 12 years at a time when there are more horses running (Frankel's era) compared with 28 horses rated 135+ for 10 years (Dancing Brave's era)?
stats for number of winners from each age group 3yo/ 4yo and 5yo+ GB only in 3yo+ Group races 2005-2012:-
year - no.races-3yo ----4yo ------5yo+
2005 - 58 - 10/149 - 25/160 - 23/253
2006 - 57 - 18/166 - 12/121 - 27/276
2007 - 57 - 21/158 - 23/223 - 13/207
2008 - 55 - 20/156 - 18/178 - 17/203
2009 - 58 - 20/149 - 21/200 - 17/192
2010 - 57 - 12/130 - 21/211 - 24/209
2011 - 58 - 23/140 - 14/180 - 21/240
2012 - 38 - 7/ 80 - 18/123 - 13/169
classic generation of each year record in classic year and next as 4yo's:-
2005 22/270 8.15%
2006 41/389 10.54%
2007 38/336 11.31%
2008 41/356 11.52%
2009 41/360 11.39%
2010 26/310 8.39%
2011 41/263 15.59%
pretty conclusive proof that the classic generation of 2011 were outstanding in relation to the last 7 classic generations
year - no.races-3yo ----4yo ------5yo+
2005 - 58 - 10/149 - 25/160 - 23/253
2006 - 57 - 18/166 - 12/121 - 27/276
2007 - 57 - 21/158 - 23/223 - 13/207
2008 - 55 - 20/156 - 18/178 - 17/203
2009 - 58 - 20/149 - 21/200 - 17/192
2010 - 57 - 12/130 - 21/211 - 24/209
2011 - 58 - 23/140 - 14/180 - 21/240
2012 - 38 - 7/ 80 - 18/123 - 13/169
classic generation of each year record in classic year and next as 4yo's:-
2005 22/270 8.15%
2006 41/389 10.54%
2007 38/336 11.31%
2008 41/356 11.52%
2009 41/360 11.39%
2010 26/310 8.39%
2011 41/263 15.59%
pretty conclusive proof that the classic generation of 2011 were outstanding in relation to the last 7 classic generations
brigust does make an interesting point about horses rated 135+ by Timeform since 2000 - only 3 it seems. Against 20 odd in the 80s. What are the reasons for this?
Has the thoroughbred declined? If so why?
Is Timeform at fault? Looking at the list of 135+ horses there is no Galileo, Sinndar, George Washington, Authorized, Rock of Gibraltar, Ravens Pass. Whereas in there are Shadeed, Slip Anchor, Sharastani, Petoski, Warning. I do not regard the latter horses as better than the former.
Has the thoroughbred declined? If so why?
Is Timeform at fault? Looking at the list of 135+ horses there is no Galileo, Sinndar, George Washington, Authorized, Rock of Gibraltar, Ravens Pass. Whereas in there are Shadeed, Slip Anchor, Sharastani, Petoski, Warning. I do not regard the latter horses as better than the former.
A_T, he makes an interesting point, but his conclusion is totally at odds with the evidence.
You can understand it when you understand that racehorses are rated in relation to the rest of the racehorse population and nothing else. If you have a school of 300 pupils it is much easier to stand out as an excellent athlete than in a school of 1500 pupils when it is more probable that there will be a dozen or so pupils with similar ability, the thoroughbreds are so much better nowadays that the gaps between the top tier is a lot less than yesteryear.
True, grendel, but I think it's fair to say that during the 80s Timeform lost their way a bit and some of those ratings are definitely out of proportion.
but I think it's fair to say that during the 80s Timeform lost their way a bit
and possibly into the early 90's as well, with Mark of Esteem and Celtic Swing on 137 and 138 respectively. Nijinsky is on 138.
and possibly into the early 90's as well, with Mark of Esteem and Celtic Swing on 137 and 138 respectively. Nijinsky is on 138.
Yes, fair point. The problem with Celtic Swing's rating lies with factoring the wfa allowance into his 2yo performances. He was an exceptional 2yo, no question, but he didn't really improve on that as a 3yo, by my reckoning he didn't improve at all. If he was being judged on his 3yo runs, as I think he should be, then that 138 looks pretty insulting to others with better form.
Yes his 2 yr old form was indeed exceptional, although the 12L RPT win was on very heavy going, but to be fair he had won impressively by 8L (beating Singspiel) at Ascot prior to that.
A 2000 Gns 2nd and a French Derby win certainly didn't warrant 138. The Irish Derby race can be discounted (lame).
I probably picked on CS because up to Frankel, he was my biggest ever bet (sadly in the 2000 Gns)
A 2000 Gns 2nd and a French Derby win certainly didn't warrant 138. The Irish Derby race can be discounted (lame).
I probably picked on CS because up to Frankel, he was my biggest ever bet (sadly in the 2000 Gns)
At last. It took a long time but we are getting there.
Some of the Timeform ratings are stupid. That is where Excelebration lies, in the stupid tray.
And because of that Frankel cannot be rated 147. That has been my point since the beginning of time.
Some of the Timeform ratings are stupid. That is where Excelebration lies, in the stupid tray.
And because of that Frankel cannot be rated 147. That has been my point since the beginning of time.
Brigust, you have pointed out that there have only been 3 horses since the millenium rated 135+, but at the same time you're saying that these present day horses are being overrated. Therefore, in your view, racehorses haven't just declined, they've dropped off the scale.
Anaglogs Daughter
01 Sep 12 16:31
Joined:
05 Jan 10
| Topic/replies: 22,519 | Blogger: Anaglogs Daughter's blog
Dancing Brave got BEAT.How can you say a beaten horse is better then an UNBEATEN NINE time GROUP ONE WINNERConfused
pmsl.
I don't know about you but i'd be happier getting 90% in an exam if i was only one of 3 to achieve that mark in a large school rather than one of 28 from less people taking the exam !
Absolutely not fig. I have sais all along the horses associated with Frankel have been overated. That is the only way they can justify their figures. I wouldn't mind betting a number of these horses that have had their ratings raised fail to achieve that and are downgraded later.
AT I think, according to Timeform's own system Excelebration should be rated 125 - 129 an average Group 1 winner because all he has won has been average Group 1's. To rate him as an exceptional Group 1 winner is just plain wrong.
AT I think, according to Timeform's own system Excelebration should be rated 125 - 129 an average Group 1 winner because all he has won has been average Group 1's. To rate him as an exceptional Group 1 winner is just plain wrong.
So are you now saying that it's only horses that have run against Frankel that have been overrated? As before, you've said that Timeform had raised their entire figures a few years ago. Which is it? If you still stand by the latter, then how do you explain the much lower percentage of highly rated horses?
brigust still doesn't get that its not timeform having inflated ratings but the official figures that are calibrated lower nowadays, about 7lbs diff so 125 OR is about the same as 133 TF (both roughly average ratings for group 1 winners)
Frankel 140 OR and 147 TF also, so you're arguing with both sets of ratings brig
I do think over the last 4 years or so, since they joined Bf their figures don't represent the facts. I think it's a promotional, publicity thing. On the ground we have had a couple of poorish years, it happens, and I'm not sure STS or Harbinger should be rated the same as Dancing Brave. In fact I'm sure.
Fig, do you agree the two Group 1's Excelebration has won are not exceptional?
AT I have said all along horses rated 140+ shouldn't be rated unless they have form lines to substantiate it. In my humble opinion I think Sea Bird 11, Brigadier Gerard and Mill Reef then Dancing Brave and Frankel should be rated the same.
Fig, do you agree the two Group 1's Excelebration has won are not exceptional?
AT I have said all along horses rated 140+ shouldn't be rated unless they have form lines to substantiate it. In my humble opinion I think Sea Bird 11, Brigadier Gerard and Mill Reef then Dancing Brave and Frankel should be rated the same.
What I meant to put was
AT I have said all along horses rated 140+ shouldn't be rated unless they have form lines to substantiate it. In my humble opinion I think Sea Bird 11, Brigadier Gerard and Mill Reef then Dancing Brave and Frankel should be rated the same. I'm not sure STS or Harbinger should be rated the same as Dancing Brave. In fact I'm sure.
AT I have said all along horses rated 140+ shouldn't be rated unless they have form lines to substantiate it. In my humble opinion I think Sea Bird 11, Brigadier Gerard and Mill Reef then Dancing Brave and Frankel should be rated the same. I'm not sure STS or Harbinger should be rated the same as Dancing Brave. In fact I'm sure.
Well for a start, anybody who rates DB higher than Frankel is doing so purely on opinions, it's fair enough to hold that opinion, but it has no place in handicapping.
'a couple of poorish years' ... you know nothing about racing if you honestly believe that
Why do you have to resort to insults all of the time Grendel? You could be the biggest muppett on the planet but I'm not insulting you. We haven't exactly been over burdened with highly rated horses in the last decade have we? You work it out.
Brig, as for Excelebration, I agree with you up to a point that Excelebration isn't an exceptional miler performance wise, but his latest win was well up to Gp1 standard and he is a remarkably consistent horse. It's difficult to compare my own ratings pound for pound as I operate on a much lower scale and I don't include wfa, but roughly my scale is about 50lbs lower than Timeform's. Approximately translated I would have Excelebration on 130, with Frankel 15lbs higher on 145. I have no idea how I would rate Brigadier Gerard or Sea Bird, but Frankel is comfortably my highest rated horse in the last 27 years. I have no personal reason to overrate him, I've never won any money on him and my favourite period of racing was probably the late 80s/early 90s.
Fig I totally disagree. The Marois was not a good Group 1. Caspar Netscher was 1/2 lngth behind Cityscape. I backed the winner beause it was an average race. The 2nd favourite had no run and is more of a sprinter whereas the 3rd favourite is a 3 year old.
Well I have Cityscape running just a pound below his best mark, most of the others running below their best to some extent, Caspar Netcher was the only improver, by 3lbs which is acceptable, imo. Frankel went on to frank his Queen Anne run in the International, where I have him running just 1lb below the Ascot run. There is just too much evidence to rate Frankel any lower.
As I said it was an average Group 1 at best. It would take a massive leap of faith to say it was an exceptional Group 1 yet that is how Excelebration is rated. As an exceptional Group 1 winner.
Not by me he isn't, 130 would be an average group 1 winner, but that doesn't affect Frankel's high rating one little bit.
According to Timeform who have Frankel on 147 an exceptional Group 1 winner is rated 130 - 135. An average Group 1 winner is 125 - 129. At best Excelebration is 129 and that makes Frankel 143. So I think Excel should be 127 and Frankel 140/141.
As Timeform rated Excelebration running below his best mark by a few lengths in the Queen Anne, what diference would your mark of 129 make? Doesn't make any sense.
According to Timeform who have Frankel on 147 an exceptional Group 1 winner is rated 130 - 135.
Timeform ratings for 3-year-olds & up are as follows :
140+ – An outstanding horse
130–135 – Above average Group 1 winner
125–129 – Average Group 1 winner
115–120 – Average Group 2 winner
110–115 – Average Group 3 winner
100–105 – Average listed race winner
I would not consider above average is exceptional
Timeform ratings for 3-year-olds & up are as follows :
140+ – An outstanding horse
130–135 – Above average Group 1 winner
125–129 – Average Group 1 winner
115–120 – Average Group 2 winner
110–115 – Average Group 3 winner
100–105 – Average listed race winner
I would not consider above average is exceptional
Brig, Excelebration is not exceptional (at least not yet) but he's a consistent yardstick to work to.
I couldn't remember the exact wording but he certainly isn't above average either. Apart from that I couldn't agree more. He could still easily achieve his current rating but he hasn't achieved it yet. And I'm not saying he isn't potentially the best around, excluding F. Frankly I think the only way is down. We will see.
Brig, Frankel beat him by 11 lengths, no less, so what difference would it make to Frankel's rating if you rated Excelebration 129, or even the derogatory low 127 you have him on?
You and I know that is wrong Fig. At that rate he would be rated 117. Even Timeform discounted that run.
So that means you don't accept Timeform's rating of him, however, you do accept their exact interpretation of how much he ran below form? Surely even you can see the contradiction there, brig?
Brigust as you have previously admitted,you think ratings are a load of bollox.Something on which we both agree,we also agreed that TF ratings are not/were not worth the paper they were written on.
Therefore I am slightly puzzled as to why you are dedicating so much effort in trying to convince people that BGs rating was ok but knocking down Frankel?
Therefore I am slightly puzzled as to why you are dedicating so much effort in trying to convince people that BGs rating was ok but knocking down Frankel?
I don't accept their rating because his, Excel, true form is not worth his rating. He has his rating purely from finishing a distant second to Frankel. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the Queen Anne.
However to raise Frankel to his high mark they used Side Glance and Indomito ffs. Everything that runs against him gets raised. We now have St Nic and Farhh on the list for getting beaten easily. Just to justify their ratings.
It is a forum GT. I have my opinion and others have theirs. If we all agreed the forum wouldn't be here for you to criticise people on.
However to raise Frankel to his high mark they used Side Glance and Indomito ffs. Everything that runs against him gets raised. We now have St Nic and Farhh on the list for getting beaten easily. Just to justify their ratings.
It is a forum GT. I have my opinion and others have theirs. If we all agreed the forum wouldn't be here for you to criticise people on.
No critic here Brig just asking you to explain your constant jigging of eras and figures.............Figgis and plenty more have asked but you just regurgitate the same stuff.
In a few sentences can you just say why BG is superior to Frankel IYO without ratings or collateral ratings/performances from decades ago?
In a few sentences can you just say why BG is superior to Frankel IYO without ratings or collateral ratings/performances from decades ago?
However to raise Frankel to his high mark they used Side Glance and Indomito ffs. Everything that runs against him gets raised.
This was taken from betting.betfair before the Queen Anne
Side Glance is available to back at 48.047/1 for the Queen Anne Stakes. Frankel, who is rated 143 by Timeform is considered 24 lb superior to the Andrew Balding runner is the favourite and trades at 1.251/4.
Therefore Side Glance was rated 119 before the race. Using your own calculation of Timeform's poundage scale for the race of 2.73, this means Timeform rated Side Glance's performance a couple of pounds below his best form. Without any evidence to back up what you're saying, some of your statements are starting to sound a little paranoid.
This was taken from betting.betfair before the Queen Anne
Side Glance is available to back at 48.047/1 for the Queen Anne Stakes. Frankel, who is rated 143 by Timeform is considered 24 lb superior to the Andrew Balding runner is the favourite and trades at 1.251/4.
Therefore Side Glance was rated 119 before the race. Using your own calculation of Timeform's poundage scale for the race of 2.73, this means Timeform rated Side Glance's performance a couple of pounds below his best form. Without any evidence to back up what you're saying, some of your statements are starting to sound a little paranoid.
The everything around him was reference to St Nic and Farhh who are now rated 130ish.
The Side Glane point was based on their ratings on the TV, I keep getting pulled up for it but it was their ratings. They had Side Glance on 117.
Nothing paranoid about that Figgis, If anything you are the paranoid one back to picking holes in every word I say when the general ghist of the conversation is obvious. You cannot improve your position by nit picking what I say. It's bl oo dy obvious what I'm saying.
My point is I don't think Frankel is worthy of 147. To compound that fact their figures clearly show it is manufactured. Add to that the horses he has beaten are not solid Group 1 horses anf have received ratings they haven't earned even in an era when good horses are very scarce.
The Side Glane point was based on their ratings on the TV, I keep getting pulled up for it but it was their ratings. They had Side Glance on 117.
Nothing paranoid about that Figgis, If anything you are the paranoid one back to picking holes in every word I say when the general ghist of the conversation is obvious. You cannot improve your position by nit picking what I say. It's bl oo dy obvious what I'm saying.
My point is I don't think Frankel is worthy of 147. To compound that fact their figures clearly show it is manufactured. Add to that the horses he has beaten are not solid Group 1 horses anf have received ratings they haven't earned even in an era when good horses are very scarce.
Charlie Brooks 'Thank heavens Frankel will not be bidding farewell in the Arc'
Last Friday the wise men that Sir Henry Cecil and Prince Khalid Abdulla are decided where the great Frankel would end his career.
By Charlie Brooks 02 Sep 2012 telegraph.co.uk
It came down to a toss-up between the Champion Stakes at Ascot over a mile and a quarter and the Arc De Triomphe over a ground-breaking mile and a half. They made the right decision.
The Arc is a ghastly race. A veritable graveyard for class horses. Paris might be one hell of a good place for a booze-up and a nice for an autumnal weekend, but that doesn’t mean you have to take your horse with you.
In addition, the track, with its false straights, multiple winning posts and loose ground can be as suitable for racing horses as the Somme. And if all of that weren’t bad enough, the lack of pace with which French races are blighted creates a potential graveyard for class horses coming from off the pace. Had the Frankel team been seduced by the Arc, like sailors lured by the sirens, Tom Queally would have been facing a potential nightmare.
That said, it will be one of my deathbed regrets that I never saw Frankel race over a mile and a half. Not quite as profound as John Betjeman’s final observation, I grant you, but heartfelt all the same.
When the Galileo colt virtually bolted his way to victory in the 2,000 Guineas at Newmarket in the spring of 2011, the doom mongers predicted that no horse could possibly race so furiously from the front and not burn out.
But Frankel now races like a lamb. and Henry Cecil’s team have done a magnificent job. That is the trait of a great horse. But Ascot over a mile and a quarter will be the end of his story, and that is that.
Ascot, whilst rightly being delighted that they have the opportunity to showcase a moment in history, may be wise to consider the status of their track when the excitement of Champions Day is over. Only they will know how close they were to having to abandon part of Royal Ascot this year owing to extreme weather. But they will also know that the final piece of the Ascot redevelopment jigsaw is missing. Relaying the round course.
They may have improved the drainage on the old turf, but that is not enough. Lord Hartington, the ex-supremo of Ascot, gave an unequivocal assurance when the straight course was relaid that in time the two different types of ground would be harmonised. It isn’t really fair to expect horses to race on two different types of ground in the same race. And it would be good insurance against future freak weather to finish the job. Having to use the hurdle track for a couple of years would be a small price to pay.
Securing the future of an autumnal Champions Day would also be well served by guaranteeing better ground than Longchamp. And why shouldn’t our racing public have an end of season blockbuster mile and a half race to pull the threads of the season together? Why should we take it for granted that the horses that have thrived within our system finish off their year in France, the USA or Asia? '
We can’t do that,’ I’m told. Johnny Foreigner wouldn’t like the competition. Really?
Last Friday the wise men that Sir Henry Cecil and Prince Khalid Abdulla are decided where the great Frankel would end his career.
By Charlie Brooks 02 Sep 2012 telegraph.co.uk
It came down to a toss-up between the Champion Stakes at Ascot over a mile and a quarter and the Arc De Triomphe over a ground-breaking mile and a half. They made the right decision.
The Arc is a ghastly race. A veritable graveyard for class horses. Paris might be one hell of a good place for a booze-up and a nice for an autumnal weekend, but that doesn’t mean you have to take your horse with you.
In addition, the track, with its false straights, multiple winning posts and loose ground can be as suitable for racing horses as the Somme. And if all of that weren’t bad enough, the lack of pace with which French races are blighted creates a potential graveyard for class horses coming from off the pace. Had the Frankel team been seduced by the Arc, like sailors lured by the sirens, Tom Queally would have been facing a potential nightmare.
That said, it will be one of my deathbed regrets that I never saw Frankel race over a mile and a half. Not quite as profound as John Betjeman’s final observation, I grant you, but heartfelt all the same.
When the Galileo colt virtually bolted his way to victory in the 2,000 Guineas at Newmarket in the spring of 2011, the doom mongers predicted that no horse could possibly race so furiously from the front and not burn out.
But Frankel now races like a lamb. and Henry Cecil’s team have done a magnificent job. That is the trait of a great horse. But Ascot over a mile and a quarter will be the end of his story, and that is that.
Ascot, whilst rightly being delighted that they have the opportunity to showcase a moment in history, may be wise to consider the status of their track when the excitement of Champions Day is over. Only they will know how close they were to having to abandon part of Royal Ascot this year owing to extreme weather. But they will also know that the final piece of the Ascot redevelopment jigsaw is missing. Relaying the round course.
They may have improved the drainage on the old turf, but that is not enough. Lord Hartington, the ex-supremo of Ascot, gave an unequivocal assurance when the straight course was relaid that in time the two different types of ground would be harmonised. It isn’t really fair to expect horses to race on two different types of ground in the same race. And it would be good insurance against future freak weather to finish the job. Having to use the hurdle track for a couple of years would be a small price to pay.
Securing the future of an autumnal Champions Day would also be well served by guaranteeing better ground than Longchamp. And why shouldn’t our racing public have an end of season blockbuster mile and a half race to pull the threads of the season together? Why should we take it for granted that the horses that have thrived within our system finish off their year in France, the USA or Asia? '
We can’t do that,’ I’m told. Johnny Foreigner wouldn’t like the competition. Really?
So you still avoid the burning question Brig?
And what happened to using your own eyes?
And what happened to using your own eyes?
Btw re Charlie Brookes...........he will have plenty of time on a prison bed to reflect........never mind his death bed.nap
And BTW Brookes,you are an arrogant and clueless idiot visa vi the Arc and the meeting.
If anything you are the paranoid one back to picking holes in every word I say
No, only the false or illogical stuff, of which there has been plenty to pick over. I know you'd just like everybody to accept your biased opinions as facts, but as you've just pointed out, this is a forum.
No, only the false or illogical stuff, of which there has been plenty to pick over. I know you'd just like everybody to accept your biased opinions as facts, but as you've just pointed out, this is a forum.
The everything around him was reference to St Nic and Farhh who are now rated 130ish.
Again, taken from betting.betfair, before the International
St Nicholas Abbey has won a Breeders' Cup Turf as well as two Coronation Cups, while Farhh has been second or third in Group 1s on his last three starts, and both are rated 130
Both horses were rated 130 before the event, or do you think it was a cunning plan to give them higher ratings in advance, just in case they bumped into Frankel?
Again, taken from betting.betfair, before the International
St Nicholas Abbey has won a Breeders' Cup Turf as well as two Coronation Cups, while Farhh has been second or third in Group 1s on his last three starts, and both are rated 130
Both horses were rated 130 before the event, or do you think it was a cunning plan to give them higher ratings in advance, just in case they bumped into Frankel?
There was a saying......"lies,damn lies and statistics".........now they talk about the Brigust effect in the same corners.
Well I never saw them rated 130 and I check them often enough. But I haven't proof. However you are telling me that Farhh finishing 3rd in the POW, 2nd in the Eclipse and in the Sussex was rated the equal of St Nicholas Abbey BEFORE the race. I'll leave that one. I doubt that Farhh was rated 130 before he met Frankel but there you are. And how either are rated within a pound of Royal Palace just shows how much that outfit has lost the plot. But of course they have got it right about Frankel, haven't they. Everything else is skewed except his rating. That is the cr ap of it all. You can fiddle with my words as much as you like it will not change the facts.
You see I get drawn into these discussions with you and they end up with you pulling my words apart. Tell you what Figgis, you tell me your position. You tell me why you think Frankel deserves to be rated 147. Explain your workings, where he achieved it and why. Let me see your workings for a change.
You see I get drawn into these discussions with you and they end up with you pulling my words apart. Tell you what Figgis, you tell me your position. You tell me why you think Frankel deserves to be rated 147. Explain your workings, where he achieved it and why. Let me see your workings for a change.
stats do not lie, however how they are collected/presented/used can easily be manipulated or misinterpreted
I doubt that Farhh was rated 130 before he met Frankel but there you are.
Taken from betting.betfair after the Eclipse, therefore before Farrh met Frankel
The Eclipse was weakened by the withdrawal at declaration time of lame ante-post favourite So You Think, but it still saw two unexposed and improving four-year-olds put up top-class performances to pull clear, Nathaniel running to 131 and Farhh improving again to 130.
Keep trying, brig, law of averages says you might get the next one right
Taken from betting.betfair after the Eclipse, therefore before Farrh met Frankel
The Eclipse was weakened by the withdrawal at declaration time of lame ante-post favourite So You Think, but it still saw two unexposed and improving four-year-olds put up top-class performances to pull clear, Nathaniel running to 131 and Farhh improving again to 130.
Keep trying, brig, law of averages says you might get the next one right
Frankel should not have a rating of 147 Brigust........there again we agree but I justify my comments purely on what I have seen...........not read.
Brig, well I'm hardly going to reveal all my workings, poundage scales etc, the same as anybody who has put a lot of work into something, you don't just give it away. It's not that hard to decipher, though. I've told you that I have Excelebration on something like the equivalent of 130, I have Farhh on 132 for his Eclipse run, a couple of pounds below that in the International, St Nic 130. My highest rating for Frankel was 145 for the Queen Anne. These are time based ratings.
Brig, I'm doing it because your latest posts have been proven to be nothing but bullshit.
Sagace won two Arcs Brig and yet Rainbow Quest is remembered as winning one and being a very good stallion.........despite the fact he didnt actually "win" the Arc.
How would you rate them in your scheme of ratings?
How would you rate them in your scheme of ratings?
THat is boll oxs Figgis. It has been the way you operate ever since I started anwering your questions. That is the first time you have actually said anything. So don't give me that. And It's not bu lls hit.
I said I 'doubted' Farhh was rated 130. I gave Timeform more credit than that.
The sad thing for you is I love horse racing and discussing it. As a punter I know I make mistakes. But I also know what I believe in and you won't change that because the facts are there however badly you feel I articulate them. The other sad thing is you will now have to find someone else to take the p i ss out of. We could have had some reasonable, reasoned debates but your natural instinct to put people down will deprive you of that.
I said I 'doubted' Farhh was rated 130. I gave Timeform more credit than that.
The sad thing for you is I love horse racing and discussing it. As a punter I know I make mistakes. But I also know what I believe in and you won't change that because the facts are there however badly you feel I articulate them. The other sad thing is you will now have to find someone else to take the p i ss out of. We could have had some reasonable, reasoned debates but your natural instinct to put people down will deprive you of that.
So when you said Timeform raised the ratings of other horses just so they could bump up Frankel's rating, with absolutely nothing to back up your statement, you expect it to go unchallenged, even though the evidence is out there?
What do you think of Charlie Brookes article Brigust re-the Arc as a graveyard for class horses?
a quick glance at the stats say SNA is a better horse at 12f, the breeding stats say that sons of pivotal prefer easy going, that twice over is regressing and prefers a bit of cut....not that i am saying the rating is wrong but cirrus de aigels must be a much underrated at 128 horse if all the the stuff phil smith says is true
I will answer this last question for you, Figgis, because that is the way I am.
You lack personal skills. If you had said something like 'you may be surprised to know TF actually had Farh on 130 before the Eclipse. I saw in in the betting section etc'. That is how you debate. Personal skills. I know it means not putting people down and you would miss that because it gives you some status, in your mind at least, but you should try it. Seriously.
You lack personal skills. If you had said something like 'you may be surprised to know TF actually had Farh on 130 before the Eclipse. I saw in in the betting section etc'. That is how you debate. Personal skills. I know it means not putting people down and you would miss that because it gives you some status, in your mind at least, but you should try it. Seriously.
French bred horses cannot win the Grand National,Montjeu progeny cannot win at Cheltenham,Dante losers cannot win the Derby?
Tells you all you need to know about stats and visa vi ratings.
Tells you all you need to know about stats and visa vi ratings.
Well over a million banked just on those 3 examples Brigust.nap
Brigust, there's a bit of pot and kettle going on here if you actually read your own responses to people who disagree with your own views. Like a lot of people who can dish it out, you don't like it in return. I have tried to be polite but you are probably the most frustrating person I've ever debated anything with on here. You constantly ignore relevant points brought to your attention, go off track then return to old ground. Then you start spouting stuff that can easily be proved to be false. Anyway, that aside, I would not want to seriously offend you and any leg pulling was only intended as that
LOL FD...........the statsmen have been noticeable by their absence since being ripped apart..........even the RP rested the anorak and Tony Morris.
Like taking candy from babies.........this is where Brigust falls apart.......relies on words written by morons.
Like taking candy from babies.........this is where Brigust falls apart.......relies on words written by morons.
the trouble with rating systems of any kind is that there is a vested interest outside mathmatics to see they are right, standard and poor gave lehmanns a triple a rating after all. i wonder who sayed a french bred could never win a national bet it wasnt a french rating system, how many of montjeus have ever run at cheltenham as for the last one it involves the drby the worst race possible to base owt on imho
you are not listening to me gt stats dont lie the only things in this world capable of lying are people, thats why even an average poker pro can beat the top computers but the computers these days hammer the top chess guys....
You are missing the point FD,stats are only as good as the last stat,completely fukcing useless in making or forming an opinion as to what will happen next.
Btw try Dignitas for the fugitive.........working as a cleaner.
Btw try Dignitas for the fugitive.........working as a cleaner.
what next downgrade the arc cos frankel 'the best in the world for the last 26 years' cant win it
rating systems are at best guides but without some sort of form study to check that the conditions of a race in the future are at least similar to those of the past u will go skint following blindly, u have to be good at contextualising things, i fear but dont know mr smiths emotions seem to be blinding him from being impartial and doing his job properly
rating systems are at best guides but without some sort of form study to check that the conditions of a race in the future are at least similar to those of the past u will go skint following blindly, u have to be good at contextualising things, i fear but dont know mr smiths emotions seem to be blinding him from being impartial and doing his job properly
stats do not lie, they cant, 1+1=2 and always will, i am only talking about maths based statistics, i hardly ever look at ratings especially in group races on the flat
No Figgis, you accuse me of picking bits of form, and being selective yet when I mentioned Triptych being a nine times Group 1 winner you brought up Shardari.
So lets apply your logic and work from the lowest common denominator.
How is Excelebration rated 133 or even your 130 yet not because of Frankel? Perhaps it's the defeat by Zoffany or his head defeat of Neebras? No, wait it must be his beating of Rio de la Plata, not won since and well beaten last time in a Group 3. A 133 there if ever I saw one. No, wait, it was beating Cityscape, winner of one Group 1, in Meydan, from 17 starts with Caspar Netscher half a length away, Or Croisultan, last in three of his last four races. Or Side Glance and Indomito or maybe Dubawi Gold. After all Dubawi Gold ran to form, pushed right out to the line. No it was his beating of Gereon, never won since in 10 starts. Real class opposition you could shake a stick at.
And Farhh, another not raised because of Frankel. He is on 130 or in your money 132. Is that from being beaten by Carlton House, at best a Group 3 horse? Or narrowly beating Reliable Man, at best a Group 2 horse. Now there is a 130+ horse. After all he finished alongside St Nicholas Abbey in the KG. Franked the Farhh form in the POW. No it must be his beating of Osteopathic Remedy by 6 lengths giving 4lbs. After all Osteopathic Remedy was only unplaced in his next four minor handicaps before winning one off 85. Another 130/132 rating to be proud of.
You see Figgis anyone can work from the lowest common denominator while selectively bringing down horses as you tried with Shardari. But what does that do when having a debate about champions?
As I have already said you lack personal skills. Your ability to debate is overshadowed by your desire to put people down, be sanctimonious and over bearing. You then end up with either no-one to debate with or surrounded by clowns.
So lets apply your logic and work from the lowest common denominator.
How is Excelebration rated 133 or even your 130 yet not because of Frankel? Perhaps it's the defeat by Zoffany or his head defeat of Neebras? No, wait it must be his beating of Rio de la Plata, not won since and well beaten last time in a Group 3. A 133 there if ever I saw one. No, wait, it was beating Cityscape, winner of one Group 1, in Meydan, from 17 starts with Caspar Netscher half a length away, Or Croisultan, last in three of his last four races. Or Side Glance and Indomito or maybe Dubawi Gold. After all Dubawi Gold ran to form, pushed right out to the line. No it was his beating of Gereon, never won since in 10 starts. Real class opposition you could shake a stick at.
And Farhh, another not raised because of Frankel. He is on 130 or in your money 132. Is that from being beaten by Carlton House, at best a Group 3 horse? Or narrowly beating Reliable Man, at best a Group 2 horse. Now there is a 130+ horse. After all he finished alongside St Nicholas Abbey in the KG. Franked the Farhh form in the POW. No it must be his beating of Osteopathic Remedy by 6 lengths giving 4lbs. After all Osteopathic Remedy was only unplaced in his next four minor handicaps before winning one off 85. Another 130/132 rating to be proud of.
You see Figgis anyone can work from the lowest common denominator while selectively bringing down horses as you tried with Shardari. But what does that do when having a debate about champions?
As I have already said you lack personal skills. Your ability to debate is overshadowed by your desire to put people down, be sanctimonious and over bearing. You then end up with either no-one to debate with or surrounded by clowns.
Ascot's Premier enclosure is SOLD OUT on Qipco British Champions Day 
Sat 20th October. Grandstand tickets still available.
Sat 20th October. Grandstand tickets still available.
You see Figgis anyone can work from the lowest common denominator while selectively bringing down horses as you tried with Shardari
This is getting very tiresome in the extreme. Show me where I tried to bring Shardari down, don't make ridiculous statements then skirt the issue as per usual, copy and paste it so I can see it. I actually said he was a better horse than Triptych, he'd showed that in the KG and at York. I asked you the question, if that Arc form is so concrete, like you reckon it is, then explain the turnaround in form with Shardari and Triptych, but as is the norm, you ducked it.
This is getting very tiresome in the extreme. Show me where I tried to bring Shardari down, don't make ridiculous statements then skirt the issue as per usual, copy and paste it so I can see it. I actually said he was a better horse than Triptych, he'd showed that in the KG and at York. I asked you the question, if that Arc form is so concrete, like you reckon it is, then explain the turnaround in form with Shardari and Triptych, but as is the norm, you ducked it.
thats the thing though innit they need Frankel to put bums on seat the Arc sold out months ago, Frankel is the saviour of british racing...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LK8sxngSWaU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LK8sxngSWaU
Frankle is at an advantage over the likes of Nijinsky and the Brigadier because he has longer legs
If it's copy and paste you want.
No Figgis, you accuse me of picking bits of form, and being selective yet when I mentioned Triptych being a nine times Group 1 winner you brought up Shardari.
So lets apply your logic and work from the lowest common denominator.
How is Excelebration rated 133 or even your 130 yet not because of Frankel? Perhaps it's the defeat by Zoffany or his head defeat of Neebras? No, wait it must be his beating of Rio de la Plata, not won since and well beaten last time in a Group 3. A 133 there if ever I saw one. No, wait, it was beating Cityscape, winner of one Group 1, in Meydan, from 17 starts with Caspar Netscher half a length away, Or Croisultan, last in three of his last four races. Or Side Glance and Indomito or maybe Dubawi Gold. After all Dubawi Gold ran to form, pushed right out to the line. No it was his beating of Gereon, never won since in 10 starts. Real class opposition you could shake a stick at.
And Farhh, another not raised because of Frankel. He is on 130 or in your money 132. Is that from being beaten by Carlton House, at best a Group 3 horse? Or narrowly beating Reliable Man, at best a Group 2 horse. Now there is a 130+ horse. After all he finished alongside St Nicholas Abbey in the KG. Franked the Farhh form in the POW. No it must be his beating of Osteopathic Remedy by 6 lengths giving 4lbs. After all Osteopathic Remedy was only unplaced in his next four minor handicaps before winning one off 85. Another 130/132 rating to be proud of.
You see Figgis anyone can work from the lowest common denominator while selectively bringing down horses as you tried with Shardari. But what does that do when having a debate about champions?
As I have already said you lack personal skills. Your ability to debate is overshadowed by your desire to put people down, be sanctimonious and over bearing. You then end up with either no-one to debate with or surrounded by clowns.
No Figgis, you accuse me of picking bits of form, and being selective yet when I mentioned Triptych being a nine times Group 1 winner you brought up Shardari.
So lets apply your logic and work from the lowest common denominator.
How is Excelebration rated 133 or even your 130 yet not because of Frankel? Perhaps it's the defeat by Zoffany or his head defeat of Neebras? No, wait it must be his beating of Rio de la Plata, not won since and well beaten last time in a Group 3. A 133 there if ever I saw one. No, wait, it was beating Cityscape, winner of one Group 1, in Meydan, from 17 starts with Caspar Netscher half a length away, Or Croisultan, last in three of his last four races. Or Side Glance and Indomito or maybe Dubawi Gold. After all Dubawi Gold ran to form, pushed right out to the line. No it was his beating of Gereon, never won since in 10 starts. Real class opposition you could shake a stick at.
And Farhh, another not raised because of Frankel. He is on 130 or in your money 132. Is that from being beaten by Carlton House, at best a Group 3 horse? Or narrowly beating Reliable Man, at best a Group 2 horse. Now there is a 130+ horse. After all he finished alongside St Nicholas Abbey in the KG. Franked the Farhh form in the POW. No it must be his beating of Osteopathic Remedy by 6 lengths giving 4lbs. After all Osteopathic Remedy was only unplaced in his next four minor handicaps before winning one off 85. Another 130/132 rating to be proud of.
You see Figgis anyone can work from the lowest common denominator while selectively bringing down horses as you tried with Shardari. But what does that do when having a debate about champions?
As I have already said you lack personal skills. Your ability to debate is overshadowed by your desire to put people down, be sanctimonious and over bearing. You then end up with either no-one to debate with or surrounded by clowns.
See, when someone questions your illogical way of putting both horses and other forumites down you don't like it. This is exactly what anyone dealing with you has to put up with. Your overbearing sanctimonious attitude.
brigust1 Joined: 07 Dec 01
Replies: 4528 03 Sep 12 14:06
See, when someone questions your illogical way of putting both horses and other forumites down you don't like it.
Not at all, I just ask them to show the evidence of where I put the horse down, if they can't, the old bullshit detector starts to twitch.
This is exactly what anyone dealing with you has to put up with.
Are you speaking for the whole forum now? Or just those who buy your bull?
Replies: 4528 03 Sep 12 14:06
See, when someone questions your illogical way of putting both horses and other forumites down you don't like it.
Not at all, I just ask them to show the evidence of where I put the horse down, if they can't, the old bullshit detector starts to twitch.
This is exactly what anyone dealing with you has to put up with.
Are you speaking for the whole forum now? Or just those who buy your bull?
I wouldn't waste any more of your time with him Fig, the guy just can't bear the fact that Frankel is rated better than his heroes from the slow racing era.
You could probably watch the equivalent of 1972 pattern racing this afternoon at Ffos Las.
Frankel's Final Race Will Not Answer Greatest-Ever Questions
Rod Crowley http://bleacherreport.com
September 3, 2012
Following the news that Frankel will bypass Europe’s most prestigious race, the Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe in favour of the Champion Stakes at Ascot and a tilt at the Breeders Cup Classic is not an option, will we ever fully understand just how good this horse actually is or was?
The highest rated horse in the world, Frankel has been taken to the racecourse on 13 occasions in his racing career, which is now in its third season, and has found the winners enclosure every time in varying degrees on demolition over his opponents.
His latest outing came in the Group One, International Stakes at York, England, where for the first time, he raced and won over a distance of ten furlongs, the furthest he had ever raced.
Not only did he win that race by seven lengths, he astonished onlookers by his sheer brilliance and speed leaving only very few who were still to be convinced that this is the greatest racehorse ever.
The ten furlong trip brought about further improvement from the four year old and led to immediate speculation that a tilt at the Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe could be on the cards as it was obvious that the 12 furlong trip at Longchamp would not present Frankel with any sort of problem.
Bookmakers in the UK were very quick off the mark and offered Frankel at odds of 1/3 (-300) to win "The Arc" and racing fans in Europe got carried away in the belief that the Sir Henry Cecil trained horse was about to earn a reputation that would take him beyond legendary status.
In a dream world, Frankel would have race at Longchamp on Sunday 7th October; put the "cream of European thoroughbred racing to the sword" before heading across the Atlantic to announcing himself to the Americans at the Breeders Cup meeting, where up to now, he is just another highly rated European horse.
A Breeders Cup win would have confirmed Frankel's status on a global scale, upon which he could be retire to stud, charging almost impossible to meet stud fees at one of his owner's, Khalid Abdullah’s, Juddmonte stud farms.
Instead, Frankel will definitely be sticking with the original plan and his next and final run will be in the Qipco Champion Stakes over 10 furlongs at Ascot on 20th October—a race that will undoubtedly bring down the curtain on his racing career.
The Champion Stakes is now Britain’s richest race with a prize fund of £1.3 m and should Frankel win, for which the odds of 1/10 (-1000) tell us he surely will, he will break the European record of nine consecutive wins at Group level.
There will be plenty of disappointment that Frankel will not contest the Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe or Breeders Cup Classic but at least Ascot racecourse can take full advantage by staging his final race in front of a record audience.
As to the original question as to how good Frankel actually is, it should remain a matter of personal opinion.
On British and European shores, he will undoubtedly be regarded as the greatest of all time by most but some skeptics will of course argue that he was the greatest over the distance of one mile and possibly 10 furlongs but to put the question out of unreasonable doubt, he would have to prevail on the International stage and demolition jobs in the Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe and Breeders Cup Classic would do just that.
There's no taking away what this son of Galileo has achieved and you won't hear an argument from this writer questioning Frankel's greatness but it would have been nice to see him go out in breathtaking fashion rather than the routine fashion fans in the UK have become accustomed to at Ascot on 20th October.
Rod Crowley http://bleacherreport.com
September 3, 2012
Following the news that Frankel will bypass Europe’s most prestigious race, the Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe in favour of the Champion Stakes at Ascot and a tilt at the Breeders Cup Classic is not an option, will we ever fully understand just how good this horse actually is or was?
The highest rated horse in the world, Frankel has been taken to the racecourse on 13 occasions in his racing career, which is now in its third season, and has found the winners enclosure every time in varying degrees on demolition over his opponents.
His latest outing came in the Group One, International Stakes at York, England, where for the first time, he raced and won over a distance of ten furlongs, the furthest he had ever raced.
Not only did he win that race by seven lengths, he astonished onlookers by his sheer brilliance and speed leaving only very few who were still to be convinced that this is the greatest racehorse ever.
The ten furlong trip brought about further improvement from the four year old and led to immediate speculation that a tilt at the Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe could be on the cards as it was obvious that the 12 furlong trip at Longchamp would not present Frankel with any sort of problem.
Bookmakers in the UK were very quick off the mark and offered Frankel at odds of 1/3 (-300) to win "The Arc" and racing fans in Europe got carried away in the belief that the Sir Henry Cecil trained horse was about to earn a reputation that would take him beyond legendary status.
In a dream world, Frankel would have race at Longchamp on Sunday 7th October; put the "cream of European thoroughbred racing to the sword" before heading across the Atlantic to announcing himself to the Americans at the Breeders Cup meeting, where up to now, he is just another highly rated European horse.
A Breeders Cup win would have confirmed Frankel's status on a global scale, upon which he could be retire to stud, charging almost impossible to meet stud fees at one of his owner's, Khalid Abdullah’s, Juddmonte stud farms.
Instead, Frankel will definitely be sticking with the original plan and his next and final run will be in the Qipco Champion Stakes over 10 furlongs at Ascot on 20th October—a race that will undoubtedly bring down the curtain on his racing career.
The Champion Stakes is now Britain’s richest race with a prize fund of £1.3 m and should Frankel win, for which the odds of 1/10 (-1000) tell us he surely will, he will break the European record of nine consecutive wins at Group level.
There will be plenty of disappointment that Frankel will not contest the Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe or Breeders Cup Classic but at least Ascot racecourse can take full advantage by staging his final race in front of a record audience.
As to the original question as to how good Frankel actually is, it should remain a matter of personal opinion.
On British and European shores, he will undoubtedly be regarded as the greatest of all time by most but some skeptics will of course argue that he was the greatest over the distance of one mile and possibly 10 furlongs but to put the question out of unreasonable doubt, he would have to prevail on the International stage and demolition jobs in the Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe and Breeders Cup Classic would do just that.
There's no taking away what this son of Galileo has achieved and you won't hear an argument from this writer questioning Frankel's greatness but it would have been nice to see him go out in breathtaking fashion rather than the routine fashion fans in the UK have become accustomed to at Ascot on 20th October.
Anaglogs Daughter
03 Sep 12 21:53
Joined:
05 Jan 10
| Topic/replies: 22,574 | Blogger: Anaglogs Daughter's blog
Frankel's Final Race Will Not Answer Greatest-Ever Questions
Rod Crowley http://bleacherreport.com
September 3, 2012
Following the news that Frankel will bypass Europe’s most prestigious race, the Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe in favour of the Champion Stakes at Ascot and a tilt at the Breeders Cup Classic is not an option, will we ever fully understand just how good this horse actually is or was?
The highest rated horse in the world, Frankel has been taken to the racecourse on 13 occasions in his racing career, which is now in its third season, and has found the winners enclosure every time in varying degrees on demolition over his opponents.
His latest outing came in the Group One, International Stakes at York, England, where for the first time, he raced and won over a distance of ten furlongs, the furthest he had ever raced.
Not only did he win that race by seven lengths, he astonished onlookers by his sheer brilliance and speed leaving only very few who were still to be convinced that this is the greatest racehorse ever.
The ten furlong trip brought about further improvement from the four year old and led to immediate speculation that a tilt at the Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe could be on the cards as it was obvious that the 12 furlong trip at Longchamp would not present Frankel with any sort of problem.
Bookmakers in the UK were very quick off the mark and offered Frankel at odds of 1/3 (-300) to win "The Arc" and racing fans in Europe got carried away in the belief that the Sir Henry Cecil trained horse was about to earn a reputation that would take him beyond legendary status.
In a dream world, Frankel would have race at Longchamp on Sunday 7th October; put the "cream of European thoroughbred racing to the sword" before heading across the Atlantic to announcing himself to the Americans at the Breeders Cup meeting, where up to now, he is just another highly rated European horse.
A Breeders Cup win would have confirmed Frankel's status on a global scale, upon which he could be retire to stud, charging almost impossible to meet stud fees at one of his owner's, Khalid Abdullah’s, Juddmonte stud farms.
Instead, Frankel will definitely be sticking with the original plan and his next and final run will be in the Qipco Champion Stakes over 10 furlongs at Ascot on 20th October—a race that will undoubtedly bring down the curtain on his racing career.
The Champion Stakes is now Britain’s richest race with a prize fund of £1.3 m and should Frankel win, for which the odds of 1/10 (-1000) tell us he surely will, he will break the European record of nine consecutive wins at Group level.
There will be plenty of disappointment that Frankel will not contest the Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe or Breeders Cup Classic but at least Ascot racecourse can take full advantage by staging his final race in front of a record audience.
As to the original question as to how good Frankel actually is, it should remain a matter of personal opinion.
On British and European shores, he will undoubtedly be regarded as the greatest of all time by most but some skeptics will of course argue that he was the greatest over the distance of one mile and possibly 10 furlongs but to put the question out of unreasonable doubt, he would have to prevail on the International stage and demolition jobs in the Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe and Breeders Cup Classic would do just that.
There's no taking away what this son of Galileo has achieved and you won't hear an argument from this writer questioning Frankel's greatness but it would have been nice to see him go out in breathtaking fashion rather than the routine fashion fans in the UK have become accustomed to at Ascot on 20th October.
is that how much u can get on
03 Sep 12 21:53
Joined:
05 Jan 10
| Topic/replies: 22,574 | Blogger: Anaglogs Daughter's blog
Frankel's Final Race Will Not Answer Greatest-Ever Questions
Rod Crowley http://bleacherreport.com
September 3, 2012
Following the news that Frankel will bypass Europe’s most prestigious race, the Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe in favour of the Champion Stakes at Ascot and a tilt at the Breeders Cup Classic is not an option, will we ever fully understand just how good this horse actually is or was?
The highest rated horse in the world, Frankel has been taken to the racecourse on 13 occasions in his racing career, which is now in its third season, and has found the winners enclosure every time in varying degrees on demolition over his opponents.
His latest outing came in the Group One, International Stakes at York, England, where for the first time, he raced and won over a distance of ten furlongs, the furthest he had ever raced.
Not only did he win that race by seven lengths, he astonished onlookers by his sheer brilliance and speed leaving only very few who were still to be convinced that this is the greatest racehorse ever.
The ten furlong trip brought about further improvement from the four year old and led to immediate speculation that a tilt at the Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe could be on the cards as it was obvious that the 12 furlong trip at Longchamp would not present Frankel with any sort of problem.
Bookmakers in the UK were very quick off the mark and offered Frankel at odds of 1/3 (-300) to win "The Arc" and racing fans in Europe got carried away in the belief that the Sir Henry Cecil trained horse was about to earn a reputation that would take him beyond legendary status.
In a dream world, Frankel would have race at Longchamp on Sunday 7th October; put the "cream of European thoroughbred racing to the sword" before heading across the Atlantic to announcing himself to the Americans at the Breeders Cup meeting, where up to now, he is just another highly rated European horse.
A Breeders Cup win would have confirmed Frankel's status on a global scale, upon which he could be retire to stud, charging almost impossible to meet stud fees at one of his owner's, Khalid Abdullah’s, Juddmonte stud farms.
Instead, Frankel will definitely be sticking with the original plan and his next and final run will be in the Qipco Champion Stakes over 10 furlongs at Ascot on 20th October—a race that will undoubtedly bring down the curtain on his racing career.
The Champion Stakes is now Britain’s richest race with a prize fund of £1.3 m and should Frankel win, for which the odds of 1/10 (-1000) tell us he surely will, he will break the European record of nine consecutive wins at Group level.
There will be plenty of disappointment that Frankel will not contest the Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe or Breeders Cup Classic but at least Ascot racecourse can take full advantage by staging his final race in front of a record audience.
As to the original question as to how good Frankel actually is, it should remain a matter of personal opinion.
On British and European shores, he will undoubtedly be regarded as the greatest of all time by most but some skeptics will of course argue that he was the greatest over the distance of one mile and possibly 10 furlongs but to put the question out of unreasonable doubt, he would have to prevail on the International stage and demolition jobs in the Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe and Breeders Cup Classic would do just that.
There's no taking away what this son of Galileo has achieved and you won't hear an argument from this writer questioning Frankel's greatness but it would have been nice to see him go out in breathtaking fashion rather than the routine fashion fans in the UK have become accustomed to at Ascot on 20th October.
is that how much u can get on
Fat Dodgy............."The Arc Sold Out Months ago"..................
ROFL..............YSDC.
ROFL..............YSDC.
thats called a logical fallacy a legitimate enough debating tool, i would however have layed long odds on that you would be in a coherent enough position to notice, ran out of 20/20 obviously
Three days holiday and still he keeps on about his beloved horse. Get a #kin life.
Brigust,
I thought you'd ended this merry go round of stupidity on your own thread. Let them think what they want, and allow them to get back too the placepots & lucky fifteens that is their normal level!
Otherwise your going to cripple Ladbrokes!
I thought you'd ended this merry go round of stupidity on your own thread. Let them think what they want, and allow them to get back too the placepots & lucky fifteens that is their normal level!
Otherwise your going to cripple Ladbrokes!
I see Brig is taking the fight to the letters page in today's Racing Post 
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539