TIMEFORM: Frankel officially the best horse ever on 147

What we need now is for Dawn Approach to win the 2000Gns and the Derby and before you know Frankel's wins will be put under close inspection.

Hardly. Maybe if he races until 4 and remains unbeaten.

Yes remaining unbeaten is impressive,but his connections certainly targetted that achievement.

Oct 21, 2012 -- 4:45AM, Angel Gabrial wrote:

PowerfanShe never needed a stablemate to go out and help her win.This is because sprint races are truly run at a decent clip. Name any European horses who have pace makers in sprint races?A bit daft you Australians.

even in longer races, we don't lower ourselves to that level, it is not allowed to happen in Australia, it's a blight on the sport and is unfair to owners with 1 or 2 horses to have to compete against millionaire owners and trainers who can send horses around with the pure intent to set the pace of the race

Second Coming you are either a liar, blind or ignorant to the facts. I don't care which. The fact remains Australian trainers and jockeys have enjoyed pacemakers "by arrangement" for years. I was one such trainer. Slings for setting the pace are a time honoured tradition in Oz.

The truth is the pacemakers in Europe are more transparent.

Brigust1

Am I correct in believing you say Sir Henry Cecil, Johnny Murtagh, Timeform and the BHA handicapper are all wrong in their assertions Frankel is the best they have seen?

Oct 21, 2012 -- 5:50AM, MattHillbilly wrote:

Second Coming you are either a liar, blind or ignorant to the facts. I don't care which. The fact remains Australian trainers and jockeys have enjoyed pacemakers "by arrangement" for years. I was one such trainer. Slings for setting the pace are a time honoured tradition in Oz. The truth is the pacemakers in Europe are more transparent.

it is not allowed to happen, it may happen if a jockey is paid off to ride their mount a particular way but by order of the stewards it is not allowed to happen, team riding is not allowed

Is that all you have in response? "It is not allowed to happen". You have no idea about your own backyard do you? Every racing person with half a brain knows what goes on in Australia - except you? Everyone knows the Hayes clan tried it on publicly against Vo Rogue and they never received the slightest sanction from stewards. The same sort of thing has gone on every week of every decade since.

Numerous enquiries into Australian racing atm. It seems team riding will be one of the lesser charges faced.

We will have to wait until next season when Cirrus Des Aigles carries the flag for his generation forward

What a complete crock. A superior wet tracker. A seven year old gelding. That will be your 2013 benchmark?

Just setting yourself up for an argumentative victory down the track that will be as meaningless as your meandering musings are now. It will be a win for you in a field of one. Give yourself a pat now!

Oct 21, 2012 -- 3:16AM, Howellsy wrote:

BJT,Your understanding of times in relation to horseracing is laughably rudimentary.Firstly, you can't compare races run on different days. Not even the Amerians, on much more uniform surfaces, do this. It's not just because of the ground - the wind is also a crucial factor. That's why you can only compare times run on the same day, in the same conditions, on the same strips of the track. I accept that Duntle's time was a very good one. I gave it an 87. I gave Frankel a 98. Duntle went on to prove herself group 1 class.But secondly, and much more importantly, you simply can't compare the final times of two races (or even the speed figures derived from the final times) and think that you have arrived at an accurate measurement of horses' abilities. You must realise, deep down, as we all do, that Duntle would have been beaten by miles in the Queen Anne, even though my figures suggest that in literal terms she was 5-6 lengths inferior. The reason for this is the varying pace scenarios in each race. A quick furlong or two early in a race would kill an inferior horse, affecting their final time. Andy Beyer wrote a whole book about his realisation of the limitations of the final time figure. It's called Beyer on Speed. Perhaps you should read it.

Not at all.  You cannot say you can't compare times on different days and then begin to even try and rate races over differet days without using the times.  How can you say that Duntles run was 5 lengths inferior to Frankels run when the times were identical?  How can you give a figure of 5 lengths?
And if you can think that 147 is accurate and that race was the best performance in the history of the sport, then you have a 3yo filly that suddenly is 5 lengths off the best in history.  Yeah?  So that puts her above all of these greats that are getting mentioned on here.  Certainly puts her above Excelebration.  Right?

Seriously, if your ratings suggest Duntle to be 5 lengths off Frankel, then you have Duntle rated above Excelebration?

In relation to times, I never said it was the be all end all.  What I said, is that Timeform, and BHA etc have compared the 2 races, either directly or indirectly.  They have suggested that Duntle running the exact same time as Frankel, over the same course, same distance, (.05 seconds slower, close enough to exact) would have been 15 lengths behind Frankel if in the same race.  That is the point of the ratings.  They are saying Frankel (147) vs Duntle (115) in the same race, they would expect Frankel to be 15 lengths superior.  That is the whole pont of the ratings.  Considering they run the exact same distance, on the same course, the only real question, is how in **** did they begin to come up with that?

They ran the exact same time.  So it can't be that.  The only difference, is that the going for Duntle was .6 better than for Frankel.  But then Frankel had the first race of the first day of the carnival, so certainly got the best of it.
The wind?  Was there different wind conditions?

What else?  Tactics?  Frankel used a pacemaker to guarantee a solid pace in the race to set it up for him to run an optimal time.  Yeah?  That is the point of a pacemaker for a horse with such a high cruising speed right?
So it is pretty fair to suggest that the pace of Frankels race was quick.  He dropped off the opposition due to the pace of the race.  He could not have run that quicker, hence the pacemaker. 
Duntle.  Was there a pacemaker?  At best, the same conditions where somebody set up a good speed to guarantee a good time.  At worst, this race was run slower.  This can only possibly boost Duntle more if she was in a slower run race.

So let us assume that the wind conditions were the same, Duntle also had a horse either directly or indirectly setting a good pace for the race, the time was identical.  The only difference, is that the going was .6 better for Duntle.

I don't care how you wish to spin it, Timeform have made the bold statement through even giving ratings, that .6 in going, is the equivalent of 15 lengths, over the course of 8 furlongs.  I don't care if they say it in those words, or not.  By rating Duntle 15 lengths worse off, when everything except the going was identical, that is the statement they are making.  The only possible difference, being if Duntle wasn't in a truly run race, which would actually mean that the going created a bigger differential than 15 lengths, so I am even doing my best to create the best possible scenario for Frankel, and this is still the statement being made.

Yeah?

BJT, you clearly haven't understood or read closely enough what I wrote. Anyone who knows anything about speed figures would not think Duntle would have finished 15 lengths behind Frankel. She would not have got that close, unless she had been ridden way out the back. It is very hard to be able to say with any certainty where the pain barrier is breached in any individual horse race. This affects the horse's final time and finishing performance. Look at Dubawi Gold. He finished 6 lengths behind Frankel in the Guineas, allowed to coast out the back and come home in his own time. Never in the race. In the St James' Palace stakes they tried to actually compete, and he was beaten 13 lengths. he was broken by trying to go through the pain barrier in mid race to keep up with a superior horse (who actually went far too early as we all know). That is what would have happened to Duntle if she had tried to go with Frankel, and that is why it is a nonsense for me to say that she would have run an 87 if she had run in the Queen Anne. It is also why it is so hard to rate horses. You could argue that Dubawi Gold's true ability in relation to Frankel was more accurately reflected at Ascot that day. And that may be why a very high rating COULD actually be justified for Frankel. But I don't get involved in the ratings argument. And you shouldn't get involved in any discussion  about times until you have read Beyer On Speed.

Why would you assume Duntle would change the way she races just because it is Frankel?  Why not sit out the back if she is a sit sprint horse?
The rating suggests, that at their best race, you have Duntle 5 lengths worse than Frankel.  TF has her 15 lengths back.

If you can run a 1m38 sec race by doing the last 800 in 45.5, then why go out any harder than allowing yourself to do that?

Either way, that really is all irrelevant.  Fact remains, they did run an identical time.  Yeah?

They may have run an identical time but Wednesdays going was about 1.7 secs/ mile faster than Tuesdays

Apologist everyone is entitled to their opinion and I'm sure, if we look back in the quotes they have made, they have all erred on occasion. If that is what they think then I am happy. We can all think what we like, even you and even me. It would be a strange world if we all agreed about everything and it would probably be safer. It is when professional organisations put forward their views backed up by false calculations that we, as a collective, should question their motives and oppose their views.

brigust1 Joined: 07 Dec 01
   
It is when professional organisations put forward their views backed up by false calculations that we, as a collective, should question their motives and oppose their views.

Agreed, if it can be proved. Likewise, we should question the motives of an individual who repeatedly accuses an organisation of aftertiming figures and then is proved to be talking utter ****.

*****

Oh ffs, sh|te

Oct 21, 2012 -- 9:22AM, grendel wrote:

They may have run an identical time but Wednesdays going was about 1.7 secs/ mile faster than Tuesdays

Interesting point you make.  If that is accurate, then So You Think running on -.6 going, and around the turns equivalent time was around half a second quicker than Frankel continuing on at the same pace for another 2 furlongs.  At absolute best, gets within half a second, but obviously would have slowed due to the extra length of the race.

No?  If it works one way has to work the other way too.  So basically you are agreeing with me that Frankel loses that 10f race, but rated 8 lengths better.

Timeform rated Frankel 8 lengths better than So You Think and at the same time rated So You Think 3.5 lengths better than Frankel.

And no it isn't my goal to suggest either is better.  My goal is to show just how ridiculous the ratings are and how inconsistant, bias, and basically what a waste of time they are.

what?
I've rated the Queen Anne as being run 7 lengths faster than the POW ... I don't follow your calculations.  The Queen Anne was run 1.15 secs fater than RP std, POW was run 2.14secs faster (1.71 per mile) in 1.7secs faster ground (0.01 per mile equiv).. therefore Frankel ran 1.14 secs per mile faster than So You Think in relation to the RP standards ... 1.14/0.17 is 6.7 lengths.

Frankel ran fast by 1.15 seconds on an 8.3 track.  So You Think ran 1.74 seconds fast on a 7.7 track.  Duntle ran 1.1 seconds fast on a 8.9 track.

3:45 - 150th Anniversary of Prince of Wales's Stakes (British Champions Series) (Group 1)
Full result
1m2f, Class 1, £283,550.00

1 So You Think 4/5F
2 Carlton House 7/2
3 Farhh 6/1


11 ran Distances: 2¼l, ½l, nk
TIME 2m 3.86s (fast by 1.74s)




2:30 - Queen Anne Stakes (British Champions Series) (Group 1)
Full result
1m, Class 1, £198,485.00

1 Frankel 1/10F
2 Excelebration 5/1
3 Side Glance 33/1


11 ran Distances: 11l, nk, 1l
TIME 1m 37.85s (fast by 1.15s)




The going for the straight where Frankel ran was 8.3 six hours before his race.  So You Think ran on the round course, with a rating of 7.7.  Duntle 8.9 up the same course as Frankel.
Yeah?

Not sure what figures you are using, but if Duntle @ .6 better in the going was 1.7 seconds per mile quicker than Frankel, then So You Think @ -.6 going, must be close enough to 1.7 seconds per mile hindered against Frankels run.
Yeah?

GOING: GOOD (Stands' side 8.7, Centre 8.9, Farside 8.8, Round 7.7).

Seems you are rating Duntle at 8.9 as being 1.7 seconds per mile better track, and So You Think the same mark even though one ran up the straight and the other was on the round track with a going of 7.7?

2013 A MATCH over 1mile 2 furlongs, York: Good- To Firm

1ST FRANKEL T.P.Queally 1/33Fav
2ND SO YOU THINK Lanfranco Dettori 16/1

Distance 25 Lengths in 2 Minutes 57secs

Takes nearly 3 minutes for Frankel to run 10 furlongs?  Ouch, he is worse than I thought.

i don't use those petronometer readings for anything in my calculations, they're certainly not used to calculate standard times .... Frankel has consistently put in perfomances 5 - 8 lengths per mile superior to the top performances that So You Think has, any speed fig compiler will tell you that

So how do you come up with the calculation that Duntle was running on a surface 1.7 seconds per mile faster than Frankel?  What is that based on?

cos apart from Duntle the next 4 performances were 4.1, 4.2, 4.1 and 4.0 secs/ mile faster than expected on Wednesday and on Tuesday apart from Frankel and the first 3 home in the Coventry (figures franked since) the top 3 performances were 2.4, 2.3 and 2.4 secs/ mile faster than expected.

So the pace in all races was exactly the same?  There were really zero tactics in any race?

IDIOT.

yeah thats right BJT, in 22 and 23 runner 5f straight course races they all come out of the stalls and take a pull

So you are basing it on a 30k pound race running below par?

I have read most of this thread and some are talking alot of sense and some are not to say it politely lol

My take on Frankel is as follows and I was there for his swansong yesterday and saw him 5 times live:

Every horse who has ever come up against him bar Nathaniel on his debut and Zoffany in the St James Palace were ruined by him physically and mentally (Excelebrations win yesterday proves that as apart from on his debut he only ever lost to Frankel). On his debut he won smoothly enough and Queally got his fractions wrong in the SJP.

He has dismantled the best horses of his generation and even if he had run in the Arc the doubters would say it was a poor race with a poor winner (as I think)so basically throughout his career he was on a hiding to nothing with the numptys of this world.

I have followed racing for 30 years plus and Dancing Brave was always my favourite horse (he cost me a fortune in todays money in the Derby)until Frankel. In the meantime we have had Sea The Stars who was a credit to connections but retired at the end of his 3 year old career (and not once did he slam a field), Zarkava who won the Arc from an impossible position but apart from that beat nothing bar her sex in French racing. We had Generous and Nashwan in the 80's and 90's and a few others who merit inclusion.

We will never know what rating Frankel could have achieved, whether he is the best ever, but in my opinion and as a lifelong fan of the great Dancing Brave, he would of just seen Frankels arse go further and further away. The others weren't in either of those twos class.

I fully believe that Frankel would have won over any distance from 6 furlong to 1 mile 4 and if the Breeders Cup wasn't in Santa Anita this year they would have gone across and decimated any opposition. Having seen Black Caviar at RA and on tape I believe she is nothing compared to Frankel.

He was a star of all time and I for one will never ever forget the reception the crowd gave him yesterday as the Ascot stand very nearly came off with everyone in appreciation of true greatness as he crossed the line (on ground he absolutely detested.

Ratings and opinions are part of this great sport of ours, and we all have different views on all races and every one of us should cherish the time this magnificent thoroughbred was around, not slate him for beating what was put in front of him on the course.

Frankel is an absolute legend of the sport!

I am not going to read the 150 replies since last night i am just going to say i hope it spits out duds just so we can have another laugh at the poms expense.

Wizard, that sums it up beautifully.

Stupid bstd nobs. Get a life you clown.

We will never know what rating Frankel could have achieved, whether he is the best ever

very true wizard.

I suspect Habibti would have beaten Black Caviar.

Oct 21, 2012 -- 11:27AM, grendel wrote:

yeah thats right BJT, in 22 and 23 runner 5f straight course races they all come out of the stalls and take a pull

The day that SYT ran, there was only 1 race over a mile.  The miles were run up the straight, with ground rating of 8.8-8.9.  The only race of the day ran on the round track was the 10 furlong race involving SYT.

How in hell are you going to use speed figures of horses running on a different track, to assess So You Thinks run?  The going suggests 1.2 less on the going stick, a going on the slower side of good, yet you are rating him as if he was running on a good to fast track.

Yeah?

And I am the idiot?

Kick me if you must but are you really working out times based on penetrometer reading taken by CoC's well before racing starts? Are you? Really?

And didn't the going get changed by the CoC during racing on the day of the Queen Anne?

Only asking.

Absolutely.  Are you suggesting that horses don't have a quicker time on a "Fast" track than a "Good" track?

So you can rely upon the penetrometer reading given? Where it is taken and what changes are made from it being taken until the race begins? Sounds like pin point accuracy to me. Couldn't possibly knock that as an idea.

You can rely on a "Good to Soft" track being declared, based on that figure and being upgraded immediately after the first race?

What I am being told here, is that SYT was rated around 6-7 lengths worse than Frankel based purely on the runners in other races, racing on a different track.  And this is what you find fault with?

How do you think they actually call a track "Good"?  You don't think it is based on said reading?  Really?

Has anyone looked at the texture of the straight track at Ascot. Apparently they used special intertwining grass to produce a better surface and more consistent, faster times. According to their website that is. Would that make a difference?

Frankel - 14 wins, 10 Gr1 wins, total prize money £3,735,532 average win per race £266,824.

Black Caviar - 22 wins, 12 Gr1 wins (1 a handicap) total prize money £3,913,951 average win per race £177,907.

Make of that what you will but my take on it is that Frankel ran at the higher level far more often that Black Caviar in relation to number of starts, that he was marginally under in total prize money in relation to number of starts and that he average more prize money per race despite having fewer starts.

By the way, don't you just know that half of Ramsey Street and Yabbie Creek were on their knees praying that Frankel got beaten yesterday?

Black Caviar is a sprinter
Frankel is an 8-10f horse
..how can anyone compare them
and of course that is the problem
How can anyone compare horses of different generations, running over different distances,
in different coutries....it is all subjective

Frankel
142 - 144 would be ok with me
147 no

but just my imo of course

The thing is both Frankel and Excelebration would beat Black Caviar at any distance from 6f to a mile and I personally reckon Frankel would do so at 5f too.

Frankel is the best horse i have ever seen at 1m/1m2f.
On pure ability, putting aside the winning trips, i have never seen a better racehorse & prob never will.
He fully deserves his title as the best ever imo.

I sincerely doubt the Excelebration claim. BC beat Moonlight Cloud, in fact would have cantered over her,and was then supposedly desperately unlucky behind Excelebration. Hopefully they both turn up in the Breeders Cup Mile.

If a miler like Moonlight Cloud can get so close to Black Caviar and only be beaten a head even allowing for BC not being pushed for a stride or two (which hardly makes a sprinter come to a standstill that late on) and Moonlight Cloud can be well beaten by Excelebration, albeit after having a bit of bad luck in running then I would have my money on Excelebration to beat BC at 6f any time.

Black Caviar had her worst race todate when she raced in the UK as she sustained an injury and yet she still won the race.Her sectional times normally are electric and no British sprint horse would be capable of beating her though none has when she raced at her worst!

Frankel also had his worst race ever the last time he raced having lost nearly 1.5 seconds at the start, losing his pace maker and having to run the widest course of all but one of the horses which added considerable lengths to his trip as was the case in the Juddemonte.

My point is that when great horses have everything against them and still win then you know that you are witnessing a very special athlete and this is the reason both Black Caviar and Frankel have remained unbeaten because no matter what fate throws at them they always deliver and are true Kings and Queens of the racing world...

Black Caviar beat milers and handicappers with the only decent sprinter being left sat down in the stalls at the start and during what part of the race was Black Caviar supposed to have been injured?

Nobody knows and so nobody can use that as an excuse, she could very well if even injured at all during the race have been so in the final strides or after the race when the jockey didn't dismount her and rode her back down the course again or could even have been the following day.

That 147 rating was 7/10/12, before his last race.  At that date they rated Cirrus Des Aigles 133.
So they will be rated closer after last Saturday's race imo.  And afaik Timeform ratings are slightly inflated during the year until they rebalance them when the season is over.

How much weight would it take to stop Frankel beating St Nicholas Abbey at York over 10f?

St Nicholas Abbey 124 beaten easily by 7L could have be 12L imo at least.

How would the match up be priced with Frankel giving SNA 23lb ??

They are not handicappers.

Of course kincsem, silly me

And Frankel has now retired so will never race in years John Smiths Cup at York.

It`s a shame that...

hey wikimug66, how'd your "decent" sprinter go on Champion's day?



your hate for anything Australian is so blatantly obvious that it makes you look like a complete muppet, oh hold on, you ARE a complete muppet

Scenic Blast sprinter of the year 2 years in a row was it?

it wasn't even a group 1 ffs and he got beaten 2L by Maarek, Maarek was beaten 5L by SOUL.



sure is a decent sprinter isn't it

NO IDEA.

Soul was beaten over 10L by Libranno at Doncaster

Libranno was beaten 11L by Maarek at Ascot

So on your assessment Maarek is now 21L better than Soul.

Do you see how quickly the sprint form turns around over here SecondComing?? They are the lowest of the low Thouroughbreds we have. Yet your Queen only just scraped home against them.

she's unbeaten and I can guarantee you our sprinters are much better then yours, that in itself says it all

Yep that says you can`t breed any great 8-12f horses.

Just one dimensional 5f ugly brutes like BC. Any chance of taking any 8-12f animals to the Breeders Cup one year?

you only have to analyse the form of Soul to know that she underperformed at Ascot, there can be no debate about that fact, are you going to tell me Soul improved many many lengths?


you aren't one dimensional if you can win 22 in a row, that statement makes no sense, things go wrong in horse races trust me pal, 22 in a row hasn't been 22 consecutive runs where nothing foul happened in the run, she only just won in one of her earlier runs it turned out she was injured but still had too much on them and won, in fact if it wasn't for the horse on her inside she would of fallen over

sometimes you just need to take your hands off the keyboard and acknowledge she is the best sprinter you'll ever see, it's just unfortunate that you didn't see the best of her, in hindsight you aren't really a deserving type anyway

Problem is to prove herself the best sprinter ever, she would have to beat champion sprinters from the past in Europe and America.

I am sure that we never saw her at her best at Ascot. She is one of the best ever and rated very closely with Dayjur, the best European sprinter i have ever seen from 1990. I could never knock her achievements, but if you ever want to talk about the class gulf between her and Frankel then we actually a line of form through Moonlight Cloud and Farhh. You start then to see were Frankel stands in a league of his own.

Oct 21, 2012 -- 1:28PM, brigust1 wrote:

Has anyone looked at the texture of the straight track at Ascot. Apparently they used special intertwining grass to produce a better surface and more consistent, faster times. According to their website that is. Would that make a difference?

Absolutely it would. It would further enhance the argument that frankel would not have collected prize money in the 10f race let alone been close in the finish.  Still yet to hear anybody argue a decent point about that. Syt ran the only race of the day not on the straight track on a worse track and put up a time that frankel couldnt compete with on a good to fast track made for speed.
Grendel?

Frankel did not take the usual route of Derby ,Arc,and many other of the male generation also took different routes,i believe the success of the fillies over the last two years is due to this fact,but Cirrus did beat some of those fillies in the last two years,and it was no surprise to me that he gave Frankel his biggest test,so how can we compare this generation with others? To rate frankel so high,you must rate others behind him also very high,yet Cirrus rated only 130 before the clash? so how can we defend such a high rating of 147 and does that pay respect to previous generations? Not trying to knock frankel,the form of the older generation is working out so well,but i believe we must have a cut off point at the top of any handicap system,The first time he met a Horse of similar ability he was not so impressive,you can blame the ground and trip yes,but that remains a visual fact.(But he was great)

Not so many year ago we had a 0-100 hcp system,we now have a 0-140 system and if idiots keep overating generations we will be heading towards a 0-160,now can you see my point of view?

If frankel would have had a 5lb penalty against cirrus would he have won? 130 +5 = 135 How many other champions of previous generations would he have given 5 lb too?

There is also more choice than ever before in history for Group 1 performers(dubai),I believe that Handicappers must start to take these facts into account.

BJT must be backwards.

Time and time again Frankel mullered SYT``s form line. Yet he chooses to be paralysed by over analysis on the times of one meeting.

I was one of Harbingers greatest fans ,the late developer never did make it to the Arc and other races, i dont think we ever got to the bottom of him. Many choose to use Work force and others of that year a guide,but is that possible? Similar comments would apply to Lammtarra a for one with so little experience he was a monster.

It would further enhance the argument that frankel would not have collected prize money in the 10f race let alone been close in the finish

He is either thick or a comedian

    1 7          So You Think (NZ) 4/5F     6    9-0     A P O'Brien    125    *    *   
J P O'Brien
   
Chased leading pair, led going well 2f out, soon challenged and ridden, quickened clear with rival over 1f out, asserted inside final furlong and stayed on strongly, drew clear final 100yds (op Evens tchd 11-10 in places)


«    2 2    2¼      Carlton House (USA) 7/2    4    9-0     Sir Michael Stoute    119    *    *    »
Ryan Moore
   
Took keen hold, held up in midfield, switched left and effort over 2f out, ridden and quickened to challenge well over 1f out, clear with winner over 1f out, beaten inside final furlong, tired and all out to hold 2nd close home (op 10-3 tchd 4-1)


«    3 8    ½      Farhh 6/1    4    9-0     Saeed Bin Suroor    114    *    *    »
Frankie Dettori
   
Reared as stalls opened and slowly away, dropped in behind, headway on inner 2f out, not clear run over 1f out until inside final furlong, good headway and switched left inside final furlong, going on strongly at finish (op 7-1)


Look at the form BJT. Its is as simple as your own mind.

you can pick fault with that form Angel gabrial? Carlton house?,Farhh? Not maybe the greatest 10f race i think frankel would have won quite easy.

Of course Frankel would have won easily.

It`s BJT saying Frankel would struggle. The form line is there. Frankel has mullered it over and over again.

He is actually saying that Farhh would have beaten him for a place
n

For absent friends


2012-Solemia
2011-Danedream
2010-Workforce
2009-Sea the Stars
2008-Zarkava
2007-Dylan Thomas
2006-Rail Link
2005-Hurricane Run
2004-Bago
2003-Dalakhani
2002-Marienbard
2001-Sakhee
2000-Sinndar
1999-Montjeu
1998-Sagamix
1997-Peintre Celebre
1996-Helissio
1995-Lammtarra
1994-Carnegie
1993-Urban Sea
1992-Subotica
1991-Suave Dancer
1990-Saumarez
1989-Carroll House
1988-Tony Bin
1987-Trempolino
1986-Dancing Brave
1985-Rainbow Quest
1984-Sagace
1983-All Along
1982-Akiyda
1981-Gold River
1980-Detroit
1979-Three Troikas
1978-Alleged
1977-Alleged
1976-Ivanjica
1975-Star Appeal
1974-Allez France
1973-Rheingold
1972-San San
1971-Mill Reef
1970-Sassafras
1969-Levmoss
1968-Vaguely Noble
1967-Topyo
1966-Bon Mot
1965-Sea-Bird
1964-Prince Royal
1963-Exbury
1962-Soltikoff
1961-Molvedo
1960-Puissant Chef
1959-Saint Crespin
1958-Ballymoss
1957-Oroso
1956-Ribot
1955-Ribot
1954-Sica Boy
1953-La Sorellina
1952-Nuccio
1951-Tantieme
1950-Tantieme
1949-Coronation
1948-Migoli
1947-Le Paillon
1946-Caracalla
1945-Nikellora
1944-Ardan
1943-Verso
1942-Djebel
1941-Le Pacha

Frankel does not appear on that list

A question for the time- speed rating guru,and all handicappers,if the ground is heavy/very soft, do you use 0.16 a lenth ,0.18 a lenth ,0.20 a lenth ,or 0.25 a lenth? and is it correct to raise the ratings of those beaten who finish behind in such circumstances?

Oct 22, 2012 -- 3:09AM, Angel Gabrial wrote:

It would further enhance the argument that frankel would not have collected prize money in the 10f race let alone been close in the finishHe is either thick or a comedian    1 7          So You Think (NZ) 4/5F     6    9-0     A P O'Brien    125    *    *    J P O'Brien     Chased leading pair, led going well 2f out, soon challenged and ridden, quickened clear with rival over 1f out, asserted inside final furlong and stayed on strongly, drew clear final 100yds (op Evens tchd 11-10 in places)  «    2 2    2¼      Carlton House (USA) 7/2    4    9-0     Sir Michael Stoute    119    *    *    »Ryan Moore     Took keen hold, held up in midfield, switched left and effort over 2f out, ridden and quickened to challenge well over 1f out, clear with winner over 1f out, beaten inside final furlong, tired and all out to hold 2nd close home (op 10-3 tchd 4-1)  «    3 8    ½      Farhh 6/1    4    9-0     Saeed Bin Suroor    114    *    *    »Frankie Dettori     Reared as stalls opened and slowly away, dropped in behind, headway on inner 2f out, not clear run over 1f out until inside final furlong, good headway and switched left inside final furlong, going on strongly at finish (op 7-1)Look at the form BJT. Its is as simple as your own mind.

What formline? Frankel was rated 11 lengths better than SYT. Based on the times how can you back that up? How many 10f races has frankel raced in to consistantly beat any formline?
The reality is the times posted and the track conditions show that there is no way in hell frankel won that 10f rac3 let alone by 11 lengths. 
Can show me all the ratings you like but when my argument is the ratings are bullshit then no point flashing false ratings to prove any point.

When you compare the times of the races there is nobody in their right mind that can say frankel wins by any clear margin let alone 11 lengths.

Can show whatever form you like. If form won races the favourite would win every race. That race of 147 did nothing but prove how ludicrous the whole rating system is.

How far and how easily did Frankel beat Farhh? the form/ratings is franked by St Nicholas Abbey. Look at the other form.

How can you say that Farhh would beat Frankel at Ascot. Are you mad?

Frankel confirms he's the best in Champion Stakes

By Sam Walker racingpost.com 22 OCT 2012

WORLD CLASS: an analysis of the international scene according to Racing Post Ratings


For Frankel it was proof he could handle anything, for Cirrus Des Aigles it showed he could soar with a legend. It might have been muddy and it might have been tense, but the Champion Stakes was a high point in the careers of both Frankel and Cirrus Des Aigles.

Any number of match-ups had been mooted for Frankel this year. Black Caviar and Camelot were high on the list, while some Americans fancied Wise Dan to make him run. But the toughest test in 2012 would be to face Cirrus Des Aigles on soft ground.

The French gelding had won his last four starts on soft or heavy by eight, ten, eight and nine lengths. He is perfectly suited to testing conditions. He doesn't have a turn-of-foot, but boy can he grind. He doesn't stop for anything. Just keeps on keeping on.

He arrived on the back of a career best effort in the Prix Dollar - an effortless nine-length win - and given that he usually comes on for a run, even better was expected at Ascot. He won last year's Champion Stakes and looked primed for a huge run this time. A huge second-place run.

Frankel was made to work in the bad ground, but this was the test which showed whether or not variables could get him beaten. If he could beat the second best horse in the world, who arrived in top form and had everything in his favour, then he would prove he was untouchable. He did.

The horse that always won, won again. The Champions Series finale, the Champion Stakes, on Champions Day, and it was all about one horse. The triple champion. European champion at two and undisputed world champion at three and four.

With Excelebration giving a timely lift to his entire back catalogue of form by running away with the Queen Elizabeth II Stakes, the day was an all out celebration of the greatness of this one horse. It can't get any better from here. Or can it?

Perhaps a little better. News came last week that after columns and columns devoted to getting the best horse in America to run in the Breeders' Cup Classic, Wise Dan will instead run in the Mile. He is the best horse in the US on any surface, but connections believe he is better on turf.

The Mile looks a tougher race than the Classic this year, so it was a bold call, and one made to look even bolder after what Excelebration did on the weekend. So the situation is thus: the horse who has been beaten an average distance of 5.25 lengths by Frankel will take on the best horse in America on any surface... on his preferred surface.

The repercussions of this race are obvious for Frankel: he could conquer America by proxy. That once considered Breeders' Cup Classic trip seems suddenly unnecessary. If Excelebration can prove himself better than the very best in America then what does that do for Frankel?

This sort of extreme hierarchy has been part of the Frankel story all along. Excelebration could never come close to the top dog, but he has won all eight starts since his debut when he has not faced Frankel.

No match for Frankel, but he won three Group 1s. No match for Frankel, but he won a Group 2 by six-lengths. No match for Frankel, but he might have been champion miler in another time.

Beyond Frankel and Excelebration, the four-year-olds as a whole have proved a very strong crop, winning most of the open Group 1s in Europe this year and regularly beating the three-year-olds out of sight. They include Nathaniel, Moonlight Cloud, Danedream, Solemia and even Japan's top horse Orfevre. So there sits the king, atop a tree of unbelievable hierarchy.

Frankel only needed to run to 136+ on Saturday. The conditions were far from ideal, but he won all the same. Runner-up Cirrus Des Aigles, with perfect conditions and pushed by the best horse he's ever run against posted a career best RPR of 132. Nathaniel (127) ran to form.

Frankel answered the ground question on the weekend, but from a form point of view Excelebration's win in the QEII was perhaps even more important to his legacy.

Champions like Frankel needed horses like Excelebration to legitimise their legend. The Coolmore colt had always done a sterling job on this front, but it took until Saturday for him to show precisely how good he is.

When a horse is that inferior to another, the presumption is that there is a limit to his ability. But he quite clearly showed, when winning by a cosy three-lengths from Cityscape, that he would have been a true champion miler in another year.

He started his campaign with an easy win at the Curragh, then he was beaten five-lengths and 11-lengths by Frankel, then he won the Jacques Le Marois with something to spare, then ran away with the QEII. He's a very smart horse in his own right. He's just no match for Frankel.

In an early end-of-season shake-up Frankel's peak RPRs from the Queen Anne and International have been raised to 143.

TOP OF THE CLASS: Frankel 136 Sir Henry Cecil (GB) (Champion Stakes, Ascot, 1m2f, 20 Oct)

TOP LIST


1  Frankel (GB) Queen Anne/International 143T

2  Cirrus Des Aigles (Fr) Prix Dollar/Champion Stakes 132T

3  Excelebration (Ire) Queen Elizabeth II 131T

4  Black Caviar (Aus) Lightning Stakes  130T

5  Hay List (Aus) Newmarket Handicap 129T
   Orfevre (****) Takarazuka Kinen  129T

7  Wise Dan (US) Ben Ali/Stephen Foster  128A/D

8 Camelot (Ire) Derby 127T
  I'll Have Another (US) Preakness Stakes 127D 
  So You Think (Ire) Tattersalls Gold Cup 127T
  Nathaniel (GB) Eclipse/King George 127T
  Moonlight Cloud (Fr) Prix Maurice de Gheest 127T
  Dullahan (US)Pacific Classic 127A

TOP TURF PERFORMERS

1  Frankel (GB) Queen Anne/International 143

2 Cirrus Des Aigles (Fr) Prix Dollar/Champion Stakes 132

3 Excelebration (Ire) Queen Elizabeth II 131

4 Black Caviar (Aus) Lightning Stakes 130

5 Hay List (Aus)  Newmarket Handicap 129
  Orfevre (****) Takarazuka Kinen 129

7 Camelot (Ire) Derby 127
  So You Think (Ire) Tattersalls Gold Cup 127
  Moonlight Cloud (Fr) Prix Maurice de Gheest 127
  Nathaniel (GB) Eclipse/King George 127
  Wise Dan (US) Fourstardave Handicap 127

According to BJT

Frankel would struggle to beat Farhh at Royal Ascot.

The man is possibly the strangest man on the horse racing forum.

Frankel would beat any horse anywhere in the world from 7 Furlongs to 10Fur(and probably 12 if allowed to), it's frightening to think that there is people loose to walk in the community who think otherwise

I agree with that AD, the first bit that is. But, as Phil Smith has already stated Frankel isn't running against the same class of horses Dancing Brave did. So he will beat them, but what is he beating? Not much is the answer to that one.

What on earth are these Aussie clowns on this thread prattling on about?

The answer to the quest for who is the best may reveal itself if you compare o the fillies of those genrations?Pistol Packer beaten 3Lenths by Mill Reef in the Arc,yet the last two years colts have been beaten by not one but two. Mill reef beaten 3l by the Brigadier,so which generation is the best.Some of you clever people may want to do some research into those thoughts?

Joined: Date Joined: 30 Oct 04 | Topic/replies: 4,305 | Blogger: BJT's blog

Oct 22, 2012 -- 9:09AM, Angel Gabrial wrote:

It would further enhance the argument that frankel would not have collected prize money in the 10f race let alone been close in the finishHe is either thick or a comedian    1 7          So You Think (NZ) 4/5F     6    9-0     A P O'Brien    125    *    *    J P O'Brien     Chased leading pair, led going well 2f out, soon challenged and ridden, quickened clear with rival over 1f out, asserted inside final furlong and stayed on strongly, drew clear final 100yds (op Evens tchd 11-10 in places)  «    2 2    2¼      Carlton House (USA) 7/2    4    9-0     Sir Michael Stoute    119    *    *    »Ryan Moore     Took keen hold, held up in midfield, switched left and effort over 2f out, ridden and quickened to challenge well over 1f out, clear with winner over 1f out, beaten inside final furlong, tired and all out to hold 2nd close home (op 10-3 tchd 4-1)  «    3 8    ½      Farhh 6/1    4    9-0     Saeed Bin Suroor    114    *    *    »Frankie Dettori     Reared as stalls opened and slowly away, dropped in behind, headway on inner 2f out, not clear run over 1f out until inside final furlong, good headway and switched left inside final furlong, going on strongly at finish (op 7-1)Look at the form BJT. Its is as simple as your own mind.


What formline? Frankel was rated 11 lengths better than SYT. Based on the times how can you back that up? How many 10f races has frankel raced in to consistantly beat any formline?
The reality is the times posted and the track conditions show that there is no way in hell frankel won that 10f rac3 let alone by 11 lengths. 
Can show me all the ratings you like but when my argument is the ratings are bullshit then no point flashing false ratings to prove any point.

When you compare the times of the races there is nobody in their right mind that can say frankel wins by any clear margin let alone 11 lengths.

_Can_ show_ whatever_ form_ you_ like_. If form won races the favourite would win every race. That race of 147 did nothi_g but prove how ludicrous the whole rating system is.



_Can_ show_ whatever_ form_ you_ like_. If form won races the favourite would win

W=2/11 FAV
W=2/11FAV
W=1/10 FAV
W=1/20FAV
W=1/10FAV
W=2/7FAV
W=4/11FAV
W=8/13FAV
W=30/100FAV
W=1/2FAV
W=1/4FAV
W=4/6FAV
W=30/100FAV
W=1/2FAV
W=7/4FAV
Can_ show_ whatever_ form_ you_ like_..................FRANKEL WINS.

If form won races the favourite........................FRANKEL WINS.

The upside down gang will struggle with that logic Pailoon.

They will say just because the form line entitled him to be favourite and win, that does not mean he came out of the race with the best form line and being favourite did not mean his previous form was superior to any other he has beat because he was favourite and that form is means nothing if you beat a horse when you are favourite.

That makes sense down under.

Oct 22, 2012 -- 7:11AM, Angel Gabrial wrote:

The upside down gang will struggle with that logic Pailoon.They will say just because the form line entitled him to be favourite and win, that does not mean he came out of the race with the best form line and being favourite did not mean his previous form was superior to any other he has beat because he was favourite and that form is means nothing if you beat a horse when you are favourite.That makes sense down under.

Absolutely I struggle with that logic.  Not even sure what was posted.  15 favourites that have won a race?  Somehow it is your opinion that a horse runs exactly the same every time?  So a horse that beats another horse will never be beaten by it?

As for you AG, you are about due to have your own opinion, and not just show that you go by what you are told.  Your answer to everything is to quote newspaper articles, and to show ratings.

The facts remain, Frankel dodged SYT in that race.  Why?  You tell me.  He was targetted for 10f for months, entered, and dodged.  Wasn't until SYT retired that he stepped up in distance.
The other facts remain that he hasn't taken on anything.  To say he would beat this and beat that is utter nonsense.  If he could have, he would have. 
The talk was he would be demanding a 200k stud fee.  And that was near 12 months ago.  Since then he has raced in meaningless second class G1 races, dodged everything around, and managed to halve his stud fee to 100k.

He hasn't proven anything in the last 12 months, so why run him?  All it did was hurt his stud fee.  So if the idea was to show just how good he was, then why didn't that happen? 

Either way, there is no rating that you can show me that can show how SYT on good to soft ground didn't run a better equivalent time than Frankel did on a good to fast track.  Even allowing Frankel the advantage of keeping his 8f average speed going for another 2f.

Can't wait for you to point out another newspaper showing somebody elses opinion that you blindly follow.

Dodged SYT !!!

Rankings surprise for Black Caviar

by: Tony Arrold
From:The Australian
October 22, 2012
BLACK Caviar has taken a slide in the World Thoroughbred Rankings, having lost her long-held spot as second-best on the planet behind Frankel, and her battalion of fans will be wanting to know why.

Having at one point achieved a rating as high as 132, the undefeated mare now sits equal sixth with three others on 125.

Black Caviar remains the highest rated sprinter, for 1000m to 1300m, and she also retains No 1 spot as the top rated female in the world.

But the latest update of the official ratings by the supervisory committee compiling the WTR for the International Federation of Horseracing Authorities beggars belief with its bewildering treatment of an undefeated multiple Group I winner who travelled halfway round the globe mid-year to take on all comers and win Europe's richest sprint race to mark her 22nd career success.

The updated listing, covering April 1 to October 7, has Frankel at the top on 140, the French blue-collar horse Cirrus des Aigles on 130 and Japan's Orfevre on 127.
. .
The British-trained middle-distance horse Nathaniel ranks equal fourth on 126 with the American three-year-old dirt runner I'll Have Another while Black Caviar is on 125 with Bodemeister, another US dirt horse, the retired So You Think and the crack Irish-trained miler Excelebration.

In the revisions at the corresponding stage 12 months ago, Black Caviar was on 128. She won her subsequent seven starts -- five at Group I level -- to push to 130 by the time she boarded a plane to England to win at Royal Ascot and draw a pat from an admiring Queen Elizabeth.

Black Caviar has not raced since but she has had the equivalent of 2.5kg stripped off her status -- so work that out.

The handicappers responsible for compiling the ratings will have an explanation for their methods, claiming something along the lines that not one of her six wins of this year come within cooee of her career highpoints of last year's T J Smith Stakes, or even the VRC Newmarket Handicap.

But whatever the spin that is put on the demotion, it will not appease Black Caviar's fans.

In contrast to the seemingly dismissive treatment of Black Caviar, Nathaniel, for example, has won a single Group I in the review period but retains a higher ranking than the two mares, Danedream and Snow Fairy (both on 124), which have beaten him in Group Is in the past 3 1/2 months.

yes i wonder how far Bullit Train would have been beaten in this years Arc?

Bullet Train has beaten about 15 horses home in 12 races and 2.5 years and is rated 6 lengths inferior to BC who has won 22/22 including 12 G1s...  56/71 horses beaten him, but should get close to a horse 22/22  rotflmfao.. 
Seems legit........

3 races preceding him running with Frankel:
7/7 beaten 23 lengths in a 28k dollar race.
5/5 beaten 7.25 lengths in a 19k dollar race.
5/7 beaten 4.25 lengths in a 19k dollar race.

You just couldn't make it up.  Oh, I guess you can...

Excelebration should be about 119-120.  130+ is CRAZY

Some quality stats there BJT

Go to bed you're drunk

Can you imagine Frankel trying to give Wise Dan 15Lb

From last week before he ran at Ascot on Saturday.

He's hailed as the greatest of all time, but experts explain... Why superstar Frankel doesn't win OUR race

PUBLISHED:22:30 GMT, 19 October 2012

Frankel races for the final time at Saturday on Ascot after winning all 13 races of his brilliant career. Here our team of experts assess the horse, and his place in the sport's rich history.

Who's who on the panel


JIMMY LINDLEY

Rode the great Brigadier Gerard and three Derby winners — Charlottown, Santa Claus and
Never Say Die — during the course of their careers. His biggest win was in the 1960 King
George on Aggressor. He was a BBC racing pundit for more than 27 years.

WALTER SWINBURN

Three-time Derby and Arc-winning jockey whose name is associated with the record-breaking 10-length 1981 Derby winner Shergar.

MIKE DILLON

Ladbrokes Director of Public Relations and one of the best-known and informed faces in the betting world.

MARCUS TOWNEND

Sportsmail Racing Correspondent and Racing Editor.




HOW DOES FRANKEL COMPARE?



FRANKEL

Unbeaten in 13 races. Biggest wins in the 2,000 Guineas, Sussex Stakes (twice), Queen Anne Stakes and Juddmonte International Stakes.

SEA-BIRD II

French-trained colt who was a giant over middle distances with superb wins in the 1965 Derby and Prix de L’Arc de Triomphe.

DANCING BRAVE

Won eight of his 10 starts. Big 1986 wins in the 2,000 Guineas, Eclipse, King George and the Arc.

MILL REEF

Won 12 of his 14 races. Landed the Derby, Eclipse, King George and the Arc – all in 1971.

BRIGADIER GERARD

Won 17 of his 18 starts, including the Middle Park Stakes. Beat Mill Reef in the 1971 2,000 Guineas.
.


MARCUS TOWNEND: Unbeaten Frankel bids to extend his record to 14 wins in the Qipco Champion Stakes at Ascot today. He is rated the best racehorse ever by Timeform and second only to 1986 Arc de Triomphe hero Dancing Brave on official British Horseracing Authority figures. Does he deserve such a lofty assessment?


JIMMY LINDLEY: Frankel is as good as I’ve ever seen but I wouldn’t say he’s the best ever. My top horse is Ribot, winner of the Arc in 1955 and the Arc and King George a year later. He came from Italy, travelled Europe and was unbeaten. But not many will remember him. Frankel is a great champion and, because he is winning by big  distances, people think he is the greatest thing since sliced bread. But how good are the horses behind him? Other top horses like Dancing Brave, Mill Reef and Sea Bird were beating top notchers. I rode Brigadier Gerard in his first ever gallop because (regular jockey) Joe Mercer was away. I had never sat on anything like him. He beat Mill Reef in the 1971 2,000 Guineas but I always felt that would never have happened again and he’s another at the top of my list.

WALTER SWINBURN: I’ve got to admit Frankel has grown on me. He is the only horse I have seen for a long time which has the ability to win at distances from six furlongs to a mile-and-a-quarter.
But he’s only No 3 on my all-time list. I’ll be accused of wearing rose-tinted glasses but I have Shergar at No 2. Like Frankel, he possessed great speed even though some dismiss him as a mile-and-a-half horse. My No 1 is US legend Secretariat. He broke three track records to win the 1973 US Triple Crown which, incredibly, all still stand today. His time of two minutes 24 seconds for the last leg — the mile-and-a-half Belmont Stakes — is also still the world record.


MIKE DILLON: Frankel is one of the highest ever achievers on the Turf but he wouldn’t be my best ever. I feel there is a little frustration in what he has achieved. He needs to race over a mile-and-a-half to be up there with the very best. Consistency is one thing but you need variety. The racehorse that left the  biggest impression on me was 1965 Arc and Derby winner Sea Bird. He had the two best weapons in a racehorse’s armoury — the ability to travel and quicken. I also think it’s a possibility the 2009 2,000 Guineas, Derby and Arc winner Sea The Stars would beat Frankel in a race-off. He only ever did enough in a race — jockey Michael Kinane never wanted to win by six lengths — and we never knew how good he was. His record of winning six Group One races in six months will stand the test of time.

MARCUS TOWNEND: Many people will be surprised by your assessments. Frankel has done things on a racecourse some of us have never seen before, like his six-length romp in last year’s 2,000 Guineas.

WALTER SWINBURN: Early in his career he was running his races the wrong way round. Too fast, too early. After a furlong in the 2,000 Guineas he was out of control with jockey Tom Queally. When he went for his whip, I sensed panic and I’ve been there. In the Derby, when I was on Shergar, I went too soon and at the two-furlong pole I felt the same and picked my whip up. I find it really hard to look back at that video.

MIKE DILLON: I agree. Frankel first came to my attention when he won his second race as a two-year-old by 13 lengths at Doncaster. You immediately noticed his stride but I remember thinking as I came off the stand this horse is not going to stay — he is out of control. I didn’t think Tom Queally had any input into what was happening when the horse was a two-year-old and I think that carried on as a three-year-old. Everyone was blown away with the 2,000 Guineas but I was quite unimpressed. In the St James’s Palace Stakes, the same thing  happened. He had control of the race rather than Tom having control of him. But now he has matured and settled down.


MARCUS TOWNEND: Given he was so headstrong, how highly do you rate the way Sir Henry Cecil has trained him?

JIMMY LINDLEY: I think it is the greatest training feat that Cecil has ever produced — I don’t think many other trainers could have achieved it, although I’ll probably get some on the phone now. Only Henry has the mentality to get inside Frankel’s brain. His  genius was settling the horse.

MARCUS TOWNEND: Frankel is unbeaten in 13 races but which would you rate as his best performance?

MIKE DILLON: The Queen Anne Stakes at Royal Ascot in June, when he won by 11 lengths. There was a maturity about him that hadn’t been there before. He is not Sea The Stars or Camelot in terms of looks. But he had muscled up in his chest. He arrived that day for me.

WALTER SWINBURN: I agree. It has to be the Queen Anne when he absolutely slaughtered Excelebration. A horse that races with the choke out, like he had done, can be vulnerable but he did everything right that day.

MARCUS TOWNEND: Some feel that Frankel could have been  campaigned too conservatively —they would have liked him to run in the Arc and, maybe, next month’s Breeders’ Cup in America. Are they right?

WALTER SWINBURN: When you are planning programmes, especially for the great horses which have to be brought to a peak, there are only so many times you can run.

MIKE DILLON:I think Henry Cecil has done exactly what was right for the horse. If he’d have gone the Arc route, they would have probably pulled him out anyway when the ground got so bad. But I do think there is unfinished business and a compelling case for keeping him in training next year. I’d implore his owner, Prince Khaled Abdullah, to consider it. It would be perfect symmetry to finish off in the 2013 Breeders’ Cup, which is again run at Santa Anita, the California home track of the late US trainer Bobby Frankel, after whom he is named. What a fantastic end to the story that would be.

MARCUS TOWNEND: Jimmy and  Walter, as former jockeys, are you envious of his jockey, Tom Queally?

JIMMY LINDLEY: I’m not envious but I would have loved to have ridden him. I only rode The Brigadier in work but to ride a world beater is a great feeling. I’d have loved to see Lester (Piggott) ride him. He would probably never have won by more than a length, and been given the Lester settling treatment. He might even have run in the Derby.

WALTER SWINBURN: I’d love to have had one go on Frankel — just to get the feel in the hands — whether it be on the gallops or the track. That’s the exciting part but Tom, who was under fire after his ride in the St James’s Palace Stakes at Royal Ascot last year, when he got a scare, deserves plenty of praise. The pairing has grown in confidence together.

MARCUS TOWNEND: Frankel has been odds-on favourite in 12 of his 13 races and been a galloping cash machine, so what has he been like for bookmakers?

MIKE DILLON: Sometimes, you have to look at the bigger picture and he has been a Pied Piper for racing. In terms of the profile for the sport, whatever it has cost us it has been well worth it. There comes a time when the losses should be put into the promotional budget rather than the trading budget.

MARCUS TOWNEND: There has been a lot of rain at Ascot and conditions will be fairly testing. Is that a worry or can Frankel cope?

WALTER SWINBURN: It would be a concern if things don’t pan out quite right from the start and he raced too freely. The other jockeys should have to come up with a plan. I’d be thinking about making it pretty noisy in stalls and getting him buzzed up. It can be a bit cat and mouse but you have to be careful not to blow the chance of your own horse. If I was William Buick on  Nathaniel, I’d be thinking about going off fast and then dropping anchor to see if I could get Frankel pulling. But he does have the insurance of his pacemaker, Bullet Train.

JIMMY LINDLEY: When I beat the great Petite Etoile on Aggressor in the King George at Ascot it was because he loved soft ground and we wore her down. When the ground gets abnormally heavy it can affect the result. But it is in Frankel’s favour that the home straight, where he will really have to race, is better drained since Ascot’s redevelopment and I think he will be all right.

MARCUS TOWNEND: Are the  bookmakers rubbing their hands thinking there is a chance of a shock result, Mike?

MIKE DILLON: Definitely not because, for the profile of racing, you’d want him to win. But it is another test and he is going into the unknown, especially against the French-trained 2011 winner  Cirrus Des Aigles, who seems to grow another leg on soft ground. Frankel has serious opposition and his two main competitors — Cirrus and Nathaniel — will relish conditions. Nathaniel is a mile-and-a-half horse. I think his big chance is to stoke the race up and keep putting on the coal. Frankel might have to prove he stays further than a mile-and-a-quarter. It will be fascinating.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/racing/article-2220317/Frankel-doesnt-win-r...
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

SecondComing 22 Oct 12 06:25 
hey wikimug66, how'd your "decent" sprinter go on Champion's day?

LaughLaughLaugh

your hate for anything Australian is so blatantly obvious that it makes you look like a complete muppet, oh hold on, you ARE a complete muppet Laugh

Scenic Blast sprinter of the year 2 years in a row was it?

LOL....you mean the one that left Ortensia for dead at Haydock and then they invented another phantom injury for her?

I've said all along we don't have any top notch sprinters which is why I described Society Rock as decent rather than anything special. I've also said often enough that on the whole they tend to beat each other from race to race, but that decent sprinter was able to give Black Cavair 5 lengths start and still only be beaten 2L.

Just for good measure, there was a strip of fresh previously unused ground at Ascot on Saturday where they moved the rail and the winner of the sprint came up that from its draw, plus SR is not a soft ground horse, even though despite that he still beat Ortensia on it, or is soft ground only an excuse for the Aussie failures? Either way SR was still only 2¾L behind the winner which wasn't a bad run all things considered.

So OK, about 6 months ago I said something happened twice when it happened once, although that was the finer detail and not the basis of my main point but you've had a hard on about that ever since and you are well named anyway as you've been creaming in your pants over it ever since too.

I think it's marginally less embarrassing though than you not knowing what age horses have to be to run in classics or telling us BC will be disadvantaged going around a left hand bend at Ascot when it was a straight 6f!

Maybe you should have looked those up in Wiki first eh?

Rod Street‏@Rod_RfC

On @bbc5live tonight at 10.15pm discussing 'life after Frankel' and the opportunities it has offered racing with @markchapman

Nice one Ima!