Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
?
Show More
and Dettori - like.....Morecombe and Wise...salt'n pepper.... fish and chips....
It's called back luck in running starfish and coffee, happens every day and to every jockey, that's racing. 
If a 7lb claimer had ridden that race you would've said o.k. But an experienced jockey....come on.
ima,
I think you know that was a poor ride, sometimes it's best to say so.
No bet in the race for me so not pocket talking. Fallon's every ride is scrutinised on here because of his perceived past misdemeanours and he's sometimes criticised unfairly, but, that was poor from a top jockey.
I think you know that was a poor ride, sometimes it's best to say so.
No bet in the race for me so not pocket talking. Fallon's every ride is scrutinised on here because of his perceived past misdemeanours and he's sometimes criticised unfairly, but, that was poor from a top jockey.
Have to agree with you holywell. I layed Velox for a fair few quid and regard myself as very fortunate to collect.
I'll copy and paste what I wrote in the other thread holywell and it was still just bad luck in running.
I expect I'll really give people ammo to call me a loony now but have you ever seen that film Sliding Doors with Gwyneth Paltrow? It's the one where she misses her tube train and the you see a parallel universe type thing of what might have happened had she got the train and what actually did when she missed it. The point being made is that you see either one or the other so only know the one actual outcome and not what might have been.
Had the gaps come for Fallon when going up the inner or had Hughes's horse had the toe to take him through and Fallon followed, then he would have been lauded for a great ride and Richard Kingscote would have been slaughtered for going around the outside and running so much farther, which will have been given as the reason for him losing.
Anyway, this is what I wrote elsewhere:
He's dropped the horse out and gone around closest to the rail all the way to save ground, gambling on either tracking the leaders through when they go for home or hoping that when runners fall away that the gaps will come. Obviously that comes with an element of risk but is exactly how he won the Arc on Hurricane Run the first time when the gaps came, yet was beaten on the same horse when riding the exact same race the second time when he got checked and another runner took the gap before him.
He isn't psychic though and he and 101 other jockeys will have done exactly the same thing before in other races as he did for tonight's ride, sometimes it comes off and sometimes it doesn't. He clearly wanted to win the race, which was why when the Hughes/Stoute horse couldn't tow him through up the inner, he moved off the rail to try to find another run, got checked by another runner so then eventually had to pull to the outer but one.
I backed it win and place and also did the winner win and place too but to half that stakes of Fallon's horse so a win the other way suited me better but clearly the best horse didn't win, yet to bring up a bugbear of mine, had he barged his way through illegally and won then you would get the old cliché trotted out that it didn't matter as the best horse won anyway, yet Fallon stayed within the rules and the best horse didn't win.
I expect I'll really give people ammo to call me a loony now but have you ever seen that film Sliding Doors with Gwyneth Paltrow? It's the one where she misses her tube train and the you see a parallel universe type thing of what might have happened had she got the train and what actually did when she missed it. The point being made is that you see either one or the other so only know the one actual outcome and not what might have been.
Had the gaps come for Fallon when going up the inner or had Hughes's horse had the toe to take him through and Fallon followed, then he would have been lauded for a great ride and Richard Kingscote would have been slaughtered for going around the outside and running so much farther, which will have been given as the reason for him losing.
Anyway, this is what I wrote elsewhere:
He's dropped the horse out and gone around closest to the rail all the way to save ground, gambling on either tracking the leaders through when they go for home or hoping that when runners fall away that the gaps will come. Obviously that comes with an element of risk but is exactly how he won the Arc on Hurricane Run the first time when the gaps came, yet was beaten on the same horse when riding the exact same race the second time when he got checked and another runner took the gap before him.
He isn't psychic though and he and 101 other jockeys will have done exactly the same thing before in other races as he did for tonight's ride, sometimes it comes off and sometimes it doesn't. He clearly wanted to win the race, which was why when the Hughes/Stoute horse couldn't tow him through up the inner, he moved off the rail to try to find another run, got checked by another runner so then eventually had to pull to the outer but one.
I backed it win and place and also did the winner win and place too but to half that stakes of Fallon's horse so a win the other way suited me better but clearly the best horse didn't win, yet to bring up a bugbear of mine, had he barged his way through illegally and won then you would get the old cliché trotted out that it didn't matter as the best horse won anyway, yet Fallon stayed within the rules and the best horse didn't win.
" had he barged his way through illegally and won then you would get the old cliché trotted out that it didn't matter as the best horse won anyway, yet Fallon stayed within the rules and the best horse didn't win."
I would rather he'd barged through and got another ban, hero then, "got some balls that Fallon" instead of "he's lost his nerve, he's past it"
I would rather he'd barged through and got another ban, hero then, "got some balls that Fallon" instead of "he's lost his nerve, he's past it"
Yeah OK holywell that's no problem but I'm sure if I asked you to give in detail why you think it was a bad ride then you would be saying very much what I have said, we would just disagree on whether those circumstances count as a bad ride or bad luck in running I suppose.
I'm not necessarily saying it applies to you here but too many people think a race is just the last 50 yards or so and don't take into account what has happened earlier in it.
If that was to me Dan Chipowski then funnily enough, the fact that I have described retrospectively what actually happened during the race is after timing, as the race has to be run first before I can describe it.....Although I think you will find with my example that that's not what people actually mean when using the word after timing anyway.
As a punter who might have backed it then I'm sure you would Duvauchelle but considering Fallon pulled Stuart Webster off his horse that time for dangerous riding when he nearly put a young apprentice over the rail, or considering Fallon is only just back from a 5 day ban, I'm guessing he probably thought it maybe wasn't the best thing to do under the circumstances.
I'm not necessarily saying it applies to you here but too many people think a race is just the last 50 yards or so and don't take into account what has happened earlier in it.
If that was to me Dan Chipowski then funnily enough, the fact that I have described retrospectively what actually happened during the race is after timing, as the race has to be run first before I can describe it.....Although I think you will find with my example that that's not what people actually mean when using the word after timing anyway.
As a punter who might have backed it then I'm sure you would Duvauchelle but considering Fallon pulled Stuart Webster off his horse that time for dangerous riding when he nearly put a young apprentice over the rail, or considering Fallon is only just back from a 5 day ban, I'm guessing he probably thought it maybe wasn't the best thing to do under the circumstances.
I have described retrospectively what actually happened during the race is after timing, as the race has to be run first before I can describe it..
Unless you have an i.q of under 10 (not ruling out given your record) you would be able to work out he is referring to your claiming 1st and 2nd post race, hope that is simple enough for you to understand.
Unless you have an i.q of under 10 (not ruling out given your record) you would be able to work out he is referring to your claiming 1st and 2nd post race, hope that is simple enough for you to understand.
" but considering Fallon pulled Stuart Webster off his horse that time for dangerous riding"
that's partly my point. H's lost a bit of his nerve, his instinct, his reactions seem slower as does Dettori's.
that's partly my point. H's lost a bit of his nerve, his instinct, his reactions seem slower as does Dettori's.
Captain Christy 05 Jul 13 22:41
Unless you have an i.q of under 10 (not ruling out given your record) you would be able to work out he is referring to your claiming 1st and 2nd post race, hope that is simple enough for you to understand.
Correct.
Unless you have an i.q of under 10 (not ruling out given your record) you would be able to work out he is referring to your claiming 1st and 2nd post race, hope that is simple enough for you to understand.
Correct.
Oops sorry lol, OK well seeing as though I know I backed the first and second and have no reason to lie, I'll admit it didn't even occur to me that anyone was doubting my word, which was why I made reference to the fact that's not usually what people mean when saying after timing. If I had a past record of claiming to have backed anything when I had not and was caught out or if I actually was lying then I might have picked up on it, but my apologies for not thinking like a total cynic. That and the fact I had written what I had backed elsewhere earlier and only copied and pasted it at the end of my originally typed message in this thread so didn't bother reading that part again.
Why would someone doubt a complete stranger's word though unless that just happens top be their default setting to doubt everyone? Let me guess what comes next, show me your bets by any chance? Funnily enough, if I had after timed I think I would probably have claimed to have had twice as much staked on the winner instead of the other way around but there you go.
GB / Hayd 5th Jul / 21:15 1m2f Hcap Double Discount Back 28065160831 05-Jul-13 21:06 C 5.7 5.00 5.7 23.50
GB / Hayd 5th Jul / 21:15 To Be Placed Double Discount Back 28065155302 05-Jul-13 21:05 C 2.74 10.00 2.74 17.40
GB / Hayd 5th Jul / 21:15 To Be Placed Velox Back 28065131645 05-Jul-13 21:04 C 2.28 20.00 2.28 25.60
GB / Hayd 5th Jul / 21:15 1m2f Hcap Velox Back 28065126920 05-Jul-13 21:04 C 3.9 10.00 3.9 (10.00)
HTH.
Why would someone doubt a complete stranger's word though unless that just happens top be their default setting to doubt everyone? Let me guess what comes next, show me your bets by any chance? Funnily enough, if I had after timed I think I would probably have claimed to have had twice as much staked on the winner instead of the other way around but there you go.
GB / Hayd 5th Jul / 21:15 1m2f Hcap Double Discount Back 28065160831 05-Jul-13 21:06 C 5.7 5.00 5.7 23.50
GB / Hayd 5th Jul / 21:15 To Be Placed Double Discount Back 28065155302 05-Jul-13 21:05 C 2.74 10.00 2.74 17.40
GB / Hayd 5th Jul / 21:15 To Be Placed Velox Back 28065131645 05-Jul-13 21:04 C 2.28 20.00 2.28 25.60
GB / Hayd 5th Jul / 21:15 1m2f Hcap Velox Back 28065126920 05-Jul-13 21:04 C 3.9 10.00 3.9 (10.00)
HTH.
The last of the big Punters. What a sad **** u are ima. Enjoy your 60 brick
Ima you're better off just saying 'he gave the horse a bad ride' and leaving it at that. I'm sure even you don't believe the essays you constantly churn out to defend Fallon. Sometimes he is in the wrong whether you wish to believe it or not. And other jockeys mistakes don't count as a reason for his.
He is a very good jockey who seems capable of upsetting any of his owners/trainers sooner or later. Sir Michael Stoute is still trusting him on Opinion today.
I never claimed to be a big punter and think your bitter message lustrumm is considerably sadder than anything I've ever written anyway. Exactly how much sadder can you get than acting like a 12 year old abusive keyboard to somebody you don't even know merely because you disagree with them? I wonder if you were in a pub and overheard a conversation between two blokes and one had a different view to one of them would you amble over and tell him "What a sad ****" he is or would the fear of being ironed out make you see sense?
Maybe I should have er, after timed and stuck a few more noughts on the end eh? Or what about if I lost a few bets where I had staked 3 or 4 figures and posted those bets up, does that make me a more authentic punter then and worthy in your sad eyes? And there was me thinking the game was all about making money!
Oh and I actually make most of my money by laying anyway so those were just a few thrown away bets for fun based on a couple of jockeys I rate that I regularly see often unjustifiably slaughtered on here by others.
I believe every word MJK but please feel free to point out what was inaccurate in my assessment.
Maybe I should have er, after timed and stuck a few more noughts on the end eh? Or what about if I lost a few bets where I had staked 3 or 4 figures and posted those bets up, does that make me a more authentic punter then and worthy in your sad eyes? And there was me thinking the game was all about making money!
Oh and I actually make most of my money by laying anyway so those were just a few thrown away bets for fun based on a couple of jockeys I rate that I regularly see often unjustifiably slaughtered on here by others.
I believe every word MJK but please feel free to point out what was inaccurate in my assessment.
Ima you're the only person in the history of the world who watches racing who has never seen Fallon give a horse a bad ride. I do believe you're long winded counter arguments are just a tool to try to bore people into submission. My point is that you'd probably get a little respect if now and again you just simply said 'yes it was a poor ride'.
LOL...cheers for that RickiBobby.
OK MJK, let's flip the coin and are you saying then that every beaten ride is either a bad or dodgy one and there's no such thing as hard luck in running?
I used to be like some members on here when I was younger and felt daft blaming things on a half ton dumb animal and the trainer "only" gets them fit and seeing as they don't usually ride their own, I'd be running out of options as to who to blame so the jockey was always the obvious culprit. I now tend to not just take note of the last 50 yards of a race and watch it over and over again and you then usually find everything happens for a reason or there's a reason why everything has happened.
Plus define a bad ride? To me it's usually about making the wrong decision more than an ability issue, like when a jockey goes off far too fast and weakens or sits too far off the pace and with no hard luck in running stories is flying at the finish but has given his mount too much to do. Or when he is tracking the runner in front and has two options to either go to the outer to pull around the leader and ensure a run or go to the inside and risk getting chopped off and then losing. Others sit far too long on the bridle at times too instead of kicking on, therefore the jockey rowing away on an upsides rival will keep at it just in case if the bridle horse doesn't go on and put the race to bed. NH jockeys with a double handful who don't kick on and jump the last with a lead so that they can afford a mistake if it happens is another example too.
Most other things are usually down to bad luck in running or a horse not having the toe at a certain stage of the race but then runs on again late once its stamina kicks in, yet all some punters see is the end part and not the earlier.
OK MJK, let's flip the coin and are you saying then that every beaten ride is either a bad or dodgy one and there's no such thing as hard luck in running?
I used to be like some members on here when I was younger and felt daft blaming things on a half ton dumb animal and the trainer "only" gets them fit and seeing as they don't usually ride their own, I'd be running out of options as to who to blame so the jockey was always the obvious culprit. I now tend to not just take note of the last 50 yards of a race and watch it over and over again and you then usually find everything happens for a reason or there's a reason why everything has happened.
Plus define a bad ride? To me it's usually about making the wrong decision more than an ability issue, like when a jockey goes off far too fast and weakens or sits too far off the pace and with no hard luck in running stories is flying at the finish but has given his mount too much to do. Or when he is tracking the runner in front and has two options to either go to the outer to pull around the leader and ensure a run or go to the inside and risk getting chopped off and then losing. Others sit far too long on the bridle at times too instead of kicking on, therefore the jockey rowing away on an upsides rival will keep at it just in case if the bridle horse doesn't go on and put the race to bed. NH jockeys with a double handful who don't kick on and jump the last with a lead so that they can afford a mistake if it happens is another example too.
Most other things are usually down to bad luck in running or a horse not having the toe at a certain stage of the race but then runs on again late once its stamina kicks in, yet all some punters see is the end part and not the earlier.
Gbtp, What's the facinination with losing rides by Fallon on here ? Moore and most of your English crappy jocks ride a lot more losers than Fallon , Spencer, Hughes , Queally and the other Irish jocks who go to the UK cos they can't make it at home and not a Dickie bird about them so if you have the time do some proper analysis before you knock the mighty Fallon or his countrymen who keep horse racing in Engerland on the road.
fallon is a dishonest **** bag i sugest everbody give his rides a wide berth
Ima I never mentioned dishonesty and no I don't think that every bad ride is a dishonest one. In fact the reason I rarely bet on the flat anymore is because there are so many poor jockeys who give poor rides, some of which are immediately thought of as dishonest but in fact are just poor rides. My point to you is that for EVERY poor ride by Fallon you immediately jump to his rescue, people may take you more seriously if you actually admit he gave a horse a bad ride.
I think Fallon is a top jockey. But I have to say the ride he gave Opinion yesterday was poor.
This is the crux of the matter with me though MJK and Facts because I agree he probably should have gone closer but was it due to a poor ride which you both think or due to not getting a clear run and bad luck which is what I think?
Whether it be Fallon or any other jockey, I then want to look back at the video and see were there any explanations for the run rather than just label it as a poor ride and use the default setting of blame the jockey. If you then take into account the race was run on ground described at Good to Firm yet the time was 4 seconds slower than average, that it was a 16 runner field, that all 16 were still in contention at the 2f pole, that at that stage there was a little over a length or two between first and last, then that tells me there were bound to be a few hard luck stories and especially from those coming from off the pace when trying to weave through and get a run.
If all 16 runners could be covered by a length or two at the 2f pole in a 16 runner sprint handicap I'd expect there to be a few problems in getting a run, let alone a 12f handicap and I don't expect too many will actually bother to but if you were to go back and watch the video of the race again but just watch Fallon alone then I really can't see what else people were expecting him to do. As I said previously, Joe Fanning got on an even worse run on Sir Graham Wade because he was to Fallon's inner so couldn't even try to find a gap via pulling to the outer.
Here are the RP's post race comments for both runs:
Opinion - Held up in mid-division, driven over 4f out, not clear run 2f out until switched right just inside final furlong, ran on well
Sir Graham Wade - Held up in mid-division, not clear run from over 2f out, not recover, eased closing stages
So basically despite practically being side by side bar a horse's width between them, Fallon finished 5th when only getting a run late on and was flying at the finish but Fanning being to Fallon's inner finished 10th because he wasn't ever able to get out.
I just find it amusing that there aren't half a dozen threads started up slagging Fanning though. Not that I think there should be because neither jockey could have done much else regarding how the race panned out with so many runners in contention for so much of the race almost guaranteed there would be traffic problems.
Whether it be Fallon or any other jockey, I then want to look back at the video and see were there any explanations for the run rather than just label it as a poor ride and use the default setting of blame the jockey. If you then take into account the race was run on ground described at Good to Firm yet the time was 4 seconds slower than average, that it was a 16 runner field, that all 16 were still in contention at the 2f pole, that at that stage there was a little over a length or two between first and last, then that tells me there were bound to be a few hard luck stories and especially from those coming from off the pace when trying to weave through and get a run.
If all 16 runners could be covered by a length or two at the 2f pole in a 16 runner sprint handicap I'd expect there to be a few problems in getting a run, let alone a 12f handicap and I don't expect too many will actually bother to but if you were to go back and watch the video of the race again but just watch Fallon alone then I really can't see what else people were expecting him to do. As I said previously, Joe Fanning got on an even worse run on Sir Graham Wade because he was to Fallon's inner so couldn't even try to find a gap via pulling to the outer.
Here are the RP's post race comments for both runs:
Opinion - Held up in mid-division, driven over 4f out, not clear run 2f out until switched right just inside final furlong, ran on well
Sir Graham Wade - Held up in mid-division, not clear run from over 2f out, not recover, eased closing stages
So basically despite practically being side by side bar a horse's width between them, Fallon finished 5th when only getting a run late on and was flying at the finish but Fanning being to Fallon's inner finished 10th because he wasn't ever able to get out.
I just find it amusing that there aren't half a dozen threads started up slagging Fanning though. Not that I think there should be because neither jockey could have done much else regarding how the race panned out with so many runners in contention for so much of the race almost guaranteed there would be traffic problems.
MJK your three and a half lines made perfect sense. I don't think it is worth encouraging yet another response - let the forum make up it's own mind about one person who isn't his agent or friend continually writing what amounts to a book of hard luck stories about one jockey when jockeys are criticised (some unjustly) on here every few minutes.
LOL...I'm taking a wild guess here that differentdrum is one of the very kind of people I'm on about who won't actually bother to go and watch the race video again....Probably through fear of seeing what I have written actually panning out in front of his very eyes.
Oh and differentdrum I could very easily have condensed my "book" post down to it "an unlucky ride" and left it at that, although call me old fashioned but I like to then elaborate on that to try to support my view. Yeah I know, a right weirdo aren't I?
Plus just to show you exactly how blinkered you are with your point about other jockeys and alluding to the view that it's only about Fallon with me (someone I neither know nor have met) I even go on to mention Fanning was unlucky too but your agenda has clearly clouded your vision or prevented you from taking that in. I think you will also find I've made comments regarding Richard Kingscote, Joseph O'Brien and others too when I thought they have been unjustly criticised but then why let the facts get in the way here eh?
Havlin isn't Fallon though djbulldog so does get the special treatment.
Oh and differentdrum I could very easily have condensed my "book" post down to it "an unlucky ride" and left it at that, although call me old fashioned but I like to then elaborate on that to try to support my view. Yeah I know, a right weirdo aren't I?
Plus just to show you exactly how blinkered you are with your point about other jockeys and alluding to the view that it's only about Fallon with me (someone I neither know nor have met) I even go on to mention Fanning was unlucky too but your agenda has clearly clouded your vision or prevented you from taking that in. I think you will also find I've made comments regarding Richard Kingscote, Joseph O'Brien and others too when I thought they have been unjustly criticised but then why let the facts get in the way here eh?
Havlin isn't Fallon though djbulldog so does get the special treatment.
Had a nice e/w double yesterday LOUIS THE PIOUS ( another fallon bad ride ) and WANNABE LOVED ( wish fallon had rode it)
I considered his ride on Opinion a poor ride because the horse had a plum draw and Fallon didn't take advantage of this. He should have closer to the pace.It wasn't as if the horse was outpaced early on.
FACTS you are spot on and believe me I know he would agree with you.
Sorry am I missing something here?
Being drawn in stall 1 in a 5f dash around Chester might be considered a plum draw seeing as it's a turning track and jockeys also have to keep straight and ride to their draw for the first 75 yards or whatever the finer detail of that rule is, but I admit to being baffled why stall 6 of 17 in a 12f race or the draw in general is supposed to be that important? I've never heard a beaten jockey in the Derby come back and blame the draw for the defeat and was it only stall 6 that was supposedly the plum draw for Fallon? What about Silvestre De Sousa in stall 5 or Liam Keniry in 7 or Joe Fanning in 8, where are their multiple threads after the race telling us what a bad ride they supposedly gave their horses. The first 4 home were drawn 14, 2, 17 and 7 so that also suggest that the draw had very little effect.
The draw is largely irrelevant in 12f race because regardless of where you are drawn, more often than not you will get a run and not have traffic problems once the ones beaten early start to fade, but the point I keep trying to stress is that this race was run 4 seconds slower than average despite the ground being Good top Firm when you would expect a fast time as a result of that and because of this, every runner was still in contention after 10f or a 12 race and that very rare.
Apart from anything else Fallon for the vast majority of the race was positioned midfield and around 6L off the lead and was still only that far from it when coming off the bend. So 6L with 4f to go isn't exactly way off the pace with a mountain to climb to make up the ground either. Not getting a clear run has cost him in the end and that's just one aspect of race riding that sometimes happens and especially in big field races run at a slow pace.
Being drawn in stall 1 in a 5f dash around Chester might be considered a plum draw seeing as it's a turning track and jockeys also have to keep straight and ride to their draw for the first 75 yards or whatever the finer detail of that rule is, but I admit to being baffled why stall 6 of 17 in a 12f race or the draw in general is supposed to be that important? I've never heard a beaten jockey in the Derby come back and blame the draw for the defeat and was it only stall 6 that was supposedly the plum draw for Fallon? What about Silvestre De Sousa in stall 5 or Liam Keniry in 7 or Joe Fanning in 8, where are their multiple threads after the race telling us what a bad ride they supposedly gave their horses. The first 4 home were drawn 14, 2, 17 and 7 so that also suggest that the draw had very little effect.
The draw is largely irrelevant in 12f race because regardless of where you are drawn, more often than not you will get a run and not have traffic problems once the ones beaten early start to fade, but the point I keep trying to stress is that this race was run 4 seconds slower than average despite the ground being Good top Firm when you would expect a fast time as a result of that and because of this, every runner was still in contention after 10f or a 12 race and that very rare.
Apart from anything else Fallon for the vast majority of the race was positioned midfield and around 6L off the lead and was still only that far from it when coming off the bend. So 6L with 4f to go isn't exactly way off the pace with a mountain to climb to make up the ground either. Not getting a clear run has cost him in the end and that's just one aspect of race riding that sometimes happens and especially in big field races run at a slow pace.
Ima, Fallon himself said before the race on tv that he was gonna try to make the best of his good draw. So he's talking bollocks then
I'd say the same to Fallon if I could as I've already touched upon, why does the draw matter in a 12f race.
Or if you can explain to me what I'm missing I'd be happy to hear it.
Or if you can explain to me what I'm missing I'd be happy to hear it.
Johnny Murtagh blamed his draw for Simenon getting beat in the Ascot Gold Cup and that's a 2m 4f race,so there's your nonsensical theory out the window ima mazed. Then again its hardly surprising as you seem to specialise in nonsense.
I think Johnny was saying that tongue in cheek Jimeen. In the interview I heard he was saying that Estimate deserved her win. Did he actually say that and do you personally believe (in all seriousness)that in a race over two and a half miles that the difference in the end can be attributed to the draw.
There are some key words I've used in my previous comments about the draw MJK.
Some of which were it being largely irrelevant and also made reference to turning tracks such as Chester. The 2 mile start at Newcastle has a bend fairly early on and whilst not exactly continuously turning, is on the turn for much of a 2 mile race with 3 corners encompassed in much of the parts of the course that are turning. So whilst a wide draw can have some bearing on tactics such as go hard early to get a position if wanting to race handy or drop out early and sit off the pace or occasionally get hemmed in on the rail at times, there is still plenty of time left in the race for the draw to be largely irrelevant.
I would also suggest that if any beaten jockey came back and blamed the draw for a defeat at 2 miles at Newcastle then not too many trainers will be impressed with that, or about as impressed with any beaten Grand National jockey blaming the fact they had to line up at the start 12 off the rail instead of 2 off it. Haydock's 12f course has only 2 bends at complete opposite ends with around 5f parallel straights either side of those bends, so again usually plenty of time to take up a position in either of those straights during the race, bar the exception of bunching at the later stages due to a slowly run race, as was the case on Saturday.
Any quotes from Murtagh then jimeen so we can see for ourselves what he actually said rather than your interpretation of it? Not really much point alluding to "what Johnny said" unless you tell us exactly what Johnny did say is there?
The first 5f or so of the Ascot Gold Cup are in a straight line so plenty of time to take up a position of choice regardless of the draw and it wasn't exactly a massive field either. 3 runners were taken out of the original 17 line up so although officially drawn 16 or 18, Simeon was actually in 13 of 14. Plus despite the winner Estimate being officially in stall 5 it was actually in 4 and there were only 8 horses between Estimate and Simenon instead of the 11 there would have been had everything run. The draw became even more irrelevant after that due to the fact that despite where Estimate/Simenon were drawn, after about a furlong or so they were sides by side around 3 and 4 horse's widths off the rail. Once again the race is on video for all to see but who will bother to go and do so and see if what I am saying is accurate or not?
Just for the record, what probably accounted more for Simenon getting beaten was the horse wanted to go faster yet Murtagh reined it back early-ish, which caused it to pull at a few stages during the race. If he's then dropped the horse out a bit more it will mean either finding gaps when making his run to win or going around the outer (much like Fallon's options at Haydock) and if those were always going to be Murtagh's tactics, then the draw would have been even more irrelevant seeing as he would have still had the same two options later on anyway.
Then add to that Simenon got bumped a bit by the Ballydoyle runner too but still had over 2f of straight after coming off the final bend to win the race if good enough. I remember most of this because I backed Simeon myself and mainly watch my own selection in races live with occasional glances at the others in the race, then watch playbacks in full a few more times later on. By they way, do losing bets count as after timing on here too?
So anyway, any particular piece of apparently nonsense of mine you can draw attention to jimeen and tell me exactly what is wrong or would that be far too much effort so it's just easier to label it nonsense and leave it at that?
Some of which were it being largely irrelevant and also made reference to turning tracks such as Chester. The 2 mile start at Newcastle has a bend fairly early on and whilst not exactly continuously turning, is on the turn for much of a 2 mile race with 3 corners encompassed in much of the parts of the course that are turning. So whilst a wide draw can have some bearing on tactics such as go hard early to get a position if wanting to race handy or drop out early and sit off the pace or occasionally get hemmed in on the rail at times, there is still plenty of time left in the race for the draw to be largely irrelevant.
I would also suggest that if any beaten jockey came back and blamed the draw for a defeat at 2 miles at Newcastle then not too many trainers will be impressed with that, or about as impressed with any beaten Grand National jockey blaming the fact they had to line up at the start 12 off the rail instead of 2 off it. Haydock's 12f course has only 2 bends at complete opposite ends with around 5f parallel straights either side of those bends, so again usually plenty of time to take up a position in either of those straights during the race, bar the exception of bunching at the later stages due to a slowly run race, as was the case on Saturday.
Any quotes from Murtagh then jimeen so we can see for ourselves what he actually said rather than your interpretation of it? Not really much point alluding to "what Johnny said" unless you tell us exactly what Johnny did say is there?
The first 5f or so of the Ascot Gold Cup are in a straight line so plenty of time to take up a position of choice regardless of the draw and it wasn't exactly a massive field either. 3 runners were taken out of the original 17 line up so although officially drawn 16 or 18, Simeon was actually in 13 of 14. Plus despite the winner Estimate being officially in stall 5 it was actually in 4 and there were only 8 horses between Estimate and Simenon instead of the 11 there would have been had everything run. The draw became even more irrelevant after that due to the fact that despite where Estimate/Simenon were drawn, after about a furlong or so they were sides by side around 3 and 4 horse's widths off the rail. Once again the race is on video for all to see but who will bother to go and do so and see if what I am saying is accurate or not?
Just for the record, what probably accounted more for Simenon getting beaten was the horse wanted to go faster yet Murtagh reined it back early-ish, which caused it to pull at a few stages during the race. If he's then dropped the horse out a bit more it will mean either finding gaps when making his run to win or going around the outer (much like Fallon's options at Haydock) and if those were always going to be Murtagh's tactics, then the draw would have been even more irrelevant seeing as he would have still had the same two options later on anyway.
Then add to that Simenon got bumped a bit by the Ballydoyle runner too but still had over 2f of straight after coming off the final bend to win the race if good enough. I remember most of this because I backed Simeon myself and mainly watch my own selection in races live with occasional glances at the others in the race, then watch playbacks in full a few more times later on. By they way, do losing bets count as after timing on here too?
So anyway, any particular piece of apparently nonsense of mine you can draw attention to jimeen and tell me exactly what is wrong or would that be far too much effort so it's just easier to label it nonsense and leave it at that?
got to be honest,kieren looked extremely ropey tonight,and i was his biggest fan for years
One of the best of all time
I think he'll retire at the end of the season age has caught him up although I think he's still pretty fit he isn't doing himself justice.I'd be amazed if he carried on after this season,infact I think he'd be better for racing if he was used on a racing channel,i'd probably turn the sound up if he was used regularly!
I think he'll retire at the end of the season age has caught him up although I think he's still pretty fit he isn't doing himself justice.I'd be amazed if he carried on after this season,infact I think he'd be better for racing if he was used on a racing channel,i'd probably turn the sound up if he was used regularly!
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539