Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
08 Oct 24
18:30
Joined:
Date Joined:
11 Mar 02
....are out for a stretch of their legs and nothing more.
Show More
Complete rubbish,100s of reasons why they’re held up,1 of them is a stretch of their legs.
Complete rubbish,100s of reasons why they’re held up,1 of them is a stretch of their legs.
Anyone,know Dave the cleaner at Betfair.
Ask him to get his lad to pop in on his way home from school,
So he can add an update to forum posting software.
If post identical match,within 2 mins,ignore 2nd post,
To stop double posting errors.
Ask him to get his lad to pop in on his way home from school,
So he can add an update to forum posting software.
If post identical match,within 2 mins,ignore 2nd post,
To stop double posting errors.
comingupthehill are you David Simcock? One for the Barstewards listeners.
100s of reasons, yeah yeah. The main one being a stretch of their legs.
The vast majority of races in the UK are crawls early turning into a sprint late on, why you would hold the horse up is beyond me. I can't believe connections are choosing to be held up and expect to actually win.
100s of reasons, yeah yeah. The main one being a stretch of their legs.
The vast majority of races in the UK are crawls early turning into a sprint late on, why you would hold the horse up is beyond me. I can't believe connections are choosing to be held up and expect to actually win.
Typically horses are held up for three reasons; to help them settle, they race better in a pack or there are concerns about staying the trip.
What is so frustrating is that for the former two they only need horses in front of them, not the whole bloody field.
For the latter - making a horse close up the ground when they are at their most tired rather than early when they may be wasting energy pulling is utterly nonsensical, yet this method has been regarded as part of the British racing 10 commandments forever.
I don't have the figures but sectionals suggest to me that UK jockeys judge their race by their position relative to other horses and pay little regard how optimal positioning is influenced by the pace of the race. As an example (and I'm playing a little loose as it's from memory): at Southwell on the old fibresand it was almost impossible to win in sprint handicaps if you were more than 2 lengths back two out when the pace was average for the grade or slower. Yet over half the horses in every race were out of position.
I'd love to know how race positioning and race pace is taught at the British Racing School. Punters have always been regarded as mud in this country - they really need serious professional punters to play a more prominent role throughout racing.
There's a reason Steve Cauthen is still so well regarded on these shores.
We need to stop lionising the jockeys who come late and fast and win despite beginning their run too late. There's no way they know how much the lead horse will slow to time things so perfectly. Lucky incompetence.
What is so frustrating is that for the former two they only need horses in front of them, not the whole bloody field.
For the latter - making a horse close up the ground when they are at their most tired rather than early when they may be wasting energy pulling is utterly nonsensical, yet this method has been regarded as part of the British racing 10 commandments forever.
I don't have the figures but sectionals suggest to me that UK jockeys judge their race by their position relative to other horses and pay little regard how optimal positioning is influenced by the pace of the race. As an example (and I'm playing a little loose as it's from memory): at Southwell on the old fibresand it was almost impossible to win in sprint handicaps if you were more than 2 lengths back two out when the pace was average for the grade or slower. Yet over half the horses in every race were out of position.
I'd love to know how race positioning and race pace is taught at the British Racing School. Punters have always been regarded as mud in this country - they really need serious professional punters to play a more prominent role throughout racing.
There's a reason Steve Cauthen is still so well regarded on these shores.
We need to stop lionising the jockeys who come late and fast and win despite beginning their run too late. There's no way they know how much the lead horse will slow to time things so perfectly. Lucky incompetence.
You're not wrong, Davros. For me, when trainers say they want a strong early pace so that they can
close at the finish they are looking at racing through the wrong end of the telescope.
The early pace of our races is nearly always a crawl. Holding a horse up and then trying to chase
the leaders down into a quickening pace is a recipe for failure. Yet we see these tactics employed
race after race.
It's even more evident in France .( I've often thought that if an American trainer say a Wesley Ward
were to open a yard in France and take over a group of front running, tractable, sprinters he could
clean up. ).The trainer who does seem to take advantage over here is Mark Johnston. We've heard time
and again from pundits how 'tough' his runners are and they are hard to pass in the final furlong.
Time after time Joe Fanning takes his runners to or close to the front, maintains a slowish pace
and therefore has horse left for the finish. As the early pace is usually slow it takes no more out
of a front runner than the rest. He can set the pace to suit the horse and then kick 1/2 furlongs
from home.
The most important part of a race is the start yet such scant attention is paid to it. Getting good
early position is vital. Hold up types could well be running at the wrong distance. Better they run
at longer distances but up closer to the pace.
close at the finish they are looking at racing through the wrong end of the telescope.
The early pace of our races is nearly always a crawl. Holding a horse up and then trying to chase
the leaders down into a quickening pace is a recipe for failure. Yet we see these tactics employed
race after race.
It's even more evident in France .( I've often thought that if an American trainer say a Wesley Ward
were to open a yard in France and take over a group of front running, tractable, sprinters he could
clean up. ).The trainer who does seem to take advantage over here is Mark Johnston. We've heard time
and again from pundits how 'tough' his runners are and they are hard to pass in the final furlong.
Time after time Joe Fanning takes his runners to or close to the front, maintains a slowish pace
and therefore has horse left for the finish. As the early pace is usually slow it takes no more out
of a front runner than the rest. He can set the pace to suit the horse and then kick 1/2 furlongs
from home.
The most important part of a race is the start yet such scant attention is paid to it. Getting good
early position is vital. Hold up types could well be running at the wrong distance. Better they run
at longer distances but up closer to the pace.
It's the one thing I've never understood with Jamie Spencer an excellent jockey with a wealth of experience who doesn't seem to realise how many hold up rides have cost him winners.
Davros • October 8, 2024 8:03 PM BST
Typically horses are held up for three reasons; to help them settle, they race better in a pack or there are concerns about staying the trip.
What is so frustrating is that for the former two they only need horses in front of them, not the whole bloody field.
For the latter - making a horse close up the ground when they are at their most tired rather than early when they may be wasting energy pulling is utterly nonsensical, yet this method has been regarded as part of the British racing 10 commandments forever.
I think "staying the trip" reason is sometimes because a horse might run (or want to run) at the speed it ran in a shorter race, so it is really "to help them settle". Amy other reason is, as you say, nonsensical.
Typically horses are held up for three reasons; to help them settle, they race better in a pack or there are concerns about staying the trip.
What is so frustrating is that for the former two they only need horses in front of them, not the whole bloody field.
For the latter - making a horse close up the ground when they are at their most tired rather than early when they may be wasting energy pulling is utterly nonsensical, yet this method has been regarded as part of the British racing 10 commandments forever.
I think "staying the trip" reason is sometimes because a horse might run (or want to run) at the speed it ran in a shorter race, so it is really "to help them settle". Amy other reason is, as you say, nonsensical.
Spencer is the obv jockey associated with this issue - he wins occasionally and suddenly everyone starts shouting he's a genius..
...obv ignoring the multitude of losers he's had holding up horses wrongly before that win.
...obv ignoring the multitude of losers he's had holding up horses wrongly before that win.
sparrow09 Oct 24 11:29Joined: 20 Jul 02 | Topic/replies: 56,690 | Blogger: sparrow's blog
It's the one thing I've never understood with Jamie Spencer an excellent jockey with a wealth of experience who doesn't seem to realise how many hold up rides have cost him winners.
and therefore he aint excellent Sparrow.
It's the one thing I've never understood with Jamie Spencer an excellent jockey with a wealth of experience who doesn't seem to realise how many hold up rides have cost him winners.
and therefore he aint excellent Sparrow.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539