have we just seen the arc winner

Nicely bred, but bombed out on firmer ground.
So may have a quiet summer

that's what I'm saying

prescott won it with a similar type

She's certainly a bit of all white.

Can't really make a judgement on preferred going based on one run, only her second run, at Yarmouth. Wasn't really a blow out either, just in the context of the jaw dropping debut, it was a bit disappointing. But obviously looks very smart indeed.

Entered so they are taking a chance on the weather the Arc is hardly ever Firm

trainer walked the track before racing today Cider. Softer the better.

But ran it on GF on her second race. Presumably just basing her assumed preference on that race. It could well be, but there's not a great deal of racecourse evidence. Time was two seconds slow, in a hack canter.

Amazing hype for a filly that's just won a gr. 3 fillies race..  not in the same parish as Kalpana, so far..

She reminds me a bit of Bruni, from way back.. or The White Wonder..? if not quite..

Pro gamblers don't wait for evidence everyone can see Cider whether it's going or anything else. The quicker you can guess with a good percentage of accuracy the better. To be honest there's too much out there with this one already. Won twice on soft 7th on G/F lower class than today.

Don't understand the point. The trainer and jockey both stated they are pleased she ran well on that ground today, and would only avoid going with no give at all.

It's not going to impact gambling. The market goes with the obvious and the obvious is that she has only been beaten on GF. So a pro gambler 'might' oppose the market if she ever ran on GF again, as there would be juice in the price, but it's inconclusive that's why she was beaten. If they don't run on GF again, as looks very likely, it's not relevant.

Bruni he stayed well. This one looks a good  stayer at 12f+

You should add it to the Arc thread as well - Selection

Very likeable performance today, but Smoky Hill is correct - 16/1 is a shocking price for the Arc given the horses on the same price who have achieved so much more. Bookmakers must be killing themselves if they are getting away with offering that. I would want double just to think about it.

Bruni never fulfilled the promise of that Leger win. Another bookmakers favourite.

May 31, 2025 -- 7:36PM, differentdrum wrote:

Very likeable performance today, but Smoky Hill is correct - 16/1 is a shocking price for the Arc given the horses on the same price who have achieved so much more. Bookmakers must be killing themselves if they are getting away with offering that. I would want double just to think about it. Bruni never fulfilled the promise of that Leger win. Another bookmakers favourite.

There were a few 33/1 quotes post race, they were snapped up, and then the 25s was laid, all of them ducked again at that price, leaving VC top at 20s. Then that disappeared. So the 16s, I suspect, isn't being laid at all. People who wanted on at bigger got what they wanted.

Yes Cider you can take the view that soft isn't  needed if the price is big enough. Here though the trainer believes she won't win in top company without juice in the ground. I believe he's right. Maybe you think/guess she is as good on G/F or it's a possibility and the price may compensate. Unlikely situation. The trainer has made his mind up.

I was responding to this line:

Pro gamblers don't wait for evidence everyone can see Cider whether it's going or anything else.

I don't see how it's relevant to 'pro' gambling.

Pro gambling is about having instinct or knowledge that consistently defeats the received view/obvious. If the trainer has told the world she wants soft, then the market tends to align with that.

There may be a 'pro' opportunity that the assumption has been made on limited evidence, and is incorrect. For example, there was a big price winner in York yesterday as the market assumed it needed AW, based on a couple of below par efforts on turf a long time ago. Those are the best betting opportunities (not that I availed that one!), but obviously it needs connections to give it another try.

I remember Timeform stating that just because a lightly raced horse has won a couple of races on soft/heavy it doesn't rule out the horse being better on G/F.  Strictly speaking they are correct. But it doesn't happen too often. I think over the years it's sometimes happened with the O'Brien horses because of the going over there and the horses being so superior.  I even think in some cases it's made some people believe the sire of these horses gets soft ground progeny.

I'm just a born contrarian when it comes to gambling though. I tend to try and oppose the market / obvious, by default.

Most pro gamblers take a quick view often negative angles on other horses. Yes you are right they go against the crowd.  What handicaps most pundits is needing all the t's crossed and i's dotted. Each to his own though. I rarely back horses bigger than 10/1. Unless you are really good it's too long between drinks.

Funny that you don’t post your thoughts on the anti post Arc thread!

I guess on here threads can get lost and such debates, so it’s why it’s more popular than the anti post forum.

Saying as they did on ITV that she can get soft ground in the Arc was a joke. There’s more easier group ones in Germany beforehand. Bit short sighted by the rampers on there. 
16/1 for a horse that has yet to win a Group 1 looks short!

Of course I only started this thread as a Rico type opener. Impressive horse with the extreme end of possibility mentioned.

For me it's the odds relative to the true probability. For example I had a bet in the £K's for a Labour Maj at the last election.

The limitation at the bigger odds is getting on. But yes a long string of value losers can be challenging.

But I still don't link pro gambling to whether Estrange needs soft or not. The trainer ran it on GF on it's second race (a horse I assume had been difficult to train/get get to the track). Doesn't suggest to me that he felt she needed soft then, it's just a convenient excuse to reach for.

Southend fc promotion a bit more likely. See great 20/1 footie bet I can't place thread on horse racing forum

Was trained by Gosden who recommended that she go to a quieter yard. Does he give away Arc hopefuls? Or find a quiet corner within his own yard and treat her differently.

She looks to have a lot of the right ingredients for the race, Delashay. But it's not a betting prospect for me. She'll need to run more times before then, and will need to win to maintain her place in the Arc market. So better of putting the stake on in the intervening races.

Agree there’s lots of races before then. Great Group 1 today @ Chantilly, no thread and the race has an O’Brien FAV.

Many horses have a preference for good/fast or soft. Trainers can be wrong even after a few runs. Pro gamblers need to take a view and quickly. But yes everything is down to price in the end so they could "change " the view solely on price.

There's a difference between a genuine thought that horse A needs X going, and coming to that conclusion to explain away a disappointing run. ie the politics of being a trainer. I maintain that it is highly unlikely you'd run a valuable filly for a huge owner/breeder operation, on GF 2nd time out if you thought she'd hate it, on her second run approaching the end of her 3yo season after winning her debut easily on the snaff. After the race, it's an easy excuse to reach for. It could easily be the case, they found out on the day, but could equally be that it was a rough race and it was the first time she'd been asked to race properly, and came on a lot for the experience.

Yes can be the experience rather than the going. I would think most trainers will  be hoping their horse doesn't need mud. Safe ground OK.  I may be wrong but maybe you don't look at a horses build ( Bull thought narrow  lighter framed types often prefered soft )  action and hoof size into account too much.