There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
04 Jul 26
20:57
Joined:
Date Joined:
05 Oct 11
Oddschecker give it as good, and the Racing Post as soft. Quite helpful given that a horse like Calandagan is involved. Given he is shortening in up, I assume it is closer to good?
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 4
|
By:
usually quicker than given by the french sometimes by some way
|
|
By:
ive heard 6 pundits ,trainer,jock banging on about how the fat grounde will suit calandagan,thats fine but how does that compute with last weeks bedwetting session about CALANDAGAN been allowed to run/pih up in THE ARC urely he,s not going to get his ground in paris in oct if prefers a faster surface
|
|
By:
The Racing Post is patently wrong and even mention the fine weather forecast being unlikely to change the ground. The official description from the course is good and the stick reading suggests the faster side of British good.
|
|
By:
I don't think you can rely on this outfit and ground - within weeks it seems they ran their best two horses on the 'wrong ground'. I am not so sure Nemone Routh, who talks a good game, would still be working for more demanding connections.
|