1000 Guineas

Ah, I get it - so if punters on messageboards don't mention training on except for 2yos, then the term is never used in the context of older horses??? Maybe you should get out a bit more my dear! ;)

I really do think that a lot of people are aware what 'not training on' means as well; in terms of 2yos to 3yos it is generally used to mean that they haven't improved from 2 to 3 in the manner expected taking into account the maturing they have done in the close season. It is also used to suggest a horse has gone backwards but more usually when talking about older horses. It is a given that a horse will improve from 2 to 3 as it matures. If the improvement is not proportional to the amount it has physically matured then it is usually thought to have not trained on.
 
EC1 said:
Would totally disagree Track

they wouldn't have to be the most impressive crop at all..


.the fact is that a mature 2yo just doesn't make the average improvement from 2 to 3..hence when a mature 2yo runs at 3 against 3yos that have made that improvement ..its then left behind...nothing to do with the rest being exceptional at all.

something like this

A 2yo at end of September at 8f is 28 lbs shy of full maturity..by the time May comes round that average 2yo..now 3 of course... will be 12lbs shy of maturity. So the average 2yo improves 16 lbs over the winter.

If we say that Rainbow View was a 117 horse last September..you must then knock the WFA off that figure as its a mature figure..ie if 2yo ran against a 4yo at a mile then it would receive 28 lbs at that point in time...so RV in real terms was only rated 117 minus 28 = 89 last September.

So you have an 89 horse in real terms that may not improve at all over winter if she was a mature 2yo..or maybe just 5 or 10lbs...so by the time that May comes around RV could now just be a 95/100 horse at best....obviously all 3yo's still have another 12 lb to go to be fully mature..so at very best at the end of her 3yo career RV would be rated 112...so....it wouldn't really need an exceptional crop after all really would it?...there will be many 3yo's at the end of this season rated above 112 I reckon.

there is no such thing as not training on..just that some horses mature more quickly than others
Click to expand...

Very interesting stuff, EC1, though I would disagree with your figures.

Taking weight for age into account, I would have had Rainbow View on 130 (at least) last year; indeed, I remember making the point (and being subsequently ridiculed! :ninja:) that she was the best 2yo filly I'd ever seen after the Fillies Mile last year.

Even if Rainbow View hasn't improved a yard over the winter, I would still be of the opinion that in order to beat her (much less by 3 lengths) would require an amount of improvement far, far higher than normal (a fairly ambiguous concept in itself).
 
the RPR for RV was 117 Track, they build in WFA as far as I know. so that is a mature figure..

I would agree that she was worth more than 117..not sure about 130 though

but even if she was say a 125..mature..her real figure then would be only 97...so IF she has stood still it wouldn't be that hard for quite a few horses to pass her

of course we are talking hypothetically..she may not have stood still...it might be she didn't like the ground

I would just add though...the ground wasn't rock hard today...even with a tailwind the times suggest the track was riding approx 30lb fast per mile...some of that will be the tailwind...maybe only 20lb fast so it wasn't firm ground.

All will be revealed I suppose when she meets Good ground.

so many questions

makes a 1 million piece jigsaw look easy does this game
 
EC1 said:
the RPR for RV was 117 Track, they build in WFA as far as I know. so that is a mature figure..
Click to expand...

If that's taking into account WFA it's insulting.

As you say, a lot will be revealed over the next couple of months, though I'm certainly not giving up on her on the basis of today alone.
 
i will stand corrected on that Track but I believe the RPR's are all WFA corrected..same as Timeform..that way when horses meet in handicaps the older horses are corrected to 10-00 whilst 3yo are corrected to 10-00 minus the WFA. That way all horses can have mature ratings and all age groups have like for like ratings
 
Interesting.

I've long been of the opinion that the best 2yos are only the best 2yos because they're really 3yos in disguise, ie they're very mature 2yos. You still expect them to improve over the winter, though.
 
DO

one of the reasons I am always wary of very good 2yo speed figures is the fact that it isn't an even playing field.

Over the last few years its fair to say that most of the big figure 2yo's have indeed improved at 3..New Approach...George W...Nagatora..etc

It seemed the view of the RP that there wasn't a lot of improvement left in RV last year - hence me latching on to that - I hope it isn't the case and we see an improved run NTO by RV on better ground...I'm doubting that though because the times today don't reflect rock hard ground as said..blaming the ground could be a reason for her not winning but it may be that Gosden has left a lot more to work on - he really seemed to be playing the guineas down in that interview.
 
EC1 said:
but it may be that Gosden has left a lot more to work on - he really seemed to be playing the guineas down in that interview.
Click to expand...

His handling of Ravens Pass last year was a negative for RV, especially at short odds. I like Gosden, but like Meehan he seems overly fixated with the Breeders Cup.
 
My experience has been the frequency with which they record them is also important, Natagora and Teofilo being two obvious ones (you can throw Zarakava into that list too). 2yo progression is normally quite predictable once they start to enter pattern races. I got burned this weekend no doubt about that (having enjoyed a mini golden period with them) but I was always less confident about the figures I held for this crop than any other. Some of them held up in truth, its just that I took the wrong horse to represent them, but that's my fault, so no complaints.

I've had plenty of success in identifying good 2yo's though haven't always backed them at the price I should have done. Natagora would have allowed me 109 free bets back to stake for instance. Teofilo I picked up at 33/1 when most others were looking at Trinty College. Finsceal Beo's price went with the Bousacc win, but Sander Camillo was never going to be a threat.

Others went the other way;

I suppose Teofilo strictly did too, but I'd take that bet again at 33/1 everytime. Evening Time got injured and was never the same. Screen Star never raced again. Minted came last having got injured in his next race and never raced again. That's racing. Having said that, I also held a rating for Kingsgate Native that said he could win the Nunthorpe at 16's. Swings and roundabouts
 
I don't agree at all that training on only applies from 2 to 3 . One category of horse where it seems to be particularly important is the improving 3 year old filly onto 4 . There have been many who did not train on anywhere near as well as expected to 4 .

Kissogram , Passage of Time and Cape Verdi being recentish examples .

Then again there is that odd category of horse - usually it seems sprinters who follow a good 2 yo career with a disappointing 3 and then bounce back at 4 - Royal Applause being the most obvious example.

It is too early to say whether Rv hasn't trained on - her work evidently suggested she had . They have a potentially valid excuse for her run but time will tell.
 
Last edited:
are we not confusing "not training on" with losing form when it comes to older horses anyway?

My point was that as soon as a top 2yo throws in a bad one FTO at 3 the "not trained on" statement is used in most cases by punters....when in fact the horse has simply progressed quicker at 2 and shown a false superiority over its peers

at 3 you then see the same horse when the rest have caught up. So in reality the horse has not failed to train on at all..its just found its level.

What makes it look like the horse isn't as good is that it then runs above its class level..due to the 2yo expectations ..and gets beat. It actually shows the same level of form it had at 2..has not regressed..then gets badly placed in races it can't win.

as I said..its only used by punters about 2yo...and is used in error imo in regard to that age group....don't forget I don't mix with all the stars of racing like you folk do:rolleyes:...so I don't know what trainers say about older ones.
 
The winner's gone favourite for the Oaks. Don't get sucked in. Sheikh Hamdan doesn't believe she'll stay a mile and a half (with some justification). He doesn't see the point of winner another Guineas (she probably wouldn't get conditions to suit as well in the other Guineas anyway). So Sheikh H's idea is to run her in the Coronation.
 
Galileo said:
I'd be amazed if the winner went for the Oaks, Ascot must be much more likely.
Click to expand...

Well it does seem so, especially considering that the owner appears adament she won't stay.

Probably be some big prices for the Oaks on Betfair despite her being the ostensible favourite.
 
Seeing M. Channon being interviewed was enough to sign off Lahaleeb's chances. He didn't seem to be serious about her (is he always casual about his charges?) ... "oh, she's well ... trains herself really"

!! weird !! :(
 
mrussell said:
Seeing M. Channon being interviewed was enough to sign off Lahaleeb's chances. He didn't seem to be serious about her (is he always casual about his charges?) ... "oh, she's well ... trains herself really"

!! weird !! :(
Click to expand...

...has her own stable key... let's herself in and out... comes and goes as she pleases.

I've heard it said the trainer is around on occasion.:)
 
I've now checked the times for Sunday.

I can't help thinking Ghanaati might just be a very good winner. I admit I find myself saying this most years and the thing about fillies is that they're not as consistent so it tends to be harder to be dogmatic about them. However, I'm going to remain positive about this race until events prove me wrong.
 
Back
Top