Arkle Appreciation Group

  • Thread starter Thread starter ArkleSupreme
  • Start date Start date
First run in Feb 1937 as a non handicap Gold Cup trial in an era when handicaps were king;remember the Gold Cup (first run 1924) was seen as no more than a Grand national trial until Easter Hero and Golden Miller gave it credence as a race in its own right. Grand National always worth multiples of Gold Cup.
Moving King George to Dec 26 as a mid season target was a stroke of planning genius.
King George chase only run as a level weight race post Arkle.
Remember we only got a premier level weight 3 mile chase in Ireland in 1986 when MVOBrien sponsored Gold Cup in Leopardstown to increase race attendance, they had prize money for first 10 to guarantee a decent size field.
 
it seems to me that arkle supreme has been banned as it says on his profile so andrew if your reading this KAUTO STAR IS THE GREATEST OF ALL TIME
16 GRADE 1 RACES
WINNING THEM IN 7 YRS RUNNING
HIGHEST RATED CHASER AT 2 TO 3 MILES 2
THE ONLY HORSE TO WIN 3.2 MILLION PRIZE MONEY
THE ONLY HORSE TO WIN 5 KING GEORGES BREAKING ARKLES RECORD WINNING DISTANCE OF 44 YEARS
THE ONLY HORSE TO WIN 4 BETFAIR CHASES AND SMASH THE COURSE RECORD BY 10 SECONDS AT NEARLY 12
THE ONLY HORSE TO REGAIN THE GOLD CUP
KING OF KINGS THE GREATEST OF THEM ALL THE ONE AND ONLY
KAUTO STAR :)
 
mayes king kauto said:
it seems to me that arkle supreme has been banned as it says on his profile so andrew if your reading this KAUTO STAR IS THE GREATEST OF ALL TIME
16 GRADE 1 RACES
WINNING THEM IN 7 YRS RUNNING
HIGHEST RATED CHASER AT 2 TO 3 MILES 2
THE ONLY HORSE TO WIN 3.2 MILLION PRIZE MONEY
THE ONLY HORSE TO WIN 5 KING GEORGES BREAKING ARKLES RECORD WINNING DISTANCE OF 44 YEARS
THE ONLY HORSE TO WIN 4 BETFAIR CHASES AND SMASH THE COURSE RECORD BY 10 SECONDS AT NEARLY 12
THE ONLY HORSE TO REGAIN THE GOLD CUP
KING OF KINGS THE GREATEST OF THEM ALL THE ONE AND ONLY
KAUTO STAR :)
Click to expand...

No need to shout. We hear you but we disagree.

Kauto Star was one of the all-time greats. Nobody is arguing with that. But you are simply dismissing Arkle because you cannot accept that something might have been better. It's a bit like not being able to accept that Shakespeare was a better writer than Katie Price.
 
Desert Orchid said:
No need to shout. We hear you but we disagree.

Kauto Star was one of the all-time greats. Nobody is arguing with that. But you are simply dismissing Arkle because you cannot accept that something might have been better. It's a bit like not being able to accept that Shakespeare was a better writer than Katie Price.
Click to expand...

I believe Katie has a wonderful range of sonnets coming out in time for Christmas
 
Desert Orchid said:
Did the KG have the same prestige in those days? (IE did the very best of the rest try to win it?) It's clear that if Arkle hadn't run in his Gold Cups, we'd be hailing the winners as greats of their time. (DAFT QUESTION LOOK AT THE WINNERS Madarin Frenchans Cove Mill House Arkle)


Fanciful, maybe, but tripe? If people believe Kauto was 191 and Arkle 212 at their best - and Kauto's best was round Kempton whereas we can only guess if Arkle's very best form was recorded at the track - then those 21lbs would equate in theory to 28 lengths. Maybe Arkle didn't produce his very best in the race (although it's possible he did, if he could run so well at Sandown) but 20 lengths is 15lbs so Arkle would 'only' need to be 206 to do the job. (So you honestly think when Kauto won the race by 36 lengths Arkle could have given him 15lbs and beat him a further 20 lengths? I'd love to have the movie rights to that one)


This is a red herring. You cannot compare times like this. After all, the handicapper Knockroe ran the 12f at Epsom faster than Sea Bird carrying more weight. You only need to look at track record holders at a random selection of tracks to see the actual race time is meaningless. Red Rum, in catching Crisp, took a huge chunk off the track record and people thought it would stand for ever. A number of years later, Mr Frisk took something like another 30s off the record. This doesn't mean winners before Red Rum were incapable of running that fast. They just didn't have to. Arkle didn't have to run any faster than he did but it doesn't mean he couldn't have if he had to. (Absolute rubbish Arkle was as racey as they come and he went flat out at the end of his races without being asked. Show me one race where Pat Taffe sat motionless on him apart from the 66 Gold Cup when he beat 3 rags and even then Arkle wasn't hanging about.


Firstly, Kauto didn't run to 191 that year. If he did Alberta's Run would have run to 185, some way above his level. The conclusion has to be that the ground was faster than just good. Secondly, 20lbs doesn't equate to 20s over 3m. It's more like 4s. I reckon on fast ground, a smart handicapper could run in the low 3m50s round Kempton. (Now you are just taking tripe the ground was actually on the soft side of good and was recorded as good soft in places. All the times indicated that was correct except for Kauto's which a was all but 10 seconds faster than the Feltham)

The old Standard Time for Kempton’s 3m is 5m55s. That’s for a 168 horse on good ground. For KS to have been a 191, he should have been able to run it in something like 3m50s. Faster conditions would bring that time down. The fastest he ever did it was 3m57 on good ground, when he beat Albertas Run 8 lengths (6lbs). His other times were between about 6m5s and 6m9s so there is no evidence on the clock that he was abnormally fast so why should Arkle have needed Frankelesque pace to beat him? Desert Orchid clocked 6m0s under 12-3 over C&D on good ground in the RP Chase and 5m50s on firm ground yet only beat Kildimo four lengths. Is anyone prepared to argue that Kildimo was a 188 beast?
Click to expand...
So many facts yet you failed to check the ground tut tut :0)
 
I did check the ground. Good for the faster times, good-to-soft for the slower times.

However, you cannot take worded going descriptions at face value. You need to take account of the race times on the day. Going described as 'good' might be approaching g/s or g/f, which can be quite a significant difference and then you need to factor in the tendency of more recent clerks of the course to give descriptions that will encourage certain favoured trainers to run their horses.

Then again, I'm not trying to tell my granny how to suck eggs.

I might, if I get the chance later in the week, look out the relevant going allowances (mine) for the years in question.

But don't try and deflect attention for your 20lbs = 20s assertion!!
 
Tanlic said:
)(So you honestly think when Kauto won the race by 36 lengths Arkle could have given him 15lbs and beat him a further 20 lengths? I'd love to have the movie rights to that one)
Click to expand...
Did I say that anywhere? Do you actually read what people write?

For Arkle to have given him 15lbs and a 20 lengths beating, that would equate to 30lbs. Nobody has claimed anywhere that Arkle was 221. Your miscalculations in recent posts undo some of the positive, sensible stuff you contribute.

When KS won his KG by 36 lengths (27lbs) it wasn't as if he was beating Desert Orchid by that distance. It was the decent but inconsistent handicapper Madison Du Berlais, from 156-rated Barbers Shop (btn 25 lengths by Albertas Run next time and further after that before running in hunter chases) so do I think Arkle could have beaten that pair by a further 20 lengths at level weights? I'd put the mortgage on it.
 
Last edited:
DO you reasoning is quite obvious, but many people live horse racing with a different approach, pounds, lengths.......to complex.....:blink:
 
Really so a higher rated horse has never lost to a lower rated horse no ??! It happens all the time so stick the ratings where the sun don't shine:)
 
Back
Top