Ascot Tomorrow

He's always very OTT and emotional in the final stages of watching one of his run, if they are in with a chance. I think it's quite endearing! I stood with him and his crowd watching Naunton Brook win at another course on a screen in the O&T at Warwick once in 2006, they went quite potty! - it was fun.
 
The horses were finishing very tired today and were pretty much crawling over the line. Twist Magic was dead on his feet from the final bend and was stopping rapidly.
 
Originally posted by Headstrong@Jan 19 2008, 05:17 PM
The changes in going at Ascot are very tough for horses, esp speed horses/non-stayers.


The fact they ran a fast race anyway is interesting, will look forweard to Warbler's number-cruching

Click to expand...
It wasn't a fast race, it was a very fast race, so fast in fact that there has to be chance Twist Magic was caught out for class, as he's been taken into unknown territory for the first time.

You might say that other novices go on to suceed in their first year in open company, and indeed the record of Arkle winners (which he isn't of course, but some might consider assigning him an honorary win?) is excellent in the following seasons 2 mile champion, which of course it is. No one can deny that. However, he was a 5yo novice, now 6. The record of 6yo's by contrast is appalling. I seem to think the Champion Chase has only been won twice in its entire history by a 6yo, (and one of those was last year).

The other thing you need to remember is how we loosely talk about the relationship between speed and stamina, as I think there's a terrible misunderstanding. Speed horses are by definition stayers (although I prefer the word stamina). They have to be in order to run very fast times, as the only way they can do it, is to sustain a series of fractions until such time as they break the back of their opponents (metaphorically). What I'll loosely call fast horses, are those who can use a devastating turn of foot off a slow pace. These horses often make visually impressive showings, especially in novice races, and often get hyped up and sent to Cheltenham as short priced fancies off the back of these performances. However, once asked to go at a grade 1 pace for the duration of a race distance, then it is their ability to sustain that pace that is called on (stamina in any other language), alot of them come up short, as they're effectively being asked to not only run, but to win a race, in a manner which they have hitherto shown little ability that they can do.

In the same way as I believe there are two types of speed horses, I'm increasingly picking up evidence to suggest that there's two types of stamina horses too, but that's still under development norty.

As regards looking forward to the number crunching :brows: I wouldn't be so sure. 'Dread' would be the word I think I would use, (and I'll probably turn into its own thread) dependent on what I think I've turned up. My first impression though, is that Tamarinbleu has won fair and square, and that Nicholls, isn't quite clutching at straws, but over-stating the excuse.
 
Tamarinbleu surely wouldnt have the pace for a QM but he looks an interesting contender now for the Ryanair Chase?

Twist Magic obviously was not suited by the going but he stopped very quickly today. I think VPU might well reverse form the Tingle Creek form at Cheltenham.
 
Not sure I'd believe too much of what Nicholls says Gal. I can't find one shred of evidence in the timings to support his hypothesis (in much the same way as I couldn't last year when Jonjo made the same excuse for BJK in the Cleeve as opposed to the Relkeel) and everyone rushed out to concur with him. To my mind it looks like a prec-onceived excuse, and where as the ground wouldn't have helped Twist Magic, I think there's other equally pertinent factors at play too.

As Gareth says, how does he account for his observation that the horse "cruised there" and yet "didn't act on the ground". Not sure he can do both?.

Why do you think a horse like Tamarinbleu lacks the pace? Surely he's demonstrated today that his stamina enables him to maintain a pace, which ultimately has translated into a fast time that's proven too hot for Twist Magic. If anyone lacks the pace (or combination of pace + stamina) it's Twist Magic on that showing.
 
Don't think Tamarinbleu has the gears to win a Queen Mother myself. Galloped them into the ground today.

Is it just me or did O'Dwyer seem resigned to the fact that Mansony would finish third today from a good way out.. might have cost Mansony second, given how quickly Twist Magic stopped.. in O'Dwyer's defence, he was of course taking care of the horse when he had no chance of winning in the testing conditions.

I personally have my reservations about whether Twist Magic will come up the Cheltenham hill.
 
I agree, Trackside - between the second last and the last it very much looked as though Mansony would catch Twist Magic, then O'Dwyer sat right up on him, easing him down. Ergo IMO the official 11l distance between 2nd and 3rd doesn't tell the full story.
 
Indeed Shads. Even after three out he has a peak round to see what the story is behind and doesn't get vigorous until after TM walks through the second last. Not talking through my pocket by the way, nor necessarily blaming O'Dwyer.
 
I hadn't picked up on this until you mentioned, but having watched the race again :eek: and one horse is 9/4 and the other 25/1. He seems to be reeling him in when the camera cuts away, and you have every expectation that Mansony will catch him when they come past the post. Clearly something happened, for him to surrender more than double the distance he had closed up. Well spotted folks, and it doesn't appear to have gone unnoticed in the RP either
 
Mansony got badly out paced when the leading two quickened up. I cannot see him being placed at Cheltenham. Not good enough.
 
Twist Magic handles the heavy ground but failed to stay the trip in the ground.
The ground at Ascot was softer than Sandown and together with an extra furlong, a stiffer track and a stronger pace this was enough to finish him off.

I think the only way Twist Magic will be beaten in The Champion Chase is if the ground is as testing as it was yesterday, which is possible but unlikely, otherwise I expect him to win.

Ashley Brook has lost the plot and has clearly been in pain when asked to jump since he fell at Aintree.
 
Ascot climbs steeply from seven furlongs out to inside the final furlong. It is a much much stiffer track than many people realise. The Sandown Hill is mentioned every Sandown meeting, but Ascot is a stiffer track on the whole.
 
If Twist Magic tired close home I would understand the whole stamina thing...but he was beaten before the home turn...2-3furlong from home!
 
I'm not sure it was the trip that did him (he was beaten long before the extra furlong came into play). If anything, it would more likely be the pace on the ground.

The race times themselves suggest the ground was riding faster Ascot than Sandown though which presents a problem. In many respects it reminds me of some damn horse last year (can't remember it's name :P ) but that involved a trainer blaming the ground for his flop in the Cleeve Hurdle, coming as it did after an impressive win in the Relkeel. Those of us who keep variance figures were looking at them rather puzzled. What the hell is Jonjo O'Neill on about? the race times indicate the ground was pretty well identical, yet people believe what they want to believe. The great Jonjo had handed down an excuse (which had no grounding in the timings data whatsoever) but the apologists for the horse in question wanted it to be true.

The more sceptical and calculating amongst us were sent looking for an alternative explanation, satisfied as we were that Jonjo's excuse was fanciful. Needless to say we put it down to trip and lack of true class.

The rest as they say, is history.

I don't think it's quite as clear cut with Twist Magic, and the margins are narrower, but I'd be concerned he could get caught paddling up the hill now watching how he emptied yesterday (assuming a fast race of course). On decent ground and a decent pace he should be fine, but I think it was his lack of ability to sustain a gallop through the sections (stamina in any other language that's done for him).
 
Originally posted by uncle goober@Jan 20 2008, 02:45 PM
as was everything else!
Click to expand...
Which goes someway to indicating that Twist Magic hasn't been done by the ground, as he was the last horse in a field of grade 1's to call it a day. He's been beaten by a much better horse on the day. Paul Nicholls using Hoo La Baloo as evidence and the ground as an excuse just looks like a poor loser. Hence Eddie Freemantle's assertion that he's probably run his race, as he's looked at it similarly to I and drawn the same conclusions.

(I posted that analysis, about 16 hours before I first read Eddie's article incidentally if there were any doubters :P )
 
As I said earlier, which also happens to be a view I formed at race time not after listening to P Nicholls, he's been done by a combination of things. Not solely the ground, not solely the trip, not solely the stiffness of the track and not solely Tamarinbleu, but a combination of those things.

When I said the trip I realise that he was empty on the turn , fully two and a half furlongs out, therefore at a race run at that pace on ground that soft on a track that stiff he got about a mile and six. So yes the trip did do him, as even two miles was too far !

As you say, all this does translate as a lack of ability to sustain a gallop through the fractions that has done for him but on THIS ground. Are this same set of circumstances going to arise at Cheltenham?

If the ground is not as testing then those circumstances will be vastly different.
 
I totally agree UG - as i said above, the ground in SWINLEY BOTTOM was HEAVY and seems to have thrown TM completely. Some horses just don't act in it at all [Best mate didn't for example]. It's possible of course we were all over-reacting to TGM's great win earlier this season, but I wouldn't discount him for the QM in GOOD ground

It was reported today that Ashley Brook was PU lame, very sorry to hear that but UG may be right that he's never fully recovered from that fall - he certainly wasn't going a yard yesterday
 
He jumped very oddly at the first fence at Sandown last time too Headstrong, there is definitely something amiss, and I dont see what a scope is going to find, which is what Bishop was intending to give him next according to the news today. I think he has hurt himself and is afraid to jump.

The thing is there is heavy here and heavy there and no amount of penetrometers or sticks can accurately report or predict how it will affect times or how it will 'ride' as it 'rides' differently for each horse.

Ascots ground yesterday actually moved when you walked on it, although the hurdles track was worse than the chase course. What do you call that ?

Soft ( heavy and moves in places)

When its like that it can be heavier two horse widths out here or two horse widths inside there. You can suddenly hit a bad bit for three or four strides that other horses didnt because they were wider or inside. Walking the whole course can help but then you find that its best on the inside for that stretch and better on the outside for that stretch and you may as well grin and bear whatever you end up in.

shrug::
 
Originally posted by uncle goober@Jan 20 2008, 04:04 PM
Ascots ground yesterday actually moved when you walked on it, although the hurdles track was worse than the chase course. What do you call that ?

Soft ( heavy and moves in places)

Click to expand...
Normal?

I think Ascot is unique in that it could have legitmately given out a going description yesterday as "Soft, with both Heavy and Good in places" and won't have been far wrong.

Incidentally HS how do you know Swinley Bottom was heavy? did you walk it? In which case what similarities do you think you have to a 1060Ib animal travelling at 35+ miles an hour? How you perceive the ground and react on it will be very different to how a horse does, and yet humans who weigh a fraction of a horses weight, without being able to run over the ground at anything like the same speed, and with only half the points of contact with the ground, still think that all they have to do is hammer a heel into a piece of ground and they know best?

FWIW, Pitman and Williamson both had a stick down in Swinley Bottom after the opening juvenile race and decided it wasn't anywhere near as heavy as jockeys or the course management were reporting. What they concluded is that it was going through the top couple of inches, and no further, as under the top surface it was encountering firm resistance (not unlike a dirt track in sloppy conditions). I've frankly lost count of the number of times I've come across clerks and jockeys declaring the ground to be riding slow, soft, heavy etc, only for the horses (who know no better) to then go out there and defy them.

Yesterday was a case in point. 8.90 secs slow over 17 furlongs for a grade 1 chase is not a heavy ground time regardless of what Ruby Walsh says (remember he's just been turned over odds on), and similarly Paul Nicholls won't be adverse to having an excuse to present connections with either.

Returning to UG's point which is more pertinent to Twist Magic and the cause of his demise; I think it's normally the case that a combination of things conspire to beat a horse, and that these rarely impact in equal proportions to their occurence.

At this stage, I'd be inclined to point the finger at the pace of the race on the ground. I suspect that better ground is likely to extend Twist Magic's operational effectiveness, and a less demanding pace most certainly will, and in all probability will bring him within his opertional threshold. I don't know that there's any good reason to believe the ground story though, unless Paul Nicholls wants to explain how both the VC and Montpellier were run faster than the Tingle Creek and the Henry VIII, as indeed was Ascot's opening juvenile Hurdle compared to Sandowns novice race won by County Zen.

I'm prepared to accept that yesterday Twist Magic was beaten by a better horse whose been able to expose some deficiencies in Twist Magic's armour, which might or might not resurface at Cheltenham.

Remember TM was the last horse to fold, it's not as if he's given up the ghost and spat his dummy out patently unable to operate on the ground. It points more towards him being the last to be out-classed. Some of the others who we know come up short of being considered top drawer such as Hoo La Baloo, fell away much earlier. The latter named is of course very interesting, as he would have been under greater pressure for the pace of the race, and his lack of true class in being bale to respond to it, has been exposed to the tune of about 20L's on his Tingle Creek running. I think there's additional clues in the novice race which was run at a similar pace to the point that they reached the sixth fence (last one omitted down the back side, so the sixth would normally be the seventh). It was at this point that the novices had tore each other up, and that Marodima was broken by Mahogny Blaze. I estimate the novices were only a second slower at this point {0.90 secs} but approaching their limits. In the Chandler however, Twist Magic is still comfortably tracking Taraminbleu at this point, proving how unsuited his was by the going by "cruising" up to him, (to use Nicholls words).

Twist Magic remains with Taraminbleu until such time as they clear the third last and begin their turn into the straight. It is in this part of the race that Grade 1 chasers have brought their class to bare over the novices as they complete this section in approximately 62.99 secs as opposed to Mahogany Blaze who now assumes the mantle of standard bearer from Marodima for the novices 65.75 secs. They've essentially increased the gap from 0.90 secs to 2.76 secs in the space of about a minute, which is testimony to their class and strength starting to show, and their ability to sustain the punishing gallop for longer.

A s they start to approach start the turn for home it becomes apparent that Twist Magic isn't gaining on Taraminbleu, and if anything is starting to go backwards. This is when Taraminbleu has put the hammer down and settled the race. He completes the distance between the third last and last fence in approximately 44.81 secs, although he's finished off Twist Magic before the latter even hits the second last, (first fence in the home straight). To illustrate this, the novices best performer is now represented by Orpen Wide who does it in about 46.95 having come wide, (but this is normally down to centrifugal force to some extent) Wee Robbie does it 47.05. In any event, despite these novices being supposidly fresher having sat off the duel between Marodima and Mahogny Blaze, from the moment they clear the third last, to the moment they clear the last, they've still lost 2.20 secs in the space of about 3 quarters of a minute to the relentless Taraimbleu.

Taraminbleu has put all of them to the sword one by one. Even if these novices were allowed to run the race as a relay with Marodima's times counting to the sixth, Mahogny Blaze to the third last, Orpen Wide to the second last, and Wee Robbie to the line, they've still been slower than Taraminbleu.

It is only from the final fence when Taraminbleu has settled the issue, and the novices had a 3 way battle royal going on, that they finally run a fractionally quicker section. From the sixth fence to the last fence Tamarinbleu was some 5 seconds faster than the novices, {about 4%}. From the last to the line he suddenly surrenders this and completes the run-in about 0.40 secs slower without any warning of tiring, or any significant incremental detrioration in his fractions (he wasn't at any time coming back to them prior to this stretch in other words, that I've so far found). If we assign this to easing therefore, we have grounds to believe he could have maintained the level of superiority he had exhibited over the novices from about the half way point onwards.

They completed the run-in in about 15.51 secs, he did it in 15.94. If he'd been travelling even say 2.5% quicker than them, he would have found about another 0.38 secs for pressure, (off their time) for a projected finishing flourish of 15.12. At about 0.81 secs for easing then, he still had about 3 or 4 L's in hand if he'd been thrashed through the line. You couldn't say the same about Twist Magic.

I think it's a feature with horses that we adopt favourite ones early, and entertain sympathetically all end of excuses to explain away their subsequent failures. Not dis-similarly, we remain sceptical about those that don't capture our imagination early, and try and deny them the true value of their achievements if we perceive them to be late developers and therefore outside of the inner circle. I think it pays to keep an open mind, and revise opinions in line with emerging evidence. I wasn't particularly enamoured by Taraminbleu prior to this, but not wanting to repeat my experience with Rooster Booster, I'm prepared to re-consider my position.

All of this pointless blathering is getting me precisely where?

Well where am I Twist Magic? He was beaten by a better horse. He showed enough for me to think that he wasn't badly done by the ground, and the empirical evidence seems to support the idea that the ground is an over-stated excuse too in light of the Tingle Creek.

However, for this weakness to re-surface he's going to need a fierce pace again at Cheltenham, and then see if he empties on the hill. The margins of his defeat aren't necessarily conclusive given the variables, but then if he'd run a shocker (aka BJK's Cleeve) I'd probably be more concerned that it could be legitimatelty explained away along the lines of 'something else/ he wasn't himself' etc. I think the chink is there, but it will require a similarly strong pace to find it. The better ground might not tax the stamina resevoir quite so early, but it's still going to be called upon, someone on the hill at Cheltenham. I'm never quite sure if we should react to the balance of marginal evidence as in this case. Or whether the evidence is overwhelming, as in BJK's case, and is so powerful in terms of an abject performance, that is then dismissed as "simply to bad to be true, and thus unreliable/ best ignored"?

9/4 about 6yo? or 10/1 about Taraminbleu? I'd be more inclined to look to the latter on yesterday's evidence now.
 
The rating system has gone mad...

by Steve Mason

TAMARINBLEU put himself firmly in the Champion Chase picture when his impressive success in Saturday's Victor Chandler Chase earned him a career best RPR of 173.

To put that into some sort of context, only Kauto Star (179) in the 2006 Tingle Creek has bettered that figure over a similar trip in the last two seasons and it puts him ahead of the likes of Newmill (172), Nickname (170) and Twist Magic (170).

____________________________________________________

For instances like this the ratings should stay unaltered simply given the nature of the race. Its the same for Mossbank...rated 170 based on a slowly run race when he has not achieved anything like it before. They only did it to give Denman a good rating or perhaps better put to prevent them giving Denman a poor rating. In instances likely these its best to be cautious as it truely undermines the genuine top class performers such as Kauto Star and Moscow Flyer. Last few months I am really losing belief in some of the rating compliers giving certain horses too high a rating and not giving others a high enough rating!
 
Obviously, when compiling ratings, a degree of subjectivity is involved but Steve Mason tends to be one of the most objective.

I must admit, I also have Mossbank high on that run but have a question mark beside it. I don't know a great deal about the horse but you have to look at the race on the day and go with what the form tells you. That's objectivity.

It's easy to say, 'I'll just rate the race around Mossbank's previous best; after all, it was a slow race," but then you come back to the fact that an inferior has finished a slow race much better than supposedly faster horses.

Every so often, a horse can suddenly find unexpected improvement. I've found it often pays to give horses the benefit of the doubt until more evidence to the contrary presents itself.
 
I don't know a great deal about the horse but you have to look at the race on the day and go with what the form tells you.
Click to expand...

I disagree....the form has to be taken in context of the horses over all profile. What harm is there in holding off to see what the horse produces on his next run?
 
Back
Top