EC1
On a break
which big races will he win?
Betfair Chase
- Thread starter Ardross
- Start date
which big races will he win?
EC1
On a break
rating for todays race looks easy
the winner rated from the field =
181 off LR
171 off TGB
171 off WA
170 off CB
170 looks fair to me.
the winner rated from the field =
181 off LR
171 off TGB
171 off WA
170 off CB
170 looks fair to me.
EC1
On a break
his last two runs have been below 170 Steve..i don't see it being good enough in either of those races
lets be clear about last March's GC..it was probably the easiest to win in the last 10 years..and he looked very one paced
he won't get an easier opportunity than last March again
lets be clear about last March's GC..it was probably the easiest to win in the last 10 years..and he looked very one paced
he won't get an easier opportunity than last March again
EC1
On a break
by a simple calculation using OHR's..as i did after Saturdays race
anyone that can demonstrate using OHR's that LR has gained a higher rating than 170 in his last two runs can have a go
i'd say he is currently running 7lbs or so below his best..for no apparent reason
if you want to use RPR's then just post up some calcs using Saturdays race and then compare it to his highest RPR
EC1
On a break
Desert Orchid
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2005
- Messages
- 25,030
These are my figures for LR on last season's runs
Betfair: 166 (via Weird Al's OR164)
K Geo: 179? (via Somersby's OR166)
Denman: 178 (via TGB 165)
Gold Cup: 167 (via TFR)
Looking at his season dispassionately, you could say his comeback run at Haydock was perfectly respectable, especially considering Kauto Star forced him into a string of jumping errors.
You could reasonably expect him to improve on that with a clearer round and a bit more work, and so he did in the King George. He was gifted the Denman with Burton Port being eased into the last but at least maintained his level.
He was clearly below that in the Gold Cup and it may be that he left his race behind at Newbury.
He probably ran to the high 160s on Saturday, possibly a pound or so higher than last year so opinions will be divided as to whether his next run will be his third high 160s in his last six races or his third high 170s, should he come on the same amount as he did last year. Then again, you could argue that his KG last year might be over-rated since Somersby over 3m might not be the most reliable yardstick.
Opinion is obviously what makes the market and I'm not averse to giving horses another chance to prove they haven't lost their ability, often to my cost. And Long Run is young enough.
I reckon if there doesn't look like being much coming through the ranks, I can see me allowing him one more chance but if something comes into the race running to marks consistently in the 170s or on an abvious curve that looks like taking it to the mid-high 170s, I think I'd want to side with that one.
But does Long Run strike me as the type to get back above the 180 mark the way he did two seasons ago? No.
Betfair: 166 (via Weird Al's OR164)
K Geo: 179? (via Somersby's OR166)
Denman: 178 (via TGB 165)
Gold Cup: 167 (via TFR)
Looking at his season dispassionately, you could say his comeback run at Haydock was perfectly respectable, especially considering Kauto Star forced him into a string of jumping errors.
You could reasonably expect him to improve on that with a clearer round and a bit more work, and so he did in the King George. He was gifted the Denman with Burton Port being eased into the last but at least maintained his level.
He was clearly below that in the Gold Cup and it may be that he left his race behind at Newbury.
He probably ran to the high 160s on Saturday, possibly a pound or so higher than last year so opinions will be divided as to whether his next run will be his third high 160s in his last six races or his third high 170s, should he come on the same amount as he did last year. Then again, you could argue that his KG last year might be over-rated since Somersby over 3m might not be the most reliable yardstick.
Opinion is obviously what makes the market and I'm not averse to giving horses another chance to prove they haven't lost their ability, often to my cost. And Long Run is young enough.
I reckon if there doesn't look like being much coming through the ranks, I can see me allowing him one more chance but if something comes into the race running to marks consistently in the 170s or on an abvious curve that looks like taking it to the mid-high 170s, I think I'd want to side with that one.
But does Long Run strike me as the type to get back above the 180 mark the way he did two seasons ago? No.
Last edited:
DO
That's the trouble with ratings; they're more or less obliged to take form at face value without allowing for circumstance.
A few brief points on your notes:
Somersby didn't stay the KG distance, much the same as he didn't stay the Ryanair c/d later in the season.
Though TGB clearly stays 3m, he didn't in the Denman owing to the way he was ridden.
Long Run was reported by his stable to be 'much more forward' for this season's Betfair than he was for last, which doesn't augur nearly so well for his prospects.
That's the trouble with ratings; they're more or less obliged to take form at face value without allowing for circumstance.
A few brief points on your notes:
Somersby didn't stay the KG distance, much the same as he didn't stay the Ryanair c/d later in the season.
Though TGB clearly stays 3m, he didn't in the Denman owing to the way he was ridden.
Long Run was reported by his stable to be 'much more forward' for this season's Betfair than he was for last, which doesn't augur nearly so well for his prospects.
Last edited:
Grasshopper
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 16,050
Not sure I agree with that, reet - or maybe I'm misinterpreting your meaning, and I do agree. We'll find out.
A rating is essentially transient; and applies to a specific set of conditions. It's whether a horse can repeat or exceed that rating in future races - which may be run under different conditions - that is key.
To that extent, the conditions have to be taken into account; otherwise you're (generally, rather than you specifically) using the rating in a very crude (and potentially worthless) manner.
Last edited:
Desert Orchid
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2005
- Messages
- 25,030
I don't necessarily agree either. If you can identify one or two - preferably more - beaten horses who appear to have run to their form relative to each other, then the ratings generated by the result can be taken pretty much at face value but it doesn't mean the result will be repeated next time. From a betting perspective you hope it will but horses are only human...
Often none of the lines correspond to each other and you're taking your best educated guess as to which is the soundest basis for generating figures, and that can be very subjective. And miles wrong.
Often none of the lines correspond to each other and you're taking your best educated guess as to which is the soundest basis for generating figures, and that can be very subjective. And miles wrong.
Last edited:
Grasshopper
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 16,050
Grass
Circumstance (in my understanding) is rather broader than conditions and would embrace such as: fitness, pace, ride, class of opposition & how the horse(s) performed throughout.
My definition of 'conditions' is similar/the same as yours, for the purposes of this discussion i.e. I didn't mean ground "conditions" alone (although they are of course something else to factor in when assessing whether or not a horse can achieve it's optimum rating).
Last edited: