I just think he wasn't good enough and beating a load of ballydoyle rejects and a dog in the Irish Derby led to him being overrated . He is a very good G1 horse but so are the four that finished in front of him behind STS - I tend to think the fact that Youmzain ran so well suggests it must have been a true pace too just not headlong.
Champions Day
- Thread starter Euronymous
- Start date
What rating did Fame And Glory hit in the Irish Champion Ardross?
That's just the problem Galileo, the Irish Champion was rated all wrong. Is it normal for STS's best rating to come in a race he looked as if he won easier than any other? Unlikely. However, a lot of people have taken a different view. My own is that MCM does not stay (or did not stay) a true run 1m2, and hence it exaggerated the performance of the first two in terms of ratings. There is simply no way Fame and Glory is a 130+ animal over 1m2, just no way.
Probably not, perhaps because of the ground, but I wouldn't say there is too much more to come. He's clearly a very good colt, but doesn't appear to be a 130+ horse (no shame in that of course).
I wonder have ratings (or rather people calculating them!) got ahead of themselves this season, as it is very hard for me to accept Fame and Glory is better than Raven's Pass, New Approach and Henry from last year.
Harbinger
At the Start
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2004
- Messages
- 11,282
I don't see the evidence that Mastercraftsman doesn't stay a true run 10f. Quite the opposite - he certainly seemed to get further at York.
I said at the time that 135 was much too high for Fame in the Irish Champion (as a resuly of STS being rated so/too highly in that race). Fame needed to be rated at 135 to square the circle (which was just too high).
I believe Fame ran to a similar rating in the Irish Champion as he did in the Irish Derby (about 130 or a pound or two lower) and that he is capable of around 130 (perhaps 128-132) at best. STS has proved to be able to do a bit better than this.
Nevertheless, I believe he is better than the 121 he ran in the Arc and if he had achieved his optimum rating in the Arc would have gone close. Softer going may well have suited his galloping style better.
Last edited:
I think Mastercraftsman is better at a mile than at 10 furlongs though.
I think it's fair to say that I'm among Fame And Glory's biggest fans, but I would be surprised if he has truly run to better than 130 this season (he probably managed about that in the Irish Champion and just below in the Irish Derby). His optimum rating could be a fraction higher than 130 I'd guess.
The rating achieved by New Approach in last season's Champion Stakes for example was better than Zarkava's Arc win and as good as anything seen this season (...and above anything Fame has achieved so far).
Last edited:
Agreed....it is similar to STS actually after his Epsom win. He did not hit the 130s plus at the time but I remember saying on here that when he got his conditions (a strongly run 10 furlong race) he would easily be a 130+ horse. Fame And Glory has never really got the conditions to hit that sort of rating - the only time he had was in the Irish Derby and he did not have a competitor to push him to such high levels. But I think he is capable of a 130 plus performance over 12 furlongs with an ease in the ground.
Last edited:
Harbinger
At the Start
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2004
- Messages
- 11,282
You're still significantly under-rating Sea The Stars.
Yes... I've given up trying to claim that Fame can match STS, but I also believe that STS has had his chance to fully shine under his optimum conditions, whereas Fame's true performance is probably yet to be seen. I agree precisely with your final sentence.
And over rating New Approach's defeat of some very average Group 1 horses.
I doubt that I am. I doubt that STS has actually run to a higher rating than New Approach achieved in the Champion Stakes (this is not to say that NA is better than STS). It's quite probable that STS has run to a best of about 136 this season, although he is no doubt capable of better if he were to be fully tested in optimum conditions (although nothing appears capable of fully testing him).
Last edited:
I agree that NA's Champion Stakes was achieved against weaker opposition than STS has typically faced. But according to the rating agencies NA achieved a very high rating. STS has not been called upon to run to his extent and has never been made to do it. What I'm saying is that STS is better than what he has run to this season. How much better is anyone's guess.
Last edited:
New Approaches Champion rating was a nonsense and the BHA only gave him 124 for it anyway. They had to give him it because he won by 6 lengths but the reality is it was a poor race and his 10f efforts prior to that back this theory up. Duke of Marmalade put him firmly in his place. Yes he pulled hard but STS did that and won doing handsprings. New Approach was a very good horse, but he was a nutcase and was high 120's at best.
Colin Phillips
At the Start
The highest figure I have for Fame and Glory is 128 for the Irish Derby, I have him running to 119 in the Arc and 126 in the Irish Champion.
The highest figure I have for Sea The Stars is 136 in the Eclipse.
I have him at 128 for the Arc.
The highest figure I have for Sea The Stars is 136 in the Eclipse.
I have him at 128 for the Arc.
You misunderstand. I’m not rating NA, but the consensus for his Champion Stakes win was up to 138 (which was regarded as better than Zarkava ran in the Arc). NA was made to perform with the precise intention of getting a high rating (as Dubai Millennium was at Ascot) – i.e. something STS has not been asked to do. What I am saying is that NA is as good as his rating (which was achieved in optimum conditions to his extent). STS has only ever done what he needed to do and is no doubt better than the true rating (whatever that is) he has run to this season. Consequently I’m not underrating STS as it’s anyone’s guess what he could have achieved.
The intention of referring to NA at all was to agree with Hamm that it is difficult to believe that Fame And Glory is better than the likes of NA at his best.
Last edited:
Harbinger
At the Start
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2004
- Messages
- 11,282
You might want to check that again.
The 126 for Fame in the Irish Champion looks a little low to me, but that aside I would say that these other ratings were about right.
davidjohnson
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2007
- Messages
- 3,434
No-one rated it 138 - certainly not even Timeform, who's ratings have long since been pitched slightly higher than RPR's or IC's.
I've not got access to all the figues at the moment, but I thought this was the highest he had been rated for that performance. I think it was the highest rating achieved last season in Britain or France.
Would agree with that.