Champions Day

Desert Orchid said:
I didn't do one. I didn't think there was enough evidence to support attempting one. It isn't as if there was a fast-run Class 2 handicap over C&D the same day. The pace collapsed in the F&M race so you would expect NM's race to be a good bit faster, especially given what a poor field that was, as was the 2-miler.

In situations like this I tend to rate the race via the form, assume a time rating for the race to match that and then see how much slower the other races were. I learned this approach many years ago after being suckered into giving fast times for ordinary horses that were faster on the day than other ordinary horses. I remember giving the likes of Cataldi a speed figure of something like 129 on its Champion Stakes rating and Legal Case something even more ridiculous like 135 in his renewal.

Mordinesque.
Click to expand...

its a doddle card to do..you can certainly rate it off Bronze Angel's race and be confident you won't overrate NM as the round course will probably be slower..if you rate off of BA you will get a 129 for Noble Mission..you certainly can't go the wrong way as we know the round course is not faster than the far side straight

the near side races were run on slower ground as can be seen by the"race" within Bronze Angels race..but Bronze Ange's time and the round track times correlate fine
 
Maybe so, but they were harping on all afternoon about how the runners in the straight course were racing into a stiff wind. That wind would have been largely behind NM & co for 70% of their race. That, to me, would distort things to a degree.
 
OK, using Bronze Angel as having run a time commensurate with his form rating and applying the same going allowance to NM's race, the latter comes out at 130. That would concern me straight off. I'd assume immediately that BA's race couldn't have been that fast run.

The other thing in the back of my mind - and somebody might be able to help out here - wasn't there something in the week leading up to the meeting about rail movement on the round course reducing the distance run? It doesn't get a mention in the form pullout but there's something in the recesses of my mind going back to thinking something along the lines of 'I didn't think Ascot could reduce the distances from those advertised.'

I wrote an item many years ago that was published in the old Handicap Book. It headlined the forum page at the time and was titled 'Form Is More Important Than Time' and highlighted the kind of situation I refer to above: where something apparently puts up a time that defies logic.

I concluded that that same fast time is just that. A fast time, probably because the other races were relatively slow.

My conclusion was long the lines of 'horses cannot record times that are faster than their ability.'

I stand by that and, honestly, if Noble Mission and Al Kazeem are both 129 horses [on my scale] I'll chuck it all in.
 
Desert Orchid said:
OK, using Bronze Angel as having run a time commensurate with his form rating and applying the same going allowance to NM's race, the latter comes out at 130. That would concern me straight off. I'd assume immediately that BA's race couldn't have been that fast run.

The other thing in the back of my mind - and somebody might be able to help out here - wasn't there something in the week leading up to the meeting about rail movement on the round course reducing the distance run? It doesn't get a mention in the form pullout but there's something in the recesses of my mind going back to thinking something along the lines of 'I didn't think Ascot could reduce the distances from those advertised.'

I wrote an item many years ago that was published in the old Handicap Book. It headlined the forum page at the time and was titled 'Form Is More Important Than Time' and highlighted the kind of situation I refer to above: where something apparently puts up a time that defies logic.

I concluded that that same fast time is just that. A fast time, probably because the other races were relatively slow.

My conclusion was long the lines of 'horses cannot record times that are faster than their ability.'

I stand by that and, honestly, if Noble Mission and Al Kazeem are both 129 horses [on my scale] I'll chuck it all in.
Click to expand...

sectional times show Bronze Angel to be a proper test with a 98% finishing effort..even the race on the standside within that race was truly run..the only difference between the two groups was the slower ground on the stand side

I use sectionals to do most of my overall time calcs now..you can spot a false run race easily...Bronze Angels was clearly truly run.

I doubt very much they have reduced a distance..yes they may doll out a rail but actually changing the course layout..i doubt very much

your scale seems different to others so can't comment..i only work on what horses actually do

out of interest what speed figure did you get when Frankel won at York?..when i compare that to mine i'll know what difference is in our workings

i work off OHR all the time,,that way i know where i am
 
Last edited:
I have Frankel on a time rating of 129 (128.6 to be precise) for his win from Farhh, using Dandana (OR 101) in the closing handicap over C&D as the most reliable comparator. Frankel was 3.4s faster but carried 9lbs less.

I have Frankel on what I would consider a conservative 134 (++) based on Farhh's OR122, or 136++ based on SNA's OR124. I had Farhh on 124 in the Eclipse two runs earlier so the latter form figure for Frankel strikes me as more likely but the concern would be that it put the OR108 Bullet Train on an uncomfortable [for me] 113.
 
Desert Orchid said:
I have Frankel on a time rating of 129 (128.6 to be precise) for his win from Farhh, using Dandana (OR 101) in the closing handicap over C&D as the most reliable comparator. Frankel was 3.4s faster but carried 9lbs less.

I have Frankel on what I would consider a conservative 134 (++) based on Farhh's OR122, or 136++ based on SNA's OR124. I had Farhh on 124 in the Eclipse two runs earlier so the latter form figure for Frankel strikes me as more likely but the concern would be that it put the OR108 Bullet Train on an uncomfortable [for me] 113.
Click to expand...

i got 131..again just a bit higher than you...the times tie in with Tax Free as well on that card
 
Back
Top