Cheltenham Gold Cup 2015

the pace of the Gold Cup last year showed quite a lull in the middle of it after what was a bit quicker than ideal pace up to Fence 7..from there to fence 18 they were running slower than par by 20 lengths in that section..that lull created a speedyish finish

leader lengths above/below par
+ figure = slow than ideal ..minus figure = faster than ideal

F1–F7 ...-10
F7–F12.... 6
F12–F18...14
F18-F21...-1
F21-FIN...-5
 
Last edited:
EC1 said:
the pace of the Gold Cup last year showed quite a lull in the middle of it after what was a bit quicker than ideal pace up to Fence 7..from there to fence 18 they were running slower than par by 20 lengths in that section..that lull created a speedyish finish

leader lengths above/below par
+ figure = slow than ideal ..minus figure = faster than ideal

F1–F7 ...-10
F7–F12.... 6
F12–F18...14
F18-F21...-1
F21-FIN...-5
Click to expand...

Based on these figures EC, do you think Lord Windermere should be rated better than the distances to Silviniaco Conti, given he came from behind him in a quickish finish? Or should On His Own be given extra credit given he was up with the fast early pace, and then came from behind the pace in the finish? I'm far from a times man and just wondering how you would interpret these times?
 
thehorsesmouth said:
Based on these figures EC, do you think Lord Windermere should be rated better than the distances to Silviniaco Conti, given he came from behind him in a quickish finish? Or should On His Own be given extra credit given he was up with the fast early pace, and then came from behind the pace in the finish? I'm far from a times man and just wondering how you would interpret these times?
Click to expand...

good question

the -10 is over a decent amount of ground..it takes about 95 seconds to cover that ground so even pace will be +/- probably 5 lengths..so once that is taken into account you can still say they have still gone faster early than they should have..but its not a damaging faster than par imo... if just in that section of the race.

If they had continued running at that speed though then it all starts adding up..running above par for large slabs of a race is what takes it toll...even if its not a lot above par as well...then you have that large section of mid race where they have gone slower than par ..over a long distance... right up to the 18th.

My reading of it is that LW has burnt them off with a show of speed..basically you have staying horses in front that haven't used lots of energy throughout the race..they then find themselves from 2 out being asked to do what they normally don't want to..ie quicken over a short distance of ground...LW has quickened better than stayers who have not really been suited to the pace of the race.

it should have suited any horse at the front that also had a bit of speed...a stayer though setting those fractions will always be liable to a speedier type ..so its not always where you are in a race of this type..its how much tactical speed you have.

thats how i read it anyway
 
Last edited:
by comparison see how slowly Denmans GC finished

2008DENMAN-3-6-3115

<colgroup><col width="40"><col width="180"><col width="65"><col width="65"><col width="65"><col width="65"><col width="65"><col width="65"></colgroup> <tbody>
[TD="width: 40"][/TD]
[TD="width: 180"][/TD]
[TD="width: 65"][/TD]
[TD="width: 65"] F1 – F7 [/TD]
[TD="width: 65"] F7 – F12 [/TD]
[TD="width: 65"] F12–F18 [/TD]
[TD="width: 65"] F18-F21 [/TD]
[TD="width: 65"] F21-FIN [/TD]

</tbody>

right up to the 18th fence they went above even pace..not by shedloads ..but look at the damage at the end..15 lengths slower than par from the 2nd last..basically walking..he burned the field to pieces

Bobs Worth's GC..they again went faster than par for a large slab of the race..the race slowed at the end for him to run past them

2013BOBS WORTH-6-2-497

<colgroup><col width="40"><col width="180"><col width="65"><col width="65"><col width="65"><col width="65"><col width="65"><col width="65"></colgroup> <tbody>
[TD="width: 40"][/TD]
[TD="width: 180"][/TD]
[TD="width: 65"][/TD]
[TD="width: 65"] F1 – F7 [/TD]
[TD="width: 65"] F7 – F12 [/TD]
[TD="width: 65"] F12–F18 [/TD]
[TD="width: 65"] F18-F21 [/TD]
[TD="width: 65"] F21-FIN [/TD]

</tbody>
 
Last edited:
What i find interesting about the pace lines is it gives you the signature of a horse that you can actually use in the real time. If you look at the 3 examples its clear that Denman + Bobs Worth relished good overall pace..

Kauto Star preferred a speedier test


<colgroup><col width="40"><col width="180"><col width="65"><col width="65"><col width="65"><col width="65"><col width="65"><col width="65"></colgroup> <tbody>
[TD="width: 40"]2009[/TD]
[TD="width: 180"]KAUTO STAR[/TD]
[TD="width: 65"][/TD]
[TD="width: 65"]8[/TD]
[TD="width: 65"]0[/TD]
[TD="width: 65"]3[/TD]
[TD="width: 65"]-3[/TD]
[TD="width: 65"]-4[/TD]

</tbody>

This year Lord Windermere for instance is unlikely to relish a strong pace...he's a speed horse..obviously thats in the context of staying horses..i don't mean he's a july cup winner like:)

we know the signature of most of the main horses running..SC needs a decent long period of good pace...Bobs Worth the same...etc

Once the race is in progress..the actual outcome is then really decided by pace as much as any other factor...i think its underestimated just how key it is.

So SC was disadvantaged last year..that will make Clive happy for this years bash.

Nicholls needs to get something in the race that sets a decent pace for the first circuit..with SC not a long away from it..or send him to make his own running if they aren't going a decent clip...thats the only way he can win the GC.
 
Last edited:
Agree Lord Windermere's likely to struggle this year, and Bobs Worth promises to exceed mosts expectations, but - while pace is significant - these views are gleaned purely from the horses' profiles.
 
A lot are obvious agreed..but its handy to see it confirmed in a numbers way..it is to me anyway.

LW might do ok this year if they don't go a decent pace..he could do em for speed again..i couldn't see Nichols allowing that scenario tbh though.

The first circuit time is a key measure for me in real time..you can see by then just how the race is shaping..i'm not much cop by eye..especially when the camera is at ground level as it is in the GC..very hard to judge pace on that far side by eye i find
 
I think he'll make the running on SC. Fehily is very good from the front and under pressure. He will be hard to peg back.
 
Doubt he'll need to, Aragorn.
While N Fehily and B Geraghty will both likely want to ensure a proper clip, there are any number of other good pace horses in the field, and a repeat of last year already seems most unlikely.
 
P.Nicholls
Speaking on a Cheltenham preview panel after racing on Betfair Ascot Chase day, the champion trainer said: "I have no worries that Silviniaco Conti acts around Cheltenham, as he was travelling when he fell in the race two years ago.

"He had a few little mishaps training, but he is much more assured now. His last two wins have been two of the best performances of his career and he had a nice racecourse gallop with Sam Winner on Wednesday. On form he is the one to beat.

"Sam Winner is in good form and loves it around Cheltenham and he needs to be fresh, which he will be. He is the sort of horse that could run into a place at a big price."
 
Can't argue with any of that. As with his summary of the qmcc, you really do proper answers from PN. Take it or leave It and many here cant wait to slag him off, he is most certainly on top of his brief.
 
Can't but like Nicholls. He's gives an opinion. Whether you agree is a different matter.
Who would be slagging him off Clive? I'll nip that in the bud.
 
Nicholls is open about things, too. Well, openish. It was good of him to let us know Kauto Star had fallen in training a week before the 2012 GC.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Paddy Power have priced up which horse AP McCoy will ride.

8/11 Carlingford Lough
EVS Holywell

Thoughts?
 
Back
Top