Coral Eclipse Stakes

His Tyros Stakes win (a very slow 4-runner affair, albeit with a very good filly in second) is actually the only time he was first past the post - he got his maiden in the stewards' room.
 
He is a horse that looks like people make excuses for..but he could also be a very unlucky horse for the reasons mentioned..if 10f is his best trip..which the ratings scream he is..then his next run is the most important one in his career..if they don't run him at 10f then it just seems daft to me
 
DO

I think you are overestimating Conduit at 10f tbh..he is the solid marker horse here and an rpr of 120..122 tops would be his 10f mark..he does not show his best at 10
 
EC1 said:
SL

Dylan Thomas didn't win the Derby either..what rating would you have given him after the Derby?
Click to expand...

I'm not after giving anything a rating, ever, and I'm not interested in doing so. It's just that the rating of RVW as a superstar doesn't work with me at all, I'm afraid.

DO, fair enough if you're right and I'm impressed that you're willing to stick your neck so much on the line for both horses. Personally although I wouldn't presume to rate anything, I think that Sea The Stars is a very good animal and I'd be inclined to agree that he could well be the best horse we've seen in a generation. He did however keep finding when RVW came to him and I'm sure he's good for a fair bit more than 2lbs over RVW. That said, you can only rate on what has actually been achieved so I can see why ratings have been what some people see as being on the conservative side, not least since it doesn't sit right to rate RVW 130+ from where I am sitting.
 
I'm not after giving anything a rating, ever, and I'm not interested in doing so. It's just that the rating of RVW as a superstar doesn't work with me at all, I'm afraid.

that would be where I differ in opinion to DO..I don't think RVW is a superstar..he is about a 126/127 horse..but has not yet had the chance to show that when winning a race

he has been run over his right trip here but met a better horse

in the Derby he ran over the wrong trip

in the guineas I think they prepped him for the main target..the Derby..which is why they shaped the Derby for him

so this season he has had..a prep..a target race that was not right for him..then runs in a race where he is ready and they probably assumed..correctly by then ...that 10 was the right trip..but unfortunately he meets a horse like STS.

if you look at his runs and read bewteen the lines then he hasn't been able to win due to differing reasons...alternatively ..you could treat a horse like a machine and when they don't win every time call them names :lol:
 
Last edited:
Or you could just say, he's actually not that great as people wish he was. He's not that bad either, just not that great. One thing for sure he won't take on STS again.
 
he won't beat STS whilst he has a hole in arse as you say G-G

but his form does need a bit of reading..the actual runs..and the fact that AOB shaped the Derby pace to suit him and not the obvious one in F&G.
 
Last edited:
EC1 said:
I don't think RVW is a superstar..he is about a 126/127 horse..but has not yet had the chance to show that when winning a race
Click to expand...


Conduit is the story here for me. How the feck can he have been rated by the RP at 127 for the Breeders Cup and 120 for the Eclipse. That is totally fecking clueless handicapping. On what basis is there a seven pounds difference?
 
Euronymous said:
Conduit is the story here for me. How the feck can he have been rated by the RP at 127 for the Breeders Cup and 120 for the Eclipse. That is totally fecking clueless handicapping. On what basis is there a seven pounds difference?
Click to expand...

2f difference is the answer from what I can see

Conduit needs 12f to show his best...he doesn't get going properly at 10f..you could see that clearly in the Brigadier

his RPR's at 10f
87+104+121+120
average of best 3 = 115

his RPRs at 12f+
113+114+124+127
average of best 3 = 121
 
EC1 said:
his RPR's at 10f
87+104+121+120
average of best 3 = 115

his RPRs at 12f+
113+114+124+127
average of best 3 = 121
Click to expand...

Sorry EC but those figures are totally meaningless. You're including his run first time out as 3yo in a handicap as part of the evidence here. Ridiculous. Look at the race on saturday and ignore the first two - Conduit is anchored at the back in a strongly run race and comes through to lead the field entering the final furlong. At the most he's run 3lbs below his BC figure.

People sometimes quote RPR's on here like they're written on stone. Unreal. I mean, would RVW finish upsides STS with a couple of extra pounds help? Would he hell.
 
People sometimes quote RPR's on here like they're written on stone.
Click to expand...

To be fair, the reason RPRs are quoted so often is probably more to do with them being the most easily accessible.
 
Euronymous said:
Sorry EC but those figures are totally meaningless. You're including his run first time out as 3yo in a handicap as part of the evidence here. Ridiculous. Look at the race on saturday and ignore the first two - Conduit is anchored at the back in a strongly run race and comes through to lead the field entering the final furlong. At the most he's run 3lbs below his BC figure.

People sometimes quote RPR's on here like they're written on stone. Unreal. I mean, would RVW finish upsides STS with a couple of extra pounds help? Would he hell.
Click to expand...


just average the last 2 then :lol:

ignoring the RPR's

can you not see by watching both races that Conduit needs further?

I only had to see the Brig Ger and I knew just watching that he wasn't in his comfort zone being asked to pick up in too short a time.

on paper there is only 2lbs between STS and RVW

again..ignore the ratings..I only post them so I can discuss this stuff with you guys :p..its clear to my eye that STS has more in hand.

i'm amazed that you can't see Conduit is better at 12f+ tbh

maybe i'm better than I thought :lol:

maybe I'm wrong..but I knew well before Saturday he weren't winning any Eclipse
 
Last edited:
EC1 said:
2f difference is the answer from what I can see

Conduit needs 12f to show his best...he doesn't get going properly at 10f..you could see that clearly in the Brigadier

his RPR's at 10f
87+104+121+120
average of best 3 = 115

his RPRs at 12f+
113+114+124+127
average of best 3 = 121
Click to expand...

I'm not convinced you can count the front two runs at either distance. He was at the lower end of his improvement curve at that point. Take them away and his averages, by your figures, are 120.5 and 125.5 respectively. The difference is marginal but it means he's run below his BG form the other day. I just can't wear that. I keep looking at the lines with the other horses that ran in the BG too.

I stifled a laugh when I saw that Conduit got 127 in the US. I couldn't believe it and I'm still not convinced they can get a proper handle on US form. I admit I can't either, to be fair. However his BG run made me think that maybe Jim McGrath was right on the Morning Line on Saturday when he said 11/2 Conduit looked an each-way bet to nothing. When I saw I had Conduit on 124 for the BG with the prospect of more to come I realised STS would probably have to improve on his two Classic wins to be sure of victory. I anticipated significant improvement from RPR to give the fav a run for its money and backed it accordingly. I anticipted STS running to 127/128 and RVW likewise with Conduit about 126. I expected CDT to be about three or four lengths off them.

In fact, this is what I wrote:
Conduit 127?t
Sea The Stars 125+
Twice Over 122
Rip Van Winkle 120++

These appear to be the contenders. I can't see anything else winning.

Conduit's high mark is his RPR in America but I have reservations about it. I also have reservations about a St Leger winner at this trip. However, he looked OK at it in the Brigadier Gerard (for which I rated him 124+) so, given the usual improvement Stoute can eke out of them, it's possible he can run to 127 today.

Sea The Stars hit 125+ in the Guineas and 124+ in the Derby. I'd be pretty sure he can hit at least 125 today and he has looked special.

If there is to be an upset, if that's what it could be called, it might be from Twice Over. Cecil knows what it takes to win the race but the jockey might be a negative.

The unknown quantity is Rip Van Winkle. I have no doubt he is a lot better than he showed at both Epsom and Newmarket and I don't find it hard to envisage his running to a similar level as Sea The Stars.

Taking all that into account, I couldn't be a backer of the favourite at odds on. He's probably the percentage call but not betting material. Nor would I be confident about laying him at odds on.

Rip Van Winkle's finish at Epsom surprised me and I reckon he might have a stronger kick than than either the favourite or Conduit so he's lumbered with the vote.

Had they run to 130 (STS), 128 (RVW) and 127 (C), I'd have been more than happy with that as G1 form. Those are the kind of figures you get in a decent Arc. I'd still have expected CDT to run to about 118 and the others accordingly but they were strung out like washing behind. It doesn't happen very often on fast ground. And, as others have remarked, the time was incredible ~ literally, in EC1's book, if I'm reading him correctly.

I know I'm pretty much talking myself into a no-win situation. How likely is it that a race will be set up for STS like that again? He's going to go into his other races like one of the greats. A fast pace won't beat him, a slow one won't either. Only if they get carried away and run him in soft might he be vulnerable, or over 12f again. Even so, he's now posted such a high figure I'd be loath to oppose him over 12f. Rip is more likely to have a race set up for him but he won't have STS to go after so he could end up winning cosily without having to run to over 130 and I'll be there to be shot at.

Such is life.
 
I know the example weren't great re conduit's RPR's..but I had to knock something together quick :D..he so patently doesn't run his best at 10f..only seems to be me that thinks this as well..which I find even more strange

I'm not really botheerd about the form rating side DO..I only go with speed figures..which I find saves all this trying to work out which horse has ran to form and which horse is that figure etc

if I did do form ratings..I certainly wouldn't rate off a horse at a different trip to get a rating..which is why I would just use Conduits 10f ratings.

when Conduit gets 12f..I'll be on him for sure

I will stick by 130 [no wfa]for STS until he runs faster..I haven't seen many 130 horses on my figures I know that for sure
 
I can't see how you can watch the Eclipse and from that single piece of evidence come to the conlclusion that Conduit needs further.
 
EC1 said:
if you look at his runs and read bewteen the lines then he hasn't been able to win due to differing reasons...alternatively ..you could treat a horse like a machine and when they don't win every time call them names :lol:
Click to expand...

I have looked at his runs and I still can't have him as being as good as some think he is - if a horse needs an excuse once, that's unfortunate, twice is unlucky and three times or more....well, you can work it out!

Personally I think that RVW is assessed by many (I don't include DO in this category) by reputation rather than performance. A horse that has only won twice in its seven runs to date (finishing out of the 3 on 3 of those occasions) can't be the second next best thing, surely?
 
Shadow Leader said:
I have looked at his runs and I still can't have him as being as good as some think he is - if a horse needs an excuse once, that's unfortunate, twice is unlucky and three times or more....well, you can work it out!

Personally I think that RVW is assessed by many (I don't include DO in this category) by reputation rather than performance. A horse that has only won twice in its seven runs to date (finishing out of the 3 on 3 of those occasions) can't be the second next best thing, surely?
Click to expand...

I can only agree with this... If RVW were rated 136 (which he isn’t) he would rate with Ballydoyle’s top-rated colt Hawk Wing officially rated 136. No one can tell me that finishing runner-up in the Eclipse, with the older horses Conduit and Twice Over visibly performing below their best (Conduit at an inadequate trip) is equivalent to Hawk Wing’s best performance. There would have to be at least a dozen you would want to rate above RVW from Ballydoyle alone over the years. Less than 50 thoroughbreds have recorded an official mark of above 136 in the history of thoroughbred racing and much less at three. I can't see a case on what I've seen to rate RVW anywhere in the 130s. He is a mid-120 performer at best.
 
Last edited:
Take RVW out of the race. Would you still believe Conduit ran below form when it has improved on relative form with Cima De Triomphe and everything else around it appears to have run to form too?

Had STS won by 6 lengths with Conduit 4½ lengths clear of the third, improving on their form from the Brigadier Gerard, nobody would be batting an eyelid about putting the winner mid-high 130s.
 
Taking horses out of races could make a hundred horses in the last 10 years worth a 135+ rating.
 
The higher interpretation of the form, whether right or wrong, is not just centred around Conduit, but also Cima De Triomphe, Steele Tango and Jukebox Jury.

I don't believe anyone thinks Twice Over ran his race or is in any way pertinent to rating the race.

Two points on Hawk Wing:

a) For accuracy's sake, his OR was 137 but in the International Classification they couldn't get it more than 133.

b) The higher interpretation of his Lockinge form was one of the most controversial subjects of recent years. There were many, many people happy to crab that form on the basis that very little if anything ran to form in behind. Ring any bells?
 
Back
Top