Derby. Epsom (no road)

EC1 said:
I wouldn't be rushing to back the winner for the Arc if the sectional data is any guide.

In a race where overall time tells you nothing due to the slow early pace...its the last 3.5f split that tells a story...once balanced with the early pace.

I'll try and highlight what i mean.

Firstly the pace was very slow as you could see anyway.

when the track speed is removed from the times to give a comparison with previous runs...this race makes a very interesting comparison with Sea The Stars win....in very similar pace scenario. The track speed was actually near identical with no need to adjust STS time and only a slight adjustment to todays.

Sea The Stars
start to 7f marker =73.5
7f to 3.5f out = 44.7
3.5f to finish 38.54

Ruler Of The World
start to 7f marker =73.7
7f to 3.5f out = 45.9
3.5f to finish 39.1

basically ROTW has saved energy early and so should be able to beat STS's last sectional to equal the rating STS got for his Derby win..but even though running a length and a half slower to 7 out...+ 7 lengths slower in the mid section...he still runs the last section 3+ lengths slower than STS.

so ROTW had saved 8+ lengths on STS to 3 out he has still run 3+ slower just in the last section...this would have put him well back in STS's Derby

lets say he had run alongside STS to 3.5 out he would then have finished a lot more than 3+ lengths behind STS as the extra energy needed to run 8+ faster would have slowed him later.

imo this could be a very below par winner
Click to expand...

Always interesting reading your analyses, EC1, but surely the going must have had a say?

I said going into the race it was shaping up as a p1ss poor renewal and that was my initial impression watching the race but it's good to have other evidence to back it up.

I'll 'do' the race midweek and let you know what I find.
 
I am sure your research and what ever analysis others do on here has lots of merit in telling the story of this race. However my feeling on the animal Ruler of the World is that today was the first time he has actually had a race. He was pure green at Chester imo. Some took it as an ordinary performance that day by a horse who needs a ledger distance. I saw it as a horse who really was just having a second educational and wasn't too sure about his job. To compare him to Sts (one of the greats) who had 4 runs under his belt before the Derby may not be a great comparison. The slow pace would not have suited him either. He went and won the race when asked to. I think he has lots of improvement in him and on that basis was worth a speculation for later in the Season.
 
Desert Orchid said:
Always interesting reading your analyses, EC1, but surely the going must have had a say?

I said going into the race it was shaping up as a p1ss poor renewal and that was my initial impression watching the race but it's good to have other evidence to back it up.

I'll 'do' the race midweek and let you know what I find.
Click to expand...

the times are corrected for ground speed DO...the going was nil on my figs when STS ran..and just 5lb per mile slow today..so only today's times needed adjusting..and that was very slight

...Camelot also beat ROTF in each sectional...Pour Moi beat him easily...others ran much faster in the early two sections and ran just a little slower late..like New Approach

ROTW............. 73.7...45.9.....39.1
New Approach..71.1...45.5.....39.4
Pour Moi...........72.1..44.9.....38.6
Camelot...........72.1..45.1.....39.0

Those winners would have eaten ROTW alive..look how strong they ran the first two sections...and still beat ROTW late on...look at New Approach..ran the first part 2.6 seconds faster....that should really have hurt his final section compared to ROTW..but he even ran middle section faster too...and then manages to run last section just .3 slower
 
Last edited:
Sheikh said:
I am sure your research and what ever analysis others do on here has lots of merit in telling the story of this race. However my feeling on the animal Ruler of the World is that today was the first time he has actually had a race. He was pure green at Chester imo. Some took it as an ordinary performance that day by a horse who needs a ledger distance. I saw it as a horse who really was just having a second educational and wasn't too sure about his job. To compare him to Sts (one of the greats) who had 4 runs under his belt before the Derby may not be a great comparison. The slow pace would not have suited him either. He went and won the race when asked to. I think he has lots of improvement in him and on that basis was worth a speculation for later in the Season.
Click to expand...

no no..i wasn't comparing him to STS per se ..i was comparing his performance in the Derby..basically a 125 ish performance on the day over that track...you can also see how he compares to other ones above as well...my initial example shows that had he run in STS's Derby he would have lost by about 8/10 lengths as his finishing effort is so poor compared to his early pace. I picked STS as his early pace was very similar...it makes highlighting whats happened a bit easier. So whatever rating STS got for the Derby...you can then knock about 10/12lbs off for ROTW..113/115?

When a horse runs slow early..he should run the last section faster than horses who beat its early times..see saw effect of energy use.
 
Last edited:
I don 't disagree with your analysis of the race but I don't think it gives a fair representation of the performance produced by a horse that had only raced twice before (and not tested) to win the Derby. Your examples of previous winners who would have 'eat him' all had more experience and where not as scopey.
 
Last edited:
Sheikh said:
I don 't disagree with your analysis of the race but I don't think it gives a fair representation of the performance produced by a horse that had only raced twice before (and not tested) to win the Derby. Your examples of previous winners who would have 'eat him' all had more experience and where not as scopey.
Click to expand...

i think many Derby winners improve..including STS and many others who only have 2/3 runs before..so you could say most Derby winners have a similar scope for improvement...which makes many Derby winners at a similar point in the improvement curve

I think it would be very hard to measure just how much scope any Derby winner has...ROTW might not have any..he might have 7lbs..but i think we are basically comparing like with like re Derby winners generally

we'll see..i get what you are saying
 
just as another reference..these are Nijinsky's

Nijinsky 70.6...47.0...38.0
ROTW 73.7...45.9.....39.1

if we simplified this in what would probably not be that scientific..Nijinsky has a 3.1 second advantage at the first section..a 1.1 section deficit in the middle section..then a 1.1 sec advantage late on...so his Derby on paper rated 3.1 minus 1.1 plus 1.1 superiority over ROTW......3.1 seconds in total superior..or 17 lengths
 
Last edited:
Sheikh said:
I don 't disagree with your analysis of the race but I don't think it gives a fair representation of the performance produced by a horse that had only raced twice before (and not tested) to win the Derby. Your examples of previous winners who would have 'eat him' all had more experience and where not as scopey.
Click to expand...

I agree with you, but I doubt his trainer will ever have a 3yo win the Arc.
 
Hmmmm............. still don't think your comparing like with like. The horses you named all had a minimum of 3 races before the Derby and all except Pour Moi ran in the Guineas first (He had 2 runs at 2 and 2 at 3 before the Derby) Most of them, bar the great Nijinsky and Seathestars did not improve. The Derby was their peak.
 
I find these small field Derbies very disappointing especially when they are run at such a muddling pace . I suspect the best horse plainly won but run the race again and any of the second to the sixth might have been second . Mars looked to have been mullered by his own stablemate two out and can be rated better than his sixth.

Shame Toronado , Telescope and Steeler for various reasons were not there today .
 
Well done to the winner and placed horses.

My gut instinct weeks ago was to dismiss DA but as the race grew closer I thought he'd do it. How wrong I was, and happy to admit it.

Well done to those people who backed the winner.
 
Last edited:
ulleyseys46 said:
libertarian run very well and proved alot of people wrong, with a decent jockey on board would of given the winner and much tougher race. william buick was useless. very weak.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't be too harsh on the jockey the horse absolutely hated that course. Libertarian might just prove to be the best horse in the race long term.
 
I was at the start yesterday and for what its worth DA was just about the most relaxed and the winner perhaps slightly warm

Ridculously given that i live all of ten miles away, it was my first derby. Seen the oaks a couple of times mind.

The start and then watching the finish from a slight rise further up is probably the best free show in racing. Its genuinely a special spot down there, surprisingly peaceful and there were a handful of racing nuts who had like me cycled down

Unless you love 14 year olds with fake tans and geezers vacantly swilling down fosters, the less said about the rest of the infield the better...

Riding back through Ewell there were hundreds of people lining the streets with union jacks which was flattering. I did my best to wave back

Didnt have a bet. Would have loved DA to win but even with "a relaxed racing style" (not) i just cant have big stamina doubts in derby runners. Pedigree just kicks in so much more than supposed manner of travelling IMO

Winner could progress nicely but with so many in a heap, its not likely to be a good renewal is it?

Only thought i did have was.... "listen Joseph, this is the best chance......... "
 
Last edited:
chroniclandlord said:
I thought that too. He could yet turn out to be the best of them, especially given his inexperience.
Click to expand...

Hughes tried to repeat his ride on Talent but didn't get the breaks. 10f and a more forceful ride will see him to best effect; heels super impressive when he made all on debut so I don't understand why they've been holding him up this year.
 
Aragorn said:
Hughes tried to repeat his ride on Talent but didn't get the breaks. 10f and a more forceful ride will see him to best effect; heels super impressive when he made all on debut so I don't understand why they've been holding him up this year.
Click to expand...

why the hell did he hold up talent for that matter
 
Sheikh said:
why the hell did he hold up talent for that matter
Click to expand...

I know what the hell was he doing - would have won ten lengths otherwise :p

I suspect AOB decided how they were all to be ridden - certainly the impression Hughes column gave in the post .
 
St Jovite
Sakhee
Dubai Millennium
Alamshar
Dylan Thomas
Hawk Wing
Barathea
Unfuwain
Dancing Brave
El Gran Senor

All were beaten in the Derby by inferior horses.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top