Epsom Derby 2020

Frankel said:
Love who committed earlier in her race was still quicker over the last couple of furlongs than the closers in the Derby.
Click to expand...

I don't think the sectionals back that up, Frankel. I'll have another look to check but I'm pretty sure she committed at the right time. Ever the one to have a downer on Moore, I'm not sure it was down to brilliant riding; rather, I reckon that was just her getting into top gear after being asked a furlong earlier.

Not that it really matters. She is clearly a mile better than any of the other 3yo fillies.

I'd said after the Guineas that I reckoned she would beat the colts with the allowance. She might just be good enough to beat them without any allowance.

I was struggling to muster up any enthusiasm on Saturday morning for any 3yo bar Love but now I think we have genuine G1 classic winners.
 
Incidentally, I see the Irish handicapper has only given Serpentine 120. That strikes me as an insult. I presume it's been arrived at in consultation with the British official but the blog hasn't been released yet.

If Serpentine is only 120, how bad must the rest of the field be?

I'll crunch some numbers myself tomorrow but my immediate (well, Sunday) rating for Serpentine was 124+p, pending hard-copy data.
 
Kameko didn't stay
Russian Emperor was given a **** ride
Mogul was given a tender ride, this year's Japan
English King followed Mogul and stayed on ok. He was very warm beforehand and undoubtedly expended energy he needed for the race.

The fact that the 2nd and 3rd were in those possies throughout suggests the better horses were too far back off of an average pace.
 
Euronymous said:
The fact that the 2nd and 3rd were in those possies throughout suggests the better horses were too far back off of an average pace.
Click to expand...

Yes, it does, but the mark-ups appear marginal, maybe up to 5lbs, and suggest English King was the second-best horse in the field, but I still think Serpentine deserves a mark-up for going too fast from five out to three out.

I hope to spend some time tomorrow crunching numbers, time ratings, mark-ups etc and will be doing so with an open mind but I'm half-expecting them to confirm that Serpentine is a good 7lbs better than anything else in the field.

It will be interesting to see how his mark ends up comparing to Love's.
 
Desert Orchid said:
I don't think the sectionals back that up, Frankel. I'll have another look to check but I'm pretty sure she committed at the right time. Ever the one to have a downer on Moore, I'm not sure it was down to brilliant riding; rather, I reckon that was just her getting into top gear after being asked a furlong earlier.

Not that it really matters. She is clearly a mile better than any of the other 3yo fillies.

I'd said after the Guineas that I reckoned she would beat the colts with the allowance. She might just be good enough to beat them without any allowance.

I was struggling to muster up any enthusiasm on Saturday morning for any 3yo bar Love but now I think we have genuine G1 classic winners.
Click to expand...

Check out Rowlands sectionals on ATR. Looks like she was behind after 4f. Then she has put herself between a 1-2 seconds ahead of the finishing 4th-8th in the Derby at the just over mile point.
They then made some ground up to the 10f before she was quicker to the line.
 
Frankel said:
Check out Rowlands sectionals on ATR. Looks like she was behind after 4f. Then she has put herself between a 1-2 seconds ahead of the finishing 4th-8th in the Derby at the just over mile point.
They then made some ground up to the 10f before she was quicker to the line.
Click to expand...

Will do, Frankel. Thanks. I read the blog yesterday but I might be mixing it up with Angus McNae's assessment.

I see the British handicapper has English King unchanged on 112. That's broadly in line with my own entirely underwhelmed view of the 3yos, which was why I fully expected an O'Brien horse to win. Like Euronymous, I had Mogul down as a Japan-type who would come into his own later in the season so I pinned my hopes on Vatican City. I'd seen Serpentine's win last week and presumed Vatican City would be better again but there you go. Timeform have put English King up to 118p (from 117p) and allowing for their ratings to tend to be about 5lbs higher than my own at the top end that might be in the right ball-park.

However, like me, they go high with Love whom they have on the same 124p mark as Serpentine so the allowance would put her clear on ratings should their paths cross in a race. However, my own provisional rating for Love is 125+p so, if I'm anywhere near right, she is heading towards superstardom. John Gosden is absolutely right to fear her should she meet Enable somewhere down the line.
 
Desert Orchid said:
I don't think the sectionals back that up, Frankel. I'll have another look to check but I'm pretty sure she committed at the right time.
Click to expand...

You're correct, Frankel.

In the tables below the markers are approximate (*), ie it's not exactly the final four or two furlongs but they're all measured at the same point.

Table one - ordered by their respective finishing times from about 4f out:

Horse
4*
2*
Russian Emperor
39.0
23.2
Love
39.06
22.76
English King
39.08
23.03
Mogul
39.35
23.45
Kameko
39.52
23.34
Serpentine
41.53
24.48

<tbody>
</tbody>


Table 2 - from approximately 2f out:
Horse
4*
2*
Love
39.06
22.76
English King
39.08
23.03
Russian Emperor
39.0
23.2
Kameko
39.52
23.34
Mogul
39.35
23.45
Serpentine
41.53
24.48

<tbody>
</tbody>


Russian Emperor clocked the fastest final half-mile and Love the fastest final quarter-mile.
 
It would be good if Simon Rowlands (aka Prufrock on here) could pay us a visit to offer clarification but if my calcs are correct, Love can be marked up 2lbs but Serpentine can be marked up 10lbs.

For the time being I'll settle for a '+' for Love and a '++' for Serpentine as a broader reflection of mark-ups but it reinforces my growing belief that Serpentine is a superior winner of a very inferior renewal.
 
Euronymous said:
Kameko didn't stay
Russian Emperor was given a **** ride
Mogul was given a tender ride, this year's Japan
English King followed Mogul and stayed on ok. He was very warm beforehand and undoubtedly expended energy he needed for the race.

The fact that the 2nd and 3rd were in those possies throughout suggests the better horses were too far back off of an average pace.
Click to expand...

Dettori said EK didn't handle the track. A stock answer in some cases where known horse will not run there again, but has been known to be true in the past.
 
G-G said:
Dettori said EK didn't handle the track. A stock answer in some cases where known horse will not run there again, but has been known to be true in the past.
Click to expand...

Also interesting considering how he breezed round Lingfield.
 
While he wasn't fat like he was at Ascot, Mogul was still carrying a load of condition and there's still a tonne of improvement to come. Anything that finished around him or behind him won't trouble the judges in Grade 1's over a mile and half or further. The fact that every horse form 2nd down to 5th were no more than a length and a half ahead of him is enough for me to say the only horses of interest from the race are Serpentine and Mogul.

It's rare for me to rate flat races, but because of the nature of the race I was intrigued to see if I could find an alternative angle to rate the race from. Whatever I do and however I look at it though, I can't find any way to rate Serpentine higher than 118. I'd happily put a p+ next to his name because of the way he won, but ultimately the performance is the performance, and that's it.
 
Maruco said:
While he wasn't fat like he was at Ascot, Mogul was still carrying a load of condition and there's still a tonne of improvement to come. Anything that finished around him or behind him won't trouble the judges in Grade 1's over a mile and half or further. The fact that every horse form 2nd down to 5th were no more than a length and a half ahead of him is enough for me to say the only horses of interest from the race are Serpentine and Mogul.

It's rare for me to rate flat races, but because of the nature of the race I was intrigued to see if I could find an alternative angle to rate the race from. Whatever I do and however I look at it though, I can't find any way to rate Serpentine higher than 118. I'd happily put a p+ next to his name because of the way he won, but ultimately the performance is the performance, and that's it.
Click to expand...
Unsure how you'd rate a race where 2nd and 3rd were untried over the distance, yet plenty of good horses behind couldn't get near them?
 
Dettori is the last person to admit he rode a poor race and the first to find an excuse.

Yes agree with you Maruco that Mogul was still tubby. Next time out for all Derby fancies plus the winner will be fascinating.
 
jinnyj said:
Dettori is the last person to admit he rode a poor race and the first to find an excuse.
.
Click to expand...

I'm saying it was a different jockey.

Totally agree with the above, regularly trotted out stock answers. They went too fast, they went too slow, couldn't get a position, couldn't hold a position, ground was too fast/slow/tacky, there was no pace, the weight did him/her, drawn badly, didn't stay, needs further....la la la la
 
Frankel said:
So are we really saying Dettori was at fault in the Derby!
Click to expand...

I think all bar the first three were at fault for letting a trailblazer (who had run like that before and got away from his field) get away from them. They assumed he was the pacemaker and would fold. You wouldn’t let a Mark Johnston horse get that much of a lead as they don’t stop so why let an unexposed, improving son of Galileo?
 
G-G said:
I'm saying it was a different jockey.

Totally agree with the above, regularly trotted out stock answers. They went too fast, they went too slow, couldn't get a position, couldn't hold a position, ground was too fast/slow/tacky, there was no pace, the weight did him/her, drawn badly, didn't stay, needs further....la la la la
Click to expand...

Dettori is by far the best jockey we have.

He wasn't to blame for EK jumping out to his left from the gate. That cost him ground. As AMcN says in his analysis, he probably ended up three lengths further back than he really wanted to be but couldn't afford to push the hose forward going up the hill as that's a tactical mistake in itself.

He was caught in the pack along with the others when the leader kicked and the sectionals suggest he was second-best on the day, which is where he nearly finished. I'm not sure he did much wrong compared with any of the other jockeys beyond the front three.

I do find it curious, though, that he would use not acting on the track as an excuse. I'd have thought he'd have been more likely to use the start and being trapped in the pack. At Lingfield he wasn't asked any questions until they'd turned for home. Maybe being asked for more earlier unbalanced the horse.

In any event, if the race was run tomorrow, I'd be more than happy if Dettori was my jockey.
 
jinnyj said:
I think all bar the first three were at fault for letting a trailblazer (who had run like that before and got away from his field) get away from them.
Click to expand...

I agree.

jinnyj said:
They assumed he was the pacemaker and would fold.
Click to expand...

I agree.

jinnyj said:
You wouldn’t let a Mark Johnston horse get that much of a lead as they don’t stop so why let an unexposed, improving son of Galileo?
Click to expand...

I agree.

However, I'm not convinced they could have gone that much quicker themselves anyway. They could - maybe - have collectively been five lengths further forward in the first six furlongs but they would have paid a price for that later on. The sectional mark-ups, if my calculations using Simon Rowlands's formula are correct, are much less for the pack than they are for the winner whose energy was distributed far less efficiently.

It is a strange one.

It's possible Serpentine isn't really that far ahead. Personally I'll believe he is until future events prove otherwise. However, we do sometimes get sensational one-off performances that don't get backed up over time.

Roberto's defeat of Brigadier Gerard comes to mind. Connections claimed the Brigadier coughed up a big lump of mucus shortly after the race but the horse had smashed the old track record and beat the third every bit as far as he'd been expected. Roberto was just brilliant on the day but does that make him better than Brigadier Gerard?

We don't have form ratings etc for War Admiral and Seabiscuit, so how was the latter who was doing his stuff in handicaps able to trounce the former the one time they met?

Would sectional analysis provide answers?

I don't know.

And if you get the chance, listen again to Ruby Walsh talking about the RSA won by Might Bite. He said he was laughing to himself through the first mile, confident that the Henderson horse was going far too fast and the chasing pack were going too fast as well and that he was just going to pick them off up the hill, "then at the top of the hill the leader just quickened away again" and nothing could live with it.

MB never put up that kind of performance again and neither did Roberto, probably because it took them to places their mind and body didn't want to go to again. It's possible Serpentine won't back up his run for similar reasons.

Right now, though, I just think we have a very moderate crop of three-year-olds and that Serpentine has been under-rated. Maybe the test that Saturday provided and the way the race was run has surprised even AOB who perhaps didn't know he had a potential superstar on his hands. Maybe we'll never see the same Serpentine again.

But it will be fascinating to see how he runs.
 
Last edited:
I've crunched some more numbers.

In the absence of a true-run all-age handicap over 12f on the same card, time comparisons become tenuous.

With that in mind, the fastest other race on the round course was the Surrey won by Safe Voyage, which looked strongly run on TV, so I've had to use that as the basis for my going allowance.

Using the current RP standards, Love's time rating is 107 and Serpentine's is 104. To that you need to factor in WFA, 13lbs according to the BHA table. I don't have Timeform's WFA table to hand (I had it a couple of weeks ago so it isn't far!) but at this time of year I think the scales are close to harmonised.

So let's say 13lbs for the time being.

This puts Love on 120, plus any sectional mark-up and any allowance for ease of victory. It puts Serpentine on 117 plus mark-up and allowance.

My own old Standard Times for the 12f Epsom course are the same but the one for the Surrey distance is slightly different. Using that comparison Love and Serpentine come out 3lbs lower.

As I said yesterday, [possibly flawed] sectional mark-ups would give Love another 2lbs and Serpentine another 10lbs. I reckon Love would have had maybe another length in her (but she can wait for broodmare duties for that :rolleyes:) because Moore wasn't asking her for absolutely everything and I reckon although Serpentine was slowing down the jockey could have forced him to another half-length to a length, so I'd allow Love another 2lbs and Serpentine another 1lb.

Best case scenario based purely on times: Love 124p, Serpentine 128p
Worst case: Love 121p, Serpentine 125p

This puts both right up there with the better Oaks and Derby winners - especially Love - but it puts the beaten horses right down in among the all-time dross.

And, especially for Granger:


  • Love is a brilliant 3yo filly
  • Serpentine is a very good 3yo colt

:)
 
Last edited:
jinnyj said:
I think all bar the first three were at fault for letting a trailblazer (who had run like that before and got away from his field) get away from them. They assumed he was the pacemaker and would fold. You wouldn’t let a Mark Johnston horse get that much of a lead as they don’t stop so why let an unexposed, improving son of Galileo?
Click to expand...

Often the case that you are hostage to how the race unfolds in front of you. How EK broke dictated the rest of his race. He was reliant on being carried in to the race from his position.
Some had stamina questions and saw what had happened in the Oaks previously.
 
Desert Orchid said:
Dettori is by far the best jockey we have.

He wasn't to blame for EK jumping out to his left from the gate. That cost him ground. As AMcN says in his analysis, he probably ended up three lengths further back than he really wanted to be but couldn't afford to push the hose forward going up the hill as that's a tactical mistake in itself.

He was caught in the pack along with the others when the leader kicked and the sectionals suggest he was second-best on the day, which is where he nearly finished. I'm not sure he did much wrong compared with any of the other jockeys beyond the front three.

I do find it curious, though, that he would use not acting on the track as an excuse. I'd have thought he'd have been more likely to use the start and being trapped in the pack. At Lingfield he wasn't asked any questions until they'd turned for home. Maybe being asked for more earlier unbalanced the horse.

In any event, if the race was run tomorrow, I'd be more than happy if Dettori was my jockey.
Click to expand...

When he's on something he thinks can win maybe, although I still wouldn't have him. Could say a lot more but not on a public forum.
 
Back
Top