Fighting Fifth

Oh, but apologies, he's a genius who has never been wrong in his life so it is his God given right to say what he wants to whom he wants, isn't it?
Click to expand...

Am I the only one who finds humour in this?
 
I still maintain (as I explained earlier) that Harchibald indeed cannot be trusted for the simple reason that it cannot be taken on trust what he has left in the tank whilst he is on the bridle. You must have quoted a wrong comment of mine then as I read that you were telling me categorically that Harchibald is far, far superior to Katchit and will beat him everytime, under any comditions - a comment in itself which has yet to be proven to be true.

I also agree that Harchibald doesn's stay and Cheltenham doesn't play to his strengths - the latter point at least that I have mentioned more than once on this thread!

I did not even get into the form of the races run by both horses, I was pointing out simple maths - that in all his four runs at Cheltenham, Katchit has remained unbeaten. Contrast that to Harchibald's record which, along with his racing style, indicates to me that he does not like Cheltenham. With those two points allied, I would think that Katchit would probably beat Harchibald were the race to be re-run again tomorrow at Cheltenham.
 
Pointing out the simple maths without considering the form involved is ridiculous. I always assumed that odds compiling was a more sophisticated science that reading the form line. It was about as ridculous a comment Sporazene, Copeland beating him in the County.
But of course, Katchit's CHeltenham's form is rock solid.

Harchibald has met Katchit once and beaten him once, and we'll see what the score is at the end of the season.
 
I also agree that Harchibald doesn's stay and Cheltenham doesn't play to his strengths - the latter point at least that I have mentioned more than once on this thread!

I did not even get into the form of the races run by both horses, I was pointing out simple maths - that in all his four runs at Cheltenham, Katchit has remained unbeaten. Contrast that to Harchibald's record which, along with his racing style, indicates to me that he does not like Cheltenham. With those two points allied, I would think that Katchit would probably beat Harchibald were the race to be re-run again tomorrow at Cheltenham.
Click to expand...

I don't see that Harchibald has any particular problem with Cheltenham. First attempt he only came 5th in the County hurdle, but the comment in the sporting life " led going easily between last two" might indicate they have learned a bit about him since then. He followed that by coming within a neck of winning the champion hurdle, his well known idiosyncracies being more to blame than the course. Followed by winning the Bula as smoothly as Harchibald is ever going to do on any course.
 
Ive had another look at the Champion Hurdle on youtube (thanks Arazi) and for me, he was pulling slightly further ahead of Brave Inca in the last 100 yards. No mean effort. But Hardy Eustace loves that hill. The thing about the previous years CH was that he put 5l between himself and Rooster Booster from the last flight. I think Harchibald was somewhat unlucky to come up against a horse of Hardy Eustace's ability that was absolutely crying out for the hill. Only a horse with strong staying ability and a huge turn off foot would have come from behind HE that day. IMO. I not sure Harchibald is back near the form he was in then, but its good to have him back.
 
Shadow, I'm not an alcoholic...I'm an insomniac...there's a big difference.

And you know I love you really. It's hot and cold. You are capable of giving a fair bit of abuse yourself, young lady, so you give it and you take it. I don't take it too seriously so why should you. I don't know you personally so couldn't give a fiddlers about what you think and vice versa I would hope...

Come January, I will delight in your propensity to get wound up. And, of course, I must point out that one's professional integrity is not influenced by what they post on a private racing forum. [Well, it would be private if some people didn't insist on rabbiting on about people's professions from time to time...this was a well known Ardross trick - I used to engage in such talk but..as a professional...I know better now]

This is a forum. This is not my life.

Chris..I take on board what Melendez says but don't want to back down as I am fully confident in my assertions. If you want to reduce the bet to a more reasonable figure such as 100 sterling etc etc or whatever you prefer then I have no problem whatsoever.

The Bula promises to be much fun...........
 
Originally posted by Bobbyjo@Dec 5 2007, 04:24 PM
Shadow, I'm not an alcoholic...I'm an insomniac...there's a big difference.

And you know I love you really. It's hot and cold. You are capable of giving a fair bit of abuse yourself, young lady, so you give it and you take it. I don't take it too seriously so why should you. I don't know you personally so couldn't give a fiddlers about what you think and vice versa I would hope...

Come January, I will delight in your propensity to get wound up. And, of course, I must point out that one's professional integrity is not influenced by what they post on a private racing forum. [Well, it would be private if some people didn't insist on rabbiting on about people's professions from time to time...this was a well known Ardross trick - I used to engage in such talk but..as a professional...I know better now]

This is a forum. This is not my life.

Chris..I take on board what Melendez says but don't want to back down as I am fully confident in my assertions. If you want to reduce the bet to a more reasonable figure such as 100 sterling etc etc or whatever you prefer then I have no problem whatsoever.

The Bula promises to be much fun...........
Click to expand...
So are we agreeing, that the terms i stated a few posts above are the betting ones; don't really fancy £500 on a match bet as its not my sort of bet for that stake, but more than happy to go £200 on a match bet if you want?

I presume you will be at Cheltenham, as will I . So if your around on the Tuesday I'm sure the loser will hand over without need for embarresment.

Are we in in agreement that both horses dont need to finish for someone to win but if both fail to finish its void, but any terms of not finishing count, and bets void if either doesn't turn up. So as long as they are in line when the tape goes up, whoever crosses the lollipop before the other is the winner ?

I just hope their 1st and 2nd so it will be a worthy bet and not 8th and 9th making it look rather silly.

Are we on?
 
Originally posted by uncle goober@Dec 5 2007, 05:30 PM
I'm just pleased we're all calling it the Bula.
Click to expand...
For crying out loud ~ it's the Cheltenham Trial Hurdle; all this new-fangled Bula business just winds me up.
 
One could see why it is an automatic reaction to assume that you post after a night on the lash, Bobbyjo - it's certainly when you are at you're most acidic! Let's face it, we all know of people who get tanked up then decide to get stuck in on here. I wasn't calling you an alcoholic either - if I thought that I'd assume you were permanently half cut, not just at 4am....

Damn right I give some as well - not least when perpetually being told by some smug git or another that I'm always wrong!!!! We'll see come March......!!

Finally, we all know about the tricks of others - although unlike others who should know better (not least when they make the Law their living!!) I don't tend to be in the habit of naming people or telling everyone exactly who they work for, or revealing other specific private details on here. As you say, this is a forum, not life, and I have one too!
 
Originally posted by trackside528+Dec 5 2007, 12:30 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (trackside528 @ Dec 5 2007, 12:30 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-chrisbeekracing@Dec 4 2007, 10:37 PM
Whoever obtains the best position, so if you fall, unseat, get brought down , pull up or carried out thats tough, that counts as a loser. The horse that finsihes closer to first wins, if you fall at the first that is tough luck.
Click to expand...
Perhaps worth noting that Harchibald has never failed to complete a race in his life, Chris!

In fact, on good ground, he is probably the best hurdler I have ever seen. [/b][/quote]
Talk about a Freudian slip!!!

What I meant, of course, was that he is the best jumper of a hurdle I have ever seen.. unbelievably quick, he made Katchit, a great jumper himself, look quite ordinary at a few last Saturday..
 
Back
Top