Frankel and the International Stakes

good reading from the RP:

Perfection not enough
anymore for Frankel

BY SAM WALKER 12:11PM 6 AUG 2012

WORLD CLASS: an analysis of the international scene according to Racing Post Ratings

FRANKEL had better get used to the dignified applause that greeted him on the Goodwood Downs last week.

His odds will be so prohibitive in his remaining starts he will never be met with the fist-pumping roar of a public gamble.

And the benchmark he set himself in the Queen Anne is so high that he will never again evoke the screams and cheers of a stunned crowd.

From now on it's respectful clapping all the way. Like a visiting royal, there for the appearance rather than to perform. Easy win follows easy win follows easy win.

Frankel has transcended the sport. The bookmakers have given up, the punters have given up, the rivals have given up. There is simply no point taking him on any more.

His exceptional ability and bullet-proof consistency have seen him smash the glass ceiling of handicap ratings and now, as an eternal 1-20 shot, he has conquered the sport itself.

But being so exceptional - perfect, even - has somehow failed to endear him to the wider public, and this tells us something we would never have known without experiencing this enigma.

In their sporting heroes people don't actually want a perfect champion. They want some vulnerability. There is simply not enough drama in this story of equine perfection.

Racing is, after all, in the entertainment industry and it would be natural to assume that the greatest horse would be the most entertaining. But not, apparently, when he's consistently that good.

Frankel's is just not a story that appeals outside racing. He is not an underdog - he started at the top as a two-year-old and just went further clear - and there is no suspense or drama in his races because he is so consistent that a high-130s performance is now guaranteed, as is a wide-margin win.

There have been entertaining highlights within his perfect career, like the fantastic cannonball victory in the Guineas and the Queen Anne blitz, but every time he raises his game he sets expectations even higher.

We can always marvel at his fantastic speed and we can give a satisfied nod every time he skips clear a furlong out, but Frankel won't shock us again. Wide-margins are to be expected. Indeed, the biggest surprise this late in his career would be to find a chink in his armour.

The only way to create excitement within the Frankel story now would be to engineer a situation where he could possibly lose. That might be against another great horse like Black Caviar or in a race like the Arc where the trip is not ideal.

That would be the best thing in the name of entertainment but not necessarily the best thing for the horse. And nobody is expecting it to happen anyway, as the end to Frankel's story has already been written.

He will run out the clock with two or three more easy victories. With three seasons under his belt he has already given more to racing than most world champions and the step up to 1m2f will likely see him crowned king of two distance spheres.

Within racing, we must accept that unblemished perfection is simply not a saleable story. He is not here to inspire the wider public to fall in love with racing.

He will not create drama, romance or suspense. He may never be popular outside the sport, he may not bring new people into racing and he may not be an ambassador to the non-racing public. Instead he is ours to savour.

Predictable, reliable and an incredible natural talent. The wider public may never know him but we will never forget.

He is here for the breeders who strive with every mating for equine perfection, letting them know it is possible. He is here for the punters who need to know that a rock of certainty resides in this eternal conundrum. He is here for the racing fans to pettifog and pontificate on his position in the pantheon. And he is here for the highest quality broodmares in the world, who next year will carry the future of the breed in utero.

Take it as a positive that he has not been lost unto the masses for a few bright months in the gone-tomorrow media spotlight, but instead kept close to those that matter, nurturing a legacy that will last forever.

Sir Henry Cecil always knew what he was doing with this horse and he was always right: run the horse for the horse. It has worked with every other horse, so why not Frankel?

With such an exceptional talent Cecil might have planned a more exciting route. Given the low standard of European sprinters and Frankel's speedy sectionals, he might, for instance, have taken in a Group 1 sprint.

But Frankel was not run for today, he was run for forever. His record will be analysed decades from now and they won't wonder why he didn't run in a sprint or in the Arc. They will just wonder.

It is curious that Black Caviar has managed to remain both exceptional and entertaining, but this is in part because of Frankel.

Being a mare never hurts a horse's popularity, but because she was always rated second best in the world, she always had something to fight against.

Despite being recognised around the world as a sprinting legend, she still managed to exist as an underdog and whenever she raced she was up against Frankel; carrying the anticipation that at any time she might post a performance to rival the colt.

Connections also helped her popularity by building her towards an international campaign and showing her off around Australia, letting people from all over the country catch a glimpse of her.

In a few years the race schedules for these two great horses will be completely forgotten. Frankel and Black Caviar will be remembered for their awesome natural power - and wherever they ran it would have been the same.

Entertainment-wise a match race between the two was always the preferred option for the people of today. But their legacy will far outlive the people of today.

Frankel ran just below his outstanding best last week, posting an RPR of 138+ for a facile six-length success over Farhh.

The early pace was not strong and he was best placed to capitalise, tucked in just behind his pacemaker. Nevertheless, this was a very easy victory at Group 1 level.

The average winning distance across his eight top-level wins now stands at five-lengths.
 
lets just hope sna takes his chance because farrh & planteur simply don't get the pulse going
 
Would that be the same Twice Over that won the Eclipse that RVW swerved, DJ?:)
Sea The Stars or not, RVW ran out of gas in the Eclipse, and I don't believe he was ever seriously considered for another try. Indeed, the only 10f race he contested between that defeat and his York triumph was around a very sharp Santa Anita.
Rather than alluding to any injury, AO'B said, after the International:
We have trained him very gently. He was just ready to step up to a mile and a quarter today. We wanted to keep him for the second half of the season. which suggests the York race was always the intention.

RVW ran out of gas in the Eclipse ? Sorry cannot have that Sea The Stars was toying with him all the way up the straight and RVW stayed on stoutly pulling well ahead of the rest in a race run at a frantic gallop for Conduit's benefit.

Coolmore talked their usual bilge after the race but Jimmy Fortune was interviewed later and said he felt he was going really well attacked STS quickened well but soon realised that STS was toying with him.

I suggest you watch it again on the Sporting Life website . The idea he ran out of gas is just not supported by any of the evidence .
 
Last edited:
RVW ran out of gas in the Eclipse ? Sorry cannot have that Sea The Stars was toying with him all the way up the straight and RVW stayed on stoutly pulling well ahead of the rest in a race run at a frantic gallop for Conduit's benefit.

Coolmore talked their usual bilge after the race but Jimmy Fortune was interviewed later and said he felt he was going really well attacked STS quickened well but soon realised that STS was toying with him.

I suggest you watch it again on the Sporting Life website . The idea he ran out of gas is just not supported by any of the evidence .

No need to watch it again, RVW travelled all over him until below the distance.
That was when AOB decided he was a miler, as is clearly evidenced by his subsequent programme.
 
Rip Van Wikle run his best race in the Eclipse and stayed very well that day
he was just beaten by a better horse
 
Tks Suny.
It sounds like Frankel will be like royalty, thinking all the world smells of fresh paint.
Pity Clive Brittain didnt train him.

Indeed, pity that in 2 years of racing thus far he's not been further than 200 miles from his box :(

Martin
 
give it up Suny..he makes his mind up based on trainers and nowt you will say will alter his view.,,the evidence on this thread that York 10f is a decent test is overwhelming..but because AOB dropped one horse back in trip it MUST mean the 10 at york is a milers trip
 
Last edited:
give it up Suny..he makes his mind up based on trainers and nowt you will say will alter his view.,,the evidence on this thread that York 10f is a decent test is overwhelming..but because AOB dropped one horse back in trip it MUST mean the 10 at york is a milers trip

With EC and Suny here.... You have to have a filter on when listening to O'Brien.
 
'Cept he didn't say it until 14 months later, even though the horse had been campaigned as a miler in the interim?
Far from being hype, admitting RVW was a miler not long after winning the International must - considering stud value, etc - be one of the most negative and revealing statements AOB's ever made about a horse in his care.

EC
Do try and stick to the script, rather than concocting your own version of what I've written, eh?
 
Last edited:
'Cept he didn't say it until 14 months later, even though the horse had been campaigned as a miler in the interim?
Far from being hype, admitting RVW was a miler not long after winning the International must - considering stud value, etc - be one of the most negative and revealing statements AOB's ever made about a horse in his care.

EC
Do try and stick to the script, rather than concocting your own version of what I've written, eh?

the script to me reads that you have based a belief about how stiff York 10 is on 1 horse

and no i don't agree that RVW was purely a miler..his run in the Derby wasn't that of a miler..it was that of a 10f horse..he came to win that race well past the 10f trip and then flattened out in the last furlong..a pure miler wouldn't have done that...Epsom with that stiff early climb is not a track that flatters non stayers

his run against STS was probably the best challenge STS had ever had in any race..it was only STS's ability to find more that beat him. Without an exceptional horse in front of him he would have a 10f Sandown easy G1 under his belt..hardly the CV of just a miler

i've done with going through this now as you never ever change your mind no matter if 10 pages of evidence were given against your view. It does help though if you actually put up something that makes some kind of convincing argument rather than picking one horse out from thousands..and even then the horse in question doesn't actually support your view
 
Last edited:
the script to me reads that you have based a belief about how stiff York 10 is on 1 horse

and no i don't agree that RVW was purely a miler..his run in the Derby wasn't that of a miler..it was that of a 10f horse..he came to win that race well past the 10f trip and then flattened out in the last furlong..a pure miler wouldn't have done that...Epsom with that stiff early climb is not a track that flatters non stayers

his run against STS was probably the best challenge STS had ever had in any race..it was only STS's ability to find more that beat him. Without an exceptional horse in front of him he would have a 10f Sandown easy G1 under his belt..hardly the CV of just a miler

i've done with going through this now as you never ever change your mind no matter if 10 pages of evidence were given against your view. It does help though if you actually put up something that makes some kind of convincing argument rather than picking one horse out from thousands..and even then the horse in question doesn't actually support your view

spot on
obviously right
 
the script to me reads that you have based a belief about how stiff York 10 is on 1 horse

Quite the contrary, in reality.
Having watched RVW in the Eclipse, and how much better he travelled than Sea The Stars until the last furlong, I decided he was a very high class colt who would probably be better suited by a lesser test. That opinion was entirely vindicated when he won his next 2 races over Im.
No surprise (given how important 10f gp1's are to breeders) to see him stepped up to 10f at the end of his 3yo season, and no surprise that it was over the sharpest 10f he was ever likely to encounter.
Knowing York well, and having known for some years it was the least exacting of all the 10f gp1 races, I expected the International to be his primary aim as a 4yo (and like most of the above, having said so well before the race), once again an opinion entirely vindicated by his trainer's statement reproduced earlier in this thread.
Seemingly, not only does AOB appreciate the International is the lesser test, so does HRAC (runs Frankel), John Gosden (won't be running Nathaniel). SMS and a host of other trainers and jockeys, so while I'm quite happy for you to believe it not to be the case, I'll rest contented that my opinion is shared by quite a few who do know what they're talking about - thank you.
 
but trainers and jockeys don't always know..they are no more knowledgeable about tracks than someone who probably has more time than they do to look deeply into which test is this or that..in fact probably less so as their time is spent actually training and running a stable

as i said earlier..you would think someone riding a horse would know the going conditions after they ride in the first race of the day..you deem they are the experts but you can get the going being from fast to slow depending on which "expert" rider you ask..how is this possible when you say they know much more than someone actually spending time just trying to guage the ground?

you put an awful lot of faith in trainers and jockeys which imo is a flawed way of looking at the game...you have to take your own view in this game and go by what evidence can be gathered..a punter has more time to gather that info than trainers or jockeys but you somehow put that person as less knowledgeable because they don't train or ride horses.

I'll just use Nick Mordin as an example of that with Dancing Rain..he actually suggested what race the horse would be suited to after it won the Oaks..the trainer acknowledged that afterwards.

How many times is a horse pulled out because the ground is not suitable only for it then to win on that ground?..many times..and yet you say the trainer should know as he is an expert..they aren't experts and don't have time to be...a lot of what trainers do is trial and error...and habit
 
Last edited:
Frankel runs in the Juddmonte
because is a very good race and also because it is sponsored by his owner
 
Quite the contrary, in reality.
Having watched RVW in the Eclipse, and how much better he travelled than Sea The Stars until the last furlong, I decided he was a very high class colt who would probably be better suited by a lesser test. That opinion was entirely vindicated when he won his next 2 races over Im.

The lesser test was not facing Sea the Stars. End of.
 
..a punter has more time to gather that info than trainers or jockeys but you somehow put that person as less knowledgeable because they don't train or ride horses.

would agree with much of the above but not that really. what do punters see that trainers and jockeys do not? and the info on a few group ones in a season is hardly mind boggling

if i was hiring a trainer i woudl bloody well hope he has a better idea of what the horse is suited to than some berk on betfair
 
bad ones yes...but aob, gosden and nichols and others are too professional to **** around guessing
 
bad ones yes...but aob, gosden and nichols and others are too professional to **** around guessing

Nicholls has had horses the last two years in the RSA that would have been better suited to running in the Midlands National a la Synchronised.
 
but trainers and jockeys don't always know..they are no more knowledgeable about tracks than someone who probably has more time than they do to look deeply into which test is this or that.

A quick glance through this thread should expose the above supposition for the complete bollocks it quite clearly is.:lol:
 
Back
Top