Frankel V Canford Cliffs

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gearoid
  • Start date Start date
So the British racing public doesn't deserve to see the best horses at various distances all in one day? I just think it's a short sighted view, so what if horses have taken both races in the past? The champion stakes was dying on its feet and the QEII has hardly been awash with quantity in recent years and barring Henry vs Ravens the quality has not been all that either. Why not create a flagship meeting, why not create an event that the rest of the non-racing world might be able to understand? Because Nijinsky won both races in 1971?!! Who cares. That was 40 years ago.

The "That's the way it's always been so why change" mantra is one used by failing businesses all over the world. Racing needs to change and update its image. As much as certain factions don't want us to they will be gone in 10/15 years. The future is what really matters.
 
Aragorn said:
So the British racing public doesn't deserve to see the best horses at various distances all in one day? I just think it's a short sighted view, so what if horses have taken both races in the past? The champion stakes was dying on its feet and the QEII has hardly been awash with quantity in recent years and barring Henry vs Ravens the quality has not been all that either. Why not create a flagship meeting, why not create an event that the rest of the non-racing world might be able to understand? Because Nijinsky won both races in 1971?!! Who cares. That was 40 years ago.

The "That's the way it's always been so why change" mantra is one used by failing businesses all over the world. Racing needs to change and update its image. As much as certain factions don't want us to they will be gone in 10/15 years. The future is what really matters.
Click to expand...

I agree it's the future that matters... this is why I'm against it. It’s been done a certain way because of the pattern book. I’d be surprised if anyone at RFC knows what the pattern book is.
This meeting is at the wrong time of year (there is talk of moving it even further back in subsequent years). It is a purely cosmetic rearrangement of something that was in place for a reason.
This is the reason Jim McGrath resigned from the BHA board, as nobody seemed aware of the damage being done.
 
Last edited:
If the pattern book is the sole reason for maintaining the "as-is" it's a flaky reason. Explain to me what damage is being done? So far the only reasons are "Some horses in the past have run in both events" and "It's because of the pattern". I don't see how either of these things will further the sport in the future.

The pattern a narrative that only people within the game truly understand and it takes work. It has taken me 3 or 4 years of study to really understand the nuance's of flat racing - Do you think it should require that level of work to understand a sport? Personally I don't. I love the detail and subtleties of form study but whilst I agree there is a balance to be struck, doing nothing is really not the solution. You can maintain that detail rich element of the sport but also make the top level competition much more accessible. Generation X has a very short attention span and the fundamental reality is that in ten, let alone 40 years time the world will be a very different place and if racing is not careful it will become a micro niche rather than just a niche sport.
 
No offence Aragorn, but you don't seem to understand the Pattern. It underpins all of flat racing, and is much more crucial, infinitly so, than getting another 1000 pissheads through the gate.
 
Can I just ask, objectively, not having a view either way, what people find so offensive about the change and conversely, so attractive about maintaining things as they are?

We've seen any amount of changes to racing in 300 years - it's an evolving activity, not one set in stone. We no longer, for instance, allow spurs to gouge horses' sides, let alone have them come back with weals all over their backsides. We've dropped four-mile heats in favour of no more than once round at that length, and we've dumped water jumps here and there, introduced protective wear for riders, starting stalls, breakaway rails, artificial surfaces, evening racing (floodlit or not), and 'summer jumping' (no relation to the hunting calendar, but it's still a change), as well as any number of improvements to the way racehorses are trained and ridden, as well as an enormously expanded fixtures list, to name but some of the changes over time.

If racing continues to change, then what's the problem with the latest one?
 
Changing the pattern, which is there to identify champion racehorses, just to entice a few more pissheads into Ascot, is not the kind of evolution that I like to see.
 
I'd agree with that all right, but was that the raison d'etre? (Bigger crowds?)

As a matter of interest, Hamm/anyone in the know - how has the Pattern been working out in that respect? Has it been pretty much on target, or have you noticed any surprising (or shocking) discrepancies? I honestly never think about it, but as it's being held up in the same regard as a holy relic, should we know whether it's still highly relevant in its indicators, or not quite as much?

Just wondering, that's all - I don't have any axe or even a small penknife to grind.
 
Hamm, you're being patronising - no need for it. We agree on a lot stuff but just saying that I don't understand it and that it underpins racing and not actually giving me a solid set of reasons why it is an irrevocable set of rules which delivers results is just flaky argumentation. I know more than enough to understand the purpose of the pattern and the role it performs :rolleyes:

I also never suggested this was about dragging a few more pissheads into Ascot. Racing's in a shit state. There are 3 or 4 main benefactors propping up the industry, one of which I suspect loses a fair bit on racing/bloodstock, the prize money is in decline (Name me a successful sport where this is happening), the calendar is a mess, owners will start leaving and the public image is shocking.

This is not just about the pattern but about developing the sport and its place in society. People need to think about building the brand of racing, about making it an attractive proposition for investment, making it a sporting medium people understand and can connect with, giving people a day out that has structure and sense (Have the best race at the end for fucks sake - What planet does racing live on?). The first division was fine until it became the premiership; then we get better football, better players and most importantly for the viewer, better coverage.

Yes the pattern is important but its an archaic structure and although i'm not saying we should completely change the fabric of racing (I love the sport - my girlfriend will vouch for that) pushing things forward and moving toward a more 21st century championship structure has to happen for the good of the sport.
 
But people are thinking about the brand, Aragorn, in fairness to racing: Racing for Change is trying hard to engage the public more. I'm even giving out nice wee booklets on my backstage tours which they've produced for racegoers, called About the Horse, trying to cut through the dense fog of jargon and tell racegoers what to look for. I'm not over-fond of every idea they've had, but at least it proves that racing's acknowledged it does have some problems and is addressing image (hence the endless debating over the whip and fatalities) and "accessibility". It's also RFC which came up with the premiership idea, which has been slated by all sorts of reactionaries in the media and training ranks.

There's little hope of racing pushing forward if half of it won't play and is obstructionist for no other reason than things have "always been that way". Which is a false argument, or we'd still have jockeys riding long and upright with rowelled spurs, and horses staggering through multiple heats to a final exhausted victor. Things have moved on through its 300 years, and should continue to do so, addressing the modern society of its times, not always trying to hark back. It doesn't need to lose its sense of history, but it does need to gain a sense of a future, I agree.
 
Last edited:
Aragorn said:
Hamm, you're being patronising - no need for it. We agree on a lot stuff but just saying that I don't understand it and that it underpins racing and not actually giving me a solid set of reasons why it is an irrevocable set of rules which delivers results is just flaky argumentation. I know more than enough to understand the purpose of the pattern and the role it performs :rolleyes:

I also never suggested this was about dragging a few more pissheads into Ascot. Racing's in a shit state. There are 3 or 4 main benefactors propping up the industry, one of which I suspect loses a fair bit on racing/bloodstock, the prize money is in decline (Name me a successful sport where this is happening), the calendar is a mess, owners will start leaving and the public image is shocking.

This is not just about the pattern but about developing the sport and its place in society. People need to think about building the brand of racing, about making it an attractive proposition for investment, making it a sporting medium people understand and can connect with, giving people a day out that has structure and sense (Have the best race at the end for fucks sake - What planet does racing live on?). The first division was fine until it became the premiership; then we get better football, better players and most importantly for the viewer, better coverage.

Yes the pattern is important but its an archaic structure and although i'm not saying we should completely change the fabric of racing (I love the sport - my girlfriend will vouch for that) pushing things forward and moving toward a more 21st century championship structure has to happen for the good of the sport.
Click to expand...

I did not intend to be patronising, least of all to you, but tell me, what difference will messing up the pattern make? Be serious!
 
The Pattern book is staged to allow thoroughbreds to run at the right time of the season. Helping them for example to step up in distance as the season progresses as they become stronger and are able to fulfil their potential.

Clustering all of the important races together in a heap at one end of the season shows zilch understanding of this. The fact that RFC was able to force this through the BHA with scarcely time for anyone to object shows just how blind the move is. This is what prompted McGrath to resign from the BHA board. As much for the actual measures as for the pig headed refusal to listen to the reasons these things are in place to begin with. It is deplorable that the BHA should approve what RFC has come up with after so-called ‘market research’ on a wet weekend.

Racing indeed deserves better than this.
 
Last edited:
I am not sure why changing the pattern should mean that the pattern is messed up.

Lots of important races are grouped together at the same stage of the season. The Queen Anne and Prince of Wales' stakes are one day apart; why should the QE2 and Champion Stakes be any different?
 
Creating an end of seasons championships gives a crescendo to the season. Racing in itself provides fantastic theatre in each individual race but as a collective whole does it make sense? Personally, my view is that the flat hasn't really got much of a narrative. I know many people here will disagree and people will say its fine but at least at the jumps we get a sense of the season ending with Cheltenham/Aintree. On the flat it just fizzles out. The only end of season meeting worth watching in Europe is the Arc (They had a brass band on course playing final countdown by Europe!!!! Pure genius!!!). I've been to the old champions day and it was a damp squib.

All i'm saying is that the flat season is difficult to understand, has an archaic structure, has no real championship meeting (I know you keep going on about the pattern but the reality is it is ratings that decide champions - This is more about presentation), declining prize money and so to sit there and be dismissive because you think the pattern works is just wrong. It really doesn't. For breeders maybe and for afficianado's but things change.

Kri, I know that's what racing for change are doing and good on them. Nobody will ever make everybody happen but at least they are trying to update racing for the better.
 
Last edited:
Bar the Bull said:
I am not sure why changing the pattern should mean that the pattern is messed up.

Lots of important races are grouped together at the same stage of the season. The Queen Anne and Prince of Wales' stakes are one day apart; why should the QE2 and Champion Stakes be any different?
Click to expand...

Exactly.... WHY?????? Steve, the rest of the pattern remains the same or broadly similar its just one day which tries to bring together all the other races you're referring to. I don't see how this changes the pattern greatly.
 
Bar the Bull said:
I am not sure why changing the pattern should mean that the pattern is messed up.
Click to expand...

Because no thought to the Pattern has gone into it. It is purely an expedient move to 'jazz up' the racing product for once-a-year racegoers attracted by all the sweeties in the shop being on display in one go. It is a disaster...
 
There are loads of things wrong with "the pattern".

There are too many G1 races over 1m2f. Do we really need the Prince of Wales's, Eclipse, Juddmonte, Champion.

For a staying 4yo, there are only three G1 races run over distances greater than 1m2f; the Coronation, King George and Ascot Gold Cup. And they are within the space of seven weeks! The Goodwood Cup should be a G1.

There is no G1 over 7f.

The pattern stinks in many ways.
 
Oh God, *anything* but a narrative like jump racing, please!

3yo middle distance flat horses' narrative:

Guineas/Derby Trial -> Derby -> Eclipse/Irish Derby -> King George -> Juddmonte -> Irish Champion -> Arc/Champion Stakes -> Breeeders Cup -> Japan/Hong Kong

Staying chasers' narrative:

It doesn't matter what you do; all that matters is the Gold Cup.
 
There are things wrong with most things in the world. But to make changes with no regard to what already exists and that attempts to ensure coherence makes no sense and pulls the fabric of the racing programme apart for no good reason.
 
Bar the Bull said:
There are loads of things wrong with "the pattern".

There are too many G1 races over 1m2f. Do we really need the Prince of Wales's, Eclipse, Juddmonte, Champion.

For a staying 4yo, there are only three G1 races run over distances greater than 1m2f; the Coronation, King George and Ascot Gold Cup. And they are within the space of seven weeks! The Goodwood Cup should be a G1.

There is no G1 over 7f.

The pattern stinks in many ways.
Click to expand...

The pattern is designed to work across different countries. Isolating Great Britain like you have ignores that. And if the Goodwood Cup regularly attracted horses that were good enough, it would be a G1.
 
Gareth Flynn said:
Oh God, *anything* but a narrative like jump racing, please!

3yo middle distance flat horses' narrative:

Guineas/Derby Trial -> Derby -> Eclipse/Irish Derby -> King George -> Juddmonte -> Irish Champion -> Arc/Champion Stakes -> Breeeders Cup -> Japan/Hong Kong

Staying chasers' narrative:

It doesn't matter what you do; all that matters is the Gold Cup.
Click to expand...

:lol:
 
Gareth Flynn said:
Oh God, *anything* but a narrative like jump racing, please!

3yo middle distance flat horses' narrative:

Guineas/Derby Trial -> Derby -> Eclipse/Irish Derby -> King George -> Juddmonte -> Irish Champion -> Arc/Champion Stakes -> Breeeders Cup -> Japan/Hong Kong

Staying chasers' narrative:

It doesn't matter what you do; all that matters is the Gold Cup.
Click to expand...

We don't have novice chasers running against seasoned campaigners so that changes the dynamic but the Arc is the middle distance gold cup. Lets be honest. Arc day has 6 group 1's so it's the same concept as Champions day or Cheltnenham (Just condensed). And when have you seen horses run in all or even 75% of the races you've listed? There are at least two divisions there. Only sea the stars has managed anything close to that.

Jumps racing is fine in my opinion and you know as well as I do that the staying chasers narrative is actually Betfair, King George, Gold Cup. It has been since the Betfair was introduced. Ireland have a parallel campaign and the best meet in the Gold cup. I don't see much wrong with that.
 
A lot of recent Gold Cup winners have taken in a handicap before the King George, in addition to/instead of the Betfair.

Kauto ran in the Old Roan
Denman ran in the Hennessy
Long Run ran in the Paddy Power.

So the narrative is actually Handicap - Betfair Chase - King George or Lexus - Irish Hen or English trial - Gold Cup - Punch or Aintree
 
Back
Top