Hennessy Cognac Gold Cup

If there's going to be a shock in the Hennessy I'd look to Tatenen to provide it. He is a classy animal on his day, although he doesn't have many of them these days. He did hack up by miles in the VC Ascot then won there again so he still retains his ability. He was 180 on the machine but now 95 and stranger things have happened
 
Does he have the stamina for 3m2f in soft?

He's also still on 147, which is maybe a bit high for this kind of race (last won off 143).
 
EC1 said:
i'm not sure i can see that LR didn't hit at least a 170 tbh..probably more

Long Runs rating using each horse in the race: [OHR's]

Tidal Bay = 186
The Giant Bolster = 176
What A Friend = 184
Burton Port = 171

Just using BP's rating makes LR a 171 horse..the Giant Bolster also points to early/mid 170's..

could be argued TGB is the horse to rate the race off. Other two can be ignored.

I'm not seeing the barely reaching mid 160's tbh...in fact i'd say TGB is a reliable stick here
Click to expand...

I remember the good old days when 170+ ratings were reserved for exceptional performances. They're now tossed around like confetti, resulting in handicappers like The Giant Bolster and Burton Port being handed wholly-inappropriate marks in the mid-160s. The BHA handicpping team are fuds.
 
Grasshopper said:
I remember the good old days when 170+ ratings were reserved for exceptional performances. They're now tossed around like confetti, resulting in handicappers like The Giant Bolster and Burton Port being handed wholly-inappropriate marks in the mid-160s. The BHA handicpping team are fuds.
Click to expand...
And yet it was in those days that Arkle hit 212...

It's been bandied about that they were over-rated in Arkle's day, that modern day chasers are far better than those of a (human) generation or two ago.

The argument can't apply both ways.

I've been doing ratings for about 40 years. I know for certain I've got more conservative as I've got better at it. Those who get my emails on Saturday morning will know I regularly comment on what a great job I think the BHB handicappers do on the whole.

Master Oats was given 186 or so for winning the Welsh National (went on to win the Gold Cup). I thought that was too generous in the weeks immediately after the race but the handicappers were right. I think Carvills Hill got 190 at one point too. Those are long enough ago.

I don't think your assertion holds much water.
 
Last edited:
165+ for the Gold Cup is like 125+ for the Derby. No matter how chronic the renewal most raters are not going to go below that figure.
 
Euronymous said:
165+ for the Gold Cup is like 125+ for the Derby. No matter how chronic the renewal most raters are not going to go below that figure.
Click to expand...
Very true, Euro, and I got quite a pasting for suggesting that I could find no grounds for getting Oath higher than 118 for his Derby.
 
Desert Orchid said:
And yet it was in those days that Arkle hit 212...

It's been bandied about that they were over-rated in Arkle's day, that modern day chasers are far better than those of a (human) generation or two ago.

The argument can't apply both ways.

I've been doing ratings for about 40 years. I know for certain I've got more conservative as I've got better at it. Those who get my emails on Saturday morning will know I regularly comment on what a great job I think the BHB handicappers do on the whole.

Master Oats was given 186 or so for winning the Welsh National (went on to win the Gold Cup). I thought that was too generous in the weeks immediately after the race but the handicappers were right. I think Carvills Hill got 190 at one point too. Those are long enough ago.

I don't think your assertion holds much water.
Click to expand...

Coming back to this issue, I wonder if the greater population of horses in training plays a part. There are more horses about so there are likely to be more good ones as well as more bad ones. The good ones are contesting the good races and are getting the credit for their performances. There's also the fact that training methods have stepped forward, so horses that 40 years ago could maybe have hit 160 are now hitting 170 with the new methods. (I'm plucking the differential out of thin air. Just hypothesising.) Again, it elevates Arkle's status rather than diminishes it, so far ahead was he.

I wonder what kind of figure he could have hit if Nicholls or Henderson could travel back in time and got to apply their methods to the horse...
 
Add in the fact that there were very few non handicap races long ago.
Bar King George and Gold Cup top horses ran in top handicaps and had to give away lumps of weight to decent horses.
There was no hiding place, no soft options so the top horses had to meet up at Kempton and Cheltenham or wherever through the season.
This was the way until the late 1970s early 1980s.
Does anyone know the first Gold Cup winner NOT to have run in a handicap chase before winning the GC?
 
If you fancy Diamond Harry with an ever decreasing handicap, what about Starluck off 144 in the last at Ascot?
 
I think you need to take each case on its own merits. Has Starluck had plausible excuses for his poor form? Is there anything in the book or in the ether to hint at the possibility of a return to old form? If you believe there is then you won't be surprised if he runs better than his odds. If not, he's a no-hoper.

Same goes for what you think about Diamond Harry.
 
Bar the Bull said:
Dawn Run?
Click to expand...

Definitely a candidate given she only had 4 chases run.
I was thinking along the lines of L'Escargot (being almost novice), Captain Christy ( a novice) and Alverton (second season)
The point being that apart from them there were not enough Graded/conditions type chases that top horses could not avoid handicaps before racing in GC in the older days; thus their ratings were as it were "genuinely "got.
 
Wayward Prince got 8lbs for being beaten over ten lenghts by Silvinaco Conti....142 would have been a delicious mark...150 not so appealing. Was practically fav for this 12 months ago...
 
With all the rain knocking about it might pay to look for a lightweight. Pleased Magnanimity was pulled from the Troytown. I think he has each way claims off 143.
 
Last edited:
Euronymous said:
With all the rain knocking about it might pay to look for a lightweight. Pleased Magnanimity was pulled from the Troytown. I think he has each way claims off 143.
Click to expand...

He was a 150+ horse before his and Dessie Hughes shocking year last term. Very encouraging runs over shorter trips since. Definitely one for the short list.
 
I backed Alfie Spinner at the weekend for a little more than his current 16/1,
his form isnt the worst in the world and on a line throught the Ascot race last Feb, he looks well treated with the favourite. The slower ground and 3+1/4 miles is bound to help his cause.It was interesting to note that they tried a 3lb claimer(mark Quinlan) in his pipe opener and if jocked up again would eleviate the couple lbs hes out off the handicap. This is going to be a slog on Saturday and wouldnt be surprised if less than half the field finish. Tidal Bay could run a big race ,but every time I back him he runs like a mule. I will also be surprised if they run Bobsworth in such a gruelling race first time up.
 
Looks like they are getting their excuses in for Bobs Worth already,says he needs to walk the track later in he week.NR IMO
 
Back
Top