Do we really think Franchoek is the stone cold certainty the market says he is?
A few considerations. Franchoek has continued to beat what is in front of him and his form around Cheltenham specifically is very hard to knock. Alun King has been round the block a few times now with Triumph winners recently with Katchit last year who went an almost identical route to Franchoek and Penance before him. When you add those factors together it's not hard to see why Franchoek is being punted and is one of the bankers of the Festival in many peoples eyes.
I take a different view though. Franchoek is no Katchit. For a start he was an out and out stayer on the flat. No doubting he was decent and may well have been able to win over shorter in the right race, but I can't get away form the fact that he saved his best performances over the furthest distances on the level. That for me is not the profile of a horse that is best served over two miles over hurdles. I then want to question what he has actually beaten around Cheltenham. Yes he's won his races well enough, but are those he's despatched good enough to go close to winning a Triumph? Subjective I suppose, but I don't think so. The fact that Franchoek has followed the Katchit route could actually mean that some of the more likely candidates have avoided taking him on with trainers assuming he is Katchit Mark II and not wanting to get beaten when there are other options. The other worry for me is that his style of racing is entirely different to Katchit (and Detroit before him for that matter). Those two were better horses held up just off the back of a strong pace, and both posesses the finishing speed to win. Franchoek on the other hand is one of those horses that grinds the opposition into the ground to win, essentially outstaying the opposition which fits with his flat profile. A typical Triumph winner doesn't do it from the head of affairs.
In a strongly run Triumph where there is plenty of cover for a horse that will appreciate a strong pace but needs to be ridden for a finishing kick surely there is a very real danger that Franchoek will set it up for something to come flying past him up the hill. Somthing with the touch of class that I'm not convinced Franchoek has. A string of wins is not necessariy a crucial thing in the profile of a Triumph winner. Ex-flat horses often take time to acclimatise and be seen at their best over hurdles. Detroit City was a case in point, and he turned out to possibly be the best Triumph winner in recent memory, but you wouldn't have been in a rush to back him after his debut over timber when he was beaten forty plus lengths at Warwick. But boy what a horse he turned out to be when the penny dropped.
So what are the alternatives. Firstly I prefer to look for a horse who did it's winning on the flat over 10-12f's. A horse that may possibly have flopped somewhere during it's early race(s) but has shown in it's most recent prep that is has improved to something like the level you'd ecpect form a Triumph winner. You'd like the selection to have the important 1 after it's name last time out, although Scolardy has proved in recent seasons you can still win without it. You would also expect it to be won by a horse who has had at least three runs over hurdles, and the market won't get it massively wrong with only a couple winning at 20/1 in the last decade. That may seem like a big price but essentially we are still talking about a horse in the top third of the betting and not totally unfancied.
Using that criteria, three runs would discount the second and third favourites Celestial Halo and Binoculor, and Celestial Halo was also turned over last time which means he has to defy the stat that only Scolarly did in recent renewals. They would both however have to defy a stat of only having two runs over hurdles which goes back further than the eighteen years of records I keep.
There are three names at the two week stage that keep coming back to me for entirely different reasons.
Firstly Ashkazar. Now we have NRNB he's worth a serious look. There have been whispers that he may go for the Supreme, but if he goes for this he is a serious candidate. People will point to he fact that Franchoek beat him at Chepstow, but that was desperate ground and he looked an infinitely better horse on good to soft last time and both his breeding and his action would suggest that quicker ground at the Festival will help not hinder. He would have a chance of turning the Chepstow form around with Franchoek who won't necessarily be seen to best effect on fastish ground so with doubts whether he goes here or not 12s/14's e/w NRNB would seem like a sensible bet.
Second one for me is Pierrot Lunaire. Yes he was beaten by Binoculor on Saturday, but he left the impression that there is possibly more to come and the stiffer track at Cheltenham could bring it out of him. If that's so he could turn the form around with Binoculor. He has to defy the stat that Scolardy beat but with 20's widely available so what. I reckon he is at least good enough to place and he's another e/w bet that seems stupidly obvious. His price is only that big because Celestial Halo is widely believed to be the Nicholls number one.
The third horse is a bit of a sideball really andwould line up totally under the radar. He's not certain to run here and may end up in the Fred Winter as he has a mark that would leave him with a great chance in that race. But I like this one. He's a horse who has improved with every run. He's available at 66/1 and if he runs here he is sure to go off at the 20's or less which fits the market profile. So far he's raced on ground softer than ideal and he still fits the ideal profile. He looks pretty unexposed and there is the potential for more to come. The horse is with Phillip Hobbs who hardly has a poor record in the race and I'm not sure he's got anything better as an alternative despite some high-profile expensive purchases including The Grey Berry, so I would suggest an e/w nrnb on Hibiki at huge odds wouldn't be the worst bet in the world. He's freely available at 66/1 at the moment and given he may not line up NRNB is the perfect safety net.
One additional note. They didn't geld him when they bought him which is often a sign that they think he has genuine potential. He's nicely bred, and he was already looking highly progressive on flat before he was bought, so maybe they are thinking he has some future stud value. And if he were proven good enough to win this, he'd be another Hobbs Cesarawitch candidate presumably. If he isn't he looked progressive enough on the flat to switch back anyway.
Whether Franhoek is a good thing or not I think he is very poor value unless you were on at early prices, so surely it's worth opposing him isn't it?
A few considerations. Franchoek has continued to beat what is in front of him and his form around Cheltenham specifically is very hard to knock. Alun King has been round the block a few times now with Triumph winners recently with Katchit last year who went an almost identical route to Franchoek and Penance before him. When you add those factors together it's not hard to see why Franchoek is being punted and is one of the bankers of the Festival in many peoples eyes.
I take a different view though. Franchoek is no Katchit. For a start he was an out and out stayer on the flat. No doubting he was decent and may well have been able to win over shorter in the right race, but I can't get away form the fact that he saved his best performances over the furthest distances on the level. That for me is not the profile of a horse that is best served over two miles over hurdles. I then want to question what he has actually beaten around Cheltenham. Yes he's won his races well enough, but are those he's despatched good enough to go close to winning a Triumph? Subjective I suppose, but I don't think so. The fact that Franchoek has followed the Katchit route could actually mean that some of the more likely candidates have avoided taking him on with trainers assuming he is Katchit Mark II and not wanting to get beaten when there are other options. The other worry for me is that his style of racing is entirely different to Katchit (and Detroit before him for that matter). Those two were better horses held up just off the back of a strong pace, and both posesses the finishing speed to win. Franchoek on the other hand is one of those horses that grinds the opposition into the ground to win, essentially outstaying the opposition which fits with his flat profile. A typical Triumph winner doesn't do it from the head of affairs.
In a strongly run Triumph where there is plenty of cover for a horse that will appreciate a strong pace but needs to be ridden for a finishing kick surely there is a very real danger that Franchoek will set it up for something to come flying past him up the hill. Somthing with the touch of class that I'm not convinced Franchoek has. A string of wins is not necessariy a crucial thing in the profile of a Triumph winner. Ex-flat horses often take time to acclimatise and be seen at their best over hurdles. Detroit City was a case in point, and he turned out to possibly be the best Triumph winner in recent memory, but you wouldn't have been in a rush to back him after his debut over timber when he was beaten forty plus lengths at Warwick. But boy what a horse he turned out to be when the penny dropped.
So what are the alternatives. Firstly I prefer to look for a horse who did it's winning on the flat over 10-12f's. A horse that may possibly have flopped somewhere during it's early race(s) but has shown in it's most recent prep that is has improved to something like the level you'd ecpect form a Triumph winner. You'd like the selection to have the important 1 after it's name last time out, although Scolardy has proved in recent seasons you can still win without it. You would also expect it to be won by a horse who has had at least three runs over hurdles, and the market won't get it massively wrong with only a couple winning at 20/1 in the last decade. That may seem like a big price but essentially we are still talking about a horse in the top third of the betting and not totally unfancied.
Using that criteria, three runs would discount the second and third favourites Celestial Halo and Binoculor, and Celestial Halo was also turned over last time which means he has to defy the stat that only Scolarly did in recent renewals. They would both however have to defy a stat of only having two runs over hurdles which goes back further than the eighteen years of records I keep.
There are three names at the two week stage that keep coming back to me for entirely different reasons.
Firstly Ashkazar. Now we have NRNB he's worth a serious look. There have been whispers that he may go for the Supreme, but if he goes for this he is a serious candidate. People will point to he fact that Franchoek beat him at Chepstow, but that was desperate ground and he looked an infinitely better horse on good to soft last time and both his breeding and his action would suggest that quicker ground at the Festival will help not hinder. He would have a chance of turning the Chepstow form around with Franchoek who won't necessarily be seen to best effect on fastish ground so with doubts whether he goes here or not 12s/14's e/w NRNB would seem like a sensible bet.
Second one for me is Pierrot Lunaire. Yes he was beaten by Binoculor on Saturday, but he left the impression that there is possibly more to come and the stiffer track at Cheltenham could bring it out of him. If that's so he could turn the form around with Binoculor. He has to defy the stat that Scolardy beat but with 20's widely available so what. I reckon he is at least good enough to place and he's another e/w bet that seems stupidly obvious. His price is only that big because Celestial Halo is widely believed to be the Nicholls number one.
The third horse is a bit of a sideball really andwould line up totally under the radar. He's not certain to run here and may end up in the Fred Winter as he has a mark that would leave him with a great chance in that race. But I like this one. He's a horse who has improved with every run. He's available at 66/1 and if he runs here he is sure to go off at the 20's or less which fits the market profile. So far he's raced on ground softer than ideal and he still fits the ideal profile. He looks pretty unexposed and there is the potential for more to come. The horse is with Phillip Hobbs who hardly has a poor record in the race and I'm not sure he's got anything better as an alternative despite some high-profile expensive purchases including The Grey Berry, so I would suggest an e/w nrnb on Hibiki at huge odds wouldn't be the worst bet in the world. He's freely available at 66/1 at the moment and given he may not line up NRNB is the perfect safety net.
One additional note. They didn't geld him when they bought him which is often a sign that they think he has genuine potential. He's nicely bred, and he was already looking highly progressive on flat before he was bought, so maybe they are thinking he has some future stud value. And if he were proven good enough to win this, he'd be another Hobbs Cesarawitch candidate presumably. If he isn't he looked progressive enough on the flat to switch back anyway.
Whether Franhoek is a good thing or not I think he is very poor value unless you were on at early prices, so surely it's worth opposing him isn't it?
