Kauto Star Or Denman

Kauto or Debman

  • Total voters
    1
Originally posted by SteveM+Mar 15 2008, 05:38 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (SteveM @ Mar 15 2008, 05:38 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-firstpastthepost@Mar 15 2008, 05:30 PM
after watching the replay of the race so many times i just cant believe this was kauto of the last two years .......
Click to expand...
He went as well as Denman allowed him to. He was being asked to do everything that much quicker because of the pressure being put on him by Denman. He has not had a horse like Denman to race against before and has had the luxury of doing things in his own time. [/b][/quote]
For heaven's sake Steve - how many times do we all have to point out that KS was jumping badly from the SECOND FENCE!! There was no way he was being put under pressure at that point! As another poster [on TRF] pointed out, Ruby usually has trouble settling him early, as he wants to go on - nothing like that yesterday, he was just never going. Only his class got him round and into 2nd up the hill.

The same poster pointed out a few other things:

The winning time of Kauto Star in last year's GS was 6m 40.2s whereas Denman's time was 6m 47.8s this year. Although the going in both years was given as G/S if was probably nearer Good last year: all the 2008 races have been slower than their equivalents in 2007 .

As was also noted, times for the first circuit differ by around 1.42 seconds, with 2008 being the faster. However, Denman's winning time was 6.4784, ie 7.6 seconds slower than Kauto Star's in 2007. The poster continues:

"If they went 1.42 second faster in the first half of the race but end up 7.6 seconds slower [overall] something is not right"
 
Does running in the Hennessey explain why Denman is more of a public horse than Kauto Star or even Best Mate was? Lumping big weights in Handicaps plucks at the heart strings something fierce.
 
you have battered me Steve...i'm still not convinced...but come out with me hands up.

anyway,,not that anyone bar Warbler might be interested but I thought I might try and put some sort of time perspective on the performace.

this is only a simple exercise but may or may not have merit

i have averaged the times of the last 7 seasons for the Gold Cup/Foxhunters/Grand Annual to try and put some measure on Denman's performance by the clock.

GOLD CUP
2000: 6m30.30 Looks Like Trouble
2002: 6m50.10 Best Mate
2003: 6m39.00 Best Mate
2004: 6m42.60 Best Mate
2005: 6m42.90 Kicking King
2006: 6m31.70 War Of Attrition
2007: 6m40.46 Kauto Star

The Average for the GOLD CUP = 6m39.58

The Average for the GRAND ANNUAL = 3m59.80
The Average for the FOXHUNTERS = 6m49.20

Using those as a rough "race pars" we should be able to rate all the gold cup winners including Denman.

Firstly Denman

2008: GC time = 6m47.84 minus par = 8.26 slower
2008: Grand Annual= 4m10.65 minus par = 10.85 slower
2008: Foxhunters = 7m1.20 minus par = 12.00 slower

adding the times behind par up and dividing them by the total furlongs shows that the ground was slowing the horses from the average going by 0.44 seconds per furlong. After removing the ground speed from the times shows the races looking like this:

GC = faster by 3.4 seconds than an average race winner
GA = 3.59 seconds slower than average race winner
FH = 0.34 seconds slower than an average race winner

The average RPR of those past Gold Cup winners was 175...so Denman can be rated approxiamately 3.4 seconds faster than 175...which is 17 lengths or near enough...so DENMAN ...on the clock is a 192 horse.

thats on the RPR scale of course

HAD TO EDIT THIS...COULDN'T CALCULATE HOW MANY FURLONGS IN ALL 3 RACES :laughing: ...STUPID IDIOT...0.37 now becomes 0.44 slow per furlong
 
ok sorted

I know that is a bit rough and ready but it demonstrates what a big performance Denman put in.

I can do others if anyone is interested

I will have to watch my calculations...head don't work right these days :laughing:
 
2007
GC = 0.88 slower than av
GA = 2.5 FASTER than av
FH = 2.6 FASTER than av

straight away you can see that the the ground was speeding the horses up from the AVERAGE going last year...this shows that KS was indeed below an average GC winner...ON THE CLOCK last year

adding up the times gives +4.22 seconds...divide that by 69.5 furlongs = 0.06 seconds per fulong needs removing from those times

Kauto Star's figure last year was thus: 2.47 seconds [0.88+1.59] slower than an average GC winner...using 175 as an average winner would therefore give a time figure of 163 on the same scale as RPR's are based of course
 
Interesting analysis EC1

You may as well do em all - no point leaving job half done and it would make interesting reading imo
 
James Willoughby (as is often the case) talking loads of sense regarding this race on RUK tonight. I hope he puts something in the paper this week.
 
Best Mate's last win is proving to be a head scratcher - it was incredibly fast compared to the other two races.

I have even checked the time of the race on youtube and it's correct - the GA and Foxhunters also appear to be truly run races but they come out slow compared with the GC time???

First Gold indeed set a relentless gallop in that race.

I can't see how this race is coming out so fast...it makes Best Mate's figure very similar to Denmans?????

Can someone that calculates figures give me the figure they gave Best Mate in the 2004 GC?

I get Best Mate as being a 190 ish horse on that run...which can't be right...can it?

Did they alter the distances that year and say nowt...the foxunters for instance was 15 seconds slower than the GC :eek:
 
Originally posted by EC1@Mar 15 2008, 08:24 PM

Did they alter the distances that year and say nowt...the foxunters for instance was 15 seconds slower than the GC :eek:
Click to expand...
I believe the time difference yesterday was also 15 seconds. Jonathon Neeson on Racing UK yesterday said a good Foxhunters winner is on average ten seconds slower than the GC winner.
 
15 seconds over the Gold Cup c&d amounts to 45-50 pounds, depending on the going but it's meaningless unless both races were true-run. In yesterday's case, if we're saying Denman is around 185, it makes the Foxhunters winner about 135-140, which would be about right most years.
 
Originally posted by Desert Orchid@Mar 15 2008, 08:44 PM
If Denman is a 192 horse, it makes Neptune C and Halcon G better than a lot of Gold Cup winners.
Click to expand...
well...every year we hear how the present crop of 3 milers are crap...so maybe they could have done


then again...i never said rating by this method was set in stone ...it's a rough guide using times...thats all

anyone got a speed figure for BM for 2004?

surely one person makes speed figures norty


then again...maybe it's a waste o time posting anything about them...seems to be quite a bias on messagboards against them...too much work involved etc. :laughing:
 
the difference friday was 13.86 seconds

in Best Mates last win it was 14.5 seconds :suspect:

the GA that year also supports the Foxhunters being truly run

this would make Best Mates time better than Denmans...which looks suss to me.
 
EC as you stated these are "rough" so i wouldn't worry too much if one or two look a bit suss


Just carry on posting imo :)
 
The Racing Post is reporting tonight that next year's Gold Cup is the "first prospect" of a rematch
Click to expand...


Thats bad news and suprises me a little. Not as if connections are shy of challenges.. Haydock would be a great test for both
 
I think the main consideration regarding next year's schedule is if Findlay still wants to go for the National.
 
Back
Top