I think the relationship between speed and stamina is often misunderstood, or perhaps I should say misrepresented. Horses that run fast times do so because of their stamina. It seems however they we misuse the word as a kind of insult to suggest a horse is slow.
There's two principal ways that races get run, imho (well strictly speaking there's 100's, but it doesn't suit my hypothesis
).
The first concerns the slow race won by a horse that uses a devastating turn of foot by way of acceleration. These horses usually appear visually impressive but come Cheltenham, they are rarely allowed to replicate this kind of run.
The second type is the fast run race. In order to generate a fast time you need to be able to go through the sections economically and evenly. Horses have a cubic capacity (lungs) and therefore a top speed over which they can not go any quicker, for this reason time lost to a slow early pace can't be recaptured. Most grade 1 horses are capable of reaching the same top speed, but not all of them can sustain this level. Which is where stamina comes into play. Effectively the fastest horse is often the last one to stop slowing up.
The race time was the fastest on the card, and also the fastest I've recorded for the Gold Cup (significantly faster than Best Mate). Last years Gold Cup was the slowest I hold a record for, and my hypothesis was that Kauto Star at 3 and a quarter miles off a quick pace might be vulnerable, as he'd never been required to perform to that level previously. Basically Denman needed to serve it up to him from about half way and just hammer out the sections. The critical aspect when assessing the speed here is not the theoretical topspeed they reach or level of acceleration shown, but the amount of time during the race they are required to sustain this speed for. Stamina is any other language.
Perhaps the best example that illustrates this relationship between speed and stamina was Tidal Bay. He too has run a very fast time, and now nudges MWDS out of second spot on my Arkle ratings. He was able to bring his stamina into play by sustaining the fast speed he set for longer than the opposition. It is perhaps no coincidence that both he and MWDS (the last two winners) were successful at further than the bare 2 miles.
It's a possible explanation as to why the Supreme Novices seems to be a source for future staying chasers too. This race is normally run at a clip and requires much more stamina than is often realised as we tend to associate stamina with distance all too readily. In many respects it isn't necessarily true. A punishing 2 miles is every bit as draining as a slower race run over further. It's possibly no coincidence that another race that is often run quickly (though wasn't this year) is the Champion Hurdle. Most winners (and certainly those who did it in a quick time) have been successful at further. Istabraq and Hardy Eustace both won Sun Alliance Hurdles for isntance and account 5 wins in the last 10 years.
A bit has been made about the Supreme being quicker than the Champion. I've dug the sections out now and it makes very interesting reading. They reached the second hurdle 5 seconds quicker than Osana, but by the time they reached the third they'd made this time back. You would normally expect the grade 1 open horses to establish a level of superiority over the novices from about here onwards, but for what ever reason they didn't. It probably points to the Supreme being well above average and the Champion being poor