The handicapper is there to assess the performance....either the horse ran to a mark of 180 in a 6 runner handicap before the Gold Cup or not. Whatever about the dubious (in my opinion) rating given to the horse in the Gold Cup the Wincanton rating cannot be defended.
Kauto Star Or Denman
- Thread starter Euronymous
- Start date
From How timeform handicaps horses
The handicapper will also review his past assessments of form and individual horses in the light of all new results and information that comes his way. This is a continuous process, and as a result Timeform ratings for individual horses may alter even when the horse concerned hasn't actually run recently but the form of other horses it ties in with looks stronger or weaker than previously
The handicapper will also review his past assessments of form and individual horses in the light of all new results and information that comes his way. This is a continuous process, and as a result Timeform ratings for individual horses may alter even when the horse concerned hasn't actually run recently but the form of other horses it ties in with looks stronger or weaker than previously
I have to admit I find the bumping up of Neptune Collonges's rating on a well beaten third in the Cotswold Chase and a very weak handicap at Wincanton just bizarre.
Willoughby on RUK suggested that a proper rating for Denman would be 181 on the basis that KS ran at least 7lb below form and NC 2-3 lb above what he had achieved before - when did NC seriously become a horse only 1 or 2 lb short of KS ?
Ruby sums it up in the RP.
RUBY WALSH, like Paul Nicholls, is convinced Kauto Star was not at his best in the Gold Cup.
The jockey said on Saturday: “I don't think he travelled as well as he can do, for whatever reason.
“Denman was the better horse on the day yesterday, but I've ridden Kauto Star when he has been better. Maybe it was the ground, I couldn't tell you, but he just didn't sparkle like he can do.
“We weren't going that hard, but it seemed to me he just wasn't going as well as he can.”
Asked whether Kauto Star might have left his race behind at Ascot, when winning the Commercial First Chase last month, Walsh said: “He might have done. He felt a bit flat yesterday – for whatever reason, he didn't show the same sparkle he showed at Ascot. Fair Along went a lot faster there than Neptune Collonges or Denman did yesterday, yet I was flat out yesterday.
“I can't explain why but he was flat. But that's what racing is all about. On any one given day, any horse can win.”
Asked about a future clash between Denman and Kauto Star, he said: “Who's to say what will happen the next time? I don't think Kauto put up his true performance yesterday – he might still not have won if he had been at his best, with the performance Denman put up, but I don't think he was at his best.”
Willoughby on RUK suggested that a proper rating for Denman would be 181 on the basis that KS ran at least 7lb below form and NC 2-3 lb above what he had achieved before - when did NC seriously become a horse only 1 or 2 lb short of KS ?
Ruby sums it up in the RP.
RUBY WALSH, like Paul Nicholls, is convinced Kauto Star was not at his best in the Gold Cup.
The jockey said on Saturday: “I don't think he travelled as well as he can do, for whatever reason.
“Denman was the better horse on the day yesterday, but I've ridden Kauto Star when he has been better. Maybe it was the ground, I couldn't tell you, but he just didn't sparkle like he can do.
“We weren't going that hard, but it seemed to me he just wasn't going as well as he can.”
Asked whether Kauto Star might have left his race behind at Ascot, when winning the Commercial First Chase last month, Walsh said: “He might have done. He felt a bit flat yesterday – for whatever reason, he didn't show the same sparkle he showed at Ascot. Fair Along went a lot faster there than Neptune Collonges or Denman did yesterday, yet I was flat out yesterday.
“I can't explain why but he was flat. But that's what racing is all about. On any one given day, any horse can win.”
Asked about a future clash between Denman and Kauto Star, he said: “Who's to say what will happen the next time? I don't think Kauto put up his true performance yesterday – he might still not have won if he had been at his best, with the performance Denman put up, but I don't think he was at his best.”
Desert Orchid
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2005
- Messages
- 25,012
I wrote before the race that I expected Neptune to cause an upset. This was slightly tongue-in-cheek but it was based on the Wincanton run and I seriously expected NC to run better than general expectations.
I thought he had a job on his hands at Wincanton, giving a lot of weight to Naunton Brook, a solid 149 horse these days. The fact that he blew him away almost on the bridle was an eye opener from a ratings perspective. He just kept up a decent gallop the others couldn't live with it.
Halcon Genelardais had put up a fantastic run in the Welsh National and Miko De Beauchene had franked the form in style but HG's rating for Chepstow fell some way short of NC's at Wincanton.
I have no beef whatsoever in using these two to gauge the value of this year's Gold Cup.
I thought he had a job on his hands at Wincanton, giving a lot of weight to Naunton Brook, a solid 149 horse these days. The fact that he blew him away almost on the bridle was an eye opener from a ratings perspective. He just kept up a decent gallop the others couldn't live with it.
Halcon Genelardais had put up a fantastic run in the Welsh National and Miko De Beauchene had franked the form in style but HG's rating for Chepstow fell some way short of NC's at Wincanton.
I have no beef whatsoever in using these two to gauge the value of this year's Gold Cup.
Harbinger
At the Start
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2004
- Messages
- 11,282
It's clear that nothing else other than Naunton Brook and Neptune C possibly ran up to form in that Wincanton race.
Naunton Brook has consistent figures in the mid 140s, so a rating close to 180 isn't that bizarre for an easy 33lb beating.
Naunton Brook's run in the Midlands National is irrelevant to how he ran at Wincanton.
Basically, the RP handicapper had as much evidence for rating Denman 180 (through Denman himself and Neptune C's original 174 rating at Wincanton) as he did for 190 (through Kauto and Halcon G) and chose the middle-ground, aided by knowing that his original 174 rating for Neptune C was actually a conservative one and could be upgraded.
Naunton Brook has consistent figures in the mid 140s, so a rating close to 180 isn't that bizarre for an easy 33lb beating.
Naunton Brook's run in the Midlands National is irrelevant to how he ran at Wincanton.
Basically, the RP handicapper had as much evidence for rating Denman 180 (through Denman himself and Neptune C's original 174 rating at Wincanton) as he did for 190 (through Kauto and Halcon G) and chose the middle-ground, aided by knowing that his original 174 rating for Neptune C was actually a conservative one and could be upgraded.
Then why go back and reassess the race after NC run in the Gold Cup? If NB run in the Midlands has nothing to do with it, then NC's run in the Gold Cup should be the same.
You say NB consistently runs in the 140s...if he didn't in the Midlands National who's to say he did it at Wincanton in a 6 runner race where 2 where pulled up?
If imagine if you go back through the records there are plenty of races like this, top weight winning well from a decent rated horse....but common sense comes into play surely.
Harbinger
At the Start
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2004
- Messages
- 11,282
Because the rating given at the time was a conservative one. Future events may prove it to have been even better. Should they do so, it would be inconsistent not to upgrade the former race.
NB's run in the Midlands has nothing to do with it because he didn't run to form in the Midlands. NC's run in the Gold Cup has something to do with it because he did run to form in the Gold Cup.
No, I said he has consistent figures in the mid-140s. The implication being when he runs to form.
Who's to say he didn't? Sure, it would be nice for there to be other horses in there who would support the figure, which is presumably why the RP handicapper originally took a conservative view.
And if that top-weight came out next time and finished a short-head away from 2nd in one of the hottest Gold Cups in history, beaten only by the two highest-rated staying chasers in 20 years, wouldn't common sense tell you that the form from the previous race might have been true?
Common sense tells me Neptune Collonges is not within 7-10 lengths of Kauto Star at his best!
It's hilarious....some were trying to compare Kauto Star to Desert Orchid and the previous greats. Now were on the verge of comparing Neptune Collonges to them as well!
I dont know why people crabbing Neptune Collonges
He has not stopped improving since coming to England.
He had run 7 chase races before the Gold Cup since joining Paull Nicholls, he is a 7yo , jumps very well in the main and the form of his races looks solid to me, I think he was very impressive at Wincanton and has still scope.
about Kauto
superb horse, Cheltenham not his best course and by the way , I think he run a better race in defeat this year than last year when winning this race.
He has not stopped improving since coming to England.
He had run 7 chase races before the Gold Cup since joining Paull Nicholls, he is a 7yo , jumps very well in the main and the form of his races looks solid to me, I think he was very impressive at Wincanton and has still scope.
about Kauto
superb horse, Cheltenham not his best course and by the way , I think he run a better race in defeat this year than last year when winning this race.
EC1
On a break
(why dont some people actually watch the race rather pointless gawping at stopwatches?)
you can always do both Clive...although you actually have to do a bit of work for the speed figure bit...something many folk don't like. Pointless?..better than being clueless ...about most of what happened in the race imho.
you might be a little more informed about races if you started ...watching the clock...which may save all this arguing about ratings afterwards....as you get more INSIGHT that way in to what you have seen with your eyes...a combined effort. The assumption that clockwatchers do only that is a bit lame really isn't it?
i'm sorry.. but anyone that thinks Denman's performance wasn't from the top draw is kidding themselves...all the evidence is there...as for Neptune...not one person yet KNOWS how good this horse is...because his ability this season is a total unknown..until he runs again...remove him from the race and you have the BEST horse for 30 years...most people's view...hammered 7 lengths...in a fast time...what more does a horse have to do prove itself???
and..I was a total unbeliever before the race..the idea that any horse in training could trounce...and he did trounce KS...was unthinkable.
I'm sure that some people cannot recognise a top performance when it hits them in the face.
you can always do both Clive...although you actually have to do a bit of work for the speed figure bit...something many folk don't like. Pointless?..better than being clueless ...about most of what happened in the race imho.
you might be a little more informed about races if you started ...watching the clock...which may save all this arguing about ratings afterwards....as you get more INSIGHT that way in to what you have seen with your eyes...a combined effort. The assumption that clockwatchers do only that is a bit lame really isn't it?
i'm sorry.. but anyone that thinks Denman's performance wasn't from the top draw is kidding themselves...all the evidence is there...as for Neptune...not one person yet KNOWS how good this horse is...because his ability this season is a total unknown..until he runs again...remove him from the race and you have the BEST horse for 30 years...most people's view...hammered 7 lengths...in a fast time...what more does a horse have to do prove itself???
and..I was a total unbeliever before the race..the idea that any horse in training could trounce...and he did trounce KS...was unthinkable.
I'm sure that some people cannot recognise a top performance when it hits them in the face.
NOBODY has suggested that Denman's performance WASN'T top drawer ffs :angy:
And most of us on here were well aware that Denman was a machine over a year ago!
- esp those of us who had been to a racecourse and seen him in the flesh, and seen him run
The evidence of my own eyes told me that KS was totally under par very early in this GC - I don't care what's been written by commentators etc. It was obvious VERY EARLY to anyone who knew what they were looking at, long before he was put under any pressure at all. Having backed KS obviously I followed him from the start - I hardly took my eyes off him. He was not the horse I have watched jumping for fun in earlier races - it was heavy weather right from the get go. I've watched many replays of his previous races, so I know what the comparison is
It WAS very sticky ground and it didn't suit him at all - most horses would have thrown in the towel
But as we have since been told, the horse was not himself BEFORE the race - he was noticeably stressed out in his box.
Both the trainer and the jockey have said that KS was under par on Friday - and funnily enough I have more respect for their opinion than for that of most - if not all - people on here.
It's therefore pointless, to me, to rate KS on that run - yes I know the handicapper has to do it! - as any rating he's given as a result of Friday tells us nothing except that he didn't run up to his best. We will almost certainly never know what was troubling him, but at his best he may - I stress MAY - have been able to stay a lot closer to the leaders. Personally I have no doubt about that. He usually *makes* ground at his jumps - even the ones he clouts - but on Friday he was visibly LOSING ground at far too many of them.
As for Neptune Collonges: he ran a lifetime best - as I predicted he would weeks ago - and he and Mick Fitz did their job admirably. He's a vastly improved horse this year - but he had a hard race, a very hard race, and I'm not certain he'll be able to do himself justice at Punchestown. Let's hope he can, there is a while yet to recover.
And most of us on here were well aware that Denman was a machine over a year ago!
- esp those of us who had been to a racecourse and seen him in the flesh, and seen him run
The evidence of my own eyes told me that KS was totally under par very early in this GC - I don't care what's been written by commentators etc. It was obvious VERY EARLY to anyone who knew what they were looking at, long before he was put under any pressure at all. Having backed KS obviously I followed him from the start - I hardly took my eyes off him. He was not the horse I have watched jumping for fun in earlier races - it was heavy weather right from the get go. I've watched many replays of his previous races, so I know what the comparison is
It WAS very sticky ground and it didn't suit him at all - most horses would have thrown in the towel
But as we have since been told, the horse was not himself BEFORE the race - he was noticeably stressed out in his box.
Both the trainer and the jockey have said that KS was under par on Friday - and funnily enough I have more respect for their opinion than for that of most - if not all - people on here.
It's therefore pointless, to me, to rate KS on that run - yes I know the handicapper has to do it! - as any rating he's given as a result of Friday tells us nothing except that he didn't run up to his best. We will almost certainly never know what was troubling him, but at his best he may - I stress MAY - have been able to stay a lot closer to the leaders. Personally I have no doubt about that. He usually *makes* ground at his jumps - even the ones he clouts - but on Friday he was visibly LOSING ground at far too many of them.
As for Neptune Collonges: he ran a lifetime best - as I predicted he would weeks ago - and he and Mick Fitz did their job admirably. He's a vastly improved horse this year - but he had a hard race, a very hard race, and I'm not certain he'll be able to do himself justice at Punchestown. Let's hope he can, there is a while yet to recover.
EC1
On a break
NOBODY has suggested that Denman's performance WASN'T top drawer ffs
i must be imagining some of the stuff on this thread then
i must be imagining some of the stuff on this thread then
But surely that argument is not whether Denman put in an awesome Championship performance - he did! - BUT whether Kauto ran up to his best or not, so enabling us to make a proper/definitive comparision?
That's certainly all I'm arguing about; and as I keep saying, whether KS did or didn't it takes nothing away from Denman's awesome display at all. What I object to is judging Kauto - and marking him down as a 'second rank' horse, on the evidence of that run
That's certainly all I'm arguing about; and as I keep saying, whether KS did or didn't it takes nothing away from Denman's awesome display at all. What I object to is judging Kauto - and marking him down as a 'second rank' horse, on the evidence of that run
Euronymous
Senior Jockey
I think the big issue for me is why have three votes been cast after the fecking race?
EC1
On a break
lol Euronymous
The thing is Headstrong...is being 2nd rank that bad?
I would rather be 2nd rank to a 185/90 horse than top dog over a group of 170/174 horses
look how Best Mate suffered...he was top dog 3 years running...and would have beat owt put in a race with him at Cheltenham...but as there were only 165/70 horses in opposition he was rated as though he was 2nd rate....if he had been pushed by a horse like Denman...we might have seen his true worth...as it was..he beat what was there...but he WAS capable of running at high speed and jumping..Best Mate would have beat KS at Cheltenham imho...even though collateral ratings say otherwise.
Collateral ratings didn't really make Denman better than KS before friday...so are they the bees method of rating horses?...i don't think so..even though many hold them as gospel
so i am not so sure that being 2nd rate as you put it is a bad thing.
The thing is Headstrong...is being 2nd rank that bad?
I would rather be 2nd rank to a 185/90 horse than top dog over a group of 170/174 horses
look how Best Mate suffered...he was top dog 3 years running...and would have beat owt put in a race with him at Cheltenham...but as there were only 165/70 horses in opposition he was rated as though he was 2nd rate....if he had been pushed by a horse like Denman...we might have seen his true worth...as it was..he beat what was there...but he WAS capable of running at high speed and jumping..Best Mate would have beat KS at Cheltenham imho...even though collateral ratings say otherwise.
Collateral ratings didn't really make Denman better than KS before friday...so are they the bees method of rating horses?...i don't think so..even though many hold them as gospel
so i am not so sure that being 2nd rate as you put it is a bad thing.
G
Gearoid
Guest
I got a good laugh out of a quote from Coral's James Knight in Friday 7th Racing Post. Asked what he would be doing on the Friday evening after Cheltenham.
If Denman does not win the Gold cup, touching up my CV :laughing:
If Denman does not win the Gold cup, touching up my CV :laughing:
EC1
On a break
I'd rather rule in hell than serve in heaven.
it's a bit hot down there though
mind you - they say the sex is good norty
it's a bit hot down there though
mind you - they say the sex is good norty
EC1
On a break
Fridays race was about as good as it gets...a truly run exceptional Gold Cup that is highly rated through colateral and time analysis
KS cannot do anymore than he did...in a Gold Cup...no shame in running a top figure and getting beat.
I would love to see both meet in the KG next time...
KS cannot do anymore than he did...in a Gold Cup...no shame in running a top figure and getting beat.
I would love to see both meet in the KG next time...