We probably need to see a Doctor GarethOriginally posted by Gareth Flynn@Mar 19 2008, 10:14 AM
I think you mean Halcon G, Charlie; I keep mixing them up in my head too.
We probably need to see a Doctor GarethOriginally posted by Gareth Flynn@Mar 19 2008, 10:14 AM
I think you mean Halcon G, Charlie; I keep mixing them up in my head too.
It`s patently obvious that NC did improve, that`s the whole point.Originally posted by Charlie D@Mar 19 2008, 02:40 AM
Not sure if this is what rating he was prior to GC, but i'll use it anyway
Neptune Collognes 165
Denman beats Neptune Collognes by 16 lengths at Cheltenham, so it's only worth a rating of 181
As you can see from my simple "yardstick" example, neither horse has warranted a rating higher than Desert Orchids in Timeforms opinion and for TF to rate those winning horses higher, they would have to be of the opinion that the "yardstick" horses had improved on their previous ratings
You don't need balls, you don't need to cop out either, you just need common sense
Although I made a mistake ( which Gareth kindly pointed out) i've tried to explain as simple as possible why Denman and Kauto do not warrant a rating higher than Dessie. A similar scenario will probably apply to Moscow Flyer too, but it seems to have gone over your head, so will not try explaining anything further.Originally posted by Euronymous@Mar 19 2008, 11:36 AM
It`s patently obvious that NC did improve, that`s the whole point.
Moscow Flyer was given a rating of 184+ in 2005 - they didn`t have the balls to rate him higher, even though a + rating on a given race by a horse is usually rounded up when it comes to the rating they publish in their Annuals (assuming it`s the animals best performance)
According to my figures, NC didn't necessarily improve. Neither did Halcon G.Originally posted by Euronymous@Mar 19 2008, 11:36 AM
It`s patently obvious that NC did improve, that`s the whole point.
Awful analysis, just terrible. Nicholls has shown time and again that he is pretty clueless as to some of his charge`s optimum conditions.Originally posted by Warbler@Mar 23 2008, 06:49 PM
The presence of NEPTUNES COLLONGES (40) and HALCON GENALARDAIS (37) in third and fourth suggests this wasn't as good a performance by Denman as many seem to suppose. Both are smart horses, but, as their connections have repeatedly said, neither likes Cheltenham. In fact I've had to assume that both ran significantly faster than they ever had before at Cheltenham which makes me a little uncomfortable about the big rating I've given Denman.
I have to say that I am still no fan of Denman. I can't help wondering just how well he'd have done here if he'd been forced to go the searching early pace that Kauto Star had to contend with in the King George. My belief is that his sprint would have been of shorter duration and that he'd have tired earlier and quite possibly lost. Only time will tell if I'm right.
I got the impression that Ruby was experimenting when he went upsides Our Vic with so long to go, maybe thinking if it works he`d try the same when he met Denman again.Originally posted by Galileo@Apr 3 2008, 02:58 PM
Kauto Star is a shadow of his former self. In his last two races he has struggled to get past the likes of Our Vic and Neptune Collonges. In the Gold Cup we were told that Denman “forced” Kauto Star into mistakes and that no horse previously was capable of that. Our Vic has done it today and we know what KS has done to him before at his peak.
I was at work and only watched the race for the first time an hour or so ago. I did not know any of the tactics talk as i just recorded the race. Methinks Rub should have just ignored the advice if he was uneasy about it.Originally posted by Headstrong@Apr 3 2008, 11:11 PM
Maybe you weren't watching BBC but that was all made clear, inc that Ruby was v upset after the race at having had to do that
But he`s clouted fences like that before and still won. The tactics meant he didn`t have the petrol in the tank to ride those last or second last fence errors.Originally posted by Warbler@Apr 3 2008, 11:47 PM
It wasn't the tactics that cost him the race though. That's just Nicholls being magnaminous. When they came to the second last Kauto had established superiority and was booked to win until Walsh put him into the fence all wrong, and cost them victory. That's got nothing to do with the tactics and everything to do with how Ruby presented the fence to the horse.