King George VI And Queen Elizabeth Stakes 2023

Is Deauville Legend a big price?

What a year he had last year. He only won his maiden at Windsor at the start of his three year old campaign. He then runs a screamer at Royal Ascot in a showcase handicap. He then progressed to win a Group 3 at Newmarket, before landing a Group 2 at York, and then started a warm order for the Melbourne Cup where he was too keen but still managed fourth.

I don't blame his trainer for giving him a break off the track since then, and he can surely be forgiven for his only run at Royal Ascot this season behind Pyledriver.

I guess a lot depends on how he has been at home since, so a positive bulletin from James Ferguson nearer the race wouldn't go amiss. I know he has his work cut out against this field, but the same could be said for most of his runs last year. He kept improving then and if he is declared on Thursday we will see if the 40/1 lasts. He is the left fielder for me.
 
Last edited:
Ratings are set by the people of the time and a lot of those decisions are subjective. Horses, as all athletes, now benefit from more scientific knowledge of nutrition, physiology, medical and improved/different facilities at yards.
Would Nijinksy be better than August Rodine? I would say yes. With today's knowledge and what's available to horses and trainers'? I would say yes but I loved Nijinsky. Subjection. There's no scientific way to prove otherwise. People can speculate and point to this and that but there's no way to prove it.
I think Kauto would cream Desert Orchid on even terms personally but again subjective and both just need to be loved for the champions they were when they were.
 
reet hard said:
Was the benefactor of too strong a pace early,imo.
Was overrated because of it,t'was well out of line with the rest of his form - Timeform - clockwatchers extrordinaire.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't that have been before Timeform got into sectional timing?

I'm not setting out to defend Timeform* per se - to me they get a lot wrong - but I think we need to be fair.

*I think Simon Rowlands got ST off the ground at Timeform but I don't think he works for them any more. I subscribed to Timeform's Sectional Analyses a couple of years ago and did okay with them when cherrypicking some of their stuff to apply to my own ratings. The issues I had with them were that they didn't have sectional timing data for the straight tracks, so nothing for races like the Hunt Cup, Victoria Cup, Bunbury Cup, Cambridgeshire, Lincoln, etc, etc, therefore of limited appeal to me.

I liked how they quantified mark-ups (I have the formula in my files but don't rely enough on times to make it worthwhile doing for every race for which they might hold some relevance) and that got me an edge in certain circumstances. I emailed them at the start of this Flat season to ask if they still didn't produce sectionals for straight-course races and they said they didn't, giving a totally lame excuse as to why not.

I can't help thinking it's the kind of thing Raceform could get their teeth into and just about put Timeform out of business but they're hampering their own progress by allowing Dave Edwards to compile Standard Times and Topspeed ratings, which I find seriously flawed.

There is a forumite, a now-rare contributor with whom I keep in touch off the forum and he has pretty much turned his analysis on its head by focusing on sectional times and when our selections concur we know we have something with which to go to war.
 
reet hard said:
Was the benefactor of too strong a pace early,imo.
Was overrated because of it,t'was well out of line with the rest of his form - Timeform - clockwatchers extrordinaire.
Click to expand...

The race has hardly fell in his lap though has it. He was travelling all over them and ran away from them up the straight. Cape Blanco who was 2nd following the pace finished 2nd.

He was a 4yr old and hardly exposed. Pace, trip and ground can always give a chance to show optimum ability.

Ratings are always questioned rightly or wrongly.
 
Last edited:
If he'd had sectional times they'd probably still have made Harbinger a wonder horse, to ensure sales of their faux expertise,while most disparage them
If SR'S figures are so hot, how come he's still working btw? :D
 
Maybe bookies won't take bets off him.

Maybe he doesn't bet.

Maybe it's an academic pursuit for him.

Apart from all that, I never said his figures were 'so hot'. I just said the principles of sectional timing appeal to me as an additional angle.
 
Sectionals are a very useful tool imo, it's SR's rigid application of the figures he produces that are at fault, having little recognition of what actually happened in a race,and why.
If you think he's some kind of guru, fine; imo you're mistaken, putting his approachh alongside Andrew Beyer's borderline criminal.
 
Last edited:
It's not that I see him as some kind of guru, reet, but he's the only one out there putting his head above the parapet, and I can empathise with that. I'm forever questioning his application but at least he's offering an element of support to other forms of interpretation of form.
 
reet hard said:
Sectionals are a very useful tool imo, it's SR's rigid application of the figures he produces that are at fault, having little recognition of what actually happened in a race,and why.
If you think he's some kind of guru, fine; imo you're mistaken, putting his approachh alongside Andrew Beyer's borderline criminal.
Click to expand...

Can you give us an example of sectional ratings produced by SR that you disagree with and why?
 
July Cup
Visually,it was an uneven pace throughout, with the majority of the field taking a grip in one form or another (RP in-running comments confirm) and the winner came away from the field without undue pressure - neither of which are indicative of a truly run gp1 sprint, imo.Those alone raise questions about the validity of the form.
Apparently, the groundwas drying throughout the day.owing to the stiff breeze and any going allowance generated by the clockers can only be a guess,which casts further doubt on the validity of any sectional appraisal.
A simple and straightforward view which can be easily verified, yet SR and others are inferring it was the second coming?
Sure,it was a impressive win and Shaquille may go on to consolidate it, but the non-sectional view is more aware of what actually happened in the race,and will treat the winner's form with caution.
 
Frankel said:
Yup, any would have struggled to beat Harbinger that day.
Click to expand...

If you look at it closely he beat very little albeit impressively. Cape Blanco was a non stayer in a true run 12f race, who stopped like shot that day and barely scraped home in Belmonts easy 12f. Workforce never raised a gallop in the race
and Harbinger was immediately packed of to stud in Japan while the going was good. He fetches about 1/2 what a top sire there fetches.
 
Last edited:
reet hard said:
July Cup
A simple and straightforward view which can be easily verified, yet SR and others are inferring it was the second coming?
Sure,it was a impressive win and Shaquille may go on to consolidate it, but the non-sectional view is more aware of what actually happened in the race,and will treat the winner's form with caution.
Click to expand...

This is what SR actually said, rating it just 121.

[FONT=&quot]Shaquille[/FONT][FONT=&quot]’s win in the July Cup is rather more complex than implied by a simple final-2f assessment. He lost a few lengths out of the stalls, then ran 10.70s and 10.64s furlongs to lead at halfway (average for the rest of the field was 11.03s and 10.93s at that stage), and somehow managed to be second-fastest of all in each of the final two sections, despite having done his bit to set what was quite a strong pace.[/FONT]

Where exactly does he infer it was the second coming? 121 is pretty bang average for a good sprinter. City Of Troy's final two furlongs were faster.

You're some man for putting words in other people's mouths.
 
And what are we to deduce from the following?:
Shaquille’s win in the July Cup is rather more complex than implied by a simple final-2f assessment. He lost a few lengths out of the stalls, then ran 10.70s and 10.64s furlongs to lead at halfway (average for the rest of the field was 11.03s and 10.93s at that stage), and somehow managed to be second-fastest of all in each of the final two sections, despite having done his bit to set what was quite a strong pace.
except it was strongly run,despite clear evidence to the contrary.
 
I hope we get can back to discussing this years race at some point!

Who will win and why...lets keep it simple.

My play on the race might be Pyledriver win and Deauville Legend E/W.

Pyledriver is a horse who has done me proud before. I backed him when he won the Coronation Cup at Epsom and the last day at Royal Ascot aswell. Sometimes it's worth sticking with horses who have helped you out before.
 
Last edited:
The RP Standard Time for the July Cup course is 70.28s, or about 11.2s per furlong for the last five furlongs to allow for a standing start in the first furlong (14.14s on the day was the quickest, by Art Power).

The next two quickest furlongs were by Shaquille, which took him to the front. Every horse in the race ran the next two furlongs in under 11.2s and only Little Big Bear took more than 11s to run the third. The pace was slowing from then on. Only two ran the fourth furlong in under 11s but all still managed to go under 11.2s. Only one, Run To Freedom, ran the fifth furlong in under 11.2s (11.07s), the next fastest being Shaquille and Kinross, the eventual first and third, both in 11.33s, still less than a length slower than even pace. Only one horse, Kinross (12.97s) broke 13s for the last furlong, which is admittedly uphill, Shaquille, Run To Freedom and Khaadem each recording 13.12s. As I said above, even the 2yo City Of Troy ran the final two furlongs faster and he was running over 7f.

And all of this on officially good-to-soft ground when Standard Times are for good/Good-to-firm ground.

The foregoing is fact. Not my interpretation, not SR's. Fact.

It's up to individuals to interpret them and/or what they see with their own eyes, but tell us all, please, exactly where is the "clear evidence to the contrary" about its being a strong race?
 
I think it’s very interesting to continue the discussion on the July Cup, but it’s littering the topic of this thread. So I’ve opened a new one with the basic info in. Perhaps mods can move the relevant post from this thread to there?
 
Desert Orchid said:
The RP Standard Time for the July Cup course is 70.28s, or about 11.2s per furlong for the last five furlongs to allow for a standing start in the first furlong (14.14s on the day was the quickest, by Art Power).

The next two quickest furlongs were by Shaquille, which took him to the front. Every horse in the race ran the next two furlongs in under 11.2s and only Little Big Bear took more than 11s to run the third. The pace was slowing from then on. Only two ran the fourth furlong in under 11s but all still managed to go under 11.2s. Only one, Run To Freedom, ran the fifth furlong in under 11.2s (11.07s), the next fastest being Shaquille and Kinross, the eventual first and third, both in 11.33s, still less than a length slower than even pace. Only one horse, Kinross (12.97s) broke 13s for the last furlong, which is admittedly uphill, Shaquille, Run To Freedom and Khaadem each recording 13.12s. As I said above, even the 2yo City Of Troy ran the final two furlongs faster and he was running over 7f.

And all of this on officially good-to-soft ground when Standard Times are for good/Good-to-firm ground.

The foregoing is fact. Not my interpretation, not SR's. Fact.

It's up to individuals to interpret them and/or what they see with their own eyes, but tell us all, please, exactly where is the "clear evidence to the contrary" about its being a strong race?
Click to expand...

post 36 on this thread.
 
Getting back on track with the thread, I think it's a pretty underwhelming field.

This is the King George. It's meant to be the midsummer championship race for the generations at the trip.

What do we have?

ORs in order:

124 Pyledriver
123 Auguste Rodin
123 Desert Crown
123 Emily Upjohn*
122 Hukum
122 Luxembourg
121 Adayar
120 King Of Steel
* 3lbs fillies' allowance added

I would argue we need to include the likes of Westover, currently 119 but historically 120.

It's just my personal take, but I want 'top class' horses to be rated 126 and more. It's possible one or two of these might improve to that kind of level but on the face of it this is a glorified handicap.

Just a lone voice crying in the wind, farting against thunder, etc, etc...
 
I think he's had his day in the sun Marb and the ground wont be in his favour.

The favourite will relish the ground if it comes up soft and Emily Upjohn will most likely replace King of Steel as 2nd fav.
 
Last edited:
Yeah there is rain forecast for Ascot this week coming from what I can tell - how much and what the affect will be on the ground are open to interpretation.

Going back to what Euro said earlier, it's interesting that Luxembourg, who being by Camelot should handle or even appreciate cut in the ground, best runs have come towards the end of the season. For his two year old campaign he won that Group One at Doncaster on soft in October, then last season wins the Irish Champion on soft in September. So maybe I am reading too much into this, but I still think he is likely much better than when we last saw him at the Royal meeting. I reckon he's the type of horse to improve with each run under his belt throughtout the season. If the rains arrives he could put in a lifetime best. I wouldn't put anyone off E/W if he ran and got his soft ground.
 
Last edited:
There's an article on the Racing Post about James Fergusons thoughts on letting Deauville Legend take his chance this Saturday. Can anyone who subscribes post it on here?
 
Back
Top