Miling Division 2010

Galileo said:
Yes, lets all keep it civil.

For me, despite Goldikova finishing in front in of Paco Boy yesterday in a similar manner to Ascot - both are likely to have run someway below that.

Goldikova won on soft ground against poor enough opposition - to take on the best of the colts she needs a much faster surface to use her accleration. I did say it before the race too.
Click to expand...

Why do you think G and PB ran below form though?

its ok saying she won on soft against poor oppo..when she did that she still got rated off the oppo

I think she is a great filly..but i also think people have rose tinted spectacles - hence i'm seeing excuses..which started at Ascot..I backed her there by the way so i have no axe to grind

each time CC wins..its oooh its only a mid 120's..even when he beat RVW..but each time G runs..apart from when losing ..its ooh a 130+
 
EC1 said:
Why do you think G and PB ran below form though?
Click to expand...

I have made my reasoning very clear as to why both ran below form - the ground.

I thought Paco Boy (who you said yourself you could not have on the ground) did not travel with any fluency whatsoever which is one of his trade marks while Goldikova never picked up in the fashion she can. Take Makfi out of the race and I still would say both have ran below their best.
 
Fuisse is no stranger to soft ground

he must be a OHR 114/115 horse..maybe more..easy G3 winner
Royal Bench a listed winner = 110?..sits nicely 3 behind

Makfi has beaten Fuisse 8.75 lengths

2lb per length makes Makfi a 132 horse on Sunday

Goldikova a 127
PB 127ish

PB is officially a 124 horse..so how has he run below form..he has probably run his best race?
 
There is unfortunately no other word than nonsense for someone who thinks Goldikova and Paco Boy ran to Ascot form yesterday. Nothing wrong with using the word nonsense - stop being so sensitive.
 
Galileo said:
I have made my reasoning very clear as to why both ran below form - the ground.

I thought Paco Boy (who you said yourself you could not have on the ground) did not travel with any fluency whatsoever which is one of his trade marks while Goldikova never picked up in the fashion she can. Take Makfi out of the race and I still would say both have ran below their best.
Click to expand...

I think PB has a habit of surprising people Gal..he did it at Ascot as well
 
Hamm said:
There is unfortunately no other word than nonsense for someone who thinks Goldikova and Paco Boy ran to Ascot form yesterday. Nothing wrong with using the word nonsense - stop being so sensitive.
Click to expand...


I'm afraid the placed horses say otherwise

instead of trying to be a smart arse why don't you back up your gob with some reasoning
 
Galileo said:
So now you think PB relish/prefers a softer surface?
Click to expand...


did i say that?

horses don't relish any ground..they just run on it..he looks like he runs to form on any ground..as does Makfi

work off the placed horses

thats how every other race is rated in this manner isn't it?
 
Last edited:
:lol::lol:

Neither of the front 2 are anywhere near their best in soft, and the ground yesterday was way worse than this. Makfi handles it well, and hence won well. He's a top class horse on fast as well, and clearly wasn't right at Ascot. The Jacques le Marois is not a difficult race to draw conclusions from, and I don't see the point in complicating something so clear and obvious ...
 
Hamm said:
:lol::lol:

Neither of the front 2 are anywhere near their best in soft, and the ground yesterday was way worse than this. Makfi handles it well, and hence won well. He's a top class horse on fast as well, and clearly wasn't right at Ascot. The Jacques le Marois is not a difficult race to draw conclusions from, and I don't see the point in complicating something so clear and obvious ...
Click to expand...


which equates to I'm just blustering my through it with no logic involved

just ignore the other horses who were well beat ..not because of the ground either...because you can't accept that PB and G are about the same horse
 
Last edited:
It looks like Canford won't clash with Makfi or Goldikova then with both likely to stay in France? Disappointing.
 
For god's sake, I'm joking. Stop taking any comment directed at what your analysis as a personal insult. I think your analysis of Goldikova is nonsense, that's it. No point in me pussyfooting around it.
 
Last edited:
Hamm said:
For god's sake, I'm joking. Stop taking any comment directed at what your analysis as a personal insult. I think your analysis of Goldikova is nonsense, that's it. No point in me pussyfooting around it.
Click to expand...


but you don't know why its nonsense even though the 4th and 5th horse back the form up to the hilt
 
even the last 3 horses are listed winners

my analysis here is the same as everyone elses from what i've seen on here..i don't go in a lot for the form rating thing but I know all you guys love it..and to be honest..I can't see how you cannot rate this race off the 4th and 5th horse

this was a true run race with decent animals left well behind..4th horse alone has to be a decent marker..he was in great form on run up to this

I think the race is being devalued when in fact its a top notch race..rating wise
 
EC, using lengths the other horses are beaten by in these conditions is the quickest way possible to the poor house. You are assuming all horses acted to the same degree on the surface which is just not the case.
 
Hamm said:
EC, using lengths the other horses are beaten by in these conditions is the quickest way possible to the poor house. You are assuming all horses acted to the same degree on the surface which is just not the case.
Click to expand...

Hamm said:
EC, using lengths the other horses are beaten by in these conditions is the quickest way possible to the poor house. You are assuming all horses acted to the same degree on the surface which is just not the case.
Click to expand...

but the 4th horse loves the ground..as does the 5th

when a horse acts well on a surface it normally gets him closer to rivals that don't act as well..even though they are better horses

the proximity of the 4th horse shows that even on favourable ground he was well beaten

this liking for the ground removes any exhaggerated distances re soft ground..soft ground usually accentuates the distances because horses don't act on it..that can't be levelled at the 4th horse..therefore he marks the form well.
 
You are ignoring the fact though that the second and third will not run to anything close to their best on that kind of ground ..
 
Hamm said:
You are ignoring the fact though that the second and third will not run to anything close to their best on that kind of ground ..
Click to expand...

they might not hit their very best but to say they are going to run lengths slower when in fact both have won on it in the past is pushing it

Sundays race looks rock solid from a rating perspective..which is a compliment to G and PB..but it doesn't mean on fast ground they would pass Makfi.

when G and PB met at Ascot it was on fast ground and G beat PB a similar distance..odd coincidence then that they run to a similar level isn't it..ie the same horse rating wise

maybe its you that is overplaying the ground..one thing is for certain..all those people who made G odds on didn't see the ground as an issue.

What rating would G have got had she won by 2 lengths do you think?
 
Last edited:
Neither have won on anything like the ground yesterday - look at their respective race records.
 
Hamm said:
Neither have won on anything like the ground yesterday - look at their respective race records.
Click to expand...

but with them previously acting slow ground how do you know they didn't act even better on it?..Makfi for instance would fit that bill.

you are taking an automatic negative view of the race becuse of the ground..which i would too if those in 4th & 5th didn't act on slow ground.

i know all about exaggerated distances - but in this instance I personally can't apply it becuse those beaten apart from G and PB had no excuse bar being beaten on merit

Put G in Makfi's place..what would the comments be on this thread?..oh yes..another 130+ performance..look at the 4th and 5th backing it up etc etc
 
Last edited:
EC, your argument was based on the fact both had won on such ground - they have not. I have no idea now what you are saying. They underperformed on soft so they'll be amazing on heavy?!

They are poorer animals on soft. They are worse again when it's heavy. Surely you're not disputing that?
 
Last edited:
Hamm said:
EC, your argument was based on the fact both had won on such ground - they have not. I have no idea now what you are saying. They underperformed on soft so they'll be amazing on heavy?!

They are poorer animals on soft. They are worse again when it's heavy. Surely you're not disputing that?
Click to expand...


i'm on about the 4th and 5th horses..horses that appreciate cut..can appreciate even more cut
 
Back
Top