EC1
On a break
if you belive all that is told you it could cost you heavy Hamm..go ahead and lay it by all means..but don't base it on that false information you were responding to above.
Last edited:
Overdose
- Thread starter Nefertiti
- Start date
if you belive all that is told you it could cost you heavy Hamm..go ahead and lay it by all means..but don't base it on that false information you were responding to above.
Euronymous
Senior Jockey
EC1
On a break
Euro - what finished 2nd to Overdose in the voided abbaye?
..like i said..its also very reliant on when races are run under the fastest conditions.
EC1
On a break
Found this on Nick Mordin's site
I have no doubt that the Hungarian star OVERDOSE (44) would have won this year's Prix de l'Abbaye de Longchamp if Fleeting Spirit's stall had opened and a false start had not been declared. What makes me so confident of this are the Youtube videos of his win in the voided race and that of MARCHAND D'OR (43) in the re-run version later in the day.
Clock both videos accurately with a stopwatch and you'll find that Overdose ran between five and nine hundredths of a second slower (it's impossible to be any more precise).
What makes this amazing is that Overdose had no company for the last furlong and a half and was eased in the closing stages by his jockey. His jockey had no need to use any of his mount's energy that he'd clearly saved to see off a late challenge.
Marchand D'Or on the other hand was in a full out drive all the way to the line. And he was racing on ground that may well have dried out at least a little in the intervening three and a half hours following the overnight rain.
If a false start hadn't been declared Moorehouse Lad would surely have pushed Overdose all the way and Marchand D'Or would have been there to challenge him in the closing stages. He would have had something to race against all the way to the line.
Do all these factors add up to more than the five to nine hundredths of a second difference between the times clocked by Overdose and Marchand D'Or? If you have any doubt take a look at the performance of STRIKE UP THE BAND (39) in both races. He ran second to Overdose in the voided race, beaten three and a quarter lengths. He was fourth in the re-run version, only three lengths behind Marchand D'Or despite his earlier exertions. In fact all the horses that completed the course in both races were beaten further by Overdose than they were by Marchand D'Or. And remember, Marchand D'Or was pulled up in the voided race after little more than a furlong. As a result he was fresher than any of his rivals for the re-run.
main bit for me is he makes the very interesting point that already tired horses got closer to a fresher Marchand later in the day
I have no doubt that the Hungarian star OVERDOSE (44) would have won this year's Prix de l'Abbaye de Longchamp if Fleeting Spirit's stall had opened and a false start had not been declared. What makes me so confident of this are the Youtube videos of his win in the voided race and that of MARCHAND D'OR (43) in the re-run version later in the day.
Clock both videos accurately with a stopwatch and you'll find that Overdose ran between five and nine hundredths of a second slower (it's impossible to be any more precise).
What makes this amazing is that Overdose had no company for the last furlong and a half and was eased in the closing stages by his jockey. His jockey had no need to use any of his mount's energy that he'd clearly saved to see off a late challenge.
Marchand D'Or on the other hand was in a full out drive all the way to the line. And he was racing on ground that may well have dried out at least a little in the intervening three and a half hours following the overnight rain.
If a false start hadn't been declared Moorehouse Lad would surely have pushed Overdose all the way and Marchand D'Or would have been there to challenge him in the closing stages. He would have had something to race against all the way to the line.
Do all these factors add up to more than the five to nine hundredths of a second difference between the times clocked by Overdose and Marchand D'Or? If you have any doubt take a look at the performance of STRIKE UP THE BAND (39) in both races. He ran second to Overdose in the voided race, beaten three and a quarter lengths. He was fourth in the re-run version, only three lengths behind Marchand D'Or despite his earlier exertions. In fact all the horses that completed the course in both races were beaten further by Overdose than they were by Marchand D'Or. And remember, Marchand D'Or was pulled up in the voided race after little more than a furlong. As a result he was fresher than any of his rivals for the re-run.
main bit for me is he makes the very interesting point that already tired horses got closer to a fresher Marchand later in the day
EC1
On a break
When you are relying on Nick Mordin, you know you've lost the argument!
he makes a very valid point though..which is why i posted it...Marchand should have beat those tired horses further.
the point is that good..there was no response from you about it
..or anything about that bollox about 3 seconds..which you bought really easy.good luck with laying it anyway..lay of the season is a big call imo.
the deal with Mordin is..pick the sensible stuff out..those who dismiss everything he says are fools imo.
Last edited:
Overdose would have cantered that field,
on what he did in Rome he would have beaten Dayjur or Black Caviar.
The only question is to know if he is the same horse or 20 pounds worse, but both situations are ok to win the Temple.
on what he did in Rome he would have beaten Dayjur or Black Caviar.
The only question is to know if he is the same horse or 20 pounds worse, but both situations are ok to win the Temple.
Gamla Stan
At the Start
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2005
- Messages
- 4,337
When you are relying on Nick Mordin, you know you've lost the argument!
Nick Mordin is a better race reader than anyone on this forum, by a long way. He has some outlandish theories but he's no idiot. I'd still be losing at gambling on horses if it wasn't for Mordin On Time.
Gamla Stan
At the Start
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2005
- Messages
- 4,337
G
Gearoid
Guest
Just to simplify this a little. Would forum members back at 2/1 or lay at 5/2 if they were the only two options available?
Euronymous
Senior Jockey
Back. It's a field of handicappers after all.
Gamla Stan
At the Start
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2005
- Messages
- 4,337
Agreed. The only danger comes from Kingsgate Native as Tangarine Trees won't be able to go the pace and there's question marks over his fitness and consistency.
I'm annoyed I missed the 5/2 with Coral to be honest.
G
Gearoid
Guest
Good replies lads, thanks.
On The Bridle
At the Start
I must be one of the only Nick Mordin fans on here. I enjoy his perspective and his fortright opinions and like me he can always find an excuse when he's wrong!
Back at 2/1 - no lay - I'd rather not have an interest than a lay.
Back at 2/1 - no lay - I'd rather not have an interest than a lay.
Not true - he's clueless. Anyone can make enough outlandish claims and be right once ina blue moon. I read his 'betting for a living' - I had to put it down as it and its arguments were infantile. You are doing a great disservice to many on here to say he is a better racereader - he isn't.
Time is one aspects of many on which to analyse racing - the problem with Mordin and others is they think it's the only one. If he is such a genius it's more than slightly surprising he still needs his couple of bob from the weekender..
No bet for me in reality but lay in terms of your post..
crazyhorse
At the Start
fully agree ! the horse won a nunthorpe and was 2nd in an abbaye; peoples memories seems really short-lived!
Last edited:
Gamla Stan
At the Start
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2005
- Messages
- 4,337
Not true - he's clueless. Anyone can make enough outlandish claims and be right once ina blue moon. I read his 'betting for a living' - I had to put it down as it and its arguments were infantile. You are doing a great disservice to many on here to say he is a better racereader - he isn't.
Time is one aspects of many on which to analyse racing - the problem with Mordin and others is they think it's the only one. If he is such a genius it's more than slightly surprising he still needs his couple of bob from the weekender..
Who would you cite as a better analyst out there? Nick Mordin is far from clueless, I could give plenty of examples up on here which shows he's a fair judge at times, he just chats a lot of shit in between. Putting up Natagora at 33s for the 1000 Guineas the July before wasn't a bad shout, neither was Rail Link at 14s for the 2006 Arc. As I say, Mordin On Time is the reason I (and many others I'm friends with) make any money from punting.
Mordin certainly doesn't view time as the only one, far from it these days. He has many other theories in his books and writings on his websites (the majority of which are bullshit admitedly) but he isn't stuck only to time.
Regarding you second point, and this is probably a broader debate to be honest, plenty of top analysts end up doing media work. This is mainly because whilst they are great at analysing form and racing, they have no idea how to bet. Which is why so many "ex pro punters" do the rounds on the media circuit, great judges of form but no idea whether something should be 6/4 or 5/2 or how much to have on a 5/2 shot in differing circumstances. I'd suggest Mordin is an excellent analyst but a shite punter, which is why I'd recommend reading Beyer on top of Mordin as he actually understands punting to some degree (albeit in an American format).
Gamla Stan
At the Start
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2005
- Messages
- 4,337
Agree with that but aside from him, it's a very weak field.
Grand Armee
At the Start
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2005
- Messages
- 635
The most laughable and pathetic comment of the century.:blink: I am sorry Sunybay that is just LUDICROUS and quite insulting to two legends.
We are talking about two of the great sprinters that ever graced the track. One created history in his own right, and the other is possibly the greatest we may ever see. She is already the highest weighted sprinter and considered by most world wide as the best to ever grace the circuit at that distance.
They would have beaten him hands down, without a fight. Dayjur would have walked past him, and she, Black Caviar would have just let down and made him look a second rate nothing.
Watch on YouTube what Black Caviar does to one of the other best sprinters in the world, Hay List.
God, and I think Hay List would blitz half of the world if he went overseas. But unfortunately the owners and trainer seem to have this pathetic vision of beating the legend, except cannot accept the fact, he CANNOT and WILL NOT beat her.
pathetic
oh great , thats very polite and you
and the reasoning is he can not beat them because you say,
thats your opinion
I have been rated horses for a long time and the Rome performance is better than any of Dayjut or Black Caviar nce.
oh great , thats very polite and you
and the reasoning is he can not beat them because you say,
thats your opinion
I have been rated horses for a long time and the Rome performance is better than any of Dayjut or Black Caviar nce.
EC1
On a break
Dayjur was superb..but you know if you look back at his races..he wouldn't have got sky high form ratings..purely on what he beat and by how far.
Would someone like to have a go at rating him..in his best races he beat a G3 horse in Statoblest by 4 lengths..and G1 horse Royal Academy by 1.5 len..Royal Academy had previously beaten G3 horse Great Commotion by 3/4 len in the July Cup.
Now if a sprinter today beat horses like that..what would their form ratings be?..very high?