Phil Smith - Arkle

Trackside: the two horses, stabled together, with entirely different temperaments and very different backgrounds. I love the story of how FLYINGBOLT came into being: AIRBORNE being thought sterile, so placed with an ancient old (supposedly barren) mare, EASTLOCK, as no more than a companion who cost a few quid. But love found its way...

Sadly, brucellosis (contracted by the horse being in contact with Dreaper's farm's cattle) ruined his career, necessitating a very lengthy recovery period from this debilitating illness. He ran a couple of times following his time off, but his spark had gone. ARKLE was done for when whacking a hoof on the guard rail of one of the jumps in the King Geo. VI, fracturing a pedal bone within it. Both of them gone from competition for sad reasons in a very short space of time, no doubt heartbreaking for the Dreapers. There are always so many 'what ifs' - what if FLYINGBOLT had remained fit throughout his racing life; what if he and ARKLE had ever been allowed to contest the same race, what if ARKLE hadn't hit the rail...
 
krizon said:
Trackside: the two horses, stabled together, with entirely different temperaments and very different backgrounds. I love the story of how FLYINGBOLT came into being: AIRBORNE being thought sterile, so placed with an ancient old (supposedly barren) mare, EASTLOCK, as no more than a companion who cost a few quid. But love found its way...

Sadly, brucellosis (contracted by the horse being in contact with Dreaper's farm's cattle) ruined his career, necessitating a very lengthy recovery period from this debilitating illness. He ran a couple of times following his time off, but his spark had gone. ARKLE was done for when whacking a hoof on the guard rail of one of the jumps in the King Geo. VI, fracturing a pedal bone within it. Both of them gone from competition for sad reasons in a very short space of time, no doubt heartbreaking for the Dreapers. There are always so many 'what ifs' - what if FLYINGBOLT had remained fit throughout his racing life; what if he and ARKLE had ever been allowed to contest the same race, what if ARKLE hadn't hit the rail...
Click to expand...

those what ifs ...crikey..3 more seasons for Arkle & Flingbolt to show their prowess at least..possibly more for the bolt.
 
It strikes me that there can few more pointless exercises than Phil Smith over 40 years on reassessing Arkle's rating.

I am too young to have seen Arkle but I have no doubt that Kauto Star's fourth KG was the best chasing performance I have seen and that he is the best NH horse I have ever seen.

As for Arkle however , he tends to be raved about by very good judges , the fact of his Gallaher Gold Cup record standing over forty years despite the enormous difference in training methods and the visual impression his performances make even in fuzzy black and white film suggest to me that he remains hors concours

For any doubters dig out his Whitbread on Youtube where he beats the Scottish National winner Brasher giving him 35lb and sprints away from the last.
 
For any doubters dig out his Whitbread on Youtube where he beats the Scottish National winner Brasher giving him 35lb and sprints away from the last.
Click to expand...

Just to stir the pot a little more... if Kauto gave a Scottish Grand National an easy 5 length and 35lb beating (let's call it 40lbs), he'd probably be rated in the 180s (on the basis that a modern Scottish GN winner usually hits an official rating of 135-140).
 
Gareth Flynn said:
Just to stir the pot a little more... if Kauto gave a Scottish Grand National an easy 5 length and 35lb beating (let's call it 40lbs), he'd probably be rated in the 180s (on the basis that a modern Scottish GN winner usually hits an official rating of 135-140).
Click to expand...

What was Brasher's Timeform rating ? Any idea ? :)

Look at Arkle prick his ears as he approaches the last - looks as if he had barely had a race as he hurtles up the hill.

And that 1965 track record he still holds was set when carrying 12-7 - and the race was won by 20 lengths in a canter.
 
Last edited:
Gareth Flynn said:
Just to stir the pot a little more... if Kauto gave a Scottish Grand National an easy 5 length and 35lb beating (let's call it 40lbs), he'd probably be rated in the 180s (on the basis that a modern Scottish GN winner usually hits an official rating of 135-140).
Click to expand...

How did you arrive at that figure, Gareth?

My figures aren't official, obviously, but I have Hello Bud hitting 147 (runner-up Gone To Lunch 162), Iris De Balme (150+) (runner-up Halcon Genelardais 172), Hot Weld 142, Run For Paddy 147+, Joes Edge 140.

Didn't Brasher carry top weight in a number of other handicaps? Didn't he run in a Gold Cup? I'd suggest Brasher was probably better than any of teh Ayr National winners I've listed except maybe Halcon Genelardais.

If peopel think my figures are exaggerated, those are the figures that link to Kauto Star so logically my rating for KS would be exaggerated too.
 
I just did a brief check of the mark that the winner's of the last 5 Scottish Nationals were raised to. Going through in a bit more detail:

2005: Joes Edge came into the race after winning at Aintree off 127. He wasn't re-assessed and ran with a 5lb penalty. Since he was still 5lbs out of the handicap, I reckon he ran there off effectively 137, not the 132 in the RP result. In any case, he next ran off 140 at Punchestown (with a 7lb penalty) and the next time he ran, after proper re-assessment, he was on 144

2006: Run For Paddy won off 135. Next time out (in October) he ran off 140.

2007: Hot Weld won off 124. He then went to the Betfred where he got in on 124, but effectively ran off 135 as he was out of the handicap by 11lbs. His next race saw him run off 141 (albeit after a long injury; I'm not sure if he was initially raised higher and was then dropped again).

2008: Iris de Balme got in off 117, but was a massive 26lbs out of the handicap and ran off effectively 143 (a 7lb claimer notwithstanding). He was still on 117 for his Betfred 4th (23lbs out of the handicap, running off effectively 140) and hasn't been seen since. His last OR, presumably given straight after the Betfred, was 141.

2009: Hello Bud won off 133 (OR 129 with a 4lb penalty for his previous win) and ended up on 141 when he came out this year.

So from that rather small sample, we have ORs of: 144, 140, 141, 141 or 143, and 141. Bump my estimate up to 140-145, and stick Kauto on ~190 for giving one of them an easy 40lb beating

(I've absolutely no idea about Brasher outside of that beating by Arkle btw, I'm just trying to put into perspective what giving such a beating to a recent Scottish National winner would mean now!)
 
Gareth Flynn said:
2005: Joes Edge came into the race after winning at Aintree off 127. He wasn't re-assessed and ran with a 5lb penalty. Since he was still 5lbs out of the handicap, I reckon he ran there off effectively 137, not the 132 in the RP result. In any case, he next ran off 140 at Punchestown (with a 7lb penalty noted) and the next time he ran, after proper re-assessment, he was on 144
Click to expand...

Yes, that's what I have. He was weighted 7lbs below a 144 horse. His Punchestown mark would have taken into account the reassessment post-Aintree then the 7lb penalty.

I also think a better class of horse contested the Scottish National in previous years. It's only a thought, since we don't have ratings or access to full results. But Playlord won it under 12-0 in 1969 and was a Grade 1 horse (which I think might also have won a King George and/or a Whitbread under top weight. He was on a par with stablemate Titus Oates, which was a 170+ horse that definitely won the Whitbread under top weight and might also have been placed in the Gold Cup.)

I remember other winners The Fossa (1967) and Arcturus (1968) running at Aintree. I'm pretty sure The Spaniard (1970, 10-0) won or went close in at least one Hennessy, but more than anything, I remember Young Ash Leaf landing a huge punt for my father and older brothers (from 33/1 down) because my father had calculated that it was absolutely thrown in at the weights. (Had it run fourth or fifth in the Gold Cup?)

It's also possible for high weights to win the race.

2004 Grey Abbey 11-12 (OR just 148 but later 169)
1999 Young Kenny 11-10 (OR just 153)
1997 Belmont King 11-10 (OR just 150)
1993 Run For Free 11-10 (OR 167)

I suspect Brasher would have been among the classier winners but without the hard evidence, it's no more than a hunch, possibly wishful thinking, I admit.

It may also back up my argument or disprove it, but I think the handicappers these days have a better grip on the form.

I suspect the handicappers 30-40 years ago under-rated the horses in much the same way as the Irish ones do nowadays (it wouldn't be unusual for the most valuable Irish handicap chase winners to ultimately prove to have been 20-30lbs well in). Timeform may well have been more accurate.
 
Last edited:
Fair points DO. As I think you've said a few times before, winning a handicap is about being better than your own mark, rather than the other horses (or more better than they are!).
 
EC1 said:
me too..maybe we should have a thread on this?..a demo of how the 191 for KS was achieved could be a good example to kick it off...Pru?
Click to expand...

I'm happy to make a start, since I've got a bit of time to kill.

These are my figures for KS and how I arrived at them. Bear in mind that the points of reference ('via ... ') are not plucked out of thin air. All form study has an element of subjectivity in its interpretation and many of you will disagree with some of my figures. However, the chacnes are that if you disagree it will because you think I'm too high with the reference point, which would end up rendering KS's rating too high, which would lend further credence to the idea of Arkle being a long way better than him.

Raceform race number first:
09-10
3032 (King Geo) 193+ (via Barber Shop 165)
2426 (Btfr ch) 174+ (via Halcon Genelardais OR 161)

08-09
4444 (Gold Cup) 188 (via Exotic Dancer 178) or 179 (via My Will 163 & Roll Along 163)
2940 (KG) 183+ (via VPU 176 & Briareus 159)
2354 (Btfr Ch) 167+ (via Tamarinbleu 167 & Cloudy Lane 158)

07-08
4849 (Tsp Bowl) 175+ (via Our Vic 175)
4463 (GC) 178++ (via Neptune Collonges 178)
3932 (Asc) 179++ (via Monets Garden 172)
2954 (KG) 182+ (via Racing Demon 172)
2390 (Btfr Ch) 179 (via Beef Or Salmon 169 c/d)
1884 (Old Roan) 182 (to prev best - nearly gave Monet's Garden 14lbs)
 
Did he bottle it?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2010/may/24/handicapper-gives-up-arkle

Handicapper gives up attempt to quantify Arkle's greatness

Kauto Star is as close to the limit of brilliance as any horse can get, so Arkle cannot have been better

Numbers are never in short supply when the official handicappers gather to pass judgment on a racing season and yesterday's event to assess and celebrate the 2009-10 jumps season was no different. If it were possible to drown in figures, they would have been handing out snorkels at the door.

Yet one number was conspicuously absent. This was supposed to be the moment when Phil Smith, the BHA's senior handicapper, revealed the result of his attempt to put a figure on Arkle, the chaser whose mid-60s shadow still extends to the present day. After many hours poring over yellowing form books and long-forgotten copies of the Racing Calendar, though, Smith has decided that the task is hopeless.

It can take a brave man to admit defeat and, while a "best guess" rating for the three-time Gold Cup winner would have been interesting, it seems that the disjointed nature of National Hunt racing at the time made even this impossible.

"There was no central handicapping," Smith said yesterday. "There were lots of different people involved and they would say that Horse A should get so many pounds from Horse B one week, and then change their minds completely the next week, even when there hadn't been any racing in between."

Nonetheless, while he could not uncover a framework on which to construct an opinion, Smith did offer a few clues yesterday to the way that his inquiries were heading at the time.

He believes that Mill House, Arkle's contemporary and, initially, his principal rival, was of similar merit to Denman, who is now rated at 182. He also concedes that there must be a biological limit on the maximum rating that a racehorse can achieve, in the same way that it is inconceivable that a human could run 100m in under five seconds.

Of course, this is all leading directly towards the old argument about the one semi-official rating against Arkle's name, which is the rating of 212 awarded by Timeform when he was at his peak.

Arkle will have been dead for 40 years next Monday and did not have an ego to be flattered or deflated in any case. The question of whether that rating is trustworthy is thus somewhat academic, but not entirely so, because every subsequent champion has been tested against it and found wanting. Horses like Best Mate, Desert Orchid and now even Kauto Star appear in the record books as relative second-raters because, for all their talent and achievements, Arkle could have given most of them two stone and a beating – in Timeform's opinion, at least.

A personal view is that a biological limit on racing ability lies around the 200 mark, and that Kauto Star's rating of 190 could well have been higher if he had ever contested a handicap. It seems reasonable to think that he is as good – not better, but as good – as any chaser the sport has seen. Both he and Arkle, in other words, are as close to the limit of brilliance as any horse is likely to get, and placing one ahead of the other is shaving hairs.

Of course, it may be that Timeform can justify their 212 rating using data in their huge archives (and, for that matter, the 210 given to Flyingbolt, his contemporary and stablemate, which put the pair of them 19lb clear of every other chaser in history). But if Smith can't stand up a figure with any confidence, it would be fascinating to know how Timeform can.

This is not a criticism of Timeform in general, as its race-readers and commentators have served the sport with distinction for many years.

But, given the totemic status of that 212, it would be good to know who came up with it and how, if only to address the rumour that Phil Bull, Timeform's founder, had so little interest in jump racing that he used to give the job of rating jumpers to the raw recruits as practice before they were let loose on "proper" racing. Otherwise, Kauto Star may not be the last great chaser who does not get quite as much credit as he deserves.
 
Didn't necesarily bottle it. Just couldn't do it.

If they offered me £40kpa index-linked I'd work it out for them. It might take me a few years but I reckon I could do it.

And I'd still end up with about 212...
 
EC1 said:
he came up with a 182 for Mill House though..so why was it so hard to find one for Arkle i wonder
Click to expand...
Indeed.

I agree about the 200 mark being plucked out of thin air.

Who'd have thought in September 1968 that human beings might one day jump 30ft (long!)?

Who'd have thought just a few years ago that the 100m record would be shattered so easily?

The recent documentary about Usain Bolt suggested his best distance might well be 400m. Just think wtf he could do to that world record if the suggestions proved well founded!
 
The real nonsense about the rating is that it assumes, a bit like Sea Bird II's that training methods have not improved. They clearly have and in my opinion if Arkle were to race Kauto he would be beaten, probably quite comfortably because he simply wouldn;t have been as fit or as well fed and conditioned. He may have had more talent but it's nonsensical trying to compare them.
 
Back
Top