Phoenix Stakes
- Thread starter Guest_
- Start date
Sea Pigeon
At the Start
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2007
- Messages
- 505
i backed him, and i certainly didn't expect him to be detached by 6 lengths after a furlong.
Anyway the winner looks very smart.
EC1
On a break
winner looked impressive to me
I can't believe anyone thinks Art Con was ever gonna beat the winner. Look 2f out, MC is only 2l in front Art Con for gods sake and he beat him 10 wickets.
The only horse that he sat miles off was the leader who came last, but would bolt up over 5f. The winner won because of one reason and that he was completely different class to the opposition. Art Connoisseur would have been second even if he sat on the winners girths, end of the day he loomed there 2f out and had every chance. He was beaten by a horse that has ability, only Michael Bell could dream Art Connoisseur has. He may have been impressive winning the Coventry but in all honesty how far would Mastercraftsman won the Coventry.
The only horse that he sat miles off was the leader who came last, but would bolt up over 5f. The winner won because of one reason and that he was completely different class to the opposition. Art Connoisseur would have been second even if he sat on the winners girths, end of the day he loomed there 2f out and had every chance. He was beaten by a horse that has ability, only Michael Bell could dream Art Connoisseur has. He may have been impressive winning the Coventry but in all honesty how far would Mastercraftsman won the Coventry.
Sea Pigeon
At the Start
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2007
- Messages
- 505
I had to do a double take on it Chris, but worked out that you were talking retrospectively in light of the subsequent debate that developed.
Incidentally, despite my initial optimism that this was going to be a stand out performance, the early 'speed based' evidence suggests it's not, and is somewhere between 7 to 11 lengths short of what a top 2yo hits.
I was talking to someone yesterday who asked me if I'd unearthed any emerging 2yo's yet, and I said I'd really struggled this year. Admittedly I'm not doing as much as did, but nothing I've found yet has burned up the clock. My experience is that the better 2yo's are normally hitting mid to upper 90's on my scale by now, but Mastercraftsman is high 80's to low 90's (not dissimilar to Admiralofthefleet and a bit behind something like Dutch Art). A 2yo normally improves about 4 to 5pts which would project this candidate into the mid 90's, which would be respectable rather than stellar. Having said that, these things are relative and you don't need to be as good as recent contempories, but rather better than your own generation. Similarly, it's not as if satisfying my calculation is a pre-requisate to success either.
At the risk of looking stupid in the next 12 months I'm going to sound a cautionary note though at this stage.
I'm going to undertake a labourious investigation along a different line to see if it confirms my revise dopinion, but in terms of raw time the following horses were all faster winners.
Holy Roman Emperor
George Washington
Damson
One Cool Cat
Johannesburg
Minardi
Lavery
Pips Pride
Macs Imp
Pharaohs Delight
Super Power
Digamist
Given that horses are generally getting faster, I'm slightly concerned we might not be over-reacting, although clearly the situation regarding the going for the horses named above it going to be critical. Oh well.... a boring sticky evening with a calculator beckons.
Incidentally, despite my initial optimism that this was going to be a stand out performance, the early 'speed based' evidence suggests it's not, and is somewhere between 7 to 11 lengths short of what a top 2yo hits.
I was talking to someone yesterday who asked me if I'd unearthed any emerging 2yo's yet, and I said I'd really struggled this year. Admittedly I'm not doing as much as did, but nothing I've found yet has burned up the clock. My experience is that the better 2yo's are normally hitting mid to upper 90's on my scale by now, but Mastercraftsman is high 80's to low 90's (not dissimilar to Admiralofthefleet and a bit behind something like Dutch Art). A 2yo normally improves about 4 to 5pts which would project this candidate into the mid 90's, which would be respectable rather than stellar. Having said that, these things are relative and you don't need to be as good as recent contempories, but rather better than your own generation. Similarly, it's not as if satisfying my calculation is a pre-requisate to success either.
At the risk of looking stupid in the next 12 months I'm going to sound a cautionary note though at this stage.
I'm going to undertake a labourious investigation along a different line to see if it confirms my revise dopinion, but in terms of raw time the following horses were all faster winners.
Holy Roman Emperor
George Washington
Damson
One Cool Cat
Johannesburg
Minardi
Lavery
Pips Pride
Macs Imp
Pharaohs Delight
Super Power
Digamist
Given that horses are generally getting faster, I'm slightly concerned we might not be over-reacting, although clearly the situation regarding the going for the horses named above it going to be critical. Oh well.... a boring sticky evening with a calculator beckons.
I've tried to muck about with the times based on going for those races run at the Curragh.
In order of the ground helping the horse at mile aggregates;
George Washington +0.47 secs
Damson +1.38
Mastercraftsman +1.53
Holy Roman Emperor +2.43
One Cool Cat +2.52
These would then need converting into 6F adjustments and adding to the race times (I think that's the right way round) as this component is attributable to the ground conditions, and therefore needs to be added on to slow the horses up who had faster conditions. (divide by 8 and times by 6)
George Washginton 0.035 + 1.12.70 = 1.13.05
Damson 1.035 + 1.13.20 = 1.14.23
Mastercraftsman 1.14 + 1.13.30 =1.14.44
Holy Roman Emperor 1.82 + 1.11.00 = 1.12.82
One Cool Cat 1.89 + 1.11.40 = 1.13.29
The evidence for Damson was a bit confusing as this involved using a split sample as the round course was riding appreciably quicker. There was some evidence too of the ground speeding up during racing, which make sme think it was either drying out or there might have been a stiff breeze involved. Damson would be the one I was least confident of getting a handle on.
My own speed ratings for the group in the sample bring out a similar rank order.
Holy Roman Emperor = 100.88 or time adjusted 1.12.82
George Washington = 99.58 or time adjusted 1.13.05
One Cool Cat = 97.70 or time adjusted 1.13.29
Damson = 90.35 or time adjusted 1.14.23
Mastercraftsman = 88.64 or time adjusted 1.14.44
I'm afraid I'm a little bit more sceptical now of initial favourable impression he made with me and reckon he's about 11 - 12L's off the performance put up by the two most notable winners. I would think he can hit 95.00 by the end of the season but it wouldn't mark him out as a Guineas winner in waiting to my limited thinking, although it would entitle him to consideration. I'd be surprised if there aren't a few others yet who will emerge, or if AOB hasn't got something else himself.
Only a handful of 2yo's break through the 100 barrier and in recent years they've included a mixed bag, but for the most part you'd say they turned out well (or at least threatend to)
Teofilo, Eagle Mountain, Holy Roman Emperor, Dutch Art, Evening Time, Twice Over, Natagora, Zarkava, 97.50+ brings in the likes of Authorized and New Approach I seem to recall (can't be bothered to look up the full records)
fanatasy result of previous Phoenix runs
1st Holy Roman Emperor
1 - George Washington
1.25 - One Cool Cat
4.75 - Damson
1 - Mastercraftsman
In order of the ground helping the horse at mile aggregates;
George Washington +0.47 secs
Damson +1.38
Mastercraftsman +1.53
Holy Roman Emperor +2.43
One Cool Cat +2.52
These would then need converting into 6F adjustments and adding to the race times (I think that's the right way round) as this component is attributable to the ground conditions, and therefore needs to be added on to slow the horses up who had faster conditions. (divide by 8 and times by 6)
George Washginton 0.035 + 1.12.70 = 1.13.05
Damson 1.035 + 1.13.20 = 1.14.23
Mastercraftsman 1.14 + 1.13.30 =1.14.44
Holy Roman Emperor 1.82 + 1.11.00 = 1.12.82
One Cool Cat 1.89 + 1.11.40 = 1.13.29
The evidence for Damson was a bit confusing as this involved using a split sample as the round course was riding appreciably quicker. There was some evidence too of the ground speeding up during racing, which make sme think it was either drying out or there might have been a stiff breeze involved. Damson would be the one I was least confident of getting a handle on.
My own speed ratings for the group in the sample bring out a similar rank order.
Holy Roman Emperor = 100.88 or time adjusted 1.12.82
George Washington = 99.58 or time adjusted 1.13.05
One Cool Cat = 97.70 or time adjusted 1.13.29
Damson = 90.35 or time adjusted 1.14.23
Mastercraftsman = 88.64 or time adjusted 1.14.44
I'm afraid I'm a little bit more sceptical now of initial favourable impression he made with me and reckon he's about 11 - 12L's off the performance put up by the two most notable winners. I would think he can hit 95.00 by the end of the season but it wouldn't mark him out as a Guineas winner in waiting to my limited thinking, although it would entitle him to consideration. I'd be surprised if there aren't a few others yet who will emerge, or if AOB hasn't got something else himself.
Only a handful of 2yo's break through the 100 barrier and in recent years they've included a mixed bag, but for the most part you'd say they turned out well (or at least threatend to)
Teofilo, Eagle Mountain, Holy Roman Emperor, Dutch Art, Evening Time, Twice Over, Natagora, Zarkava, 97.50+ brings in the likes of Authorized and New Approach I seem to recall (can't be bothered to look up the full records)
fanatasy result of previous Phoenix runs
1st Holy Roman Emperor
1 - George Washington
1.25 - One Cool Cat
4.75 - Damson
1 - Mastercraftsman
Last edited:
You have to put it in the context of todays trip being a minimum for him.He can only improve for an extra furlong and more patient tactics.
I've conceeded he'll improve (he'll need to) but I fear at the moment he's coming from too far back. I expect him to be there or thereabouts come the end of 2008, but I don't think he's on the top drawer yet, and given normal progress he'll be just below that threshold. Having said that, there does seem to be a dearth of 2yo's around at the moment, and as I said, things are only relative against the generation in which you're competing, but under normal conditions I don't think a performance of this nature would be good enough. I've played about with a few different angles to get a fix on him, and they all tend to put him between 12 and 7 L's behind HRE and GW, my own silly fanatsy result makes it 8L's. The only way I can rate him in the higher 90's is if I use 'projection' and take the blind leap of faith that Art Conniseur has run to his Coventry mark (which I doubt). I could give him 98.00 under these conditions, but I think I'd be guilty of manufacturing a rating to fit what I want to report.
Having bemoaned the lack of 2yo's last week that were hitting high speed figures and suggesting that nothing that we've seen so far this season is anything better than ordinary to useful in terms of being top class (possible exception at Goodwood this week) I was mildly amused to see Nick Mordin writing in a similar vein about 10 days later in the Weekender this week. Rather than re-produce his entire article I'll try and select appropriately;
"Hughes (Richard) had this to say (reference to his RP blog) about the tremendous run being enjoyed with the 2yo's trained by Richard Hannon"....
"People have been talking about our juveniles and how well they've been running this season, but in truth we haven't done anything different. I remember that a week ago at Windsor we ran two in a maiden that we thought would finish fourth or fifth, but they went and ran first and second. I think its partly down to the fact that the season seems to be changing. For some reason I don't think we have seen the best 2yo's out yet, and that is giving our horses even more of a chance."
Mordin goes onto to eulogise about Hughes as a judge and draw comparisons with the French scene which used to feature fast 2yo's 20 years ago but doesn't see them out now until much later in the season (alright June 19th was a date that flashed through my mind as that was when I first latched onto Natagora - Mordin picked her up on his website about 2 months later) but leaving that quibble aside, he goes onto agree with what I was alluding to earlier in this post.
"Indeed, I can't think of any good reason why the number of fast early season 2yo's should drop. But the truth is they have, Hughes is right. This year there has been a marked drop in the number of fast early season performances by 2yo's in Britain. Only 93, 2yos earned speed ratings of 98 or more from Raceform up until the end of June. This is the lowest number in the nine years they've been making ratings to their current scale. This year is probably a blip caused by seasonal factors. Back in 2002 there were also a remarkably low number of fast performances by 2yo's trained in Britain before July. Only 100 earned Raceform speed ratings of 98 or more. But the number recovered, peaking at 162 in 2007".
(now the last time I knew, Nick lived in New York state, and might not be aware that 2007 was if anything, and even worse Spring and Summer than this one, so I'm struggling to reconcile his seasonal factors explanation, but what the hell)
"I figured what was needed was a system to produce a list of 2yo's who had only just started racing and who were likely to improve markedly in the second half"
He proceeds to go on naming about 16 horses. I tend to agree with him. I've recorded very little so far, and am starting to wonder whether the pre-August form could come under serious pressure from better class horses who have been held back. For the most part punters will back the form on display and should create value for the new horses whom they've got to learn about yet. Unfortunately, I don't know the identities of these horses until they run, but those who have so far to date, seem to have been consistantly down on their 2007, and 2006 counterparts. Only Finjaan to date has matched Fleeting Spirits Molcombe (well about 3L's faster - which I'm struggling to believe, but am happy to accept it as a comparable performance). Art Conniseur was comparable to Henry's Coventry too, but then that rating was all about development anyway, as although it typically sets the June benchmark, it never seems to survive July. That is to say that even in defeat on unsuitable ground, Henry still bettered it (something which Art Conniseur didn't quite do)
"Hughes (Richard) had this to say (reference to his RP blog) about the tremendous run being enjoyed with the 2yo's trained by Richard Hannon"....
"People have been talking about our juveniles and how well they've been running this season, but in truth we haven't done anything different. I remember that a week ago at Windsor we ran two in a maiden that we thought would finish fourth or fifth, but they went and ran first and second. I think its partly down to the fact that the season seems to be changing. For some reason I don't think we have seen the best 2yo's out yet, and that is giving our horses even more of a chance."
Mordin goes onto to eulogise about Hughes as a judge and draw comparisons with the French scene which used to feature fast 2yo's 20 years ago but doesn't see them out now until much later in the season (alright June 19th was a date that flashed through my mind as that was when I first latched onto Natagora - Mordin picked her up on his website about 2 months later) but leaving that quibble aside, he goes onto agree with what I was alluding to earlier in this post.
"Indeed, I can't think of any good reason why the number of fast early season 2yo's should drop. But the truth is they have, Hughes is right. This year there has been a marked drop in the number of fast early season performances by 2yo's in Britain. Only 93, 2yos earned speed ratings of 98 or more from Raceform up until the end of June. This is the lowest number in the nine years they've been making ratings to their current scale. This year is probably a blip caused by seasonal factors. Back in 2002 there were also a remarkably low number of fast performances by 2yo's trained in Britain before July. Only 100 earned Raceform speed ratings of 98 or more. But the number recovered, peaking at 162 in 2007".
(now the last time I knew, Nick lived in New York state, and might not be aware that 2007 was if anything, and even worse Spring and Summer than this one, so I'm struggling to reconcile his seasonal factors explanation, but what the hell)
"I figured what was needed was a system to produce a list of 2yo's who had only just started racing and who were likely to improve markedly in the second half"
He proceeds to go on naming about 16 horses. I tend to agree with him. I've recorded very little so far, and am starting to wonder whether the pre-August form could come under serious pressure from better class horses who have been held back. For the most part punters will back the form on display and should create value for the new horses whom they've got to learn about yet. Unfortunately, I don't know the identities of these horses until they run, but those who have so far to date, seem to have been consistantly down on their 2007, and 2006 counterparts. Only Finjaan to date has matched Fleeting Spirits Molcombe (well about 3L's faster - which I'm struggling to believe, but am happy to accept it as a comparable performance). Art Conniseur was comparable to Henry's Coventry too, but then that rating was all about development anyway, as although it typically sets the June benchmark, it never seems to survive July. That is to say that even in defeat on unsuitable ground, Henry still bettered it (something which Art Conniseur didn't quite do)
Last edited:
