Please Explain..

Originally posted by crazyhorse@Dec 27 2007, 08:44 AM
Apart from that as always Venusian is pretty accurate. I too believe the thoroughbred has reached a certain (biological) limit and times show that even despite much better keeping, training regimes, feeding etc. the horse is neither getting faster nor sounder.
Logic dictates as in athletics there has to be a cieling over which the cubic capacity of horse or human can not go beyond, and yet world records keep falling. The scope exists at longer distances of course as endurance is a boundary that can be pushed. I'd be surprised if the equine world is close to that yet, and there's always the spectre of genetic modification lurking which can't be detected and will almost certainly find it's way into the frame in the future.

More specifically Gareth produced a series of charts detailing times for the last 50 odd runnings of certain races about a year ago and it is perfectly clear what the trend is. The idea that times hadn't plateued was just not born out.

Theoretically you could attempt to produce historical speed ratings, but would need all the times and their standards for the entire card concerning the horse under investigation. Where as I accept this would in no one settle the issue, I'd be prepared to have ago at producing some if I knew where to source the info from. Theoretically of course, a horse running in the 1960's (although it would be slower than its modern contemporary) wouldn't be penalised for it using this method, as it would be effectively be being assessed against its level of superiority against its cohorts.

It would be a moderately interesting academic exercise for saddo's like myself, but if some one knows where I can source the info from, I'll have ago at running a fantasy all time Champion hurdle etc if you want to nominate the 'acceptors' and the race in question that you wish to invoke. The apparent beauty of the methodology is that it doesn't alter from race to race and is relative to the generation, making it pretty well incorruptable and I wouldn't have a clue who'd come out on top. My god we could even draw a book up!!!

But first and foremost, I'd need the times, distances and class of race being run for each card. I hold records going back to 1996, and can produce hypothetical race results based on these already, but there's always a few rogues in there.

If anyone's curious, I could post up 1-2-3 with distances for the;

Supreme
Arkle
Champion Hurdle
SAH
SAC
Champion Chase
Stayers dawdle
Gold Cup
and Triumph

Although I could do the handicaps, they're much harder to equalise and I've never bothered. There's a fair chance that if you were asked to nominate the fastest performance over this period, you could get at least 50% correct
 
Highest Timeform Chaser Ratings:



212 Arkle

210 Flyingbolt

191 Mill House

187 Desert Orchid

186 Dunkirk

184+ Moscow Flyer

184 Burrough Hill Lad

184 Kauto Star

183 Master Oats

182 Azertyuiop, Best Mate, Captain Christy, Carvill's Hill, Kicking King,
See More Business, Well Chief

180 First Gold

I can't see a horse ever getting near Arkle or Flyingbolt's rating. After watching Moscow Flyer vs Azertyuiop vs Well Chief it's hard to believe that Flyingbolt could give all that weight to Moscow Flyer and still beat him. Then again ever since I got into racing I've heard during every National Hunt season how amazing Arkle & Flyingbolt were, espeically Arkle. I think they are both untouchable. Even if Kauto Star won the Hennessy, Tingle Creek, King George, Victor Chandler, Racing Post Chase, Champion Chase, Gold Cup, Irish National & the 'Whitbread' Gold Cup all by 20 lengths in differing ground conditions and in the same season he'd still not be rated as good as Arkle.

Looking at that list and seeing Master Oats & First Gold there is quite surprising. I've recently put quite a few of One Man's victories on Youtube and for me he was a superior horse to both Master Oats and First Gold.
 
Yeah, those top two ratings are wrong imo, and are based on Arkle and Flyingbolt beating horses like Height O Fashion and Splash who were rated 168 and 157 respectively by effectively 40 odd pounds in two seperate contests. Chances are the latter named animals were nowhere near that good, and that Mill House is overrated as well. I can`t have an animal well beaten as often as he was as better than Desert Orchid.
 
Originally posted by Warbler@Dec 27 2007, 11:22 AM
Theoretically you could attempt to produce historical speed ratings, but would need all the times and their standards for the entire card concerning the horse under investigation. Where as I accept this would in no one settle the issue, I'd be prepared to have ago at producing some if I knew where to source the info from. Theoretically of course, a horse running in the 1960's (although it would be slower than its modern contemporary) wouldn't be penalised for it using this method, as it would be effectively be being assessed against its level of superiority against its cohorts.

It would be a moderately interesting academic exercise for saddo's like myself, but if some one knows where I can source the info from, I'll have ago at running a fantasy all time Champion hurdle etc if you want to nominate the 'acceptors' and the race in question that you wish to invoke. The apparent beauty of the methodology is that it doesn't alter from race to race and is relative to the generation, making it pretty well incorruptable and I wouldn't have a clue who'd come out on top.
That sounds like a lot of work, Warbler, but I'd be fascinated to see how it worked out!
 
Back
Top