Prix de l'Arc de Triomphe 2011

SteveM said:
It's true. Even when the older horses are as good as they are this year they are really up against it given the WFA conditions. Like you say, when the pacemaker for an older horse (that was favourite) finishes runner-up in front of the other one, something is wrong somewhere.
Click to expand...

Simply not true. Can you not see the posts above yours where people have gone to the trouble of proving this theory incorrect?

I know this doesn't fit with yours and others reconstruction of the race of the race to fit with your ideas beforehand (and I was just as wrong with my predictions) but Shareta was NOT running as a pacemaker. That was the assumption in the UK&I, but not in France - we all got this wrong. She ran in the Vermeille on her own merits and ran very well, and was entitled to improve. She did, and in a true run race, there is absolutely nothing, and certainly not wfa, to suggest she is anything other than a very, very good filly.
 
Last edited:
SteveM said:
It's true. Even when the older horses are as good as they are this year they are really up against it given the WFA conditions. Like you say, when the pacemaker for an older horse (that was favourite) finishes runner-up in front of the other one, something is wrong somewhere.
Click to expand...

no it doesn't necessarily mean something is wrong..it means older horse hasn't run to best..or..gasp..3yo pacemaker ..who incidentally was ridden as if to win..has improved...or maybe a bit of both of those

you one of the best straw clutchers i've come across Steve..olympic standard;)

when the Arc is run..a 3yo still has 3 months of growing to do...so if they run at level weights they are disadvantaged..and eventually no 3yo will run in such races..why is this so hard for you to understand Steve?..you will trash races with your ideas.
 
Hamm said:
Simply not true. Can you not see the posts above yours where people have gone to the trouble of proving this theory incorrect?

I know this doesn't fit with yours and others reconstruction of the race of the race to fit with your ideas prior to the race (and I was just as wrong with my predictions) but Shareta was NOT running as a pacemaker. That was the assumption in the UK&I, but not in France - we all got this wrong. She ran in the Vermeille on her own merits and ran very well, and was entitled to improve. She did, and in a true run race, there is absolutely nothing, and certainly not wfa, to suggest she is anything other than a very, very good filly.
Click to expand...

I'm glad someone pointed this out. If you saw Nick Luck's interview with ADRP on Racing UK then this confirmed that.

They could have ran Sarafina in the Vermeille but ran her in the Foy and Shareta went off a fancied horse for the Vermeille, a top group one in it's own right.
 
Bar the Bull said:
In hindsight, Masked Marvel shouldn't have been in the race. But he was fancied in many quarters.

Shareta was also a pacemaker, and she bumped up the average finishing position.

If you take out the leader in each race, the result wouldn't be much different.
Click to expand...

Ssshhhh.

Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story.
 
Gamla Stan said:
I'm glad someone pointed this out. If you saw Nick Luck's interview with ADRP on Racing UK then this confirmed that.

They could have ran Sarafina in the Vermeille but ran her in the Foy and Shareta went off a fancied horse for the Vermeille, a top group one in it's own right.
Click to expand...

As did (and wait for this!) the French commentator who previewed the French horses in the William hill near me. Anyone have any idea who he is? He went on and on about Shareta and made it very clear she was the bet, and was certainly not a pacekmaker.
 
I think it was a very good bunch of older horses but some excuses can be made


Rewilding dead
Workforce, injuries and stable out of form
Sarafina not suited by the firm road ground
St Nicholas abbey being a 10f and not camapigned for the Arc



Even all these things , all of them would have been clearly beaten by a fillie that is better than Pride or Zarkava were.
 
Hamm said:
She ran in the Vermeille on her own merits and ran very well, and was entitled to improve. She did, and in a true run race, there is absolutely nothing, and certainly not wfa, to suggest she is anything other than a very, very good filly.
Click to expand...

The history of the Arc is full of 3yo's supposedly proving themselves very good but who ended up doing frig all as 4yo's.
 
Not at all, it's my favourite race on the Flat. But I've come round to the idea that 3yo's are hugely advantaged by the conditions of the race. I'm at work now so can't look it up but I suspect a lot of those that were close up or placed haven't kicked on and shown similar form as older animals. Look at Hurricane Run, he seemed a superstar when he won the race and was rated 134 by Timeform - but honestly he got nowhere near that mark as a 4yo and probably wasn't worth it at the end of the day.
 
Last edited:
Plenty of flat horses don't improve from three to four. Some of them don't even improve from two to three.
 
train on is the word

some horses are not able to make the transition , others do.


wfa is ok for me and without it we would not watch 3yo running against the older horses
 
But why would you want to tweak anything? Bar's stats show there is no bias and WFA is nigh on perfect!
 
The last four home yesterday were 3yo's who had no business being in the race. They were either pacemakers, plainly not good enough or entered as an afterthought. It totally skewered his stat and made it worthless.
 
Last edited:
Euronymous said:
The last four home yesterday were 3yo's who had no business being in the race. They were either pacemakers, plainly not good enough or entered as an afterthought. It totally skewered his stat and made it worthless.
Click to expand...

So the winners of the Irish Derby, French Derby and Leger have no business running in the race? Come on, you're being ridiculous now. Just because you don't feel a horse will win, that doesn't mean they have 'no business' being in the race.
 
I understood your point about the last four skewering my data.

That is why I went to the trouble of doing it for 7 years. And Reliable Man? No business in the race? That is a very good one. He won the Niel and the Jockey Club.

You are making stuff up.
 
Look, it's difficult doing this whilst I'm at work as I can't look at any results and I apologise for Reliable man - he skipped my mind. But Masked Marvel should not have been in that race and TB was a poor Irish Derby winner and a pacemaker in any event.
 
Its important to remember that weight for age is an average that is applied against the entire 3yo horse population when they take on their elders - whether in Group races, handicaps or maidens. There will always be horses for whom, at any particular point in the year, its too much, and horses for whom its not enough.

Hurricane Run might well have been precocious enough such that by October 2005 the WFA given to him was too much. Maybe his improvement (whether it be found through growth spurts, or experience, or whatever) was made during those few months leading up to the race. Then, come the next year, he's no longer getting the allowance, his advantage is gone, and he doesn't look quite as good (although he did still somehow manage to win a King George that he looked dead and buried in!).

This is always going to happen, just as you'll always get horses who only got going at 4 or 5 (although there's probably less of these since they require patience from owners and trainers!)

Unless you find some magic way to judge each individual horse's disadvantage due to their immaturity, there's simply no way to do it without treating them all the same. Picking and choosing outliers who were given an advantage by the system doesn't make the system worthless.
 
On his day Treasure Beach is a very good horse..many thought so earlier in the season on the forum..he was a tough pass..Reliable Man had every right to be there..Maked Marvel..imho shouldn't have run..but i automatically rule out Leger horses in this..they are too slow

I think if the Arc was so slanted by wfa error then 3yo would be regularly dominating the first 3..not just winning

the fact is that the Arc is a definate target for fully primed 3yo's..whereas is sometimes an afterthought for the older horse..plus the older horses have a lot of years been stripped of the top echelon ...would have loved to have see such as STS as a 4yo in this race

its the positioning of the Arc in the calendar..rather than wfa that makes it a race where 3yo dominate it..imo

i'll generalise and say that other big races are won by 3yo because of the lateness in year..on a smaller scale the November handicap used to be won by a 3yo..because most of the older brigade had been on the go from day one....and not specifically been one race aimed like the 3yo's

Its quite ineresting that last year when i suggested the wfa scale favoured 3yo's from summer onwards it was suggested in the main that i was wrong..odd how some people now think the same.

I'm not convinced either way..some years i see stuff and think they are favoured..then other years i feel its ok..so on balance..its probably about right.

the only time people think its wrong is when 3yo's from one year are better than the 4yo's they race against..some years..3yo crops just are better than the previous years..then the 3yo's win all the races and people think wfa is to blame..when its just the average crop level is better over a 2 year period
 
Last edited:
Back
Top