Prix Morny and Prix Jean-Romanet

Re: Prix Morny

Given suspicions over the time of this race, I suggest the following may have occurred although I have no proof and stand to be rebuked and corrected but I find the time unlikely if not almost impossible.

I believe the race distance was correct and the going at Good 3.1 was as given, perhaps a little firmer, however, controversially I am going to speculate that the electric timing for this event did not work and when realising this, the race was hand timed from the video recording, which if you do it yourself you will get close to the official 1.7.90 as David found above.

However, when you study the recording you may find something strange happens around the 300m mark, where there is a line across the course that is clearly visible. The film at this point shows an abrupt change of camera angle and appears to have moved the runners on by perhaps as much as 50 metres, or 2 to 3 seconds of race has gone missing.
It's a bit like watching a poorly edited old film where a bit of the action that you are expecting to see has disappeared and it's fast forwarded a little, as in the earlier shot they have not reached the 300m mark [it's not visible] but in the very next shot they are well past it.

I suggest the hand timing was taken from this video recording and is therefore suspect. The correct race time I believe to be probably about 1.10.5.

I also think the distance between Special Duty and Canford Cliffs was a good 1/2 length and not a neck as officially given as CC was always about that distance down on the filly through last 200m and died a little more right at the end, indicating not a lot left in the tank for CC.
　
 
Dakota said:
Re: Prix Morny

Given suspicions over the time of this race, I suggest the following may have occurred although I have no proof and stand to be rebuked and corrected but I find the time unlikely if not almost impossible.

I believe the race distance was correct and the going at Good 3.1 was as given, perhaps a little firmer, however, controversially I am going to speculate that the electric timing for this event did not work and when realising this, the race was hand timed from the video recording, which if you do it yourself you will get close to the official 1.7.90 as David found above.

However, when you study the recording you may find something strange happens around the 300m mark, where there is a line across the course that is clearly visible. The film at this point shows an abrupt change of camera angle and appears to have moved the runners on by perhaps as much as 50 metres, or 2 to 3 seconds of race has gone missing.
It's a bit like watching a poorly edited old film where a bit of the action that you are expecting to see has disappeared and it's fast forwarded a little, as in the earlier shot they have not reached the 300m mark [it's not visible] but in the very next shot they are well past it.

I suggest the hand timing was taken from this video recording and is therefore suspect. The correct race time I believe to be probably about 1.10.5.

I also think the distance between Special Duty and Canford Cliffs was a good 1/2 length and not a neck as officially given as CC was always about that distance down on the filly through last 200m and died a little more right at the end, indicating not a lot left in the tank for CC.
　
Click to expand...

...even more intriguing, thanks Dakota... sounds like a scene out of the Matrix.
 
That line on the track is digitally added, and is probably only available from the camera that the action switches to.
 
There is something screwy with the video, though:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kalgOpBaHVU

Notice how at 57s, after they're well past that digitally-added 300m-to-go line, Equidia's graphic at the bottom says there's still 400 to go (having come down in increments of 50 up to this point).

As they go past the 200m line, it says there's 350 to go...

And then suddenly the Equidia graphic jumps from 350m to go to 200m to go!

I've no idea how the distances are measured by Equidia, or whether that bar at the bottom is even supposed to be accurate, but it sure does jump suddenly!
 
My first impression is that it's likely to be a genuine time.

An inaccurate race distance is quite possible and not unheard of (although it's normally an irish speciality). The French have tended to specialise in timing past the wrong post, or the faulty clock before now. I would think the balance of probabilities is that you're dealing with 3 of the fastest 2yo's in Europe (I don't know to much about the others) but had very high ratings for the other 3.

I seem to think that Deauville has been redesigned/ re-laied/ re-configured or re-somethinged? it's been a problem track all year for speed-rating with the RP no longer issuing standard times at certain distances. It could also be that the RP have started providing a worse service and less comprehensive coverage since they started to think we'd be daft enough to pay for it. Their coverage of French racing has always been second rate anyway.

Perhaps the good folk who write 'Frogs Racing' could shed some light on any adjustments made to Deauville? It was the only race run on the straight course yesterday I seem to think, and a combination of the following could easily account for the track record.

1: Strong tail-wind (they'd be sole beneficaries of it)
2: Good to Firm ground
3: Upgrading of the drainage/ new course lay out

When Rakti broke the course record in the Lockinge every other horse in the race did the same. It's not unheard of. When conditions prevail it can be done to a ridiclious degree. 1909 six records went on the same day at Churchill Downs. Similarly, shortly after Ascot was relaid the new 6F course record fell to a 2yo who was granted ideal conditions on the day and used them. The record still stands today (henrythenavigator).

Arcano had run 97.76 with me at Newmarket and headed my 2yo lists anyway, so his win was no surprise. Special Duty had beaten the fastest early season french 2yo I had a record for (Siyouni 94.11) by 1.5L's so was probably capable of hitting 95.61 on that performance plus 2.5 for maturation so would have projected out 98 and a bit. There was no reason to believe she wasn't their fastest 2yo filly therefore. Canford Cliffs had run 94.76 in the Coventry, a marginally quicker rating than Henrythenavigator, but would have been the most difficult to project for not having run after the Coventry. The ease with which he won the Coventry would have been worth another 1.5, so had probably hit 96 back in June. By now all 3 would have entertained reasonable expectations of being 99-100 performers

These ratings are a little bit historical, and the better 2yo's are starting to run figures between 92-94 now (which is where I'd expect them to be in August). These 3 horses were doing this sort of thing about 6-12 weeks ago.

Unless the horses have got GPS in their saddlecloths then I would think the graphic is visual Gareth rather than anything else and probably operated by a human. I wouldn't have thought it was any more accurate then those pips they occasionally put on F1 coverage which shows where a few cars are on the course at any time. It's largely indicative. I'm sure if it were truly scientific then they'd be furnishing us with sectional times because you would in effect being generating them. I tend to think it's a red herring to be honest
 
Last edited:
Found a video of 2008 and the same thing happens there. Just an Equidia red herring.

Worth pointing out that at 14 seconds into the video of this year's event, you can see the 5f marker (it reads 10, as in 1000m and has a red and yellow check flag on it) in the bottom right of the frame.

They haven't reached it at this point, which is around 11 seconds into the race (the stalls open at 3s).

It's impossible to accurately tell when they do, but it's probably around 13s/14s into the race, which I would have thought was about right for a fast first furlong?
 
Watching the way Canford Cliffs travelled in the race as well and finishes it off doesn't suggest anything was particularly wrong. Perhaps it is just a case that because of all the talk and hype people are fining it hard to accpet he has been beaten by better horses. I'm pretty sure yesterday we saw the winner of the 1000 guineas providing she gets there etc...and it wouldn't be beyond to think Arcano could well win the 200o guineas
 
its quite possible we have another fast Coventry winner that doesn't follow it up..its happened before

this is the problem with adding wfa to 2yo speed figures..its totally misleading as you could be adding what is already there..CC could just have been a mature 2yo

then again he may have needed the race..may not have been right etc

his Coventry performance was not displayed yesterday for certain imo
 
the whole field covered by a blanket with a 40/1 shot in the mix:(..form is worth nowt to me..how anyone is betting antepost on any of the horses in this is beyond me..run the race again you would have a different result
 
EC1 said:
the whole field covered by a blanket with a 40/1 shot in the mix:(..form is worth nowt to me..how anyone is betting antepost on any of the horses in this is beyond me..run the race again you would have a different result
Click to expand...

Don't really follow form but regardless of the 40-1 beside the name its still a horse and a horse thats got to within a head of Siyouni staying on last time out and within 1.75 lengths of Special Duty which is probally up there with Canford Cliffs beating Xtension.

If the time has proven to be slower than expected then the horses coming from behind are to be paid even more complients, Canford Cliff is just not the horse we would of hoped him to be, in the 9 years Tagula has been siring we haven't seen anything out of the ordinary which hinders Canfords long term prospects.
 
Last edited:
still rate the coventry as a top time performance..but you just don't know where you are with rate of maturity..its always the case with 2yo's

i prefer later season races over 7f for judging 2yo's by....so many horses in the last 20 years have won 6f 2yo races in very smart times and then failed to develop further
 
CC was described as " sore " this morning - Hughes is recorded as saying there was a strong tailwind.
 
The tailwind is good news in that I'd be worried how the race would affect them all if the ground was as fast as it would have to have been.
 
In other words, we cannot find a reason for him losing so we are assuming it is the ground (despite appearing to relish a fast surface at Royal Ascot) and we do not want to take on the best colts over 7 furlongs so we will go the easier route of the Middle Park.

By Ashley Iveson, Press Association Sport
Richard Hannon is keen to put the disappointing effort of Canford Cliffs in the Prix Morny down to the fast ground after a scope revealed nothing abnormal.
Although he was only beaten half a length into third by Arcano and Special Duty, Hannon is certain his charge was not at his very best and is confident the Tagula colt will bounce back on a more suitable surface.
"Canford Cliffs' tracheal wash was OK and everything else is fine but having watched endless replays it is noticeable how he lugged to the left and I am convinced that he was feeling the firm ground," the trainer told his website www.richardhannonracing.tv.
"It was soft when he won on his debut at Newbury and Royal Ascot produced beautiful ground, but Deauville are coming to the end of a month's racing and it was very firm - and rough in parts - there on Sunday.
"By hanging to his left Canford Cliffs also ended up racing on his own up the stands rails, which certainly did not help, so I am inclined to forgive and forget and write off the performance.
"He was a bit stiff when he arrived home, but it is nothing major and he'll be fine in a few days.
"We will talk to the owners about his next race but while the Dewhurst remains very much an option there is also the Middle Park Stakes which is also a Group One and an important race in its own right."
Click to expand...
 
I wouldn't quickly dismiss the possibility that he didn't like the ground. Ascots high-tech super-drained straight is a long way from Deauville's bruised, battered and (this year) parched ground at the end of August.

That said, they all had to run on it and there's no reason to think any of the others enjoyed it any more.
 
I thought CC ran okay. He didn't win but it was a decent performance. He probably didn't like the ground and lugged over to the rail. He's scoped clean but was a little sore. He'll be okay.
 
Galileo do you not find times at Ascot are obsurd this year? I am finding them increasingly hard to trust it is abit likeDoncaster in 2008, you just can't beat a horse producing a good time at Newmarket in my opinion.
 
Found?

For Gods sake be very careful when using images. Gareth or Col will explain it. I don't fully understand it, but things can get expensive
 
Last edited:
Back
Top