Road to the 1000 Guineas

SteveM said:
In comparative terms Maybe will run much better next time as she would have stiffened up considerably.
Click to expand...

I don't think there is any evidence for this.

The argument is that the two fillies that were not loaded the first time benefited because they did not reach the heightened state of pre-race anticipation that comes with being loaded into the stalls.

There is no way that they would have been allowed to 'stiffen up considerably' at the start.
 
Zenyatta said:
I don't think there is any evidence for this.

The argument is that the two fillies that were not loaded the first time benefited because they did not reach the heightened state of pre-race anticipation that comes with being loaded into the stalls.

There is no way that they would have been allowed to 'stiffen up considerably' at the start.
Click to expand...

You're right no absolute evidence. It's what I'm suggesting as a contributing factor among several in explaining how she won the Guineas. I don't believe she is anything out of the ordinary and certainly not the "monster" that has been suggested.

When horses are left for that amount of time in the stalls they start to stiffen up. It was a cold day and I don't think totally unconnected that the first and second were the two not originally loaded.
 
Last edited:
That point had nothing to do with Homecoming Queen. Why would Maybe have stiffened up any more than the other runners, if at all?
 
Zenyatta said:
That point had nothing to do with Homecoming Queen. Why would Maybe have stiffened up any more than the other runners, if at all?
Click to expand...

Like I say because she was one of the first loaded. It's almost impossible to say how much of an effect it would have had, but John Francome for example said that he would have kept his filly on the go rather than dismount by hacking her down the course.

What is has to do with Homecoming Queen is that she wasn't initially loaded and wouldn't have stiffened up in the stalls. So by jumping her out an initiative was seized.
 
Last edited:
The horses were standing in the stalls for a matter of minutes. They don't go from being warmed up and ready to race to stiffened up in that time. All of the horses came out of the stalls and were walked round to keep them warm and ready to go.

I don't see any correlation between your argument and your conclusion but perhaps I am completely missing your point . . .
 
Zenyatta said:
The horses were standing in the stalls for a matter of minutes. They don't go from being warmed up and ready to race to stiffened up in that time. All of the horses came out of the stalls and were walked round to keep them warm and ready to go.

I don't see any correlation between your argument and your conclusion but perhaps I am completely missing your point . . .
Click to expand...

Quite a number of minutes Zen. I think you underestimate the effect it had on those that were originally loaded. If you don't fancy it as a possible reason though ignore it. But you might want to revisit the suggestion when the winner fails to live up to her classic victory.
 
I think it is quite possible that there is something in the stalls argument. However, it has nothing to do with them stiffening up. In fact, it is the exact opposite. The horses that were loaded built up their heartbeat and sense of anticipation so that they were physically ready to race. When they were reloaded they were unable to build up the same peak. The two horses (the 1st and 2nd) who were not loaded on the first occasion did not have the same problem.

I don't see where your suggestion that "In comparative terms Maybe will run much better next time as she would have stiffened up considerably" fits into this?
 
SteveM said:
What I meant by this was that the fast time was a consequence of how she was ridden.
Click to expand...

You're going to have to explain this. You said yourself that comparatively, Camelot ran a quicker second half of the race having been held up so surely he was ridden in a way which was beneficial to achieve a fast second half of the race? Homecoming Queen however was sent to the front and thus naturally will run a quicker first half and a slower second half due to her tactics.

Therefore, how on earth do her tactics equate to a fast time?! The race time is the first 4 furlongs and last 4 furlongs combined remember. :p
 
It doesn't fit into what you have said because you have only got it half right. Yes their heartbeats peak when they have the anticipation of racing and trepidation of going into the stalls, but also they stiffen when standing fixed for any length of time and just standing around when unloaded causes them to get a bit colder in their muscle. This is why horses go down before a race rather than just load at the start and why Francome advocated hacking them back down the course after they were unloaded.
 
I am fully aware of the nuances of warming horses up and down and so on. Them standing in the stalls was not for a sufficient time for them to 'stiffen up'. The reason they were unloaded was so that they were not standing still and they were walked around so that they were kept warm and their muscles moving. There is no way the jockeys would be prepared to start a Classic race on a horse that wasn't properly warmed up.
 
Gamla Stan said:
You're going to have to explain this. You said yourself that comparatively, Camelot ran a quicker second half of the race having been held up so surely he was ridden in a way which was beneficial to achieve a fast second half of the race? Homecoming Queen however was sent to the front and thus naturally will run a quicker first half and a slower second half due to her tactics.

Therefore, how on earth do her tactics equate to a fast time?! The race time is the first 4 furlongs and last 4 furlongs combined remember. :p
Click to expand...

You have understood correctly Stan.

It’s true she did slow in the final furlongs and they were coming back to her, but this is only to be expected because she ran to her extent (i.e. her capacity) in all of the separate eight furlongs. When a horse runs to its extent throughout the race it achieves the best performance in terms of time that it is capable of. Thus this is the best we could have seen from her on the day and her margin of victory is flattered.

Contrary to this Joseph restrained Camelot in the first quarter and only asked him to run in the remaining six and a bit (in which he outperformed all of the other colts in the race and in comparative terms also Homecoming Queen). Now Hamm is right (to an extent) to say that he was able to achieve this because he was asked to do nothing in the first quarter, but it is also counter to his prepotent strengths and quite admirable that he could show such flourish. Consequently I’m encouraged as to his chance in the Derby as nothing in the Guineas will be able to beat him at a mile and a half so dangers will have to come from elsewhere. Apart from a couple it seems most of these dangers are in his own yard and consequently probably not dangers as the other Ballydoyle colts will be asked to set the Derby up for Camelot.
 
Zenyatta said:
I am fully aware of the nuances of warming horses up and down and so on. Them standing in the stalls was not for a sufficient time for them to 'stiffen up'.
Click to expand...

Normally not, but they were in there for longer than you think and I suspect you are underestimating the effect, as almost everyone apart from Francome is.
 
My question is how many of us would be talking about heart rates if Aidan O'Brien hadn't of spoken to Channel 4 about it? my guess is none of us.

Think people are using it as an excuse to be honest because they can't quite believe the winners performance which in fact is quite a relatively poor time in the circumstances.

We should be praising Aidan O'Brien, last year we saw a new "way" to win a Classic and he found himself a similar horse who could achieve a similar racing style and was well worth the chance because if she didn't see out the mile then Maybe would have been closing on her coat tails.

Homecoming Queen would have a excellent chances in the future if she has a racing style like that in her locker but the fact of the matter is she will probably be beat a few times between now and end of the season due to the lack of class element.
 
Zenyatta said:
Agree to disagree. ;)
Click to expand...

The effect may be overestimated by some and underestimated by others but the fact that someone as experienced as Francome is making a big deal about it causes me to think the effect may have been underestimated.
 
Zenyatta said:
Francome is a big fan of storms in teacups.
Click to expand...

...if you say so. It seems plausible to me, as he was advocating hacking them back down the course before the race rather than after it, precisely for the reason that those that were loaded would be caught cold. I'd say he's called it with some accuracy as the two that weren't loaded were first and second.
 
Last edited:
You know your argument is on thin ice when you have to use 'John Francombe said...' to back it up! :lol:
 
That is precisely the point I contest. I fail to see how there is a big difference between those horse who were loaded and those who were not in terms of how well warmed up they were. I am not saying Francome is wrong, but the way you have expressed it overstates the case IMO, but that all the fillies were in the same position.
 
Why not make your own opinion on the matter Steve?

All I ever read you saying is quoting what other people said and going with their insights and judgments rather than your's.

Wouldn't surprise me if you wasn't entirely 100% behind what you're saying but just backing it to fight one side of the argument because you don't like some people.
 
Back
Top