REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do much without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view all discussions - and most importantly, you haven't joined our community. What are you waiting for? Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Join Talking Horses here!

Reply to thread

Message

Getting back to Frankel's performance in the Guineas, I had an IT mate of mine put up the replay on a big screen in one of the conference rooms at lunch yesterday (no comments please...) and watched it back a few times.

Couldn't resist at least a crude attempt at some sort of sectionals given the nature of the race. What we came up with was that Frankel ran the last 4f to the line in 52.1/51.2 seconds. Given any substantial outlier of this nature I would always tend to err towards the conservative (52.1 in this case), which would mean that Frankel ran the first four furlongs at Newmarket in 45.2 seconds! Whilst it is obviously difficult to be precise I would certainly be confident that that figure isn't out by any more than 0.3, meaning he has run no slower than 45.5 and quite possibly faster than 45.2.

Of course that does not take into account the nature of the track (is the Rowley slightly downhill through the first half mile I wonder?) and we could presumably expect the last half mile to be slower given the rise to the line, but it is still pretty extraordinary I would say!

Roll on Royal Ascot!

<blockquote data-quote="trackside528" data-source="post: 2305989" data-attributes="member: 65311">Getting back to Frankel&#039;s performance in the Guineas, I had an IT mate of mine put up the replay on a big screen in one of the conference rooms at lunch yesterday (no comments please...) and watched it back a few times.Couldn&#039;t resist at least a crude attempt at some sort of sectionals given the nature of the race. What we came up with was that Frankel ran the last 4f to the line in 52.1/51.2 seconds. Given any substantial outlier of this nature I would always tend to err towards the conservative (52.1 in this case), which would mean that Frankel ran the first four furlongs at Newmarket in 45.2 seconds! Whilst it is obviously difficult to be precise I would certainly be confident that that figure isn&#039;t out by any more than 0.3, meaning he has run no slower than 45.5 and quite possibly faster than 45.2. Of course that does not take into account the nature of the track (is the Rowley slightly downhill through the first half mile I wonder?) and we could presumably expect the last half mile to be slower given the rise to the line, but it is still pretty extraordinary I would say!Roll on Royal Ascot!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="trackside528, post: 2305989, member: 65311"] Getting back to Frankel's performance in the Guineas, I had an IT mate of mine put up the replay on a big screen in one of the conference rooms at lunch yesterday (no comments please...) and watched it back a few times. Couldn't resist at least a crude attempt at some sort of sectionals given the nature of the race. What we came up with was that Frankel ran the last 4f to the line in 52.1/51.2 seconds. Given any substantial outlier of this nature I would always tend to err towards the conservative (52.1 in this case), which would mean that Frankel ran the first four furlongs at Newmarket in 45.2 seconds! Whilst it is obviously difficult to be precise I would certainly be confident that that figure isn't out by any more than 0.3, meaning he has run no slower than 45.5 and quite possibly faster than 45.2. Of course that does not take into account the nature of the track (is the Rowley slightly downhill through the first half mile I wonder?) and we could presumably expect the last half mile to be slower given the rise to the line, but it is still pretty extraordinary I would say! Roll on Royal Ascot! [/QUOTE]

Verification: 5 + 3 = ?