Road to the 2014 Cheltenham Gold Cup
- Thread starter SteveM
- Start date
Desert Orchid
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2005
- Messages
- 25,014
Best Mate's Gold Cups:
2002
Best Mate beat two rank outsiders, both of which had been out of form that season, in Commanche Court and See More Business. The favourite, Looks Like Trouble suffered a tendon injury and the second favourite Bacchanal couldn't handle the fast ground. The time was ok - about as far ahead of the foxhunters as you'd want. I had BM on a recent best of 174 going into the race but I don't think he needed to hit that to win. I have him on 170+ for it.
2003
If you're wondering about how certain horses can be over-rated, try this one. RPR gave Best Mate 188+ for this performance; for beating the 151-rated 33/1 shot Truckers Tavern 10 lengths! The 40/1 shot Harbour Pilot was next home from the 160-rated Valley Henry. Second-favourite Beef Or Salmon we know with hindsight never really performed over here. Commanche Court was third-favourite having been trained for the race but never got into it. Best Mate won quite easily, though, and I have him on 175+ for it.
2004
Best Mate was driven out to beat the 155-rated Sir Rembrandt (33/1). Again, the second-favourite Therealbandit failed to run his race (tailed off) and the third-favourite was Beef Or Salmon who could only plod on for fourth behind Harbour Pilot (20/1). This, for me, was the least impressive of his three wins but the time was commensurately faster (45lbs) than the foxhunters won by Earthmover (OR 124). I rated Best Mate 169+ for this, the plus because he was hampered when making his move and because I suspected Earthmover was a wee bit better than a 124 horse. With the second third and fourth earning ratings (from me) of 168, 167 and 166, it was hardly a vintage renewal.
So, over the three years, Best Mate never had to beat anything of significance. He was convincing in at least two of the races but he wouldn't have been placed in some of the better Gold Cups.
2002
Best Mate beat two rank outsiders, both of which had been out of form that season, in Commanche Court and See More Business. The favourite, Looks Like Trouble suffered a tendon injury and the second favourite Bacchanal couldn't handle the fast ground. The time was ok - about as far ahead of the foxhunters as you'd want. I had BM on a recent best of 174 going into the race but I don't think he needed to hit that to win. I have him on 170+ for it.
2003
If you're wondering about how certain horses can be over-rated, try this one. RPR gave Best Mate 188+ for this performance; for beating the 151-rated 33/1 shot Truckers Tavern 10 lengths! The 40/1 shot Harbour Pilot was next home from the 160-rated Valley Henry. Second-favourite Beef Or Salmon we know with hindsight never really performed over here. Commanche Court was third-favourite having been trained for the race but never got into it. Best Mate won quite easily, though, and I have him on 175+ for it.
2004
Best Mate was driven out to beat the 155-rated Sir Rembrandt (33/1). Again, the second-favourite Therealbandit failed to run his race (tailed off) and the third-favourite was Beef Or Salmon who could only plod on for fourth behind Harbour Pilot (20/1). This, for me, was the least impressive of his three wins but the time was commensurately faster (45lbs) than the foxhunters won by Earthmover (OR 124). I rated Best Mate 169+ for this, the plus because he was hampered when making his move and because I suspected Earthmover was a wee bit better than a 124 horse. With the second third and fourth earning ratings (from me) of 168, 167 and 166, it was hardly a vintage renewal.
So, over the three years, Best Mate never had to beat anything of significance. He was convincing in at least two of the races but he wouldn't have been placed in some of the better Gold Cups.
Last edited:
With respect - that shows how ratings can just lead people up the garden path at this level .
It ignores :
1 He won 3 Gold Cups and the level of ability required to come back and win repeat Gold Cups - it really will not do to suggest he was simply lucky to come up against three weak fields. If that was the case there should be a hatful of multiple GC winners
2 It is no good to dismiss the races on the basis that the most fancied opponents did not perform. The reason the majority did not perform is that they were outclassed and suffered from trying to make a race of it with Best Mate and fell apart allowing other horses to pick up the pieces with the exception of LLT in the 2002 race who went wrong . Commanche Court had been trained to the minute in 2002 and I clearly recall Ted and Ruby Walsh having been very confident and a bit shell shocked afterwards. See More Business was so out of form he had thrashed the 150 rated Upgrade by 30 lengths the month before at Wincanton .
Consider - Valley Henry for example tried to make a race of it and fell in a heap . Behrajan rated 164 in the same race also fell apart after trying to take Best Mate on .Marlborough at 168 also beaten out of sight . In 2004 First Gold was still rated 163 and was well beaten in fifth and Keen Leader rated 165 beaten a distance. In 2002 amongst the also rans - Florida Pearl rated 170 beaten far further in that GC than ever before , Alexander Banquet the Irish Hennessy winner a well beaten sixth - other 160-165 horses- Lord Noelie, Behrajan, Shooting Light , Cyfor Malta( who was to show his rating of 155 wrong at Aintree) - completely out with the washing.
3 The 2004 edition was a gruelling race run on soft ground . First Gold set a really good gallop and Sir Rembrandt and Beefy were enormously flattered and ran on when the front three were tiring.
Last edited:
This is exactly what you have done with this years race. Dismissing them based on the fact that there were mid 150 horses in the finish. So, we'll use ratings when it suits the argument and dismiss them when they dont. Trying to make sure that you are never wrong, without looking at anything objectively.
You are not comparing like with like at all. SC and BW did not perform up to their abilities but if you think that had anything to do with the quality of the competition then I suggest your views are misconceived.
In Best Mate's GCs these horses were beaten well before the home turn rather than not quickening as expected or running about a bit in the final 100yds.
Desert Orchid
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2005
- Messages
- 25,014
The race can be a gruelling one so for him to win it three times is, I accept, a genuinely rare feat but you have to take each race on its merits and the bottom line is nothing he beat should ever have been near a Gold Cup.
If anything, it was Best Mate picking up the pieces. In both 2002 & 2003 he was held up in rear (a la Lord Windermere but maybe not as detached).
He was mid-div as I recall it . I would certainly accept that had Culloty ridden him with more restraint in 2004 he might well have won more easily. I have never seen a horse travel as well and jump as well as he did in those Gold Cups.
I don't think one can say that See More Business, First Gold, Florida Pearl, Beef or Salmon, for example should never have been near a Gold Cup - indeed I would fancy quite a few of the horses he beat to have won on Friday !
One could say that Arkle beat little in 1966 but that would mean nothing.
Last edited:
EC1
On a break
yes indeed...if those were bad GC's with those horses in them..then can someone explain how you would get better fields?
they were easy GC's??...are we really sure on this?
No , not at all - which is my point . They may not have been stuffed with 170 plus rated horses but the recent shift upwards in ratings does appear to be heavily influenced by the Long Run 2011 rating debacle. Best Mate's GCs included lots of very good horses but it is true that seldom did they chase him home but I put that down to how they were out on his feet and horses came from the rear Truckers Tavern,Sir Rembrandt and Beefy etc when the others had cried enough. Take Best Mate out of those races and I think one might have seen quite different results in 2003 and 2004 for a start.
EC1
On a break
yes i knew it was your point..was directing at anyone thinks that they were below par races
Desert Orchid
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2005
- Messages
- 25,014
Form book comment for 2002 & 2003: Held up in rear.
2002
Beat horses rated 160, 162 & 153.
2003
Beat horses rated 151, 160 and 164
2004
Beat horses rated 155 (Sir R), 165 (non-stayer Keen Leader) and 150 (2nd fav!! Therealbandit)
Compare Long Run
Beat Denman (174), Kauto Star (174) and What A Friend (159) with 163, 166 and 168 horses further back. What A Friend went up to 169 for that.
Also, that year when the 'big two' went on turning for home we all thought the race of the century was on, only for Long Run to sweep past them. The race probably left its mark on all of them.
Long Run's rating is entirely justified.
Last edited:
EC1
On a break
LR rating isn't justified imo...remove the big guns...who for differing reasons weren't that big at that point and you have What A Friend [160 rated for a long time...he went up to 169 wrongly to make LR rating justified] putting the mark to the race..its no good using lower rated horses in one race and ignoring them in another...thats if we want to use this method of rating ...which i think only tells a part story
you are ignoring the effect of pace ...its not a winner's fault that good horses didn't run their races...very fast or very slow pace will bring horses together at the end that an even pace will stretch out to show true superiority
Last edited:
Desert Orchid
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2005
- Messages
- 25,014
Just checked the Youtube footage.
BM was in the latter third of the field in 02 and 03 (carbon copy ride) and in the front third/half in 04 in a smaller field.
BM was in the latter third of the field in 02 and 03 (carbon copy ride) and in the front third/half in 04 in a smaller field.
When I was a kid a good friend used to play his own subbetteo tournaments. He supported Chelsea and guess which team won every time. He was adamant there was no bias
Point is that a lot of ratings seem to start from a premis and then build the argument around it.
I am very much with ardross here however and one thing I will say for certain it is hard to think of any recent staying chaser who jumped better and of many that have travelled more strongly or with such smooth purpose. He had class
Ratings may be geared to "prove" that he was barely a handicapper but frankly that simply doesn't weigh up against the very experience of watching him
Jump racing is not like 2year old sprints and impressions of a horses very racing count for a lot
Point is that a lot of ratings seem to start from a premis and then build the argument around it.
I am very much with ardross here however and one thing I will say for certain it is hard to think of any recent staying chaser who jumped better and of many that have travelled more strongly or with such smooth purpose. He had class
Ratings may be geared to "prove" that he was barely a handicapper but frankly that simply doesn't weigh up against the very experience of watching him
Jump racing is not like 2year old sprints and impressions of a horses very racing count for a lot
Last edited:
I think its is absurd to suggest that Denman or Kauto ran to form in that race. Denman was rated only 3lb lower for being stuffed by Diamond Harry and Burton Port than he was for beating What a Friend giving him lumps of weight. I believe he was a 10-12lb lower in reality between the two Hennessys . He was then beaten at Aintree and retired .
Kauto had been ill at Christmas . Is there really anyone in the world who thinks Riverside Theatre was a better horse than him and although he ran well for a long time blew up off the home turn hence him struggling home just in front of What a Friend . That autumn when nearly 12 he twice slapped Long Run all over the place .
The ratings inflation was already present . Neptune Collonges and Tidal Bay were given silly ratings for the Argento . NC was almost certainly only a high 150s horse by then . Pandorama was given an absurd 166 .
Long Run's rating is grossly inflated .
Last edited:
EC1
On a break
What A Friend's OHR's
a classic case of a horse with a short term falsely inflated rating
157
153
152
159
159
159
159
156
169
165
162
161
157
doesn't really fit does it?
a classic case of a horse with a short term falsely inflated rating
157
153
152
159
159
159
159
156
169
165
162
161
157
doesn't really fit does it?
Last edited:
Desert Orchid
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2005
- Messages
- 25,014
What A Friend was blinkered for the first time that day and ran out of his skin.
He went up to 169 for his Gold Cup effort but became unreliable. I can see the case for his proximity bringing down Long Run's rating but take him out and there would have been little argument about the figures with Midnight Chase (163), Tidal Bay (166), Pandorama (166) and Neptune Collonges (168) all in behind and all staying on.
Last edited:
Grasshopper
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 16,050
Best Mate was a significantly better Gold Cup winner than Kicking King, Long Run and Syncronised, all of whom were awarded unreasonably high-marks in comparison. If Beef or Salmon had ever run his race at Cheltenham, I think he would have been awarded a more appropriate mark- his rating was possibly held-down a touch by the only real form threat never serving it up to him.
Also agree with clivex about his jumping (Hen and Terry certainly knew how to school them), and the way he travelled through his races. He was a pretty tremendous steeplechaser.
Also agree with clivex about his jumping (Hen and Terry certainly knew how to school them), and the way he travelled through his races. He was a pretty tremendous steeplechaser.
Last edited:
EC1
On a break
we can't start taking horses out though DO because they don't suit...or we will be playing all year with this
WAF wore headgear after that run and his rating still spiralled back to the mean
Last edited:
EC1
On a break
thats a good point about BOS..if he had performed at Cheltenham we would have had really interesting times
All four of those ratings are unreliable ! NC was given a big hike for winning the Argento . Tidal Bay was nowhere near as good a staying chaser in those days Nicholls has improved him no end . Midnight Chase was not a 163 horse and Pandorama was given a big hike for beating Joncol in mud .
Harbinger
At the Start
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2004
- Messages
- 11,282
I'm in the Long Run's Gold Cup win was over-rated (via What A Friend) camp also. Not enough credence was given to how badly out of form Kauto and Denman were at the time (of course Kauto came back just long enough to put Long Run in his place).
EC1
On a break
These are the pace scenarios of the GC's i've got
2014 Lord Windermere 106.7
2013 Bobs Worth 100.2
2012 Synchronised 106.3
2011 Long Run 104.2
2010 Imperial Commander 103.6
2009 Kauto Star 104.8
2008 Denman 97.3
2007 Kauto Star 107.5
2006 War Of Attrition 107.6
2004 Best Mate 99.5
2003 Best Mate 104.1
2002 Best Mate 103.8
median pace figure for even pace works out at 103% to 104%..lower than that is a faster race early...above that is a slower early pace.
Looking at the extremes...Denman in 2008...a real stamina sapping test...then the other extreme..Kauto Star & War Of Attrition where speed won the day
Best Mate...won both types of pace scenario
This years race is more speed than stamina
2014 Lord Windermere 106.7
2013 Bobs Worth 100.2
2012 Synchronised 106.3
2011 Long Run 104.2
2010 Imperial Commander 103.6
2009 Kauto Star 104.8
2008 Denman 97.3
2007 Kauto Star 107.5
2006 War Of Attrition 107.6
2004 Best Mate 99.5
2003 Best Mate 104.1
2002 Best Mate 103.8
median pace figure for even pace works out at 103% to 104%..lower than that is a faster race early...above that is a slower early pace.
Looking at the extremes...Denman in 2008...a real stamina sapping test...then the other extreme..Kauto Star & War Of Attrition where speed won the day
Best Mate...won both types of pace scenario
This years race is more speed than stamina
Last edited:
The 2004 race is very interesting. It was Best Mate's narrowest win . It had rained all morning and Thierry Doumen clearly had decided that Best Mate was most vulnerable by going a very good gallop in softening conditions . They did not let up and it explains why Beefy ran much his best race at Cheltenham having completely lost his place he charged up the hill as he so often did when conditions were hard in Ireland. It also allowed out and out staying chaser Sir Rembrandt to run on into second.
Best Mate did not merely win three Gold Cups but three races that posed distinctly different challenges to him .
Best Mate did not merely win three Gold Cups but three races that posed distinctly different challenges to him .
Last edited:
Desert Orchid
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2005
- Messages
- 25,014
A rating of 175+ hardly makes him just a handicapper. My point is that he would have come up short in a good few Gold Cups.