swedish chef
At the Start
I've thought of it a couple of times but it would take months trawling through all the posts on this site - plus the amount of times I've roared with laughter over posts on here you'd have to make it top 500 me thinks.
Road To The Champion Hurdle
- Thread starter Guest_
- Start date
I've thought of it a couple of times but it would take months trawling through all the posts on this site - plus the amount of times I've roared with laughter over posts on here you'd have to make it top 500 me thinks.
Grasshopper
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 16,050
EC1
On a break
top bombing David:lol:
Bar the Bull
At the Start
Well worked.
Irish Stamp
Forum Moderator
Waiting till it gets dark....Topper, DJ. :lol:
Where's trackside?
rorydelargy
At the Start
Get your money back while you can Simon. Unless you've backed him at a million, which I doubt.
rorydelargy
At the Start
I genuinely thought that GMOOH might have been lined up for a repeat bid in the Totesport Trophy earlier in the season (and said so after the Greatwood where I reckoned he was allowed to run himself out rather than in it to win), but Jonjo couldn't be colder at the moment as a look at his stats for the last fortnight shows. He had one trade odds on in running yesterday (Viking Visitor - BSP 3.8) that stopped so quickly it was tailed off, and that's been the story with most of his of late. Knowing Jonjo, he'll find form just in time to land a couple of handicaps at the Festival, but a Champion Hurdle for GMOOH is an absolute impossibility.
Euronymous
Senior Jockey
Has Celestial Halo regressed that much? It could be argued that he's always been a bit overrated and paceless and that his presence in the frame the last couple of years devalues the form of both Champion Hurdles he's run in and points to Binocular being a favourite well worth taking on.
EC1
On a break
fookin hell..we will have Champion Hurdlers winners rated 150 in a bit..whilst GC winners knock in 180+'s like Phil Taylor:blink:
if CH's are so easy to win..I wonder why trainers bother any more with the Supreme Novice ..just send them straight to the CH..its a gimme.
Euronymous
Senior Jockey
Go Native and Solwhit running below form kind of handed the race to Binocular last year. A true 170 hurdler would have put more distance between himself and Zaynar given that McCoy went for him quite early.
EC1
On a break
Zaynar was rated 168 going into the CH..so beating him 9.5 lengths makes Binocular a 177
yes i know..Zaynar is bound to be another one of those horses that the Handicapper got wrong..so lets say the Handicapper is a fool again and we say he was only a 164..its still makes Binocular over a 170 horse
starluck a 160 horse beaten 12 by Binocular..again makes B 170+
is Starluck another one thats overrated as well?
i sometimes think i've got a different form book or summat
come on..if HF had won last years CH in the same fashion he would be being lauded as a 175 horse here
Last edited:
Euronymous
Senior Jockey
EC1
On a break
you got some imagination Euro re HF..you didn't argue the 175 point though
so lets get this right..Zaynar..CelestialH ..both well overrated by the handicapper..you forgot Starluck..he'll be another one I bet
i can't believe you getting no stick here..anyone that gets Binocular at less than 170 for the CH run doesn't know how to handicap imo
this is so biased against Binocular I can't get me breath
Last edited:
Euronymous
Senior Jockey
Well. you painted the picture re HF winning last year's race, I was just telling you how he'd have done it.
The form of last year's CH has not worked out, that is plain to see. And Binocular's price, the fact that this is a better renewal, and his inconsistency point to him being a favourite worth taking on.
The form of last year's CH has not worked out, that is plain to see. And Binocular's price, the fact that this is a better renewal, and his inconsistency point to him being a favourite worth taking on.
EC1
On a break
not answered any points there..thats waffly Euro
i painted the picture to highlight how people rate horses depending on their bias..HF would have been lauded as the new Isty..and been lofted a 175 on this forum alone
Last edited:
Grasshopper
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 16,050
Zaynar was rated 168 going into the CH..so beating him 9.5 lengths makes Binocular a 177
yes i know..Zaynar is bound to be another one of those horses that the Handicapper got wrong..so lets say the Handicapper is a fool again and we say he was only a 164..its still makes Binocular over a 170 horse
starluck a 160 horse beaten 12 by Binocular..again makes B 170+
is Starluck another one thats overrated as well?
i sometimes think i've got a different form book or summat
come on..if HF had won last years CH in the same fashion he would be being lauded as a 175 horse here
And what race did Zaynar get his 168 in, EC1? A race over 21f in bottomless ground, that's where.
Just because a horse is given a rating, doesn't mean that it can or will run to it every time. Trip, ground, well-being, track, stable form - all of these factors need to be taken into consideration. If all criteria are met, then a horse is potentially capable of running to it's mark. If they aren't met, then a horse may find it tough.
IMO, yes - the handicapper got it wrong with his 168. That rating is the stamp of a horse with Champion Hurdle winning class, not one of a horse who gets turned over at 1/14 in a 2m race at Kelso. The error is only further compounded when you buy the theory that the Champion Hurdle provided a set of circumstances where Zaynar could run up to his very best.
Your interpretation is far too simplistic, and your apparent belief in the infallability of the Official Handicapper somewhat eye-watering, I have to say.
Grasshopper
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 16,050
Here's the rub, EC1.
It's only really hindsight that affords us perspective. Practically everyone thought that Binocular's form was well up there last year - him generally being rated anywhere between 168 and 175 across various forums (fora? Dunno, ask Graysons).
But hindsight suggests that the race was perhaps not all that clever. A re-assessment is not only necessary, it should really be mandatory for anyone looking to have a bet in this year's Champion Hurdle.
If Hurricane Fly wins this Champion Hurdle by a half-dozen lengths, there will be no-one (and I mean no-one) more delighted than me. I might even be inclined to toss ratings numbers around like confetti.
But if we get to February 2012, and the form of the Champion Hurdle hasn't stood-up, I'm not going to be sticking with him limpet-like - because that would make me a muppet.
:blink:
EC1
On a break
And what race did Zaynar get his 168 in, EC1? A race over 21f in bottomless ground, that's where.
Just because a horse is given a rating, doesn't mean that it can or will run to it every time. Trip, ground, well-being, track, stable form - all of these factors need to be taken into consideration. If all criteria are met, then a horse is potentially capable of running to it's mark. If they aren't met, then a horse may find it tough.
IMO, yes - the handicapper got it wrong with his 168. That rating is the stamp of a horse with Champion Hurdle winning class, not one of a horse who gets turned over at 1/14 in a 2m race at Kelso. The error is only further compounded when you buy the theory that the Champion Hurdle provided a set of circumstances where Zaynar could run up to his very best.
Your interpretation is far too simplistic, and your apparent belief in the infallability of the Official Handicapper somewhat eye-watering, I have to say.
You missed out Starluck..lets be knowing how he ran a full stone below his beat in the CH
go on..he's unreliable too isn't he
if these horses were so unsuited to the CH that they were guaranteed to run a stone below their best then wtf where they even there for?
I know all about Zaynar..but you talk like because he wants miles further..his rating means diddly squat re the CH..that isn't true is it?..he was 13/2..not 50/1..his chance was as a good as any other horse in the race.
if he has run 5lb below his best..its still a good CH..you talk as though the CH is some flat track speed test..there are many 2.5 mile horses appreciate the 2m at Cheltenham
its all too easy to say Zaynar never had a prayer in the cH..but thats not the case
i've conceded in the first post that he didn't run a 168..but your assertion he has run way below his best is naive form reading imo.
EC1
On a break
I don't particular subscribe to this post Cheltenham form analysis stuff Grass though
its not like its a 2000 guineas where horses have run once or twice..with lots more potential
this isn't the case at Cheltenham..we don't need to know subsequent runs because.. we already have a very good handle on the day of what horses are capable of
your post race changing of a race's rating completely ignores the fact that a horse might not be the same horse 6 months after the CH..you are rating a race well after it has been run which is flawed imo.
In a CH or GC..its quite easy to rate on the day..with the horses in that abilty window that they have shown up to that point..what they are rated 6 months later has no bearing on the strength of that race
those ratings just after the race are far more accurate than the ratings being thrown up now here
just because CelestialH isn't the same horse now..does not make him poor in that race..time has passed..things change.
lets say that since Celestial ran in a CH.. his form really nose dived..and he could only win a claiming hurdle..would you then go back and say..well that ChampionH must only be rated 120 now because Celestial is only a claiming hurdler?
it doesn't add up does it really?..not very good logic?
ratings on the day are key..not months afterwards
Last edited:
Grasshopper
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 16,050
EC1, you do know it's impossible for me to debate with a man that isn't listening? Even more difficult than that, to debate with someone who puts words in my mouth.
Perhaps my second post might make my point clearer to you (though I wouldn't necessarily bet on it).
Perhaps my second post might make my point clearer to you (though I wouldn't necessarily bet on it).
Grasshopper
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 16,050
Bar the Bull
At the Start
Cheltenham isn't Starluck's track. Simples.
Grasshopper
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 16,050
No, but I'd like to think I would say "Hold on a minute.......Celestial Halo has let the form down badly. What have the rest done?", at which point I would look at Zaynar...........and then Kyber Kim...........and then Go Native.............and then Starluck................and then - if I'd hung a 175 round Binocluar's neck - I'd say "Fu*ck".
I might go even further to look at the recent Fighting Fifth, and wonder whether I might have rated Peddlars Cross too highly. Who knows.
What I wouldn't do is say "Bollocks to it. Recent form is irrelevant - Binocular only has to turn up".