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

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.

<blockquote data-quote="EC1" data-source="post: 2280986" data-attributes="member: 65360">You missed out Starluck..lets be knowing how he ran a full stone below his beat in the CH<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />&nbsp;go on..he&#039;s unreliable too isn&#039;t he <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />&nbsp;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?&nbsp;I know all about Zaynar..but you talk like because he wants miles further..his rating means diddly squat re the CH..that isn&#039;t true is it?..he was 13/2..not 50/1..his chance was as a good as any other horse in the race.&nbsp;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&nbsp;its all too easy to say Zaynar never had a prayer in the cH..but thats not the case&nbsp;i&#039;ve conceded in the first post that he didn&#039;t run a 168..but your assertion he has run way below his best is naive form reading imo.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="EC1, post: 2280986, member: 65360"] 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. [/QUOTE]

Verification: 5 + 3 = ?