Royal Ascot Day 1

EC1 said:
he always does have doesn't he?

he would only beat a 90 horse by a length..its how he is
Click to expand...

Nowadays yes - not when he was a 2 year old !!! :lol:

Hughes put his whip down 100yds out .
 
Last edited:
This is what i got today re speed figures for the anoraks amongst you

Ascot 14 June 2011

120 CANFORD CLIFFS
118 PROHIBIT
117 FRANKEL
106 POWER
108 FREDERICK ENGELS
87 VEILED

no wfa added

Going +25lbs per mile: Good/Firm

I did Veiled's race just to give a bit more data..both the 2yo races are fast figures for this time of year
 
Last edited:
chroniclandlord said:
I don't think that the overweight made any difference either.
Click to expand...

don't get me wrong..any weight extra is ..no help..but CC was cozy near the line..had to work to get there definately..but once he hits that top speed he just cruises.

i'd rather have peslier with extra weight than someone less able riding
 
Last edited:
Totally agree with that, he's a world class jockey. Pretty silly not to do the correct weight and a little unprofessional but it made no difference to the result.

Didn't Warbler write something up on here challenging the status quo on pounds per lengths? It was very interesting and basically argued that 1 pound isn't going to stop a half ton animal from running a length slower etc. Makes perfect sense when you think about it.
 
It's not just 2lb, though, it's 2lb over the course of the entire race.

And 1 length isn't exactly very far - its 0.17 of a second, which in this case is 0.17% of the entire race.

And if an average throughbred weights 1100 pounds and has another 126 on board, then 2lbs is 0.16% of the entire weight of the horse.

So you can see where the relationship came from, although in reality its surely far more complex than that.
 
Gareth Flynn said:
So you can see where the relationship came from, although in reality its surely far more complex than that.
Click to expand...

Very good points although that's surely an argument for times to be used in everyday handicapping a lot more. Indeed it is easy to see where the relationship came from but it's not as black and white as is made out. It infuriates me when "pundits" say that if a jockey hadn't put a pound overweight up when it's beaten a head in a handicap then it "would have made all the difference" etc.

This is a topic that Mordin covers quite well in his books to be fair to him (I know he's a divisive figure on here!) but the chapter on calculating weight is pretty interesting and well worth digging out on Google Books.
 
I watch a fair bit of American racing and one of the top analysts always says that weight doesn't matter in American racing.
 
LUKE said:
I watch a fair bit of American racing and one of the top analysts always says that weight doesn't matter in American racing.
Click to expand...

That's bullshit. If that's the case then why prescribe weights in non handicaps. Let the connections decide what weight their horses carry...
It pisses me off that overweights are not communicated to the wider public earlier and more clearly. Joseph O'Brien has put up overweight pretty consistently this season - most recently when beaten half a lenght whilst carrying 3 lbs overweight at Leopardstown. I believe this does make a substantial difference to both the horses performance and the betting publics likely decisions. With 24 hr decs here and mostly evening meetings taking place the jocks know what weight they have to do fully 30 hrs before they ride. If the jockey cannot do the weight he shouldn't be allowed ride on the race, end of.
 
The point relates to American racing OTB where pace is the major factor and the range of weight in the average race isn't as great as it is on this side of the Atlantic.
 
Gareth Flynn said:
It's not just 2lb, though, it's 2lb over the course of the entire race.

And 1 length isn't exactly very far - its 0.17 of a second, which in this case is 0.17% of the entire race.

And if an average throughbred weights 1100 pounds and has another 126 on board, then 2lbs is 0.16% of the entire weight of the horse.

So you can see where the relationship came from, although in reality its surely far more complex than that.
Click to expand...

Good post. Anyone who thinks weight doesn't stop horses is missing a very basic point about horses, horse racing and basic science - this one I'm afraid isn't a point to be debated - it is a stone cold fact.

Debating on the difference the weight may have made in terms of what Canford Cliffs could have done had Goldikova a couple of pounds less on her back is another point ..
 
Last edited:
Gamla Stan said:
Totally agree with that, he's a world class jockey. Pretty silly not to do the correct weight and a little unprofessional but it made no difference to the result.

Didn't Warbler write something up on here challenging the status quo on pounds per lengths? It was very interesting and basically argued that 1 pound isn't going to stop a half ton animal from running a length slower etc. Makes perfect sense when you think about it.
Click to expand...

Warbler was a bit mad and is the forum equivalent of Nick Mordin (best ignored despite the once a year good point). That ignores modern science and is completely nonsensical.
 
Last edited:
Have to say don't think it was Tom's finest hour. Clearly no need to quicken up as early as he did, could easily have waited to the turn as per Royal Lodge. Still we learned some more today, he settled very well. I'm sure people will be quick to knock the performance because of the last furlong, but we must remember though Frankel is an awesome horse, he is not a machine. Personally I hope connections stick to 1m and the Sussex, no doubt the "Hannon Hype" will go into overdrive , but I know where my money will be going. My lasting memory of the race will be when Frankel did quicken, fully 5f out, watch Hughes and Dubawi Gold try to stay with him.. said it all for me..
 
Interestingly , from the great man's website " Cecil said: “Any win at Royal Ascot is lovely. That was a bit nerve-wracking and it didn’t go to plan. The plan was to go just before the bend - like the Royal Lodge when he sprinted away.”
 
Hamm said:
Warbler was a bit mad and is the forum equivalent of Nick Mordin (best ignored despite the once a year good point). That ignores modern science and is completely nonsensical.
Click to expand...

thats very unfair imo..he spotted some very good big race winners..before many people did

the forum is a poorer place without him

thats also a fact
 
That post was meant partly in jest; it's often nice to read opinions miles different from your own, but I dislike opinions that are contrarian just for the sake of it.
 
Back
Top