Sea The Stars - Retirement Announced

I think the Racing Post had it as Good.

Would be a little bit wary over the distances given they were running two courses on the day, but it looked like they'd created a new finishing post, suggesting that they'd measured things properly.

I was quite surprised how relatively little they were kicking up in the back straight, though, seemed like very nice ground.
 
I favoured "good to soft" over "good", though it is complicated by Leopardstown's using two separate courses, something which they don't always publicise as widely as was the case on Saturday.

On the face of it, Saturday's ground was about 15 lb slower than the later races on 06/08/09 (officially "good to yielding"), 26 lb faster than the later races on 23/07/09 ("yielding to soft"), 20 lb slower than 18/06/09 ("good") and 49 lb slower than 11/06/09 ("good, good to firm in places"), imo.
 
Has the use of two courses been confined to the December festival before last Saturday, or have they done this before for a flat meeting?

Of course, they clearly move the rails around a lot independent of that.
 
I thought in the inside track look much slower than the outside track that Sea The Stars and co had. Poet had them strung out a long way from home on the softer track.

They did the same thing for last years corresponding meeting Gareth.
 
Mastercraftsman looked like he ran his race again; Kinane just went for home earlier this time because Fame and Glory had already passed Mastercraftsman.

I'm no ratings buff so can't really comment on the empirical evidence available (Does not appear like it would be easy to decipher accurately given the changed course config) but Fame and Glory has lost twice in his life, finishing second both times to Sea the Stars. Surely in any other year being unbeaten he would be early to mid 130's? He would certainly have a very similar profile to Galileo. What if Mourayan hacks up in the Leger?!
 
Desert Orchid said:
Interesting that previously STS 'couldn't possibly' have run to the mid-130s earlier because it meant Rip VW would also need to be thereabouts yet it's OK for F&G to be there and he was beaten further...
Click to expand...

I don't think Fame ran to anything like 135 in the Irish Champion and I can't have it that STS ran to 140. 4-5 lbs lower for both I'd say.
 
I have rated STS 139+ for this ad Fame And Glory is now for me a 133p, I think he run a good race in a shorter distance race than ideal.



About STS campaign
I would like to see him running in the QEII and clashing with Goldikova and Rip Van Wikle rather than in the Arc.
 
SteveM said:
I don't think Fame ran to anything like 135 in the Irish Champion and I can't have it that STS ran to 140. 4-5 lbs lower for both I'd say.
Click to expand...

What makes you think F&G didn't run to 135-ish, Steve?

I'd have thought your bullishness beforehand (no dig) meant you expected him to run to tht kind of mark given that you were pretty convinced on two counts:
a) that we'd see a far better F&G than in the Irish Derby, and
b ) that he'd beat STS, which was already mid-130s.
 
Desert Orchid said:
What makes you think F&G didn't run to 135-ish, Steve?

I'd have thought your bullishness beforehand (no dig) meant you expected him to run to tht kind of mark given that you were pretty convinced on two counts:
a) that we'd see a far better F&G than in the Irish Derby, and
b ) that he'd beat STS, which was already mid-130s.
Click to expand...

I thought 135 or 136 might be the sort of mark one of them needed to hit to win this ahead of the race. I think STS achieved that. I said that Fame was underestimated at this trip and I believe that the low 130s was more than most were expecting of him. The winner of this year's Arc may need to run to something even higher.

As things stand I do not think that this win was comparable to Dancing Brave's Arc by a long chalk. Dancing Brave ran all-out to a very high rating that day. This was won quite snugly in beating a horse that maybe ran to about 130. I wouldn't have thought that Fame ran any better in this than he did in the Irish Derby for instance. He'd need to run half a stone better to win the Arc against this sort of opposition imo.

To rate this race higher than say Peintre Celebre's Arc or Montjeu's Arc would be an insult to those two I'd say.
 
Last edited:
Dancing Brave ran all-out to a very high rating that day.

I would like to know peopole's opinion on his 140 rating ...which I assume was for his Arc win...how did he actualy..on paper..earn that mark?
 
Dancing Brave ran all-out to a very high rating that day.

I would like to know people's opinion on his 140 rating ...which I assume was for his Arc win...how did he actually..on paper..earn that mark?
Click to expand...

Interesting you should mention that, EC.

Dancing Brave's Arc was an exceptionally strong contest, packed with good horses, but people seem to forget that the horse did not massacre his rivals in terms of margins beaten, for all that he was visually impressive.

Shahrastani, a good Derby and Irish Derby winner but not an exceptional one for that period (he had since been stuffed in the King George), was 2 lengths and a short head behind him at levels. Shahrastani had an end-of-year rating of 135, which suggests that Dancing Brave ran to 138 or 139.

There was less than 8 lengths between the first 10, with that tenth horse Dihistan (a Hardwicke Stakes winner, but in the race as a pacemaker and eased when beaten) ending the year with a Timeform rating of just 122. Taking Timeform's weight-for-age scale at the time into account, this would point to Dancing Brave having run to more like 135 to 137.

The first 5 in the race were rated 132 or more (the sixth also would have been if you ignored the fillies' allowance). I suspect there would be cries of "hype" from the forum massive if the same were to happen now.

Dancing Brave also beat Shardari (134) by 3/4 length at Ascot, had some rubbish (Iades 121 and the perennial whipping boy Bold Arrangement 117) less than 6 lengths behind him in the Eclipse, was beaten in the Derby (:D) and had a horse called Vainglorious, who was rated 89 at the end of the year, less than 7 lengths behind him in the 2000 Guineas.

Personally, I did not have a problem with Dancing Brave being rated 140 at the time and do not now, despite some well-established handicapping principles seemingly having been bent to the purpose.

But I do think it shows that it is possible to pick holes in any form - well, almost any form - if you try hard enough.

This year's Irish Champion Stakes may prove to be an exception.
 
Last edited:
J Alfred Prufrock said:
Shahrastani, a good Derby and Irish Derby winner but not an exceptional one for that period (he had since been stuffed in the King George), was 2 lengths and a short head behind him at levels. Shahrastani had an end-of-year rating of 135, which suggests that Dancing Brave ran to 138 or 139.
Click to expand...

Shahrastani was a good half length behind Bering and with DB eased close home he was certainly value for 3 lengths imo. Bering was rated 136 by Timeform and was passed with ease. 140 was spot on and there are certainly far fewer questions with this rating than Shergar's.
 
"Eased"? Eddery only put his hands down two strides from the line.

A long-looking 1½ lengths, though, it has to be said.

It is a period I remember pretty well, having started working in racing only a few months before. Shahrastani was not unlike Fame And Glory: an easy classic trial winner, second-best in the Derby to you-know-who and a runaway Irish Derby winner.

His proximity, and that of others in an Arc in which the first 10 were covered by less than 8 lengths, was not enough for people to poo-poo Dancing Brave's 140 rating. Correctly, imo.

Quite what Sea The Stars needs to do to be accorded the same treatment is not clear. Become British and "conquer" in a foreign field, perhaps?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCucJx2vL-k
 
Galileo said:
I thought in the inside track look much slower than the outside track that Sea The Stars and co had. Poet had them strung out a long way from home on the softer track.

They did the same thing for last years corresponding meeting Gareth.
Click to expand...

Kevin Manning said it was "slow" inside.
 
I was glad to see, Sheikh, that your going inspections last week paid off for you in the shape of a bet on STS at juicy odds. It was on the strength of your bulletins and Aidan's reports that I had a little go myself on Wednesday night.
 
Grey said:
I was glad to see, Sheikh, that your going inspections last week paid off for you in the shape of a bet on STS at juicy odds. It was on the strength of your bulletins and Aidan's reports that I had a little go myself on Wednesday night.
Click to expand...

Thanks Grey, I had a few bob on as it would have been irresponsible to let the price go but the real thrill was watching History happen before my eyes. The added bonus was that everyone knew it and responded to the presence of a superstar . A very special days racing.

Chabal looks one to follow too.
 
Grey said:
I was glad to see, Sheikh, that your going inspections last week paid off for you in the shape of a bet on STS at juicy odds. It was on the strength of your bulletins and Aidan's reports that I had a little go myself on Wednesday night.
Click to expand...

Same for me mate. Many thanks:)
 
J Alfred Prufrock said:
A long-looking 1½ lengths, though, it has to be said.




His proximity, and that of others in an Arc in which the first 10 were covered by less than 8 lengths, was not enough for people to poo-poo Dancing Brave's 140 rating. Correctly, imo.
Click to expand...


The victory margin was 2 lengths, that's plain to see if you watch the Youtube clip of the race and pause it as DB crosses the line. Any horse that takes the lead as far into the final furlong as he did that day and wins by more than a length and a half has a lot in hand - it's the key thing I look for when punting on handicaps as the assessor hardly ever puts horses up as much as he should do in those circumstances.

The weights and measures brigade will say he won by so much so that's 3lb's or whatever. But how much weight would Bering have needed to receive from Dancing Brave for the result to be reversed? I'd say nearer 5 or 6lb.
 
It's misleading to think that a horse who comes from the back, and wins like Dancing Brave did had(or has) an awful lot in hand. Maybe he did, but he would have saved a lot of enery racing at the back the way he did in comparison with those who raced more prominently.
 
Well, they didn't go too fast up front - DB was the only horse who came from the rear. We see horses finish fast running up the outside in virtually every Arc - White Muzzle, Bago, Ouija Board. But they rarely win - especially by two lengths.
 
J Alfred Prufrock said:
Quite what Sea The Stars needs to do to be accorded the same treatment is not clear. Become British and "conquer" in a foreign field, perhaps?
Click to expand...

Why not.:) While STS won wonderfully well in Ireland, Timeform has lost its head in rating this around 140. It is very rare for a 3-y-o to break 130 and they would have us believe at least two of them did that here substantially. While Fame may have run to about 130 and Fame to about 135 Timeform are out on a limb here and I believe gushingly wrong.
 
Last edited:
I would have thought you of all people would support this theory as it would back up your own view of Fame and Glory??! :blink: STS is exceptional, why can't people just accept that!!!
 
Back
Top