Sublimity
- Thread starter eric c
- Start date
Useful-I don't want to be dragging the arguement out because basically I stand to win a fair amount on Sizing Europe and that matters more to me then winning an arguement on here.
Getting back to Mordin -the Irish Field article is the same as the website one-obviously vehicles for his premium phoneline.The bottomline is that SE carried a stone more and ran the distance 6 seconds faster despite having the race shot to pieces some way out.It always been my opinion that horses are ridden to win races and not to impress clockwatcers.The clock can be a source of misinformation -someone on TRF recently used the clock to compare Desert Orchids King George victories with Kauto Stars.Nearly 20 years apart and some major work on the track didn't matter.
Getting back to Mordin -the Irish Field article is the same as the website one-obviously vehicles for his premium phoneline.The bottomline is that SE carried a stone more and ran the distance 6 seconds faster despite having the race shot to pieces some way out.It always been my opinion that horses are ridden to win races and not to impress clockwatcers.The clock can be a source of misinformation -someone on TRF recently used the clock to compare Desert Orchids King George victories with Kauto Stars.Nearly 20 years apart and some major work on the track didn't matter.
U
useful
Guest
Luke, I am not saying Mordin's methods are gospel, however combining his reservations with my own deductions led me to lay. I stand to win £200 and lose £500.
However, the very best of luck to you, and may the best animal win!
However, the very best of luck to you, and may the best animal win!
EC1
On a break
He makes See you then look like Chaplins Club
:laughing:
liked that one Clive
The only time I went to Cheltenham was the first year See You Then won, Desert Orchid also ran in that champion hurdle, it was also Francome's last Cheltenham.
I seem to remember SYT had won in about January and was possibly on only his 3rd run that season when winning the CH...did he just have one prep race for each of the following two years wins?...i can't remember now.
:laughing:
liked that one Clive
The only time I went to Cheltenham was the first year See You Then won, Desert Orchid also ran in that champion hurdle, it was also Francome's last Cheltenham.
I seem to remember SYT had won in about January and was possibly on only his 3rd run that season when winning the CH...did he just have one prep race for each of the following two years wins?...i can't remember now.
EC1
On a break
I've developed a fair rule of thumb when comparing novice hurdles with races like the AIG Champion Hurdle. The results I've obtained suggest that if the early pace is slow in a novice hurdle a true Grade 1 horse will still come home in faster time however fast they themselves go early. Usually they'll clock about two seconds faster for the last half of the race however slow the novices went early.
this is a load of genealistic sh.te really isn't it?
a novice hurdle can be run painfully slow early and so they are bound to have more energy left to run the last few furlongs as fast as a champion hurdle race.
you just cannot say SE should run 2 seconds faster without knowing just how much petrol the novices had left....it's just so illogical.
i'll put it in reverse...the early sectionals of a 6f top class sprint can be matched by lower grade horses...who will then pay later with extremely slow latter fractions. Those latter fractions will vary enormously in proportion to just how fast teh early pace is...so to set a general rule of thumb in a hurdle race is possibly some of NM's daftest logic.
late fraction times are totally reliant on early pace...so just saying that a pace is slow means bugger all.
this is a load of genealistic sh.te really isn't it?
a novice hurdle can be run painfully slow early and so they are bound to have more energy left to run the last few furlongs as fast as a champion hurdle race.
you just cannot say SE should run 2 seconds faster without knowing just how much petrol the novices had left....it's just so illogical.
i'll put it in reverse...the early sectionals of a 6f top class sprint can be matched by lower grade horses...who will then pay later with extremely slow latter fractions. Those latter fractions will vary enormously in proportion to just how fast teh early pace is...so to set a general rule of thumb in a hurdle race is possibly some of NM's daftest logic.
late fraction times are totally reliant on early pace...so just saying that a pace is slow means bugger all.
trackside528
At the Start
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2006
- Messages
- 5,377
Mordin seems to have completely ignored the fact that Sizing Europe hardly came off the bit at all in the AIG. He won hard on the steel ffs and yet Mordin doesn't seem to have factored this into his calculations at all. Has he even watched a tape of the race?
There's a grain of truth in what Mordin is suggesting, but I tend to think it's the result of things happening the other way round. That is to say that it wasn't the novices conserving energy and hence being able to run the final 7 furlongs faster than the Grade 1 horses, (I think he's correct in this, in that they shouldn't really be able to do it under normal circumstances) but same thing would occur if the AIG was run very fast early on, and thus quite a few of them had nothing like the reserves left for the second half of the race. Had it not been this way round, the overall AIG time couldn't have been as fast as it was. As so often in racing, like life, there's normally a combination of things that contribute to such an occurence
In any event the other thing to note is that Siege of Ennis should be assessed on the clock as a juvenile. I too took the trouble to try and hand time them using the hurdles as the splits and it's difficult to disagree with Mordins findings. The bigger question probably revolves around whether its significant or not?
Sizing Europe first, Siege of Ennis second, Difference in brackets
Start to 1st - 13.99 - 14.33 {-0.34}
1st to 2nd - 35.54 - 37.40 {-1.86}
2nd to 3rd - 14.69 - 15.82 {-1.13}
3rd to 4th - 43.60 - 45.73 {-2.13}
4th to 5th - 23.89 - 24.53 {-0.64}
5th to 6th - 14.60 - 15.62 {-1.02}
6th to 7th - 37.00 - 37.82 {-0.82}
7th to 8th - 31.92 - 30.35 {+1.30}
8th to post - 14.46 - 13.90 {+0.62}
It makes for a total of 229.69 secs and 235.50 secs respectively meaning that I've got Sizing Europe as runing slow by 0.59 secs and Siege of Ennis by 6.50. Now I'm not disputing the official times for one second, they had Sizing Europe -1.30 and Siege of Ennis -7.00, meaning that I've hand timed Sizing Europe 0.71 secs faster than he ran, and Siege Of Ennis 0.50 secs faster, so if anything my margin of error favours the Champion Hurdle prospect, by about 0.21 secs.
It's the distribution of time that's interesting. The last 4 sections taken cumulatively would suggest that the juvenile has run 0.08 secs faster than the grade 1. Sizing Europe covered this distance in 97.98 secs and Siege of Ennis in 97.69 secs. As a percentage of total race time you can work out that this equates to no less than 45% of the entire race distance, the final 7 furlongs. Even if you extend the parameter to the final mile and 1 furlong, Sizing Europe has only gone 0.56 secs faster. Which means that the juvenile has probably eclipsed all of the grade 1 runners from this far out, apart from Sizing Europe.
Even if the novice race were slow initially, the juvenile still shouldn't be able to do this to aspirant two mile champions, I'd have thought? and certainly not for something that amount to a little short of being half the race distance?. The only way he could have done it, is if they went very quickly in the AIG early, and were running out of steam later on. Or if the AIG runners aren't quite as good as we think they are, and that the novice hurdlers are better than we realised. Although there's evidence that they did go quick in the AIG, and lets not forget the overall time was above grade 1 par. In truth I haven't really done enough sectional stuff to know what figures like -1.13 and -2.13 and -1.86 actually mean, in terms of how frequently they occur.
A race like the Fred Winter for instance (Siege of Ennis?) would be assessed off a class par of 3.2 secs per mile and the Champion Hurdle 1.1. There should have been a theoretical 4.2 secs between the runners. The par for a grade 1 juvenile is 2.2 secs by way of comparison, meaning that they would finish this same distance apart if the juvenile was a Triumph winner in waiting. A major track novice par would be 4.7 secs, meaning they should have finished 7.2 secs apart, which is nearer to what happened.
You can half dive into the records for a clue, although the races aren't run over same C&D, as the Fred Winter is half a furlong longer so I'm forced into using standards.
Sublimity (a very slow Champion Hurdle) beat Gaspara by 2.05 secs
Brave Inca beat Shamayoun by 7.20 secs
Hardy Eustace beat Dabiroun 2.42 secs
Sizing Europe beat Siege of Ennis 5.70 secs
The average winning distance is 3.89 secs. {A grade 1 juvenile up against a grade 1 hurdler would expect to be beaten a theoretical 2.2 secs) but then the Fred Winter isn't for grade 1 juveniles. If it's assessed off the conditions par of 3.2, then 4.2 would be the expectation, so the averages to date is a mere 0.31 secs off the projected expectation. Unfortunately, it's putting Siege of Ennis slightly off where he'd need to be, in order to win the Fred Winter, but this was only his second run, and Sizing Europe's run in the AIG represents a pretty good benchmark to aim at.
I was hoping to use the analysis to get a handle on Siege of Ennis as a Fred Winter prospect, as I reckoned he was going to be the better value, but there's little closure to it, and the evidence points more towards him coming up a bit short.
I wouldn't seek to dispute the times, but in truth am far from certain that we're not in danger of reading into something, something that might not be there. I'd be tentatively leaning however, towards the idea that Siege of Ennis is useful rather than very good, which means his proximity to Sizing Europe points to the favourite also being good, but perhaps not quite so good as the reaction he's largely provoked.
In any event the other thing to note is that Siege of Ennis should be assessed on the clock as a juvenile. I too took the trouble to try and hand time them using the hurdles as the splits and it's difficult to disagree with Mordins findings. The bigger question probably revolves around whether its significant or not?
Sizing Europe first, Siege of Ennis second, Difference in brackets
Start to 1st - 13.99 - 14.33 {-0.34}
1st to 2nd - 35.54 - 37.40 {-1.86}
2nd to 3rd - 14.69 - 15.82 {-1.13}
3rd to 4th - 43.60 - 45.73 {-2.13}
4th to 5th - 23.89 - 24.53 {-0.64}
5th to 6th - 14.60 - 15.62 {-1.02}
6th to 7th - 37.00 - 37.82 {-0.82}
7th to 8th - 31.92 - 30.35 {+1.30}
8th to post - 14.46 - 13.90 {+0.62}
It makes for a total of 229.69 secs and 235.50 secs respectively meaning that I've got Sizing Europe as runing slow by 0.59 secs and Siege of Ennis by 6.50. Now I'm not disputing the official times for one second, they had Sizing Europe -1.30 and Siege of Ennis -7.00, meaning that I've hand timed Sizing Europe 0.71 secs faster than he ran, and Siege Of Ennis 0.50 secs faster, so if anything my margin of error favours the Champion Hurdle prospect, by about 0.21 secs.
It's the distribution of time that's interesting. The last 4 sections taken cumulatively would suggest that the juvenile has run 0.08 secs faster than the grade 1. Sizing Europe covered this distance in 97.98 secs and Siege of Ennis in 97.69 secs. As a percentage of total race time you can work out that this equates to no less than 45% of the entire race distance, the final 7 furlongs. Even if you extend the parameter to the final mile and 1 furlong, Sizing Europe has only gone 0.56 secs faster. Which means that the juvenile has probably eclipsed all of the grade 1 runners from this far out, apart from Sizing Europe.
Even if the novice race were slow initially, the juvenile still shouldn't be able to do this to aspirant two mile champions, I'd have thought? and certainly not for something that amount to a little short of being half the race distance?. The only way he could have done it, is if they went very quickly in the AIG early, and were running out of steam later on. Or if the AIG runners aren't quite as good as we think they are, and that the novice hurdlers are better than we realised. Although there's evidence that they did go quick in the AIG, and lets not forget the overall time was above grade 1 par. In truth I haven't really done enough sectional stuff to know what figures like -1.13 and -2.13 and -1.86 actually mean, in terms of how frequently they occur.
A race like the Fred Winter for instance (Siege of Ennis?) would be assessed off a class par of 3.2 secs per mile and the Champion Hurdle 1.1. There should have been a theoretical 4.2 secs between the runners. The par for a grade 1 juvenile is 2.2 secs by way of comparison, meaning that they would finish this same distance apart if the juvenile was a Triumph winner in waiting. A major track novice par would be 4.7 secs, meaning they should have finished 7.2 secs apart, which is nearer to what happened.
You can half dive into the records for a clue, although the races aren't run over same C&D, as the Fred Winter is half a furlong longer so I'm forced into using standards.
Sublimity (a very slow Champion Hurdle) beat Gaspara by 2.05 secs
Brave Inca beat Shamayoun by 7.20 secs
Hardy Eustace beat Dabiroun 2.42 secs
Sizing Europe beat Siege of Ennis 5.70 secs
The average winning distance is 3.89 secs. {A grade 1 juvenile up against a grade 1 hurdler would expect to be beaten a theoretical 2.2 secs) but then the Fred Winter isn't for grade 1 juveniles. If it's assessed off the conditions par of 3.2, then 4.2 would be the expectation, so the averages to date is a mere 0.31 secs off the projected expectation. Unfortunately, it's putting Siege of Ennis slightly off where he'd need to be, in order to win the Fred Winter, but this was only his second run, and Sizing Europe's run in the AIG represents a pretty good benchmark to aim at.
I was hoping to use the analysis to get a handle on Siege of Ennis as a Fred Winter prospect, as I reckoned he was going to be the better value, but there's little closure to it, and the evidence points more towards him coming up a bit short.
I wouldn't seek to dispute the times, but in truth am far from certain that we're not in danger of reading into something, something that might not be there. I'd be tentatively leaning however, towards the idea that Siege of Ennis is useful rather than very good, which means his proximity to Sizing Europe points to the favourite also being good, but perhaps not quite so good as the reaction he's largely provoked.
That I may be, but even I never advocated backing a horse for 3 successive Champion Hurdles, any more than I suggested that the 2006 Prix de Force was going to provide the winners of all the European classics