Sussex Stakes

think difference between Gosden saying it and AOB saying is..all evidence points to it being possible with Kingman..whereas when Aob says it.. its all in his mind.
 
Decent enough performance but run at yet another dawdle.
Hopefully on Champions day we get a proper test.
 
Frankel said:
Decent enough performance but run at yet another dawdle.
Hopefully on Champions day we get a proper test.
Click to expand...

the truth is though..many Group 1 races are run in a similar way..the fact that not one trainer thinks to stick a 100+ pacemaker in with his own horse a length behind it in these races shows how little thought goes into it..particular those trying to beat a horse that has 6f speed in his armoury.
 
Last edited:
Bar the Bull said:
Just caught up with the JlM. Kingman was very impressive. Are we under-rating him? Bar Frankeln he's up there with the great milers in my view.
Click to expand...
practically everyone is on record saying he's the best since Frankel and basically a crack miler with a fantastic turn of foot.

i would have won a packet on him in the guineas. fml.
 
EC1 said:
the truth is though..many Group 1 races are run in a similar way..the fact that not one trainer thinks to stick a 100+ pacemaker in with his own horse a length behind it in these races shows how little thought goes into it..particular those trying to beat a horse that has 6f speed in his armoury.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more. Maybe now 'finally' they will realise that trying to beat Kingman in a sprint is a no go. Though I thought it was ruddy stupid the first time they tried it.
Not saying they will get Kingman beat at Ascot but they will certainly have more chance with proper pace.
 
There was never much likelihood of today's race being other than a jog-and-sprint affair. That's how most French races are run. It was always going to be simply a question of Kingman handling the going.

Interesting to read Gosden's comments on the tactics going into the race, though.
 
You got that right re the pace DO.

Seems like the rest of the trainers and jockeys are brain dead and would have at least tried to run the sting out of Kingman's tail.

Total lack of imagination on the part of the BHA, by the book handicapper, if Kingman is only a 126 horse I'm Peter Pan.
 
The idea he will get tested in a true run race is a myth imo..he already has large speed figures when facing an even pace ..the guineas was his Kris moment..for those that don't remember Kris..he was the best miler by far of his era.. he was also beat in the guineas..not because he couldn't face a pace..it was just one of those things..its a funny race..on a funny course and is sometimes like watching the st wilfred hadicap.
 
Last edited:
It is baffling though that the Hannons have now three times tried to beat the horse with most speed by going at pedestrian gallops .

The effect has been to diminish Toronado and Olympic Glory's performances - one would expect the latter to beat Anodin on that ground easily in a truly run race and Toronado to be more than a head in front of Darwin too .
 
Ardross said:
It is baffling though that the Hannons have now three times tried to beat the horse with most speed by going at pedestrian gallops .

The effect has been to diminish Toronado and Olympic Glory's performances - one would expect the latter to beat Anodin on that ground easily in a truly run race and Toronado to be more than a head in front of Darwin too .
Click to expand...

yes..after they failed with those tactics in the SJP you would have thought they would have done something different at Goodwood..well they did really..they went even slower..probably as slow as you can go with the finish being the most bizarre i've seem in a 8f G1.

Just imagine though if Frankel had been faced with the same pace scenarios as Kingman has faced...there would now be a view that he could be beat in a true run race..because he would have won in a similar style to K and people have to look for a chink ...i just think people are looking for something thats not there re the pace.

The horse is very special..best enjoy it imo..because this game has a habit of throwing up very good horses in close proximity..then years of average and just above average ones. We have had Sea The Stars,Frankel and now Kingman in a similar way to Nijinsky-Brigadier-Mill Reef era...its odd how these things occur

i think that constantly pulling a horse down because it doesn't meet this pace scenario or that pace scenario demeans a horse unfairly...nobody ever says..oh yes Sea Bird was a good horse..but he never ran in a true run race..or one run at 6f pace just to test him out...and unless he runs under these conditions he will never be a great.

The horses of the past did not come under this sort of scrutiny..they were just judged on their records...lets just say computers are not around for another 20 years...what will Frankel, STS & Kingman's records look like then?..pretty damn special i think. No one will be saying..oh well Kingman were all right but all those wins were lucky..no one sent a horse off at 90 mph to test him.

i think people have too high expectations of horse performance now that we can analyse a horse to death..its because of this that people always believe the giants of the past are better than the current ones...simply because they are just a form line in a history book..a form line that is probably littered with jog sprint wins totally ignored due to time passing and lack of analysis at that time.
 
Last edited:
EC1 said:
yes..after they failed with those tactics in the SJP you would have thought they would have done something different at Goodwood..well they did really..they went even slower..probably as slow as you can go with the finish being the most bizarre i've seem in a 8f G1.

Just imagine though if Frankel had been faced with the same pace scenarios as Kingman has faced...there would now be a view that he could be beat in a true run race..because he would have won in a similar style to K and people have to look for a chink ...i just think people are looking for something thats not there re the pace.

The horse is very special..best enjoy it imo..because this game has a habit of throwing up very good horses in close proximity..then years of average and just above average ones. We have had Sea The Stars,Frankel and now Kingman in a similar way to Nijinsky-Brigadier-Mill Reef era...its odd how these things occur

i think that constantly pulling a horse down because it doesn't meet this pace scenario or that pace scenario demeans a horse unfairly...nobody ever says..oh yes Sea Bird was a good horse..but he never ran in a true run race..or one run at 6f pace just to test him out...and unless he runs under these conditions he will never be a great.

The horses of the past did not come under this sort of scrutiny..they were just judged on their records...lets just say computers are not around for another 20 years...what will Frankel, STS & Kingman's records look like then?..pretty damn special i think. No one will be saying..oh well Kingman were all right but all those wins were lucky..no one sent a horse off at 90 mph to test him.

i think people have too high expectations of horse performance now that we can analyse a horse to death..its because of this that people always believe the giants of the past are better than the current ones...simply because they are just a form line in a history book..a form line that is probably littered with jog sprint wins totally ignored due to time passing and lack of analysis at that time.
Click to expand...

It’s not a case of looking for a chink EC. The Guineas did actually happen, it’s not a myth. Yes maybe the way the race unfolded saw Kingman an unlucky loser. Very possibly, but not fact.

Kingman is a cracking horse with a very good turn of foot. No one would possibly dispute that. There is also every chance Kingman will still win at Ascot under a more searching pace. As a purist though, that is something I would still like to see him answer, as the races since have only been to his advantage the way they have been run. Your suggestion regards the same pace situation if Frankel had faced is slightly redundant as he ran over 10f, so the suggestion he may be outstayed doesn’t really come in to it. Kingman won’t be running over further than a mile which is the reason I would like to see a proper test. I get the point you are trying to make though. You can pick holes in anyone’s form if you look hard enough.

Indeed we have been lucky to see some seriously good horses in the last few years.

Roll on Ascot. :cool:
 
Kingman looks a very good horse , great turn of foot.
But is impossible to know at the moment how good he is , my feeling is he can post a 133 or similar but thats a big margin to find with a frankel.

The key is not how races have been run , it is that he has not faced a horse of the level frankel used to beat by long margins.


Toronado, Olímpic and company are miles below cirrus, Farhh, excelebration, dream ahead etc.......


The only time he has run a truly run race was beaten and he has much to prove to be rated in the level of sea the stars, cirrus and the good horses of recent years.
 
he has never been ridden fully out though Suny.

even when Frankel won at Ascot by 11 was it..people tried to crab it by saying Excelebration ran below form..and yet the reason he did so was he tried to go with Frankel..well isn't that how we ultimately measure horses..by going up against them blow for blow?

my point about Frankel and true run races is speaking as though he hasn't yet run at 10f..what would have been said about Frankel if he had trod same road as Kingman and faced same pace...he would have shown electrifying pace that people would have said he won't be able to to that in a true run race

i'll keep harping on about Kris as well..who ran in great st wilfred..i mean the guineas..something about the race or wide open spaces didn't suit Kris..looked ordinary there.

Hawk Wing was another who didn't win a guineas..to me guineas isn't a champion prover..its a bit of an odd race over an odd track..doesn't always suit horses

champions are proven over a number of races..and i've never yet read about pace scenarios in any sea bird..mill reef...brigadier races..just what they won.

if guineas is such a measure of being a champion...then how come winner didn't maul Kingman at Ascot?...does anyone think NOT will beat Kingman again?
 
Last edited:
sunybay said:
Kingman looks a very good horse , great turn of foot.

Toronado, Olímpic and company are miles below cirrus, Farhh, excelebration, dream ahead etc.......


.
Click to expand...

toronado has a similar OHR to Farhh Excel & Dream Ahead..so can't see they are miles below tbh...Cirrus really large ratings gained on ground that exhagerrates distance..OHR is 130

Kingman had a matter of a few yards to get past pace favoured Toronado and ate him alive...not many horses can do that to a 126 horse

I'll have a stab that Kingman if ridden out can throw out a mid/late 130's run
 
Last edited:
I dont mind OR


I have Olímpic and toronado on 125 or worse

While excelebration , cirrus and dream ahead were better than 130


All about kingman is speculation until he proves he can post a130 performance on the racecourse.


About the queen anne
Excelebration tried too hard but frankel didnt achieve the rating as if exc was running to his best.



I think excelebration at his best would beat toronado and Olímpic in a canter.
 
You gotta be kidding me if you think the pace of the race would have suited Toronado more than Kingman EC.

N.O.T was never given a chance at Ascot in that crawl.
Probably won't beat Kingman again, no.
 
I have always thought he was tip top. Well since the Greenham anyway. To me it was insane that people thought the Guineas winner would ever beat him over a mile again, as I felt the Guineas was a strange race.

I suppose I restarted this thread again as his BHA rating, and the lack of posts any time he runs suggests to me that he is not really a "public horse" in the way I would expect a horse as good as he is to be. And by that, I mean media fanfare, posts on web forums, etc.
 
Frankel said:
You gotta be kidding me if you think the pace of the race would have suited Toronado more than Kingman EC.

N.O.T was never given a chance at Ascot in that crawl.
Probably won't beat Kingman again, no.
Click to expand...

in a slow run race the horse at the front is favoured though..both toronado and NOT were in that position..so were favoured..they have both won top mile races..so the only difference between them and Kingman is that Kingman is a lot better to be able to pass them from behind off easy fractions.

You say NOT was never given a chance at Ascot..most people say now he doesn't stay 10..so he is a top miler..not a plodder...so he was 5 lengths in front of another miler off a soft pace turning in..how is that not being favoured?

Kingman is a miler who is better than them by some way to win from disadvantaged positions. Like with Frankel in his 2000..he was a lot better than how the result reads...same with SJP when he scraped home When Frankel won guineas many people said he only won by 6...when in fact if he had run even pace was probably 20 length better than the second.

bare results do not give the full picture
 
Last edited:
Indeed it is not easy to pick up the one's in front off a slow pace. But we all knew Kingman would as he has serious boot. Wouldn't be so easy to use that speed in a fast run race.

As for N.O.T, never convinced he would get 10f. A fast run mile is probaby his optimum. We know he doesn't have the boot of Kingman so he was always a sitting duck imo.

Indeed bare results do not give the full picture.
 
Kingman had weight for age in the Sussex and rightfully so but Toronado by High Chaparral was hardly going to be suited by the way the race was run and nearly pinched it with Kingman taking a few too many seconds to get his feet right before finding his stride. A true run mile in the QE11 between the two is the race I want to see. Kingmans only defeat was run at a proper clip and even if the result was a fluke it's only possibly way of beating him as going a crawl hasn't worked in the 4 races since.
 
Back
Top