The 2000 Guineas (and beyond)

I don't think Steinbeck had the tactical pace for it. I need to watch the race again but he seemed to have a gap to go for, only for CC to yoink it off him and leave him in his wake.
 
I don't think Steinbeck was given that hard a race but I reckon CC will have made Ballydoyle think about where to take him next. Can't see anything there getting close to CC in that form.

I was pleasantly surprised by Free Judgment. I thought the jockey was doing the right thing throughout the race, letting them get on with it up front and just lugging along at the back before showing a decent bit of speed to take second.
 
Last edited:
I treat Irish times with a large pinch of salt - even when the times are accurate the starts are not always in the correct place - but at least we had four races all at a mile today. The time comparisons, if they are to be believed, reflect well on Canford Cliffs in my book.

Bangalore Gold 99.36
Canford Cliffs 97.64
Shamwari Lodge 101.35
Aghadoe 99.70
 
J Alfred Prufrock said:
I treat Irish times with a large pinch of salt - even when the times are accurate the starts are not always in the correct place - but at least we had four races all at a mile today. The time comparisons, if they are to be believed, reflect well on Canford Cliffs in my book.

Bangalore Gold 99.36
Canford Cliffs 97.64
Shamwari Lodge 101.35
Aghadoe 99.70
Click to expand...

So there's 2.06s between Canford Cliffs and Aghadoe. What are they using these days, 6 lengths per second? Or is it less in Ireland? With 6 lengths, that's just over 12 lengths, or almost 25lbs (at 2lbs per length over a mile).

Aghadoe looks to have run to a rating of around 80 today, carrying 6lbs less than Canford. 80 + 25 + 6 = 111.

(Back of a fag packet stuff here, what have I missed?)
 
2.06 seconds is 2.06 seconds. It doesn't matter what lengths per second they are using, as you are trying to quantify what the time differential between two separate races is worth in these circumstances.

As it is, they return individual times for horses: http://www.irishracing.com/results/v5result084201005221545.htm, which show that Aghadoe would have been a fraction over a length ahead of Fencing Master but carrying 6 lb less.

I would make 2.06 sec quite a bit more than 25 lb for 1m run in sub 100 secs.
 
Just in from the Curragh. Well done to Steve, Clive, Hamm, David and anyone else who said Canford Cliffs would stay. I was completly wrong on that. He put up a great performance, well done to Richard Hannon and his team.
 
thanks Gareth

just using the 4 x mile races i get each race fast or slow in lbs

-7 BANGALORE GOLD
-36 SHAMWARI LODGE
+8 AGHADOE
+2 CANFORD CLIFFS

Canford Cliffs speed figure is approx :) 128 [incl wfa]

oddly the ground times out at Good?..bit puzzling

I wouldn't like to stake my life on that rating by the way:)
 
EC1 said:
thanks Gareth

just using the 4 x mile races i get each race fast or slow in lbs

-7 BANGALORE GOLD
-36 SHAMWARI LODGE
+8 AGHADOE
+2 CANFORD CLIFFS

Canford Cliffs speed figure is approx :) 128 [incl wfa]

oddly the ground times out at Good?..bit puzzling

I wouldn't like to stake my life on that rating by the way:)
Click to expand...

If Canford Cliffs is on 128, what does that put Aghadoe on?
 
EC1 said:
8lb higher than current OHR
Click to expand...

So that's 82?

So you effectively have Canford Cliffs giving Aghadoe a 46lb beating, which includes the 6lb that Aghadoe received, leaving it at 40lbs.

2.06s = 40lbs?

Or 12.36 lengths = 40lbs, which gives a poundage of 3.23 lbs per length? Over a mile? What am I doing wrong here?
 
i got CC's race 29 lb faster than Aghadoe's race which I rate as a 93 race [timewise]..then add 6 speed points for wfa

i don't rate off individual horses Gareth..knocking so much time off for weight etc...that way you don't tamper with the actual times..hence Aghadoe's race is a 90 race the way I work...I use a sort of Beyer method of working..have found it gives consistent results..but it all depends where you put your going allowance obviously..Bangalore Gold has helped here because i'm sure that race wasn't slowly run by much..it certainly wasn't faster than class though or we would have ridiculous ratings for tothers

I do two sets of figs tbh..this way and the traditional weght adjusted..messing about with the times to allow for weight etc..i find that method inferior.

as said..it may be that 128 is too high..but Bangalores race wasn't slowly run and it still comes out 7 slow so I am pretty sure 128 isn't far out

the going comes out at just 1lb faster than good... which is obvioulsy good ground..on time :)
 
Last edited:
EC - I don't see how you can realistically give Aghadoe's performance today - currently rated 74, likely to go up to around 80 - a rating of 93. Not unless the overall level of your ratings is around a stone higher than official ratings, and your 128 for Canford Cliffs is equivalent to an OR in the mid-110s?
 
Gareth Flynn said:
I don't think Steinbeck had the tactical pace for it. I need to watch the race again but he seemed to have a gap to go for, only for CC to yoink it off him and leave him in his wake.
Click to expand...

Canford Cliffs had a turn of foot that Steinbeck couldn't match, though the way Steinbeck finished makes me wonder if he might be better over 10f.
 
chroniclandlord said:
Canford Cliffs had a turn of foot that Steinbeck couldn't match, though the way Steinbeck finished makes me wonder if he might be better over 10f.
Click to expand...

Everything about Steinbeck in the parade ring to the betting ring suggested not much more was expected from him today. He ran the a-typical race a Ballydoyle horse will often produce if not fully there - travel well, back pedal and then stay on again under minimum enough encouragement. Weither he has the improvement to ever beat today's winner is of course another matter altogether.
 
Gareth Flynn said:
EC - I don't see how you can realistically give Aghadoe's performance today - currently rated 74, likely to go up to around 80 - a rating of 93. Not unless the overall level of your ratings is around a stone higher than official ratings, and your 128 for Canford Cliffs is equivalent to an OR in the mid-110s?
Click to expand...

i give the race a 93 Gareth..not the horse..all i can tell you about the race is its 8lb faster than it should have been..the expected time. This is why i have said in the past I don't actually use speed figures as such..I just give each race a figure based on how fast its been run compared to other races.

That race was a 90 race when I start calcs..ie the best horse in that race is a OHR 90 horse. but as its a 3yo race I expect it to be run 5 speed points slower to allow for wfa..ie expected speed figure 85..the actual figure earned was 94..this later reduces to 93 as the ground is speeding races up by 1lb.

the alternate is to start changing the actual race time to equate each race to 9 stone..that to me is starting to bring in a lot of guesswork..lets say a horse rated 74 carries 8-3 and wins in 96.00..how can you guess how fast it would have run with 9-0 on its back so that you can bring all races to the sme weight level..using a set scale isn't accurate as weight affects horses differently

thats why i prefer race expected times

like i said..i do both methods..and over a period of time the race time method is very consistent..the weight alloted way is a head scratcher on many occasions.

it sounds harder than it is really..but it is a very simple way of working figures out..and relies on actual times..not juggling about guessing the effect of weight on times and messing with them when calculating the expected time
 
Last edited:
Back
Top