The Best A P O'Brien has ever trained

Euronymous said:
Azamour slightly inferior to Dylan Thomas and High Chapparal.
Click to expand...

Whilst I wouldn't disagree with that comment, I wouldn't have Azamour ahead of Giants Causeway or Rock Of Gibraltar. I'd also say that I see DOM as being of similar quality to Azamour, given that they have run to similar levels in similar races. (at this time - DOM could still prove to be a better racehorse).
 
apart from Istabraq, for raw talent it might well have been Mozart, I think. Wrong distance early on and excuses in America.
 
simmo said:
Whilst I wouldn't disagree with that comment, I wouldn't have Azamour ahead of Giants Causeway or Rock Of Gibraltar. I'd also say that I see DOM as being of similar quality to Azamour, given that they have run to similar levels in similar races. (at this time - DOM could still prove to be a better racehorse).
Click to expand...

I`d have Azamour slightly inferior to GC as well. The pecking order for the Aga`s horses imo:

Sinndar>Alamshar>Dalakhani>Kalanisi>Azamour>Darjina
 
It was close, but the former`s King George win was for me slightly better than any piece of form Dalakhani achieved.
 
We could argue all day, but Dalakhani was the outstanding performer of his generation for me.

Renowned for a finish kick and needing decent ground to show it, to turn up at Longchamp on Heavy ground (I cancelled my trip I was so upset at the going) and win an Arc was superior to anything Alamshar achieved surely? 134+ RPR. The likes of HC and Doyen trailing behind. People use Mubtaker to hold down the form, but the Arc often throws up a shock place. It was the win in the conditions so detrimental to him for me though, top, top class.

Alamshar's KG was very good too (I backed Sulamani) but there was no High Chapparal in that field.
 
High Chaparral beat Vinnie Roe by two lengths in that Arc. Its impossible to use him as a reliable form guide to the race.

Mubtaker got a rating of 132 for that run, around 10lbs higher than anything he ever hit before (he hit 129 in his prep race for the Arc was that was re evaluated after his Arc run)...132 is 2lbs higher than High Chaparral ever reached.
 
Last edited:
That was Vinnie's ground though. Regardless, to win an Arc in such unfavourable conditions having won every other race in its career bar the debacle at the Curragh and to do so making it looks so easy. Class.
 
I do not think the ground was a problem for Dalakhani. Bred to handle it, and he is passing it on to his stock as well.
 
Ah come on Gal, any horse with that kind of kick is inconvenienced by Heavy ground.

His participation was in doubt in the build up because of the going and he was allowed to go off at a ridiculous 9/4.
 
Regardless of whatever way you look at it, the exposed (but admittidly high class Mubtaker) suddenly hitting 132 (and never doing so again) is very hard to swallow. 134 is a ridiculous rating, not saying he might not have been able to achieve it, but on the day he definitely did not.

If he could hit 134 with everything against him...what was he a 140 plus horse on good fast ground? He won a Group 1 on heavy ground at 2 and handled an ease as a 3 year old. He also travelled really well throughout the Arc that day, so he clearly handled the going fine in my book.
 
He handled it because of his class. It could not have allowed him to perform to his best. Yet he still won the Arc.

The 134 bit is a little shaky I agree. The + isn't.

The outstanding horse of his generation.
 
Take his Arc run away and the highest RPR he achieved was 126. In fact he only got into 120s twice! A horse with alot of style, but I am not so sure the substance was there. Shame he was not kept in training as a 4 year old, type to improve with age.
 
Look at the number of '+'s though. He cantered over fields and won as he pleased. Nine starts, eight wins.

Not seeing him at four was a shame for sure.
 
That is why I said more style over substance,certainly looked the business but failed to actually hit a mark that sets him out as a great imo.

That might not be the horse's fault, given that it was the way he was ridden...but is is impossible to rate him so highly based on what he actually achieved.
 
Not being ridden to achieve massive ratings is fair (after all he was winning comfortably, what was the need?). To say style over substance though is derogatory.
 
Montjeu was ridden in similar style but put in bigger ratings etc.

Ok I can see where the "style over substance" quote could annoy a Dalakhani supporter...but the essence of it still remainds.
 
Back
Top