The Cesarewitch (and the other races)

St. Michel as well in, travelled well, finished like a sack of shite. Frustrating season with the handicappers that has nixed all the fine work on the conditions races.
 
It was a strange race, though. Starchitect going out like a light. St Michel likewise. The loose horse maybe forcing the pace a bit. Need to see it again a few times. So much, too, for all the pre-race brouhaha on C4 about the draw and the need to be less than 18.
 
EC1 said:
even though it looks a handicap snip..it will need to be to overcome the number of lbs that draw will cost it

the average beaten opponent IV in the cesarewitch is 1.10,,the draw as follows

low = 1.28
middle = 1.06
high = 0.97

st michel will need those lbs in hand to overcome it imo..not for me at the crazy price it is

i've slung a tenner on each of these based on trainers/draw record in the race

Alan King 1.35 GRUMETI 65/1
Alan King 1.35 FIRST MOHICAN70/1
AJ Martin 1.49 GOLDEN SPEAR 85/1
D Simcock 1.22 THE CASHEL MAN 40/1

any of those to win will be very nice
Click to expand...

Great run from First Mohican, EC1!
 
wilsonl said:
Anybody thinking St Michel is a handicap snip needs to consider Sweet Selection was 5.5L behind him at Donny, giving him 11 lb. On Saturday he gives him 2.

The way St Michel travelled impressed but there shouldn't be much between them and one is double the price of the other.
Click to expand...

Called it early, wilsonl. Well done.
 
and the cashel man DO:)

well in-ness is hard to measure v draw..butyou have to have a go in these nonsense events,,i never looked at form and got 2 out of first 4 at immense prices..just based on trends

but they are laughable..so just probably got lucky


well done Wilson
 
Last edited:
I was surprised to see St Michel fold so tamely but I wonder if it has something to do with the way Morris rode him off the bridle. He looked like he was on a 3m chaser whereas SDS brought the winner with a good run.

You can attribute it to that draw as well. You're running so much further from out there he understandably ran out of gas.
 
I think anyone who backed The Cashel Man is entitled to feel a bit pissed at the ride he got. I presume Buick was riding to instructions as he usually comes from the back but surely there's a difference between coming from last of 10 ten lengths off the pace and last of 34 twenty lengths off it? And from an inside draw ended up on the wide outside.
 
makes no difference getting peed off at jocks really..best pack game in if you expect consistency in this area..as every day of week you see daftness on a high scale...jockeys have cost me in the past..and will do so in the future..part of the game..many punters haven't caught on to this yet though
 
Last edited:
I think punters do know if/when a jockey has cost them a race and realise it is part of the risks you take when betting. The Cashel Man wasn't one of my bets but I have plenty of sympathy for those who did.
 
Oh I agree, I'm not one to bash them.

Personally had no bet in the race but it was just an observation as they got to the 3 pole.
 
Desert Orchid said:
I think anyone who backed The Cashel Man is entitled to feel a bit pissed at the ride he got. I presume Buick was riding to instructions as he usually comes from the back but surely there's a difference between coming from last of 10 ten lengths off the pace and last of 34 twenty lengths off it? And from an inside draw ended up on the wide outside.
Click to expand...

The Cashel Man was badly affected by the incident in which Seismos stumbled and unseated his rider early in the race. Jinked, taken back and moved out to his left to avoid Seismos whose jockey fought a losing battle for several seconds to stay on board. Ended up considerably wider out from the rail and could never really get back in.
 
EC1 said:
makes no difference getting peed off at jocks really..best pack game in if you expect consistency in this area..as every day of week you see daftness on a high scale...jockeys have cost me in the past..and will do so in the future..part of the game..many punters haven't caught on to this yet though
Click to expand...

The wilful blindness on the part of many jockeys to the clear draw bias at Newmarket yesterday certainly struck me as "daftness on a high scale".
 
On the subject of Newmarket, what do our time experts - I'm looking at you, EC - make of the performance of Coronet in the Zetland Stakes? It looks a very fast time to me but it would involve accepting hugely improved figures for the apparently exposed Cunco in second and for Permian in third. I'm prepared to allow for Cunco benefiting from the step up in trip and for Permian being flattered by racing near the rail but it still looks difficult to rationalise.
 
gus said:
On the subject of Newmarket, what do our time experts - I'm looking at you, EC - make of the performance of Coronet in the Zetland Stakes? It looks a very fast time to me but it would involve accepting hugely improved figures for the apparently exposed Cunco in second and for Permian in third. I'm prepared to allow for Cunco benefiting from the step up in trip and for Permian being flattered by racing near the rail but it still looks difficult to rationalise.
Click to expand...

Newmarket 8/10/16
86KASSIA
78ISLAND VISION
100BEST SOLUTION
102CHURCHILL
106CORONET
58MUFFRI'HA
Going: Good/Firm +28lbs PM

<tbody>
</tbody>
 
Thanks, EC.

Yes, I also have it the best time on the card.

She's clearly smart, especially as she raced well away from the rail. Gosden likes her - talking after the race in terms of the Musidora first time out next season.
 
Diamond Geezer said:
https://www.timeform.com/horse-raci...wmarket-future-champions-meeting-2016-9102016
Click to expand...

Thanks for the link, DG. That's really interesting.

Coronet's figures clearly impressed Simon Rowlands (Prufrock) and she's been backed since Saturday into second favouritism for the Oaks. His comments on Rhodedendron, ante-post favourite for the Guineas and Oaks, suggest that she might be better suited by the longer trip next year and I'm inclined to agree.

Also interesting are his comments on Cosmeapolitan's run on Friday. I backed the horse and thought he ran an eyecatching race, held up out the back then making excellent and quite rapid headway from about 4f out which briefly looked like swamping the rest for pace before his run petered out approaching the final furlong.

I'm not sure I'd have particularly blamed the jockey, John Fahy, but Prufrock describes it as a "notably inefficient ride" and I've looked up his comments on Twitter where he goes further still: "sectionals show that 9th-placed Cosmeapolitan ran the fastest and second-fastest furlongs of any in the 12f handicap...absolutely braindead ride...slowly-run. Held up several lengths back. Made all ground up in space of 2f. Predictably weakened. Totally inefficient."

These are quite outspoken comments, by the standards of racing journalism. They make refreshing reading. But the great thing about them is that I'm sure Prufrock would say they're not "comments" at all but statements of fact with the data available to back them up. They bring a new dimension to analysis of horse races and how they're run.
 
Last edited:
I'd be inclined to take the view the Cosmeapolitan ride was deliberate but I plan to watch the race again a few times over the next couple of days.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top