The Derby

Originally posted by Desert Orchid@May 30 2007, 12:50 PM

As you know, I prefer to start by looking at the best horses and seeing if they are likely to operate effectively at the trip. I think Archipenko is by some way the best in this year's race and I'm not put off on stamina issues.
Click to expand...
That's a very good way of looking at things DO and I wish you well… I for my part have passed over Archipenko to a large extent as I think there are others who will see out the trip a bit better. But in terms of ability he seems as good as almost any of them, I’d agree. If he does get the trip well it will take a decent one to beat him and I wouldn’t want to put anyone off. I just feel that the French Derby is more his race (Gal had him earmarked for the French Derby for a while now, I believe, and if I owned him that’s where I’d send him). I’ve got to got with my instincts as well as the figures and they tell me to look elsewhere.
 
Only one winner as far as I can see, no not the favourite but those greedy bookmakers....AGAIN........ :rolleyes:

I am personally undecided, but the monies that I would bet on the race takes the odds on fav out of my equation and I will be looking for a bit of value come Friday....
 
It rained through the night and from breakfast time till about an hour ago. Though the sun is shining now the weather men got it badly wrong. With some rain now forecast for tomorrow, Friday and Saturday could we see them come down the stands side for the first time in living memory?
 
Shame, looks like it`s the favourite`s race to lose now. Laid off my position on Strategic Prince.

Hopeful rather than confident about Archipenko.
 
Did they go down the stands side in the Derby in Kazzia's Oaks year? I know they did in the Oaks but I can't remember whether they did on the Saturday.
 
They havent raced up the stands side in The Derby in my lifetime, no have I seen any old photographs of them doing that.

Well, only a certain French jockey :laughing:
 
Very interesting article Steve, cheers

Using your data and Pedigree Query site


From last 20 years @ 5 year intervals

Average

0.99 06 - 02
1.67 01 - 97
1.67 96 - 92
1.10 91 - 87


Not sure what it shows really, but is it a coincidence the average DI has fallen under 1.00 along with quality of the winners in the last 5 years?
 
Yes Euro

2006 Sir Percy 0.54
2005 Motivator 1.43
2004 North Light 1.13* (from 1.60)
2003 Kris Kin 1.05* (from 1.34)
2002 High Chaparral 0.82

Don't get me wrong Motivator put in a decent performance, but the last decent winner to go on and prove it imo was in 2002, there's time for SP to make up ground though :)
 
Originally posted by jft2005@May 30 2007, 07:08 PM
from 2002 it would appear so.
Click to expand...
These things come in cycles. Be tough to find a worse five year cycle than this:

95 Lammtarra
96 Shaamit
97 Benny The Dip
98 High Rise
99 Oath
 
Why? Lammtarra was a poor Derby winner who happened to progress as he was entitled to given his lack of experience before Epsom.
 
Originally posted by Euronymous@May 30 2007, 07:52 PM
Why? Lammtarra was a poor Derby winner who happened to progress as he was entitled to given his lack of experience before Epsom.
Click to expand...
He was a very good Derby winner because he was a very good horse...
 
He ended up being a top class animal, but his Derby winning performance was below average for the race. This isn`t an opinion it`s a fact.
 
Don't think it's fair to include a horse who broke down on his only subsequent start in that list Euro.

2002-2006 is nearly if not as bad if you discount High Chapparal. Add an iffy winner in this year and this past 5 years will be the worst few Derby's of at least the last 40 years.
 
Originally posted by uncle goober@May 30 2007, 08:12 PM
its a fact based upon opinion. so its opinion.
Click to expand...
Like the Beatles are better than Take That i suppose. There`s always one pedant lurking on here.
 
Originally posted by Euronymous@May 30 2007, 08:10 PM
He ended up being a top class animal, but his Derby winning performance was below average for the race. This isn`t an opinion it`s a fact.
Click to expand...
I was under the impression that "quality of winner" is how good the horse is, not how good the performance was, and that is why Kris Kin, High Rise etc. are considered poor quality winners because of their subsequent poor performances, whilst High Chaparral, Sinndar etc. are considered good quality winners because of their subsequent very good performances.

Maybe "quality of performances", or "quality of the races" would have made it more clear...
 
Back
Top