The Derby

With the ground looking to be G-F at Epsom should they let Cape Blanco take his chance there ?
 
What do you make of Bullet Train, EC1 ? i am surprised he is so strong in the market, the form of the Lingfield trial is nothing special, but he is open to improvement being lightly raced.
 
..wonder what DO thinks?

If my figures are right, the Dante is probably the fastest 3yo race of the year so far.

I got my going allowance using Fareer's race and assumed it to be true run.

It put Sariska on 122 (cf OR 118 / RPR 117), and Cape Blanco on 120+wfa. It also puts Johannes on 105 (cf RPR 107) & Rose Blossom on 96+wfa (cf RPR 100) and Hollins on 72 (cf OR 70 / RPR 85). The juvenile winner Elzaam comes out with a very high 93+wfa.

Were it not for that figure for CB, I'd say those races offered quite convincing evidence that the races were pretty true run throughout the day, at least in terms of final times.

However, a figure of 120+wfa is highly unusual. I'm not sure I've ever come across it in a Derby, let alone a trial.

If others in the yard are significantly better than CB then they must have quite a team!
 
It wasn't an excellent time on my figures.

you have a different view now DO?

the % pace figures make CB unlikely to have been a true run race..surpised you have CB so high tbh..as said..a lot of horses would have to have run 10lb above their level to make CB that high.

its probably me thats wrong

just re read it again..120+wfa..about a 132/135 horse then DO??

i can't see how you could get a figure that high without really overating most of the first 4 home in most of the races.
 
Last edited:
CB has run 7lbs faster than Fareer including wfa..thats not near 132..Fareer's race is about 1lb faster than its rating..making CB somewhere near a 110 incl wfa

unless i wrote the times down wrong :)
 
you do know that they changed the distances at York when they held the Royal meeting?..the 7f, 8f + 12f distances were all changed at that point
the 8f race is now an 8f race..it was 7f 202y before..if you are using older standard times your 8f standard will be about 1 second out of line..which will affect Fareer's rating on your figs
 
Last edited:
Also the distances on Dante day were changed due to rail movements. Worth taking into account given the clerk was good enough to specify them.
 
Also the distances on Dante day were changed due to rail movements. Worth taking into account given the clerk was good enough to specify them.


they were changed for the Royal meeting and as far as I know a mile is now a mile rather than 7f202y ..since then

RP show in their results the new distances,,have done since then..its always specified as 8f nowadays

what were they changed to for the Dante Gareth?
 
From the RP analysis:

"Rail movement meant that the distances of races over 1m1f were reduced by 27yds."

Not sure if it makes a big difference, but worth noting.
 
From the RP analysis:

"Rail movement meant that the distances of races over 1m1f were reduced by 27yds."

Not sure if it makes a big difference, but worth noting.
thanks for that Gareth

it would make the 10f standard easier to achieve..by about 8 lengths which would overate the Dante quite a lot

on saying that..i calculated without knowing that and still only got 110 for Dante winner:)..so now its even less :)

I think a lot of people are still using old standard times for York..RP still have same standard they used for 7f202 ..which seems bizarre...but it has changed by about a second over the mile.
 
Last edited:
I think a lot of people are still using old standard times for York..RP still have same standard they used for 7f202 ..which seems bizarre...but it has changed by about a second over the mile.

I understood that the distance of the race was the same but they'd simply re-measured it.
 
I understood that the distance of the race was the same but they'd simply re-measured it.


it must have been wrong before then?

its getting confusing now

as far as I know..because they wanted full distances for up north Ascot they changed the distances of the races..so the start of the old 7f 202yd was moved back 18 yards

maybe someone can throw light on this?
 
It did sound that way from AOB's interview on the ML. And yet at the same time he didn't say SNA worked badly, just the same as Midas Touch, good but not brilliant. To me you don't rule a horse out who is working well but not outstanding.

SNA out to 5.7 on the machine. I think anyone who has a position on him needs to cover with JV.
 
you have a different view now DO?

the % pace figures make CB unlikely to have been a true run race..surpised you have CB so high tbh..as said..a lot of horses would have to have run 10lb above their level to make CB that high.

its probably me thats wrong

just re read it again..120+wfa..about a 132/135 horse then DO??

i can't see how you could get a figure that high without really overating most of the first 4 home in most of the races.

If I said it wasn't an excellent time in reference to the Dante I must have been mixed up. I must have had a different trial in mind. The thing about the Dante compared with the other races is that the other races work out very close to the form figures, so they don't seem over-rated as such. If the Dante is wrong then the other races must have been moderately run overall.

I remember last year in the early meeting at Newmarket a similar scenario which ultimately proved misleading.
 
It did sound that way from AOB's interview on the ML. And yet at the same time he didn't say SNA worked badly, just the same as Midas Touch, good but not brilliant. To me you don't rule a horse out who is working well but not outstanding.

SNA out to 5.7 on the machine. I think anyone who has a position on him needs to cover with JV.


its like russian roulette with these AOB horses ante post isn't it?..you are gambling on A whether horse is good enough..and B whether it runs even if theres nowt wrong with its health

i'll stick to on the day..at least he is unlikely to whisk one over the sea just before the race :)
 
you do know that they changed the distances at York when they held the Royal meeting?..the 7f, 8f + 12f distances were all changed at that point
the 8f race is now an 8f race..it was 7f 202y before..if you are using older standard times your 8f standard will be about 1 second out of line..which will affect Fareer's rating on your figs
Yes. I took the 7f 202y time divided it by the yardage and multiplied it by 1760. It isn't necessarily bang on the money but it would be any more than a pound or so out. The old standard time for 7f 202y was 1m36s. 'My' standard time for the full mile is 1m37s. I'va calculated other 'standard' times for the new distances.
 
If I said it wasn't an excellent time in reference to the Dante I must have been mixed up. I must have had a different trial in mind. The thing about the Dante compared with the other races is that the other races work out very close to the form figures, so they don't seem over-rated as such. If the Dante is wrong then the other races must have been moderately run overall.

I remember last year in the early meeting at Newmarket a similar scenario which ultimately proved misleading.

on my weight allowed speed figs i get this DO..

Speed Fig....+/- below OHR

90.... -5....JOHANNES
108...-1....SARISKA
110...-10....CAPE BLANCO
103.....+1....FAREER
87.....-12....ROSE BLOSSOM
100.....+10...ELZAAM

Going: 40lb per mile fast = FIRM
 
Last edited:
Yes. I took the 7f 202y time divided it by the yardage and multiplied it by 1760. It isn't necessarily bang on the money but it would be any more than a pound or so out. The old standard time for 7f 202y was 1m36s. 'My' standard time for the full mile is 1m37s. I'va calculated other 'standard' times for the new distances.

we are both on same page then :)
 
Back
Top