The Derby

Not that few, I don't think. I'm in the Churchill camp and he's ante-post favourite so those who fancy him must be in the majority, no?
 
CoM and Venice Beach look the types who'll need a long straight to be seen to best effect. Yucatan also will improve for 12f. I think they'd be mad to run Churchill in the race.
 
Desert Orchid said:
Not that few, I don't think. I'm in the Churchill camp and he's ante-post favourite so those who fancy him must be in the majority, no?
Click to expand...

Not really DO. Making him favourite in a ante-post market doesn't always mean that weight of money forced it, bookies often react with a price after an event before a bet is even struck.
 
Euronymous said:
CoM and Venice Beach look the types who'll need a long straight to be seen to best effect. Yucatan also will improve for 12f. I think they'd be mad to run Churchill in the race.
Click to expand...

I totally agree. To much doubt and a lot of prize money to be won at more realistic distances. There's always next years Coronation, King George, etc.
 
Churchill dam by Storm Cat (7.7f) next dam by Air Express (8.6f), next dam by Indian Ridge (7.8f) ,next dam by Tina's pet (7.1f) , next dam by Blue Cashmere (7.2f) .
Apart from Indian Ridge there is not one of those stallions capable of siring a credible Derby prospect.
Should Churchill win it will be all due to Galileo's influence.
 
Doesn't the risk v reward make it worth taking ?. It's common knowledge that he adds a lot of stamina influence but if he can still produce a classic winning horse over 12f out of a mare with that line then surely his fee only increases even more.

Sadly he's 19 and won't be around forever but he could still pass that influence on.

Can't see him winning it myself but I reckon they could well go for it.
 
Last edited:
Where is SteveM's dosage analysis - anyone got a link to it?

I'm green on the race but fancy Cliffs of Moher and Venice Beach. Going off Cracksman by the minute although he would be a big winner for me.
 
The 52 rated maiden looks like not running due to the BHA suggesting her apprentice jockey lacks the necessary skills after less than 70 rides, only one winner and zero experience around Epsom.
 
If the rider is the problem, then logically speaking apprentice races must be impossibly dangerous affairs?
 
I think it's one way of stopping it running! Let's face it it's like me taking on Usain Bolt at levels!!
No way it should run especially round a technically difficult course like Epsom with an inexperienced rider on. They need to tighten conditions.
 
Jimmy Lindley had an interesting take on the situation today in Racing Post.
He recalled the 1962 pile up when an inexperienced french jockey was clipping heels on the horse ahead of him so Jimmy and Joe Mercer got out of his way just before the pile up. While no jockey was held responsible the stewards recommended against inexperienced jockeys riding in the race; that year there were 26 runners.
 
They can't allow the Derby to become a publicity gimmick, no matter the cause, for any Tom Dick or Harry with a few bob who wants to abuse/use the race. This mule belongs in a seller and a bad one at that...and please don't anyone give me shyte about them having to run the horse wherever they want
 
I completely agree, it's good that they won't be running, but I'm not sure about the logic that has been used. They've said it's about the rider rather than the horse, but really it's about both.

The BHA should give themselves the discretionary power to prevent bad horses taking part. Or maybe change the conditions of the race so that maidens and lowly rated horses wanting to run in it have to pay a hefty supplement.
 
So....its ok for Betfair to provide a celebrity to ride over FENCES at cheltenham, but its not ok for a graduate of the BHA Jockey School to ride in a flat race?? and people wonder why the general public can't quite take to horse racing. Run by complete and utter fannies.
 
The owner is clearly a publicity seeking idiot. It's reminiscent of when Fergus Wilson was running no hopers in the big Cheltenham races.

However it's the rules which need to be changed. Minimum ratings for horses in group races and minimum experience levels for jockeys.
 
BennyB said:
The owner is clearly a publicity seeking idiot. It's reminiscent of when Fergus Wilson was running no hopers in the big Cheltenham races.

However it's the rules which need to be changed. Minimum ratings for horses in group races and minimum experience levels for jockeys.
Click to expand...

Under the rules, there is surely no basis for excluding the jockey? If there was a legal challenge, I'm not sure how it could be upheld?

She holds a license and is eligible to ride in the race. Would they do the same if it was a male jockey?

All sorts of angles to this.
 
Digger said:
So....its ok for Betfair to provide a celebrity to ride over FENCES at cheltenham, but its not ok for a graduate of the BHA Jockey School to ride in a flat race?? and people wonder why the general public can't quite take to horse racing. Run by complete and utter fannies.
Click to expand...
The difference there is that there are loads of poor jockeys in the foxhunters every year, getting the ride due to family connections etc. Not the case in the derby.

Sent from my SM-G360F using Tapatalk
 
they've jocked up another apprentice now. paddy pilley.

record is a bit more experienced than mangan, had 4 spins round epsom.
 
Charlie Poste put forward a sensible argument on ATR in that it's hard to see how any good can come from the experience. They either pop her out last and let her come home in her own time, in which case they'll get no coverage as all eyes will be on the horses fighting out the finish and winning connections. Or they try and go with the rest of the field and in a c. 20 runner race cause potential disaster as they quickly drop backwards.

It seems the only way they'll get the coverage they desire - aside from the should she / shouldn't she talk that has plagued the media - is if she causes notable interference in the race.


Biggest travesty though is the response of certain bookies publicly bemoaning their liabilities about her. Bet Victor's Charlie McCann yesterday; "We couldn't believe the level of support for the filly and were forced to cut her to 1,000/1 at 4:15pm on Monday"

F**k right off.
 
I wonder how many jockeys they had to ask before one took the ride. Surely any self respecting jockey would tell them where to go - you're just setting yourself up to be a laughing stock.
 
Back
Top