The Dewhurst

tdk said:
HE has achieved a better speed figure than Dream Ahead - on the bridle (at Doncaster). Although the Racing Post have been ramping up the gallop reports in the last couple of days, I can't have Frankel as a hype horse - his last two performances have been absolutely exceptional - and the clock provides plenty of evidence that he is one of the best 2yos we have ever seen.
Click to expand...

would you like to put up your calculations to demonstrate the superiority over such as Teofilo or New Approach's 2yo time figures?

i make him 10lb behind Teofilo ..his speed figure was very impressive in the Dewhurst

what was your figure for Teofilo..and how did you come to the conclusion he is slower than Frankel?

on my beyer type figs

Teofilo 119
New Approach 117
Frankel 109 [donny]

they are without wfa
 
Last edited:
Hamm said:
Now you're taking time off what he actually clocked because he won easily?

Whatever next..

We should deal in facts when discussing time not ease of victory..
Click to expand...

No - I'm not taking any time off anything...

It was a Group 2 class time (and, arguably, better than any time Dream Ahead has recorded) achieved virtually on the bridle. That, in my opinion, is the mark of an exceptional horse.

Mr Rowlands will also tell you that the final 2f sectional at Ascot was a split that only an extremely good horse could achieve.
 
The Newmarket card that Dream Ahead took part in looks fraught with ifs and buts..Cityscape put up a major figure as did Hooray..the ground has influenced the winning distances big style.

I got the ground that day as 43lb slow

Hooray on 115 :blink:
Dream Ahead on 111

so it could be argued that Frankel is at least the 3rd fastest 2yo just this season..and i ain't rated many races

how he is the fastest 2yo ever is totally eluding me

I look forward to seeing your calcs to show Frankel being the fastest 2yo..i'm mystified by that claim
 
tdk said:
No - I'm not taking any time off anything...

It was a Group 2 class time (and, arguably, better than any time Dream Ahead has recorded) achieved virtually on the bridle. That, in my opinion, is the mark of an exceptional horse.

Mr Rowlands will also tell you that the final 2f sectional at Ascot was a split that only an extremely good horse could achieve.
Click to expand...

any chance of replying to my query TDK?
 
tdk said:
No - I'm not taking any time off anything...

It was a Group 2 class time (and, arguably, better than any time Dream Ahead has recorded) achieved virtually on the bridle. That, in my opinion, is the mark of an exceptional horse.

Mr Rowlands will also tell you that the final 2f sectional at Ascot was a split that only an extremely good horse could achieve.
Click to expand...


i'm not really questioning how good Frankel is..just trying to put some facts behind it

could you explain how the final 3f in isolation is telling you something without measuring how much energy he used up to that point..and without seeing the final 3f of other horses throughout the season on similar ground
 
Courtesy of our Simon Rowlands

There were three races over the round mile at Ascot on Saturday, and the hand-taken sectionals for the principals from them make for interesting reading. Royal Lodge Stakes
FRANKEL 101.73 sec overall (35.5 sec final 3f) 107.5% finishing speed (+20 lb sectional adjustment)
KLAMMER 103.55 sec (37.6 sec) 103.3% (+4 lb)
TREASURE BEACH 103.68 sec (37.7 sec) 103.1% (+3 lb)
Fillies' Mile
WHITE MOONSTONE 102.75 sec (36.2 sec) 106.4% (+14 lb)
TOGETHER 102.80 sec (36.3 sec) 106.1% (+13 lb)
THEYSKENS' THEORY 103.02 sec (36.8 sec) 104.8% (+8 lb)
Queen Elizabeth II Stakes
POET'S VOICE 99.76 sec (36.8 sec) 101.7% (+1 lb)
RIP VAN WINKLE 99.78 sec (37.9 sec) 98.7% (+1 lb)
RED JAZZ 99.87 sec (37.6 sec) 99.6% (+0 lb)
I made the optimum % finishing speed, on ground that seemed to be less testing than the official "good to soft", 100.2.
While Poet's Voice's overall time was fastest, that reflected a truly run race. Both White Moonstone and (in particular) Frankel ran faster at the end of their wins.
This might not be anything to get especially excited about where Frankel is concerned were his overall time poor (I explained analysis of overall race times in a much earlier blog series). If you go slow early and fast late it is not always such a big deal.
However, Frankel's overall time was respectable, at least, and his finishing effort deserves to be viewed as exceptional in that context.
I have timefigures of 124, 98 and 112 respectively for Poet's Voice, White Moonstone and Frankel, which leads to sectional ratings of 125 for Poet's Voice, 112 for White Moonstone and a whopping 132 for Frankel.
 
But what are your speed figures for Frankel TDK..you said he was one of teh fastest 2yo's ever i think.

that sectional analysis is interesting...but not totally conclusive obviously

like i said..he is obviously very good..but on overall speed figures..it is an exagerration to say he is the fastest ever ..he may be after Saturday..but he isn't at this moment

the sectionals show he has a lot of speed..a lot

the ground at Ascot timed at true good ground as Pru suggests..no give in it
 
Last edited:
I don't keep speed figures, EC1, but I am capable of looking at a number of different ratings and drawing my own conclusions from them.

I'm not suggesting that Frankel has recorded the fastest times in the history of juvenile racing. What I am saying is that he has recorded very fast times (and arguably better times than Dream Ahead or his other rivals) whilst barely coming off the bridle.

Think of it as Usain Bolt doing a 9.90 while easing down 30m from the line. He hasn't broken the world record yet - but your eyes and your brain tell you that he could if he wanted to.
 
tdk said:
I don't keep speed figures, EC1, but I am capable of looking at a number of different ratings and drawing my own conclusions from them.

I'm not suggesting that Frankel has recorded the fastest times in the history of juvenile racing. What I am saying is that he has recorded very fast times (and arguably better times than Dream Ahead or his other rivals) whilst barely coming off the bridle.

Think of it as Usain Bolt doing a 9.90 while easing down 30m from the line. He hasn't broken the world record yet - but your eyes and your brain tell you that he could if he wanted to.
Click to expand...


on paper he isn' actually faster - but i know what you are saying obviously..potentially he could be a lot better

on saying that..i still don't see how he was cruising at Ascot..he was being urged quite a lot..he has had some urging to run that sectional so quickly.

the sectionals show he was 3 seconds slower after 5f than PV..but has then pulled that back to run what is a very respectable overall time..that is indeed quite a feat


the race on Saturday is a watcher for me tbh..hopefully we may see something special..i want a true run race for a start:)

i still wouldn't be taking 1/2 about Frankel..the other two are good horses
 
Last edited:
re the sectionals

the last 3f is fast for Frankel..but..66.2 is very slow for a mile race for the first 5f

by comparison..and this isn't an exact comparison obviously..so don't go all microsecond on me:)

looking back at the Newmarket sectionals when they produced them..yes Newmarket is a bit easier track..but in the last 3f it does contain an uphill section.

When Killybegs won the Craven on Good ground..not dissimilar to Frankels ground..he ran the first 5f in 64.03

this race was slowly run..jog and sprint job..but still 2 seconds faster than Frankels slowly run affair..the track is easier yes..but Killybegs Craven was one of the slowest Cravens early on

his last 3 furlong time was 34.76

so ..yes he was a few months older than Frankel..but he did run faster early on..and still sprinted those 3f nearly a second faster than Frankel

what impressed people a lot about Ascot was that Frankel passed them so easily..but..they were walking there in relative terms..which has exaggerated his move..basically he caught them napping on the bend in..then just sprinted to the line.

35.5 looks very impressive in isolation..in terms of the early speed..which we didn't have a race of similar early to compare it with

I've tried to find a similar early pace over the mile at Ascot..but I haven't found one that was as slow as Frankels to compare it with..it was that slow

the Killybegs comparison shows that a horse can run sub 35 seconds for 3f on good ground..without being exceptional..Killybegs was no world beater..but he beat 35 seconds and used more energy early on than Frankel.
 
Last edited:
Hamm said:
Excuse the relative ignorance of sectionals etc, but wouldn't this fact make a very strong final 3 furlongs much much more likely?
Click to expand...

thats why i used the Killybegs example..he too went slow early and hence could run very fast late on

the real question here is..when a horse runs 66 seconds early..how fast can he run the last 3f.

obviously i used two tracks..and Ascot is tougher

if we had split records of most races over the Ascot mile it would simply be a case of finding another horse..on similar going..that ran the first 5f in 66..then see how well he runs the last 3..and compare diretly to Frankel

my guess is that his last 3f time is very good rather than average..he COULD be a monster..but before i take short odds i would want to be finding that 66 seconds horse and measure from him just how good Frankel is

is anyone prepared to put the work in on this one?..i know if i bet big i would scouring those past meetings to find that comparison
 
Last edited:
EC, you quite clearly should NOT just be looking for isolated similar circumstances against which to compare another time, one on one.

How about establishing optimum sectionals at the course and trip from a large enough sample of suitable races run in a "good" time, in order to establish "how to run fast", and a way of adjusting the final time when races are run in a non-optimal way (if you are interested I have written about this in various blogs)?

It is extremely questionable to cherry-pick examples that may or may not shed light on the matter, let alone to take them from different courses under different conditions etc.
 
Hamm said:
I love hearing stories about wonder gallops 2/3 days before a race - usually forces the price down when it lessens their chances in reality.
Click to expand...

Absolutely - it's hilarious stuff. No trainer is going to risk giving their horse a strenuous piece of work that close to a race, he'll have had a breeze as a pipe opener.
 
I we all think it is the greatest 2 year old race in years - how can he be a 1/2 shot?
Click to expand...

Because after Ascot, whatever any analysis tells you, you just know its not a good idea to take this particular animal on
 
J Alfred Prufrock said:
EC, you quite clearly should NOT just be looking for isolated similar circumstances against which to compare another time, one on one.

How about establishing optimum sectionals at the course and trip from a large enough sample of suitable races run in a "good" time, in order to establish "how to run fast", and a way of adjusting the final time when races are run in a non-optimal way (if you are interested I have written about this in various blogs)?

It is extremely questionable to cherry-pick examples that may or may not shed light on the matter, let alone to take them from different courses under different conditions etc.
Click to expand...

I agree that doing that is the best way

but the isolated time would be interesting..if a horse rated 100 hits that 5f marker at 66 and goes on to win..it would give a measuring stick..the last 3f time would be a valid comparison as its unlikely that any dawdling in the race at that point would hinder it.

not that i can find one like

anyone making that bet without checking the worth of that 3f sectional is a guesser imo..its information vital to measuring the worth of that form

its a complete guess at this time which of he 3 will win..i haven't seen anyone here that has any way of actually predicting which of the 3 will win...which straight off makes odds on about one of them..the mug bet of the year
 
Back
Top