The King George

swedish chef said:
Master Minded future in limbo

Owner Clive Smith believes a decision on whether Master Minded will race again may not be made for another year.

The dual Champion Chase winner severed a tendon when stepping up to three miles for the first time in the King George at Kempton on Boxing Day. He has undergone successful surgery, and remains in Newmarket convalescing, but Smith warns the chance of infection is now the main danger.

"I was down at the yard on Monday and Dan Skelton gave me a good summary of the injury in detail, to which Paul Nicholls added some points," said Smith.

"Basically, he has had his open tendon sewn back together. It was not ruptured, just severely damaged. The big problem with injuries like this is if they get any muck in them but Master Minded's is clean at the moment.

"He remains in Newmarket and as much as possible is being done for him. He's in plaster and I think he will be for about a month. He will obviously have a very long rest but hopefully he will be walking on the roads by the end of the year with a possible return to training about 12 months away.

"The main thing is infection, although there is no sign of that at present. A similar case I remember is Azertyuiop, whom Paul trained. He came back in to full training but couldn't stand it after a year off.

"The answer is we just don't know if he will race again at this stage. But if he doesn't he's been a wonderful horse - if it wasn't for Kauto Star he would have been the horse of a lifetime."
Click to expand...

A shame this happened to the horse. I've loved watching Master Minded jump fences. So quick from one side to the other. I definitely did not expect what was to come after seeing him unseat at Exeter.
 
Didn't Paul Nicholls take out a Flat Trainers Licence?

Would be interesting if he could take a few spins on the Flat, maybe aim for 2013 Ascot Gold Cup as a 10-year old?
 
Look at the proximity of Calgary Bay in IC's Gold Cup
Click to expand...

instead of giving a list of horses that age had caught up with (plus in llt's case recovering from an injury) take a look at the proximity of sir rembrandt in his gold cup run against BM
you will be shocked
 
prince regent said:
instead of giving a list of horses that age had caught up with (plus in llt's case recovering from an injury) take a look at the proximity of sir rembrandt in his gold cup run against BM
you will be shocked
Click to expand...

Very soft ground that day for crying out loud ! :confused:
 
Very soft ground that day for crying out loud !
Click to expand...
:confused::confused:

in the gold cup the ground was described as good that day the race was run 5.6 seconds below average which dosnt indicate very soft ground which incidentally was run in a faster time than his first victory which was 13.10 seconds below average
 
Last edited:
I think it's fair to say Best Mate disappointed that day - even though winning - and was probably never the same horse again afterwards. Equally Sir Rembrandt ran the race of his life - as endorsed by his trainer, in the aftermath.
 
Does anyone actually remember the race? Best Mate did not get things his own way but still found a way to win. Considering it was his 3rd Gold Cup I don't think he needed to do any more than that. How quickly Paul Carberry's piece of race riding at the bottom of the hill is forgotten. Not everything is as black and white as the number of lengths that you beat trees. That Gold Cup was one horse versus the field and he prevailed, like a true champion.


On a side note the handicapper was supposed to look at Arkle's form and give him his thoughts on what mark he would give him. Why has this never happened?
 
What a pity. As David Johnson said earlier, comparing horses to Arkle is boring but the chief handicapper allocating him a mark would be something.
 
SlimChance said:
Does anyone actually remember the race? Best Mate did not get things his own way but still found a way to win. Considering it was his 3rd Gold Cup I don't think he needed to do any more than that. How quickly Paul Carberry's piece of race riding at the bottom of the hill is forgotten. Not everything is as black and white as the number of lengths that you beat trees. That Gold Cup was one horse versus the field and he prevailed, like a true champion.
Click to expand...
Did Paul Carrberry's gamesmanship account for the 11 lengths Harour Pilot made up on BM from the previous year?
 
SlimChance said:
What a pity. As David Johnson said earlier, comparing horses to Arkle is boring but the chief handicapper allocating him a mark would be something.
Click to expand...

Don't know about boring. He was the yardstick they all have to measure up to.

Euro’s right the handicapper gave up, although he did indicate the way his inquiries were heading.

Phil Smith believed that Mill House was of similar merit to Denman (which at the time he quantified as about 182). Timeform, for its part, awarded Arkle a rating of 212 in the mid-1960s.
 
SteveM said:
Don't know about boring. He was the yardstick they all have to measure up to.

Euro’s right the handicapper gave up, although he did indicate the way his inquiries were heading.

Phil Smith believed that Mill House was of similar merit to Denman (which at the time he quantified as about 182). Timeform, for its part, awarded Arkle a rating of 212 in the mid-1960s.
Click to expand...

Extrapolating from that - would that not bring Arkle down to a rating around 202? (Mill House was 192 or so from Timeform?).

If so, I think I could accept that - I've just always found it difficult to accept that the two best chasers of all time (by a margin of 20) were found in the same stable at the same time. 202 to Arkle and 200 or so to Flyingbolt would not be anywhere near as anomalous.
 
Flagship uberalles said:
Extrapolating from that - would that not bring Arkle down to a rating around 202? (Mill House was 192 or so from Timeform?).

If so, I think I could accept that - I've just always found it difficult to accept that the two best chasers of all time (by a margin of 20) were found in the same stable at the same time. 202 to Arkle and 200 or so to Flyingbolt would not be anywhere near as anomalous.
Click to expand...

You could view it that way. On the other hand Smith did give up on it.

He wasn't a big horse and was forced to carry 12st or more in his last 19 races. He was a freak and a half.
 
Last edited:
SteveM said:
Don't know about boring. He was the yardstick they all have to measure up to.

Euro’s right the handicapper gave up, although he did indicate the way his inquiries were heading.

Phil Smith believed that Mill House was of similar merit to Denman (which at the time he quantified as about 182). Timeform, for its part, awarded Arkle a rating of 212 in the mid-1960s.
Click to expand...

Did the handicapper say why he have up?
 
Irish Stamp said:
He had to focus on getting other horses handicap marks wrong.
Click to expand...

:lol:

...not far off I'd say. Something about the structure of the handicapping scale... another way of saying he couldn't be arsed.;)

Randall and Morris have of course attempted to square the circle in the Portway Press book A Century Of Champions, which is essentially Timeform based, but uses a common universal scale.
 
Last edited:
EC1 said:
if he concluded MH = Denman..then how come he couldn't rate Arkle?..they met enough times.
Click to expand...

He clearly didn't want to put his name to a rating and saw it as additional to his job spec.

Randall and Morris (... deceased) give us a good enough handle on him though in relation to other steeplechasers of the 20th century.
 
SteveM said:
He clearly didn't want to put his name to a rating and saw it as additional to his job spec.

Randall and Morris (... deceased) give us a good enough handle on him though in relation to other steeplechasers of the 20th century.
Click to expand...

I might be wrong but it could appear that he started the job with the intention of downrating Arkle..and when it was clear he couldn't he just said it was too difficult.

I can't see what is hard about it tbh after you have guaged the merit of one horse like MH..its only like trying to tie in form between Irish, English & French horses.
 
If someone here had the results in enough detail, I don't think it would be too difficult for us to have a stab at it.
 
EC1 said:
I might be wrong but it could appear that he started the job with the intention of downrating Arkle..and when it was clear he couldn't he just said it was too difficult.

I can't see what is hard about it tbh after you have guaged the merit of one horse like MH..its only like trying to tie in form between Irish, English & French horses.
Click to expand...

Now that most of us who really remember him are dead it has become fashionable to suggest he wasn’t as good as they said he was. Given that they had to change the handicap scale to accommodate him and that however much weight they lumped on him above 12st he still seemed to cope despite not being a big horse and from what those of us who are not dead still remember, it’s possible he was even better than they said he was. I don’t expect to see his like again. No one at the time thought he was merely 2lb superior to Flyingbolt but they just had to put a ceiling on Arkle somewhere. If I read about this horse without seeing him I wouldn’t believe it either.
 
Back
Top