The Road to the 2012 2000 Guineas

I know that (ie the conclusion of the sectionals - the overall time is simply slow. There can be no getting away from that). That's why I think they must have some inherent serious flaw.
 
Last edited:
I fail to grasp how people can come out and say he's won a Group 1 race over a mile.

In name and on paper it states the race was a Group 1 mile but the way it was run suggests you wouldn't have needed to stay much further than 6f to win being held up on the day.
 
My time rating for Camelot is very slow too but I just don't buy the sectionals' conclusion. There must be a fatal flaw in the calculation. Of the seven races run on the day and taking the first as the marker for the going, not one of the other races produced a time rating in advance of the form rating and Camelot's time rating was only 18lbs faster than that of Red Quartet, winner of the 3yo 6f handicap off 81 and 19lbs faster than Rewarded who won the 3yo handicap over course and distance off 83. Lindop, anyone?

The overall time for the Guineas was therefore slow and the race was won by a potential stayer. My pre-race hope that there wasn't any pace and that the race would fall into the hands of a true miler proved unfounded because Trumper Major has taken them along at too fast a pace. Camelot and French Fifteen came from almost last at halfway to go clear, usually a clear sign that the front runners are weakening. There can be no guarantee that they'd have got to the front off a less generous pace.

Looking at the three groups, on the near side TM has made the running and actually burned off everything that chased him. On the far side Abtaal made all and weakened significantly, probably having gone too fast in order to keep up with the near side. Caspar Netscher back in ninth led home the trio who raced up the middle but his stamina was in doubt beforehand and the other two were big outsiders. Forget them. I'm not sure what to make of the far side group given that Coupe De Ville was only beaten just over a length by Hermival.

I think time will prove Trumpet Major is far better than this bare form and possibly a better miler than French Fifteen. He'll probably improve as the season progresses and I'd defintiely fancy him to beat Camelot on the outside chance they dropped the winner back to a mile at some point.


The pace wasn't over strong imo DO.

The leaders time after 5f, after correcting ground speed, was 62.03. That isn't overly fast, certainly not going to damage a horse in the finish.

the ideal pace for a 2000 guineas winner at 5f is in the 60/61 second range..so its fair to say that 62.03 is very comfortable. Attraction for instance ran a 59.95 first 5f and still had enough in the locker to win. Haafhd & Footsteps ran 60.26 & 60.46 when winning their guineas. If 62.03 is too fast then its unlikely that these other horses would have won after running faster earlier.

Frankel ran a ground corrected 4f time of 46.64 which is fookin staggering when you consider the ideal pace would be 49/50 second region..not using him in the argument obviously as what he done we won't be seeing again i don't think
 
I fail to grasp how people can come out and say he's won a Group 1 race over a mile.

In name and on paper it states the race was a Group 1 mile but the way it was run suggests you wouldn't have needed to stay much further than 6f to win being held up on the day.

in which case Casper should have won as he could be champion sprinter material

Camelot comes out a bit better than Rock Of Gibraltor on his split times..ROG was certainly a 2000 guineas winner

I didn't give Camelot a chance...but i am happy to eat humble pie..because he has run against quite a lot of negatives in this race and won in style
 
Agreed he should have run better.

The runner up had won over 5-6f though hence it played into his strengths.
 
But he had the turn of foot to win a 6f race on Saturday.

Now I am really lost! :lol:

Your argument against Camelot seems to do nothing but make his case stronger. If he had the turn of foot to win a 6f race then he must be absolutely exceptional given that his breeding and everything else about him suggests that he is crying out for at least 10f.
 
Maybe,

But he had the turn of foot to win a 6f race on Saturday.

i think you might be exaggerating the 6f thing tbh...it wasn't a dawdle..it was just not a true test..but a 6f horse wouldn't have won it imo.

and if Camelot has shown 6f pace as you suggest then he is going to be one hell of a horse when he finds his correct trip do you not think?
 
Now I am really lost! :lol:

Your argument against Camelot seems to do nothing but make his case stronger. If he had the turn of foot to win a 6f race then he must be absolutely exceptional given that his breeding and everything else about him suggests that he is crying out for at least 10f.

snap ;)
 
I thought it at the time and I still think it. 5/4 is actually not too bad.

Is it really a 55% (roughly) chance that there is another 3yo better than him over 12f?
 
The leaders time after 5f, after correcting ground speed, was 62.03. That isn't overly fast, certainly not going to damage a horse in the finish.
There has to be the chance the correction is wrong. I'd be intersted in knowing what your going allowances for the two days were. For the record, mine were 0.32spf (soft) for the Saturday and provisionally 0.15spf (g/s) for the Sunday. Homecoming Queen put up a 7lbs faster time rating than Camelot.

By the by, I saw a mention for Kailani somewhere in relation to the Oaks. Her time rating (on my figures) was miles off the likes of Ouija Board and Ramruma.
 
I thought it at the time and I still think it. 5/4 is actually not too bad.

Is it really a 55% (roughly) chance that there is another 3yo better than him over 12f?

I think you have to factor in that Epsom doesn't suit every horse into any price.

Sea The Stars was 11/4 when he won the Derby..i wouldn't have backed even him at 5/4

also..what if Camelot is only a 10f horse?...he has shown a lot of toe for a 12f horse

of course he could be a real 12f horse which would make him nigh on unbeatable at that distance with the versatilty it would show

5/4 is very short imo..i would just rather watch and see if we have another superstar or not..if he were 11/4 i'd be in like;)
 
There has to be the chance the correction is wrong. I'd be intersted in knowing what your going allowances for the two days were. For the record, mine were 0.32spf (soft) for the Saturday and provisionally 0.15spf (g/s) for the Sunday. Homecoming Queen put up a 7lbs faster time rating than Camelot.

By the by, I saw a mention for Kailani somewhere in relation to the Oaks. Her time rating (on my figures) was miles off the likes of Ouija Board and Ramruma.

speed figure wise..no wfa added..Camelot 104..HQ 113

going correction Saturday = 0.50 spf
going correction Sunday = 0.33 spf

a difference between the days of 0.17 ...exactly the same as yours

ours could differ in level depending on the standard times you and i use..all mine are based on a 90 race on Good ground

Kailani's race was decently run but the time by then had been affected by rainfall..so no use for analysis
 
Last edited:
There has to be the chance the correction is wrong. I'd be intersted in knowing what your going allowances for the two days were. For the record, mine were 0.32spf (soft) for the Saturday and provisionally 0.15spf (g/s) for the Sunday. Homecoming Queen put up a 7lbs faster time rating than Camelot.

By the by, I saw a mention for Kailani somewhere in relation to the Oaks. Her time rating (on my figures) was miles off the likes of Ouija Board and Ramruma.

just to add..if i used your going allowances..then it makes the guineas 5f time even slower than 62.03
 
Last edited:
DO

On Warbler's board the concensus is about 0.45 pf slow...what did you make it Stan?

What did Topspeed make it as well?..anyone else make figures?
 
Last edited:
also..what if Camelot is only a 10f horse?...he has shown a lot of toe for a 12f horse

This thought had occurred to me. How ironic it would be if he didn't stay in the Derby.

I haven't backed him and wouldn't take the 5/4 now for the reasons others have said. However, that doesn't mean he's a bad price and I think it fairly reflects his chance and possibly underestimates it if you assume that he is 100% to run (which he isn't obviously). If he were any bigger then I think I might be tempted.
 
Back
Top