Welsh Grand National

[Frankel]

Time nearly 20 secs slower than last 10 runnings.

 

[EC1]

70 lengths per mile slow by the time they got to that race..at most NH tracks ..the average for soft ground is 40 lengths slow..heavy = 63...desperate = 85+...near on unraceable..100+

so..slow side of heavy would be the estimate

 

[Desert Orchid]

Convenient, but a narrow interpretation, I fear, DO.

Where does he finish if you measure his ability relative to Benvolio?

Convenient and narrow to you, obviously.

Benvolio was beaten before the end of the first circuit so that's entirely spurious but obviously convenient and narrow to you.

It's a question of examining all the collateral form lines as well as the norms for the race and finding whichever makes best sense to the interpreter.

Going forward, I'll continue to rate Black Thunder as having finished alongside Upswing last time when not 100% trying but I'll also keep in mind that he might well have won this. I'm pretty confident he is a long way better than we've seen.

Not much point in my trying to say any more than that, I suppose.

 

[Grasshopper]

I'm not having a pop, DO. I just think it takes too much of a leap-of-faith, to rate BT the logical winner, but each to their own.

Thinking the horse is capable of better is an entirely different thing, of course, and isn't something I would dispute.

 

[Desert Orchid]

Using the RP site for calculating ratings along my normal lines, let's say Mountainous equalled his best career form, ie his win in this two years ago off 137.

He won yesterday off 132 so if we could have been sure he'd run that well we could have regarded him as a strongly possible winner. He has run 15lbs better than his OR (on my scale) when the average for the winner of the race is about 12lbs so he is a very good winner.

Shotgun Paddy's rating for yesterday, via Mountainous, has him 6lbs short of his career best. If we say the weight in the heavy ground accounted for that than we could expect it to affect BT in the same way.



Yesterday I backed BT expecting it to run to at least 165 (my Cheltenham rating for him) before taking Cobden's claim into account. If he is worth, as Nicholls seems to think, pretty much all of it I'll go conservative and say 5lbs. So I'd have him that much further clear in my figures. If the weight wasn't going to be a factor he should have, on my figures, have been able to beat his OR by 18lbs before taking into account how much he may have improved for the Cheltenham run. As it stands, that would be 3 lbs better than Mountainous so if we deduct the 6lbs that SP was below his best it leaves BT 3lbs behind Mountainous. It would then all depend on how much better BT was expected to run compared with Cheltenham. I don't think 3lbs is unreasonable. And what if Cobden is worth all of his claim?

Of course it's all speculation and is easy to dismiss as such but I like to think a wee bit differently to other punters. I think it gives me a useful edge when it comes to punting. But as you say, each to his own.

 

[marbler]

I once thought I had an edge, when wanting for Time For Rupert to be entered, (or more specifically declared), for the 2012 William Hill handicap chase at the festival.

Early in the 2011/2012 season he beat The Giant Bolster in a graduation chase by 1.75 lengths.

The Giant Bolster won its next start in a decent handicap chase at Cheltenham in early 2012, so was subsequently raised to 160.
.
The horse that beat him off level weights by 1.75 lengths, Time For Rupert, was on a mark of 153 with an entry in the WH Handicap Chase on the Tuesday.

Using some basic arithmetic, Time For Rupert was seven pound ahead of the handicapper just on the raw figures alone, (plus the 1.75 lengths winning margin over The Giant Bolster), so maybe about 10 pound well-handicapped for the WH Chase at Cheltenham.

However, his trainer decided to run him in the Gold Cup, where he ran a massive race until weakening after at the last fence in what was a longer distance than the handicap.

Connections did go for the same handicap at the meeting the following year, where he finished nowhere at fancied odds of 10/1.

I'm not sure what my point is, other than Time For Rupert was a good thing the William Hill handicap Chase in 2012 (not 2013), but I've enjoyed writing the story.

Ps, And yes...The Racing Post database was used to recite this!

 

[Desert Orchid]

I once thought I had an edge, when wanting for Time For Rupert to be entered (or more specifically declared) for the 2012 William Hill handicap chase at the festival.

Earlier in the 2011/2012 season he beat The Giant Bolster in a graduation chase by 1.75 lengths.

The Giant Bolster won its next start in a decent handicap chase at Cheltenham in early 2012, and was subsequently raised to 160.
.
Meanwhile, the horse that beat him off level weights by 1.75 lengths in that graduation chase, Time For Rupert, was on a mark of 153 with an entry in the WH Handicap Chase on the Tuesday.

Using some basic arithmetic, it seemed to me Time For Rupert was seven pound ahead of the handicapper just on the raw figures alone, (plus the 1.75 lengths winning margin over The Giant Bolster), so possibly/probably about 10 pound well handicapped for the handicap at Cheltenham.

However, His trainer decided to run him in the Gold Cup, where he ran a massive race, showing he was in rude health for sure, and although beaten just under ten lengths in the blue ribbon, I was left gutted that they never went for the handicap.

Connections did go for the same handicap the following year, where he finished nowhere at fancied odds of 10/1.

I'm not sure what my point is, but enjoyed doing this story.

It's entirely reasonable to think along those lines, marble. Plenty of people were doing something similar when weighing up Westren Warrior's chances yesterday, using Singlefarmpayment's easy win the week or two before as a big pointer to WW's chances. They were very unlucky that Yala Enki got a 6lbs allowance from the starter (although I think the other jockeys have to take a share of the blame for letting him stand so far ahead of them).