Which Way De Solzen

Nothing to learn about MWDS on the back of that run. Reminded me a bit of looks like trouble's king george effort.
 
Can someone start one of those poll thingies

Qu; Where would you run My Way De Solzen

a) Champion Chase
b) Ryanair Chase
c) Gold Cup
e) Grand Annual Hcp
f) Racing Post Plate Hcp(Mildmay of Flete)
g) William Hill Chase Hcp
h) Stayers Hurdle
i) Champion Hurdle
j) miss Cheltenham
 
Originally posted by Shadow Leader@Dec 27 2007, 08:37 PM
Re-read Warbler's initial post, and then the one from Gaz's Way De Solzen, and then tell me no-one is saying he doesn't stay! It seems clear to me that both are basing that evidence at least partly on yesterday's run.
Click to expand...
I'm afraid you're only reading the bits you want to again Dom. The cirtical bit to my hypothesis is a "truly run" 3 miles, and again you've omitted this. I'm not sure how much clearer I could make it? I don't believe a typical Stayers Hurdle is truly run (don't confuse a fighting a finish with a true run race) they are two totally different things. The overall evidence is the time it takes to cover the entire race distance, not the final half mile. You can't run an overall fast time by sprinting a fast final half mile after going moderately for the first 2 and a half. A horse, not unlike a car engine, has a cubic capacity, which means they've got a top speed over which they can't go, and therefore can't make up the lost time without some kind of artifical assistance, like a JATO unit.

Now that being so, the next thing to conceed is that every horse has an optimum performance range. It might be best to try and visualise what I'm getting at as an X - Y axis. The X represents trip and the Y a level of performance. If you plot the performance against trip you should get something of a parabolic curve, with the apex representing their optimum performance etc After this point the level of performance detriorates, but it requires the horse to be travelling in a truly run race in order to make it like-for-like comparable, along its perfromance schedule.

Although its not strictly a direct comparison, it might help illustrate the principle of what I'm suggesting if you tried to think of it like this?

If you an I were given identical cars with the same cc and same amount of fuel in, and were then asked to drive in an uniterupted straight line at the same top speed, we should in theory run out of petrol at more or less the same time. We could therefore say that this was our maximum trip. If however you drove at 100mph (a true pace for the car) and I drove at 56mph (a false pace for the car) I would ultimately end up being able to travel further, as a result of running below what i was capable of, and thus making less demands on my energy reserves.

What I'm clearly suggesting from the first post, is that staying hurdlers, for reasons I've gone onto expand upon by way of suggestion, (poorer quality fields with few having true grade 1 credentials, despite what we assign to them?) are able to push their optimum limit (there parabolic curve) to the right along the X axis, as a result of being allowed to get away with racing at a slower pace (and one that is badly out of kilter with all other divisions i hold a record for, where the figure suggests the winners run to the par they're supposed to).

It is this that I'm suggesting has seduced Alan King into thinking his horse stays a truly run 3 miles, when in actual fact he didn't have any evidence to base this on, given that his horse had never been asked to run 3 miles at a true grade 1 pace before. Now this isn't uncommon, and most stayers can still get away with it as their performance tapers off rather than dramatically collapsing, depending on where the apex of the parabolic curve sits within the window.

What I'm saying is that MWDS's might just have been in that window. He's probably a 16 - 20F horse, who was allowed to look like a 21 - 25F by virtue of running in staying hurdles. The slow pace associated with these contests concealed his limitations by way of trip, and allowed him to push his performance curve towards the right hand of the X axis, compensating for what he lacked in true pace, by increasing his potential effective range.

When he's been asked to go the distance at a true pace for the first time though, the artifical nature of his previous performances has been exposed, as the very thing that was insulating and protecting him (a false pace) has been removed. A correction has therefore occured, and with the choke out much earlier, the performance curve has shifted to the left, and thus brought his optimum distance nearer to that of his true ability in terms of trip.

This would explain why King was bullish pre Haydock. The horse had clearly been sending him all the same signals as he had previously. The big difference this time though, is that he was going to have to run a true 3 miles for the first time, as opposed to a moderate 3 miles. The latter is within his compass according to his hurdles form and speed figures, the former, remains unknown.

Watch the race again, and that's exactly how it plays out. Note the distance under which this mid distance horse starts to lose touch.

King then compounded this mistake by seemingly blaming himself for not preparing the horse properly, and thus launched into a rigorous training regime. He doesn't seem to have countenaced the possibility that the stayers hurdle isn't always guaranteed to be sure fire evidence that a horse stays a truly run 3 miles. Under this mis-diagnosis of cause and effect he has probably been responsible for over doing MWDS ahead of the KG (imho)

Far from basing it on yesterday, (though you never said it was exclusively so) it's based on 12 years worth of stayers ratings, and a few other checks and balances I've performed for Aintree, Newbury and Wetherby just to make sure that it isn't an aspect pecuiliar to Cheltenham.

I would broaden it out, as I believe there are a couple of other useful, nay, good things, who've similarly yet to prove they can stay a Cheltenham race trip under a true or searching pace. BJK was obviosuly top of last years list, and he proved it to me. The year before that Sweet Wake and Mister Hight were similarly crying out. That's not to say such horses are destined to flop, but rather that they go into unknown territory if asked to suddenly run to a true pace at that distance. There's another two candidates this year too norty
 
Originally posted by Gaz's Way De Solzen@Dec 27 2007, 06:10 PM
I dont know as much about horse racing and general knowledge as you guys and im not sure what tests they do in such situations.
Click to expand...
Your opinion is as valid as anyone's and if you need any information from those possibly better informed, you only have to ask! :)

I am possibly not the best person to respond, but some of the things they can do at the racecourse can be to ask the on call vet to give the horse a once over. This can include scans if a broken bone is suspected. The on call vet at the race track is very often the first port of call. The vet can do a scope although many trainers prefer their own vets to carry out tests once the horse returns home. The stable staff can trot up a horse to check to see if he/she is lame and if a horse has bled that can normally be seen immediately. Some horses can be kept overnight at the track if the horse needs immediate rest with someone keeping a regular eye on them. They can also contact a local vet to take them in if they have travelled a long distance.

My Dad works at the racecourse stables of a few racetracks so you do get to learn alot about what happens "behind the scenes" on race days and it is always very interesting to watch and learn.
 
Kathy - thank you so much for the explanation, makes things a lot clearer.

I often look at the info and knowledge on here and think wow, you people know so much.

Im learning slowly, ive only been in the game for around 1-2 years looking more closely at things.

I visited the King stable not so long ago, which is why i love their horses :D.
 
Oh please, Warbler, I even quoted your "truly run 3 miles"!!!! Don't patronise me with bollocks about reading the bits I want to read.

I still disagree, no matter how you dress it up with caveats such as "a truly run 3 miles". As I said before, we are not talking about a selling hurdle at Plumpton and a horse does not win the Stayers' Hurdle without staying the trip, not least as it is run at Cheltenham, one of the stiffest tracks in the country. That's completely aside from the fact that most 3m hurdlers will want 3 1/2-4m [at least!!!!!!!] when sent over fences, which buggers up your argument entirely!

Besides which, from your initial comments one would easily assume you were basing at least part of your non-staying argument on yesterday's race going on the following quote [bear in mind this was posted after, not before the KG]

"I've given it a bit of thought as I had high hopes for him this season, and my simple conclusion is that he doesn't stay 3 miles, and never did"
 
Without wishing to sound patronising, I love it when Warbler starts threads like this. It's refreshing and gets us all - well saddos like me - thinking from another perspective, which in the long run can't be a bad exercise.

Still, I have to say it is surely extremely dangerous to draw firm conclusions from two runs, especially when the most recent was so obviously unrepresentative of the horse's true ability regardless of optimum distance.

Where I do tend to agree with Warbler is is global assessment of stayers. I've been trying to tell people for long enough that the current bunch of stayers is nothing great. Mind you, I don't think the 2-milers are that hot either. There's a bunch running close to true Grade 1 figures without any standouts (Osana might end up hammering them all) but they're still better than what we had a few years ago when only Istabraq and then old Foghorn Leghorn were upt o hitting figures beyond the G1 benchmark (168 on my figures).

Baracouda and Rhinestone Cowboy could do it over distances and on his best form so could Iris's Gift, just.
 
MWDS won a Long Walk hurdle at Chepstow by outstaying Neptune Collonges on softish ground-for a non stayer he has a nice record over 3 miles.
 
Originally posted by Shadow Leader@Dec 27 2007, 03:29 PM
I disagree with you still Warbler, and I am reading the same from your comment as I did the first time, second time and fourth time. If you feel it is not necessary for a horse to need to stay a truly run 3 miles to win the Stayers' I will disagree with you every time.

Click to expand...
Well this is the only the bit I can find where you've quoted it? I left the initial comment alone as I simply thought you were getting the wrong of the stick.

What I'm saying is a horse needs to be able to stay a truly run 3 miles to win a stayers, but can get away with it off a moderate pace, which brings those who are effective off say, 21F into play, as they're not required to run a true pace. This is very much at the hub of the hypothesis. I've consistantly said that the stayers hurdle ISN'T truly run (for whatever reason) . Indeed, I've gone on to ask what might happen to a few reputations if it were?

Far from "buggering up my argument" (such eloquence) all you've done in suggesting that they'd want further if sent over fences is provide me with an alternative explanation as to why the race rarely (well never on my records) produces a grade 1 time. Are we dealing with horses, a majority of which were simply too slow for shorter distances? and that this deficiency is then shown up when they're asked to race against each other in a division that the more talented haven't felt it necessary to indulge? If we're dealing with marathon plodders and aspiring Eider candidates it might offer a clue. It would explain why the elite stayers (as i do believe a few exist) are able to come back year after year and still win.

I think it's probably fair to say that some of the non-staying argument pertaining to MWDS was drawn from yesterday, but I've gone to great lengths to spell out that I thought it stemmed from Haydock, and was compounded by Alan King's reaction to the Betfair run. It is his mis-diagnosis of the route course, and his subsequent commitment to a detrimental course of action at home, that I suspect compounded a vulnerability. Again, I thought I'd made that clear?

The idea of the stayers being a slow division however, isn't new, and I seem to think I raised it 12 months ago at least. In this context, MWDS is possibly the latest victim
 
Originally posted by LUKE@Dec 27 2007, 10:19 PM
MWDS won a Long Walk hurdle at Chepstow by outstaying Neptune Collonges on softish ground-for a non stayer he has a nice record over 3 miles.
Click to expand...
Another one whose missing the point.

Leeds United have the best record in the football league, does that make Leeds the best team in the country? It's why I used the phrase;

"In the Kingdom of the blind, the one eyed womens Queen" (elsewhere in the Long walk thread)

How do you know these are grade 1 horses? Because the HRA says they are? The stopwatch (which is neutral and confirms the grade 1 assignations in all other divisions, with a possible bit of a small slip in staying novice chases) says they aren't. If it were wrong, and the class par method so badly flawed, it would show up across all the divisions and appear random. The simple fact is that it doesn't. It picks out the same division year after year, and rates it more or less at the same percentage below true grade 1 pace, year after year too.

I for one, have long wanted to know what would happen if a staying hurdler (or to make it work pragmatically you'd probably need 3 or 4 to avoid the phenonemon of a pace setter and a peloton etc) set out to run a grade 1 time from when the tapes went up?

The name Lough Derg looms up foremost in my mind (and he didn't run a grade 1 time either) but was faster than most staying hurdlers
 
"Can someone start one of those poll thingies

Qu; Where would you run My Way De Solzen

a) Champion Chase
b) Ryanair Chase
c) Gold Cup
e) Grand Annual Hcp
f) Racing Post Plate Hcp(Mildmay of Flete)
g) William Hill Chase Hcp
h) Stayers Hurdle
i) Champion Hurdle
j) miss Cheltenham"


k) July Cup
 
I admit of being guilty of only reading half of warblers post to be honest, far too theoretical for me. On what MW has done this season, no one can judge his best distance, that is the only way I can look at it. Both runs were far too bad to be true, whatever the reason, under-/overtrained, but we talk about a dual Cheltenham Festival winner here, so class is not an issue, and he did not show any so far, so there clearly must be other reasons and one can certainly NOT discuss his best trip on evidence of the two runs.

If he would have been fighting for 2nd with OV and ED, one could have said, OK, it was not the best Arkle blabla, but ... well, see above.
 
Maybe horses communicate with each other when they are milling round at the start and Exotic Dancer put the shits up My Way De Solzen by remarking how Kauto Star had been peeing all over him for the last 2 years and he would do the same to him again and again, cry giving him a chance to get out now so to say while there is still time! :P
 
MWDS won a Long Walk hurdle at Chepstow by outstaying Neptune Collonges on softish ground-for a non stayer he has a nice record over 3 miles
Click to expand...

Precisely.

Warbler, if he didnt stay that distance (at possibly the most gruelling of courses) he would have been beaten by far lesser performers than Grade one horses. as it happened, nothing beat him...

As has been correctly pointed out, he was never going, so the staying issue is neither here nor there. At his best, 3m at kempton should have been perfect for him, especially with those quick fences in the straight playing to his strengths

Didnt back him though.
 
MWDS won a Long Walk hurdle at Chepstow by outstaying Neptune Collonges on softish ground-for a non stayer he has a nice record over 3 miles
Click to expand...

Precisely.

Warbler, if he didnt stay that distance (at possibly the most gruelling of courses) he would have been beaten by far lesser performers than Grade one horses. as it happened, nothing beat him...

As has been correctly pointed out, he was never going, so the staying issue is neither here nor there. At his best, 3m at kempton should have been perfect for him, especially with those quick fences in the straight playing to his strengths

Didnt back him though.

and isnt it the opinion of many trainers that 3m over hurdles takes more getting than 3m chase?
 
Oh for crying out loud, this is getting exasperating. :xmasrudolf:

I've frankly given up the number of times I've had to explain the concept of staying a race distance proper is dependent on how a true a racing pace is set for the race concerned, before you can hope to draw any meaningful conclusion from it!!! If a horse isn't being asked the question, and hasn't been asked to dig into its reserves, and 'show us what its made of', how on earth can you confidently suggest it stays the trip?

All horses stay 3 miles, if they're given enough time to complete the distance. To stay it properly at racing pace requires a true pace to be set though, and not a jog.

The race in question was not run on punishing ground, though in fairness the word used was "softish", which is a bit ambiguous. The official going at Chepstow was Good to Soft, the Time based going was also Good to Soft, my own figure was -1.28 (slow side of Good) although I believe the hurdles course was slightly slower probably -2.92 which would also be Good to Soft. no dispute there then, but lets not pretend this was some kind of gruelling swamp battle.

The next thing to consider is how true a pace the race was? Once again (and typically for the division) it was slow. MWDS's RPR was 159 for his performance, his TS was 114, that's a full 45Ibs slower in terms of race speed than his handicap rating. It was yet another example of a slow staying hurdles race, i.e. wasn't run at a true pace, which makes the idea of seeing the trip out at a true grade 1 pace, irrelevant. If his TS was within 7Ibs of his RPR then I'd conceed the pace was true, and we'd have the basis to try and make some assessment on. As it happens, we don't.

A class par analysis for the race reveals that it was the slowest on the card. MWDS earned a rating off me of 85.80 if assessed on the more generous hurdles track variance. I've noted elsewhere that the typical grade 1 stayers hurdle is run about 13% below the class par equilibrium figure of 100. In this case he's 14.2% below this figure, which is pretty well within the usual territory, so again I can't say I'm surprised, nor do i believe you've unearthed some decisive 'magic bullet'.

Check out the differentials in BJK sometime if you want to see a serious example of a non stayer camoflauging his weaknesses with a series of slow TS figures totally out of kilter with his RPR's.

Anyway lets bring it back to MWDS for the benefit of Clive and Luke:

The first figure quoted is his TS, the second figure his RPR, the third figure is the number of pounds slower the race was run than his form suggested he was capable of. All races, apart from the last are at 24F plus over hurdles

TS RPR

102 - 148 = -46
114 - 159 = -45 (Chepstow)
145 - 166 = -21 (World Hurdle)
160 - 166 = -6 (Aintree; he lost)
57 - 150 = -93
141 - 141 = zero (Betfair Chase)

On the two occsions he was involved in a truly run race over 24F+ he lost. Unfortunately, by virtue of pulling up he won't have a TS for Kempton, but I think you can safely take an indication off kauto Star, that it was truly run again, which would give him a projected figure of 1 placed and 2 unplaced efforts over 24F+ in a truly run races.

Now let's see what happens to him at 16 - 17F by contrast;

TS RPR

107 - 109 = -2 (he won)
122 - 127 = -5 (he won)
106 - 136 = -30 (5th)
19 - 148 = -129 (he won)
82 - 103 = -21 (15th - Supreme, the race will of course have been quicker)

142 - 145 = -3 (Nov Chase Lingfield he won)
146 - 151 = -5 (Henry VIII he lost to Fair along coming second)
166 - 165 = +1 (The Arkle)


The first thing to note, is how much truer races run at this distance are 5 of the 8 feature RPR's and TS's with 5Ibs of each other (which of course is central to the whole hypothesis that a lot of grade 1 staying hurdlers are grade 1 in name only) given their tendancy to generate very slow races.

To some extent his Supreme performance might be discounted as he was so far back in the field, you'd need to take a figure off the winner in order to establish how true a pace the race was run at. The same would be true when he finished 5th in that hurdles race too

The final thing I'd ask you to re-consider is that list I put up regarding where the top 3 finishers in both divisions tend to come from. Its much easier to source Champion hurdlers geneology than it is Stayers, as the latter have historically been more prone to swerving the previous seasons festivals and emerged instead through a series of handicaps and staying hurdles (in fairness the Brit Ins wasn't in place for them for the best part of the sample period - not that, that race has yielded anything yet).

Despite being a numerically smaller sample those running into a place in the Champion hurdle can source their grade 1 credentials back to their novice days with much greater clarity then those doing the same in stayers division.

The following horses ran in the first 2 in a Championship race at Cheltenham of the previous seasons festival;

Brave Inca - WON grade 1 Supreme
Hardy Eustace - WON grade 1 SAH
Rooster Booster - WON grade 3 County Hurdle
Rhinestone Cowboy - WON Bumper
Westender - 2nd grade 1 Supreme
Hors Loi La - WON grade 1 Supreme
Bilboa - WON grade 2 (but given that it was F&M year, I'm prepared to accord it honourary Supreme Novices grade 1 status for the year concerned)
Istabraq - WON grade 1 SAH
French Holly - WON grade 1 SAH

All of these horses had serious claims to be considered true grade 1 animals?

The stayers by contrast;

Inglis Drever - 2nd grade 1 SAH
Baracouda - is difficult to get a handle on, but the strong balance of probabilities points to genuine class even if he emerged in France at staying distances without taking our festivals in until such time as he was ready to sweep them up
Princeful - 2nd in a grade 1 Supreme
Paddys Return - WON a Triumph Hurdle

Now during the season previous alot of the horses graduating to the stayers were useful, but essentially also rans in Grade 1 company, and most definately when compared against the horses that had largely beaten them as novices. They tended to fall in two groups;

1) Those who ran between 3rd and 8th at a festival (usually Aintree)
2) Those who missed out the festivals and took a handicappers route into staying hurdles

yet within 12 - 24 months, these Grade 1 'contenders' - but ultimate near misses, have suddenly been re-assigned Grade 1 status by the stroke of an administrators pen?

Hurdles courses normally ride slower Clive by virtue of bigger fields churning the ground up (assuming it's got some cut in it). It's not a problem for the World Hurdle though, (quite the opposite). The race is the first Hurdles race run on the New course on the Thursday, and as such the staying hurdlers get first use of the fresh ground, (and still generate slow times)
 
Originally posted by Warbler@Dec 27 2007, 11:34 PM
How do you know these are grade 1 horses? Because the HRA says they are? The stopwatch (which is neutral and confirms the grade 1 assignations in all other divisions, with a possible bit of a small slip in staying novice chases) says they aren't.
Click to expand...
Erm, because in the case of MWDS he has won 2 grade 1 hurdles, a grade 2 hurdle, a grade 1 chase and a grade 2 chase - that record tells me he is a grade 1 horse! Not least that two of those grade 1 wins were at the Cheltenham Festival! You cannot take away from him the form he has posted, he can only beat what is put in front of him.

I can't buy the "stopwatch doesn't lie" theory either - the stopwatch can't sodding read a formbook, I know that much! It is not the be all and end all and cannot be relied upon absolutely - Lindop is a case in point.

As for

The race in question was not run on punishing ground, though in fairness the word used was "softish", which is a bit ambiguous
Click to expand...

...you are quite correct, it wasn't punishing, it was horrendous ground. That day the ground was exceptionally tiring and very gluey, they had trouble getting through it.

I owe you an apology, mind - no, I didn't quote your paragraph in my first post, but in saying "your third paragraph" I didn't think that needed any explanation whatsoever!!!
 
Lindop isn't a case in point, though, SL.

The time ratings for that day put Lindop on about 89, which subsequently proved to be about his level.
 
Another couple of short priced Favs from the King yard were turned over today - the yard consists of two big interconnected barns, then a separate biggish barn, and a couple of rows of boxes a little way off. It would be interesting to know if all these horses running disappointing races are in the same barn
 
Back
Top