Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 132

Thread: Clockwatchers' Corner

  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Yorkshire
    Posts
    152
    Thanks
    72
    Thanked 25 Times in 25 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by MrFrisk View Post
    Leshlaa is in the 2:05 at Newmarket on Saturday. I think the Queens horse looks a weak fav. The going is the concern.
    Question for me is - are any of them going to be suited by the going?

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to 2017diary For This Useful Post:

    reet hard (1st June 2017)

  3. # ADS
    Circuit advertisement
    Join Date
    Always
    Location
    Advertising world
    Posts
    Many

    To remove these adverts please either login or join if you are not a member.


     

  4. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,068
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 105 Times in 88 Posts
    Mr Lupton (courtesy of Mr Frisk) engaged 7.25 Windsor, Mondsy - ground should suit.
    Last edited by reet hard; 21st May 2017 at 11:18 PM.

  5. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,068
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 105 Times in 88 Posts
    Looks to have a fav's chance, and ATR's clocker naps him. However, likely lack of a strong pace could be a problem and a bunch finish wouldn't be in his favour.
    Dancing Star has been well backed, and could be the one to benefit.

  6. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,068
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 105 Times in 88 Posts
    ignore the 25/1 boil-over and that went pretty much to script.
    ATR sectionals will tell the full story, but the final furlong was run (relatively) much quicker than Mr Lupton's win at Newmarket which suggests the field wasn't coming back to him the same.
    ML's mark shouldn't go up for this, and the trainer has the stated aim of the Wokingham or Steward's Cup, where the pace would suit much better. Whether he's good enough is a moot point but R Fahey's probably right to peg him as a 'twilight horse' (between h/cap and group class), and he's unlikely to prove up to that level.
    Worth looking out for in other big field contests where there's likely to be a strong pace, though.

    All imo. of course, but the lack of other opinions is disappointing.
    Last edited by reet hard; 23rd May 2017 at 8:05 AM.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to reet hard For This Useful Post:

    Desert Orchid (23rd May 2017)

  8. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    11,103
    Thanks
    307
    Thanked 296 Times in 204 Posts
    I appreciate the low-down on how the race went, reet, but as I've often said I tend not to follow midweek racing, partly because results such as the above are too common for my liking. I've also said many times I tend not to offer strong opinions until I've crunched numbers for myself, which I don't do until I've got the hard copy in front of me, which will be tomorrow at the earliest (and won't include yesterday's race).

    It looks like 'clockers' are very much in a minority and even I don't consider myself one but am interested in hearing the views of those who are.

    I understand your frustration.
    Two's company, three's allowed.

  9. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Talbot Green
    Posts
    12,126
    Thanks
    1,007
    Thanked 511 Times in 369 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Where's EC1 when you need him? I feel sure this thread would appeal to him.
    Ah! but a man's reach should exceed his grasp......

  10. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Chew Valley
    Posts
    3,333
    Thanks
    234
    Thanked 158 Times in 129 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by reet hard View Post
    ...the lack of other opinions is disappointing.
    [/I]
    I know next to nothing about time analysis and certainly don't produce my own figures, but I'm reading this thread with interest.

  11. #28
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    20
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 6 Times in 3 Posts
    pleases keep it going reading this thread with interest as well

  12. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    11,103
    Thanks
    307
    Thanked 296 Times in 204 Posts
    I think recent results prove one thing: that hard races take it out of horses.

    Leshlaa was well beaten after putting up a monster time on 1000G day. Mr Lupton was also beaten yesterday by a horse that should have had little chance of so doing.

    I don't follow these things closely enough but maybe someone who does could keep us informed of when the fast-time horses tend to return to form?

    I know the 'bounce' theory suggests 42 days. Could it be the same for fast horses. Did Nick Mordin have a theory about it? (I have his book somewhere up the loft.)

    I do recall (30 years ago?) when Pipe and Scu were the big thing in NH races that some of their horses would put up huge time performances before losing at odds-on then coming out and verifying the original form, sometimes going on to improve again. At the time I wondered if they were just at it but maybe horses just need time to get over a big run and the bigger the run the more time they need?
    Two's company, three's allowed.

  13. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Yorkshire
    Posts
    152
    Thanks
    72
    Thanked 25 Times in 25 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Desert Orchid View Post
    I think recent results prove one thing: that hard races take it out of horses.

    Leshlaa was well beaten after putting up a monster time on 1000G day. Mr Lupton was also beaten yesterday by a horse that should have had little chance of so doing.

    I don't follow these things closely enough but maybe someone who does could keep us informed of when the fast-time horses tend to return to form?

    I know the 'bounce' theory suggests 42 days. Could it be the same for fast horses. Did Nick Mordin have a theory about it? (I have his book somewhere up the loft.)

    I do recall (30 years ago?) when Pipe and Scu were the big thing in NH races that some of their horses would put up huge time performances before losing at odds-on then coming out and verifying the original form, sometimes going on to improve again. At the time I wondered if they were just at it but maybe horses just need time to get over a big run and the bigger the run the more time they need?
    There are always the conspiracy theorists (I'm sure we've all cried foul at one time or another) but to look at it in the way you are doing just could be the way forward. The 42 day between runs makes a lot of sense.

  14. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    11,103
    Thanks
    307
    Thanked 296 Times in 204 Posts
    Mordin also suggested, if memory serves, that horses can run [badly] during those 42 days and still return to form after that.

    He also suggested, I think, that a big improver might be able to build on a hard race within the time scale.
    Two's company, three's allowed.

  15. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    11,103
    Thanks
    307
    Thanked 296 Times in 204 Posts
    I’ve crunched some numbers from the Chester meeting to see how they stack up and if any well-handicapped three-year-olds can be identified.

    Wednesday
    The times point to pretty fast ground. Two races appeal as possible indicators of the going and give the other times on the day a lot of sense. The two races are those won by El Astronaute and Russian Soul. I think the latter might have been unusually well handicapped for its class and given its age [nine] but it was arguably let in lightly relative to its all-weather rating.

    The upshot is that one race stands out a mile as being faster than expectations and will hopefully throw up at least two good handicap winners. Here And Now (Becket) and Stradivarius (Gosden) had their field well strung out and their respective 7lbs and 4lbs rises arguably still leave them dangerously well in.

    The Lily Agnes form looks okay based on times with the winner posting a raw unadjusted figure of 75.


    Thursday
    After allowing for rails movement, the going difference into day two was negligible but the form across the card sets a poser. Was there only one true race or was that race very fast? The race in question is the Vase. If the time matches the official ratings, every other race was between slow and very slow, except maybe the 2yo race, the winner of which is only 3lbs off the Lily Agnes winner. I’m reluctant to let unknown quantities dictate my figures but I have to allow for the possibility that the Vase was a better race than it looked. Before allowing for WFA, it was 17lbs faster than the Huxley Stakes won by Deauville.

    Friday
    A similar scenario emerged on day three of the meeting with only the Conditions sprint race won by Judicial posting a good time. The worrying implication is that the Dee Stakes might not have been much of a trial for the Derby based on its time. Even the new OR of the fourth, Mirage Dancer (raised 11lbs to 98 for this), suggests the winner is only around the 105p mark. Other than that, the form across the card is largely forgettable.

    I hope to do York soon and post my findings but it might be next week before I get round to it.
    Two's company, three's allowed.

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to Desert Orchid For This Useful Post:

    2017diary (23rd May 2017)

  17. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The Shire
    Posts
    2,655
    Thanks
    68
    Thanked 199 Times in 129 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Desert Orchid View Post
    I think recent results prove one thing: that hard races take it out of horses.

    Leshlaa was well beaten after putting up a monster time on 1000G day. Mr Lupton was also beaten yesterday by a horse that should have had little chance of so doing.

    I don't follow these things closely enough but maybe someone who does could keep us informed of when the fast-time horses tend to return to form?

    I know the 'bounce' theory suggests 42 days. Could it be the same for fast horses. Did Nick Mordin have a theory about it? (I have his book somewhere up the loft.)

    I do recall (30 years ago?) when Pipe and Scu were the big thing in NH races that some of their horses would put up huge time performances before losing at odds-on then coming out and verifying the original form, sometimes going on to improve again. At the time I wondered if they were just at it but maybe horses just need time to get over a big run and the bigger the run the more time they need?
    I know Suny Bay certainly agrees with this. He's pointed out several times horses that are well ahead on the clock and urged caution because they will bounce. I seem to think every time he's made the point on here he's been right.

  18. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    11,103
    Thanks
    307
    Thanked 296 Times in 204 Posts
    Curiously enough, Sunybay and I rarely discuss times! All these years and I didn't know that!

    Anyway, I managed to trawl through York late last night (couldn't go to bed after watching the programme about the Lisbon Lions - still high as a kite!) and there were one or two results worth mentioning. I'll do so later. It's a glorious day outside and I've a lot of work in the garden to catch up on!
    Two's company, three's allowed.

  19. #35
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    11,103
    Thanks
    307
    Thanked 296 Times in 204 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Desert Orchid View Post
    It's a glorious day outside and I've a lot of work in the garden to catch up on!
    After four hours out there, I think I've overdone it. I feel queasy...
    Two's company, three's allowed.

  20. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    1,817
    Thanks
    119
    Thanked 163 Times in 137 Posts
    Emenem entered in the opening race on Derby day.
    Alcohol, because no good story ever started with "I was eating this salad..."

  21. The Following User Says Thank You to wilsonl For This Useful Post:

    Marble (30th May 2017)

  22. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,068
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 105 Times in 88 Posts
    Certain to get in, and jocked up - 12/1 currently.

  23. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    11,103
    Thanks
    307
    Thanked 296 Times in 204 Posts
    I'd want to study the race before diving in, though. There could be something in there I haven't looked at yet (ie from a smaller midweek meeting).
    Two's company, three's allowed.

  24. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    11,103
    Thanks
    307
    Thanked 296 Times in 204 Posts
    With my RP sub having expired (and I instructed them not to renew it) I'm grateful for the link to the ATR tracker.
    Two's company, three's allowed.

  25. #40
    Senior Member Dave G's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    2,574
    Thanks
    138
    Thanked 29 Times in 26 Posts
    Look out for James Garfield ( George Scott trained ). Ran third in the 2.20 at Leicester today at an unfancied 14/1. Gave them a good 5 or 6 lengths leading the stalls yet pulled his way up to dispute for the lead inside the furlong marker before just fading to be beaten around 1 length. Well worth watching out for.
    You should not confuse your career with your life.

  26. The Following User Says Thank You to Dave G For This Useful Post:

    fonz (30th May 2017)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •