Originally Posted by
Desert Orchid
Thanks, Barjon. I wouldn't have a problem with any horse I back making the running. In fact, I'm usually happier seeing them at or near the front. More often than not (in my opinion) it's a sign they're definitely off.
When Al Qaqaa made all at Nwm the sectionals confirmed that he'd got it easy in front and he was the fastest finisher in the race.
When he ran at Gwd, the form book analysis noted:
So, slow start, perhaps moved too fast mid-race and probably paid for it late on. I'm not a good judge of whether a horse is acting well or otherwise on a given track but the analyst in this case comes across as pretty convinced the horse is a lot better than he showed here.
ATR has a sectional analysis of the race and it suggests the first furlong wasn't fast but after that they've gone too fast through the next three furlongs. It looks like O'Neill has tried to ease off a bit after that but the pace picks up again, presumably when My Frankel makes his forward move. AQ was already slowing down three furlongs out and even the principals were just not as slow as the others in the final stages. Nothing in the race got an efficiency grade of better than D while AQ's was F. In O'Neill's case, for Fanny.
I'll forgive both O'Neill and the horse this one. O'Neill is a useful jockey to have on your side, especially for Hamdans. AQ goes into the tracker as I want to recoup the losses incurred on this run. I'm pretty sure he'll oblige and if the handicapper decides to drop him a few pounds so much the better. I really thought I was punting a 100+ horse off 88 so that's how I'll keep punting him until he proves me wrong. Shandoz (89) will probably go up about 7lbs to 96 so that illustrates the kind of margin I thought I had with AQ and my rationale for getting so heavily involved at double-figure odds.