Starting with FRANKEL, who else? I was less keen on the jockey's performances than the stunning win.
I think when Henry Cecil said to Queally ...'go and do your own pace-making ...', he did not mean go and do the first 5f at Group 1 sprinters pace!
I think the comment made after Blue Bunting's Oaks win, when asked about how Casamento was after his run behind Frankel, 'He's fine, but you don't chase a speedster like that (with a stayer)' says much as what I thought at the time!! Hence the change of tactics the next day, successfully, I might add. Not a good 2000gns for Dettori either.
In fact the only two that got it right were the placed pair. Hannon said before the race that they were only racing for second place, and consequently they got it right.
The rest of the field did barely more than a very fast speed gallop, and were not pushed to their limits when they couldn't keep it up. I suspect they will have taken less out of themselves than the winner, and will bounce back when seen again?
There were a couple of comments made in last week's Weekender, which I cannot go along with entirely. Nick Mordin had a long-winded way of saying that Frankel went very slow over the last furlong without mentioning that the placed horses apart, so were the rest of the field. The real question was, if the likes of Csamento, Roderick O'Connor, and Pathfork had been held up would they have got closer than Dubawi Gold and Native Khan? The answer is probably, but we will never know having got there would they have gone on to win? Which is why I think Frankel will be ridden differently next time, giving Queally one more chance to get it right?
The other, more stupid comment in my opinion, was from Mr Pricewise himself. He said it was a poor 2000gns field because the rest were not good enough or not fit enough? The latter part of that gives him cover if the do make the grade later in the season. In my view, I think the jockeys were caught out by the sheer speed that Frankel did without being pressed to do so, that they went much too fast for their own mounts, and having been caught out they did not slaughter their horses in trying for minor honours. Most were allowed to come home in their own time after a hard bit of sprint training. It will not happen again, of that I am sure.
Talking of time. My rating suggests, yes, it was Frankel's best performance, but only by a couple of lbs. The overall time was the quickest per furlong against my standard times of all races, but only 0.02secs faster than Tangerine Trees in the sprint(before any conditions allowance is added).
I find 'Jimbo's' comment the next day, about Frankel being 3.5 stones better than Tangerine Trees on Timeform ratings hard to follow from the above. They carried the same 9st after all. I can only think that they have given Frankel special allowance for going into the cross/head wind as a front runner? Hence their seriously high rating for winning. I might have got closer to their rating had Frankel been held in check until 3f out and put his sprint burst in then and won going away from good horses. The two he beat by (a short looking?) 6 lengths, he was entitled to beat by much further in a sensibly run race?
No knocking his time compared to Blue Bunting, who clocked the best time on the day under similar conditions, but nearly 2 seconds slower than his. Not fair to compare too closely, as the wind may have been stronger or in a slightly different direction on the various days. But from all accounts, it was pretty similar? Blue Bunting did her Oaks claims no harm at all though, as her breeding suggests further will suit better?
More later on the Derby/Oaks trials, after York.
Have a good day ...
No comments:
Post a Comment