Have you ever wondered why horse racing is such a difficult game to pick winners on a consistent basis?
Well while I was completing my 2011 database several things became obvious. Apart from the obvious things like horses running over their best trip, with the right under-hoof conditions, and in a grade where they are capable of winning ... These are a given for any form student. No, it is the imponderables on the day itself that can make a mess of all your calculations. Lack of pace, or at least, the wrong pace that suits the selection best, might be again the first thing you have doubts about when checking the draw? But none of these things can have you tearing you hair out as much as this ingredient ....
.... HORSES DO NOT ALWAYS IMPROVE THEIR RATINGS WHEN WINNING ...Or to put it another way, HORSES CAN WIN WITHOUT BEING AT THEIR BEST.
What that simple observation does is opens up so many possibilities ... Did it win despite the way the race was run? Is it actually passed its peak? Did the horse behind/in front improve a lot?
So, when entering calculations before a race, how much of the above can you actually include in your assessment? Very little I would suggest. I repeat, have you ever wondered why horse racing is such a difficult game to pick winners on a consistent basis? ...
On that note, here are my thoughts on Saturday's 2000 Guineas:
Every horse in this race will have to improve on what they have done so far, especially if they want to break into that 120 plus rating that marks them out as a good winner of this race.
In my ratings order:
PARISH HALL - 25/1
POWER - 15.5/1
These two have the least ground to make up on their best performance in the same race. The problem they face is turning up not only as good as they were as two year olds, but at least 7lbs better. Not impossible, but a tough ask. Neither should be troubled by 8f, nor the drying ground.
TRUMPET MAJOR - 12/1
This one improved on my best rating from last year, and got near his OR with his convincing win over C&D last month. More rain might not inconvenience him, and any improvement will see him go close.
FRENCH FIFTEEN - 100/8(old money)
ABTAAL - 9/1
HERMIVAL - 24/1
I have put these three together from their run in the Prix Jebel at the beginning of last month, but their rating is only an estimate from the 4th placed ROCKINANTE. French Fifteen won the race, and is the selection of the 'dosage king', Steve Miller( ... not the 'Gangster of Love', that 'midnight shaker' is somebody else).
Here we have the first of what I alluded to in the intro ...Last season, Abtaal beat French Fifteen by 3lns, now has one improved more than another? Was one primed for that run more than the other? Did the second just not get away with not running to its best? How can you tell. Well I thought that Rockinante was a good yardstick, being a Group 3 winner ... BUT, this race was run over just short of 7f, in a slow time, and he is a stayer (in the making). If he ran anywhere near his mark, then these three have an excellent chance. I say 'three', because Hermival will like the stiffer track and extra furlong, and probably more rain. If it does turn sloppy, he is the one to be on out of the three. He is bred for further, so to stay on, in what was probably a typical 3f sprint, shows he may have the speed for this mile. He won on heavy first time out. Whether Abtaal reverses places having had that run, assuming First Fifteen just got first run on him, and they both improve the same, is anyones, outside of their traner's circle, guess. Me, I think 3f sprints don't cut it at Newmarket?
The next group are all in with a shout of winning a 2nd class Guineas, but might go on to better things later.
CASPAR NETSCHER - 29/1
BRONTERRE - 41/1
BORN TO SEA - 11/1
FURNER'S GREEN - 109/1
The last two both have an estimated rating through other horses, but have done nothing wrong at Group 3 level. For those who watched the RP forum, they had a few good words for Born To Sea, given it was lame after its last run, but his much respected trainer is running him without a prep race. Got a bit to find, but if the others are not up to scratch it is possible. Furner's Green is the most experienced, and has steadily improved since his 4th behind POWER. Reliable, but may be best at a lower level
Bronterre is very similar to the above, improved as the season progressed, brought that level over into this season behind CASPAR NETSCHER, but does not seem to quite get there at the top level. Whereas the winner above, has been a fairly solid performer. I like him a lot as he always seems to be the underdog who comes good? I wouldn't rule him out of a place, because he is that sort of horse.
That leaves:
CAMELOT - 5/2
I have this rated below 100 for his slowly run Racing Post Trophy win. He won it like a sprinter, yet he is bred for the Derby distance? Did he just have more stamina than his juvenile rivals? Until he has shown his class in a true run race he will not be my selection. He takes FENCING down with him, even though his previous rating was higher.
TOP OFFER - 10/1
For a 2nd fav to be rated below 80 shows that something is not right? A maiden winner, A good maiden winner ... but to date, that is all!
COUP DE VILLE - 99/1
Although he tops the 100 mark with a Salisbury Listed win, he did nothing to add to that over 10f last month. Perhaps the mile will suit him better, but he has got a lot to do to get ahead of those above.
Selections ... well I'll wait until the weather has done its stuff. If it stays dry, then PARISH HALL is the obvious one. If it is very wet, then HERMIVAL and TRUMPET MAJOR ...
Think on ... Have you ever wondered why horse racing is such a difficult game to pick winners on a consistent basis?
No comments:
Post a Comment