Hawk Wing I agree could win over 12 furlongs but in my opinion only against horses with inferior class.

HW will not run over 12 fur`s again (in my opinion).

If he were mine I`d clean up over 8 - 10 fur`s.

** HW will prove to be a champion but unfortunately for connections when he becomes a sire he will not have have that `classic` Group 1 to his name.

Cheers,

in my opinion HW did stay, he showed at the 2 furlong post, but when asked the question HC found that bit more.

strangely enough was thinking the same thing late last night about hw & hc take hc out etc, but was obviously a bit late in getting on to post this morning never mind .

maggsy i am sure it was s.p. last time out & not todays the gentleman was referring to, he said "he has never seen anyone else mention the price of a horse l.t.o. as a guide to a horse running today I WONDER WHY"? the figures are his btw, whether they are accurate or not i have no idea, just thought would post them up to see what others would make of them, as guest has indicated it is a factor worthy of interest, should add though there were other considerations involved not just s.p.i have the the whole 3 page article somewhere if anyone wants to explore further.
mac.

[This message was edited by mactheknife on June 10, 2002 at 08:28 AM.]

Mactheknife
Having done some research using the RSB database
which covers the last 16years ,i get these
results
SP LTO below 1/2 wins 26% of the time 455 winners
from 1751 runners.
1/2-20/21 wins 23.6% of the time 1492 winners from 6320 runners.
evans-11/8 win 21.86% of the time1703 winners
from 7789runners.


Perhaps someone else who has RSB or winanylyser
can check these results to make sure i`ve
done it correctly, but i think you will find
they are correct.



regards



Maggsy

Hi Determined
You seem tobe saying that HW best distance is
not 12Furlongs.What makes you think this and
do you think HW would have beat HS over 10Furlongs?



Maggsy

does anyone have a view about conflict?

is the aspect of conflict from the ratings in their own right or from the actual form of the horses in the race?

does the ratings conflict matter if there is no form conflict.

i think this horse is worth a good look at the likely odds.

2nd on class/form delegate 705w

it doesnt seem to like sharp tracks

Barney & Maggsy,

I will respond later as football highlights await.

Everybody,

Guest has mentioned Kelburne`s last run. I think this subject should be open to discussion. Anybody have any comments ?

Cheers for now,

Maggsy,

2000 Guineas – Hawk Wing`s head was down and he was full of running at the line.
Derby – at the 2 furlong marker Hawk Wing`s head was in the air. A clear sign in my opinion that the horse was hurting and he had no more to give. It was his class that kept him going. His finishing effort was in total contrast to the Guineas.
On that basis I take the view that against top class opposition in a true run race Hawk Wing will not visit the winners enclosure over 12 furlongs.
At 10 furlongs however if the 2 were to meet put your mortgage on Hawk Wing.
*** one point to bare in mind is that quite a lot of Woodman`s I believe are `soft` in a finish ***
Dare I suggest that (a) is why Spencer was asked to stay where he was in the Guineas in order to avoid a fight with Rock Of Gibralter and (b) is why his head went in the air on Saturday.
Just possible thoughts which I don`t really feel have any real foundation.


Barney,

Aren`t we only supposed to use the other ratings as a guide only ? Bar in mind that I haven`t studied the old examples yet but if horse (a) had all factors in his favour other than the `other` ratings I suspect it wouldn`t put me off.
That said, I suppose it would depend on what the `other` ratings are.
Does that make any sense.

Kelburne,

Anybody any thoughts as yet ?.

Cheers,

To quote Guest Ekbalco ran a strange race in race 2199 before taking home a valuable prize, race no` 2325.

From memory and I was only a kid then but if I`m right then the running of `E` in race 2199 caused alot of media attention and the word Guest has used namely `strange` wouldn`t be the words I`d have used for the performance that day.

I haven`t looked into the opposition `E` faced in race 2325 but just by studying his runs that season then the trainers intensions were there for all to see.

*** how `E` run in race 2199 compares to Kelburne`s placing is something I`ll be having a look at shortly.

Cheers,

Guest said

Just one thing to think about re The Derby and it's immense coverage in the press and on TV is this. The amount of so called 'experts' ie trainers,jockeys,tipsters,etc who are paid to give their opinion but got it wrong. Even those closest to the two principles seemed unsure, yet the facts in the formbook clearly showed that the winner had many plus points. Class,form and stamina and many other factors to boot. A few were

Fair enough guest found the winner
Before the race for a change
But

What happened to the VDW quote
If you want to know where the bus is going ask the driver? in other words the trainer

do we now discount the trainer as a so called Expert who doesnt know what he is doing

If he doesnt know which one of his horses has the best chance in the race
What hope is there for the rest of us

With respect can I suggest you choose your words carefully.

Your quote re` Guest of "for a change" is hardly fair given the amount of help he has given so many of us.

He has only just come back to the thread so again with respect think before making such a statement.

With regards the bus driver. Nobody no matter how good at a specific job, trade, etc knows everything. There will always be times when the expert in his/her field doesn`t get it quite right.

Cheers,

boozer

which method do you use?roushayd?

Re The Derby - It is clear that had HC not been in the field then HW would have proved a wide margin winner, proving only one thing though, that being the point that class will often win the day whatever the trip especially when the opposition is not up to much. Of course though sticking to the facts and what actually happened we could see before the race that HW was taking on a class animal with both the form and stamina for the job in hand.

Remember that Coolmore is a very profitable and powerful racing empire and you will rarely, if ever, hear their team speak negatively about a horse in their setup. Ask yourself why?
Then consider why HW was left in the Derby at all, considering they already knew they had a rock solid candidate in HC. Hype in the press can prove a powerful tool for the big stables housing the stars who are eager to mop up top races with little opposition to speak of.

Boozer - Yes, we are guided by the trainers intentions via the form book and how the horse is placed, but having intent is not enough. We as the punter have to make an informed decision based upon the facts available as to if we think the horse is definitely in a position to win the race it is sent for. This involves a tremendous amount of time and study, something which a busy trainer is unlikely to be able to do with all his horses. He is only interested in bringing the horse to fitness and trying to win races, be they long term targets or shots in the dark. I doubt most trainers consider some of the factors that VDW placed emphasis on, certainly not in the same way. Backing and training winners is quite different in many ways. For a start, a trainer will not be certain as to the exact opposition in a race until after decalrations are made. We can make our choices based on the known field and all the facts held within. Trainers do have ways of insuring minimal opposition though as indicated above. How many trainers canvassed in the days and weeks leading upto the Derby selected the winner? Not many because they had been taken in by the hype surrounding Hawk Wing.

Every stable works differently and some do so in strange ways. I don't need to name names, because a study of results shows those trainers who rarely ask their horses to win more than once on the trot or those who overface their charges before dropping in class to collect. Some trainers follow the same path year after year, sometimes collecting and sometimes not. For example, the race Presto Vento won at Sandown last week had been won plenty of times by the same trainer in past seasons. Likewise, D.Nicolls won the final race on Derby day this year having trained a heavily gambled on runner up last year. Of course HC took the same route as his trainers 2001 Derby hero Galileo.

Determined - Ekbalco did indeed cause a minor storm when winning the 1981 Imperial Cup having run down the field in a moderate handicap shortly before at Doncaster. Previously he had very good form at the same level as the IC with plenty of weight, but had been absent from the track for 2 months before the Doncaster run. Make your own conclusions there. Interesting to note the protagonists for future profit.

Mtoto re Rifle Brigade - VDW had the trainer angle well covered, but as always he kept it simple. RBs trainer had success at the track in recent years prior to RBs win. The horse was consistently in form, unlike the rest of the field. He was the class form horse and with no serious in form stamina laden contender, he rated a good thing. Remember, everything is relative and many of those discarded by VDW in this and other races, had distinct flaws in their make up strongly indicating that they were unlikely to beat the selection. Have you or others pondered Inside Quarter who won first time out in 1979 and named as a good thing by VDW? It may have appeared that the fav Dibbinsdale Lad was a serious contender but there were a few tell tale flaws in it's "form".

Finally with regards to trainers and the question should we be guided by them, I would say yes we should be guided but like any guide, we shouldn't follow them over a cliff.

Similar
But in low class races
as in

Prime recreation tonight 7-05 windsor

Bold Ewar 4-45 Nott

Hi,

There have been a couple of interesting posting.

Maggsy.

I have to agree with Determined and Guest on Hawk Wing. He did stay the 12 furlongs, but any horse can run that distance. The important thing is how long will it take him? His class carried him through beating the less classy horses, but HC also has class. They both accelerated about 3 furlongs out, they piled on the pressure when lesser horses needed to take a breather. That is class, class horses run faster longer. I have no doubt this was a class race, and HW will be a top 10f horse. O'brien did nothing wrong in running HW. How was he to know until it came to the crunch who had the most class? HC was the % bet as he had proved he could act on any going, and there were no stamina doubts with him.

Another posting asks for comments on Guest's selection Kelburne. I must say I found it a very strange selection coming from Guest. I thought he was a fair bet in his previous race so much so I backed him. He ran a poor race, the market expected him to win. He was raised in class on my figures, as well as Guest's, for the Sandown race. Dropped in distance from his best ever race, (the one before last), I don't use ability ratings but I don't think his was very good. He also was running against an in form horse, proven over distance and class. This is in no way a criticism, I just can't follow it using the Prominent king example on how to apply vdw. If it doesn't give too much way I wonder if Guest could go into a little more detail.

I would like to thank you for the best wishes. I am as well as can be expected, the operation was to improve my health. I can only wait to find out if it has worked.

Be Lucky

In his reply to Mtoto yesterday Guest mentioned Gaye Chance and Kenlis. But neither of these two were considered bets by VDW.
Gaye Chance's cons figures were shown in Spells It Out as 12? or 3? VDW didnt ignore the last run in higher grade. He duly noted it was otherwise consistent apart from this run and the likely winner but stated "The alarm bells start ringing as soon as you look at this race"
Likewise Kenlis who scores on all other aspects but is not a bet for him because 4 points covers the entire field for the ability rating. "The same procedure shows Kenlis to be a good thing but note how...." etc.
The only bets he made from the spells it out examples were Little Owl and Sunset christo. At a guess he left Gaye Chance because he considered that its last run showing could possibly have been down to something unforeseen other than the class hike and with Kenlis he was unhappy with that 4 point spread.
The other interesting comment he makes about Gaye Chance's race is "This race is a good example of conflict and should be left alone. No element of a gamble should be allowed to creep in."
At the end of Spells It Out he sends us back to its beginning and the first 5 or 6 paragraphs to give the reasons why he didnt back more than LO and SC that day. Any use Barney?

Guest,
I cant comment on Eckbalco but I cant see too much strange about Kelburne's penultimate run. he was up against some proper (multiple distance winners) 10f handicappers at York who finished 1,2,3 in a fast run race. His previous 10f win was with a light weight against only 2 horses proven at 10f with a single distance win each, Pinchincha (had only won on soft) and Broadway Score who ran unaccountably badly and was again beaten by Kelburne at sandown. I'd say the newmarket race was clever placing by a trainer who certainly knew "where the bus was going." and the york race was against specialists who had too much pace at that distance.Whether the Sandown race was the main plan or not, the newmarket race was a nice bonus on the way.
regards,

Its wonderful to see this thread `alive` again. Long may it continue.


Mtoto,

I sincerly hope the operation has done the trick.

Guest,

Keep posting.

Statajack,

Keep posting.

Cheers for now,

mtoto,

you will soon be running round the rails.good luck

statajack

thank you for the redirection about confict and appraising the odds, i thought that i had that bit under control but in view of your comments and a re assesment of a few selections i am definatly, at present, lacking in the temperament department. i suppose that you have been there done that,got the tee-shirt etc.THANK YOU.

boozer

well done on your winners. hope you have many more.

Statajack

With regard to the race won by Gaye Chance, there is another phrase worth attention: "with experience it is not difficult to sort out the eventual [11/1] winner". And for me whether VDW actually backed GC, or left it, is an open question.

The tone of the article is that of a primer: bringing material from previous letters together for the presumed benefit of those unable to do it for themselves. In reaching the conclusions stated, VDW quite appropriately kept them on the conservative side.

But we know from studying his examples that VDW was certainly prepared to accept risk - the Ekbalco race currently being referred to on the thread being just one instance. And its "with experience" that one is better able to calculate the risk and judge whether its worth running. So my hypothesis is that the conclusions reached in the "Spells is all out" article - both specifically in relation to leaving GC alone and more generally in not allowing any element of gamble to creep in - were, very sensibly, aimed at those beginning to apply VDW's approach and not a reflection of the practice of someone "with experience".

Indeed, although Guest refers to a number of the relevant factors re Rifle Brigade, there was most definitely a deal of calculated risk-taking in that bet. Yes, Hindley had a track record of winning with fto 3yos, and had utilised aspects of RB's history for runners in previous years. Yes, none of RB's competitors had decent form in 1978. But the majority of Hindley's first time out 3yos lost, and there was no way VDW or anyone else could be SURE RB was fit enough to win fto; or indeed manage 1m 4f. And, in a generally modest field, RB was no "star in waiting" as his subsequent record makes clear. It was a piece of calculated risk-taking, as in my view were almost all VDW's examples. Few, if any, were without some "element of a gamble".