Has anyone looked at the 2.45 and the 5.20? To my way of analysis, Irresistable Jewel and Hurricane Alan should be hard to beat.

Chris

Had a quick look at the 2.45 Curragh; according to my reading of the form IR is the class horse in the race but 10f is definitely NOT her distance.

Good luck anyway
Johnd

determined 33/1 yum yum pity i missed that one

missing all those winners yesterday and then missing a four foot put that would have won me and my mates the am/am comp yesterday. well enough said.

I`m going away for 2 weeks at the end of the month which means I`ll be missing one of my favourite races namely the Cambridgeshire.

I had a reasonable ante post bet on Halland last year only to beaten by a 6yo 7 furlong horse.

Anybody fancy having a look at this race to see if we can identify any probable winners.

I appreciate such races are difficult given the likely weights rise due to many non runners at the head of the field. Added to that, we do not know the going conditions, etc.

I`d be interested in any thoughts.

*** at this early stage I have 3 horses I`m keen on ***

More later,

Cheers,

has anyone looked at this race

class form spartacus( who has upset o'brien/kinane hotpots in the past) is 8/1 why?

Thanks for the reply. I can see what you mean about the distance for IJ and it is not necessarily the ideal going, but only chorist and Tivoli garden have won at 10F on G/F ground - both in significantly lower class events. Is this the important factor, or are you more worried by C's progressive profile?

Chris

At Sandown there is a book to be made with Shaiyzima/Ace Of Hearts.

Anyone spotted the glaring mistake in Calcuttas race yet ?

Guest

Not making a book with the c/f.

Your Bangor selection won well. I should be interested to know whether its Flat form had any bearing on your judgement that it was a good thing, and indeed whether you saw it as the c/f in the race.

Good luck with your book in the 3.50 today. I shall be interested to see whether Pentecost returns to form.

[This message was edited by Fulham on September 15, 2002 at 12:15 PM.]

is the mistake not spotting muchea?

i dont know if its a mistake but i find
when upped muchea had reversed the form and had then been placed so that it would be coming out of handicap company.

it had also won the highest value race, it was also in form, it was the only runner who had group three and group two wins to its credit.

if thats not it I am going to have to start again!

ISNT PENTECOST A BEACON LIGHT?

if thats not out of form i dont know what is.


c/f doesnt look like one to win twice on the trot

There was a turnaround of 18 lb at the weights between,Calcutta and Muchea,for just about 4 lengths,from the corresponding race last year.Both horses have been in top form recently,and Calcutta was carrying 8 lb more actual weight compared to last years victory,Muchea carried 10 lb less this year.This was just one factor.

Barney

Yes indeed. That's why I said I'd be interested to see if it RETURNS to form. One couldn't back it today without inside knowledge, but if it hasn't shot its bolt for the year, a decent run today could be the precursor of a final win this season now its down the handicap.

Guest.

As you brought up the subject of Calcutta, I would like to ask a couple of questions. First which method made him a selection? I can't see how it can be the consistency method. That brings me to my other question, what is the point of the c/form horse? VDW said they seldom fail when the prize is right. If that is correct, how does it sit with his guide line the horse that is in the lowest 3 for consistency are the ones to consider? If after finding the c/form horse if it then fails do you just ignore the race or the c/form horse. The main reason for asking this is because out off the 20 horses VDW said where c/form horses none failed on this filter.

Must admit to being very surprised with your bet today. Did you make either of them c/form horses? They both failed on class for me. I couldn't find a bet in the race.

All this just when I was begining to think I was getting to grips with the way it works for you

Be Lucky

Barney

Pentecost
I had a look at him today to see what you were on about
He could have gone wrong judging by the fact that hes started wearing bandages in some of his recent races

Another thing
If we are talking handicap's

This in form out of form shot his bolt etc
Doesnt anybody ever think that the horse in question has reached a point where he cant improve above his handicap mark anymore?

Scott’s view
How much has he got left to negate the rise on the OR
Time will tell

If you want to see the logic in the above
Have a look at Flak Jacket
Placed to win his last 4 races off a mark of 66

The handicapper will eventually get a horses measure

Boozer,

I dont look at OR at all really but since your comment I have looked at this from an OR point of view.

This horse won a class B (0-105) handicap off an OR of 91.There were several better horses in the race from an OR point of view.

Today the race was only a (0-100) c handicap and there were no better horses in the field.

the horse has improved, it must have as the handicapper keeps putting it up.

So surely the horse should have won against lesser opposition.

joint statement

good thing

Barney

I wasnt really saying that Pentecost Had run out off steam re the OR, as he is only I think 6lbs above his last winning mark

the bandaged fore and nr Hind would be more of a worry and could be connected to his poor form of late

Or is the trainer trying to fool us?

Who knows?

Boozer

Today Pentecost ran off a mark 3lb lower (in a class 110) than when he won a class 391 in June. We therefore learnt quite a lot through his run today.

One to keep an eye on in 2003.

Fulham,

I think he was really lucky in that race his real class is some where between that and the one before.

Boozer,

he must be as I am sure that a trainer wouldn't run a horse that wasn't right, the risk of permenant damage would be far to great wouldn't it?