Superior European Stayers?

One aspect of racing in Australia that has always astounded me is the cultural cringe that Australians have regarding the ability of our stayers. Many Australians are in awe of the ability of European horses over a staying trip and continually plunge their money on the UK raiders in the Melbourne Cup with the belief that the UK horses are better stayers.

Many of the European horses that come for the Melbourne Cup are used to running at 3200m or longer, at a very leisurely pace before taking off at the 800m mark. They are usually against small fields on huge tracks with plenty of room. These horses are typically a plugging type of horse that would be more suited to the Adelaide Cup or perhaps the Sydney Cup.

The best 2000-2400m horses from Europe are not always considered for a trip to the Melbourne Cup, just as the best 2000-2400m Australian horses are not always considered for the Melbourne Cup. That has changed recently with more locals taking on the Melbourne Cup once they have been proven over 2000-2400m. Perhaps the British may adopt a similar attitude though it is hard to envisage this happening as they have a tendency to turn their noses up at a handicap over 2 miles.

For the purposes of this article I will start at 1993 even though there was the odd European horse racing in the Melbourne Cup before that. I will start from this date as it was the year that a horse trained in the UK (Vintage Crop) won the Cup.

The track that day was heavy, conditions that suited Vintage Crop. However, Vintage Crop was a horse of good credentials. Before the Melbourne Cup he had 15 starts for 9 wins including a Group 1 in the Irish St Leger over 2800m where he beat Drum Taps by just under 10 lengths which was the last start for both horses before the Melbourne Cup. Drum Taps was the other UK raider that year and started 2nd favourite when beaten just over 10 lengths in the Melbourne Cup. Drum Taps had 21 starts before the Melbourne Cup for 11 wins including 2 Group 1’s, 2 Group 2’s and 4 Group 3’s.

If we take a look at the local contenders, 2nd was Te Akau Nick. An honest performer who had 14 starts before the Melbourne Cup for 4 wins including one Group 1 (the Metropolitan). 3rd was Mercator who had 28 starts before the Melbourne Cup for 5 wins, the best a Group 2 at Riccarton in NZ. Local favourite was Our Pompeii (14th) who had 25 starts for 4 wins including the Group 1 Adelaide double of Derby and Cup as a 3yo. Hardly form that would make you rush in and back the locals.

I will not go through every year but there is a pattern that is repeated throughout the rest of the 1990’s and into the 21st Century. The Europeans have sent, mostly, well performed staying horses (greater than 3000m) and they have performed against local horses that were not considered our best at 2400m or less. When the locals have been represented by a horse that can be considered as one of the top horses in Australasia at around the 2000-2400m mark, they invariably win it, no matter how good the foreign contingent. For instance, Might And Power, Saintly, Ethereal and Makybe Diva 3 times (I know she was bred in the UK but breeding has become a worldwide industry. Her mare was from US, bred to a sire with an American sireline, born in England but did all her early racing in Australia. Media Puzzle was bred to an American mare mated to a sire with an American sireline, born in the US but did all his early racing in UK.).

Vinnie Roe was considered the best UK stayer at longer than 2800m and had the record to prove it. In his 1st attempt at the Melbourne Cup in 2004, the track was rated dead but a huge storm hit the track in the lead up to the Cup and it was run in very wet conditions-probably a heavy track (and the overall time reflects this). In conditions that were made to suit, he was still beaten by Makybe Diva by over a length. In 2005 on what would now be rated as a dead 4 track (almost good) he was beaten 5.5 lengths into 8th spot. Makybe Diva won again. 3rd and 4th were Xcellent and Leica Falcon, two lightly raced 4yo’s that were building an imposing record at around the 2000-2400m mark. This was a year where a UK horse stood little chance as there was depth to the Australasian challengers. Vinnie Roe was 1st home of the UK Raiders.

There will still be years when the local horses aren’t good enough to extend to the 3200m and the European horses could be in with a chance. 2006 was a chance for the Europeans but the Japanese took control. The retirement of Makybe Diva and the long term injuries to Xcellent and Leica Falcon left a gaping hole in the depth of Australian horses at 2000-2400m, that were capable of extending to 3200m. The local list of stayers was weak but it is interesting to note that if you take out the Japanese quinella, then the 1st two home were Australians (Maybe Better and Zipping).

In the 14 runnings of the Melbourne Cup since 1993 there have been a total of 48 European trained runners for 2 wins, 3 2nds and 5 3rds. But also 22 that have failed to finish in the top 10. Failure to acclimatise is often used as an excuse. This can be valid for a particular horse but is an over-used excuse to cover up for the failings of a racehorse. There are a number of trainers that have had more than 1 runner and know what it takes to prepare horses for overseas campaigns. Statistics tell a valid story and should compensate for those horses that failed to acclimatise. The mean finishing position for the 48 runners is just under 11th and the median finishing position is 8.5.

(Comparatively, Australians feel that their horses have an edge in sprinting ability, but raw statistics do not entirely bear that out. Since 2003 when Choisir and Belle Du Jour contested Group 1 sprints in the UK, there have been 12 Australians contest Group 1 sprints in England for 1 win, 2 2nds and a 3rd. The average finishing position is 8.5 and the median is 9.5. It is a much smaller sample and whilst the win/place strike rate is superior to the European horses in the Melbourne Cup, the average finishing positions are similar. It must also be remembered that we do send the best sprinters to England.)

Before the 2006 Cup Kieran Fallon, the jockey of Yeats, was supremely confident and stated that Yeats had never been in better condition. This does not sound like a statement about a horse that failed to acclimatise. By what Fallon had said, Yeats was ready to run the race of his life and probably ran up to his best in finishing 7th. It is interesting to note that after the race Fallon stated that Yeats was not the type of horse suited to the Melbourne Cup. This was a statement made possibly to cover up his ordinary ride but would have been made after Fallon had seen the pace and tightness of Australian racing.

It can be argued that the best European horses do not come down to contest the Melbourne Cup. The best European horses will contest the Arc in France and perhaps go to the Breeders Cup in the US, Dubai World Cup meeting or Hong Kong International Day. The horses that are rated as the best from the UK are horses running around the 2000-2400m mark.

However amongst the beaten brigade in Melbourne Cup’s have been:

• Oscar Schindler (15th in 1996) who ran a gallant 3rd in the Arc at his start prior to the Melbourne Cup beaten only by the champion performers Helissio and Pilsudski. He ran in the Arc again the following year and finished an honest 4th again beaten by champions in Peintre Celebre and Pilsudski.
• Razkalla (9th in 2004) who was twice beaten 2 lengths in the Dubai Sheema Classic over 2400m when finishing 4th in 2004 and 2nd in 2005.
• Yeats (7th in 2006) who had beaten Alkaased by 2.5 lengths in the 2005 Coronation Cup over 2400m. At his next 4 starts Alkaased won the Group 1 Grand Prix in France over 2400m beating Bago (2004 Arc winner) by 4 lengths and Elvstroem by 4.3 lengths. Alkaased then finished 2.5 lengths 2nd in a Group 2 French race behind champion mare Pride-winner of 3 Group 1’s in 3 different countries plus a close 2nd in an Arc. 2 starts later Alkaased won the Japan Cup beating the well performed locals Heart’s Cry and Zenno Rob Roy as well as champion Europeans Ouija Board and Bago.

Currently the only turf races around the world where horses from more than a couple of countries assemble to take each other on over 2400m are the Dubai Sheema Classic, the Arc in France, the HK Vase and to a lesser extent the Breeders Cup Turf in US. The form from these races is very similar and what the results show, is that over the last 12 months is, there is not a lot between the top 2 or 3 from each race. (Hurricane Run ran in the Arc and Breeders, Scorpion ran in both the Breeders and Vase and Red Rocks ran in both the Sheema and the Breeders). One of these horses was Vengeance Of Rain who won the Dubai Sheema Classic and was bred in NZ and did his early racing in Australia. It must be remembered that Vengenace of Rain is nowhere near the horse he was in 2005 before he had problems which put him off the scene for almost 11 months.

The perceived strength of the European stayers comes from worldwide ratings authorities which have a distinct bias towards northern hemisphere racing. The Arc is always rated highest out of these events. There seems to be no regard for the relative strength of the field. The Cox Plate is always rated many lengths below this. Is it any wonder why Australians have an inferiority complex regarding the strength of our 2000m plus horses. It would be ludicrous to suggest that every Cox Plate winner would beat every Arc winner if they met in that year but I believe that over a 20 year period there would be little superiority either way. There are only two Australasians I can think of to run in the Arc. First was Balmerino who never won a Cox Plate and his best victory in Australia was the Brisbane Cup, but he finished 2nd to the great Alleged in the 1977 Arc. The second was Strawberry Road in 1984 who finished 5th behind horses like Sagace and All Along. It is a hypothetical but I imagine that Cox Plate winners such as Kingston Town, Better Loosen Up, Octagonal, Saintly, Might And Power, Makybe Diva and possibly Bonecrusher would have been more than competitive in an Arc over 2400m.

If the winners of the highest rating 2000-2400m race from each major country were to line up against each other, the winner would most likely be the horse suited by the pace scenario that was given the best ride and having the most luck in running. It would be a close finish. If a horse put a margin on the rest of the field then it could be said that the country that it came from had the highest rating race. Unfortunately we do not see this scenario and have to rely on, mostly inflexible, hypothetical ratings. There are years where you can say that the Australian representative would have little chance but it will be just as likely that the representative from the UK would be no chance for similar reasons.

The lesson to be learnt is that you should never consider a horse a superior stayer because it comes from the UK or Europe. A horse is rated superior on ratings scales around the world if it wins a big race in the northern hemisphere but this is due to the bias in an antiquated system of rating racehorses from different countries. Reputation means nothing on a racetrack.

Any comments are welcome at info@intelligentpunter.com.au .

For the latest form analysis on current races visit www.intelligentpunter.com.au

Brisbane to Sydney and Melbourne.

The main part of the Brisbane carnival is over and we now look forward to the Sydney and then Melbourne spring carnivals. The question that needs to be asked is whether there are any performers from the Brisbane carnival that can go on and compete in the major spring races in Melbourne.

Queensland Oaks: Won impressively by Eskimo Queen. Eskimo Queen showed tactical speed from the barrier and settled in a handy position. She was then moved wide as they straightened, balanced up, accelerated and easily accounted for her rivals to win by 3.5 lengths. Her opposition were not great but did include the AJC Oaks winner, Rena’s Lady and Rose of Sharon and My Lady’s Chamber who have both placed in black type events in Sydney. Eskimo Queen backed up in the Derby and was unfortunately galloped on and dislodged her jockey. I believe she would have won fairly comfortably. At her previous start she settled well back before storming home for a 3rd beaten by a long neck. Ethereal raced in both the Doomben Roses and the Oaks (winning both) in similar fashion before winning the Cups double in the spring. Ethereal did show marked improvement as most 3yo fillies usually improve after a winter in Brisbane and if Eskimo Queen improves in the normal fashion she looks a chance in the Caulfield and Melbourne Cups.

Queensland Derby: Won by Empires Choice, this was a dour affair that became a real slog in slow going. Even allowing for the conditions the last 600m was run in just under 40 seconds (the slowest by far of the day) and the overall time was a slow 2.32.98. In my assessments, a Group 1 horse in similar conditions would have run their last 600m in approximately 3.5 seconds faster which equates to around 20 lengths. That’s a lot of improvement before they get warm in a Caulfield or Melbourne Cup race. In fact I’d be surprised if any runner from the Derby can finish in the top 10 of either of the big cups during the spring.

Brisbane Cup: Won by Newport by the barest of margins. This was run at a fast pace and set up for the backmarkers. Newport finished well along the inside and Lilakyn stormed home down the outside. 3rd and 4th placed Ice Chariot and Mirkola Lass respectively also came from well back. This was an ordinary race with the first seven separated by 1.5 lengths. This form will be weak and again I’d be surprised if any of the starters in the Brisbane Cup could manage a top 10 finish in one of the big spring cups in Melbourne.

Other honourable and dishonourable mentions.

Bentley Biscuit: This horse has finally learnt what racing is all about. His effort to beat Takeover Target in the Group 1 BTC Sprint over 1200m was enormous. He settled last and just when Takeover Target asserted his authority over the rest of the field Bentley Biscuit rattled along the inside to score narrowly but impressively. He has now won 3 straight Group 1’s and his next start will be in England. Should he return for the Sydney carnival he will be very hard to beat. Melbourne is a different question as he was less than average in his 2 anti-clockwise attempts in the Melbourne spring. Whether this was from immaturity or getting on the wrong leg is an answer only time will answer.

Gold Edition: A lot has been said about this filly and to what level she can reach, having not won an open age group race as yet. This filly is a speed machine. It has now been shown that she cannot extend that speed to 1600m and I would be surprised if she was tried over anything longer than 1400m in the future. Her performance in the Stradbroke was close to brilliant. It did however suggest that in a true Group 1 event over 1400m she will struggle to win as she did fade slightly towards the end. The field was at best the equivalent to a southern state Group 2 event. I still believe she would have gone closer had she been aimed wider as she came around the turn and in to the better going. She has the potential to win many open Group 1’s over 1200m and Group 1’s up to 1400m against mares. However, I genuinely believe she can win an open Group 1 over 1400m. Perhaps one early in the season (Rupert Clarke Stakes at Caulfield?) when the cups horses are warming up and there is very little substance in the 1400m horses opposing her.

Reigning To Win: He has promised so much and has been touted as a Group 1 performer but I have always had a slight doubt on him. My doubts were multiplied when he won narrowly from Raheeb and Sirmione in the Doomben Classic over 1615m. In Sydney Raheeb was at best a Listed race performer whilst Sirmione has been disappointing until striking Group 3 classes for 3yo’s in Brisbane. Taking a line through the form of the placegetters it was obvious that Reigning To Win would struggle in higher classes. This was then confirmed in his failure in the Group 1 Doomben Cup and then the Group 1 Stradbroke. Plenty of excuses were made but the truth is that he will struggle to win a Group race in Melbourne. In Sydney, the competition may be easier and he may get a chance there.

Sniper’s Bullet: His win in the Stradbroke was impressive. He was the only horse to make good ground in picking up the leader in Gold Edition and beat her comfortably in the end. He has been mentioned as a possible Cox Plate contender. On face value the effort looked good but on closer evaluation, I feel the form from the Stradbroke may not prove overly strong. Sniper’s Bullet seemingly got out into the better going and finishing within 5 lengths of him were horses like Benedetti, Mr Ubiquitous, Nova Star, Hard To Catch, Black Ink and Stormhill. Whilst not wanting to denigrate these honest performers, they are hardly group 1 standard for the southern states, let alone Cox Plate standard. On the positive side is that he is only a 3yo and will surely show further improvement. 2000m is a query although he does race as though it will suit him. Whilst he wouldn’t be in my top 10 picks at the moment for the Cox Plate, if he improves enough as he matures he may at least make the field and give a good account of himself. The jury is still out on him and his reappearance in the spring should point us in the right direction.

2yo’s: I don’t believe that any of the 2yo’s contesting the Group 1 TJ Smith, Group 2 Sires and Champagne Classic won respectively by Apercu, Masked Assassin and Keiki can measure up to the southern state 2yo’s. I would conservatively place them at least 5 lengths behind the best that was seen in the Autumn Sydney carnival but it would be closer to 10 lengths. The 2yo crop that was seen in Sydney and Melbourne look to have the most potential for many a year and the lot that raced in Brisbane are the best of the rest but a long way from the top. The transition from 2yo to 3yo can be a hard one to predict but I’d be surprised if the Brisbane carnival lot can mix it down south.

Are Australasian stayers slipping away?

There was a sequence of events that occurred over the last few weeks that made me take a longer than usual look at the Australasian breeding scene.

Scattergun
On the 14th April 2007, Scattergun was defeated at a very short price of $1.14. Trainer Brian Smith made the excuse later in the week that he may have been rubbing or pinching his testicles together. This is not the 1st time I have heard this excuse being used and how genuine it is, I am not sure. What I would like to know, is how they know that there is a problem with the testicles. Before his next run on the 28th April 2007 the trainer mentioned that he would be rubbing Vaseline around his testicles to stop the friction. Again, I am not sure whether this is a common practice. Perhaps it is. As some of you will know he failed with the Vaseline as a $2.60 favourite. The truth regarding Scattergun is that he is simply not that good but that is another story.

Japan
On 29th April 2007 there was a Group 1 3200m race in Japan called the Tenno Sho. Many of you will know that the 3 Japanese horses to have raced with success in our big cups-Eye Popper, Delta Blues and Pop Rock are all stallions. Whilst doing the review of the Tenno Sho for the web site, what I found was that there were no mares in the race. Granted, that is not so strange. But the other thing that I noticed was that there were no Geldings! That is right there were 16 starters and they were all Stallions or Colts. Not only this, but their ages ranged from 4 to 8 with an average of 5.625.

Possibly Japanese trainers use a lot of Vaseline as most of their horses are stallions (other than the females, of course). Or is it simply, that the Japanese trainers are better than ours in dealing with colts and stallions. Is it also true that the Japanese breeding industry is more adept at finding the right bloodlines for stallions being able to stay.

This is ironic as I remember the story of how many years ago when the Japanese were serious about establishing a world class racehorse industry, they sent a contingent to New Zealand to study their racing and breeding industry. This was done in the 1970’s if my memory is correct (give or take a decade to be safe). Some of the contingent stayed with trainers and others with breeders.

Breeding Industry
If you have a look at the leading sires table in Japan, you will find that the majority are either bred in Japan or the USA. Some of these have had limited stud seasons in Australia including Sunday Silence, Fuji Kiseki and End Sweep with limited success yet they continue to be at or near the top of the sires list in Japan. Sunday Silence only served a handful of mares. My opinion on why the other two failed to set the Australian breeding industry alight is that we were sending the wrong mares to them.

Where have Australian and NZ breeders gone wrong? In NZ we have access to one of the best staying pedigrees in the world in Zabeel. We have shuttle stallions from all over the world trying to bring the ‘best’ bloodlines into the local scene.

Perhaps we should study the Japanese industry. In the early 1990’s Japan experienced a slight slump in sales figures due to the increased competition of bloodstock from all over the world. To counter this, they decided to increase the standard of broodmares and only serve the mares that would strengthen the resulting progeny. In other words they decided not to continue serving the inferior mares.

Perhaps we can partly blame Hong Kong for the decline in the strength of our racing stock. To breed successful horses at distances above 2000m a horse needs to have depth to its pedigree. In HK, from memory, there are only 2 races every season at a distance of 2400m. HK buyers are not looking for high class stayers. (Is it a surprise that the Zabeel sired Vengeance Of Rain has dominated races over 2000m in HK over the last few seasons). The majority of racing in HK is between 1200-1600m and coupled with the Australian obsession with races over these distances, the local Australasian industry has bred horses to service this market. In other words our industry has bred horses for a quick return. Either geld them and sell them to HK or keep them to make a quick return in 2 and 3yo races in Australia worth a lot of money. Or keep them as stallions, win a couple of early races and send them off to stud, perpetuating the weakness of our stock. But the blame should not be pointed at HK or our local obsession with sprinting, as Japan have horses that are competitive on the world stage at all distances (example Admire Moon who won the 1777m race at Dubai recently against the worlds best milers).

There is nothing wrong with making money, and a quick return is what appeals to most human beings. It is expensive to own and race a horse and you cannot begrudge a person trying to make a living by any means possible. However, there is a lot of competition for the sprinting dollar and it is harder for the owner of the average sprinter to make a profit. In the staying circles, there is not as much competition in Australia but there is still plenty of money to be made in targeting the major staying races at 2000m, and above, with the right bloodlines. You have to be more patient and pay training fees for longer, but the rewards can be excellent. Perhaps then we can get back to the days of Better Loosen Up and Horlicks winning the Japan Cup.

What steps should be taken to improve our breeding? I believe that we should take a leaf out of the Japanese strategy in trying to strengthen our broodmare population. That is, weeding out the mares that don’t have any substance to their pedigree. Secondly, like the Japanese we should look towards the Americas for shuttle stallions where they race on speed and stamina rather than the European bloodlines where the horses are more dour. Another contentious point is the gelding of horses. Gelding a horse has long being thought of as been beneficial in Australia to get away from the effects of testosterone. The success of the Japanese in racing stallions should force us to have another look at this process. If we are to race more stallions then we should send a contingent over to Japan and see what techniques they use in training stallions and being able to get them to race so tractably whereas in Australia, our inclination is to geld them in order to get them to race better.

My aim in going into a racing/breeding partnership is to focus on strong bloodlines to give the horse every chance to succeed and also to try and get at least 1 top line stayer based on the breeding principles I have mentioned above.

Melbourne Cup.
It is too early to tip for this years Melbourne Cup but just a few observations since I have bought up stayers. It is hard to determine which horses the Japanese will target for the Melbourne Cup this year. Delta Blues put in an average effort in the above mentioned recent 3200m race in Japan when finishing 12th after being ridden up on the pace. Eye Popper came home well after being ridden at the rear, when finishing a close 4th. The other horse we know-Pop Rock, didn’t race but has been in good enough form this season to suggest he can be competitive again. I was impressed with the efforts of the 1st 3 horses-Meisho Samson, Erimo Expire and Tokai Trick (who were amongst my 5 chances in the preview and the trifecta paid over $4000). All are well bred with staying bloodlines. The 1st two are only 4yo’s and the 3rd horse a 5yo which would indicate that there is still room for improvement. If you see any of these at big odds in early markets, they may be worth a small bet. The other Japanese horse of substance in form and breeding is Dream Passport.

Of the local horses the ones I’d be looking at are Efficient and Fiumicino. Both have good form and are well bred. Both being by Zabeel and from well bred mares. Santagostino from NZ who won last Saturday at the Gold Coast and looked quite impressive, is also well bred from a staying perspective (from a sire that raced in UK, but bred in USA). Perhaps we can see a resurgence of the locals if these 3yo’s develop as they turn 4. Of our older horses Pompeii Ruler looks the best chance to train on if they decide to tackle the Melbourne Cup.

Any comments can be emailed to info@intelligentpunter.com.au

My latest race analysis can be seen at www.intelligentpunter.com.au

Golden Slipper Update

With 2 weeks out from the Slipper, it is time to update my post from the 19th February 2007.

Saturday at Rosehill was supposed to clear the Slipper chances. It has done the exact opposite. The fillies race left me perplexed. What seemed a race with plenty of speed ended up being a stroll. Run slow enough to be a considered a glorified barrier trial. They ran their first 600m in 36.7 and flew home the last 600m in 33.8 sec on a track rated dead. You didn't have to look at the stopwatch though. You only had to see Miss Watagan being pulled back hard in the lead. Just off her, Mimi Lebrock was being held back tightly and the speedy Illuminates didn't want to take up the running.

As mentioned in my previous article "Re-cap on Super Saturday" when there is such a slow pace the best horses do not necessarily win. This was supposed to be the opportunity to see how the old Sydney and Magic Millions form (Mimi Lebrock) lined up against the Melbourne form (Sleek Chassis) and the recent Sydney form (Forensics). Instead these 3 finished 3rd, 4th and 5th behind Press The Button and Hurried Choice. All five finished within 1.2 Lengths. What does this tell us? Basically we should forget the race as a form reference unfortunately. It has only told us which horse can sprint fastest off a slow speed.

Two races later the Colts & Geldings had their turn and this was going to help us line up the Sydney (Shaft) and Melbourne form (Zizou). Unfortunately, the weather had turned by this race and the rain was falling quite heavily with a very strong wind. It would have been uncomfortable conditions for relatively inexperienced youngsters. Relying on times, as it was difficult to see the horses actions with the weather, this race was run a little more genuinely. Meurice who had old Melbourne form and was 1st up after a switch to the Waterhouse stable ended up the victor from Zizou and Shaft. Only half a length separated the placegetters. What does this tell us? Unfortunately, I am of the opinion that the conditions were very extreme and the race possibly was not a true indication of each horses ability.

Lets look at my early 5 selections. Danehill Smile remains undefeated but looks as though her campaign has ended as of today, unfortunately for connections.

Murtajill has come back well and the blinkers at his 2nd up start definitely switched him on. My initial opinion of that 3 length win was that it was good without being brilliant. My reasons for that were that the opposition seemed to be made up of a tired horse(Husson Lightning) and the 2nd tier 2yo's.

Mimi Lebrock resumed on Saturday and whilst she didn't have her sprinting shoes on, she did not disappoint too much, other than I expected her to be ridden a bit more aggressively. It looks as though she will not make the field and she has not been nominated for this Saturday as it would have meant her racing 3 weeks in a row into the Slipper. Whilst on this, it is a disgrace that money from the Magic Millions and Inglis Classics races are not counted towards the Slipper. The fact is 2 of the most impressive 2yo's this season, Danehill Smile and Mimi Lebrock were not going to make the field as the prizemoney they won from those races was not counted towards deciding the order of entry.

With Danehill Smile and Mimi Lebrock seemingly out, Murtajill becomes top choice by default.

The next 2 were the QLD roughies. Miss Watagan has performed honestly but as mentioned in the original article, needed to find a couple of lengths from her Brisbane form to compete with the better 2yo's. She hasn't quite found enough but I believe she needs to be ridden aggressively as she was in her 1st Sydney start. The trainer is an amateur and is a truck driver (shades of Joe Janiak) and I believe this filly given the right training and riding can develop into a good filly perhaps over the Brisbane winter as she will not be paying the late nomination fee for the Slipper. Whether the current trainer is the right trainer that will be seen in the future.

The other filly, Chinchilla Rose did us proud at her 1st Sydney start winning well at double figure odds. However I rate that race at least 3 lengths behind Murtajill's performance on the same day. I do not think she has improved enough from her Brisbane debut. It was only her 2nd start and she had a 5 week break, so she may improve but making up 3 lengths will be a hard task. She is nominated for this coming Saturday and it will be interesting to see whether she has improved further.

What of the others? I originally didn't rate the Melbourne form as the Blue Diamond field, I felt, was quite weak. However, as I have mentioned the runs of Sleek Chassis and Zizou were full of merit. After their runs on Saturday, I would have to say that they are up to winning the Slipper. Press the Button, Shaft, Forensics and Meurice, however, I would prefer to see one more time. Unfortunately, we will not get a chance.

In summary the Slipper has become full of chances and the barrier draw and run of the race will become crucial. There may even be a late chance forcing its way into the field by winning this Saturday and doing a Stratum from 2005.

Stay tuned for the pre-race analysis of Saturday's races on http://www.intelligentpunter.com.au/

Any feedback is welcome to info@intelligentpunter.com.au

Re-cap on Super Saturday.

What a great day of racing from Caulfield with the stirring finishes in the Guineas and Newmarket and a superb Australia Cup.

Before reviewing the races I would like to touch on a factor from the previous article titled "The Fallacy of Sectional Times". In an average pace race all horses get their chance. As the pace is slowed weaker horses get closer to the better horses. When the pace becomes very slow the weaker horses become threats to the better horses. The reason for this is that when the pace is slow a horse conserves its energy whether it is in the lead or out the back. In reality the race can become a glorified barrier trial (how many times have you seen a horse fly home in a barrier trial or trackwork but it cannot repeat such a sprint in a race?). When the pace is average or fast a good horse will maintain his finishing section much better than a weaker horse. To give you an example we will say they are racing at Randwick and assume that on perfect conditions the fastest last 600m able to be run is 34 seconds. Lets assume there is an Open Class race with a Class 3 horse engaged. If they run to their abilities, then in a fast pace the Open horse can run his last 600m in 35 seconds, whilst the Class 3 horse will take 36 seconds. In an average pace the the Open horse will be able to run 34.5 seconds whilst the Class 3 horse will run 35 seconds. In a slow pace the Open horse can run 34 seconds (the limit for the course), whilst the class 3 can run 34.2 seconds. If in all situations the class 3 horse is 1.5 lengths in front of the Open horse at the 600m mark, then the open class horse will win in a fast and average pace but the class 3 horse can win in a slow pace. (All the times suggested are hypothetical but are realistic). In other words there is a limit to the top speed of a horse. All horses will hit their top speed if they have a leisurely run before being asked to sprint. The difference between the top speed of a Group horse and a restricted horse in this scenario is much smaller than you think.


Now on to the Group 1's.

The Newmarket was an enthralling race. Gold Edition to race on the outside of Dance Hero. I honestly thought Dance Hero may crack the filly but he obviously wasn't fit enough 1st up. As it turned out the super filly that Gold Edition is, she cracked the older proven Group 1 male! I don't think I've seen a tougher 3yo filly over the short courses. (I may have forgotten something, so please let me know if you can come up with one.)

Gold Edition looked home but lurking just behind her was the tough mare Miss Andretti. She looked under pressure to haul in the filly but knuckled down like the star she is and got home in time. I believe Miss Andretti is capable of running at least a mile. She is actually bred to get 2400m to 3200m easily-she has Nijinsky, Ela-Mana-Mou, Marooned(by Mill Reef) and Alydar in her pedigree who were all world class stayers. (I remember Freedman saying that he thought Makybe Diva was so good that he wouldn't be surprised that if he aimed her for a Newmarket she could win it. I wonder if they have a similar thought in reverse with Miss Andretti. If you see her entered in the Melbourne Cup I'd suggest a small nibble at what should be huge odds).

It is a shame that the Newmarket is only a week before the Coolmore Classic because I believe that the 1st 2 home in the Newmarket would have had a huge chance in the Coolmore. In Miss Andretti's only 1400m run in Melbourne in the spring of 2006 she should have won a Group 1. Gold Edition on the other hand would be a slight risk of running the 1500m of the Coolmore. However, I have no doubt she could win an Open Group race over 1400m. The tactics employed on Gold Edition in her defeat by Mutawaajid were almost unbelievable. Allowing him to cross and dictate, turning it into a slow pace made it extremely difficult for Gold Edition to beat Mutawaajid. In line with my opening paragraph the slower pace allowed an inferior horse to beat her. Apparently they thought she was underdone for the race. I don't believe that as she had a lead up run and should have been the fittest horse there. I believe it was an error in judgement on behalf of the trainer and jockey. Perhaps they thought Mutawaajid would pressure her too much in the lead and set an above average pace and that is why they decided to hold her back. This thought is flawed as the stronger of the 2 horses is obvious for all to see and I'm surprised they didn't have enough confidence in the ability of Gold Edition.

The Australian Guineas was hyped as the match up of the year with Miss Finland vs Haradasun, with the Derby winner Efficient going around. We didn't get the finish we wanted to see. It was still a thrilling finish with Miss Finland finally overcoming Casino Prince and Jokers Wild.

How did such a finish eventuate? Miss Finland, Haradasun and Efficient are by far the superior 3 year olds in Melbourne. However a slow pace eventuated which bought the 3 stars back to the field. Jokers Wild is a consistent horse but his NZ form does not look to be up to the standard of the Melbourne stars. Casino Prince whilst honest and perhaps picking up his form could not have realistically been expected to challenge the other 3.

If we look at the race, Jokers Wild tracked the leaders and was a good 1.5 lengths in front of Casino Prince who raced on the inside of Miss Finland. 1.5 lengths further back was Haradasun and another 2 lengths back was Efficient. With the slow pace Jokers Wild was able to stay in the battle all the way to the line. Miss Finland had a slightly superior sprint of the slow pace and was able to pick him up. Casino Prince was almost able to sprint as quickly as Miss Finland and just went under. Haradasun and Efficient held their ground or lost a touch against Miss Finland on the line.

The disappointment for me in the race was the lack of a tactical battle. It was evident from the speed map that there was little speed engaged and I had assumed all involved would have known about this. I had then assumed that Haradasun sitting behind Miss Finland would put the pressure on early and make it into a solid test. I'm not sure whether it is trainer tactics, jockey ability or horse ability that is to be blamed for this. Haradasun had little chance the way the race developed. Apparently the horse is still having feet problems and Haradasun should be forgiven. However, I would hope sense prevails and they turn him out for the spring. Talk of a Sydney campaign can only be justified for the sake of the egos of those involved. The horse should be given time to get over any niggling problems. Efficient had no hope with the way the race developed and obviously didn't have the fitness to make a move and put on early pressure. With a 2 run autumn campaign he should be forgiven and should come back better as a spring 4yo.

The Australian Cup looked a great race on paper and that is how it turned out. Just to explain last years bolter result where Roman Arch got up over Candy Vale-they ran their 1st 1400m more than 2 seconds slower than this year and ran their last 600m almost 1 second faster last year. In other words last year there was a very slow pace and it bought the weaker horses up to the better horses and hence the result.

In this years Cup there was an average perhaps slightly below average pace but Pompeii Ruler showed a great bit of acceleration to race away although very green, hanging in to end up along the rail. Marasco was also very green and hung every which way possible. Pompeii Ruler was beautifully ridden by Newitt and is a horse that is on the way to stardom. He is only 4 years old and as mentioned is still quite immature and green. I am worried about the proposed trip to Dubai. I hope he copes with the travel as the horse doesn't seem to be fully there mentally yet. The only positive is that they have decide against the 2400m in Dubai and gone for the 1777m race. A better option in my opinion would have been the BMW in Sydney (at his mercy) and back in the Spring for Cox Plate, Caulfield Cup and other Group 1's. He would only be 5yo next year and Dubai could have waited till then. However the money is huge in Dubai and I hope he does well and comes back safe and sound.

Marasco was poorly ridden. He had a beautiful spot just beyond midfield for the opening half of the race. What happens next is a bit of a mystery as the camera angles are not clear, but seemingly by the 700m Marasco looks to be left flatfooted and is running last alongside El Segundo. Perhaps he was checked. Perhaps the horse was flatfooted. Or perhaps the jockey was left stranded when everyone around him took off. He finished off brilliantly and had he gone straight would have gone closer. Like Pompeii Ruler he is a lightly raced 4yo and still has a lot to learn. Both look likely to improve by the spring and some great clashes should ensue.

There was a Group 1 upset the previous weekend at Warwick Farm when He's No Pie Eater upset WFA stars Desert War, Mentality and Eremein. How? Surprisingly a slow pace eventuated which is unusual for Desert War. As mentioned in the opening paragraph this bought He's No Pie Eater closer to the better horses. Having said that, He's No Pie Eater was resuming and may have improved over the summer. I would caution about going overboard about him although I have seen the nominations for this Saturdays Ranvet and they do not look overly strong with an injury cloud over Eremein.

To end on, I would like to reference a previous article on the relevance of weights. Many people had mentioned Any Suggestion as being well weighted in the Newmarket, meeting Miss Andretti 7kg better for being beaten 1.25 lengths at their previous meeting. The other weight turnaround not mentioned as much was that Magnus and Shadoways were meeting Undue 1.5kg better for being beaten 0.6 and 0.9 lengths respectively at their previous meeting. The result of the Newmarket is just one example that backs up my claim of weights being insignificant.

Any comments are welcome at info@intelligentpunter.com.au

For my latest analysis on upcoming races please visit www.intelligentpunter.com.au

The fallacy of sectional times.

I am already on record as stating that weight is insignificant when analysing form. I will now state that for the most part, sectional times are also irrelevant when analysing form. Before I start, let me state that after abandoning weights in the mid 80's I started looking at times. It didn't take me long to realise that a 1.08 for 1200m at Doomben was not necessarily good enough to win a race run in 1.10 for 1200m at Rosehill. With the availability soon after of sectional times I spent many hours over years trying to understand sectional times.

The reasons for my statement regarding sectional times are numerous but I will concentrate on two main points. Firstly, there are a number of tracks where the sectional times are inaccurate and/or inconsistent. Even with the introduction of equitimes in Melbourne and Sydney there are inconsistencies. In particular in Sydney, where the published times vary from the equitimes on a regular basis. You only have to look at the official time and sectional time for a Sydney race and then compare it with the equitimes sectionals to see that one or both cannot be correct.

To understand the second point I will point out the obvious. That is, that in a slowly run race the leaders are favoured, as all horses are conserving their energy fairly much equally and if there is not a huge difference between the field, the horses that are closer to the lead have the advantage. Conversely, in a fast pace race the horses that are away from the leading pack and have cover are favoured, as the horses that are in the leading pack or have no cover are using up energy, whilst the others with cover or back in the field will have conserved their energy allowing them to finish strongly.

There are then two anomalies (there are many more actually but I'm sure you don't want to read a thesis). These are the fast pace races that are won by horses leading, and slow run races that are won by horses from back in the field.

The fast pace races that are won by horses that are leading can be explained in a number of ways. The horse could be a star and a couple of classes above the opposition. Or the horse is better than the opposition but the opposition is very average to weak. In this case, on paper the run looks full of merit but when studied closer it is revealed that it is a risk of repeating the performance at its next start against better opposition.

The slow pace races won by a horse from well back, or which are highlighted by a horse storming home from an impossible position are responsible for one of the most common misconceptions I have seen in racing. There are also a number of ways to explain this. The horse may be a star and is a couple of classes above its opposition. Or the horse is better than the opposition, but the opposition is very average or weak. Most importantly if the race was run at a slow pace, the race becomes almost a barrier trial. The horse out the back has dawdled out of the barriers, hasn't spent a penny for the duration of the trip, peels off the horses in front of it and storms home in the fastest sectional of the day. Many will make this a horse to follow. I would advise you to look closer at the way the horse races.

The thinking of the average punter is that this horse has produced stunning sectionals off a slow pace. Just imagine what it could do off a faster pace! The answer to this is not so easy and this is where you need to know more about the horse. Some horses enjoy slowly run races because they do not have much stamina and can be saved for a sprint from the 300m mark. This is what you see in barrier trials and trackwork. Many horses loaf around and then sprint home the final 400m or 200m in stunning sectionals, demanding that we all be impressed. Once they are in a race with average pace or a fast pace they are so busy expending energy to keep up with the field that when it comes to the business end they have nothing left. Punters are left scratching their heads as the horse fails to run on.

The challenge is that the next time a horse puts up a seemingly good run against the pace of the race you need to determine whether it has genuine merit or whether it was false merit due to the weakness of the opposition. This is not necessarily an easy task but one you need to master.

The next time a horse runs a sizzling sectional at trackwork or the fastest sectional on race day, do your homework and don't believe the hype.

Any feedback is welcome at info@intelligentpunter.com.au
Please visit the Intelligent Punter web site for the latest analysis for upcoming races.

Golden Slipper Pre-Post

I have been asked by a number of people about my early selection(s) for the Golden Slipper. Let me start by saying that I am not a fan of Pre-Post markets especially 6 weeks away from the race. Particularly in a 2yo race where they are racing propositions from week to week. I advise only to have a go if your selection is at big odds and obviously has a chance.

3 of the horses that have impressed me to this point are the top 3 in the market.

Danehill Smile impressed from her 1st start where she ran down Mimi Lebrock. She then took a while to run down Keiki at her 2nd start but this was a sprint home and when she got going she was very strong. After a break she wins the Inglis Classic at Randwick by 5 lengths running away after unleashing a devastating sprint.

Murtajill looked the ultimate professional on debut in September in one of the 1st 2yo races. Was impressive but he needs to have at least held that form and improved. That is the unknown, but he is nominated for this week in the Silver Slipper at Rosehill and that question will be answered.

Mimi Lebrock improved after her debut defeat to Danehill Smile where she raced a little greenly. She won well at her 2nd start and then after racing 4 wide with no cover still fought on to win the Magic Millions at her 3rd start.

The other 2 that have caught my eye are two roughies from Queensland.

Miss Watagan is clearly the best of the Brisbane fillies and has won all 3 starts. She has not raced since 30 December 2006 where she beat Sashenka and Rock Idol. Both went down by just over 2 lengths in the Magic Millions to Mimi Lebrock. She is bred to improve with age and if she has found a length or 2 over her break she will be right in the slipper. However, from what I can see whe was not nominated originally in the Slipper and will have to be a late nomination. She is not listed in the TAB Fixed Odds. She is nominated for the Silver Slipper and will be interesting to see how she lines up against Murtajill.

The last horse is Chinchilla Rose. Won her only start impressively. Was not an overly strong race but the 2nd horse won at subsequent start. Should be improved for her next start and if continues to improve can put herself into the picture.

info@intelligentpunter.com.au

See my latest analysis for upcoming races at www.intelligentpunter.com.au

The Dawning Of A Golden Age For Australian Racing?

It can't be denied that in the last 10 years we had the emergence of stars Sunline, Northerly, Lonhro, Makybe Diva and to a lesser extent Elvstroem. But maybe I miss the years of 1995 and 1996 where we had younsters like Octagonal, Saintly, Nothin Leica Dane, Filante, Our Maizcay, Flying Spur and an older horse like Doriemus dominating the staying events. Then a year later Might And Power emerges.

The depth in the Australasian scene seems to have diminished. The emergence of Hong Kong as a racing power and buying many unraced and lightly raced horses from Australia and New Zealand seems to have taken an effect.

The 4 highest profile horses in HK over the last couple of years were all bred in Aus or NZ-Silent Witness, Vengeance Of Rain, Armada and most recently Absolute Champion. Then you throw in group 1 winners and placegetters like The Duke, Floral Pegasus, All's Well, Danacourt, Hello Pretty and many more that were all bred in Aus or NZ and you start to wonder what the Australasian racing scene could have been like. They have won and placed in the HK International Sprints, Miles and Cups against the best from around the world.

However this may all be about to change as it looks possible that we are about to reach the heights of the mid 90's. In early 2006 Miss Finland burst onto the scene winning the Golden Slipper easily and then managed to come back as a 3yo filly and win the Thousand Guineas and VRC Oaks. In the process she managed to just beat a 1/2 brother to Elvstroem that is being touted as the rebirth of the King-another 3yo-Haradasun. Haradasun having only his 3rd start was unlucky to lose his unbeaten tag to Miss Finland but he made it known that he was here to stay.

In the Golden Slipper, whilst Miss Finland hugged the rail, Gold Edition was 3 wide on the pace all the way and went extremely wide around the turn, losing all hope but only finishing 2 lengths from the placings.

In the meantime over in Perth a big horse that carried the silks of Northerly and trained by the same master, Fred Kersley was taking all before him. His name, Marasco, a 4yo. Meanwhile, El Segundo was still holding his claim as the best horse in Australia with consistent performances in Group events.

Then on Derby day, 3yo Efficient delivered on all the promises made in the weeks proceeding.

With Efficient, Marasco, Haradasun, Miss Finland and Gold Edition throwing down the gauntlet to El Segundo there is also a number of others ready to take aim. Other 3yo's such as Court Command, Wonderful World, Mentality and a number of others, suddenly make our racing stocks look great.

We are a week or so into the autumn carnival and some of these have had their 1st run back from a spell. It is now time to take stock and see what will come out of 2006 and continue rising in 2007.

Gold Edition-this iron filly really hasn't gone away and has had 5 runs since the Melbourne spring and despite one little glitch has proven herself capable of taking on the best of the older sprinters.

Marasco has just had his 1st Eastern States run in the C.F.Orr Stakes and put in a gallant effort. 3 wide the whole trip, forced wider around the turn, Childs drops the whip and he even looked lost for a little bit. But once he balanced he made good ground to run a great 2nd to proven Group 1 performer El Segundo.

Miss Finland also had her 1st up run in the Orr and whilst not as impressive, her run still had merit. She was close to the pace but didn't have the acceleration of the big boys in the straight. ( I don't subscribe to the theory that the inside was off-there were many good runs along the fence throughout the day). The fact is had she been racing against 3yo fillies she probably would have won well (unless up against Gold Edition). She was up against a higher grade of horse and they could match and better her acceleration when it counted. I would assume she would take benefit from the run.

Haradasun has had 2 runs since resuming and has not been tested. He has stuck against his own age group and has won easily without being extended. Hard to gauge how much he had left in the tank but did seem to be cruising. One negative, is that I noticed at his last start that he didn't really get away from them when slapped with the whip a couple of times in the last 200m. He did hold the margin though and looked like a horse that would appreciate a longer distance.

The one we have yet to see in 2007 is Efficient.

Who will turn out to be the star? Possibly all of them.

If I had to stick my neck out I would go for Efficient even without seeing him this year. From what I saw in the spring of 2006, Efficient could be the superstar we have all been waiting for.

For my latest analysis for upcoming races visit www.intelligentpunter.com.au

Any comments email on info@intelligentpunter.com.au

Weight Over Matter

Why Weight Doesn’t Matter.

In the 1970’s and 1980’s the Australian horse racing scene was all abuzz with the Don Scott method of weight handicapping. Growing up through this era, I was caught up in this method of finding a winner. As I grew older and more experienced and saw many weighted certainties not only getting beaten but well beaten, I started to do my own research. I started looking into whether the weight of a jockey really mattered in the outcome of a horse race.

Using my Science/Mathematical based degrees I started to look at this scientifically. I will try and simplify this as I may have gone overboard at the time! If you had a machine and loaded it with different weights you could see that extra weight would require more revs to get to the same speed as with a lighter weight. But translating this to horses, there is no way we can measure the effect of weight on a single horse. A horse will not perform exactly the same from one gallop to another so trying to calculate the effect of extra weight on a single particular horse is useless as it can not be measured with any degree of confidence.

Lets get to specifics regarding a horse and the weight it carries. An average racing thoroughbred horse weighs approximately 500 kgs. Lets say the Average weight of a jockey would be 54 kgs. Meaning that on average a horse must carry approximately 10.8% of its body weight.

A horse weighted on 50 kgs would have to carry 10% of its body weight and a horse carrying 58 kgs would have to carry 11.6% of its body weight.

If we say that the average male human weighs 80 kgs then the equivalent weights would be 8 kgs 8.64 kgs and 9.28 kgs for 10%, 10.8% and 11.6% of his body weight respectively.

Do you think a man carrying 9.28 kgs can run as fast as a man carrying 8 kgs? I think your answer will be, no way! But before you dismiss this, remember that a cereal box can contain anything from 500g to 1.5 kgs. We are also assuming that these males are fit. Still you would probably say that the 1.28kgs extra would make a difference.

When comparing the weights between horses and humans we must remember a number of factors to make the comparisons more applicable. Humans stand on 2 feet and need to carry the weight on their back whilst upright or perhaps hold it in front of them. Horses stand on 4 legs and cover well over 2.5 metres. This means the weight of a jockey that they have to carry is actually distributed not only on 4 legs but over a larger area.

It is hard to then make a direct comparison of body weight carried by a horse or a man but using only the fact that a horse has double the number of legs then we can say that a horse carrying 10% of its body weight is similar to a man carrying 5% of its body weight (Even this is conservative as we have already mentioned that a horse distributes the weight over a larger area whereas a man is carrying it whilst upright with the full weight being subjected to the force of gravity).

Therefore a horse carrying 50, 54 or 58 kgs is equivalent to a fit 80 kg human male carrying 4, 4.32 or 4.64 kgs. Do you think a man carrying 4.64 kgs can run as fast as a man carrying 4 kgs? You may still be saying no. Remember that the true comparison would mean the weight difference for a human would probably be less than 640 grams and most probably less than 500 grams (a tub of butter). Also remember that this 640 grams is equivalent to 8 kgs on a horse. How many times do you see an 8 kg turnaround between horses?

Why then do they use handicapping by weights?

The simple answer is because they always have. Like many things in the universe we do things because we have always done things. Handicapping by weight started hundreds of years ago and those who like tradition will never change it. By the way, I am not suggesting to get rid of weight handicapping. The WFA scale was set to allow for the difference in size of horses between ages and sexes. Perhaps all racing should be at the WFA scale.

Then what matters in a race?

Speed, pace and run of the race. Pace makes a race. A slowly run race will in the large majority of cases, suit the horses up on the pace. A fast run race will in the large majority of cases suit the horses well off the lead. Horses that have pressure applied to them whilst leading will find it difficult to win. Horses caught wide without cover are unlikely to win. A clear uninterrupted run obviously helps a horse run at its best. There are so many factors in running that determine a horse’s chance of winning that the weight becomes insignificant.

Why do a lot of racing analysts talk about weight turnarounds?

Because that is how they were taught and that is the way they have always assessed their form. Whenever I hear or read an analyst, trainer or jockey talking about Horse A meeting Horse B on 4 kg better terms or even 1 kg better terms, I have a good laugh. I have never seen any evidence that weight turnarounds make a difference. If anyone has a list of weight turnarounds that actually work then I’d be interested in seeing them. But remember you must include all the weight turnarounds that didn’t work.


Do I have any evidence that weight doesn’t matter?

Well, not anymore. I kept statistics in the 1980’s of weight turnarounds between 2 horses in a race from previous meetings and seeing which horse got home in front. The results were almost 50% for each. Examples of weight turnarounds having no bearing on the outcome of a race occur every day, I just don’t have the time or need to look for them, anymore.

There is no way you can truly handicap a horse. My example of male humans above, carrying different weights is assuming that the men are equal in ability. In this case significant extra weight will make a difference. But there is no way we can determine how good a horse is and then how many kilos will need to be added to slow it down. If anyone has a scientific study that shows that a horse slows down by a certain amount for each extra kilo of weight, I would again be happy to read this.

What about the world ratings scales?

Most of these Timeform ratings are so misleading. They are called Timeform but are basically based on class and weights. I pay little attention to these type of ratings. Why? They tend to rate all races of the same level similarly. In other words all Open Handicaps at a certain racetrack are rated practically the same. This is the 1st flaw as we all know that races of the same level vary significantly. The 2nd flaw is that the rating is then based on the weight the horse has carried in that race.

In closing, forget about looking at weights. There are so many factors that determine the outcome of a race that the weight it has to carry is as trivial as the colour of the jockey silks.

Any comments feel free to email at info@intelligentpunter.com.au

To see our latest analysis visit www.intelligentpunter.com.au