Sussex Stakes

Nuts102

tryfix wrote: »

I've been reluctant to go with the hype, but Frankel has already done enough to be considered one of the greatest of all time. Not quite as impressive in what he has achieved so far as Brigadier Gerard was, not as versatile as Dancing Brave, not even as impressive as Harbingers King George win.

But he's done it time after time, 3 seasons undefeated, his Royal Lodge win as a 2 yo, his devastating 2,000 Guineas win at 3yo and his Queen Anne romp as a 4 yo. He's just got better and better, he's matured from the good looking bull of a 2yo he was into an uglier harder stronger machine of a horse.

He's truly a freak of a horse, I can't put him ahead of the all time greats on what he's done at a mile. A soft Juddmonte over 10F won't tell us much, but if he retires undefeated in the style we've become accustomed to, he's the best horse I've seen.

I think Frankel is the best miler of all time but not the best horse of all time imo. If he steps up in trip and goes abroad and does it then i will accept it. I hate hearing my friends say because of the distances Frankel wins by he is clearly better than Sea the Stars. As someone pointed out above Kinane just done what he had to do. Sea the Stars defeated better horses and done it over further an against better horses. Sea the stars victory in the Arc was more impressive than anything Frankel has done. Some horses are different Frankel showboats and Sea the Stars just done what he had to do.

Gringo180

I would of loved to see a race over a mile with Frankel, Dubai Millenium, Rock of Gibraltar, Giants Causeway, Observatory, Kings Best etc in it, I dont think Frankel would have it as easy as he has in any of his races

TheMilkyPirate

Gringo180 wrote: »

I would of loved to see a race over a mile with Frankel, Dubai Millenium, Rock of Gibraltar, Giants Causeway, Observatory, Kings Best etc in it, I dont think Frankel would have it as easy as he has in any of his races

I would.

Overthelast

Good piece written on rp site today under int'l news. http://www.racingpost.com/news/live.sd

Morgans

Gringo180 wrote: »

I would of loved to see a race over a mile with Frankel, Dubai Millenium, Rock of Gibraltar, Giants Causeway, Observatory, Kings Best etc in it, I dont think Frankel would have it as easy as he has in any of his races

What I find strange is a) the dismissal of what beating Side Glance by 11l over a mile actually amounts to. Trying to equate that to a 4l defeat in a Group 2 over 10f in fact backs up the rating that Frankel received for the Queen Anne.

b) that horses like landseer, golden silca, best of the bests, aramram and other decent but limited horses don't bring down the form of Giants Causeway, Observatory, Rock of Gibraltar in the same way Side Glance supposedly brings down Frankel. Rock of Gibraltar wasn't even the clear top rated miler in his year. Equal with Keltos for the nerds out there. Nostalgia never looked so rosy

c) Completely dismissing Excelebration, who is very unlucky not to be a multiple group 1 winner, and Immortal Verse as if they never existed.

tryfix

Can someone explain how Frankel is rated at 140, if 1 pound = 1 length then he's never run to that level. So what method are they using to arrive at the 140 figure?

Excelebration's 126 rating has been used to boost Frankels rating, yet he only ran to 114 in the Queen Anne unless you think Side Glance is a 125 horse.

I can't see how Excelebration can be rated the equal of Rock Of Gibraltar and Giants Causeway 126 and above Henry the Navigator 125. There's a whole host of really great horses around that mark.

Am I missing something?

Morgans

Different companies use different ratings but none use 1lb to a 1l over a mile. It also depends on the ground, but timeform ranges from 2lb to 3lb for a length.

The horses at 125 are not really really great. There are too many of them to believe they are really great. 126 is often set as the standard for a group 1 winner. It may be that the really really great horses that got ratings of 125 are over rated in the mind.

RPR use a slightly different scale but works on the same principles.

Morgans

http://betting.betfair.com/horse-racing/royal-ascot/results-reviews/frankel-queen-anne-winner-is-timeforms-highest-rated-horse-in-history-on-147-200612-43.html

tryfix

Morgans wrote: »

Different companies use different ratings but none use 1lb to a 1l over a mile. It also depends on the ground, but timeform ranges from 2lb to 3lb for a length.

The horses at 125 are not really really great. There are too many of them to believe they are really great. 126 is often set as the standard for a group 1 winner. It may be that the really really great horses that got ratings of 125 are over rated in the mind.

RPR use a slightly different scale but works on the same principles.

The link you give IN #38 gives a good explanation. The 140 rating comes from the BHA handicapper which doesn't really give any indication that they use anything other than the 1lb for 1 length method.

The horses at 125 aren't really really great, but they've achieved an awful lot more than Excelebration has.

Frankel is cracking any good horses that try to go with him with his burst of speed and they're finishing on empty.

ziggy

This post has been deleted.

Morgans

tryfix wrote: »

The link you give IN #38 gives a good explanation. The 140 rating comes from the BHA handicapper which doesn't really give any indication that they use anything other than the 1lb for 1 length method.

The horses at 125 aren't really really great, but they've achieved an awful lot more than Excelebration has.

Frankel is cracking any good horses that try to go with him with his burst of speed and they're finishing on empty.

They dont use 1lb per length. They use 2lbs per length over a mile. Google should satisfy your curiosity if you want confirmation but you can continue to use the 1lb per length measurement if it suits the argument.

Morgans

ziggy wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Sure you can prove anything with facts.

tryfix

Morgans wrote: »

They dont use 1lb per length. They use 2lbs per length over a mile. Google should satisfy your curiosity if you want confirmation but you can continue to use the 1lb per length measurement if it suits the argument.

I bow to your superior knowledge of the handicapping system. From the BHA website.

Flat
5f: 3lbs per length
6f: 2.5lbs per length
7f-8f: 2lbs per length
9-10f: 1.75lbs per length
11-13f: 1.5lbs per length
14f: 1.25lbs per length
15f+: 1lb per length


Jump
1lb per length is used in most instances except over very long distances or on very testing ground.

tryfix

Excelebration's rating adds up, but I'm still scratching my head as to how he would have been good enough to match Giants Causeway and Rock Of Gibraltar and also better than Henry the Navigator.

Morgans

Henrythenavigator wasn't as good as Ravens Pass that year. Decent Group 1 winner but no better. I'd guess he wouldnt be in the top ten of O'Brien's milers. The ratings are the best method of measuring the performances of horses who never met. The reason why Excelebration is rated higher is that he has beaten/been beat by horses better horses than Henrythenavigator. Its not perfect, it measures the performances they put on the track not actual ability.

Same with Giants Causeway. Because he is remembered fondly, especially in the Breeders Cup, but horses like Greek Dance, Best of the Bests, Observatory not to mind Kings Best murdering him in the mile.

Is it that surprising to believe that Excelebration couldnt beat Greek Dance, Best of the Bests, Observatory...

Gringo180

tryfix wrote: »

Can someone explain how Frankel is rated at 140, if 1 pound = 1 length then he's never run to that level. So what method are they using to arrive at the 140 figure?

Excelebration's 126 rating has been used to boost Frankels rating, yet he only ran to 114 in the Queen Anne unless you think Side Glance is a 125 horse.

I can't see how Excelebration can be rated the equal of Rock Of Gibraltar and Giants Causeway 126 and above Henry the Navigator 125. There's a whole host of really great horses around that mark.

Am I missing something?

There is no way on earth is Excelebration on a level par with The Iron horse or The Rock!!! Definately an inflated rating to favour Frankel.

tryfix

Morgans wrote: »

Henrythenavigator wasn't as good as Ravens Pass that year. Decent Group 1 winner but no better. I'd guess he wouldnt be in the top ten of O'Brien's milers. The ratings are the best method of measuring the performances of horses who never met. The reason why Excelebration is rated higher is that he has beaten/been beat by horses better horses than Henrythenavigator. Its not perfect, it measures the performances they put on the track not actual ability.

Same with Giants Causeway. Because he is remembered fondly, especially in the Breeders Cup, but horses like Greek Dance, Best of the Bests, Observatory not to mind Kings Best murdering him in the mile.

Is it that surprising to believe that Excelebration couldnt beat Greek Dance, Best of the Bests, Observatory...

Ravens Pass and Henry The Navigator. The two dominant 3 yo milers of their season, one two in the Breeders Cup Classic. But I'll give you them because bar the Breeders cup and New Approach in the Guineas their collateral form isn't great.

Greek Dance second to Montjeu by 1 1/2L in a GP 1,second to Fantastic Light in a GP1 beaten by 1 1/2L and winner of a GP 1 that season.

Best Of The Bests won Prix D'Ispahan beating the likes of Banks Hill.

Observatory a dual GP 1 winner, winner of the Prix D'Ispahan.

Medicean back in 4th in the QE II dual GP 1 winner, winner of the Coral Eclipse.

Indian Danehill, back in 4th at Leopardstown a GP 1 winner that season.


I'll throw back Dubawi Gold, Rajsaman and Rio De La Plata at you.

Morgans

There is no throwing back at me. If you have an issue with the rating, fine.

But because you win group 1s, it doesnt make the form any better. Calling Rio De La Plata a DUAL Gp1 winner who was beaten 1/2l in the Moulin ahead of Paco Boy doesnt make Rio de La Plata any better.

Medician's Eclipse was star-studded with Grandera, Bach, Toubougg, Black Minalousshe all within a lenght. Warningford and Swallow Flight within half a length in the lockinge. An utterly awful generation. Yet, he is put up as a DUAL GROUP 1 winner and an ECLIPSE winner as if saying it means he is a super horse.

Ratings dispose of such subjective bull****. Its why they are used. If you have a problem with them, dont be looking at me to defend them, but you need have to better arguements than the line you are going down here to expose them. The agencies will have view the form the same way you are looking at it now and made their decision objectively. Its not like its news to them that Medicean won 2 Gp 1s or Rock of GIbraltar won 7.

Morgans

Gringo180 wrote: »

TThe Iron horse or The Rock!!! Definately an inflated rating to favour Frankel.

THE IRON HORSE and THE ROCK.

Racing post headline hype.

Surprised that you being so clever not buying into the Frankel nonsense seem to embrace the hype around those admirable but in no way extraordinary horses.

hucklebuck

For me the way the way they rate horses is fine except horses that idle at the front just get rated on the margin, I know you can't assess what they could potentially have left.

An interesting look at ratings could be Shergars Derby but I can't find the ratings for the field, I remember hearing people knocking Shergars Derby because of what he beat, sure it was a weak field but after looking to have loads left and cantering the last furlong and walking the last 50y he still won by 10 lengths.

Morgans

There will be people in 20 years time looking back on Camelot - especially if he wins the St. Leger as a true great of the sport. Facts are that he won a very average guineas and a poor Derby. He may not need to have been anything other than an average gp1 3yo winner.

I think he is a bit better than we have seen so far, but on what he has done on the track.

shergar got a timeform rating of 140.

Gringo180

Morgans wrote: »

Gringo180 wrote: »

TThe Iron horse or The Rock!!! Definately an inflated rating to favour Frankel.

THE IRON HORSE and THE ROCK.

Racing post headline hype.

Surprised that you being so clever not buying into the Frankel nonsense seem to embrace the hype around those admirable but in no way extraordinary horses.

I would say Giants Causeway would be an extraordinary horse, a mulitple group 1 winner from a mile to 10f and extremely unlucky not to add a breeders cup classic to his cv, in my eyes hes done more than Frankel has done in terms of tackling much better opposition and over a trip they werent sure he would get.

Until Henry Cecil takes the cotton wool off this horse and ups him in distance and wins as easily in the likes of an arc or breeders cup classic then he shouldnt even be mentioned nowhere near the likes of Brigadier Gerard or Dancing Brave etc.

Morgans

Gringo180 wrote: »

I would say Giants Causeway would be an extraordinary horse, a mulitple group 1 winner from a mile to 10f and extremely unlucky not to add a breeders cup classic to his cv, in my eyes hes done more than Frankel has done in terms of tackling much better opposition and over a trip they werent sure he would get.

Until Henry Cecil takes the cotton wool off this horse and ups him in distance and wins as easily in the likes of an arc or breeders cup classic then he shouldnt even be mentioned nowhere near the likes of Brigadier Gerard or Dancing Brave etc.

Again, funny how Frankel is being talked about being wrapped up in cotton wool when he is running as a 4 year old. Giants Causeway on the other hand....Dancing Brave.... Let's also forget that Brigidier Gerard only ran one race away from a mile as a 3 year old.

So if Frankel wins the Juddmonte - which has been the scheduled step up in distance since April, he will be a multiple group winner at a mile and 10f. Will that make him as good as Giants Causeway? Is Camelot better cos he is a multiple group winner over a mile and 12f?

Lets forget about Bachir beating Giants Causeway in the irish guineas. Superstar horse Bachir. Lets forget about beating Valentino a hd in the St. James palace. If Giants Causeway is a superstar, then Valentino is. Lets forget that he was beaten by Observatory. Another superstar. He outbattled Kalanisi in two great finishes, but they were not great performances.

Wonder if Henry Cecil had the choice between Shibboleth (1.5l behind Giants Causeway in the James Palace) Shiva (2.5l behind Giants Causeway giving him 8lb in the eclipe) and Frankel, which won would he choose as his best?

Yeah, Frankel's all hype. IRON HORSE and THE ROCK FTW.

ArmaniJeanss

Morgans wrote: »

Again, funny how Frankel is being talked about being wrapped up in cotton wool when he is running as a 4 year old. Giants Causeway on the other hand..............

Sea The Stars another example of this - four wins in all-aged company and hurried off to stud. No coming back as a 4yold and trying to give weight-for-age away to the next generation. Understandable at one level though I wonder whether the Tsui's will regret it when they realise they'll never have another one like him.

I genuinely think that the incredible sportsmanship of PKA in keeping Frankel racing as a 4yo won't be appreciated for a few years - when people are reminded by future events that horses who win Classics by 5+ lengths and get 135 ratings rarely stay in training.
Hopefully by that stage the debate about his campaign (e.g., not going for the Arc via the July Cup) will be forgotten and we can just remember his greatness.

****
Excelebration rating debate is quite interesting, without Frankel he'd potentially be an 8 times G1 winner now and people would probably be saying his rating is a pound or two too low

Gringo180

Morgans wrote: »

Again, funny how Frankel is being talked about being wrapped up in cotton wool when he is running as a 4 year old. Giants Causeway on the other hand....Dancing Brave.... Let's also forget that Brigidier Gerard only ran one race away from a mile as a 3 year old.

So if Frankel wins the Juddmonte - which has been the scheduled step up in distance since April, he will be a multiple group winner at a mile and 10f. Will that make him as good as Giants Causeway? Is Camelot better cos he is a multiple group winner over a mile and 12f?

Lets forget about Bachir beating Giants Causeway in the irish guineas. Superstar horse Bachir. Lets forget about beating Valentino a hd in the St. James palace. If Giants Causeway is a superstar, then Valentino is. Lets forget that he was beaten by Observatory. Another superstar. He outbattled Kalanisi in two great finishes, but they were not great performances.

Wonder if Henry Cecil had the choice between Shibboleth (1.5l behind Giants Causeway in the James Palace) Shiva (2.5l behind Giants Causeway giving him 8lb in the eclipe) and Frankel, which won would he choose as his best?

Yeah, Frankel's all hype. IRON HORSE and THE ROCK FTW.

Of course Henry Cecil would choose Frankel over those 2 horses it would be silly to suggest otherwise, I am not doubting Frankels ability all I am saying is he is on an inflated rating and people coming out saying he is the greatest of all time is ridiculous considering what he has beat.

Do you honestly think Frankel is 12lbs or whatever it is superior to Giants Causeway, who has beaten the likes of Sakhee, Kalanisi, Fantastic Light, Captain Steve (14 Group 1 wins between them including a Arc, Dubai World Cup, 2 Breeders Cup Turf & Japan Cup)

Morgans

Who is saying that he is that good? Over a mile 12lb equals 24l.

I think he woudl beat Giants Causeway by upwards of 10l over a mile if he was trying. 12l would be a fair assumption.

Over ten furlongs, we'll see how effective Frankel is in the Juddmonte. I bet if he wins Nathaniel and St. Nicholas Abbey will be seen as sub par group 1 horses. I'd guess think Frankel would win by 8l.

I think he could win the arc if he went for it. I also dont think he should go for it. I dont see the obsession with stepping up in distance. If he stepped back and won the Haydock Sprint by 5l, it would be more astonishing

swimming in a sea

Morgans wrote: »

Who is saying that he is that good? Over a mile 12lb equals 24l.

I think he woudl beat Giants Causeway by upwards of 10l over a mile if he was trying. 12l would be a fair assumption.

Over ten furlongs, we'll see how effective Frankel is in the Juddmonte. I bet if he wins Nathaniel and St. Nicholas Abbey will be seen as sub par group 1 horses. I'd guess think Frankel would win by 8l.

I think he could win the arc if he went for it. I also dont think he should go for it. I dont see the obsession with stepping up in distance. If he stepped back and won the Haydock Sprint by 5l, it would be more astonishing

European Trainers only see sprints as a last resort for a failed miler, look at strong suit this year only now they seem to have accepted he is a sprinter.
Last year in an interview with Henry Cecil someone mentioned Frankel going for the july cup and he looked at them like they had a screw loose.
Same thing from Aidan O'Brian he loves to talk about how his top horses have enough speed to win a july cup but never enters them in it.

But I agree with what you said, much more pleasing to me for him to drop down to 5f\6f race as that shows speed, as for 10f\12f not much contest there as its pretty simple if he stays he'll win. If he doesn't stay 10f\12f it doesn't make him any less a great horse, otherwise he should win everything from 5f to the cross country race at Cheltenham.:)

Morgans

You know what is funny as well. Frankel is moving up to 1m2f as a 4yo yet his trainer is accused of keeping him in cotton wool. Unlike giants Causeway or Rock of Gibraltar.

When is Rock of Gibraltar not crabbed for not stepping up/down in distance? Or continuing on as a 4yo?

Gringo180

Morgans wrote: »

You know what is funny as well. Frankel is moving up to 1m2f as a 4yo yet his trainer is accused of keeping him in cotton wool. Unlike giants Causeway or Rock of Gibraltar.

When is Rock of Gibraltar not crabbed for not stepping up/down in distance? Or continuing on as a 4yo?

There is bigger races they can take on with Frankel outside of the UK, the likes of The Arc and The Breeders Cup Classic but they wont as he will be out of his comfort zone.

Morgans

Why should they?

Name the last champion miler to go for/win the Arc? Why didnt THE ROCK go the Arc? Is he diminished because of it?

I wouldnt be so foolish to make such a claim, yet you seem to doing so.

To satisfy some internet poster who doesnt appreciate what he is seeing. Is that the only reason.