Unpopular Horse Racing Opinions

andyman

These threads appear in a good few sports forums and they're good for enticing debate and discussion.

I'm going to put it out there. I think Frankel, as class a horse as he was, should not have got such a high rating and that Sea The Stars was a better horse. I think this because as Jim McGrath put it when he won the Arc - "perfection in equine form" and because of everything he achieved. I don't think The 3yo in 2011 were all that either. Sea The Stars achieved what he did against a very, very talented bunch of 3yo in 2009.

Over to you.

Urban Sea was forced into early retirement

longshotvalue

andyman wrote: »

These threads appear in a good few sports forums and they're good for enticing debate and discussion.

I'm going to put it out there. I think Frankel, as class a horse as he was, should not have got such a high rating and that Sea The Stars was a better horse. I think this because as Jim McGrath put it when he won the Arc - "perfection in equine form" and because of everything he achieved. I don't think The 3yo in 2011 were all that either. Sea The Stars achieved what he did against a very, very talented bunch of 3yo in 2009.

Over to you.

I Agree Sea the Stars achieved far more than Frankel.

sdoc13

aidankkk wrote: »

I Agree Sea the Stars achieved far more than Frankel.

Plus 1

jimjamcos

Sea The Stars achieved more because he was campaigned more adventurously, it shouldn't take away from Frankel's legacy though. What we do know is that the form of his wins has been repeatedly franked. Forget his 3yo form, his beating of St Nic and CDA, multiple Gr1 winners and the two highest earning European horses in history (the latter having just beaten one of the finest Arc winners we'll ever see) is outstanding. His old whipping boy Farhh also made a mockery of staring at Frankel's arse to win his Gr1's in style last season.

Frankel can never match Sea The Stars achievements but you can't blame the horse for that. In terms of talent it's impossible to split them though.

tryfix

They were roughly about the same level of ability with Frankel hitting the heights constantly as a 4yo but in a very controlled environment which renders him a little soft. Frankel was a move horse with one mighty sustained burst of acceleration which brought to him to 135 as the limit of his abilities, another horse like Sea The Stars who achieved that level with something in reserve and with the ability to quicken at the death would have done Frankel at the line over 10f.

Using St Nick as a marker of Frankel's ability you need to take into account the trip, St Nick tried to win at 10f 4 times and failed every time. He was a 120-122 horse at 10f. Frankel's beating of him was equal to a 135 run. The same with using the dodgy Cirrus Des Aigles in the Champion Stakes, that day Frankel beat Nathaniel in 3rd a 124 horse at 10f by 4 1/4l or 8lb. His monster Ascot Queen Anne win was another crock rating wise, he beat Indominito 108 by 12 1/2l or 25lb, Excelebration beat the same horse by 10l and 10 1/2l soon after.

Too much hype and he never did what the greats do, he never ran outside his comfort zone.

Dancing Brave would have beaten the pair of them at any trip.:D

ComplyOrDie

STS = Talented, Done enough,
Frankel = Excitement, power, acceleration, dominance, Flash

While I was a big Frankle fan I always felt he should have globe trotted. They played it safe and for that I was disappointed. I had a lot of respect for Black Caviar coming over and I almost felt let down by connections to deprive the world of Frankle. In fairness to STS he toured Europe and won in style, but he did not have the same presence as Frankle. I backed STS in his mdn when he lost and I even backed him for the 2000G at 20-1 but to me he would never beat Frankle over 6f-8f. I always thought I would love to see what Frankle could do over 6f in a g1, I have a feeling he would take it. I remember an advertisement at the time the only certainties in life Death, Taxes and Frankle and tbh he was one of a small few that you could say that confidently about .

jimjamcos

tryfix wrote: »

They were roughly about the same level of ability with Frankel hitting the heights constantly as a 4yo but in a very controlled environment which renders him a little soft. Frankel was a move horse with one mighty sustained burst of acceleration which brought to him to 135 as the limit of his abilities, another horse like Sea The Stars who achieved that level with something in reserve and with the ability to quicken at the death would have done Frankel at the line over 10f.

Using St Nick as a marker of Frankel's ability you need to take into account the trip, St Nick tried to win at 10f 4 times and failed every time. He was a 120-122 horse at 10f. Frankel's beating of him was equal to a 135 run. The same with using the dodgy Cirrus Des Aigles in the Champion Stakes, that day Frankel beat Nathaniel in 3rd a 124 horse at 10f by 4 1/4l or 8lb. His monster Ascot Queen Anne win was another crock rating wise, he beat Indominito 108 by 12 1/2l or 25lb, Excelebration beat the same horse by 10l and 10 1/2l soon after.

Too much hype and he never did what the greats do, he never ran outside his comfort zone.

Dancing Brave would have beaten the pair of them at any trip.:D

Impossible to know if Sea The Stars, or any horse from another generation, would have beaten Frankel as the gun was never put to his head against a horse good enough to eyeball him. Racing style is irrelevant in such a fantasy debate.

As for the "dodgy" CDA Champion Stakes, you fail to mention the ground which definitely wasn't to his liking and more importantly the fact that he badly missed the break.

How does Farhh fair in your analysis of Frankel's form?

andyman

ComplyOrDie wrote: »

STS = Talented, Done enough,
Frankel = Excitement, power, acceleration, dominance, Flash

While I was a big Frankle fan I always felt he should have globe trotted. They played it safe and for that I was disappointed. I had a lot of respect for Black Caviar coming over and I almost felt let down by connections to deprive the world of Frankle. In fairness to STS he toured Europe and won in style, but he did not have the same presence as Frankle. I backed STS in his mdn when he lost and I even backed him for the 2000G at 20-1 but to me he would never beat Frankle over 6f-8f. I always thought I would love to see what Frankle could do over 6f in a g1, I have a feeling he would take it. I remember an advertisement at the time the only certainties in life Death, Taxes and Frankle and tbh he was one of a small few that you could say that confidently about .

See, STS didn't just "do enough". He won the Guineas, Derby, Arc and Eclipse, all races over different distances and against some of the best horses racing has seen. Frankel was kept very precious and, like tryfix said, was never taken out of his comfort zone because of his unbeaten record and the risk of decreasing his stud value.

He was a monster at 8f and 10f, but he was rated a lot higher than he should have been. Excelebration was never a 135 (?) rated horse but it makes Frankel look stronger.

Morgans

andyman wrote: »

See, STS didn't just "do enough". He won the Guineas, Derby, Arc and Eclipse, all races over different distances and against some of the best horses racing has seen.

Funny how Excelebration is always thrown up as medicore (three gp 1s wins, 3 times runner up to Frankel) and Sea the Stars beat some of the "best horses racing has seen" like delegator, fame and glory, rip van winkle and Youmzain.

I think Frankel maybe over rated a touch, but I dont think he would have been beaten by Dancing Brave or Sea The Stars at anything less than 12f. But there you go. Both those horses were campaigned as if there 3yo careers were all that they were getting, Frankel wasnt. It appears the OP has failed in putting forward an unpopular opinion. In fact, I wonder if Frankel was trained by John Oxx, would there be as many out to knock him (I appreciate Tryfix's work in his ratings)

Slattsy

Frankel would have beat STS over a mile and 10f (imho)

Slattsy

My own personal and hopefully unpopular opinion to stir things up:
Willie Mullins is over-rated and cant train chasers !!!!

Slate me

andyman

Morgans wrote: »

Funny how Excelebration is always thrown up as medicore (three gp 1s wins, 3 times runner up to Frankel) and Sea the Stars beat some of the "best horses racing has seen" like delegator, fame and glory, rip van winkle and Youmzain.

I think Frankel maybe over rated a touch, but I dont think he would have been beaten by Dancing Brave or Sea The Stars at anything less than 12f. But there you go. Both those horses were campaigned as if there 3yo careers were all that they were getting, Frankel wasnt. It appears the OP has failed in putting forward an unpopular opinion. In fact, I wonder if Frankel was trained by John Oxx, would there be as many out to knock him (I appreciate Tryfix's work in his ratings)

Quote where I said Excelebration was mediocre please.

If you come back with "quote where I said you said he was mediocre" then you're bringing it up in the first place is moot.

jimjamcos

Slattsy wrote: »

My own personal and hopefully unpopular opinion to stir things up:
Willie Mullins is over-rated and cant train chasers !!!!

Slate me

Bang on! He's also to blame for boring the arse of all Irish NH fans, entering 46 horses in a Novice hurdle before pulling 43 of them, leaving his pick of the week to beat two stable donkeys. Look at the flat equivalent AOB running Australia and War Command in the Guineas with loads at stake as future stallions. AOB > Willie.

Morgans

andyman wrote: »

Quote where I said Excelebration was mediocre please.

If you come back with "quote where I said you said he was mediocre" then you're bringing it up in the first place is moot.

Aaaah jeez. I paraphrased a commonly thrown up criticism which is often used by those looking for some reason to knock Frankel. You dont think he is worthy of his rating - suggesting that those giving the ratings have some agenda in keeping Frankel's ratings high. I apologise for any offence in paraphrasing.

Now, I take it that you are standing by the statement that Delegator, Fame and Glory, Youmzain and Rip Van Winkle are some for the best horses racing has ever seen (or are their others), rather than correcting yourself and saying you were a little carried away.

Every horse that was beaten by HORSE A was a superstar, while every horse beaten by HORSE B was overrated. All to win an argument. Not even remotely interested in getting at something close to the truth of the matter.

wicklowwonder

Ted Walsh should not be on TV he brings nothing to RTE commentary and really hasn't much of a clue at all, or is really poor at getting it across. Knows even less about flat!

Ruby while a great jockey is not someone I would ever like to go for a pint with. He will follow his old lad onto TV too, but probably on channel 4 and I can't see him doing a decent job.

NaiveMelodies

My unpopular opinion is that people should not bet on horses if they are going to regularly call X trainer and Y jockey bent after losing a bet.
Part of the game.... the great game.

jimjamcos

wicklowwonder wrote: »

Ted Walsh should not be on TV he brings nothing to RTE commentary and really hasn't much of a clue at all, or is really poor at getting it across. Knows even less about flat!

Ruby while a great jockey is not someone I would ever like to go for a pint with. He will follow his old lad onto TV too, but probably on channel 4 and I can't see him doing a decent job.

Ruby will become a flat trainer like a good greedy bastard! £££

NaiveMelodies

wicklowwonder wrote: »

Ted Walsh should not be on TV he brings nothing to RTE commentary and really hasn't much of a clue at all, or is really poor at getting it across. Knows even less about flat!

Ruby while a great jockey is not someone I would ever like to go for a pint with. He will follow his old lad onto TV too, but probably on channel 4 and I can't see him doing a decent job.

Ah man, Ted is like the Eamon Dunphy of the RTE coverage, talks so much crap but is thoroughly entertaining!

Agreed on Ruby.

Slattsy

I don't mind Ted.

Ruby now....

Morgans

tryfix wrote: »

They were roughly about the same level of ability with Frankel hitting the heights constantly as a 4yo but in a very controlled environment which renders him a little soft. Frankel was a move horse with one mighty sustained burst of acceleration which brought to him to 135 as the limit of his abilities, another horse like Sea The Stars who achieved that level with something in reserve and with the ability to quicken at the death would have done Frankel at the line over 10f.

Using St Nick as a marker of Frankel's ability you need to take into account the trip, St Nick tried to win at 10f 4 times and failed every time. He was a 120-122 horse at 10f. Frankel's beating of him was equal to a 135 run. The same with using the dodgy Cirrus Des Aigles in the Champion Stakes, that day Frankel beat Nathaniel in 3rd a 124 horse at 10f by 4 1/4l or 8lb. His monster Ascot Queen Anne win was another crock rating wise, he beat Indominito 108 by 12 1/2l or 25lb, Excelebration beat the same horse by 10l and 10 1/2l soon after.

Too much hype and he never did what the greats do, he never ran outside his comfort zone.

Dancing Brave would have beaten the pair of them at any trip.:D

Think your work on the ratings is good. But one thing that I dont get. The frankel and the comfort zone thing. I think its utter bull****. If anything, he went out of his comfort zone to a far greater degree than most horses are ever done. There had to be a point after 3f in the 2000 guineas that Frankel supporters thought that Queally was going to blow it. They put the gun to their horses head that day and again in the Queen Anne and the Juddmonte. Had it been intent on keeping their horse in the comfort zone, they could have sat, moved upsides 1f out and won 2l doing handstands. They stretched their horse (almost american style) in making him race balls out. To a far greater degree than most other inferior Grade 1 performers. I really dont get the criticism of connections. They should be applauded.

The only race they dodged was the Derby, and I he might have got away with it through his class, but subsequently he was proven right. IMO O'Brien made a balls of Hawk Wing by running him in the Derby.

tryfix

jimjamcos wrote: »

Impossible to know if Sea The Stars, or any horse from another generation, would have beaten Frankel as the gun was never put to his head against a horse good enough to eyeball him. Racing style is irrelevant in such a fantasy debate.

As for the "dodgy" CDA Champion Stakes, you fail to mention the ground which definitely wasn't to his liking and more importantly the fact that he badly missed the break.

How does Farhh fair in your analysis of Frankel's form?

Ah here, Frankel absolutely powered through soft ground ( remember his best ever performance in the Queen Anne on Soft ground ) his missing the break was probably worth another 2-3lb which still puts him at 135 and it may have helped him settle.

Farhh is problematic from a lot of perspectives. He was a 122 horse going into his Juddmonte performance behind Frankel, remember he was beaten by Nathaniel and by 2 1/2l by the 125 rated So You Think at 10f previously.

He chased home Moonlight Cloud in the Moulin, but the horses behind pull that form down to a lower level than you could blow it up to if you were trying to.

His run in the Lockinge was an 8lb beating of Sovereign Debt 111, he looked so good that day because he had plenty in hand of the runner up.

His win over CDA in the Champion was value for the distance Ruler Of The World 120 in third was beaten which was 3/4l or 1 1/2lb.

CDA had his failed drug test and had had a poor year which saw him running off 123 in that Champion Stakes.

Farhh never hit more than 124, and he didn't run to 124 despite his being claimed to have done so in his 7L defeat by Frankel because if he did he wouldn't have finished beside the not a 10f horse St Nicholas Abbey in that race.

tryfix

Morgans wrote: »

Think your work on the ratings is good. But one thing that I dont get. The frankel and the comfort zone thing. I think its utter bull****. If anything, he went out of his comfort zone to a far greater degree than most horses are ever done. There had to be a point after 3f in the 2000 guineas that Frankel supporters thought that Queally was going to blow it. They put the gun to their horses head that day and again in the Queen Anne and the Juddmonte. Had it been intent on keeping their horse in the comfort zone, they could have sat, moved upsides 1f out and won 2l doing handstands. They stretched their horse (almost american style) in making him race balls out. To a far greater degree than most other inferior Grade 1 performers. I really dont get the criticism of connections. They should be applauded.

The only race they dodged was the Derby, and I he might have got away with it through his class, but subsequently he was proven right. IMO O'Brien made a balls of Hawk Wing by running him in the Derby.

By his comfort zone I mean, he never raced outside England and kicked much the same bunch of horses around again and again until he stepped up to take two 10f races as 4 yo on his final lap of honour. He was never subjected to the helter skelter of a race like the Derby, Arc or King George. Unlike Sea The Stars and Dancing Brave who got 12f on class, Frankel was bred to get 12f, he was just not hardy enough at 3 to handle the kind of season that the other two managed.

His trainer managed him perfectly. He didn't move Frankel outside his 8f comfort zone as a 3yo, an age that the greats took on all and sundry and mastered them.

He was however exceptional in his consistency, three years with astonishing performances in all three years, his Royal Lodge 2yo win not receiving the attention it deserves.

Harry Angstrom

Ruby will be great as a commentator. He'll cut through all the crap. Lots of paddock commentators are afraid to upset trainers because they all co-exist in a cosy world. Ruby will call a spade a spade, even more so than his old man. He's the Roy Keane of horse racing.

Morgans

Ruby was fantastic on Derby Day on RUK, and Im guessing it will be the same during Royal Ascot.

Slattsy

That's something i have a huge issue with lads, why cant they get ex-flat jocks to do the flat meetings?

I cant be the only person that finds Mick Fitz's flat analysis cringeworthy, its awful stuff and you cant take him serious.

handsfree2

Slattsy wrote: »

That's something i have a huge issue with lads, why cant they get ex-flat jocks to do the flat meetings?

I cant be the only person that finds Mick Fitz's flat analysis cringeworthy, its awful stuff and you cant take him serious.

They have too much money!!

dilinja1

handsfree2 wrote: »

They have too much money!!

Channel 4s coverage is cringe worthy full stop. I like Mick but I sometimes think he holds back from conveying his full knowledge on the jumps. Probably a production decision to dumb down the content to appeal to a wider audience

risteard7

Tom Quelly is a terrible jockey. How Cecil had him near the yard I don't know. Unless he's on a steering job or everything goes his way in the race forget it.

ComplyOrDie

Joseph is one of the best jockeys I’ve ever seen. Gets slated for being the son of god and for riding for Coolmore, but TBH for his age he is polished, powerful and an excellent tactician

ComplyOrDie

If you haven’t trained at least one good mare you can’t train…..this included Noel (can’t think of even one mare he trained)

MassDeb8r

A couple of opinions which I believe to be true.

While I appreciate that not everyone will agree with these, that's the very spirit of this thread.

1) Frankel was a (brilliant) freak but will flop at stud.

2) Ruby is insufferable when out of the saddle, Ted is bearable only because he recognises how much of a chancer he himself is.

3) WP Mullins is an excellent hurdle/bumper trainer but fences are not his thing. Some trainers can train them better than others and that's no sin.

4) Joseph O' Brien deserves a lot of respect as a jockey given his size and will go far in the training world when the time comes.

5) The new forum mod should have been picked from an existing and regular horse racing boards.ie poster.

6) It is extremely difficult to make money from horse racing without regular inside knowledge or absolute cast-iron discipline with a bet specialty.

7) National Hunt racing is far more enjoyable than flat racing.

8) Godolphin are absolute underachievers given their resources, their overall results are shambolic and I can't see it improving.

Bateman

MassDeb8r wrote: »

7) National Hunt racing is far more enjoyable than flat racing.

That's surely a majority opinion!?

Great post btw

rossom

I'd like to preface this that I think both horses were magnificent animals and there is no detracting what either showed on track.

Frankel will forever more be known as better than Sea The Stars and it's such a shame from the latter's perspective that Frankel came along so soon after him.

The predominant reason for this is that Frankel was visually the most impressive with his performances. He ran all the way to the line regardless of where his opponents were and was breathtaking on most occasions.

Sea The Stars, however, was a horse who had a bit of a canny brain on him and when he hit the front he knew the job was done and that was that. He knew what it was to win a race before the finish line and when he did that he tried to relax.

I personally think the following facts are irrefutable (followed by my opinion on these facts)

1) Sea The Stars achieved much, much more than Frankel did on the track.

To win a Guineas, Derby, Eclipse, Juddmonte International, Irish Champion Stakes & Arc in 5 months is an absolutely incredibly feat and I don't think we'll see any horse achieve as impressive a CV in his 3 year old career for a long, long time. Credit to connections and the horse especially to win those 6 Group 1s in what is a long and busy second season and perhaps it was STS' racing style whereby he only just did enough that gave him the longevity to achieve what he did.

2) Frankel was wrapped in cotton wool.

Simple as. Connections gave him the perfect racing calender to maintain his unbeaten record and he could have clearly achieved much, much more on the track than he did.

3) Frankel's reputation is largely crafted on his 4 year old season.

For all it was a brave decision for connections to keep him racing given his impending career as a Sire, Frankel's legacy was really forged in his 3rd season as he went from a great miler who proved he could cut it at top class at 10f. STS never raced at 4 and could have been even better if kept in training for a 3rd season.

It's hard to say who the better horse is as nothing really pushed either horse to the limit and you could spend days arguing and there would never be a conclusive, definitive answer.

Frankel's performances were breathtaking and he'll always get the higher plaudits. STS was only truly breathtaking when overcoming tremendous adversity when winning the Arc and you've only got to look to that performance to see how much quality he truly had.

All we can say for certain is that, through no fault of his own, Frankel has taken a lot of gloss of the achievements of Sea The Stars.

Both were horses of a generation that were born a mere 2 years apart.

rossom

Warren Greatrex to be a future Champion Trainer would be my 'out there' statement. Think he is pure class and it won't be long before he gets some serious ammunition from the top owners.

dilinja1

rossom wrote: »

Warren Greatrex to be a future Champion Trainer would be my 'out there' statement. Think he is pure class and it won't be long before he gets some serious ammunition from the top owners.

agree with the above - doing extremely well at the moment. Gavin Sheehan is also turning into a cracking jockey

Bateman

Matt Chapman seems to think Kingman can be compared to Frankel which is interesting, whatever about the STS comparisons

helimachoptor

Appreciate that this started before my time on the forum, but for clarity...

This is the forum charter (http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=153693)

Any opinions from here on out must be within the rules of the charter i.e no trolling, no abuse , if you have an issue with a post, report it and one of the mods will take a look

rossom

helimachoptor wrote: »

Appreciate that this started before my time on the forum, but for clarity...

This is the forum charter (http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=153693)

Any opinions from here on out must be within the rules of the charter i.e no trolling, no abuse , if you have an issue with a post, report it and one of the mods will take a look

Hey Helimcachoptor. Welcome to the forum.

Could you just clarify what about this thread seems to be causing the issue as I'm a bit unsure. I've read the charter.

Thanks

helimachoptor

rossom wrote: »

Hey Helimcachoptor. Welcome to the forum.

Could you just clarify what about this thread seems to be causing the issue as I'm a bit unsure. I've read the charter.

Thanks

Hey there, nothing so far. But some of the feedback posted already was that some of the off topic threads didnt have rules/guidelines placed on them so people may have thought it was a free for all.

While nothing bad has been said so far in the thread i just wanted to let you guys know that it is still governed by the charter.

Frankly these types of threads generally go spinning wildly out of control of other forums, i'd like to try and make sure that doesn't happen here

rossom

helimachoptor wrote: »

Hey there, nothing so far. But some of the feedback posted already was that some of the off topic threads didnt have rules/guidelines placed on them so people may have thought it was a free for all.

While nothing bad has been said so far in the thread i just wanted to let you guys know that it is still governed by the charter.

Frankly these types of threads generally go spinning wildly out of control of other forums, i'd like to try and make sure that doesn't happen here

That's a perfectly fine and sensible attitude to have. Thought it was more something had already contravened the charter as opposed to a warning.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Gregk961

MassDeb8r wrote: »

8) Godolphin are absolute underachievers given their resources, their overall results are shambolic and I can't see it improving.

Couldn't agree more on this point. All the money in the world being thrown at the operation with little to show from it. Maybe they review the total prize money at the end of the year and reckon things are going great, largely because of the dubai carnival of course, while infact their reputation in britain is at an all time low.

Gringo180

I think Treve is the greatest filly of all time.

Morgans

Donald McCain is a trainer worth avoiding.

I'd give Richard Newland any horse to train with full confidence. Not nearly as controversial. Think he is the best out there pound for pound.

Gregk961

Gringo180 wrote: »

I think Treve is the greatest filly of all time.

Thats even more unpopular now!

Gringo180

Gregk961 wrote: »

Thats even more unpopular now!

:pac:

Long way off her best today

tryfix

Gringo180 wrote: »

:pac:

Long way off her best today

10f at 4 on firm ground at Ascot in summer after hitting a blip last time out is a long way from 12f at 3 in the soft in October at Longchamp after being in the form of you life.

Today was an accident waiting to happen, the Arc win was so good and the vibes from the Treve camp were that good that common sense didn't even enter the picture.

Good race all the same. Not sure what to take from it other than that Magician looks good for another Breeders Cup Turf win.

kksaints

Not sure how unpopular this is but Galway races is a horrible meeting full of low quality races. Only 4 of the races are of a decent quality, The Plate, The Hurdle,the 2-yo maiden on Monday evening and the fillies 2-yo maiden on Tuesday evening.

Another few years of Mullins domination of Irish Jumps racing will start to damage the sports popularity.

Joesph O'Brien gets a lot of unfair abuse. He is a decent jockey.

klairondavis

The obsession with Cheltenham is beginning to spoil the rest of the national hunt season.

Harry Angstrom

kksaints wrote: »

Not sure how unpopular this is but Galway races is a horrible meeting full of low quality races. Only 4 of the races are of a decent quality, The Plate, The Hurdle,the 2-yo maiden on Monday evening and the fillies 2-yo maiden on Tuesday evening.

I don't think that's an unpopular opinion among people who appreciate decent racing. The only people who might disagree with you would be the once-a-year dickheads who go to Ballybrit, get tanked up and think they know everything about amateur handicaps. Galway is rubbish. Always has been and always will be.

NaiveMelodies

klairondavis wrote: »

The obsession with Cheltenham is beginning to spoil the rest of the national hunt season.

Great point.