Underrated Horses

Backstreet Moyes

Is Al Boum Photo massively underrated people might question the strength of the opposition but how many horses have won back to back gold cups

Probably the way he is campaigned which obviously works but is not fashionable

Plasandrunt

Yeah i think the reason Al Boum hasn't got more credit is that he has only ran 5 times in the last 2 seasons. When Kauto and Denman were winning Gold Cups they were also winning Hennesseys, Befair Chases, King Georges and Lexus's.

The division as a whole is very strong by the way, quality wise this years was one of the best I've ever seen

RivetingRoger

Jezki
Champion Hurdle winner
Royal bond winner
Aintree hurdle winner
Irish champion hurdle winner
Irish Stayers Hurdle winner
Numerous grade 1s
Beat Hurricane Fly 3 times
Almost €1m in prize money

Never spoken about in the great horse conversations

Plasandrunt

Bobs Worth

Gold Cup winner, Albert Bartlett winner, RSA winner, Hennessey Winner, Lexus winner and Betfred Hurdle winner

IAMAMORON

I will tell you what is the most overrated pile of shight I have ever read in my life.

Timeform's assessment of Chacun Pur Soi is the greatest pile of shight I have ever read. These are the same clowns that told us about Cyrname. Assholes.

How they are rating horses so highly after 8 runs is simply wrong. Anyone following these **** will lose a fortune. Talk about fake news.

https://www.timeform.com/horse-racing/features/top-horses/timeforms_top_chasers

https://www.racingpost.com/profile/horse/901723/chacun-pour-soi/form

I respect that the horse is above average but rating it 11lbs ahead of a double King George winner is simply a piss take. Scumbags.

IAMAMORON

To compound my hatred of Timeform you only have to look at the eternal love in which is Frankel. Albeit he was the fastest racehorse in history.

But my biggest gripe is the way they underrate Sea The Stars. He was not 7lbs inferior to Frankel. Given that he won a 2000 Guineas, Derby, Eclipse, National Stakes, a Champion Stakes and an Arc. Sea the Stars is the greatest flat racehorse I have ever seen.

I am not one for glorifying superstars but I cannot help thinking that if the Sea the Stars was bred in the UK he would be up a few pounds for starters.

Timeform are full of it. They even have Azertyuiop in the same list as Dessie and Kicking King. They are idiots.

Highest Timeform Annual Ratings (Jumps - Chasers)
212
Arkle
210
Flyingbolt
192p
Sprinter Sacre
191
Kauto Star, Mill House
187
Desert Orchid
186
Dunkirk
184
Burrough Hill Lad, Moscow Flyer, Long Run
183
Don Cossack, Master Oats
182
Azertyuiop, Best Mate, Captain Christy, Douvan, Carvill's Hill, Kicking King,

See More Business, Well Chief

IAMAMORON

Nuts102 wrote: »

Is Al Boum Photo massively underrated people might question the strength of the opposition but how many horses have won back to back gold cups

Probably the way he is campaigned which obviously works but is not fashionable

I think he is underrated, but he is also lightly raced. But it is difficult to argue with 2 Gold Cups.

lemush

IAMAMORON wrote: »

To compound my hatred of Timeform you only have to look at the eternal love in which is Frankel. Albeit he was the fastest racehorse in history.

But my biggest gripe is the way they underrate Sea The Stars. He was not 7lbs inferior to Frankel. Given that he won a 2000 Guineas, Derby, Eclipse, National Stakes, a Champion Stakes and an Arc. Sea the Stars is the greatest flat racehorse I have ever seen.

I am not one for glorifying superstars but I cannot help thinking that if the Sea the Stars was bred in the UK he would be up a few pounds for starters.

Timeform are full of it. They even have Azertyuiop in the same list as Dessie and Kicking King. They are idiots.

Highest Timeform Annual Ratings (Jumps - Chasers)
212
Arkle
210
Flyingbolt
192p
Sprinter Sacre
191
Kauto Star, Mill House
187
Desert Orchid
186
Dunkirk
184
Burrough Hill Lad, Moscow Flyer, Long Run
183
Don Cossack, Master Oats
182
Azertyuiop, Best Mate, Captain Christy, Douvan, Carvill's Hill, Kicking King,

See More Business, Well Chief

Sea The Stars is the greatest flat horse of all time and I won't hear any different. Frankel barely left his back yard. Six grade ones, six months, three countries. Will never again be done.

RivetingRoger

Dunno who was the better horse but Frankels Guineas was the greatest flat performance I have ever seen
Breathtaking

More recently , Battash Nunthorpe was special

IAMAMORON

RivetingRoger wrote: »

Dunno who was the better horse but Frankels Guineas was the greatest flat performance I have ever seen
Breathtaking

More recently , Battash Nunthorpe was special

Frankel was a savage miler. But he never ran further than 10f's and if he was bred in Ireland they would have rated him 10lbs less. That is how they do. They would still be offering superlatives about Dancing Brave.

I would say Battash is just a doped up pile of shít, sprinters me hole. Godolphin copped on about 5 or 10 years ago that they could not compete with Coolmore and started focusing on sprinters. All their big winners are either on the special cabbage or have been. Look at the shight going on down in Dubai ffs.

Battash has never won a race at Royal Ascot. Over hyped. The same British biased rating. Sole Power won the Kings Stand twice and 5 group 1's … guess what …. Battash is rated a half stone better for winning two group 1's. I have been watching this all my life, they cannot help themselves.

The only time the Brits accurately rate Irish horses is before Cheltenham, then they pour it on. The reason being they know we have better horsies.

Cheekpieces

RivetingRoger wrote: »

Dunno who was the better horse but Frankels Guineas was the greatest flat performance I have ever seen
Breathtaking

More recently , Battash Nunthorpe was special

Sts guineas was 2 seconds faster then frankels and not only that the only horse to come out of frankels guineas to win again I think was fury in a mickey mouse affair

RivetingRoger

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Frankel was a savage miler. But he never ran further than 10f's and if he was bred in Ireland they would have rated him 10lbs less. That is how they do. They would still be offering superlatives about Dancing Brave.

I would say Battash is just a doped up pile of shít, sprinters me hole. Godolphin copped on about 5 or 10 years ago that they could not compete with Coolmore and started focusing on sprinters. All their big winners are either on the special cabbage or have been. Look at the shight going on down in Dubai ffs.

Battash has never won a race at Royal Ascot. Over hyped. The same British biased rating. Sole Power won the Kings Stand twice and 5 group 1's … guess what …. Battash is rated a half stone better for winning two group 1's. I have been watching this all my life, they cannot help themselves.

The only time the Brits accurately rate Irish horses is before Cheltenham, then they pour it on. The reason being they know we have better horsies.

Moron, I love you man, but..... That's some spectacular BS you just spouted about the fastest thing on 4 legs in the world
Battash is a f***ing King

IAMAMORON

RivetingRoger wrote: »

Moron, I love you man, but..... That's some spectacular BS you just spouted about the fastest thing on 4 legs in the world
Battash is a f***ing King

Get over yourself. He might be the fastest sprinter from maybe the last couple two years, but he is no all time great or anything.

Choisr ,Oasis Dream ,Killachy… all would laugh at Battash.

Borderlescott would have stuffed Battash on his day. Different class.

RivetingRoger

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Get over yourself. He might be the fastest sprinter from maybe the last couple two years, but he is no all time great or anything.

Choisr ,Oasis Dream ,Killachy… all would laugh at Battash.

Borderlescott would have stuffed Battash on his day. Different class.

Get over myself?!
Go way you innocent boy

NaiveMelodies

Nuts102 wrote: »

Is Al Boum Photo massively underrated people might question the strength of the opposition but how many horses have won back to back gold cups

Probably the way he is campaigned which obviously works but is not fashionable

Definitely. Tis a weird one. Timing of gold cup being on the same time as the world ending not ideal for him.

NaiveMelodies

lemush wrote: »

Sea The Stars is the greatest flat horse of all time and I won't hear any different. Frankel barely left his back yard. Six grade ones, six months, three countries. Will never again be done.

Freakish stuff by horse jock and trainer

BoldReason

Cheekpieces wrote: »

Sts guineas was 2 seconds faster then frankels and not only that the only horse to come out of frankels guineas to win again I think was fury in a mickey mouse affair

The second part of that statement is simply not factual. Just from memory Roderic O Connor won the Irish guineas next time out. Also Dubawi Gold was second he won the celebration mile in goodwood that season and possibly more.

Also you can't possibly compare a race where a horse made the running from the 1f pole to the finish against a race which shaped completely the opposite on times.

They were both phenomenal horses for very different reasons. Id take Frankel over sts in a match bet but only slightly.

Also Frankel was carrying a 10lb penalty almost everytime he ran. :pac:

lemush

BoldReason wrote: »

The second part of that statement is simply not factual. Just from memory Roderic O Connor won the Irish guineas next time out. Also Dubawi Gold was second he won the celebration mile in goodwood that season and possibly more.

Also you can't possibly compare a race where a horse made the running from the 1f pole to the finish against a race which shaped completely the opposite on times.

They were both phenomenal horses for very different reasons. Id take Frankel over sts in a match bet but only slightly.

Also Frankel was carrying a 10lb penalty almost everytime he ran. :pac:

Queally should have been jocked off after that ride in the James Palace, probably the worst winning ride I've ever seen.

The Mig

Frankel was visually impressive whereas STS had the better CV. His Arc win was something special!

Cheekpieces

if you win neither the derby or arc your not in the conversation

kksaints

Could say that Sinndar is underrated. Dual derby winner including one of the most comfortable wins of the Irish Derby in memory, Arc winner beating the mighty Montjeu and Group one winner 2 year old. Yet he seems to be completely forgotten about when it comes to talking about great horses.

Cheekpieces

kksaints wrote: »

Could say that Sinndar is underrated. Dual derby winner including one of the most comfortable wins of the Irish Derby in memory, Arc winner beating the mighty Montjeu and Group one winner 2 year old. Yet he seems to be completely forgotten about when it comes to talking about great horses.

shout and absolute star

I says

Yeats 4 gold cups and for longevity for a flat horse.

IAMAMORON

I says wrote: »

Yeats 4 gold cups and for longevity for a flat horse.

+1 , he was also even money favourite for the Epsom Derby until he got a niggle.

The Tetrarch

IAMAMORON wrote: »

To compound my hatred of Timeform you only have to look at the eternal love in which is Frankel. Albeit he was the fastest racehorse in history.

Ah come on now. Frankel beat standard time twice in his fourteen races, by 0.75s and 0.11s.
And the commentator said he was 15 lengths clear in the 2000 Guineas.

The Tetrarch

I looked up Sea The Stars. He beat standard time by 2.10s, 1.41s, 4.20s.

The Tetrarch

Falbrav is my underrated horse.
He won Group 1 races in five countries: Italy; France; England; Japan; Hong Kong.
He was imo an unlucky 2nd in the Irish Champion Stakes (objection), and beaten a head in the Breeders Cup Turf.
He wasn't wrapped in cotton wool. He ran 26 times, 1st x13, 2nd x5, 3rd x5.

IAMAMORON

The Tetrarch wrote: »

Ah come on now. Frankel beat standard time twice in his fourteen races, by 0.75s and 0.11s.
And the commentator said he was 15 lengths clear in the 2000 Guineas.

I am not disagreeing with Frankel being a superstar. My main gripe is with Timeform and also the Brits overrating their best horses and underrating ours. I said it before, if Frankel was trained by Ger Lyons or Eddie Lynam he would have gone off 5/2 for this Guineas. He also would never have received the top rating even if he had achieved the exact same times etc.

Rating STS 7lbs inferior is a piss take, for starters.

I also gave the example of Sole Power, he won a Nunthorpe as 2 yr old and won 5 group1's including the kings Stand twice. Yet Battash is rated half a stone better.

We could be here all night with examples of something similar.

The Tetrarch

I was just joking.
My thoughts on Frankel - beat the same horses, on the same courses, and never put up a good time, and much of his reputation was connected with Henry Cecil's illness.
He may have put up a good time on a card compared to the other races, but not a good time against standard time.
Frankel was a very good horse, but the Timeform rating was based on repeatedly beating Excelebration, Farhh, and Dubawi Gold.

Slattsy

IAMAMORON wrote: »

+1 , he was also even money favourite for the Epsom Derby until he got a niggle.

Guess who was on him ante post for the Derby! Lol

Imhof Tank

What about Rock of Gibraltar. Never gave his supporters a moments worry in racking up his group 1 sequence until he was asked to run around a glorified dog track at the Breeders Cup.

BoldReason

IAMAMORON wrote: »

I am not disagreeing with Frankel being a superstar. My main gripe is with Timeform and also the Brits overrating their best horses and underrating ours. I said it before, if Frankel was trained by Ger Lyons or Eddie Lynam he would have gone off 5/2 for this Guineas. He also would never have received the top rating even if he had achieved the exact same times etc.

Rating STS 7lbs inferior is a piss take, for starters.

I also gave the example of Sole Power, he won a Nunthorpe as 2 yr old and won 5 group1's including the kings Stand twice. Yet Battash is rated half a stone better.

We could be here all night with examples of something similar.

Sole Power did not win the Nunthorpe as a 2yo.

It has only been done three times in the post war era. 1 was Kingsgate Native I'd have to Google the others. But it wasn't Sole Power.

Interestingly Kingsgate Native broke his maiden tag in the Nunthorpe. Doubt that will ever happen again. Bit of an underrated horse in his own right was running consistently to 100-110 up to the age of 9.

IAMAMORON

BoldReason wrote: »

Sole Power did not win the Nunthorpe as a 2yo.

It has only been done three times in the post war era. 1 was Kingsgate Native I'd have to Google the others. But it wasn't Sole Power.

Interestingly Kingsgate Native broke his maiden tag in the Nunthorpe. Doubt that will ever happen again. Bit of an underrated horse in his own right was running consistently to 100-110 up to the age of 9.

Your right, he was 3. But worth adding lightly raced at the time, not a maiden but was 100/1.

My bad apols etc.

The Tetrarch

Sole Power's real claim to fame was Moneytree advised him as a lay in the Nunthorpe on the Betfair forum. The horse won at 100/1.
That "tip" followed Moneytree around like a bad smell.
I think Moneytree underrated him.

BoldReason

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Your right, he was 3. But worth adding lightly raced at the time, not a maiden but was 100/1.

My bad apols etc.

Sole Power is an old favorite of mine. His 2nd King Stand win with Hughes on board probably my favorite race of his.

Morgans

Cheekpieces wrote: »

if you win neither the derby or arc your not in the conversation

Most Derby winners should never be near the conversation. Only 12f horses need apply. Zero logic used. It is funny how all those criticising Frankel all somehow see Sea the Stars at better. It smells a lot of being an anti-english thing.

If Frankel was Irish, it would be about him being a champion at three different ages when Sea the Stars only ran in Group 1s over 6 months, and how while he was consistently good it was only Youmzain, Delegator, Rip Van Winkle that he beat. A poorish crop that he happened to be a bit too classy for.

Unfortunately because Sea the Stars never beat anything by far, he can never be rated much higher than Youmzain, Delegator, Fame and Glory etc. If he is the greatest, then those have to be in the argument. They arent.

lemush

Morgans wrote: »

Most Derby winners should never be near the conversation. Only 12f horses need apply. Zero logic used. It is funny how all those criticising Frankel all somehow see Sea the Stars at better. It smells a lot of being an anti-english thing.

If Frankel was Irish, it would be about him being a champion at three different ages when Sea the Stars only ran in Group 1s over 6 months, and how while he was consistently good it was only Youmzain, Delegator, Rip Van Winkle that he beat. A poorish crop that he happened to be a bit too classy for.

Unfortunately because Sea the Stars never beat anything by far, he can never be rated much higher than Youmzain, Delegator, Fame and Glory etc. If he is the greatest, then those have to be in the argument. They arent.

Not beating anything by too far I don't think can be levelled against STS in my opinion, he was one of those that only ever did enough. I'm a huge fan of Frankel but for me STS achieved more in six months than he did in his three years on the track. But mainly for me it sums up why I can't take to flat racing, potential horses of a lifetime seen all too fleetingly.

IAMAMORON

Morgans wrote: »

Most Derby winners should never be near the conversation. Only 12f horses need apply. Zero logic used. It is funny how all those criticising Frankel all somehow see Sea the Stars at better. It smells a lot of being an anti-english thing.

If Frankel was Irish, it would be about him being a champion at three different ages when Sea the Stars only ran in Group 1s over 6 months, and how while he was consistently good it was only Youmzain, Delegator, Rip Van Winkle that he beat. A poorish crop that he happened to be a bit too classy for.

Unfortunately because Sea the Stars never beat anything by far, he can never be rated much higher than Youmzain, Delegator, Fame and Glory etc. If he is the greatest, then those have to be in the argument. They arent.

Some other names that Sea Stars took and some other asses he kicked....

You forget to mention 4 time Group 1 winner Mastercraftsman.
Casual Conquest won the Tatersalls Curragh G1
Conduit a double breeders cup turf winner, st leger winner and King George winner ( another 4 G1's)
Dar Re mi won 3 group 1's
Fame and glory won 4 group 1's
Stacelita won 3 group 1's
Getaway was a group 1 winner.
Cima de Triomphe won a G1 in Italy
Jukebox Jury won an Irish Ledger
Twice Over won 4 Group 1's

He beat all those for starters. Stuffed all of them.

Frankel beat Zoffany, Excelebration, Dubawu Gold and Farhh. He also beat Canford Cliffs ( the only real quality horse IMO ).

If Frankel was trained in Ireland he would be rated a stone lighter. That is a simple fact.

Sea the Stars simply has a better record and over time people will realise it, even if they don't already.

The Tetrarch

Morgans wrote: »

Unfortunately because Sea the Stars never beat anything by far, he can never be rated much higher than Youmzain, Delegator, Fame and Glory etc. If he is the greatest, then those have to be in the argument. They arent.

Hawkwing won a 6 runner Lockinge Stakes by 11 lengths.
His previous best RPR was 127, but after that he was given a RPR of 134.
Then in his next race he was 6th beaten 11 lengths and got a RPR of 101 (finished lame!).
Once the hype gathers momentum journalists reach for superlatives.

In a run of 5 consecutive races (latest first)
Frankel beat Farhh by 7l (9 runners) fast 0.11
Frankel beat Farhh by 6l (4 runners) slow 1.36
Frankel beat Excelebration by 11l (11 runners) fast 0.75
Frankel beat Excelebration by 5l (6 runners) slow 2.74
Frankel beat Excelebration by 4l (8 runners) slow 0.85

In every one of the five races he had Bullet Train setting the pace, even in a 4 runner field.
Take Frankel and Bullet Train out of those fields to find out how many runners he beat.
Dubawi Gold was in the first three of those races.
His career was beating his pacemaker, Bullet Train, Dubawi Gold, Excelebration, and Farhh many times, and beating standard time twice in 14 races.

You say Sea The Stars "never beat anything by far".
You could make a case that Frankel never beat anything.

Faugheen

When we talk about the great horses over jumps I feel like one isn’t given the credit he deserves, and many will think ‘wtf’ upon first reading.

Big Buck’s.

When we talk about the best horses people will instantly think Denman, Kauto Star and Sprinter Sacre but Big Buck’s is always listed further down. I think he’s unfortunate to be associated with probably the least most interesting feature at Cheltenham but he is absolutely up there with the best of the best.

I think his story is great too. Nichols could easily have let him continue over fences and get nowhere but brought him back over hurdles where he found his calling.

I hope that post made sense!

BoldReason

People talking so matter of fact about what are essentially opinions. None of us know who was better. The conversation has been done to death here a few times.

Also people can stick there standard times up their arse they are an absolute archaic way of quantifying something. I don't know why they still list those tbh. People who haven't a clue about race times bring them up in arguments they should never even be in.

People will not realise that sea the stars was better because there is not enough evidence to back up that claim. Racing on at 4 for me trumps all. That is why I favour Frankel over sts.
I'm not really interested in having this discussion much beyond this post as I've tried and people don't listen to facts and stick what they want up here as fact.

Also Cirrus Des Aigles was the best horse Frankel beat he was rated 130ish at the time. People talking as if Excellebration is some sort of handicapper as well is laughable. He won 3 Group 1s.
He also beat Farhh, Nathaniel, St Nicholas Abbey, Twice Over, Dream Ahead. All multiple group 1 winners. These horses are every bit as good and highly rated as what Sea The Stars beat.

Huntergonzo

Tidal Bay was a solid horse, certainly doesn't belong in the same conversation as some of the others mentioned here but he had a tidy record winning the Lexus, the Bet365 Gold Cup and the Arkle for over €800k in prize money.

IAMAMORON

BoldReason wrote: »

He also beat Farhh, Nathaniel, St Nicholas Abbey, Twice Over, Dream Ahead. All multiple group 1 winners. These horses are every bit as good and highly rated as what Sea The Stars beat.

He beat Nathaniel in a maiden - I don't think he would have beat him over 12f's, especially on soft or worse. He beat an undercooked St Nicholas Abbey over 10f's- all his G1's were over 12F's. Dream Ahead was a sprinter.

Farhh was on the good cabbage I reckon. That will never be proven but Zarooni was busted in 2012, he never trained Farhh but there is enough smoke there for me.

I also think it is worthwhile discussing how their foals also turn out. STS has had a more successful stud career. Considering the mares that were flown into be covered by Frankel his progeny have not been great. Cracksman and Logician are hardly a suitable return on investment considering his cover fee.

Compare that with Tagroodha, Harzand, Stradivarius, Crystal Ocean, Star Catcher and the unlucky Sea of Class.

BoldReason

IAMAMORON wrote: »

He beat Nathaniel in a maiden - I don't think he would have beat him over 12f's, especially on soft or worse. He beat an undercooked St Nicholas Abbey over 10f's- all his G1's were over 12F's. Dream Ahead was a sprinter.

Farhh was on the good cabbage I reckon. That will never be proven but Zarooni was busted in 2012, he never trained Farhh but there is enough smoke there for me.

I also think it is worthwhile discussing how their foals also turn out. STS has had a more successful stud career. Considering the mares that were flown into be covered by Frankel his progeny have not been great. Cracksman and Logician are hardly a suitable return on investment considering his cover fee.

Compare that with Tagroodha, Harzand, Stradivarius, Crystal Ocean, Star Catcher and the unlucky Sea of Class.

More skating around the truth he beat Nathaniel in the champion stakes over 10f.
He wasn't a 12f horse so saying he wouldn't have beaten him over that distance is clutching at best. You could honestly go through each horse both beat and pick out something that knocked them down. We will agree to differ in our opinions on who was better.

Are we talking about racehorses or stallions. I have no notion of going into the merits of either one as a stallion. That has no bearing on what either done on the track.

IAMAMORON

BoldReason wrote: »

More skating around the truth he beat Nathaniel in the champion stakes over 10f.
He wasn't a 12f horse so saying he wouldn't have beaten him over that distance is clutching at best. You could honestly go through each horse both beat and pick out something that knocked them down. We will agree to differ in our opinions on who was better.

Are we talking about racehorses or stallions. I have no notion of going into the merits of either one as a stallion. That has no bearing on what either done on the track.

The thing is you can't. Sea the Stars was simply beating better horses than Frankel. I listed them above.

Nathaniel and Canford cliffs is all I will give the discussion. But I am not having Farhh or Dubawi Gold, no way.

Mastercraftsman, Conduit , Fame and Glory, Dar Re Mi, Stacelita. They are different class.

I haven't started adding up the group 1 wins yet....

BoldReason

Cirrus Des aigles is a better horse than sea the stars ever raced against. Frankel beat him well.

The Tetrarch

BoldReason wrote: »

Also people can stick there standard times up their arse they are an absolute archaic way of quantifying something. I don't know why they still list those tbh. People who haven't a clue about race times bring them up in arguments they should never even be in.

I am familiar with ratings. My collection of Timeform annual is a continuous run from 1953 onwards (Timeform annual started in 1947).
What you will know (or should know) is over time ratings are changed.
Horses that Timeform rated highly in their annuals when they ran are a few years later often shown in the Timeform annuals at a much lower rating.
You might ask how could a horse that ran in 1970 and was given a rating in the 1970 annual appear in their flat annual in say 1985 at a lower rating when the horse retired more than ten years earlier.
It appears in the later annual where it is the sire or dam of a horse running in 1985.
Timeform quietly revised the previous ratings when they realised they were too high (no announcement).
In my work on pedigrees I collected the ratings of 159,000 horses. I have seen hundreds (perhaps thousands) of ratings downgraded.
Standard times are that - a standard. Ratings are, or should be, linked to times run, adjusted for ground and wind conditions (the usual way is to assess the going adjustment from the truly run races on the card).

You can judge horses by collateral form: D (rated 110) was beaten by C, who was later beaten by B, who was then beaten by A.
You get D (110); C (120); B (130); A (140) or similar.
When you link collateral form with ratings the ratings levels can all be doubtful.
At the end of the year when they review the ratings the levels look ridiculous.
There is usually ratings creep, and it is upwards.
All the ratings are higher than previous years. They change the ratings downwards before they produce their annual.

Why would Timeform reduce ratings in later annuals? They made mistakes in rating horses too highly.
That is not as common now as it was, but ratings are just that, opinions.

In the year Geoffrey Freer, the official handicapper, was retiring from the job, Dancing Brave was given a rating of 140. It was said they wanted Geoffrey to retire with a big horse.
The Frankel career was tied in with the terminal illness of his trainer, Henry Cecil. Henry went out with a big horse with a record rating.
Frankel ran his last race on 20th Oct 2012. Henry Cecil died on 11th June 2013.

BoldReason

You were going so well until you ruined it with the last 2 lines with nothing to back it up only utter speculation.

I'm really out this time this thread is supposed to be about underrated horses and half of it is about the merits of 2 of the best horses of the last 50 years. I've said my bit. People can have their own opinions.

The Tetrarch

BoldReason wrote: »

You were going so well until you ruined it with the last 2 lines with nothing to back it up only utter speculation.

I'm really out this time this thread is supposed to be about underrated horses and half of it is about the merits of 2 of the best horses of the last 50 years. I've said my bit. People can have their own opinions.

Thanks.
I looked back through the thread and as far as I can see you have not yet put up your underrated horse.
You are telling people the thread should be about underrated horses.
You have said your bit, but not on the thread topic.

BoldReason

Kingsgate native i put him up a few pages back.

Plasandrunt

Faugheen wrote: »

When we talk about the great horses over jumps I feel like one isn’t given the credit he deserves, and many will think ‘wtf’ upon first reading.

Big Buck’s.

When we talk about the best horses people will instantly think Denman, Kauto Star and Sprinter Sacre but Big Buck’s is always listed further down. I think he’s unfortunate to be associated with probably the least most interesting feature at Cheltenham but he is absolutely up there with the best of the best.

I think his story is great too. Nichols could easily have let him continue over fences and get nowhere but brought him back over hurdles where he found his calling.

I hope that post made sense!

Love BB but the Staying hurdle division was so poor for so many years, I would personally have Barracouda over Big Bucks