King George Ascot 2019

Morgans wrote: »

We can all read racerecords and whichever handicapping system you want to use. Can you name the horse that beat Nijinksy in the Arc without googling or what was second in the Leger to him? For the record, O'brien got huge criticism for leaving the arc behind Nijinksy at Doncaster. As for the Oaks, Irish Oaks are Breeders Cup Turf being competitive. Jeez, the Irish Oaks competitive. Its irrelevant.

One factor you seem to have missed is how unusual it is for a horse of Frankel class to race at 4, and to have it said so early in his 3 yo career that he would do so (Partly because of the health of Khalid Abdullah and Henry Cecil). If you are only having a three year old career, you can afford to race more often - be it Nijinksy, Rock of Gilbraltar, Nashwan, Dancing Brave, Sea the Stars. It was not a lack of consitution, it was a planned out career. At the moment, Frankel has raced more than Enable.

The idea that Frankel needed to come to Ireland to beat SNOW FAIRY (of all winners) in the irish Champion. The idea that they ducked the challenge for teh easy option of beating Cirrus Des Aigles (check out his heavy ground form, and probably the best 12f horse in Europe at the time) on heavy ground in Ascot was the easy option just shows how utterly ridiculous that criticism is.

The hype around Frankel can be hard to take but he is a long way ahead of Enable and anything else in the 21st century.

Enable is a great filly not on ratings but on her ability to battle to win G1 races. She doesn't enter into my thoughts of who the great racehorses are.

As for Frankel his legacy is a lot more complicated than just looking at his ratings and saying yeah he's the greatest.

It's not the idea that Frankel needed to come to Ireland to beat Snow Fairy that mattered, it's the idea that he needed to travel outside of England to show his durability that mattered. Wear and tear, racing when conditions and timing are not optimum take their toll on horses. Frankel's 4yo career was all about his running on his team's preferred terms of timing and trips.

I'm glad that you sniggered at Snow Fairy because that's another point about Frankel's beating of Cirrus Des Aigles, it was 3L superior to Snow Fairy's Leopardstown form.

Was Snow Fairy actually less than 3L inferior to all the brilliant 10f champions of the ages?

Was Excelebration superior to Giants Causeway, George Washington? There's a list of great milers that Excelebration was elevated over ( grade inflation that elevated Frankel )

It feels churlish to crab the definitely brilliant Frankel but at every turn his status was inflated so his greatest ever status is slightly dubious.

Morgans wrote: »

Yes Excelebration and Farhh were better than George Washington (?????wow) and Giant's Causeway. A more interesting race would be Excelebration vs King's Best from the Guineas.

Connections planned Frankel's 4yo career from half way through his 3yo career and didn't deviate for it to please people. People with no connection to the horse's desire to see him win every group race from 6f to 14f. Ballydoyle could take a leaf from Juddmonte's book in getting their horses into the right races.

EDIT - The Snow Fairy comparison - I think Frankel got away with things in the Champion stakes. First time it was any form of struggle, since the St James Palace. No horse has run more 135+ performances. You can argue the toss over a pound or two but for sustained brilliant performance, he is the best by that marker.

And it is churlish. When Tiger Woods was asked if he was the best ever, he said 'im in the argument'. That's all you can do. There will never be a discussion about the greatest thoroughbreds without Frankel in the argument.

Coolmore and Juddmonte. The giants of the modern era.

Like all sports it's a different ballgame these days. Dancing Brave, Mill Reef, Brigadier Gerard, Nijinsky etc they raced in a less professional racing world to today's one.

No mega outfit now would run their best 3yo stallion prospect from April through to November without a break. They simply wouldn't go to the well that often for fear of running dry. It's okay to do so with fillies because the breeding reputation of a top filly is less hard to protect and less important.

The traditional European Pattern has broken down. There's so much international racing about that the likes of the Derby have really lost their ability to draw in the best racehorses. France has destroyed their own Arc challenge by making their Derby a non staying event.

Coolmore can win record numbers of G1 races but they can no longer produce an OR 130 type 3yo from their dozens of G1 winning 3yos. Gosden has no problems producing these types, why is he so good at it and why are they so poor? They have similar bloodlines available, similar training yards, and both have access to whatever the other crowd are feeding their horses.

For a long time Coolmore have not given two fecks about ratings. They seem happy to win a race cosily rather pushing out the winner for a stunning rating. Don't they want superstars at stud?

The desire for quantity over quality at Coolmore is probably an unintended drag on the showbiz of racing.

Morgans wrote: »

Two other things - it is interesting in the discussion around enable since the weekend - how she is a superstar. Despite not coming out of the weekends race as the best horse. If it was a superstars performance then it was the same for crystal ocean and waldgeist. Very few grade 1 performers demolish other multiple grade 1 winners like Frankel did. He was raced as if he was a champion. I've never seen a guineas EVER run that way. Excelebration tried to go with him in the QA and finished drunk.

The form of Windsor palace you quote are at distances from 2m4f to a mile. As mentioned, it's easy to read form and come out with the worst possible interpretation to suit a hypothesis, you'd hope that the handicapper (at the very least) can see through that.

I have gone through Frankel's races to see how the figures were arrived at, in his case exposed horses he had beaten were dragged up the rankings. I showed Windsor Palace's record as a beaten pacemaker to emphasise the point that Frankel's similar beatings of him to those administered by other G1 winners wasn't of the standard of a horse who was officially a minimum of one stone superior to the other horses who were beating Windsor Palace

It may be fair enough to give a horse like Frankel style points as a means to reward consistent excellence but very few horses ever get these bonus pounds on to their ratings. For instance the superstar Enable hasn't risen in the weights because she has only being winning by small margins each time.


A horse's Form is only as good as the weakest link in the race. In Frankel's monster run he gave the OR 104 Windsor Palace a 31lb beating = 135 lbs performance and we are to take it that despite the 7yo Windsor Palace being used as the pacemaker he still somehow not only managed to run to his full OR 104 potential in that race he actually managed to increase his OR that day to OR 106 which allowed for the ratings to be driven towards 140.

In order for Frankel to be dragged up to a greatest ever mark the pacemaker had to have his OR inflated. Frankel's own pacemaker Bullet Train was an OR 106 horse when he was first used as a pacemaker for Frankel, he was beaten 12L by Frankel then, in his next race as pacemaker for Frankel he was again beaten by 12L but this time he was adjudged to have improved by 5Lbs to a new career high of 111, three races later as Frankel's pacemaker sees Bullet Train being beaten 13 1/4 L by Frankel and his rating climbs yet again to another new career high of 113.

That kind of grade inflation for punch bag pacemakers allowed Frankel's OR rise to it's silly level.

Morgans wrote: »

I don't agree there should be style points. And a lot of what you say makes perfect sense but "a horse's form is only as good as the weakest link in the race is 100% wrong." That's not the purpose of form or handicapping.

Would you give pacemaker Sovereign an increased rating for his Irish derby form Vs Epsom derby. If you are saying pacemakers can't improve their performance you are also wrong.

Subject to a time analysis proving that there was improvement in Sovereign's form from Epsom to The Curragh I absolutely would give Sovereign an increased rating for his Irish Derby form. Note how Sovereign's OR 118 rating in the Irish Derby is hugely inferior to the potential rating of 127 he could have been given for beating OR 118 AVD into second.

Instead of using the seemingly outfoxed AVD 118 and Madhmoon 117 as form guides the handicapper used the weakest link to record a lowish interpretation of the winners worth. The weakest link was the 104 rated Norway who was given a 13lb beating which allowed the handicapper to come to 118 for Sovereign.

There is also a huge difference between a 12f bred 3yo having only his second ever run over 12f at the Curragh Vs the exposed 7yo and 5yo pacemakers that were running as pacemakers in Frankel's races. Many horses leave their Epsom form well behind when they get away from the difficult track and race that is the Epsom Derby. You can be sure that the modest credit given to Sovereign for his Irish Derby win will vanish very quickly If he runs again without backing up his Curragh rating.