Daily Racing Thread Saturday 6th June 2026
- Thread starter QuarterMoonII
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
When the going changed to Soft it became a ‘no bet’ Derby for me.
Just like last year, the O’Brien punters were done in as they punted the wrong one: the money went on talking horse Pierre Bonnard and it did not oblige. Those that did the friendless favourite Benvenuto Cellini will get their money back with it deemed a non-runner, unless they backed it ante post.
Soft ground Derbies very rarely throw up great horses and I do not think that this one will be any different. I was at York on Dante day when Christmas Day was behind Action and Item; and there were no excuses on good flat ground that day. Yes, the horse has improved and obviously he handled the soft ground and the track. The runner-up wandered around in the last two furlongs and might have been hitting the wall (coming to the end of his stamina) on ground easier than he wanted. At lot of the fancied runners never got into the race but Ronan Whelan decided at Tattenham Corner that he was heading for the middle ground having sat right next to his pacesetting stablemate to that point.
If they send Christmas Day for the Irish Derby and Ryan Moore takes over in the saddle, then which of the others Ballydoyle run will be winning? When he swapped to True Love in the Irish 1000 Guineas, the horse that he abandoned from the British Classic won.
Just like last year, the O’Brien punters were done in as they punted the wrong one: the money went on talking horse Pierre Bonnard and it did not oblige. Those that did the friendless favourite Benvenuto Cellini will get their money back with it deemed a non-runner, unless they backed it ante post.
Soft ground Derbies very rarely throw up great horses and I do not think that this one will be any different. I was at York on Dante day when Christmas Day was behind Action and Item; and there were no excuses on good flat ground that day. Yes, the horse has improved and obviously he handled the soft ground and the track. The runner-up wandered around in the last two furlongs and might have been hitting the wall (coming to the end of his stamina) on ground easier than he wanted. At lot of the fancied runners never got into the race but Ronan Whelan decided at Tattenham Corner that he was heading for the middle ground having sat right next to his pacesetting stablemate to that point.
If they send Christmas Day for the Irish Derby and Ryan Moore takes over in the saddle, then which of the others Ballydoyle run will be winning? When he swapped to True Love in the Irish 1000 Guineas, the horse that he abandoned from the British Classic won.
Christmas Day was the only horse that got home. Maltese Cross looked to be a certainty at the distance but then emptied in the matter of 50 yards
The last good soft ground winner of the Derby was Teenoso, though he didn't win again as a 3yo. But he took a lot of scalps as a 4yo.
The last good soft ground winner of the Derby was Teenoso, though he didn't win again as a 3yo. But he took a lot of scalps as a 4yo.
If that ground was good to soft there should be no excuses. It looked softer than that to me, and so did Teenoso's Derby
I'm sure you are right Ron. It was called soft 15 minutes before the off and horses ran as if it was soft.
I think I'd agree with Marquand that on firmer ground he would beat the winner. Will he be the GB hope against the AOB battalion of runners this summer?
Think the colts would have to worry about the Oaks winner though.
I think I'd agree with Marquand that on firmer ground he would beat the winner. Will he be the GB hope against the AOB battalion of runners this summer?
Think the colts would have to worry about the Oaks winner though.
The NR ruling on Benvenuto Cellini was the worst decision stewards have made in my lifetime. EOS.
Not been on since Saturday so missed the handful of post-race comments after the one that I posted.
I have some sympathy with the stewards as they applied the rule as it stands. It was good of the BHA’s man to front up on ITV and explain their decision. I saw on Sunday that William Haggas was one of a number of people unhappy with the decision that made reasonable arguments. They have made a rod for their own back with the ruling and that may come back to bite them. The problem that I have with the likes of Haggas complaining is that when the rule was changed (after the Harry Angel incident) the BHA did consult with trainers, owners and other interested parties so perhaps they should all have thought about it a little longer. I expect that the page of the rules on the BHA website was the most visited on Saturday and Sunday.
An interesting point that was made on Saturday was what would have happened if this incident had happened to some other horse in the field that did not have an ITV camera above the stall showing the stewards what had actually happened. Would Ryan Moore have gone and complained to the stewards that his horse had a foot up in the stalls and expected them to just believe that was why the horse missed the kick and never got a favourable position in the race? He would surely have needed the starter or some of the stalls handlers to corroborate his claim. Going forward, what is to stop some jockey making such a complaint if some long odds on shot plays up in the stalls, misses the break and gets beaten? We see horses miss the break every day of the week because of the quirks of horses bucking in the stalls or virtually sitting down.
As for the decision on the day of the race, it was the correct decision following the letter and spirit of the rule. The jockey told the stewards that his plan was to take an early position in midfield and so the horse was clearly disadvantaged by getting out of the stalls last. What the stewards can take no account of is whether the horse would have finished any better placed had it broke with the rest of the field. The rule is not intended to determine outcomes, only to ensure that all the participants get a fair chance. Unfortunately for the BHA it ended up being used on the most important flat race of the season with a global betting audience and the horse was the favourite.
The rule has been worded so that horses are only declared non runners if they were effectively denied an opportunity to participate. Had the horse stayed on and finished third or fourth its placing would have remained although ‘win’ punters would have lost out as the horse placed in the prize money. This serves to highlight one of the many drawbacks of the rule. Let us say that the favourite had somehow managed to make up the lost ground (e.g. the field went very slowly on the initial uphill stretch) and got a good position coming around Tattenham Corner. In the final furlong he was positioned to throw down a challenge to the leader but was beaten in a photo. The punters lose their money because the rule will not declare the horse a non runner even though everyone would know that it lost the race at the gate.