One of AOBs 'second string' will run a belter. Astrology did not impress me at all in a mudheap on the Roodee against a absolutely nothing. Father Of Science will continue to improve and I think he might be the e/w value of the race if he runs. Truthfully though something seems to say Camelot as been quite a talent from the beginning. I thought as much when I saw his name. It sounds stupid but he is almost the follow on from Galileo, and we all know what a special talent he was. When I nsaw him eating up the ground cantering on his maiden I thought he looked a serious horse but I couldnt have had him winning over 1m. He did that despite the trip whereas I think he will win the Derby because of it. He settles really well and can quicken as and when needed, which is important at Epsom. I think he looks well balanced, really good long stride, and will relish the good ground at Epsom and bound clear by 4L. Its unlike me to duck any potential value, but I've liked this horses chances over further for some time.
Are the Camelot supporters not worried about the trip with him?* I know his breeding says he will most likely stay, but it doesn't always work out that way. He has shown so much speed over a mile that I have my doubts, particularly when your talking about an odds on favourite. The 2000 Guineas, whilst not being a ridiculously slow race, was still pretty slow, and Camelot had the speed to come from last to first.* So I ask do horse's with that sort of speed stay 12 furlongs?* In my experience they don't, but if he does stay we could be looking at another monster of a horse following up from Frankel last year.* My other concern is the ground, Camelot is completely unproven on firm ground, he does look to me like he appreciates softer ground, so will he be able to run to the same level of form on fast ground? I have my doubts.* Worthy favourite, no question, but is he a 4/5 shot? Not for me*
Was Galileo realy as great as he is made out to be? Id say his actual ability as a race horse has been somewhat overrated, because of how great a sire he is.* The only top class horse you could say he beat was Fantastic Light in the King George, and he benifited greatly from the usual Coolmoore team tactics, which ment Fantastic Light was forced to travel very wide, whilst Galileo was on the rails, and the pacemaker moved over to let him through. When the pair met in a smaller field in Irish champion Fantastic Light proved his superiority over Galileo, by reversing the form.* After that they didn't even run Galileo in the Arc, opting to go to the Breeders Cup, and he was well beaten out there.* I'd say he was slightly above your average derby winner, but I wouldn't say he was anything overly special. I think High Chapparel was AOBs best Derby winner, whilst Dylan Thomas was for me his best ever 1m4 horse *
I dunno Shergs, Galileo was such a powerhouse over a mile and a half. He ground really put in a sterling finish to see off Fantastic Light that day. He was just a real class Derby winner. He never really went out to anihalite rivals like a Montjeu did. Kinane was always in control on him you felt, pushing go when he needed to. Got done for toe a little bit when he went down a neck to Fantastic Light in the Irish 10f Tatterstalls but he was bloody good. Hard to pick holes in his Breeders Cup disappointment as Kinane said he never travelled at all on the Dirt. I think there are certainly more compelling arguments for others being better than him, but I for one think he was very special and underrated as a racehorse as a result of what he has done as a sire. He seemed to have an extra gear really close to the line and it says a lot about Fantastic Light to have managed to just nudge him out over 10f, he was another superb horse. He would never have beaten Galileo at a mile and a half though. Galileo was a bit like Sea The Stars, just did what he had to, travelled, quickened, stayed strongly, and beat everything put in front of him. A shame he didnt go to the Arc but I do think his record as a sire reflects just what ability he possessed.
Amazing, I find myself virtually agreeing with KS again. The speed that Camelot showed at Newmarket (to get Joseph O’Brien out of jail) makes me think that he will be a ten-furlong horse. I also have my doubts about drying conditions at Epsom being to his liking and I also think that the 2000 Guineas this year may turn out to have been quite moderate so he may not be a wonder horse. Also, what are the chances of there being two great horses on the go at the same time in Europe (admittedly one a miler, the other a middle distance performer)? Everybody knows that I do not buy the Ballydoyle hype very easily. Which good horse has Camelot beaten decisively in his career to date? I would definitely take the field against Camelot at this stage, although Bonfire is hardly an “outsider” with a winning chance.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels Camelot hasn't beaten anything of significance so far. Also he hasn't posted a fast time yet. However, in his favour, both his runs on good ground were impressive, winning easily, so it is definitely conceivable that he could have posted good times had it been necessary, and that the ground should not be too much of an inconvenience. Although he looks bred to stay the distance he hasn't yet raced beyond a mile so that is 50% extra than he's ever gone before. As it's unknown territory that could be a major risk at his price. If he is a 12f horse then it may be the softish ground in the 2000Gns brought his stamina into play. If he's a 10f horse then maybe the sound surface in the Derby will be in his favour. The way I see it, he may be exceptional and a fast time in the Derby will go some way to proving that. But at that price, there should be no question marks. If he wins the Derby, a clash with Frankel over 10f will be something to look forward to.
What exactly is out there that Camelot hasn't beaten yet? Of course he hasn't beaten anything of significance yet, he's had 3 runs, all against his own generation. He won the RP Trophy and, perhaps this year's 2000 Guineas wasn't the best renewal, but it was still the Guineas after all. As for his stamina, the thought had occurred to me. The speed he showed to win the Guineas could mean that he is exceptional when step up to his correct trip (10f/12f), or it could mean that he is a non-stayer at 12f. I think he'll get away with the trip in the Derby even if he doesn't relish it. It must be remembered that the trip is a doubt for Bonfire too. And, as the saying goes, if you're certain about stamina then they're too slow.
I've heard a few people say this but I can't for the life of me understand it. Could you please explain? I thought Astrology did all that could have been expected and Father Of Science looked like a slow boat.
Well it could be argued that Bonfire's form over a mile ties in pretty well with Camelots. If you take the view that Bonfire would have beaten French Fifteen had he got a clear run in the French guineas. I realise his pedigree isn't as good as Camelots for the Derby, but atleast he's proven over 10f, and he certainly wasn't stopping when he crossed the line in the Dante
Totally see what you mean Zen. But, watch St Nicholas Abbey at Chester last year, then watch Astrology this year. Then you'll see just how big a difference there was, and also have a look at what Astrology was up against. http://horses.sportinglife.com/Video/Racing I think the improvement from Father of Science is still to come, only two starts in and very green, which is why I thought he was more value. But you never know!
Really, really trying hard to look for some value in the Derby and must admit I'm struggling. I think the best I can come up with is Rugged Cross, currently 50/1 with Hills. Although I think with a bit of give in the ground Noble Mission would have won this comfortably, I think Rugged Cross ran a real good race. Watching the race, I think he got a little outpaced when the two upfront wound it up, but then stayed on really well only finishing a neck and 3/4 behind Thought Worthy and Noble Mission, suggesting the trip shouldn't be a problem. Given some improvement for the run, and the fact it was his only 3rd start, he could represent a little e/w value. Whether he is good enough or not, is of course another question. If I'm going to consider Rugged Cross, then I have to look at Imperial Monarch for value. He beat Thought Worthy on desperate ground in Saint Cloud quite comfortably. I personally don't think the ground would have suited either of them really, and Imperial Monarch showed a little inexperience by leading up early on, then dropping away to last, before staying on again to win by 1 and 3/4 lengths. I think the trip will definitely be now problem for him, and although he's only raced on soft ground or worse, I can see better ground being a problem. I personally think that's one of the best bits of form on offer. However, I think the best piece of form on the table is the Dante, and subsequently Bonfire. I really liked his run, staying on really well to shake off a very smart horse in Ektihaam. I had backed Ektihaam that day, and think he could turn out to be a very nice horse. If you consider that was Bonfire's first run of the season, but Ektihaam and Fencing (4 lengths behind) had already run a couple of weeks prior it makes Bonfire's run all the more impressive. With standard improvement for the run a given, he looks to be the pick for me. Therefore: 1. Bonfire 2. Imperial Monarch 3. Rugged Cross Don't like the Guineas form to be honest, and I hope I'm proved right on Camelot not reaching the frame!
Anybody interested in the Sandown Imperial Monarch/Thought Worthy race I advise you have a good read of this - http://www.ohracing.net/forum/f279/derby-75267/
just had a quick look at how the field is shaping up, although to be honest for me this race has been about Camelot ever since I took the 12/1 for the Derby on him, on the morning of the Racing Post Tophy last October. I certainly wouldn't be backing him at 4/6 or worse right now though! 2 problems I have with him: 1) I am not convinced about the quality of horses he has beaten this year 2) will the ground be too firm for him? I suppose the reason that he is 4/6 is that this looks a pretty sub standard renewal so will probably win (although we could all be saying that Camelot is the next superstar come Saturday). I reckon another O'Brien horse will also find its way into the frame at long odds (anyone know who Ryan Moore will be riding on Saturday?)
If you can't find a credible alternative to the favourite, back the favourite. Mind you, 8/11 is a bit strong. I wouldn't be a bit worried about the trip though, he's always looked a middle distance type.
1) I am not convinced about the quality of horses he has beaten this year They might not be the best bunch but he has still beaten the best of the 3yos at an unfavourable distance. 2) will the ground be too firm for him? No. He will likely relish a sounder surface. He is a beautifully balanced good moving colt and I can't imagine that quicker ground will be anything other than a help. It will also place an emphasis on speed which he clearly has more than enough of. As Archers says, the only question mark I could have is whether he has too much speed for the trip. Then again his pedigree is stronger on stamina than Bonfire, for example, and he has always looked as if middle distances would be where he excelled. All of the best Montjeu's have been seen to best effect over at least 12f so it is hard to imagine that the trip will be beyond him. He isn't much of a price but when you look at what he has to beat you can see why he's as short as he is.
Zen - that Mr Spook on the forum you put a link up for certainly puts some serious time into his racing. I've seen some of his analysis before, and while I agree with some of it, I think that basing a horses performance on time can be a very risky thing in itself. Although he does make a good a case as any I've heard for Thought Worthy. On the bear face of it though, I'd suggest that Imperial Monarch is the superior animal, and more importantly is more likely to relish Epsom. The only reason I won't back Camelot is his price. I think he has good chance, but there is too many question marks over the form for me to invest some money in him. I also love getting short priced favourites beaten!
Posted on 25/05/12 - "I'm not finding myself prepared to sit down and go through things to the level of detail that i used to." To which I replied - "Bloody hell. You must have gone into some detail in the past then!" Back on track, that analysis of what advantage/disadvantage Imperial Monarch might have gained by taking the route that he did at Sandown is the only attempt (and a bloody good one I think) to actual nail down what effect it had on the result and the form. Of more imminent concern for his supporters would be whether he and Astrology will run at all. Both still hold their entries in the French Derby after the latest forfeit stage.
I think we all do but sometimes it pays just to stick with the blindingly obvious. Camelot looks an outstanding Derby candidate as far as I can tell. I think the holes that you can possibly pick are pretty insignificant. As an example, the Guineas form might not be terrific, but he was still good enough to beat the best 3yo milers over an unsuitable trip.
I've just read that about the French Derby. I'd actually argue that O'Brien seems to use some big races (Guineas, Derby etc) as prep races for the horses ACTUAL target. Maybe the French Derby for IM and Astro. We shall see. Your right about backing the obvious, but not being an overly serious (money-wise) punter, I'd rather take him on.
