Frankel v Camelot

I'm not claiming Camelot is a super star Blue. All he has done has beaten average horses easily. And I would say the same about Frankel and STS. This is what makes it so difficult. Until a horse is exposed we don't know how good they are or could be.

 

Frankel most definitely has set a really really fast time taking account of conditions. His 2000 Guineas was nothing short of exceptional.

An absolute fast time means nothing. Course records are frequently held by horses that wouldn't blow wind up the backside of a decent handicapper, let alone a horse like Frankel.

 

I'm sure you know that I'm playing devil's advocate Zen. Look at that 2000 Gns race again and see how much start Dubawi Gold gave to Frankel. He was still at the back when Frankel was 10-15l clear (according to the commentator). Therefore at one stage he must have been at least 20l behind yet finished only 6l behind. It's pure conjecture how much faster Frankel could have gone but is a fact that DG made up at least 14l on him.

 

If Frankel and Dubawi Gold travelled side by side in the race, would Frankel still have beaten him by 6 lengths?

 

I don't know Cyc. Absolutely no idea. I suspect it would have been a different result depending on whether DG got away with Frankel or Frankel was slowly away with DG. I suppose it's pretty obvious that had Frankel been as slowly away as DG and shown the same speed as he did in the actual race then, at the stage where he was 15l clear, he would have been coming through to take the lead. The mind boggles.

 

I do feel that Frankel has been tested against some pretty good opposition in as much as Canford Cliffs had rock solid form in the book and although he keeps beating Excelebration nothing else does as he is a good horse in his own right.

This debate is what is great about the sport, we want to see who is best and this year is already looking fantastic on two counts as we have a very sporting Prince Khalid keeping Frankel in training and a very promising 3 year old in Camalot. Many people claim that it's just about gambling but nothing is capturing our imagination like these two horses and i for one will be unlikely to bet in any race they contest all year due to skinny prices, but it's these races i really want to see.

 

I agree 100% Blue. The thrill of seeing top class horses and the anticipation of seeing the best clashing at some stage is far more exciting than the betting.

 

Excelebration and Canford Cliffs are two exceptional milers. The fact that Frankel makes them look ordinary just confirms how good he is.

As for the Guineas, Frankel had Group 1 winners beaten after 2f. He absolutely destroyed them. Astonishing.

 

I can't see them meeting. If they did it would be over 10f which would give Camelot a squeek but for me he has a lot more to do to prove he is in the same league as Frankel.

 

Bloody hell Zen. That really is scraping the barrel. That is one argument I would never use.

Anyway, it's about time I said what I really like about Frankel.

1. He looks magnificent
2. I love his pedigree


Sire Galileo by Sadlers Wells out of Urban Sea

and just look whats' behind that wonderful dam Kind.- Northern Dancer, Ribot (my all time favourite), Blushing Groom, Noblesse, Roan Rocket.

One would think, with that pedigree, that he has a better chance of staying 12f than some of the horses that contested this year's Derby.

 

For a horse that was going to be campaigned at 10f this season, i am very disappointed with Frankel,s connections.
He is going to through half the season without stepping up from a mile...a bit of an anti-climax if you ask me.

Thank god for AOB and and Camelot.

 

I agree Dancingbrave there is little point in Frankel taking in the Sussex. I think the pipe opener at Newbury was perfect for him and to take in the Queen Anne is also appropriate, after this however i see no reason in running over a mile again and he should contest the Eclipse if coming out of Ascot ok, then the Juddmonte followed by the Champion stakes. If they feel the Eclipse is too soon after Ascot it would be better to miss Ascot and take the Group 1 Eclipse over 10f. Whatever this permutation of targets there can be no point at all in taking in the Sussex over a mile if already having won the Queen Anne.

 

I think I have missed your point Ron. How is saying he had Group 1 horses beaten after 2f 'scraping the barrel'?

Dave Edwards - Topspeed

"Faced with a stiff headwind head·wind he was never likely to establish any new benchmark times and taken at face value his winning time of 1m 37.30sec was over three seconds slower than the track record and 1.8sec outside Racing Post standard. But once factoring in the all important going allowance, his performance warranted a Topspeed 132, topping the previous race best 129 posted by King's Best in 2000. When analysing the sectionals the usual caveats about hand times, points of reference and margin of error apply. From a standing start he covered the first furlong in 13.5sec, the second in 11.5, third in 11.0, fourth in 11.0 and the fifth in 11.5 which cumulatively means he covered the first five furlongs in an astonishing 58.50sec. In effect he went at a Group 1 sprinter's pace for five furlongs and, when clocking the consecutive 11-second splits, he was averaging 20yds - almost the length of a cricket pitch a second. Understandably he slowed in the closing stages with the final three furlongs taking 12.5, 13 and 13.5sec respectively but considering the headwind and that he had no company to make him go even faster it was a staggering display of raw speed and power. Frankel went through the first five furlongs in around 58.50sec - over a second quicker than the time Tangerine Trees clocked in the Palace House, admittedly not over the same section of the track - and then maintained a relentless gallop for a further three furlongs. Looked at another way, Newmarket's five-furlong track record established in 1994 by Lochsong is 56.81sec but factor in the going allowance from that day and the six-year-old's 'adjusted' time becomes 58.61sec. Apply similar logic to Frankel and his adjusted time for the opening five furlongs on Saturday equates to 56.3sec. Admittedly there are a few ifs and buts involved, but the comparison further illustrates just what an electrifying performance Frankel put up."

Simon Rowlands - Timeform

"Sectional analysis would have helped greatly in measuring the merit of how Frankel went about winning the 2000 Guineas, and not just that he did. But British racing does not have official sectionals, and the falseness of this economy becomes especially apparent on occasions like this. Nonetheless, it is possible to establish that Frankel got to halfway in about 47.5 sec (after response delay and parallax error is accounted for). That is significantly faster than the Guineas for which we have electronic sectionals, including ones run under quicker conditions than this year's. Frankel appeared to be posting 11-second or near-11-second furlong sectionals mid-race, something more likely to be seen in a top sprint."

 

It would be impossible for Frankel to be considered less than sensational Odddie no matter what happens now but i feel the reason people want him to try a trip other than a mile is that in showing versitility he is demonstrating that final facet of greatness in a racehorse. I believe he could have won the July cup last year at 6f and then moved back to a mile while this year could win at 10f easy whilst also winning at 12f if selecting a sensible group 1 as opposed to something like an arc that may not suit with a fast pace and softened ground.

I think we all want to see him tested and we often do not get the chance in racing.

 

Only because have you looked at the rest of the form of those G1 winners Zen? And the other horses that also beat those G1 "performers" that day? I was just trying to point out that Frankel is a bloody good horse and the form of those 2 (or 3) horses you mention doesn't do him justice.

We must be very careful this doesn't start to look like I'm putting Frankel under scrutiny. All I have tried to do is look objectively at the possible outcome of a clash between Frankel and Camelot over 10f with Camelot in receipt of 11lbs and, bearing in mind the respective adjusted Timeform ratings, I have said it is not so cut and dried as many think and that my money (under those conditions) would be on Camelot.

Is it so wrong to consider that any outcome other than a Frankel "walk over" is conceivable?

 

If you have seen another race where one horse had a field containing numerous Group winners beaten after 2f then I would be delighted to see it.

I think scrutiny is a good thing but your criticisms of Frankel are very wide of the mark in my opinion. I fail to understand the obsession for a fast time when time is so much a factor of conditions rather than ability. Similarly I don't understand how you can criticise his Ascot win when the way he raced would have made defeat a certainty for any other horse. And finally, the Guineas form is very good, not necessarily exceptional, but it was the way he did it that was so amazing. I am not saying that they are superstars in behind him but they were the best of his generation and nothing else had a chance from before halfway. I have never seen a performance anything like it.

 

I have always maintained that Frankel is unbeatable over 7f and would have probably beaten anything from any generation over 7f. These figures certainly support that belief. Absolutely incredible. Also makes one wonder why he didn't bag the most valuable sprint race on the calendar; sounds like it would have been a cakewalk.

To show such speed with his pedigree is incredible. On breeding one would think he should easily get 10f and I sincerely hope he gets the chance to prove his greatness over 10f. He might prove to be even better over 10f now he's learned to settle. Now that would be something to savour.

 

I think this is getting out of hand. You keep accusing me of criticising Frankel. Also you are now accusing me of having an obsession with fast times. If that's how I have come across then I think I will just have to apologise to everyone. As I have said so many times, I am a fan of Frankel, just as much as anyone else on here. I was just trying to be objective about the feasibilty of him giving away 11lbs to Camelot in a truly run 10f race. If it goes against the grain to question what others believe to be inconceivable then maybe I should keep my comments to myself.

I consider this debate to be a failure on my part and am wondering if I should maybe close the thread.