Had he been unbeaten I don't feel they'd be going to America, but that defeat at York has allowed them to take the shackles off abit, as I don't believe a defeat in at the BC would effect his potential fee as a stallion. if he is beaten they'll have valid excuses considering he's travelling so far and has had so many tough races this year. It usually proves a race to far for Arc winners though, history is littered with Arc winners who've flopped at the Breeders Cup. I think the last one to try it was Dylan Thomas, and he ran a shocker in America. If Golden Horn can take his best form out there then he'll win easily, but that's easier said than done. I certainly won't be investing any money on what will be a long odds on price
I just think one more race will do no harm. You do not get to see these animals much to start with. I am sure the travel etc is a lot more comfy these days than in 1986, DB lost a lost of weight in transit I remember going over to the US and it was a bit of an after thought as well to go. Manila was a top horse mind.
No Arc winner has ever won at the Breeders’ Cup. The year after Dancing Brave’s fourth, the 1987 Arc winner Trempolino was second in the Turf to Theatrical. In 2001, Arc winner Sakhee chased home Tiznow in the Classic on dirt. Arguably the best record (without winning) of any horse from this side of The Pond belongs to dual King George winner Swain: third in the 1998 Classic and the 1996 Turf (which was a British clean sweep with Pilsudski beating Singspiel). The best record amongst winners must be 2008 St Leger and 2009 King George winner Conduit, who won the Turf both years and is a son of 2003 Arc winner Dalakhani.
The fact Conduit was able to win it twice just shows what a joke the race is as an end of season 'championship' race. If your gonna send a top horse like Golden Horn over to America for a race, then you run in the Classic like Sakhee did, and you take on the best American horses. We all know no decent American horse is campaigned on turf. When you've already won the Arc, I'm not sure what they are trying to prove by running in what is a 2nd rate at best contest. May aswell take a risk and have a go on the Dirt
I think it's because the win on the record will say Breeders Cup and that it was in the much easier race will count for little, as it is the term Breeders Cup that is the thing that matters to his record.
You think potential breeders are that stupid bluesky? Winning the Turf will add little to no value to his fee as a stallion, as hes already proven he's the best 1m4 turf horse on the planet by winning the Arc. Winning the Classic would prove that he's the best horse on the planet on any surface and over any middle distance trip
It would of course, but I think they feel they can pick up the turf race for nothing and is going to make his record shine a little bit more, it's not so much that people will be fooled in thinking he went and conquered America but a career finished off with Group 1 Breeders cup will do no harm at all on the stud profile.
I was really excited to see Gleneagles in the Classic although his sub par run at Ascot might make them think carefully. Being a Galileo doesn't fill me with confidence and dirt is hardly what a 'fast ground horse' wants as its like Southwell all-weather! but the fact that the trainer likens him a lot to Giants Causeway does make you hopeful. The Breeders Cup Is a funny old meeting really!
Don't mean to nitpick, but I do not think the 'dirt' is like the 'Fibresand' at Southwell, it's much much faster. The synthetic surface has much more kick-back even under 'standard' conditions, while 'dirt' has kick-back problems when it's 'sloppy', which is relatively infrequent. I would say 'Fibresand' (sand particles and polypropylene fibres) is more akin to 'soft' on the turf, and 'heavy' when it's classified as 'slow'? Dirt is dirt, and can be described as 'sandy loam'**? Going from a shaky memory, but I think that's right. Racehorses get jarred-up pretty easily on a fast 'dirt' track. **Here's a rather quaint description from the Merriam-Webster dictionary: "Definition of SANDY LOAM: A loam consisting of less than 7 percent clay, less than 50 percent silt, and between 43 and 50 percent sand." Keeneland, Kentucky, is the venue for the 2015 Breeders's Cup, so here's a bit of blurb on its new dirt track surface, for anyone who's interested: https://www.keeneland.com/racing/keeneland-debuts-new-dirt-surface-main-race-track
We had a sand track in Brisbane decades ago. I remember reading about the makeup of the track, but the info is long lost on me. When it had rain on it, it sort of compacted somewhat like a beach does, and the times got quicker. I don't know if that applies to those rain affected dirt tracks in the USA though.
Cyc, some horses seem to skim over the 'slop' and often lead all the way. Remember in Canada they used to post fast times too.
