redcgull said: ↑ Works outing at Haydock tomorrow and they are all asking me for tips, fools that they are, haha... So just to gain favour with some of them any tips from the NOT606 forumite's will be greatly received... please log in to view this image please log in to view this image Some thoughts red ...................... 5.25 Beggar's Wishes looks to be progressive (unlike most of his rivals) and preferred to Ballyarthur due to the going. Have a great day please log in to view this image please log in to view this image As I posted on Saturday, I went to Haydock this weekend with 9 other work colleagues to enjoy a grand day out at the races which we all duly did. Plenty of horsey talk, only 2 out of the 10 people there had ever stepped on a racecourse before. Not only that, only 4 of them had ever bet on a horse race before, it was a proper novice day out. Anyway I tried to educate some of them on the ways of betting, not that they took any notice, and all in all it went very well... But... Some of the party wanted to take a look at the horses in the parade ring to which I took them along for the 5:25 parade in all its glory. Firstly we saw Ballyarthur to which I thought was a strong looking type with a nice stride on him. Then we saw Exxaro, who just looked big and carrying a bit too much weight for my eyes, and I just didn't take to him. Next round was Rocklander who I thought looked the smallest of the runners but had a bit of a spring in his step and thought might have a chance just going off his looks. Then Beggars Wishes came round to which I was a little bit surprised with if I'm honest. I thought he looked way to thin in his back legs, not fully developed, and didn't look like a chaser in the making. His coat was in good condition and he walked very well but my confidence and hard earned cash on him looked to be a wasted thing... Anyway, they left the parade ring, my two mates were equally impressed with the sheer size of the horses and being so close to them and we gained a spot to watch the race unfold. After about 3 jumps I could see even with my eye Ballyarthur was struggling, so I maybe got my initial hunch right when looking at the cards earlier on. Then Rocklander got pulled up, the one I thought looked the best in the parade ring . Then my eyes trained to Beggars Wishes to which when passing the winning post for the 1st time looked totally at ease like he was just going out for a casual Sunday morning stroll. My confidence in the horse returned... With 4 jumps to take Beggars Wishes looked the winner already. Three out, he had moved to second and with the 2nd about to be jumped he had gone a few lengths clear. He eventually could have won by as many as he wanted to but was pulled up to a near walk by the line to round of a really good race and win for Sean Bowen and myself... Now... In my mind, sat at home looking at the card on Friday night and Saturday morning I thought Ballyarthur could be taken on, and I wasn't totally sure who to take him on with, but I had leaned towards Beggars Wishes solely on the fact he won lto, liked the ground and the Sean Bowen seemed to be on his game with a couple of recent wins under his belt. Once Oddy had put him up as well on Saturday morning I was well chuffed I left with what in my mind was a great chance in that race... However, had I gone to Haydock without a mere glance at the race card and gone straight to the parade ring there is no way in hell I would have picked Beggars Wishes out as the run-away winner that he was. In fact I would have told the trainers to give the boy a good feed as he looked like he needed a full breakfast in him so lean he came across in his frame... So it begs the question, if you do go to the races and watch the horse walk around the parade ring what do you look for...?? I have watched them before go round the parade ring but maybe as I was trying to show my mates what to look for I might have taken a closer look this time... I know there are a fair few of you who go to the races, and know a load more than I do, but what do you look for in a horse when close up. Or dos it not matter and you just stick to what you initially thought before even setting eyes on the horse. I would be interested to see what you all think as I would like to spot a winner more than I do and maybe this would help me in the future when I'm at the racecourse... So, what do you look for in a horse...??
I never go to the parade ring to look at horses anymore. I did it at one meeting changed my mind on horses I'd picked to one's I liked the look of in the ring and missed out on 5 winners. In conclusion I don't give a **** what it looks like and do all my selections before hand
I'm in that camp too Smokey. Before his Champion Hurdle win I swear Faugheen wouldn't have looked out of place on Blackpool Beach to my clearly untrained eye.
Agreed with you lads - I saw Big Bucks at Aintree a few years back and thought he looked like a right mongrel. He then hacked up at 2/9. I guess there are some definite signs to look for in certain types of races e.g. in a 2YO maiden if one of them looked like Mike Tyson in his prime it might be a sign of the horse being very forward and fit. I think the "pick of the paddock" is irrelevant in 90% of races. Maybe even 95%.
Agree, i've tried it before at a race meeting, looked for a strong rump, not much fat, how it walks, posture, nature. None of them won, ironically the one and only time i've ever won anything from something i noticed in the paddock was i saw a horse with one eye no word of a lie there are horses who run with one eye (Zaeem currently in training only has one eye), anyway i was like ****ing hell that's weird never seen it before, was 25/1,thought sod it i'll have 5 e/w on it bless him, absolutely pissed it by about 5 lengths, can't for the life of me remember the name though, was about 2014 at lingfield
The phrase "no brains, all brawn" comes to mind. I won't waste anyone's time by pretending to know what to look for if I was staring at a horse rather than the form book. On a good day I could probably only accurately identify the geldings from the colts. For the most part in big races I'm looking for proven consistency and times vs weight carried.
I leave the paddock inspections to my wife and daughter. And I wouldn't back against them when they are sure of themselves. One can't expect to find the pick of the paddock in every race, far from it. But there are races where one or more stand out as the most likely winners and some (often well backed) stand out as having no chance. The one that stood out most was Golden Horn in the Arc, also Enable. And in the 2000 Gns, Saxon Warrior. In last years's CH Douvain was a definite no no. And, unfortunately, the horse we went to see in GH's Arc, Treve, was a definite no no on that day. Very sad to see. The problem is we hardly ever go racing and they are usually too busy to watch racing on the TV. Otherwise I would put their picks and rejects on the daily thread Generally we are looking for potential superstars. A long sloping shoulder, strong back end and plenty of heart room is where we start. The layback of shoulder will tell you the extent of its reach. It will need a good strong back end to drive the horse forward to maximise that front extension and if there isn't plenty of heart room it won't have room for a big engine. That's just the start but if you look at horses like Sprinter Sacre. Frankel and Ribot you can see perfect specimens. Enable looked pretty special as a 3yo. It will be interesting to see if she just had a maturity advantage or whether she has continued to mature as a 4yo. Hopefully the latter Cracksman was a big baby as a 3yo and did well to go so close in the Derbies. He looks as though he could be a super horse but will wait to see what he looks like come the summer. He looks a big danger to Enable for the Arc this year and will be a more than adequate replacement should Enable not make it
I have no idea what to look for, but the Raceform writers do. So any juvenile noted as a "nice sort" on their first appearance is invariably worth following.
It sounds like its more for the purists than the Joe Blogs punter then. I must admit that standing close up to the horses as they walk past is pretty cool as you don't tend to see them that close up. But looking at what the lads have put down it would seem that its a pointless exercise when it comes to placing your faith in them come the race track...!!
There was also one time where i shouted " Go on Rob bring home the bacon " to Rob Winston riding a 16/1 shot and he did duly oblige lol self note i aint usually one of them shouters usually pretty reserved but was half pissed and miles down on the day and was like sod it
generally you're looking for a relaxed animal , and it's just as important to see how they go down to the start, any wasting energy , pulling hard , etc, they generally not going to win , but like most have said , we bet from the entries , trainer form , going , distance , course , etc , so actually being there could put you off , i e beggars wishes , in short , unless you're looking for a superstar , most racehorses are more mundane , win occasionally , lose more often !!
Agreed Rudey, there are plenty of other things that will indicate that a horse will not be running to its best ability. If you look at a hare, it has extremely long powerful hind legs that can propel it forward at a rate of knots. However, its relatively upright shoulder cannot support all that drive from the rear and therefore it will tire quickly. You will not see a horse with an upright shoulder winning middle distance races (unless of course all the other runners are equally unequipped). A well balanced horse will spend less energy producing the same out put as an unbalanced horse. So the further they go the less chance the unbalanced horse has. This all assumes the horses are fit and healthy and mentally willing, have had their teeth and backs checked and are 100% sound. It doesn't take much for any of these to completely ruin any chance of a horse winning. Unfortunately some of these things aren't realised until the race itself. So, in big races, I would be looking for trainers who are meticulous in the care of their horses and not overridden by greedy owners. In jumping classes, the slightest back pain will cause sufferance but the horse will keep going. A good horseman should feel this and pull the horse up. Horses will also keep going when they are unsound and sometimes show no sign of it. A good horseman should feel that before the race starts but unfortunately a lot of these jockeys are just sat on the horse to make it go as fast as it can and wouldn't have a clue until the horse eventually has to give up Horses are very delicate animals. They are handicapped/rated in pounds but they simply can't be expected to run every race at the level of their best rating. So, unless the horse is fit to run its race, a few pounds in hand means nothing. Hence, if you don't want to throw money down the drain, it might be a good idea to learn what to look for in the paddock. Looking handsome does not count.
George Washington was the finest horse I've ever seen in a parade ring. I don't bother with the parade at nh, I prefer to see them going to post. I like a horse with a nice over track in the walk who is quiet with an even rear end and a nice eye.
If you are looking at a bunch of experienced horses in the parade ring then for me looks have very little value. I will always try to go to the paddock for 2yo races, 3yo maidens and bumper races. With these you are looking for a fit looking horse and one that isnt sweating profusely. You also want one that is equal in its development. You also dont want to see displays of coltishness in the paddock as again they are wasting energy and very likely to run green. I like horses to be good movers through all their paces but that is just me and some pretty poor walkers have been very good horses. I always look behind the girth to see if they are carrying some condition and I really to see a very well defined rear end (a la Mrs Chan). When I go to the paddock I try not to know what the numbers are of fancied horses so as not to skew my decision making but the rugs are generally a big giveaway. I also find it useful to discuss what I am looking at with decent judges, Nass is a very good paddock picker.
I am off to the races in a few weeks time and will report back on any trouble I see seeing as this seems to be a hot topic at present. I like to get up close to the horses but find that time is often limited. If you are aiming to have a drink between most of the races there is no time...30/35 mins flies by
Nothing better to do early on a Sunday morning than trawl old threads... I guess I missed this one... Generally when I do a paddock inspection, I am looking for negatives – especially with regard to the beast that I am prevaricating over burdening with the weight of my cash. On the positive side, I look for a horse with a shiny coat and a relaxed demeanour. That seems like something quite obvious that even somebody that does not know one end of a horse from the other can do. I also look for one that walks well, as that is usually a sign of a horse with a good action, before you actually see it canter to the start. By walking well, I mean watch where it puts its feet and how it moves its legs. A horse that lifts its front knee (bends its leg) is reaching out in front of itself moving forward is probably going to have quite a round action; whereas a stiff walker is going to hit fast ground hard. Watch where the horse lifts it front feet from and see how close to that spot it puts down the rear feet. A horse that walks well will put the rear foot down pretty much where it just lifted the corresponding front foot. All horses have their own characteristics. If you have seen a particular individual before, you may know that it is always on its toes in the parade ring. So if you see a horse that is normally on its toes behaving differently, or a horse sweating up that does not normally do so, these are the sort of negatives that make me leave one alone. On the rare occasions that we have warm weather, it may be that lots of the horses sweat whilst a few will be more sweated up (especially behind the saddle) or chewing at the bit indicating that they are distressed or agitated. Of course, ultimately, superior ability will overcome physical imperfections. On a number of occasions I can remember seeing Frankel in the pre-parade ring looking like he wanted to be somewhere else but as we know, temperamentally he was a tightly coiled, explosive spring.
You want the back feet to pass through where the front feet put down this is called an over track which is a good sign. Generally a horse with a good walk will have four good paces.
