The Joys Of Racing.

Nothing better launches the smelly stuff into the air than a major upset. I wonder what it is about mankind that makes him revel in the misadventures of others? And I'm not having a shot at those who've taken the opportunity offered by the young Irish postilion aboard the duel Derby winner Australia, to wield the club, for I'm on their side. It was an absolute shocker of a ride. As mentioned in yesterdays forum, O'Brien was probably riding to instructions. I can just imagine the conversation as the lad was being legged into the saddle. "You're on the best horse. Just keep him clear of traffic and he'll do the rest." It's not a bad piece of advice under most circumstances, but it shouldn't be set in cement. As any council must be treated with a fair amount of caution, especially when proffered by someone who at best can only be an onlooker. Of course I can't know if instructions of this type actually took place, but I'm prepared to believe that they did. And there in lies a major lesson, hopefully learned yesterday by young Joe. It will be just one of many lessons learned during a career. And allowing himself to be outridden on such a large stage, will not sit well with the man. I should imagine that the humiliation will run deep. But he will be all the better for what happened aboard Australia at Leopardstown.

As to whether Australia goes to the Arc, I haven't the faintest. Of late it's been a race well suited to three year old horses. So I suppose it probably means that it might be worth while casting a keen eye over the babies who take to the race this year. If it's decided that Australia should be aimed at the event, I doubt that he can't be considered a major threat. The 10 furlong trip of the Irish Champion Stakes, for mine, probably wasn't ideal. Sure they went along at what appeared a decent clip, a pace that was made to order for him, but I still can't get away from the fact that was still only a 10 furlong race. A strongly run race of this distance can not be equated with a strongly run 12 furlong event. And it's been at the latter that Australia has excelled. Over the shorter trip, The Grey Gatsby just had just a little too much ping for him, which combined with the poor ride, it was enough to bring him undone. I know nothing of AOB's thoughts on the horse, but with the experience he's had in the game, I'd be surprised if he genuinely thought Australia to be better over mile and a quarter than over one and a half.

Something else on which I'd like to pass comment. The apparent certainty of belief when it comes to reading race form. And I say this with great warmth. I love reading this stuff. The cut and thrust on this forum is what makes it all worth while. A beats B by X, B beats C by X, so obviously C can never blow smoke up the arse of A. Sorry, it doesn't always work that way. There are more variables in horse racing than black, curly hairs on Danny Devito's back. Racing is not like some computer that's capable of spitting out information comparable to quantum machinacs. Punch in the numbers, hit enter, then sit back and reap the dividends. And just a thought on Treve. If the track record offered up in consolation for her defeat, was her effort in the Prince of Wales, then maybe all is not as it seems. Sure The Fugue is a very nice racehorse, one with a bright future, but what of the Magician who finished in front of her? Can the same be said of him? Again it comes back to punching numbers into the machine. Maybe the track was on fire that day. Ahhh who knows? The more I think about this stuff, the more confused I become. Thank God I no longer punt.

 

How are ya brother?

 

Queensland is known as the Sunshine State Oddy. Our wet season is in the Summer when we can get late afternoon storms. The electrical kind. A lot can be understood about our climate when it's understood that we're the skin cancer capital of the world. We get our fair share of the sun.

 

You just can't resist a below-the-belt blow at Timeform can you, Cyc? Since the late 1940's Timeform has done more for the ordinary, man-in-the-street, punter than anyone on the face of this earth. You really should read some Timeform literature, fellah, their Annuals for example. Years ago I offered to send you an old one just as a gift, but you refused, so, what to do?

 

Swanny old mate, at no time in the article did I refer to Timeform, nor was it my intention to do so. And I can assure you that the above was not a subtle swipe at the company concerned. It was more to do with yesterday's chat on the St Leger Day Daily, about the merits of the performance of Australia. In that debate, all manner of issues were raised in connection with a number of horses, some of whom were mentioned above. The article was spun off the back of that day's warm discussion.

As for the merits of Timeform, I have no doubt that they are of great value to the punter. They save many a long hour when it comes to homework. Most of what I've said about the company and it's merits have been tongue in cheek. I've written some pieces in the past that were steeped in hyperbole, and meant as little more than an excuse to play with words. They are a soft target. All of that said though, I still find too much about the concept that leaves me a little cold. For me, there are far too many variables to be factored into the equation to make the ratings any more than a thin guide to the reality. Run the same horses a dozen times over against one another, and the results will be different. Of course the powers that be rightly make adjustments, but a domino effect is set in train that has a never ending knock on effect. There can be a hundred and one reasons why animals may race below par on any given day, but the hands of Timeform are tied by a set of well defined rules that make it hard for them to cement in place a true fact. And I fondly recall your generous offer, it was a nice thing to do. I need it not though and it would be a waste of your hard earned mate. We have Timeform here in OZ, and I suppose in time it'll probably become just accepted here as in the UK, but at the moment, it's receiving a bit of stick around the place. Maybe it's just because we don't know our arses from our elbows.

 

You've nailed the forum with that last sentence, can't deny that

 

I know my arse from my elbow................................. Can't remember which is which though.

 

Neither can I, Ron, will ask the doc when I see him next. Actually, like many old timers I think of only the good things of the past, and brush aside the many bad things that happened, and there were a few. One very good thing about horseracing was one Phil Bull, who founded Timeform. I have already dwelt on this subject many times before, so won't repeat myself, other than that he did so much to educate the ordinary racing fan into the many mysteries of thoroughbred horse racing. In short, he tried to help us bet wisely and not waste our hard-earned on too many daft bets. The problem for Timeform nowadays is, basically, that there are just too many 'horses in training', many of them just plain bad. Even with the help of technology, Timeform, Raceform, and whatever, are deluged with statistics, much of which is useless when related to poor and inconsistent animals. The playing field was always, of course, very much slanted in favour of the bookmaking fraternity, even more so at present. Cannot see it improving either.

 

I can only agree entirely about reading the Timeform essays. They are very illuminating and I wish I had more of them. Much more interesting than the straight ratings.

Phil Bull was a wonderful man and spoke so much good sense. I think he'd have a real go about modern racing.

 

Good morning, Cyc. I trust you are keeping well bronzed on those Aussie beaches. Personally, I can’t be having them. The temptation to go into the surf would be irresistible, and the thought of a box jellyfish sticking his feelers up my posterior would probably deter me from even sitting on the white bowl and feeling the backsplash from my flush toilet.
Back to reality! One of your good Articles, Cyc!
I don’t particularly rate young Joseph, either. His father’s nepotism will be admired by some and may have been engendered by Aidan’s dissatisfaction with past jockeys’ associations .
For me, the young jockey has no real craft. Sure, he’s bound to ride plenty of winners, given the ticker tape output of Galileo’s current progeny.
There it ends. Suffice to say, when I think of past masters of their craft- like Lester, Scobie, and your own ‘Cotton Fingers,’ most present day jockeys leave me cold. Thank God they have starting stalls. Many of them wouldn’t even take part if they had to revert to the old-fashioned tapes!
As for Australia’s demise, I half expected it. It’s a symptom of what I have known for several years ie. the decline in quality of our Flat Racing.
Look at Saturday’s St Leger. The worst I have ever seen. Nothing more than a bunch of good handicappers who have lost more races than won- if not beating one another.
That gets rid of early Monday morning cynicism.
Good to hear from you, Cyc. Look after yourself.
What-with jellyfish, funnelwebs, salt water crocs, etc, Australia never did have a chance on Saturday! Forgive the pun.

 

Hey Tam, long time no see mate. Old Cotton Fingers was one hell of a rider. I remember being in Brisbane in 1970 when he won the Doomben 10000 on a horse called Black Onyx. In those days, we Queenslanders were in awe of the Sydney visitors who came North each Winter to plunder our major races. Moore rode for a man called T.J. Smith who I think at one time held the world record for successive training titles. (thirty odd I think) Black Onyx was looking to make it back to back wins in the G1 race. He rode a belter of a race. Imagine a career where a man can make off with 119 G1 wins. Amazing.

 

Yes, Cyc. Great jockey, Georgie!
Taking a trip down memory lane.....Thirsk Racecourse, April 1967. 1000 Guineas favourite, Fleet, is unbackable at heavy odds on in a small field. Wikipedia reports that Fleet "refused to race ...and yet completed the course."
Wrong! I was told before the race that Fleet would lose. She whipped round at the start and yet completed the course to finish last.
George Moore later won the 1000 Guineas on her- and the 2000/Derby on Royal Palace- and yet went back home the following year.
The truth is frightening and cannot be repeated here.

 

Yep quite a story there Tam. I'd have buggered off nice and quick too.

 

I remember George Moore as a jockey I had down to follow. Couldn't afford the fare though.

 

Taking a trip down memory lane.....Thirsk Racecourse, April 1967. 1000 Guineas favourite, Fleet, is unbackable at heavy odds on in a small field. Wikipedia reports that Fleet "refused to race ...and yet completed the course."

This reminds me of one of Australia's greats from the past, a horse called Shannon. In the 1946 G1 Epsom Handicap he went in as an odds on shot, looking to make it two Epsoms in a row. A mix up at the starting strands, a clerk of the course still had hold of Shannon when the starter let them loose. He stood the second last horse 70 yards start and went down a head. He carried 9.9 on a minimum of 6.8. It's estimated his time was better than a full second under the track record. He was eventually sent to the USA where he ended up running a world record. An amazing horse. And they say he couldn't hold a candle to Bernborough. He must have been something else.

 

I'm sure this is all true about Moore yet Murless was somewhat annoyed about his riding of Royal Palace in the Derby.

What is the truth about Moore's return after one season? People allude to it but never say much?

 

It's alleged that Moore was leaned on throw races. I'm not sure what happened, but it ended in threatening phone calls and his flat being broken into. His cloths were shredded. He gathered his family and fled the country.

 

Hi, Bustino. You've mentioned previously that Murless was annoyed about Moore's tactics on Royal Palace.
I can't think why. Moore was very positive on the horse and put the race to bed before the last furlong. Piggott's late flourish on Ribocco flattered that horse.
Re. Moore's return, let's just say there were very real threats to health and family by a very large organisation.