Every year The Derby makes one or two horses and ruins the rest. Look back over the years and see what happened to the horses that ran in the race: half of them do not win anything else all year, even in lower grade pattern races. If it were not for history, Epsom would either have been levelled out years ago or turned into an “all weather” course like Kempton and Lingfield; or it would now be a housing estate because the land must be valuable in leafy Surrey, London commuter belt territory.
Some are probably ruined because they run on ground they can't act on and/or being asked to run the race of their life over a distance too far and/or racing completely out of their depth. Some may be ruined because they have become unbalanced. I'm not aware of any that were good enough to win that have been ruined by the track, but I could be wrong. Which horses did you have in mind QM?
Why has this theory not caught on in other sports and the world cup final held on a bumpy pitch to prove the real control of top footballing teams, or the 100 metres over undulations. These are horses made to race, lets at least provide them a level surface on which to do it. As a track I have no issue with it has trainers are allowed to choose to enter or not, you very rarely see a Hannon horse entered at Chester because they do not rate the track. The issue is that when you run the most prestigious group 1 race for 3 year olds at the track trainers hands are forced somewhat. Epsom has a place as a unique trak but is not a place to run a classic in my opinion. Ascot ,York & Newmarket are our best tracks in my opinion and although I have nothing against Doncaster were we to have a shake up I would keep the guineas at Newmarket, Ascot for the oaks and Derby and the Leger at York as it deserves a classic.
As racing uk are able to show the race as well as channel 4 I would imagine they would have pulled some of the audience away. I preferred the bbc coverage tho !
He regularly runs horses there, ran 2 at the last Saturday meeting and has won the two year old races quite often. Not loads of horses but it's hardly close to his Wiltshire stables is it?
and whilst we are at it, lets remove Monaco from the F1 as its too twisty and tight, lets remove the hills from the Tour De France and lets remove the sand dunes from the Dakar Rally.
We've seen this argument about Epsom whether it is a suitable test or not due to the courses idiosyncrasies and I struggle to see a right or wrong answer. I do think it isn't the best track and the single reason for that is with the camber on the straight surely there's a safety concern here more than on level tracks? I'm no expert on horses actions or what causes them to 'lose' their action but I'd have thought it more likely at a track like Epsom where the horses generally hang in towards the rail due to the slope of the track? I could just be talking absolute rubbish of course.
Since the 100 metres is all about speed and nothing else, they obviously want to make the conditions perfect so that somebody might cover the distance quicker. In athletics they even go to the trouble of factoring in the wind conditions. If you are running in too much of a tail-wind, your time does not count. We make no such considerations for horses, although it has to be said that the only horse races run in a straight line generally are sprints. I am no fan of Epsom. I have only been there once – to see Reference Point win the Derby – and I do not take a second look at any of their other meetings because the course disadvantages too many horses. If you are trying to fiddle your handicapper down the weights by running it down the field, it must be a great place to enter them. It is often said that what is needed for The Derby is a compact, well-balanced horse; and that is entirely attributable to the course topography. If you mention a safety concern the animal rights rabble will be down there insisting that they level it all out, except when they are busy at Aintree in April getting all those dangerous fences removed.
I think it's a great track. All the dominant 10-12f line sires of the moment acted round it. Galileo, Mill Reef, Rainbow Quest. It wasn't full of cockneys: there were quite a few Irish and Japanese.
being able to watch some of the Royal Ascot coverage during the past week I think that actually they did a pretty good job - the problem is maybe not with channel 4, but just the fact that people are not interested in horse racing anymore. How many people knew this was taking place last week outside of the small horse racing bubble?
You are probably right Steveo. Nobody cares about racing anymore. Football is the opium of the masses these days. The masses are welcome to it. Epsom was a great experience this year. It was a beautiful day, the crowd were good-natured and friendly, the roar for the Derby was still great and it was a fine race won by probably a good Derby winner. There is the quote from Tesio in the main stand and as he bred Ribot(GB) and Nearco(Ity) I'll leave you with that: The Thoroughbred exists not because its selection has depended experts, technicians or zoologists but one piece of wood: the winning post of the Epsom Derby.
Racing UK's Royal Ascot coverage was excellent. The only time I even considered switching to CH4 was to avoid having to watch the seller at Redcar. I imagine anyone who pays for RUK is going to choose that channel every time. They're in a strong position because they know their audience, whereas CH4 have to try to cater for the casual observer as well as the hardcore racing fans. At least having the blue-ribband events on the BBC made a national event of them; the clue is in the name, British Broadcasting Corporation. As for Epsom, it's a nightmare of a track. So is Goodwood, and the Rowley Mile, and wtf is going on with Sandown? Let's just run all the Pattern Races at Lingfield on Polytrack, and while we're at it pump the horses full of drugs. Oh, and drop the Derby distance down to 1m1f.
I did manage to watch a few of the races at Ascot last week and I thought it was standard coverage by C4, nothing special, but what I would say was that when the horses are walking around the parade ring why oh why can we not get to see a proper shot of the horse walking around. Instead we had a fixed camera position at one end of the ring that showed either the horse's backside if it had just passed the camera or you were looking at the horse through all of the bunting and people standing around... Shambles... Plus, when dear ole Willie Carson was on with the beeb, he could spot a good one when the horse was strutting his or her stuff in the parade ring and I for one miss that. All they say now is that such n such 'looks good in his coat' or is sweating up etc... Willie used to tell you what to look at, like a big strong backside, how the horse walked and even quoted the sire's etc... It is the one thing that I do think they are missing out on as a little bit of education into what you are watching always helps... I am by far one of the most knowledgeable people on here but I always like to learn something new about a sport I love and I think that is one of C4's biggest let downs...
I only saw the CH4 coverage on Tuesday and bits and pieces on the Friday and Saturday. Must admit I thought it was Dreadful with a capital ‘D’. Top of the dross for me must be Mick Fitzgerald’s statement, when discussing Mr O’Brien’s runner in the ‘Queen Anne’, that they ‘don’t race on turf in America’ and him squealing repeatedly after Dettori had won the Coventry about the possibility of him doing a flying dismount.
I agree Barney. I think Archers has put his finger on the issue in that the Channel four are trying to appeal to a casual audience as well as racing fans, which is never going to work. Clare Balding did a good job as always and really does come across as totally professional, Emma Spencer adds glamour to proceedings and if anyone looks like they belong at Royal Ascot she does. She also does fine in her capacity of picking up the post race interviews. Jimbo does a great job of providing the knowledge from the studio and this is where the changes need begin however as he needs a Francombe type side man to bring some humour and informal insight, Rishi just needs changing with someone with more personality and who will take an odd risk and Fitzy needs changing with anyone, absolutely anyone.
I thought Ems was brilliant last week. A true ‘rose amongst thorns’. Loved the way on Saturday she very sternly told Sir Michael he wasn’t going anywhere until he answered her final question. Brilliant. Brian Gleeson was another who annoyed the 'eck out of me. His repeated pomposity in presenting his views and opinions as fact was very, very grating.
