I must apologise to you and others who follow your tips. I look on in wonder as you pick these good-priced winners out but try not to back them as I know what will happen. Today I backed both of your tips and they went down. It happened last time I did it too. I promise not to in the future.
I am not disposed to think you could possibly be a burden to them. Sometimes we get it right and sometimes we get it hopelessly wrong.
I had a go on Shugborough too and was similarly hacked of with the standing start. Bless her the Billionaire Stoke Turf Accountant gave me my dough back as a gesture of goodwill.
My god, she must fancy you! I spent fifty years laughing at the incompetence of NH starts at Cheltenham and Ascot- where they brought them out for the start on a tight bend close to the tape. The 1985 Champion Hurdle was a watershed for me. Watch the start and what the starter did to the favourite, poor Browns Gazette. Now, sensibly to start with, they walk them in at a straight line distance and, even though they can have a perfect line, they carry on walking them in too far, giving them a chance to play up - and then end up with this daft standing start idea. It's about time racing employed a professional starter, instead of the old boys' network. So you might pay 20 grand a year as an owner- and your highlight is to run your horse in a big race and suffer what happened yesterday. It beggars belief and I'm sorry, Ruby Walsh, but your comments post race on that start are not good enough. As a commentator, you should have exposed its utter incompetence and stupidity.
Bizarre story about Supremacy's defeat. Cox said he'd never run on such soft ground yet the going is slated as good to firm. Apparently Ascot had a heavy rainstorm sometime Wednesday, which Cox said affected the going. Doesn't add up.
Lets take a look at that race in terms of time against what we've seen at the course since 2010. Race time - 73.67 All 6 furlong races average by official going (Firm seems erroneous because of so few Firm going descriptions) Good To Firm 73.80850579 Firm 73.88999939 Good 74.18607809 Good To Soft 75.54394732 Soft 76.65866623 Heavy 76.86500168 So if you look at it against those times you would say the ground was Good To Firm. However, if you look at it by class of race. This was a Class A race in terms of the database. Good To Firm 72.88071387 Good 73.59888882 Firm 74.40000153 Good To Soft 74.83764648 Soft 75.92499876 Heavy 76.86500168 You would say that it was good ground rather the the good to firm suggested. To show a comparison, the listed mile race time was 100.60 All mile races Firm 99.61500168 Good To Firm 99.98383809 Good 100.9391549 Good To Soft 102.8808572 Soft 104.3115153 Heavy 105.5799999 All class A races Firm 98.65000153 Good To Firm 99.24866587 Good 99.45153867 Good To Soft 101.495455 Soft 103.9407142 Heavy 105.579998 Which suggests again that it was probably good ground rather than the good to firm suggested.
The overall course description was Good to firm, good in places (most places perhaps?) Either way, it would seem Cox talking bollocks, so to speak
So, moving on from official going, Proform and others then give their own going standards for times. Their times for the 6 furlong race are - Race time - 73.67 all 6f races Firm 71.8799998 Good To Firm 73.32800039 Good 74.06968979 Good To Soft 75.75904737 Soft 77.34952364 and Class A Firm 72.73999786 Good To Firm 73.12200012 Good 73.35187467 Good To Soft 75.32999914 Soft 76.43272677 So on the adjusted it looks like the course was good at best. I wouldn't say he was talking bollocks at all, I would suggest that was probably the softest ground the horse had raced on, again showing the issue UK racing has with watering of courses and then the British weather on top of that. Its not showing that it was soft ground in anyway, but its showing that it wasn't Good-Firm in most likelihood.
Yes. I was drawn away from the fact by his quoted words "such soft ground° which seemed to imply that it was incredibly soft. Supremacy's 3 wins were on good, good and good to firm with all times being relatively fast. So, as you say Nass, it was probably the "softest" he had run on. He must have run several seconds slower than in all his 2yo wins. It will be interesting to see how he goes next time I wonder where the RP get their explanations
Stewards report - The performance of SUPREMACY (IRE), which started favourite and finished unplaced, was considered. Clive Cox could offer no explanation for the colt’s performance. The Veterinary Officer reported that a post-race examination of SUPREMACY (IRE), during routine testing, failed to reveal any abnormalities.
As I say it doesn't add up. Here you have a horse that Cox apparently said was inconvenienced by 'good' ground. Now surely if you call yourself a horse you should be able to run on good ground. I can understand horses that can't run on firm ground, though personally disappointed by it, and I can understand horses that can't run on soft going.... but good going? When I first got interested in flat racing and breeding my dad pointed out that when it was soft or heavier to look for the names Court Martial, his son Counsel or the latter's son Privy Councillor in a short pedigree. I was often amazed how often Counsel horses were transformed by heavy going. Of course they weren't transformed it was just the others were hopeless on it. Counsel horses acted on it. Now it seems in general that the problem is horses don't act on firm ground. At the same time I was watching Counsel horses winning races in the wet you had plenty of horses running good races on firm ground. Now you get single figure fields because horses can't handle firm or even good to firm (look at Ripon on Saturday; its card had 7 races with £100,000 of prize money yet only 35 runners). Here we have a horse we are led to believe is inconvenienced by good ground. Maybe you are right Nass and the issue is watering and its greater effect on ground, especially if it then rains.
I can understand why horses with a pronounced round action wouldn't act on firm ground. It would cause stress on their tendons and shouldn't run on such ground. Horses with a well laid shoulder are more suited to a sound surface but should be able to act on any but the softer it gets the more advantageous it becomes for the round actioned horse
