Who ran the best Triumph trial today and did you see a Cheltenham Festival winner?

I have to say that for my money GRUMETTI ran the best Triumph trial. Unsurprising that he is now the bookies fav. Of course Nicholls already thinks he has this ones measure with Pearl Swan. Baby Mix ran a belter too and while it wasnt as visuallt impressive it was in a faster time. My biggest reservation about Baby Mix is that it really doesnt jump very well at all. Sadlers Risk would have to find some improvement and may as well not bother sending Minsk over.
As regards part two of the question the most likely Festival winner seen today would surely have been Cristal Bonus. The way he came right away from the second last was quite breathtaking.

Opinions please

 

2 hurdles out Minsk cruising looking all over the winner. Slight mistake, upsides and edges ahead as they go to the last, not fluent jump and then very much outstayed by the winner and almost lost 3rd to another fast finisher. Didnt look great I have to say, but his engine gives him a chance still.

 

This could be one of those comments that are made to look very, very stupid in hindsight! He's only been beaten a neck in his first start over hurdles, is it not early enough to be dismissing him?

I'd have to say Grumetti looks the best Triumph horse I've seen all year, though I love the way Baby Mix goes about his business. I wouldn't be having a bet until the day.

 

Im with you BOS, Minsk should not be written off and Baby Mix is my selection against the field, I thought he travelled on the bridle and always looked the likely winner turning for home.

If teh vibes coming out of the Hobbs yard are to believed, Sadlers Risk was a real hotpot and one they really fancied to win the Triumph but found nothing an dI doubt he will get the Cheltneham hill, whereas Baby Mix did find plenty and although I think it will be a close call between him and Grumeti, whos form is being franked all over the place and another one who finished third to him runs today Oscar Davy.

 

Minsk should be written off - http://www.racingpost.com/news/hors...h-favourite-minsk-misses-festival/992559/top/

If you ask me I would have the two King horses against the field with preference fro Grumeti. He is tough and thoroughly professional and must be a decent EW bet because I find it hard to see him out of the money. It sounds like the King camp are fairly sure that Grumeti is their best Triumph hope, with Balder Succes more one for the future.

 

Minsk won't be running in the Triumph. Can't say that I am surprised

http://www.racingpost.com/news/hors...h-favourite-minsk-misses-festival/992559/top/

 

My comments were based on a run Zen, thanks for the link it would appear the connections were not to impressed and maybe all is not well with the horse.

 

That explains the run then... disappointing for his ante-post backers on the Triumph though at least it shows there was valid reasons for the slight disappointment. Afterall Dessie Hughes isn't renowned for doing Aidan O'Brien-esque wonderhorse talk like he did with this horse so it's probably testament to the horse that he still finished so close whilst harbouring an infection...

I'll definitely be waiting till the day for my Cheltenham bets

 

So he had an infection? What a load of rubbish. The horse was the yards great hope and turned out not to be as good as they were hoping. They were probably a bit shocked and ended up deciding to make up this nonsense as an excuse for pulling him out of Cheltenham. They've not run him all year - that smacks of problems training him or a covered up injury - so given that they've shown a track record of not running him if he's not 100% right I find it almost impossible to believe that they would run him yesterday if they had even the slightest inkling that he was ill.

 

Quel to be fair I think there's a question mark over the health of Hughes horses all season as he's had a lean spell of it. I certainly don't listen to everything all trainers have to say but on this occassion I'd be pretty surprised if they simply 'made up' the horse had an infection...

 

Don't you think it's funny how often problems are found post race? Why wouldn't they know pre race - especially if it was their money that was caught up in the gamble yesterday. If I owned the horse and was having a proper bet on him I'd want to know if he was fit and healthy.

 

I disagree with you here tbh Quel

He travelled like a good horse yesterday and yes it was disappointing he got beat but with normal improvement expected he was certainly entitled to take up his triumph entry. I bet the yard/staff have done the nuts ANTE POST and would have come over if he was fine imo

 

They scoped him on Wednesday (I think) and everything was fine so clearly the problem has arisen since then. Horses aren't machines. Just like us they can feel fine one day and then wake up the next feeling a bit rough.

They said they'd run but since the problem has come to light that decision has changed.

I find it very strange how people have such conspiracy theories against trainers/connections etc. Of course problems come to light post-race because it is only in a race, when the pressure is on, that a problem will show up.

 

I can't agree with you two lads. Sorry gents.

I'm as far from a conspiracy theorist as is possible and don't see where you're going with that Zen. Just because I don't believe the trainer's post race explanation for why his stable star lost a race doesn't mean I'm creating a conspiracy theory.

I'm just saying what I see. Minsk looked like a bridle monkey yesterday. He travelled easily the best in the field and jumped fairly well if unspectacularly but he found absolutely nothing when push came to shove in relation to how well he was travelling. I can't blame the yard for not knowing he's a bridle monkey. He's probably their best horse and presumably they have nothing in training that can get him off the bridle in their work. There's nothing wrong with that. Happens all the time.

What i find impossible to believe is their excuse when the bubble is burst. He may well have an infection. That didn't seem to stop him hacking away three out and looking easily the best horse in the race though did it? Am I to believe that the infection only impacted Minsk's performance in the final furlong?

He would have to improve hand over fist and find a way to prove he's not a bridle monkey to be capable of living up to expectations. These are the same expectations, by the way, that the trainer and owner have perpetuated themselves.

What I see is an embarrassed and disappointed trainer searching for excuses as to why the horse he has pinned his hopes on for a successful renaissance has not performed to expectations on his big day.

To be clear I've never bet a penny on Minsk to win any race so this is in no way my pocket talking. I have actually been pleased he's around because it's made the market for my fancy in the Triumph, Darroun.

 

Sorry, I wasn't referring to you specifically. However, I find it strange why people (in general) are so sceptical about trainer comments. It is quite apparent that they need to be taken with a pinch of salt, and treated with a degree of caution, but too often people dismiss them out of hand when they disagree with their opinion. I'm not saying it is necessarily wrong either but I do think there is often the belief that the trainers are somehow the enemy.

As I have said before, a problem is likely to come to light when the pressure's on, ie inside the last furlong. Therefore, nothing strange about that.

They clearly think he is very good. They checked him out earlier in the week. He ran disappointingly. They accepted that but said they'd still give the Triumph a crack. After getting him checked out post-race they found a problem which means he won't be ready for Cheltenham. Simple. Nothing fishy about as far as I'm concerned.

Have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

I'm not saying there's anything fishy about it. I'm saying he's not as good as they think he is.

 

He might not be as good as they think he is but by saying that connections "ended up deciding to make up this nonsense as an excuse for pulling him out of Cheltenham" you are implying that the connections are lying about their reasoning for the performance, and why he will miss Cheltenham (even though they said he would run immediately after the race). Unless I am mistaken that means that you think there is something 'fishy' about it.

 

I'm just pleased that my comment was vindicated....they WONT be going to Cheltenham, they are NOT going to waste the journey! LOL

 

I've not implied that at all Zen. My implication is that the trainer had to find an excuse and came up with a flimsy 'infection'. Just like sportsmen and women it is very rare for athletes to be 100% fit at any point and i think the same is true of horses. If you look hard enough for a problem you'll find one.

You inferred, incorrectly, the 'fishy' goings on. I've not said that or implied it at any stage and actually think my explanations have been lucid. I'll thank you not to put words into my mouth. If you don't agree with me that he's a bridle horse that's fine. If you don't agree that the trainers searching for excuses that's fine as well. We're not going to agree on everything.

I'll leave this there.