Monday October 2nd 2023

Nice win for start of month.

Well done for sticking with this one GForce. He's done me a favour on here a couple of times and although I deserted him today for the comp, I (thankfully) still backed him. CC remains one of my favourite trainers.

I always back the ex-.Ballydoyle Coventry.

He is taking the Monkey but it is when I stop backing him that he will rub it in.

Don't get sent to Coventry EGS - I spent most of my life in England & nobody was ever able to properly explain the origin of 'sent to Coventry'. In north inner-city Dublin back in the 1980s the old fellas used to say in moments of extreme exasperation - "I can't get me hat on". I’ve absolutely no idea what that’s supposed to mean – did your head expand or did your hat suddenly shrink regarding the unexpected news?

That brings back memories of bould seriously assaulting nigel clough way back down the city ground....nasty, not even a yellow!

That was SB's audition for the Match of the Day gig.

I don't think yesterday's Fancy Dans would cope with the long throws from Rory Delap or a Horse trained by Tony Pulis.

Alas, Shallow River a neck 2nd, but close...

Hi Tom, physics says that of course weight must be relevant to performance on certain ground, but that does not mean to say that a lighter horse would be at an advantage over a heavier rival, whatever the ground is. I am at the time of day that my brain is functioning on a quickly draining battery, so I shall return to this, and your other points tomorrow.

Thanks Joe. As you know, my knowledge of horseracing could barely fill a betting slip...so I just put in some random thoughts. On the weight issue, which is crucial for handicapping, I was thinking more of, perhaps, the combination of conformation and weight, some sort of ratio, as some "small" horses do remarkably well.

Hi Tom,

Sorry for the late response. I've pasted yours and commented in turn.

"What is the body conformation of a horse?

As viewed from the front, the horse should show significant width from shoulder to shoulder, a large circumference to the forearm, and a prominent "v" in the front muscling. As viewed from the back, the horse should be wide from stifle to stifle, and the quarter should tie in deep to strong gaskins."

So to a layperson, that is its general appearance in terms of how it looks as an athlete? Does the size of a horse's hoof affect its ability to cope with different types of ground, favourably or unfavourably?

Size of the hoof will have some bearing, but I don't know enough about physics to argue for big or small, whatever the ground. For example on heavy ground a large hoof will not go in as deep as a smaller one, but would the suction effect on the large hoof require more energy than the small one to pull it out?

On good ground the situation would, I imagone, be reversed, with the small hoof going deeper. It's an issue I wouldn’t take account of, but others might.

That general description of conformation is fine, but I am much more interested in the mechanics that an excellent conformation allows at the gallop, especially in tracking (hind feet following front). If you get hold of a video of Frankel from head on, you will see that he tracks very straight, much more so than the vast majority of horses, whose galloping action is a series of corrections for comparatively poor conformation - legs of different length: asymettrical hips, and/or spine, and/or shoulders. You will see many galloping horses 'dish' with a front foot, where, rather than coming through straight, the foot moves outward before landing, sometimes alarmingly so where it seems a circle is scribed before he foot comes down. This is probably more common in NH horses. I wonder how much energy is drained by all these corrections in trying to make the horse execute the most efficient gallop?

Going back to your query and theory about ground dependency (which is interesting after Ace Impact's "impact" yesterday) if you are right in saying that "I suspect most horses run to within four or five pounds of their median rating (all else being equal)." how does this help? It does not do away with the strong probability that a horse such as Ace Impact shows his best form on good ground or that other horses such as say, Sottsass, show their best ability on heavy ground?

It is of limited help in betting other than say a horse who has won all three of its races and those were on good ground, comes out for a fourth but it is soft ground. There is a question of whether that horse will act, I believe it is much ore statistically likely that it will than the market allows for. But nobody will get rich on that.

This goes back to the other point made by Dilton about the trip. Presumably, the longer the trip on "unfavoured" going, the less probable that a horse will achieve its maximum performance.

Agreed

A different point which may have some relevance is the weight of the horse? I read about Through Seven Seas that she was in the 470 kilos category and that the theory was that this would assist her at Longchamp (as the decision to send her was taken way back and the assumption was that Longchamp would be soft or worse as it usually is). Is the weight of a horse a relevant factor in respect of the going or not?

I'd say the weight of the horse is definitely a factor, but you are back in the physics territory wondering if the larger muscles that heavier horse has compensates?

All the best.

Joe