Here's a GSV for you today George!

General racing discussion.

Moderators: Roguelet, hpkingjr, WaveMaster

Pierre LP
Yearling
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:05 am
Location: UK

Here's a GSV for you today George!

Postby Pierre LP » Wed Jul 05, 2006 12:38 am

6.40 Chepstow (UK)

Reebal GSV = 80.91

Danehill (USA) x Applaud (USA)

Pierre LP
Yearling
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:05 am
Location: UK

Postby Pierre LP » Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:45 am

Opened on course at 16/1.....unplaced :(

The going was good to firm half an hour before the race when it started raining.....but after the race I had a call to say the jockeys said it was soft going so no surprise that the price of the first two finishers was 50/1 and 33/1

The second race was delayed by 40 minutes as there was a safety inspection of the track.....
7/2, 66/1 and 50/1 the prices of the first 3 home in the second race.

Forget about the form from this meeting as some jockeys were certainly being "careful."

User avatar
George William Smith
Restricted Stakes Winner
Posts: 756
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 1:48 pm
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Contact:

Postby George William Smith » Thu Jul 06, 2006 8:30 am

If the Applaud is by Rahy out of Band, the updated GSV is a whopping 81.41. Yikes :mrgreen:

Pierre LP
Yearling
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:05 am
Location: UK

Postby Pierre LP » Sun Jul 09, 2006 4:10 am

George: thats the one........

The track conditions in the UK vary to such an extent that many of the top rated animals cannot win because they are unsuitable. If all tracks were flat and a similar configuration it would probably be a different story.

Seabird
Suckling
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 11:19 pm
Location: England

Postby Seabird » Sun Jul 09, 2006 5:34 am

Just to add another viewpoint... the race report said

<quote>
The rain had got into the ground and it was closer to good than anything else. This six-furlong juvenile event did not look that strong on paper and with outsider KYSHANTY collecting, that would seem to be the case. However, there did not seem to be any fluke about the result as he won on merit. This represented a huge improvement on his debut effort, where he never got competitive, and he is obviously going the right way.
<unquote>

Don't you think Reebal's lack of performance might have something to do with the fact that his dam, Applaud, has never had a winner out of five progeny? Also Reebal's Conduit Mare Profile leans heavily towards the stamina side rather than for the six furlong sprint he was unplaced in. I think he may come into his own at 3 or 4 over some longer distances.

jagger
Grade III Winner
Posts: 1119
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Peoria, Illinois

reebal

Postby jagger » Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:44 am

Graham,

Very good call on Reebal! He is only a two year old and there are not many, if any, races where his pedigree that STRONGLY favors classic distance can come in to play.

User avatar
George William Smith
Restricted Stakes Winner
Posts: 756
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 1:48 pm
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Contact:

Postby George William Smith » Sun Jul 09, 2006 5:12 pm

Applaud has two winners, two placed runners and 1 unraced runner from her first five foals. You are very right though, a very high GSV of 80 almost always suggest classic distances preferred, though the good ones can have well enough quality speed to win good maiden races over shorter distances.

george

Pierre LP
Yearling
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:05 am
Location: UK

Postby Pierre LP » Tue Jul 11, 2006 2:31 am

Seabird...I agree with the likelihood that he will be much better at 3 and 4.

If the going was good for that race then I'm the world's leading brain surgeon :wink:

If your quote comes from the Racing Post, then I'd advise you that approximately 50% of the time when I have been at meetings and walked the course their opinion of the going has been different to mine. One day at Bath they reported that all the races as having been run on good/firm going. In fact the last race, in which I had a runner, was reported to me as soft by the mud splattered jockey. The horse's performance and time of the winner verified his comments.

Seabird
Suckling
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 11:19 pm
Location: England

Postby Seabird » Tue Jul 11, 2006 3:19 am

Hi Pierre LP

Yes, the report was from the RP and I agree completely with you on their standard of assessing going. Their standard times seem over-generous perhaps making the differential of 'over standard' too small.

By the way, the last race (9:10) at Chepstow that night was abandoned, do you happen to know why? Was it bad light stopped play or did Chepstow become water-logged (not a necessarily rare occurrence)?

Pierre LP
Yearling
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:05 am
Location: UK

Postby Pierre LP » Fri Jul 14, 2006 3:35 am

After the first race they went down to the start for the 2nd...then they spent 40 minutes inspecting the course for "holes." This meant that they were so far behind that the light was too bad for the last race.

The other thing that the RP doesn't take into account is when the rail has been moved at the actual distance is not as advertised.

louis finochio
Darley line
Posts: 9181
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2004 5:21 am
Location: Alhambra-Calif.
Contact:

Postby louis finochio » Fri Jul 14, 2006 7:09 am

To all you UK riders. What would happen to your poly track if you got a real gulley washer =a good old fashioned downpour of rain and hail.

Would that gulley washer float the poly track away or would it hold its course?

I know they train on poly track when the weather is bad, as their is a roof to protect the poly track.
Those without sin cast the first stone.
Louis Finochio

Pierre LP
Yearling
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:05 am
Location: UK

Postby Pierre LP » Fri Jul 14, 2006 9:14 am

there would be a few puddles but it wouldn't wash away at Lingfield......I don't jknow the other 2 tracks well enough to comment on them.