Voy Por Ustedes improves by 30LB!

[Posts: 265Joined: 19 Nov 2006, 13:55Location: Selby]

Or: why its silly to call Master Minded 'a 186 horse' rather than a horse who has achieved one '186 performance' (and has lots of potential).

Otherwise you get people on BBC2 saying things like 'he's the greatest horse I've ever seen'' (leap-frogging a horse who won The Cheltenham Gold Cup and The King George four times, and was ridden by that very pundit) after one performance. Maybe when he's strung together a few 186s over the years.

[Posts: 668Joined: 21 Apr 2004, 20:36]

Or: why its silly to call Master Minded 'a 186 horse' rather than a horse who has achieved one '186 performance' (and has lots of potential).

Isn't it equally, if not more, silly to slate a horse for being beaten over the wrong trip?

[Posts: 154Joined: 07 Mar 2008, 15:38Location: Berkshire, UK]

I could not agree more - yet another case of the media letting commonsense sail out through the window following Master Minded's triumph at Cheltenham and labelling him a "superstar" (or whatever that might mean !).

On the evidence of today's running, might it not be that Voy Por Ustedes ran below his best at Cheltenham, for whatever reason ? He has always been a good horse, and it disappoints me that he has not been given the credit he deserves in many quarters.

[Posts: 3433Joined: 06 Jul 2007, 11:38]

I thought Richard Dunwoody had more sense. Maybe his trek to the North Pole has played tricks with his brain. An absurd comment.

Although I did not bet in the race, I still thought Master Minded would have had enough about him to win today, even allowing for the extra half mile.

In retrospect, it is clear that the horse is a two mile specialist and doesn't ( at this stage in his career anyway) stay beyond that.

[Posts: 265Joined: 19 Nov 2006, 13:55Location: Selby]

Or: why its silly to call Master Minded 'a 186 horse' rather than a horse who has achieved one '186 performance' (and has lots of potential).

Isn't it equally, if not more, silly to slate a horse for being beaten over the wrong trip?

Not as silly as Francome's quote that Master Minded 'could have won any race at the Cheltenham Festival'.

You're right that it was the trip that beat him (I'd back him in next year's Champion Chase); but it seemed like a convenient moment to bring up something that had been bothering me anyway.

[Posts: 668Joined: 21 Apr 2004, 20:36]

On the evidence of today's running, might it not be that Voy Por Ustedes ran below his best at Cheltenham, for whatever reason ?

Voy Por Ustedes ran as well as he'd ever done (up to that moment in time) at Cheltenham, beating Fair Along (OR 152) and Schindlers Hunt (OR 154) by sixteen lengths. It's possible that he's improved for the step up in trip today, but Master Minded has run miles below his Cheltenham form.

[Posts: 668Joined: 21 Apr 2004, 20:36]

Not as silly as Francome's quote that Master Minded 'could have won any race at the Cheltenham Festival'.

I missed that gem from the Carrot Cruncher. That truly is an idiotic statement.

[Posts: 154Joined: 07 Mar 2008, 15:38Location: Berkshire, UK]

NWRA, I think the modern trend is to jump on bandwagons and hype up horses before they have proven their worth.

I don't recall many people saying Dessie was the best horse since Arkle when he won the 1986 King George in a canter.

In recent weeks we have witnessed a number of examples of horses being hyped beyond their proven ability, Sizing Europe, Master Minded, and Kauto Star.

I think a lot of the people guilty of this were not alive to have jumped Arkle's train, and underestimated Best Mate having got their fingers burnt on the Florida Pearl bandwagon of the late 90's. And its not just forumites who are guilty - in truth the media are largely guilty of leading the hype probably to sell papers and get viewing ratings up.

It is unfair to the horses and everybody connected with them.

I agree with most of what you say Mycenean Princess, though I have to differ re Best Mate. I think he was very overrated and was simply the best of a poor bunch (nothing will sway me from this view).

It is the media who get carried away and are desperate to make almost any horse that wins the Gold Cup or a Champion Hurdle into one of the greatest of all time - you see it year after year, and it inevitably makes me see red when they lose all sense of proportion.

I was around in the Arkle era (and before, though hard-pressed to remember much about the 1950's !) and there was definitely none of the hype then that is churned out now on such a regular basis - neither was there in the era of L'Escargot, when there were so many good chasers around.

[Posts: 3433Joined: 06 Jul 2007, 11:38]

Why does the Aintree curse only seem to affect the Cheltenham winners ?

[Posts: 4148Joined: 20 Jan 2006, 11:28Location: The Ainsty of York]

Inevitably I'm open to being tarred with the 'aftertiming' brush, but in my defence I did hint at the questionable choice of races for KS and MM in an earlier post when I thought (foolishly as it turned out) that Nicholls' 'preferred' engagements for the two horses would have been the Melling and the 2m Punchestown race respectively so:

I humbly suggest that all consider the possibilty that KS is not suited by a truly run 3m+ and MM (at present) is a two-miler. Ideas that KS has 'gone' and MM is not worth 180+ for his CC win are well wide of the mark: they were wrong-distanced.

That KS finished where he did in both the GC and yesterday actually reflects great credit on the horse, IMVHO.

I was also very surprised Richards didn't choose the Melling for Monet's Garden.

Not a particularly edifying couple of days for two otherwise good trainers.

[Posts: 4482Joined: 03 Sep 2007, 22:56Location: Milton Keynes]

Master Minded did not stay as simple as that - he did not stay 21f in France he hasn't stayed 20f at Aintree.

The mistake at the second last was that of a tired horse.

Voy Por Ustedes, conversely, has handled the 2m 4f easily and looks as though he could also get an easy three.

[Posts: 3339Joined: 19 Jan 2004, 11:50Location: Hope Valley, Derbyshire]

Or: why its silly to call Master Minded 'a 186 horse' rather than a horse who has achieved one '186 performance' (and has lots of potential).

I think the distinction would be lost on most people.

The phrase "186 horse" (or "105 horse", or whatever) has customarily been used to mean a horse capable of a 186 performance. It may, of course, be qualified, such as "a consistent 186 horse", or "a 186 horse on his day".

Or, perhaps more relevantly in this instance, a 186 horse at two miles.

I thought I was the king of pedantry and pointless semantics.

[Posts: 4080Joined: 10 Apr 2002, 20:03Location: essex]

I don't think it is fair to say Master Minded simply did not stay - there is evidence in his breeding to suggest he should stay 2m 4f at least.

I don't think referring back to the breeding of a horse at this stage of its career is a particularly useful exercise, to be honest. The horse clearly didn't get home.

In any reasonably competitive top grade chase, Master Minded will struggle to win over 2m4f. I doubt we will ever see him running over this trip (except maybe as a 12yo in hunter chases!).

He may also have been feeling the effects of Cheltenham - this does not necessarily stem purely from having had a hard race, but could also be down to having been trained to hit peak form at a certain time.

Just out of curiosity, what does Bible Lord's breeding tell us about his chances of staying a yard over 2m6f?