FOLLOWING UP AN ANALYSISIn the analysis I made for you of the upcoming Derby I tried to demonstrate how many factors could influence the result. Some were known, some were problematical.For example, the observation that the subsequent winner had not been beaten at Randwick and was "bred to run the distance". But I called him a "promiser" You couldn't know he'd give his best. It was of course easy afterwards!And the Victoria Derby winner ran a respectable third, not bad and mo
FOLLOWING UP AN ANALYSIS
In the analysis I made for you of the upcoming Derby I tried to demonstrate how many factors could influence the result. Some were known, some were problematical.
For example, the observation that the subsequent winner had not been beaten at Randwick and was "bred to run the distance". But I called him a "promiser" You couldn't know he'd give his best. It was of course easy afterwards!
And the Victoria Derby winner ran a respectable third, not bad and more or less what we felt might happen. Big run, minor cigar.
One of those two Tulloch Stakes nominations ran second, while the horse that beat him in that race got himself cast and was scratched at the start. Heartbreaking for many, including yours truly, who chanced the 17s early in the day and saw the horse backed in to 8s. It happens.
We did indeed nail the "iffy" brigade. Class will out (usually).
And the NZ filly wasn't up to it at all
And Bart? Last and second last! I saw not one report on that.
No worthwhile news in reporting failure, I guess.
Had Count Encosta not become cast, we can just wonder what might have been. The horse he demolishes beats all but the winner. Where's that put him? Well, second at worst. But that's easy to say and hard to be sure of. He didn't run.
All in all, we should all be able to take from this that it's possible to learn a lot by a thoughtful pre-race analysis that involves what we, as punters, know about the competitors. That's before the race.
And then to add heaps by a patient and balanced post-race examination of what we thought and why we thought it.
Now try your hand at three upcoming races: the Doncaster, the Oaks and the Sydney Cup.
I'll give you a few clues as to my thinking prior to my analyses, and then you can have your own notes ready and see how we stack up.
I regard the Doncaster as possibly pickable this year (there are years when it simply isn't). There are three near the top of the weights and one - yes, just one - lightweight that I feel may hold all the aces. You do your homework before Friday afternoon and see what you come up with.
The Oaks looks to me to be virtually over now, nearly two weeks ahead of time. I am seeing 1-2-3 as clear-cut. Will something happen to make me - or you- change my mind? Balance up your thoughts.
And the Sydney Cup. Well, if it rains we have an interesting challenge. But if it manages to stay reasonable, say around dead to a goodish slow, I've been watching with increasing interest a classical olden dayes preparation of one runner. I'll give you a clue and you can do the rest for yourselves.
In the Melbourne Cup last year I thought he was right in it as they approached the final furlong. In another year, with another run, he'd have placed. That's good enough to win most Sydney Cups, or go close. A cryptic clue? All right then. You could throw a coat over him.
Go and search this bloke out and we'll talk a bit more about these race analyses on Friday.