posted May 25, 2007

'As stated Jackane, a ridiculous statement.
Barbaro would have destroyed Bernardini in last years preakness had he finished, wait here comes a better one, Horatio Nelson would have hammered Sir Percy in the Derby had he completed, Marciano would have beaten Ali....think before you come out with these stupid statements as the answer is that we don't know. Youmzain might have beaten Sixties Icon, thats as far as you can go. Sixties Icon was still on the bridle a furlong out in the Leger and also, Red Rocks appeared to not stay the 14 furlongs so there are holes in the form. Sixties Icon showed what a nice animal he was at Newmarket a few weeks back.
So in conclusion, Youmzain may have went past Sixties Icon but you cannot say that he would definitely have won.'

:o So many holes in that argument.

Sir Percy beat Horatio Nelson in the Dewhurst.

Barbaro and Bernadini never raced against each other prior to that race. Only line of form is against Bluegrass Cat I think, and both winning margins over the horse were the same.

Ali and Marciano, meh, couldn't care less about boxing.

Red Rocks didn't stay 14f and lessened the form? He came 3rd. If he's lessening the form, that makes it more likely Sixties Icon would have beaten by Youmzain yes?

And then you refer to Sixties Icon's last run. Meh. Horses improve from year to year you know? If you're saying that he proved his class in his last run, that's fine. Youmzain would have won the Derby because he beat Sir Percy last time out in Dubai. :o

Youmzain also destroyed Red Rocks in Dubai. Which makes it 2 meetings, 2 wins. Sixties Icon beaten 10 lengths by Rail Link. Youmzain beaten 1/2length.

Why don't you let your pathetic argument lie down and just respect that 'would surely have won' is a figure of speech, opinion, and NOT fact.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 25, 2007

Obviously you didn't detect my sarcasm in my references to Horatio and Barbaro. I boldly stated that Horatio would have hammered Sir Percy in the Derby but I'm wise enough to know that you can't say that and also wise enough to know that you don't compare two year old form with three.
Then you kindly point out that horses improve from year to year....Sir Percy, Horatio?? The pot calling the kettle black? Your arguement is full of contradictions.
Lets play your simple mans game. Youmzain beaten twenty lenghts in the King Edward by Papal Bull who beat Red Rocks and Sixties Icon in that same race, Papal Bull hammered by Sixties Icon earlier this month, yes I apologise on this form line Youmzain is the moral winner of the 2006 St Leger.
You are correct in your arguement.
Enough said.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 25, 2007

'Papal Bull hammered by Sixties Icon earlier this month'

Badly hampered by my good friend Dettori

'Youmzain beaten twenty lenghts in the King Edward by Papal Bull'

Quote from Racing Post - Youmzain's run is best ignored as his chance effectively disappeared when he took a false stride on the home turn and almost came down.

Or do you count this in your form?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 25, 2007

Ahhh now I see what you are doing, you are looking into the reasons why horses didn't perform and disregarding the run? You are very erratic with your arguements.
If, as you are now arguing we actually look at races and not just results, then was Horatio hampered in the Dewhurst or was Sir Percy merely idiling?? Interesting isn't it.
From IMO is when horses run on decent ground with no apparent excuses, I always throw soft ground form out the window. There are so many variables in horse racing which is why I'm sure we could argue all evening.
A weekend accumulator for all the poor, whatever O Brien runs in the Marble Hill on Sat, Finsceal, Cockney and Dylan.

Also, one final point before the weekend, I believe that Cockney Rebel will turn out to be an exceptional colt, came from last to first in a fast time, that is exceptional. Just think, if he had been wearing dark blue silks and if he had been ridden by Mr Fallon then the media would lead us to believe that we have the next Secretariat on our hands, best of luck on Saturday Cockney
Again look at Sixties Icon in his last race, just had to be pushed out to win.
Look at Sixties Icon in the Arc, they weren't going half fast enough for him as he pulled the arms off Frankie in the first 3 furlongs, do we use this as an excuse or was Rail Link actually 10 lenghts better? Same applies to Red Rocks in the Sheema,

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 25, 2007

'Ahhh now I see what you are doing, you are looking into the reasons why horses didn't perform and disregarding the run? You are very erratic with your arguements.'

The horse almost fell over ffs. You are a joke.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 25, 2007

Jackane there are more holes in your argument than a golf course.

Firstly you discard runs when it suits you. For example - you disregard youmzain's run against papal bull but consider sixties icons run in the arc as his best form even though frankie said he didnt handle the track. Also papal bull would never have beaten sixties icon in a million years at newmarket this season.

I have no doubt that youmzain would have gone close in the leger but would have to have been pretty special to beat sixties icon on the day.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 25, 2007

'Firstly you discard runs when it suits you.'

I'm not going to have an argument with people if they class horses basically falling over as giving their running. You lot are pathetic.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 25, 2007

'sixties icons run in the arc as his best form even though frankie said he didnt handle the track'

Where did I say it was his best form?

Didn't handle the track? I'm confused. Longchamp is a FLAT, right-handed track.

Not only did he win going right-handed TWICE before the Arc, he also won at GOODWOOD.

Dettori reported the horse was flat, yet someone said that Sixties Icon was pulling his arms out :o

Tell me which runs I am excusing please. Other than Youmzain falling over. And Papal Bull getting taken out by Linda's Lad. Are you going to take an objective look at the Derby, and realise than Papal Bull would have been a lot closer, or just be a yes-man and say that a result is a result?

'Chester Vase winner Papal Bull ran much better than his finishing position suggests, as he didn't come down the hill well but was at last making good headway up the inside rail when he was stopped in his tracks by Linda's Lad two furlongs out. He couldn'trecover - in fact, he didn't look entirely happy afterwards - but he had been motoring at the time and might well have been in the frame if he had sustained his run.'

'Also papal bull would never have beaten sixties icon in a million years at newmarket this season.'

I DIDN'T SAY HE WOULD! I HAVE HAD ENOUGH OF PEOPLE SAYING I SAID STUFF THAT I DIDN'T! HORSES CHANGE FROM YEAR TO YEAR! RED EVIE AT 2YO IS NOT THE SAME HORSE AS RED EVIE AS A 3YO.

And to come back to the Horatio - Sir Percy thing, you're blind if you can't see Horatio should have won the Dewhurst.

'Little went right for Horatio Nelson, including a hefty collision with Red Clubs when settled at the back early. He was niggled along to recover but then moved up stylishly before having no room between Red Clubs and Palace Episode, who were both starting to tire after a strongly run contest.'

Come back and talk to me when you have acknowledged that horses have not given their full running when they have fallen over.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 25, 2007

'You lot are pathetic'.

I bet you feel a bit silly after saying that. It was just a debate and not a fight to the death.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 25, 2007

About Hoaratio - it is arguable that sir percy was idling up front?

Please don't shout at me. Im just expressing an opinion.

add comment | complain about this comment