Horses preferences/Specific racecourses

[EnvoyAllen]

Thought I’d take the plunge and create a new topic. What are the members thoughts/views here on the often discussed topic of horses specifically needing right/left handed tracks and only going well on these types of tracks?

We often hear ‘Cyrname loves Ascot’, and only recently Sire Du Berlais ‘doesn’t ever run well at Leopardstown’.

Why is this? Personally speaking, I always think it’s a load of rubbish. It infuriates me.

Do we think if Envoi Allen or Shishkin were asked to race on clockwise/ante clockwise tracks within a 3 week period against identical opposition they’d struggle on one of them? Of course not.

Envoi Allen has twice shown how good he is up the Cheltenham Hill going ante clockwise. He’s starred this season twice going clockwise. He just wins.

Shishkin the same, with his two Kempton runs this season.

Did Altior or Sprinter Sacre when they were pummelling the opposition in a Tingle Creeks at Sandown arrive a few months later at Cheltenham, look up the hill going the other way round and think ‘Jeez, i don’t fancy this course. Going ante clockwise too? Not for me’.

Its a subject matter that continually frustrates me. Don’t the very best,and I mean the elite horses, just rock up and win?

Every. Single. Time?

We used to hear the old adage about when title contenders like Spurs or Chelsea had great starts to the season and everyone got excited about their chances. But could they ‘win at Stoke on a cold,rainy Wednesday night?’

For me, it’s always been a very big excuse - ‘We won’t be aiming him for Cheltenham, Aintree should suit him better’.

The very elite horses have never, ever had any problems winning winning on any track, in any direction. It’s the horses that are not quite grade 1 level that always seem to be the ones that are ‘re routed’.


As Ruby Walsh has said enough times “The only horse I want to be on is the one with a string of 1’s besides it’s name”.

[Kevloaf]

Clan Des Obeaux & Santini

I'd consider them both Grade 1 animals and think it's quite clear that Kempton and Cheltenham suit their strengths differently?


The absolute elite horses can win anywhere, but how many horses are actually in that bracket, of having so much ability it wouldn't matter where they ran? Must be less than 20? Maybe less than 10? You've named two novices, and they do look head and shoulders above the rest....how deep can you make the list though?


Being able to deal with undulations is surely a leveller, therefore to dismiss it as not being important is not accurate in my opinion?

[Istabraq]

Kevloaf

I think in the case if Santini it’s more distance and lack of stamina the course requires at the finish, 3m Kempton and 3m 2f Cheltenham are very different challenges, it’s much less the right/left handed for me...

[Garrison Savannah]

Desert Orchid says you’re wrong

[BigChaang]

Getabird , Asterion Forlonge ...... 2 of the top of my head that would prefer R/handed tracks . in.my.opinion.
sure there's plenty more .

[Kevloaf]

Kevloaf

I think in the case if Santini it’s more distance and lack of stamina the course requires at the finish, 3m Kempton and 3m 2f Cheltenham are very different challenges, it’s much less the right/left handed for me...

Maybe not the best example then given they're different distances.

I don't get too caught up on left-handed versus right-handed preferences but I'm pretty sure archie found an article that proved it a couple of years back that it is 'a thing'...

[archie]

Fair play for raising the topic and nailing your colours to the mast, EA. However, I think that you are guilty of over-simplifying a complicated issue.

By and large, most horses are happy leading with either foreleg and switch without too much difficulty depending on whether they're going left-handed or right-handed (right leg lead on a left-handed course). Some, however, don't find it as easy. The longer the race, the bigger the issue, and with the added complication of jumping, this is almost exclusively a NH problem.

What it is all about is being in a rhythm to jump as efficiently as possible. Apart from the course direction, you have to consider its configuration. Undulations have an effect, as does the placement of fences/hurdles and whether there are long straights. Kemboy is a good example. Having won G1s at Aintree and Leopardstown, he obviously can go left-handed. Those two tracks feature long straights and his jumping there is generally very good. Cheltenham is on the turn for much of the circuit and, while he doesn't hate it, he doesn't seem to be able to get in the same rhythm. At G1 level that makes a difference. He also seems to enjoy it more when, other than given a good sight of the fence, left alone to do his own thing.

Other examples have been put forward and Desert Orchid is probably the most famous. He would emphatically not have won his Gold Cup if poor old Ten Plus had stood up. Another from my personal experience would be Lord Noelie. Although I didn't buy in until 3 years after his RSA win, it was made quite clear that he would not be running on right-handed tracks or on soft (or worse) going.

NB Other inaccurate tropes would be:
- a good horse can run on any going.
- a good horse can win at any distance.

The whole point about racing at any level is to maximise your chances of winning. It's plain foolish to generalise the particular.

[Quevega]

I agree mostly with EnvoyAllen.
And a little bit with Archie.

The vast majority of the time, the ground, trip, and course, and direction are used as excuses for losing, or not performing to expectation.
When a horse gets beat, it's not as simple as that. And that's a Fact.

For any horse to perform at his very best, then there will be a set of these conditions that would be ideal for each individual horse, and not so much for their opposition.

But the very best horses are usually more adaptable, in that they have top notch speed, top notch stamina, and can win going in either direction. Some can even lead on different legs.
Which is what EnvoyAllen is saying.

Archie's comments are fair, but it's not that common for a horse to be so disadvantaged by his lead leg. Obviously some will struggle with it more than others.
Frodon just won a King George on the wrong lead.
And they run straight for the most time, as most bends are very gradual.

The jumping issues is a different matter alltogether, and if extreme and persistent then this clearly not ideal, if you want to win a race.

A horse's balance and the undulations of certain courses, and of course the ground will also have an impact, and this will also aid or hinder the speedier or stamina influenced.

All of these minor habits and subtle changes of conditions will affect most horses optimium performance and can make the difference sometimes in close contests for sure.
Which is what Archie is saying.

[Hardy Eustace]

Beef or Salmon.

[Middle_Of_March]

Santini a clear example of a stayer suited by Cheltenham because of how stiff it is so he’s an excellent candidate for a gold cup. Despite me calling him a boat. But put the Gold Cup at Kempton and he’d be taken off his feet and never in a million years win the race

Elegant Escape is another dour stayer but isn’t overly suited to Cheltenham. And yet you’ll still have had people over the years thinking that horse would win a gold cup. Madness...

Asterion Forlonge in the supreme. Jumped out to his right throughout and never gave himself a chance to show his class. The fact he finished third was actually quite remarkable. Put the race on a right handed course and he’d have certainly finished closer to Abacadabras and Shishkin.

Horses for courses is definitely a thing.

[archie]

The thing about jumping to the right (or left) is that, in terms of time lost, it's often better to do that in stride than jump straight out of stride.

[Geordieboy83]

Suppose the old saying of ‘horses for courses’ springs to mind. Certain horses just prefer certain tracks. Like jockeys and trainers too.

[EnvoyAllen]

Fair play for raising the topic and nailing your colours to the mast, EA. However, I think that you are guilty of over-simplifying a complicated issue.

By and large, most horses are happy leading with either foreleg and switch without too much difficulty depending on whether they're going left-handed or right-handed (right leg lead on a left-handed course). Some, however, don't find it as easy. The longer the race, the bigger the issue, and with the added complication of jumping, this is almost exclusively a NH problem.

What it is all about is being in a rhythm to jump as efficiently as possible. Apart from the course direction, you have to consider its configuration. Undulations have an effect, as does the placement of fences/hurdles and whether there are long straights. Kemboy is a good example. Having won G1s at Aintree and Leopardstown, he obviously can go left-handed. Those two tracks feature long straights and his jumping there is generally very good. Cheltenham is on the turn for much of the circuit and, while he doesn't hate it, he doesn't seem to be able to get in the same rhythm. At G1 level that makes a difference. He also seems to enjoy it more when, other than given a good sight of the fence, left alone to do his own thing.

Other examples have been put forward and Desert Orchid is probably the most famous. He would emphatically not have won his Gold Cup if poor old Ten Plus had stood up. Another from my personal experience would be Lord Noelie. Although I didn't buy in until 3 years after his RSA win, it was made quite clear that he would not be running on right-handed tracks or on soft (or worse) going.

NB Other inaccurate tropes would be:
- a good horse can run on any going.
- a good horse can win at any distance.

The whole point about racing at any level is to maximise your chances of winning. It's plain foolish to generalise the particular.

Thanks to those contributions with regards to this topic, especially Archie here providing a good analytical take on things.

I do still maintain though that the very best horses, just like all the elite sportsmen/women/teams throughout history, find a way’ and adapt to every single competitive situation that presents them.

Mike Tyson never asked for an opposing boxer to be “my height only” (he was only 5ft 10”) and “no Southpaws please”. He beat them all.

Just like Federer has for 2 decades. Messi & Ronaldo have every week for 15 years. Steve Smith is currently doing in international cricket - from the slow dust bowls of Indian wickets to the fast & bouncy Australian counterparts.

Doesn’t matter the opposition, the conditions, the problems faced, crowds, no crowds, 1st round qualifiers or champions league finals - the elite always, always find a way of way of winning. It’s all that matters.

And it’s why I’ll always be a tiny bit suspicious of any specific horses ‘true quality’ when I hear their trainer suggesting certain tracks don’t suit their strengths.

[Spectre]

Taking this to Cheltenham specifically, this is worth a watch for anyone who hasn't seen it, and Ruby in part of it explains why a right-handed jumper will always find it difficult at Cheltenham.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i596M4wsHkQ

Horses have their own traits and quirks, some of which can be disadvantageous at courses with certain characteristics. Surely that's obvious to anyone that understands racing?

[Rooster Booster]

Shit somebody needs to let the Oxford dictionary know before horses for courses becomes indelibly stamped into everyday prose