2024 Novice Hurdlers

[Carnage at Taunton]

I see GE tried to get back CPotter but outbid

[DenmanSacre]

That is an obscene amount of money for a jumps gelding

He'd need to win 2 gold cup to get that back

If they cared about the money, they'd be racing them in France. Theleme won over 1m over there. Hermes Baie over 800k.

Means nothing to them - they just want grade 1 wins.

[TigerRolllllll]

If they cared about the money, they'd be racing them in France. Theleme won over 1m over there. Hermes Baie over 800k.

Means nothing to them - they just want grade 1 wins.

They want winners at Cheltenham….thats what the big owners are all in it for …..over G1s fun and nice bonus

oh and National obviously

[AaronLad]

If they cared about the money, they'd be racing them in France. Theleme won over 1m over there. Hermes Baie over 800k.

Means nothing to them - they just want grade 1 wins.

Exactly this
these guys spend near 400,000 for an unproven recruit from ptp or france.
They just got a proven performer with a very good pedigree for the same price as two potential chances at becoming something

[That Horse]

I see GE tried to get back CPotter but outbid

He was interviewed yesterday after his DRF win saying they were going to be bidding for a lot of them, it looks like he has lost out on majority of his top notchers. Gutted is probably an understatement for him and the yard.

[Kevloaf]

https://twitter.com/Tattersalls_ie/s...42438595629192


Already putting in the Aintree feelers for Caldwell..

I'd be out of there if I had him in the book

Yeah agree. I cna't get out of my bets but I would do after watching that, personally.

[darlojim]

On the PP Podcast, Ruby was asked for his 1-2-3 for the Supreme

He gave

Ballyburn (no idea if he goes this way blah blah blah)

Mystical Power

1 at a bigger price Mirazur West, going the right way and slightly overlooked

Also gave a small squeak to Mistergif EW.

[Lobos]

That's a lot clearer now. Thanks Ruby.

[Evesham Road]

It annoys me when people refer to it far more than it should.
Although to be fair - some will add in that it's a retrospective viewpoint, which is funny but fair enough.

Why is it 'funny'?!

To one of your earlier points, clearly the whole world didn't know quite how good Constitution Hill was/ is, which is why he went off 'only' 9/4JF. But...that still represents significant market support vs the at the time unbeaten Mullins first string Dysart Dynamo (9/4JF) and the erstwhile Henderson-trained hype horse Jonbon (5/1).

If the wider world had some idea how good CH was/ is, I think its quite reasonable to suggest that those at the heart of the racing industry, including WIllie Mullins, might be better placed to have at least more of an idea.

And whilst most or all on here are very respectful admirers of Mullins' abilities and record, these threads are filled with discuss about concepts such as 'which is the easier race' and I have certainly read many many times that what Willie cares most about is Festival wins. That latter logic is incompatible with the idea that a possible world-beater in one race would have had zero bearing on the decision making process for allocating horse to races. Also discussed on these pages are things like in-race tactics, how to get one beat, etc, which suggest that we are open to the idea that trainers, jockeys etc think about more than just which race their horse is best suited to; in other words they do consider their opponents.

We have folks asserting confidently that Constitution Hill had 'nothing to do' with Sir Gerhard's ultimate destination without a hint of IMO and then shortly after characterising Paul Nicholls as a trainer who doesn't "waste time trying to beat horses at Cheltenham he knows he can’t beat". Are we really to believe that the two most successful NH trainers in Ireland and the UK over the last 20 years are so fundamentally different that one refuses to place any weight whatsoever on the strength of opponents while the other places so much that they won't even attempt to try to win?!

I'd have thought that being able to retrospectively adapt our understanding of events based not just the information we had before an event but to factor in what we know after the event would be one of the core skills we'd look to take advantage of as punters.

So I think I get the point that people are trying to make but I reject some of the absolutes being expressed over the past couple of pages and...I actually think its funny that people would think that the strength of his opponents is completely immaterial as a factor for Mullins, and Mullins alone.

[Exar Essay]

On the PP Podcast, Ruby was asked for his 1-2-3 for the Supreme

He gave

Ballyburn (no idea if he goes this way blah blah blah)

Mystical Power

1 at a bigger price Mirazur West, going the right way and slightly overlooked

Also gave a small squeak to Mistergif EW.

Good mention for Reading Tommy Wrong in the BB too.

Quai De Bourbon is off to that Clonmel race apparently too.

The one I took from it was definitely Mirazur though. He seemed very sweet on him and no hint of a mention for the Ballymore.

[Craigy14]

Good mention for Reading Tommy Wrong in the BB too.

Quai De Bourbon is off to that Clonmel race apparently too.

The one I took from it was definitely Mirazur though. He seemed very sweet on him and no hint of a mention for the Ballymore.

Mirazur was in the process of handing DB Cooper a good beating before he went wrong.

No Flies On Him only beat DB a length or so was it not? Obviously don’t know how revved up NFOH and DB were on debut but it gives a little context to the form.

Also King Of Kingsfield ran respectively enough this weekend so it wouldn’t be a huge stretch to see Mirazur step forward again after only 2 runs. The jumping right etc would be a concern of course.

[Quevega]

Why is it 'funny'?!

To one of your earlier points, clearly the whole world didn't know quite how good Constitution Hill was/ is, which is why he went off 'only' 9/4JF. But...that still represents significant market support vs the at the time unbeaten Mullins first string Dysart Dynamo (9/4JF) and the erstwhile Henderson-trained hype horse Jonbon (5/1).

If the wider world had some idea how good CH was/ is, I think its quite reasonable to suggest that those at the heart of the racing industry, including WIllie Mullins, might be better placed to have at least more of an idea.

And whilst most or all on here are very respectful admirers of Mullins' abilities and record, these threads are filled with discuss about concepts such as 'which is the easier race' and I have certainly read many many times that what Willie cares most about is Festival wins. That latter logic is incompatible with the idea that a possible world-beater in one race would have had zero bearing on the decision making process for allocating horse to races. Also discussed on these pages are things like in-race tactics, how to get one beat, etc, which suggest that we are open to the idea that trainers, jockeys etc think about more than just which race their horse is best suited to; in other words they do consider their opponents.

We have folks asserting confidently that Constitution Hill had 'nothing to do' with Sir Gerhard's ultimate destination without a hint of IMO and then shortly after characterising Paul Nicholls as a trainer who doesn't "waste time trying to beat horses at Cheltenham he knows he can’t beat". Are we really to believe that the two most successful NH trainers in Ireland and the UK over the last 20 years are so fundamentally different that one refuses to place any weight whatsoever on the strength of opponents while the other places so much that they won't even attempt to try to win?!

I'd have thought that being able to retrospectively adapt our understanding of events based not just the information we had before an event but to factor in what we know after the event would be one of the core skills we'd look to take advantage of as punters.

So I think I get the point that people are trying to make but I reject some of the absolutes being expressed over the past couple of pages and...I actually think its funny that people would think that the strength of his opponents is completely immaterial as a factor for Mullins, and Mullins alone.

It's funny because I laughed.

And I can pretty much guarantee if you asked Willie - did he avoid CH because he saw the Tolworth or him training on the gallops, or someone else told him about his work on the gallops -he'd reply "Don't be daft" and probably laugh or at least smile wryly.

I simply disagree strongly with the idea that Willie swerved the Supreme because he thought Constitution Hill was as good as it turned out, and did add an IMO (more than a hint)
I didn't refer to the prices on the day but Kev did and it's a very valid point. And adds strength to that side of the discussion. Him being backed is Moot, unless it was very significant.

I'd refer you to Willie's comments about bigger cars that I posted to try and stop the farcical (IMO) conversation about the best novices etc. If he doesn't know for certain who his best horses are until he runs them, how is he the type to run away from a twice raced novice who'd beat nothing of note until the supreme itself ?

For the record I dislike the easier race mantra also, it's such an obvious concept, it's purile and banal.

I do appreciate your post isn't all aimed towards me and is a general thing so the final thing I'd add is I agree with some of what you're saying and looking back at things to find other answers and learn is always a good thing, although you mention what we KNOW after the event, and all we really know is that Constitution Hill is exceptional. You've used that to form an opinion that we disagree upon.

As to the strength of opponents, I agree that of course Mullins will consider this, I'm not sure anyone said otherwise - in fact he is very adept at finding races where the penalties favour certain horses.

But in this instance with CH we simply disagree. I cannot believe Mullins would have avoided a Henderson Supreme novice horse after seeing what he'd seen on the racecourse, twice.

And Paul Nicholls wastes a lot of time trying to beat horses at Cheltenham, he's made a career of it, sometimes he does win but the vast majority of the time he doesn't. That's not a dig at him or anyone - it's just racing.

[Lobos]

Good mention for Reading Tommy Wrong in the BB too.

Quai De Bourbon is off to that Clonmel race apparently too.

The one I took from it was definitely Mirazur though. He seemed very sweet on him and no hint of a mention for the Ballymore.

Makes you think those three may all go Supreme then. Tommy, Il Atlantique and Predators Gold his main three for the Ballymore. What's not to like ?

[Evesham Road]

It's funny because I laughed.

And I can pretty much guarantee if you asked Willie - did he avoid CH because he saw the Tolworth or him training on the gallops, or someone else told him about his work on the gallops -he'd reply "Don't be daft" and probably laugh or at least smile wryly.

I simply disagree strongly with the idea that Willie swerved the Supreme because he thought Constitution Hill was as good as it turned out, and did add an IMO (more than a hint)
I didn't refer to the prices on the day but Kev did and it's a very valid point. And adds strength to that side of the discussion. Him being backed is Moot, unless it was very significant.

I'd refer you to Willie's comments about bigger cars that I posted to try and stop the farcical (IMO) conversation about the best novices etc. If he doesn't know for certain who his best horses are until he runs them, how is he the type to run away from a twice raced novice who'd beat nothing of note until the supreme itself ?

For the record I dislike the easier race mantra also, it's such an obvious concept, it's purile and banal.

I do appreciate your post isn't all aimed towards me and is a general thing so the final thing I'd add is I agree with some of what you're saying and looking back at things to find other answers and learn is always a good thing, although you mention what we KNOW after the event, and all we really know is that Constitution Hill is exceptional. You've used that to form an opinion that we disagree upon.

As to the strength of opponents, I agree that of course Mullins will consider this, I'm not sure anyone said otherwise - in fact he is very adept at finding races where the penalties favour certain horses.

But in this instance with CH we simply disagree. I cannot believe Mullins would have avoided a Henderson Supreme novice horse after seeing what he'd seen on the racecourse, twice.

And Paul Nicholls wastes a lot of time trying to beat horses at Cheltenham, he's made a career of it, sometimes he does win but the vast majority of the time he doesn't. That's not a dig at him or anyone - it's just racing.

I agree that's what Willie would say but I'm not a Mullins so I'd have no reason to believe he'd told me the truth!

The IMO (hint or otherwise) wasn't in reference to you. My bad on muddling yours and Kev's points though.

Agree that the 'best' novices aren't known with certainty. One of my perspectives which I perhaps haven't articulated well enough is that I don't think trainers' knowledge of other yards' prospects is limited to racecourse evidence.

Ta for the response!

[Quevega]

I agree that's what Willie would say but I'm not a Mullins so I'd have no reason to believe he'd told me the truth!

The IMO (hint or otherwise) wasn't in reference to you. My bad on muddling yours and Kev's points though.

Agree that the 'best' novices aren't known with certainty. One of my perspectives which I perhaps haven't articulated well enough is that I don't think trainers' knowledge of other yards' prospects is limited to racecourse evidence.

Ta for the response!

I thought you'd conflated one or two posts.

I totally agree with the knowledge of other yards, but aside from the evidence on the track the rest is likely hearsay. Could be all sorts of information doing the rounds really and each trainer and yard will obviously pay heed to anything they deem valid information.

I cannot think of anything that would have been valid in this specific instance though. Unless they heard he was on undetectable steroids.