Wednesday 4 July 2012

The Arkle 2013: Initial Inspection


My initial reaction when Simonsig was put in at 4/1 for the Arkle was a mixture of surprise and mild amusement. It’s a price that takes some getting used to and then some work to place in context. On surveying the Arkle landscape more closely, however, 4/1 was fair. Plenty of people agreed, he’s now best price 100/30.

The price is largely immaterial though. I remember very well being amused – prices clearly amuse me a fair bit – by the reaction to Big Buck’s’ price of 7/2 for the World Hurdle of 2011 some eight months before the race. It was a very nice gift. William Hill offered a similar gift for the 2012 renewal, effectively giving Big Buck’s away at 3/1 under the tagline of being unbeaten for the season. What tends to happen when such prices surface is betting people on social media sites start to pick apart the technicalities of the price: often, this exercise lacks reference to the race in the round. Some even start to cast around with mathematical formula regarding the likelihood of so and so and the risks of this or that. Such an approach is by and large a waste of time. To talk of the greatest staying hurdler ever, to remain briefly with Big Buck’s, is to talk of a racehorse with no weaknesses whatsoever. As such unless there is an opponent in the ranks with similar characteristics or the potential to develop them the prices are irrelevant as a discussion point (like most prices, I would contend) and are only of substantial interest as a subjective aspect of betting for a nominal reward. The price is the reward for correct analysis, not a clearly definable aspect of an abstract, metaphysical equation. (There will be an article at some stage on the ‘value myth’.) Perhaps the greatest wild goose chase ever to wreak havoc in people’s minds stems from the formulation of a question that has no definitive answer, that cannot be answered, and should therefore never have been posed in the first place: it is most commonly found in the format of “Is (price) value?” for whatever horse. Posed that way the question offers two possible answers, neither of which have any bearing on the actual race outcome, which strikes me as completely pointless. The aim is to find the likeliest winner of the race in question and only then assess whether the nominal reward figure, displayed as potential via the price on offer, appeals.

Last year’s Arkle, as it would happen, was a perfect illustration of the above. Sprinter Sacre won the race easily at 8/11 having first been offered at 10/1. In the very initial phases, it seemed he would have two hugely talented chasing rivals: the Supreme Novices winner and a Champion Hurdle runner up. Both those rivals unravelled fairly quickly and correspondingly Sprinter Sacre’s price fell in direct correlation to his ascent to superstar novice status not only with his performances but the expectation that accompanied them. At every turn, Sprinter Sacre’s price was questioned, examined, critiqued and occasionally derided. The value myth shone bright: precisely because he was by far the likeliest winner as every month passed, whether or not he was ‘value’ was completely irrelevant. Focus on the physical characteristics and raw talent needed to win the race meant his opponents were leagues below him (one even failed to make the race): to what extent were backers prepared to invest for the nominal reward was the only pertinent issue derived from analysis of the runners and the demands of the race. The prices were merely over generous for far too long, regarding the eventual winner at least.

Which leads us to Simonsig. The easiest thing to do is start with the potential level of opposition he is likely to face in March at this stage. On so doing it becomes clearer to see that 4/1 may well have been a good/fair price. The second favourite in the market is Overturn, a lionheart who will be a nine year old in March having raced 37 times before seeing a fence. Peddler’s Cross was not an Arkle horse and neither, one fears, is Overturn. Oscars Well made a strong impression in the Neptune novices hurdle because he ran with the choke out and clattered the last: in open company he registered no wins to rack up seven consecutive defeats leaving his only victories recorded on soft or heavy ground. Captain Conan, a huge police horse, did well to win on debut but looks to lack any kind of raw travelling speed that is essential in an Arkle. He’d need to be an electric fencer to figure but looks likely to be aimed elsewhere given his stable have the favourite.

The horse I would have thought most likely to become a true Arkle contender is Montbazon. Subject of glowing talk from his trainer his strapping yet elegant build was matched by an ability to cruise through races without being overly flashy. Unfortunately, he cannot hurdle well. Looking a huge threat in the Supreme Novices hurdle despite a couple of altercations with his hurdles he was also a little keen and the exertions all told saw him obliterate the last obstacle and fade into fourth. It is not only a little surprising that connections intend keeping him to hurdles where he will face razor-sharp technicians of the art not least his conquerors from that Tuesday, Darlan and the winner Cinders and Ashes. That leaves Trifolium as the more interesting candidate but he has raced almost exclusively on heavy ground despite his meritorious third placing in the Supreme on good ground and it is open to question as to whether he will feature heavily in Irish novice chases and thus the Irish Arke with Cheltenham as an after-thought (see Realt Dubh). That said, his ownership was recently pointed out to me as a core reason why Cheltenham is likely to be on his agenda again in March.

Overall then, there doesn’t appear to be any real depth of challenge. That’s not always indicative of the end result, as Captain Chris somehow besting Finian’s Rainbow despite their subsequent campaigns showing the Arkle face-off to be all wrong, but not on the day that mattered. Simonsig himself (deeper analysis of him not required yet) has form, reputation, natural ability and the right trainer to go off odds-on come March. How ‘big’ would 4/1 be then? 


No comments:

Post a Comment