An eclectic mix as so often with this race but very few with any kind of chance should Cue Card attempt to defend his crown. He is by far the classiest horse in the list and this race suits his peculiar on/behind ratio very well.
Benefficient enters the elite list. He showed he has progressed into his open company season well by winning the Grade One Chase at Leopardstown over two miles. His Jewson Novices Chase win was full of merit and he would be a clear player in this race.
Sir Des Champs has limitations in a Gold Cup context but having won the 2011 Jewson Novices Chase a return to this trip may a more viable option. He may have a touch more class than First Lieutenant, who was second to Cue Card in this race last year. He therefore enters the elite list for this race.
The limitations of First Lieutenant, Riverside Theatre and Captain Chris are fairly obvious.
Al Ferof needs to confirm the promise of his King George run but that run and his Paddy Power Gold Cup win give him the foundations for a big run, physicality and maturity permitting.
Dynaste and Arvika Ligeonniere have various questions to answer.
Grandouet and Rock On Ruby have gone novice chasing leaving the obvious cluster clashing with each other as an elite group.
The chances of the two English contenders are obvious with both promising high class runs in the main event. My Tent Or Yours won the Fighting Fifth Hurdle and the Christmas Hurdle; The New One won the International Hurdle and was a close second in the Christmas Hurdle.
In Ireland Hurricane Fly remains a class above everything else, with no sign of his powers diminishing, comfortably beating Jezki who is a strong and honest horse, whilst this is a tough year for Our Conor (3rd)to make an impact of any kind.
Following the King George VI Chase and Lexus Chase:
Gold Cup
Elite
Bobs Worth
Silviniaco Conti
Elite with Exposed Limitations
Cue Card
Sir Des Champs
First Lieutenant
Long Run
Potentially Elite
Al Ferof
Full race Preview in February. The Depth Model naturally points to the shape of that Preview.
What has changed since the start of the season? Not much. For all the to and fro of opinion and performance, the depth model only moves in accord with events causing significant impact.
Bobs Worth was clearly not readied, not desired, at Haydock and he duly stamped his class on the Lexus with a dramatic demonstration of his irresistible on/behind bridle ratio and energy distribution. His Haydock run had caused some to think that a certain type of track or ground were necessary but if that were the case he would not be a top class elite horse. For sure he may have optimal preferences - Cheltenham and good ground - but top elite horses have the mentality and class to cope with almost anything.
Silviniaco Conti delivered his Gold Cup performance to the line at Kempton, improving on his run at Haydock where he was clearly being safeguarded by running wide throughout, tiring physically after challenging the winner in the manner of a horse with a bigger target. He will deservedly get his re-match with Bobs Worth, the clash that never quite made the hill last season.
Cue Card remains purely elite in the Ryanair Depth Model but here his unsuitable staying on/behind bridle ratio was made visible in the starkest of manners. He has a physicality that makes racing proper once challenged and forced from his extremely high class comfort zone difficult for him, and when required to switch behind the bridle as Silviniaco Conti came to him he had no response. Talk about better ground is a red herring because on any ground it is his on/behind bridle ratio, his physicality, that will determine his type of performance in accord with the class of rival he is facing.
Long Run remains hugely admirable but time and class of opponent are now too much for him.
First Lieutenant again ran with great credit and was again beaten for the twelfth time in thirteen starts over the last two years.
Sir Des Champs ran with credit after his crashing reappearance fall. He was once again no match for Bobs Worth, however.
Al Ferof faced a difficult race and he was unable to bridge the gap to the two fit and firing opponents ahead of him. He ran with credit and showed just how hard it can be to break through the barrier into elite company in a strong/deep division. That said, he also has around two months of training and physical progression to come, having been broken down physiologically by the demands of this race. The owner most likely favours this race but there is merit in taking time with him via the Ryanair Chase, where he could once again face Cue Card. That said he would be a live outsider in this race for sure.
There has been no real movement through a porous barrier with a high degree of rigidity from the outset.
As the 2013/14 National Hunt season reached November the echoes of a common refrain rose steadily in volume. The King George VI Chase had come into view. It was always highly likely that the first and second from 2012 would run again, fitness permitting, in the same race at the same point on the calendar, but there was a difference in the numbers assigned to each horse. Roughly a 6 for Long Run and a 25 for Captain Chris. Long Run was the winner in 2012 - he beat Captain Chris - but he did so by a neck. A year later, if - (insert reason(s) why) - Captain Chris could run a yard or so better he would be winning a (parallel) King George. Reward for Long Run holding him off by an inch instead of a neck, six apple crumbles. Reward for Captain Chris going one yard and one inch quicker, twenty-five apple crumbles. Which would you choose (freezer facilities are available)?
The reason so many people were going crumble crazy relates to an abstract notion that is ingrained, but rarely ever questioned, within the sport of National Hunt turf racing. That notion says that what should be one of, or for many the most important factor when placing a bet is a concept that has no foundations: "Value".
Understanding the reasons why this concept is flawed is not the aim here. They have been addressed, in extremely preliminary form, some time ago here (no alterations to that article have been made since). Nonetheless, because the notion as it relates to British turf horse racing lacks any form of credible foundations, it is not difficult to explore the myth without the need for an extensive and technical exposition. Unfortunately, the re-match that was to form the basis of this example was denied when Captain Chris was found to be lame in the week before the King George. But with the ground once again riding soft, the performance of Long Run would elicit a fairly accurate conclusion to the "four-times-the-price-value" theory. There was an added extra too, as Menorah happened to be four times the price of Silviniaco Conti, whom he had beaten by a length in the Grade One Betfred Bowl at Aintree (behind race winner First Lieutenant) at the end of the previous season (this was a very flaky claim, given the entirely different conditions of that race to this).
So we can see the angle quite clearly. The selection of one horse at a bigger price than another with closely matched form to that horse is a timeless approach. Other tools from the full spectrum of traditional racing language (first time out record, track, ground, stable form and so on) can then be used to support the basic evaluation of the approach and, significantly, that the bet is therefore "value", the most emphatic supporting agent any bet can lay claim to. Now, with the race run - in this case the King George VI Chase - something intriguing occurs. Regardless of the result, in the vast majority of cases the notion of "value" then disappears from discussion, reviews and highlights reels. If the concept of "value" is so crucial before the event, why does it become so irrelevant after it?
The reason why is that the concept of "value", whatever its perceived validity, is "present" only before a race. After a race is run it disappears, vanishes, like a phantom. Two-fold, part of the reason for that is that when the winner and placed horses cross the line no-one cares any longer because the result and monetary returns are then known and fixed. "Value" as a concept evaporates once its use as a reason for betting evaporates. The other reason is that language to describe "value" when "value" was not theoretically present is missing from traditional betting language. If a horse like Captain Chris had, for example, run far worse than expected by "value" theorists, what terms do we then use to describe that reality? "Dark value"? "Anti Value"? It is nothing short of incredible how much time is afforded to discussions of abstract, man-made formulations (prices) rather than the specific characteristics, profile and stamp of the horse in question. Those abstract prices are irrelevant because the influence they have in determining a horse's performance is close to zero in and around elite level competition.
Silviniaco Conti won the King George his Gold Cup performance hinted he could. Menorah, at four times the price or more, was pulled up having never been in the race. Long Run, the signifier of "value", unseated his rider when well beaten having struggled from some way out, which by "value" logic suggests Captain Chris would also have been toiling. He certainly would not have had the class of the front two and would have been a long way adrift on that basis. All this was not difficult to predict but in the justification process for betting "value" was writ large across performance prediction and winner selection. Now those performances can be analysed they confirm what many thought so surely we must term that process, those original prices, "Dark Value" or "Anti Value", meaning that many things of huge significance were being omitted from the thought process. In adumbrated form, it was obvious from Long Run's first two performances that the mentality on which his physicality depended had "gone", and he was a shadow of the horse he was last year. So how in any way was his performance in last year's race significant not least when the race itself had a completely different texture, with greater depth and two or three new, improving, top class horses in the field? Captain Chris's own build-up was also much changed. When all this was know Captain Chris had come into roughly the same price as Long Run so how then was his original "value" at "four times the price of Long Run" to be described? Nothing. The whole abstraction, the time invested in it, the flawed thought process simply slides away to be resurrected another time, for another race, destined to repeat itself ad infinitum.
Nor did the long time favourite, Cue Card, escape the same abstraction. Because he was favourite and also because his general profile had suffered inaccurate inflation (as a result of many things associated with his Haydock run), as the day dawned many realised that this was an altogether different test for him. As his price was pushed out by the men and women who created the abstraction of his price in the first place, a curious mist descended and seemed to offend many people. How could Cue Card possibly be the same price as, or a bigger price than, Silviniaco Conti whom he had beaten at Haydock? "At the prices", that other classically traditional way of crowbarring in a "value" justification regarding a horse which people are increasingly no longer certain about, began to shape much of the day of race talk. But "prices" did not help Cue Card get air into his lungs, and "the price" did not help Menorah with a thankless task nor would "value" have helped Captain Chris move comfortably in the company of improving elite horses this time around. Dark Value was all over the King George, but will "value" exponents work on concepts to help explain the other, hidden side, of their approach to themselves and to others?
The currents carrying the misunderstanding residing in the flawed structure of the "value" concept run deep. The Value Myth 2, the article that will uncover more fully their theoretical roots, is a complex one that must wait until the Summer. What the first article made clear is that those currents continually flow and swirl around the word "repeatability". No National Hunt turf race is ever repeated with the exact same conditions. "Value" as a concept is dependent in its entirety on the same situation(s) being repeated. In those two lines we can therefore point to the futility of "value" as a concept. The King George VI Chase of 2013 was different in innumerable ways to the King George VI Chase of 2012. To claim any kind of "value" on the basis of relating the outcome of the first event to the potential outcome of the second event is simply flawed.
"Prices", "value", "at the prices", "how is <x> a shorter price", "how is <y> a bigger price": None of this affects the outcome of a race. To have basis in the reality of making profits on events the situations in question must have repeatability. To reiterate, no National Hunt turf race is ever repeated. It is a far, far more interesting elite level sport when each individual horse is the main focus. Not just in a traditional sense of form, fitness and so on, but the animals themselves, their shape, constitution, physicality, mentality, technical aspects, bridle ratio and so on, those things which are only briefly discussed, if at all, before the numbers come tumbling in to obliterate nearly all the foundations of interest and enquiry.
The real value, the value that does not require quotation marks, perhaps lies in the widespread and unfailing commitment of the general racing community to the repeated use of a flawed concept as a way of navigating every racing event. By analysing elite racing performances in a way that has nothing to do with "value" whatsoever, it becomes possible to predict outcomes with a much greater degree of conceptual rigour. In so doing, the implications of performances from each elite event for the next one in that division or a related one can be tightened or loosened accordingly. Not always, but more so than before, it is possible to work to improve the tools needed to predict a horse's performance in advance of its target race. As for the King George VI Chase, it has now passed for another year. A whole year to wait for those wishing to repeat the unrepeatable, to claim "value" from an unrepeatable event. Unless, of course, some difficult questions are brought under consideration, and the "dark value" of this year's race is remembered.
* The problems afflicting At Fisher's Cross were stated to be "well known" by her trainer. This is highly questionable. On December 28, 2013, for the first time so far as can be seen, they were stated clearly: hock, back and rib issues. ** Solwhit subsequently missed his intended reappearance run with a suspected sprained fetlock, which would not be serious and is unrelated to previous injuries. It it is more serious his preparation for and participation in the race would be compromised. The injury will be updated when known. Still undefeated, Big Buck's remains in the Super-Elite bracket. The greatest staying hurdler of all time, his absence from the 2013 renewal and remainder of the year has highlighted still further the extent of his domineering stature in this division. His imperious quality aside, Big Buck's has over the years provided us with a fine insight into the widespread use of limited analytical tools that have been eagerly employed in a number of places to try and uncover his weaknesses, despite it being obvious fairly early on that non existed.
The much-sought-out "flat spot" (for example, racing television productions brought the "flat spot" up even after Big Buck's had won his previous race by being on the bridle throughout) during a brief phase of his hurdling career seemed to elicit no end of amusement from Ruby Walsh, because when it was put to him it was in the context of a possible weakness or "problem" despite the triple World Hurdle winner Inglis Drever making an art out of switching behind the bridle, which is essentially what that point of the race refers to. Nonetheless, the widespread misunderstanding of this aspect of physicality and staying race characteristics seemed to make acceptable the notion that "speed", "acceleration" or a "turn of foot" was what was required to win a lung-bursting elite class race over three miles against one of, and then the, best staying hurdlers ever, even long after Big Buck's had dispensed with his lazy stage of a race. What was even more confusing was that this "turn of foot" to get past Big Buck's was suggested to take place either going to the last hurdle or just after it. These kind of views were not just widespread for a particular season but persisted through each subsequent campaign. This suggests a certain inadequacy inherent in the traditional regularity to the process of performance analysis in National Hunt racing. Of course, huge numbers of people across a range of social media platforms and sites were fully aware of the inadequacy of this kind of view of physicality and elite race requirement. Furthermore, racing attracts and thrives on variety in opinions, on "taking on" favourites, on questioning the validity of everyone and everything. This is fine; but in profiling elite racehorses and elite race requirements there has to be a certain level of perspective, of what is actually attainable in a particular race. It is important that, at the very least, the attempt is made to understand why certain physical characteristics and profiles are particularly well suited to certain events and why others are not. The "turn of foot after the last" theory was a poorly thought out excuse to "take on the favourite" with the likes of Grand Crus, Oscar Whisky and Dynaste. And whilst words are easy to conjure, there is little doubt that behind all the attempts to dethrone Big Buck's with poor analysis there has been a vast amount of money squandered.
Actually, it was Dynaste that perhaps best exemplified the hole in the "turn of foot" approach to a top class staying race when he took on Big Buck's in the 2012 Cleeve Hurdle. Whilst not run at a true Championship/elite gallop pace, which is significant, the Cleeve Hurdle is still usually contested on softer ground than the World Hurdle, and remains a fairly thorough stamina test. Analytically, the "turn of foot" to which people referred in this context is in itself not accurate. It is simply not possible for a horse to cruise along for 2m7f of a World Hurdle that has Big Buck's as a healthy runner, and then somehow "sprint" or "accelerate" for a hundred yards or more. What they were hoping for, without taking the time to explore the ramifications, was that a horse could remain on the bridle in a forward position for longer than Big Buck's and then maintain their gallop sufficiently so that Big Buck's could not get to them. It was a mirage, an oasis, a figment of the imagination, not because of the presence of Big Buck's, but simply because even top class staying horses are incapable of racing in that way. If we are able to identify a horse who does most of his racing on the bridle - that is to say, he (or she as with Voler La Vedette) lasts deep into the race without racing behind the bridle (usually indicated by jockey animation) - then their ability to actually "race" proper is severely limited at the top level, and any finishing effort will be insignificant, resulting in a loss in a race of that nature, however close.
In the 2012 Cleeve Hurdle, Dynaste races prominently the whole way. As with his career over fences, connections are not concerned by his ability to stay three miles. As they descend and start to motor towards the last hurdle, the positions are as below, still 16 seconds before reaching the final obstacle (apologies for sizing of graphics):
The different animation of the jockeys is clear. This corresponds to the different physicality of the horses. Still in second, and since rounding the final turn, Ruby Walsh has been more animated than Tom Scudamore. Care is needed. By 'more animated' we mean that Ruby Walsh has been asking Big Buck's for more effort; essentially he has been asking Big Buck's to now race proper, to engage all he has, instead of remaining at an elite gallop within his own comfort zone. As a stayer of exceptional quality, Big Buck's is only too happy to respond, and begins to lengthen and scorch the ground in front of him (whether there is a horse to chase after or not is irrelevant). Tom Scudamore is crouched and compact - he is holding on to Dynaste in a bid to keep him galloping at the pace he can. Dynaste is racing at elite pace, no doubt, but his rider knows, in contradistinction to Ruby Walsh, that when he lets him down to 'go for everything' the response will make little difference. So long as it is Big Buck's behind him, there can only be one outcome.
This is the dramatic turnaround in lengths at the winning line. Ruby Walsh is no longer animated, Big Buck's has won him the race long ago by switching behind the bridle and having the power to race with stamina; Tom Scudamore is in drive mode but there is no response from behind the bridle: Dynaste travelled deep into the race within his comfort zone but once asked to switch behind the bridle he does not possess the physicality to respond in any meaningful way, something to bear in mind when assessing his likely on/behind bridle ratio in a race like the King George. Another thing to note when assessing the physicality of both horses is that whilst Ruby Walsh clearly shakes Big Buck's up to 'go about his business', he never resorts to the whip. At his level it is about asking, assisting, making sure, and not any kind of desperation for maximum effort, the full extent of which in his case is likely never to be known.
What emerges from this is a clearer picture of why top class elite staying hurdlers and chasers have pace. It is not raw speed or acceleration, as some Champion Hurdlers possess, but it is a pace of gallop that few can live with over such a long distance. Big Buck's is 'fast' in the sense he has top class pace, the very reason Ruby Walsh has said he would fancy his chances in any Champion Hurdle (in his prime); but what he also has is an irreducible amount of residual class allied to an iron will to race in a way that hurts most 'quick' horses. It is such a unique blend of pace, stamina and class that opponents, ground, track and tactics are irrelevant to him. He can win on any track, on any ground, at any pace, any time of the year, against any opposition. As a result of a minor tendon problem, we may now endure the talk of "speed" and "acceleration" once more, this time in relation to Solwhit.
One World Hurdle entrant who has been pushed arbitrarily up the betting lists is More Of That. He beat the very good handicapper Salubrious in a four runner 21f race at Cheltenham, despite trying to obliterate three of the later hurdles in the contest. A five year old and with only four runs in his career, he was then allotted the mystical "160 official rating" that requires any runner to contest (in theory) a Championship race at the festival. Whilst he has almost no realistic chance in a World Hurdle, it was interesting to note that his elevation into "contender" was based partially on the notion that he beat Salubrious "very easily" and "on the bridle". This wasn't the case, but it brings us to a discussion of physicality that is often misunderstood, none more so than in the case of Oscar Whisky in this context.
Oscar Whisky is optimally a 20f horse with a highly unusual running style brought about by his peculiar on/behind bridle ratio. At elite level he can only race at 20f: this is the distance at which he has won two Aintree Hurdles, the only Grade One wins of his career. In that race, for whatever reason, he gallops at elite pace and is then able to maintain that same pace from behind the bridle some way out. This gave credence to a lie, namely that he was somehow staying on strongly at the end of 20f. The other lie was that he had the raw speed for a Champion Hurdle and this was brought about by outclassing inferior rivals on the bridle. Perhaps the race that exemplified this best was this one on New Year's Day 2012 at Cheltenham over 20.5f. At the time it caused quite a stir, a very good horse winning hard held from his (hugely inferior) main rival on the bridle the whole way. He had done the same the year before. The performance now created a perfect storm: running like that he could get three miles easily; running like that he had the speed for a Champion Hurdle; when in fact running like that made neither possible. Oscar Whisky has virtually no tactical pace. He can run at elite pace, as he is a very good horse, but a Champion Hurdle expends his bridle energy far too quickly and a World Hurdle exhausts it to such a degree that there is nothing left at all behind it well before the line. The details of his defeats in the 2011 Champion Hurdle and the 2013 Cleeve Hurdle (pulled up in the 2013 World Hurdle) confirm this view.
If - if - More of That had won his race on the bridle it would be the biggest possible clue that he should not run in a World Hurdle. Admittedly we know next to nothing about him, which indicates a different reason as to why he shouldn't run in a World Hurdle but it is clear from his run at Cheltenham that his jockey was doing all he could to "hold on to him" or "hold him together". This act of jockeyship is often misunderstood in combination with the recency bias (where only the last stages of the race are remembered). The horse is gradually emptying/tiring on the bridle and the jockey is aware that there is very little expense of energy left, so instead of animating themselves and asking their horse to give even more, the jockey gathers the reins and sits as still as possible, holding the horse's head and neck compactly so the horse can complete his energy distribution as much as possible. With jockey remaining as motionless as possible so not to disrupt the horse's rhythm, viewers can mistake this for confidence that the horse is somehow 'cruising' and has 'loads left', when the opposite is in fact the case. More Of That is not Oscar Whisky and didn't travel through his race with anything like the class of that horse, but nonetheless it may be worth taking the time to assess what kind of physicality More Of That actually displays on the racecourse, and why, at each stage of his young career.
What then of Solwhit**? The reigning World Hurdler owing to His absence, it has been suggested that Big Buck's has never faced a horse like him before. The inference here is that Solwhit is high class at all three Grade One distances of two miles, two and a half miles and three miles and there is some substance to this observation. He won the Aintree Hurdle as a five year old in his novice season (Oscar Whisky won his first as a six year old) before having a Champion Hurdle campaign the following season culminating in an 18L sixth to Binocular after which he was just headed by Hurricane Fly at Punchestown. In his next season he continued that theme with three more consecutive defeats to Hurricane Fly in the first half of the season before he was injured, missing nearly all of 2011 and 2012. Significantly, two weeks prior to his return on December 31 2012 Big Buck's suffered his injury, leaving the World Hurdle devoid of potential runners with high levels of residual class. Solwhit ran adequately on his comeback (20f) and won his next start in January 2013 (19f). He then won the World Hurdle over three miles beating Big Buck's' substitute Celestial Halo. Analytically, however, Solwhit's World Hurdle was run for a long way at a crawl, with no significant elite class pace injection at any stage, making the race overall a slowly run one (see video, below). It was a performance high on 17-20f residual class, but low on stamina and behind the bridle requirements. As Celestial Halo is owned and trained by the same connections as Big Buck's, they will have a grounded insight into what Solwhit achieved against them in relation to what is normally required when Big Buck's is present in this race.
Should Big Buck's not make the race, it is likely that Zarkandar - himself an Aintree Hurdle winner - will step in to offer some of that elite level gallop. Unless he misses the festival, he is likely to run in the race regardless. If Big Buck's does line up this presents Solwhit with no less a problem than it did Oscar Whisky: what happens when the elite gallop is decided by a member of the super-elite? In other words how much of the race can be spent comfortably on the bridle at a pace that uses up that energy more rapidly than in any race before. Solwhit's high level of residual class, as so often, is matched by an elite mentality and toughness - he was able to reproduce his winning effort at Aintree. The area of major concern with Solwhit relates to his time off the track and the decision to go pot-hunting in France after Aintree. After three hard races in five weeks against Hurricane Fly between December 15 2010 and January 23 2011, plans on an attempt at the 2011 World Hurdle were abandoned after he failed to sparkle in his workouts. The plan was to give him time off and come back for a novice chase campaign. It subsequently transpired that he had heat in a leg and even more time off was required, culminating in a near two-year absence. His trainer was obviously keenly aware of the effect the hard races against Hurricane Fly had had as he stressed that his horse was only 50-50 to line up in the 2013 World Hurdle, with the Aintree Hurdle mentioned as the real aim. He did eventually run at Cheltenham with huge success, and then again at Aintree (but over 3m, not the Aintree Hurdle). What is slightly worrying is that connections felt the need to make the most of his vein of form and well-being by then taking him over to France for an arduous race over a slightly longer distance. He again gave his all before flattening out for stamina two out (finishing second, beaten 8L). This probably explains why he has been kept back until late December for his reappearance run but the trip to France can be indicative (as it proved with Grand Crus) of a lack of surety regarding the future physicality of the horse. Having just collected two of Big Buck's races, it would have made more sense to end the campaign at Aintree, turn the horse out for the summer, and bring him back for a World Hurdle campaign. But that instead they sought to maximise potential revenue whilst he was "fit and firing" may mean they suspect the years may catch him sooner rather than later, and is something to bear in mind if the race in March looks like being a stronger renewal overall. Nonetheless, only Big Buck's himself offers more class than Solwhit in this race, and whatever the background to and fro regarding his training for the race, Solwhit has high class claims once again.
Shin-Pads: Classy Solwhit claims the 2013 World Hurdle on his third start after a near two-year absence.
As yet, it is difficult to go in to too much depth with Zarkandar, but in one sense the signs are ominously strong, in others not so. Not so because his trainer is reticent to send one of his best hurdlers in pursuit of Big Buck's. Zarkandar lacks elite level two mile speed, and has done since moving into open company following his Triumph Hurdle win. It seemed almost inexplicable that he should be assigned the task of a second Champion Hurdle assault when his first had clearly revealed his limitations in that sphere but the only alternative was a similarly also-ran experience chasing his stablemate. Zarkandar, a beautifully built athletic horse, got his Grade One victory when beating the exciting Neptune Hurdle winner The New One in the 2013 Aintree Hurdle over 20f. The similarities to Solwhit begin to build: beaten in a Champion Hurdle, winner of an Aintree Hurdle, well worth a try in a World Hurdle. This would no doubt transpire but for Zarkandar still being only six years of age and the shadow of Big Buck's still looming large. In contrast to the likes of Dynaste, Grand Crus and Oscar Whisky, Zarkandar's on/behind bridle ratio is much more even. He has high level gallop pace which is primarily why his trainer sent him back to two miles for more prizemoney against The New One in the International Hurdle. He also has a great deal of resolution behind the bridle and tries extremely hard, making all and repelling The New One for his Aintree Hurdle success. Solwhit did not run at three miles until his World Hurdle win at the age of nine so Zarkandar has time on his side but his seasonal reappearance against Annie Power over 20f was perfectly satisfactory under the conditions of that race and he would be worth returning to that trip and further. Whether he runs in the World Hurdle, one suspects, depends on the continued health and well-being of his more illustrious stablemate as otherwise a second Aintree Hurdle win looks the obvious target this season.
Seeking, but struggling, to make progress along the corridor of elite contenders is At Fisher's Cross*, whose distinctive physicality made him a fascinating pre-season possibility. His style of racing is not dissimilar to that of Big Buck's himself so while his level of residual class cannot compete, he may possess the physicality and elite level characteristics to make his presence felt. Since his easy win on debut last season, he finished his more competitive races (as can be seen on his videos) with "kept on strongly", "stayed on well", when beating The New One "stayed on well under pressure run-in to forge ahead in closing stages", and when winning the Albert Bartlett Novices Hurdle "stayed on strongly to draw clear final hundred yards". There is nothing fancy here, no two mile form of any note, no sauntering around tracks over 20f on the bridle. What we can see is a physicality highly attuned to racing behind the bridle, to switching distinctively from gallop pace to racing mode, winning races with a force of will, and with stamina.
Physicality: At Fisher's Cross uses his power behind the bridle, but his efforts are being compromised by clear physical problems of some kind*.
Following his festival win, he went to Aintree and dismantled Just A Par, cruising well within himself to draw into the race easily, challenge two out and run right away from his field in the post-Festival style of a Big Buck's and, latterly, Solwhit. The obvious question was then posed: can he threaten to deliver the same kind of performances as his novice season in open company? His reappearance run answered little, although he exhibited some of his customary power as he moved through each stage of the race. He jumped sketchily (as he had done on his debut last season) and although moving up to challenge the eventual winner two out he screwed badly at the hurdle making a mistake and losing all momentum, and was allowed to coast home in fourth, 22L adrift of Celestial Halo. He was due to take on the winner again in the Long Walk Hurdle at Ascot but Celestial Halo missed out with a foot injury. Instead it would be the slightly more limited Reve De Sivola who would lead the field, this time on soft ground, something many (including his trainer) had referenced to be in At Fisher's Cross' favour. However, what was indicated at Newbury was given resounding clarity at Ascot. At Fisher's Cross has been suffering from clear physical problems during the first part of this season. His pain, or the fear of feeling pain of some kind, can be clearly seen as he identified that he was about to begin to run towards a hurdle. This is not the same as galloping normally and then, at the moment jumping is required, not having the class, technique or desire to jump and race. He visibly slowed and changed his legs into a stutter well before the hurdle, managing to only jump around three hurdles 'normally'. To his credit, despite losing lengths at each hurdle, he did again showcase some of that galloping power, that elite potential, as he was somehow still second, albeit beaten, when diving over the last, jolting his jockey out of the plate.
The problems being experienced by At Fisher's Cross are at the time of writing unknown*. This situation ties in very closely with the problem of understanding the physicality of runners I have discussed elsewhere. There is no standardised frame of reference from which enquiries can be made or information gleaned. Speaking personally for a moment I have only heard one comment prior to his second race that after his first run the trainer said he may be "feeling his hocks", and that after his unseating at Ascot his jockey, AP McCoy, said he did not feel right for the last half mile (his jumping signified pain from the start, however). Fuller details may emerge in time, but it is a reminder that conclusions are difficult to draw. Despite his problems it can be seen that At Fisher's Cross has the ability to compete in a World Hurdle; but to do so will require a process of significant physical treatment and recovery during the second half of the season. With both Big Buck's and Solwhit yet to reappear this season the task of preparing him for March is still possible, so long as his physical problems are treatable. With a World Hurdle legend and reigning World Hurdler in the line-up, it shows how difficult it can be for a potentially elite novice to make an impression on a division where the structural depth is vertically stretched for whatever reason.
As things stand, the World Hurdle crystallises into a very simple question. Is Big Buck's a better World Hurdler than Solwhit? The fascinating aspect comes from the fact that that question could change at any time.
At 5:14/15 Ruby Walsh gives him a slap on the neck to go quicker. Ten seconds later he has the race won despite everything hunting him down from close range. The commentary is almost as electric as his performance, still amenable to directional change whilst going full tilt towards the last hurdle. "Sixteen in a row, a fourth World Hurdle, equals Sir Ken's record, Big Buck's beats Voler La Vedette, we won't see his like for many years". Enjoy!
* The original enquiry referred to a specific bet with another person. With the intention now to keep Boston Bob to hurdles the bet has been mutually voided. The discussion of physicality that follows in no way refers to any one individual viewpoint or approach to racing. Quite the opposite, it is based on a general apathy across all racing media and platforms towards the use of important racing language of a certain kind.
The original enquiry asked why, despite seemingly obvious signs of ongoing physical issues, Boston Bob retained a relatively high profile during general pre-season expectations. Instead of a keen focus on the details of the horse's performance and profile following his last-fence fall in the RSA Chase, that outcome was written off as simply "unlucky" and his next, far more worrying run, summarised as an "end of season" effort where again he was assumed to be "getting into the race when falling" when in reality it was fairly clear he was struggling within himself. It took until December the following season for the trainer to confirm that those ongoing issues were in fact "muscle problems" and that they were a problem serious enough to keep the horse away from jumping fences.
This explains, categorically, the unusual shape of his energy distribution in the RSA Chase, an aspect of performance analysis that many reviewers of that race failed to grasp. I concluded that:
"With only two runs in his legs when contesting the RSA, going deep into that race would have been a highly strenuous experience. He again lost his place (conditioning) which then resulted in the need for a rather dramatic sweeping move around the field to surge into the lead (stressful) meaning he was likely to be tiring rapidly when he fell at the last fence. It was not an even, fluid movement through the race; it was staccato, rise and fall, surge and tire. Analytically that can also be deduced from his next start, where the effort of the RSA was revealed in full."
Many reviewers mistook the phase when Boston Bob lost his position in the race and got shuffled back to last place as a (most unusual) positive move by his jockey to give the horse the space to overtake the whole field and win. Without being able to know for sure what kind of physical problems his trainer was continually managing throughout the season, I chose to reference general "conditioning" as the reason for this dropping back to last place. We now know that muscle problems of some kind were impacting on the horse's level of performance. It is testament to how little information is in the general domain regarding racehorses and physicality that even when an explanation has been given we are not much closer to understanding the specific implications of the problem. Presumably - for without a clear frame of reference we are in the dark somewhat - Boston Bob's muscle problems led to a 'tying up' of his physical power, his capacity to race. It could also have been a nutritional imbalance: the ongoing struggle with his conditioning may have been his diet and the effects of that on his muscular strength. All this is essentially the reason Ruby Walsh chose to ride Unioniste instead.
Either way, we can be more certain that in both the RSA and Champion Novice Chase his muscles were unable to cope with the elite novice demands of those races, whereas before in weaker races or trials he 'got away with it' to an extent, but only just in the case of his Moriarty win. The gruelling nature of the RSA Chase is well documented. He appeared to be racing comfortably enough but even the in-running comments of the Racing Post fail to note his brief but significant demotion for no apparent reason to last place. A horse moving well within himself and with the requisite levels of residual class would have no cause to fall away in such a manner. The RUK commentator Richard Hoiles did reference it, however:
"....and Boston Bob's been shuffled right towards the rear in company with Terminal who has always been towards the tail..."
at which point there were seven fences left; he was still last (one horse was detached) with five fences left before moving into sixth place three out. It is at this point that another problem becomes obvious: Boston Bob is hanging to one side. His jockey begins to pull on the right rein indicating his horse is leaning left. When Boston Bob is pulled wide to make his sweeping move around the bend - at a great expense of energy - he does not maintain his position in the centre of the course but almost immediately moves over to the left rail, appearing to lean briefly into the rail at one point. Approaching the last fence the jockey has the reins elevated quite dramatically in his attempt to keep the horse straight but the battle is eventually lost, the horse is tiring, tying up, and falls by failing to lift his front legs sufficiently. What most considered unlucky was a tired fall.
"...at Punchestown he was out the back on the first circuit and detached at the back on the second. No doubt his class and heart - he appears to be a brave horse that tries hard - were behind his slight progress approaching three out but the simple effort to try and get closer whilst still last appeared to tire him and he fell quite heavily. Staying chasers often race prominently with power and rhythm that increases gradually and evenly with intensity: this has not been the stamp of Boston Bob's races owing to his physical problems."
His Punchestown run requires little elaboration. What is startling is that the question of physicality was never really brought to the fore in general terms and, as a result, he was mentioned in a number of places as being the "best outsider" for the Gold Cup. A horse that was a late starter, has had ongoing physical problems for some time and fell as a result of those in his last two races...in a Gold Cup? Conventional "racing speak" does not appear, to me at least, to be comfortable with discussing the myriad and often fascinating aspects of physicality among elite and potentially elite horses. In many ways, it shows a clear lack of invention and willingness to invest time in a structured form of enquiry regarding a compelling feature of National Hunt racing (in particular). Yet in the purely human world of sport, physiology and the monitoring, control and discussion of physical problems is absolutely central not only to the progression of individual and team performances but to levels of understanding of why certain types of performance occur when they do (levels of physical performance in the Premier League following demanding Champions League fixtures with short recovery periods is one such team example; the monitoring of heart rate and other physiological indicators during training sessions is a simplistic example at an individual level).
In racing such discussions are eschewed. There are many obvious and credible reasons for this. Time constraints is one; the omnipresence of the Value Myth is another, whereby top class races are easily reduced to a simplistic form of reasoning that suggests something at a big price has a chance (regardless of whether it does or not); and sensitivity is another, trying to ask trainers to discuss physical issues relating to horses in their care will never be a straightforward task. Nor is it mandatory in any way to have to discuss physicality: winners can be found and previews can be written in any number of ways, but it often feels as if something is missing, as if the story of what is really happening on the track and behind the scenes is a little unknowable, because the use of language to undertake performance analysis is accepted and understood to be traditional: "the form", "come on for the run", "not wound up fully", "better on this track", "got the run of the race" and other somewhat ambiguous terminology often conceals more than it reveals.
This applies not just to racehorse performance analysis but also to actual top class race requirements. The structure, the depth and the sheer physical demands of, for example, a King George VI Chase or an Arkle Chase are such that very few and usually only one or two horses in training can cope with them. Why is that? What is it about these elite races that exacts such a physical toll on so many horses and which select few horses therefore display the right characteristics for those special challenges? What is found when asking such questions is that traditional forms of language that are sufficient for everyday racing lose a lot of their relevance when analysing elite contests and this is one of the reasons why horses with highly questionable characteristics can be seen to maintain extremely prominent positions in betting markets for the kind of Graded races found at the Cheltenham Festival.
His trainer may not have been willing to state publicly that Boston Bob had muscle problems but, if looking carefully enough, the horse was only too willing to do so.
