Too often in racing, over the years, the media come out with gushing superlatives following a winning performance in a big race that may appear amazing to the eye on screen. However, when the data is examined objectively in the cold light of day, the results are not as “magnificent” as we were led to believe. In my last column, I mentioned the case of Little Big Bear and some of the comments that were coming out following his win in last year’s Phoenix Stakes. Despite the performance on the clock (111) which was an excellent figure for a two year old historically in the race, I was not taken in by the over the top comments. “A rating in the high 120’s…there has only been three or four performances like it from a two year old by August in the last fourty or fifty years” said one Senior Analyst. My main concern was the performance of Bradsell in the race (who reportedly injured himself during the race) and the decline in Persian Force on the clock since he looked a world beater in the Brocklesby. With a little research, I highlighted the fact that Sioux Nation (113) ran faster in the race just five years previously, which was never mentioned at the time.
Looking at yesterday’s Juddmonte International Stakes at York, it would be fair to say from a timing perspective that Paddington left his best behind at Goodwood following a gruelling race on Heavy ground. In winning yesterday’s race I was again lukewarm to the over the top headlines for Mostahdaf. Majestic, magnificent, masterful were some of the comments doing the rounds. While I understand that the use of these words are necessary to get clicks and sell papers, what I find more annoying is the constant over the top ratings that get published. Oh it’s a high 120’s rating, it’s a low 130 rating…..A recent annoying one was the 128 rating for Hukum (116) winning The King George at Ascot. A higher rating than Enable (121) who won the King George in 2019 with a much bigger speed figure, despite the fact that conditions were 23 lengths per mile slower than standard on advertised Good going for Hukum’s race! Usually it is well worthwhile looking into the sectional times, and evaluating the performance through going allowance and past runnings of the race before claiming greatness.
The following table contains the data from the last four runnings of the Juddmonte International, along with Frankel’s 2012 performance which is an example of when the superlatives are fully deserved. I have accounted for the 32 yards extra in the last two runnings of the race by taking 1.78 seconds from the winning time, and the time it took for the winner to reach the 3 furlong pole. I have used manual timing for yesterday’s race which is within (0.08) of Coursetrack’s time. I find that any timing that is within (0.20) seconds is a perfectly acceptable range of accuracy for analysis purposes. Manual timing also comes in handy on occasions like 2020 when the sectionals were not published on the website.
The following abbreviations have been used in the table.
SF (Speed Figure). GA (Going Allowance in Seconds Per Furlong). WGA (Adjusted Sectionals With Going Allowance Taken Into Account)
| YEAR | HORSE | SF | GA | TIME | SECT TO 3F | 3F TO FIN | WGA | WGA |
| 2023 | Mostahdaf | 117 | [-0.31] | 2.04.62 | [1.29.40] | [35.22] | [1.31.65] | [36.15] |
| 2022 | Baaeed | 117 | [0] | 2.07.52 | [1.32.67] | [34.85] | [1.32.67] | [34.85] |
| 2021 | Mishriff | 118 | [-0.15] | 2.05.92 | [1.31.61] | [34.31] | [1.32.70] | [34.76] |
| 2020 | Ghaiyyath | 118 | [+0.01] | 2.07.38 | [1.30.96] | [36.42] | [1.30.89] | [36.39] |
| 2012 | Frankel | 123 | [+0.05] | 2.06.59 | [1.31.99] | [34.60] | [1.31.63] | [34.45] |
The first thing to note from a speed figure point of view is that Mostahdaf’s performance was equal to the Group 1 Par. The next thing to note is how quick conditions were yesterday. The next area to concentrate on is the last two columns in the table where the sectional times to the 3 furlong pole (and from the 3 furlong pole to the finish) are adjusted to create a level playing field. It is also worth noting that while Baaeed’s performance in 2022 drew all the superlatives, and the fact that he beat Mishriff so convincingly, the data tells us that the 2022 Mishriff was a much different proposition to the 2021 Mishriff (who ran a very similar race to the 2022 Baaeed!). The other thing to note is that our eyes did not deceive us when it came to Frankel’s performance in 2012!
In summing up, I would say we understand why the flashy comments are used in order to sell papers and generate clicks, but it makes them stand out even more when we also have the data that can back them up. It must also be highlighted that conditions probably didn’t allow us to see the best Mostahdaf either yesterday, as he had to make all his own running. It was still a fine performance, and we look forward to seeing him again soon.
Until the next big performance.
Stay Lucky,
Graham