Sea The Stars Arc Win Reaction: Twitter ye not

General / Simon Rowlands / 05 October 2009 / 3 Comments

"Was this the greatest Flat performance of all time? No, not by a long chalk. Was it even Sea The Stars' best piece of form? Almost certainly not."

Simon Rowlands argues for considered analysis to hold sway over heat-of-the-moment reaction when it comes to placing Sea The Stars in the list of all-time greats.

The success of Sea The Stars in the Prix de l'Arc de Triomphe at Longchamp on Sunday was one of most memorable performances in my 30-plus years of racing. It was a phenomenal effort for the horse to win his sixth Group 1 out of six this year - one per month - racing against most of the best middle-distance horses around and at a trip that arguably stretched him.

We knew he was the best horse in the field, but best horses get beaten each and every day when circumstances conspire against them. Circumstances conspired against Sea The Stars on Sunday - he pulled hard early, ended up some way back and had by no means a clear passage in the closing stages - and yet he overcame them, showing a blistering turn of foot to win with authority.

He is rare, possibly even unique, among top-notch racehorses in that he seems to cope with anything that is thrown at him.

The immediate post-race reaction in the media and on various forums was, understandably, euphoric. There was a huge sense of relief, in that Sea The Stars long since became a horse who had a lot to lose and only a bit more to gain, but there was also genuine elation at seeing a horse take his rivals apart in the way that he did.

However, some of those who made sensational claims for Sea The Stars' Arc performance, as opposed to for the horse in a wider context, should be feeling a little foolish by now. There seems to be an ever-increasing tendency to think that what is said or written in the heat of the moment, without all the facts at hand, passes for proper analysis. It does not. Twitter ye not, I say.

Was this the greatest Flat performance of all time? No, not by a long chalk. Was it even Sea The Stars' best piece of form? Almost certainly not.

He beat Youmzain by a short-looking two lengths, the same margin as Zarkava had beaten that horse 12 months before. There was a head back to Cavalryman, a far from impressive winner of an ordinary Prix Niel on his previous start, and a further head back to Conduit, a Breeders' Cup winner and a King George winner but not a horse that anyone thinks is within a few pounds of greatness (Sea The Stars had beaten him far more convincingly in the Eclipse). There were plenty of others stacked up behind, notably the second- (or even third-) rate La Boum, beaten less than five lengths into seventh.

However, I come to praise Sea The Stars, not to bury him. Anyone looking for proof of the horse's supreme ability is much better off harking back to his Eclipse win in a mind-bogglingly good time and to his Irish Champion Stakes win, in both of which he had a number of good and in-form rivals beaten a long way.

The "problem" with the former is that Rip Van Winkle finished only a length behind him, and the problem with the latter is that Fame And Glory was just two and a half lengths in arrears. It is far more likely, in my view, that that pair are near top-notchers themselves - as some of their other performances suggest they are - than that Sea The Stars caught everything else on off days and is flattered by the clock.

And anyone looking for proof of Sea The Stars' ability to bang out top-class (though not necessarily "great") performances time and again at a variety of trips and on different goings will have no problem whatsoever in making their case.

When discussing "greatness" - of a horse as opposed to a one-off performance - that surely has to count for a lot also.
.....

Fortunately, Sea The Stars' Arc win did not have too much of the "what if" about it. The best horse won and most of the speculation surrounds how much better he might have won under different circumstances or on another day.

I had my own "what if" scenario the day before, however, when One Way Or Another ran in my colours in a quite a valuable 7f handicap at Newmarket. He was beaten by just a head, and, who knows, he might have won if the pace had been a bit stronger, the going a bit softer, or if Newmarket had filled in The Dip the night before. He should get a chance to make amends before the season is out, possibly in a £40,000 handicap at Doncaster on the last day of the turf campaign.

Nonetheless, in his own little way, One Way Or Another's personal-best Timeform rating of 102 seemed a massive achievement. It confirms him as "useful" in Timeform parlance and puts him, by my reckoning, somewhere around 600th in the list of horses by rating and just inside the top 10% in the horse population.

He only has another 38 lb and 599 places to go to be up there with Sea The Stars.....

Comments (3)

1. Sammy da Bull | 06 October 2009

   LAME! Considering his position in the race - its a wonder he won by 2L. And consider he was eased up the last 50m.

   Winning margins are irrelevant. Horses need to win - whether it be a nose or a straight - a win is a win. Its how the run is that should be considered ie. interference.

   So his Timeform should reflect the position he came from and that he was eased up last 50m.

   This race itself is proof the Timeform Ratings is flawed.

2. Robin Keck | 07 October 2009

   I'm in danger of being sexist but when someone used to say they didn't find a Sharon Stone (just an example) attractive I'd always want to ask "surely you mean in a room full of top models you don't think she's THAT attractive?". Mr Rowlands seems to be only qualifying the greatness of this performance not suggesting it wasn't still pretty amazing.

   p.s. I don't agree Sea The Stars was 'eased up' in the last 50 metres. I'd need to watch the tape again but to these eyes he was either stopping or idling but I doubt Kinane would have risked easing a horse in the Arc.

3. Simon Rowlands | 07 October 2009

   I should point out that I am writing on my own behalf and not on Timeform's. That has always been the case.

   I have long been a believer in quantifying results through analysis of how those results are arrived at, rather than just through the results themselves.

   Doing that, through sectional analysis, with the Arc would almost certainly not make Sea The Stars many lengths better than the result.

   But that seems irrelevant, other than when considering this race in isolation, as he had already proved that he was capable of that.

   One of the dangers of lauding Sea The Stars' Arc win to the skies is that it will be easy for subsequent generations to pick holes in the form.

   They should instead concentrate on his wins in the Eclipse and Irish Champion and on his consistency and versatility.