Simon Rowlands: Freshman sires for a fresh new Flat season

Ante-post / Simon Rowlands / 29 March 2011 / 9

" class="free_bet_btn" rel="external" onclick="javascript: pageTracker._trackPageview('/G4/inline-freebet');" target="_blank">

Unbeaten dual Group 1 winner Teofilo (right) should have a large first-crop running this year.

Our blogger looks for guidance in the First-season sire market and explains some crucial alterations to the draw in Britain...

The more eagle-eyed among you might have noticed a recent addition to the Betfair horseracing options, namely a market on the leading first-season sire under the "Breeding & Bloodstock" heading. If you have an elephantine memory to go with your eagle eyes, you may remember that I even managed to tip the winner Iffraaj at 8.0 in this 12 months ago.

But I digress. The criteria for this market are fairly simple and can be found on the "Rules" tab next to the market. If nothing else, a bet on the leading first-season sire market could well give you an interest on most days of the remainder of the year.

I have already backed Teofilo, based on his high yearling sale average and large number of named offspring, and managed small lays of a few others. One of those, Dylan Thomas, made a good start with a winner with his first runner at Dundalk last Friday.

But I am a mere novice in bloodstock matters compared to a few people I know, so I asked them for their views. More specifically, I asked them for one to be "for" and one to be "against" from near the top of the market.

The winner will be the one with the highest number of wins once "against" has been subtracted from "for", and they will get a £100 donation from me to the charity of their choice. This is what they came up with:

Sid Fernando (US-based international bloodstock journalist): FOR Amadeus Wolf; AGAINST Teofilo.

Janet Hickman (former chief bloodstock writer of Racing Post): FOR Dylan Thomas; AGAINST Teofilo.

John Ingles (Timeform's pedigrees guru): FOR Dark Angel; AGAINST Dylan Thomas.

Emma Berry (Bloodstock editor of Thoroughbred Owner & Breeder): FOR Amadeus Wolf; AGAINST Dylan Thomas.

Stephen Heath (Formerly of Timeform, now of Newsells Park): FOR Red Clubs; AGAINST Dutch Art.

James Willoughby (former chief correspondent of Racing Post): FOR Dark Angel; AGAINST Dylan Thomas.

I think we would all agree that we are looking for a good blend of precocity, some speed, and plenty of opportunity. It's just that we seem to differ quite a bit on where that is to be found in what looks the most open market for years!

If you have any opinions, you can post them below or back them up with cash on the market itself.

...

I received a phone call from the BHA the other day. My initial disappointment that it was not to offer me the vacant position as their independent director was soon replaced with pleasure at speaking with the organisation's director of raceday regulation, Jamie Stier.

Stier comes across as plain-talking and logical, and he does not seem to mind taking time out of his busy schedule to address the concerns of those who might not necessarily share his vision. I began to wonder what he was doing working for the BHA at all.

His phone call was a follow-up to remind me that new rules come into place this turf Flat season regarding the draw and to alert me to the issue of another press release to this end. As from 30 March 2011, stalls in the UK will be numbered with the lowest nearest to the inside rail, whereas they used to be numbered from left (low) to right (high) if you were standing behind the stalls and facing the finish, regardless of the orientation of the track.

In order to establish where the "inside rail" is, it has been necessary to define whether a track is left-handed or right-handed, despite some of them (such as Newmarket's July and Rowley Mile courses) being far from obvious.

The following courses have been defined as right-handed (with the remainder left-handed): Ascot; Beverley; Carlisle; Folkestone; Goodwood; Hamilton; Kempton; Leicester; Musselburgh; Newmarket (July and Rowley Mile); Ripon; Salisbury; Sandown; and Windsor.

The intention is to bring British racing into line with most of the rest of the world, but it will not ensure that "low is best" in all circumstances, as some have assumed. For instance, high numbers will be nearest the stand rail on the straight course at Ascot (and possibly advantaged in some instances) as that course is right-handed at longer trips. You have at least been told.

Ultimately, it is likely to make little difference to punters as long as they know what has changed and when. It may even make British racing a little more comprehensible abroad.

In the words of Ten CC, "communication is the problem to the answer", and, in this instance at least, Stier and the BHA deserve credit for doing everything that was required of them, if not more.

'.$sign_up['title'].'

'; } } ?>

(9)

Alan Mosley | 29 March 2011

Expecting a good season for Dark Angel and Excellent Art, though pretty sure Teofilo will be the best longer term prospect. Lawman, as a son of top 2yo sire Invincible Spirit, is a decent long shot.
Alan Mosley | 29 March 2011

Expecting a good season for Dark Angel and Excellent Art, though pretty sure Teofilo will be the best longer term prospect. Lawman, as a son of top 2yo sire Invincible Spirit, is a decent long shot.
Nigel | 29 March 2011

Really can't agree about the draw changes.

Firstly, it beggars belief that anyone turned up at the BHA offices one morning and decided that the most important thing to do today was change the way stalls were numbered. Evidently idle hands are indeed the devil's tools.

The stipulation that the inside stall will be left empty whenever possible is flawed. If the space is important change the safety limit, if it isn't why bother with it? The same thing often happens in athletics where either the inside lane should be considered usable or not: it's either fair or unfair.

And if this is truly about making British racing more appealing to overseas markets, then the more logical thing to have done would have been to match the saddlecloth numbers to the stalls position in the manner of the US, Australia and UAE.

Surely the obstacle to newcomers is in having to consider an unnecessary set of numbers, rather than wondering which side stall 1 is on: a large plaque in plain view is an adequate pointer on that score. Perhaps above all, that could have been done with few, if any, implications for historical results data, unlike the changes which have been made.
Simon Rowlands | 29 March 2011

Alan above is from Weatherbys Bloodstock and very much an expert in his own right. I have given him a supplementary entry of FOR Dark Angel and AGAINST Dutch Art.

I will permit one more supplementary entry taken at random from anyone posting a comment on this blog before April 2nd, giving a for-and-against combination not covered above and a brief bio of themselves (e.g. "bus driver and punter").

In the event of a tie (for instance, James Willoughby and John Ingles have gone for the same selections) I will devise a bloodstock-based tiebreak.

Simon
Simon Rowlands | 29 March 2011

Many thanks, Nigel.

I am not sure who it is you "really can't agree" with. Most of your points concern matters not mentioned specifically by me in my blog.

I, too, saw little need to change how things were, regarding draw numbering, though people with experience of racing elsewhere in the world see things differently. I would also agree with you that racecard numbering should correspond with draw.

But, given that things are going to change, I would still argue that "ultimately, it is likely to make little difference to punters as long as they know what has changed and when. It may even make British racing a little more comprehensible abroad."

The BHA, and Jamie Stier in particular, have gone to great lengths to inform people "what has changed and when" in this matter.

There is an onus on those in the media - me included - to publicise this important information also. I hope the media does not let the public down.

The BHA has been criticised for "not consulting punters" in this matter. But the problem here lies with there being no formal process for doing that. Talking to the likes of me, after the decision had already been made, is no substitute.

The BHA should, in my view, work on punter consultation and communication. But that is a much wider issue altogether than the one immediately at hand.

Simon
Nigel | 30 March 2011

Just for clarity, I was disagreeing with...

"Ultimately, it is likely to make little difference to punters as long as they know what has changed and when. It may even make British racing a little more comprehensible abroad."

I do think it makes a difference to punters and I don't think it really addresses the problem of accessibility, or at least addresses it in the best way.
Simon Rowlands | 30 March 2011

Just for clarity, by "ultimately" I meant "in the fullness of time" or "eventually". And by "little" difference I meant "little difference" rather than none.

Any punter not already recoding draw details to take into account back-to-front draws and modification as a result of non-runners is fooling themself. Now, they also need to be aware of the nature and date of the change described above.

It will make little difference - ultimately - and perhaps that is the main argument in favour of it, or of leaving things as they are, depending on your take on things.

Would you like to enter my first-season sire competition?!?
The Buzz King | 01 April 2011

Nigel, i believe the main reason for the inside stall to be left empty in future is to allow handlers access to stalls on either side of the inside horse if/when it gives trouble.
Simon Rowlands | 02 April 2011

There is one final supplementary to the Freshman's sire competition, from Kevin Sommerville of Juddmonte, who has gone 'for' Dutch Art and 'against' Teofilo.

That makes an octet of bloodstock titans scrapping it out until the season in Ireland ends on December 16th.

I will post updates as the season progresses.

Simon