IRISH BLOODSTOCK FORUMS :: View topic - DANCING RAIN

Enzed»Fri Jun 03, 2011 15:37 pm
Yes Mill Reef, Dancing Rain's dam is a 3/4 sister to Dewhurst/Derby winner Dr Devious (as Indian Ridge is by Ahonoora, sire of the Dr)......... the damline has Robt Sangster's fingers all over it - granddam Roses Red was bred by Robt who owned her dam Cambrienne. Besides breeding Dr Devious, he also bred SHINKO KING (by Fairy King) who has stood @ stud out here in (NZ) and is a very good sire who leaves tough stock and has bred (amongst other SWs) both a NZ Derby winner (can't recall his name, ) and an NZ Oaks winner Bramble Rose (trained by Mark Todd) Reply

Oreally»Fri Jun 03, 2011 17:13 pm
You are correct - all Robert Sangsters breeding and what do you know - DANCING RAIN was bred by Sweetenham Stud too ! Reply

daraabah»Sat Jun 04, 2011 3:12 am
Rose Of Jericho is also dam of Irish stallion Archway who stood here in Aust getting Oaks winners Grand Archway, Rose Archway and She's Archie. Reply

Valerie»Sat Jun 04, 2011 5:43 am
My goodness. So many Oaks winners. As far as I remember ARCHWAY was a SPRINTER over here! Reply

TOPOFTHEHILL»Sat Jun 04, 2011 7:30 am
Its always very hard to compare races but looking at the times and the ratings of the Coronation Cup and Oaks the classic was a very poor class renewal. It is always hasty to make these decisions so close to the race but if you think Dancing Rain is very good then St Nicholas Abbey is probably on my calculations 25 or 26 lbs better at WFA, thats a very very long way. I only make this comparison because Midday was not far behind SNA and her Oaks form was far far better than that of Dancing Rain. You would have to say that the great disappointment was Blue Bunting, but I have always said that Dettori rides Epsom very badly and unbalances horses. I think his riding has been in decline for a couple of seasons but is even more noticable this season. Blue Bunting ran about 10 lbs worse than in the Guineas, and equal level of form would have more or less won her the race yesterday and she was supposed to improve for the trip. Sceptics will argue that Dettori rode well in the first but don't kid yourself. Apart from Timepiece who was about 6 lbs behind the winner, the winner was so well in it would have been hard to loose. Reply

Red Light»Sun Jun 05, 2011 7:01 am
All DANCING RAIN could do was win the Oaks. I laugh when commentators 'knock' her for not winning it by a longer margin/quicker time etc. Give us a break. She went out to win and she won. Wait for another day to rate her overall ability, please. Reply

TOPOFTHEHILL»Sun Jun 05, 2011 7:46 am
Red Light you have a very distorted view on the above comments. It was merely an attempt to place the performance in context. She won the Oaks, She is a classic winner, it was a fine piece of race riding no one is knocking. Much was made in the media just before the race that this was a very good oaks field and that it was likely to produce a high class renewal. The facts appear to suggest this was NOT the case. That was all the post was intended to illustrate. Reply

MYOPI»Sun Jun 05, 2011 10:08 am
Of Course TOTH you are right in what you say but I also think Red Light has a good point. A Classic winner is what DANCING RAIN will be remembered for and not her rating . Anyway that rating will change as the season goes on. For instance, yesterday I think I heard POUR MOI was rated 122 compared to WORKFORCE 128 last year. That is hard to swollow. The reason apparently is because he only won by a head. They do not seem to take into account that perhaps on Derby Day ALL the first five/six finishers are going to run the race of their lives and to best ever ratings. . Reply

TOPOFTHEHILL»Sun Jun 05, 2011 11:57 am
What you say in defence of Red Light is true Myopi but as someone on the Racing forum said this morning, I was merely making an interesting observation. IS THAT NOT ALLOWED! I am of course quoting Red Light. It is perfectly possible that the first 5 home in the Derby were well above average but it is equally unlikely. Where I think the handicapper has got it wrong is to rate Pour Moi based on his head victory. If it is possible and I believe it is he won very well by a head. His ratings would also be based on the muddling trials and the fact that Native Khan was so far behind Frankel in the Guineas. Handicapping is a very imperfect science and you have to hang your ratings on what you have got. Times Distances relative and collateral form. ITs no good waiting until this works out at the end of the season if you are going to take a stake for or against a horse the next time it runs. By making comparisons and judgements NOW you may just be able to come out on top. I have not done my work on the Derby because I have shortcommings about the distance it was run over in relation to the Coronation Cup but I might suggest that the winner was not at all suited by the track and his early position andhis position through most of the race indicates that he was superior to the field by much more than a head. This is what history and experience tells you, if you like he was like Dancing Brave except he managed to win. Reply

TOPOFTHEHILL»Sun Jun 05, 2011 12:05 pm
Unfortunately Myopi everyone is not as generous as you and without any attempt to prejudice what Dancing Rain achieved yesterday or the admirable performance of her jockey and trainer she may not simply be remembered as an Oaks winner. Again without wishing to take away anything from the achievement how is the Trainers Derby winner remembered. (probably the worst Derby Winner in recent times). Reply

MYOPI»Sun Jun 05, 2011 13:52 pm
Yes ofcourse you are allowed make an interesting observation! Your interesting observations brighten my day! If we all thought the same and agreed all the time there would be little point on having these discussions. So what if someone gets a bit hot and goes OTT ? That is what happens everywhere and keeps us all alert, yes? I have found I have - on several occasions - 'changed my mind' on a subject from reading others opinions on these Forums. Sometimes I even agree with you !!! Reply

TOPOFTHEHILL»Sun Jun 05, 2011 15:20 pm
I couldn't agree more Myopi actually everyone must realise that I could get in to an argument with myself. I certainly don't take any comment personally (too thick anyway), but if forum members say one thing and do another they will get reminded about it. No one who has an opinion worth anything has never changed thier minds. In this breeding business it is almost an essential requirement because nothing stands still. It is very dangerous to adopt a fixed position about horses and I continually modify. I happen to think that the Oaks was a poor classic this year and the Derby better than the official handicapper but I will almost certainly have to change this view. I will in the course of the next few days meet with better judges of form and they will influence me for sure. I must admit that on occasions when the forum is a bit quiet I might deliberately throw in a few remarks that are guaranteed to get a response. Reply

Enzed»Sun Jun 05, 2011 17:01 pm
I love this way you play "he said", "She said" ......... is that what the Welsh girls in those scrums in the vallees got up to in your days ?? ........... I actually disagree with your basic premise of the CLASS of The Oaks winner. ONLY time will show whether Dancing Rain is high class / and her win in the Oaks was too. I make the mistake when assessing the merits of the winner of past Classic races by looking at the TIME RUN; it is fact that Johhny Murtagh indulged the Oaks field to a DAWDLE in front and the pace was slow with no jockey (incl Keiron Fallon who was probably on a better filly , formwise !!) willing to take Dancing Rain on in front/or increase the pace. Clever ride by Murtagh, dumb ride by Fallon; who was the better FILLY on the day? - Dancing Rain - because she WON (Wonder of Wonders had her chance but the fat conductor buggered up the ride ). Timeform can make their judgement around a table discussion. A bit of a quandary all around. I guess a lot of people will be interested to see what the respective 2 fillies go onto achieve as 3yos and 4yos.......... but at the moment, Dancing Rain has all the bragging rights Reply

Little Man»Sun Jun 05, 2011 17:57 pm
If the first three met again over 12 furlongs and somebody other than Dettori was on BLUE BUNTING then my money would be on THAT filly! Reply

TOPOFTHEHILL»Mon Jun 06, 2011 1:41 am
I can't disagree with you NZ and maybe I just don't explain myself clearly enough all I was saying was that this was not a high class Oaks I was not saying it was not a high class winner. The race was what it was she could only win, but when you assess the race you should take into consideration its CLASS. I compared it to another G1 on the same day on the same track with a runner who had won the Oaks. You seldom get such an opportunity. If Bolt won a 100 meters where the other competitors were geriatrics it wouldn't make him less of a class act. Reply

Enzed»Mon Jun 06, 2011 4:13 am
Now you and I are disagreeing again........ after all, it's only opinion (and Timeform may or may not agree with you - because of the dawdle). Bolt v's Geriatrics in 100 metre sprinting parlance - you are just in la la land & it's not a good contrast. After all we're talking Classic Age Group Grp 1, not wfa with a 3yo Bolt v's Aged Ben Johnson (who must these days have breasts the size of Mae West/Bardot) Reply

TOPOFTHEHILL»Mon Jun 06, 2011 5:14 am
I don't think we are really NZ its my lack of expression lets try it another way. The winner of a good class race is a good class horse the winner of a poor class race is NOT necessarily a poor class winner. I am saying that in my opinion the oaks was a poor quality renewal but I am NOT saying the winner was a poor class horse. Is that better. In the fullness of time we will find out her merits but that does not alter my view that the race was not TOP quality. It was in fact a very good race to watch, and one of the best pieces of race riding I have seen from the front. Waiting in front is proably the most difficult tactic to perfect. Reply

Hi Ho Silver»Wed Jun 08, 2011 4:56 am
But DID the best horse win the Oaks ? Reply

Bono 2U»Wed Jun 08, 2011 5:09 am
On the day......yes. Time and future form will determine quality. Reply