Did form for those races the other day for a mate who loves his Cup doubles, so thought I'd share it with you all. Posted this in another thread, thought I'd put it here too for people to see if they want to take doubles.

Good luck all:

On the ********************.com figures, this is what I found for the horses I liked:

Accumulate - will peak at 119, has 50 both Cups. I like it over the 3200, I reckon at this point it looks very hard to beat. Rated 114 the other day, that was a stayers run for SURE. Trainer knows something about the big race too....

Confectioner - peak probably 122, very well in Caulfield Cup with 52.5. If he does 122 in Caul (rated 117 1st up winning, natural 122 peak then on the 5 point theory), if he does 122 in Caul with 52.5, he wins it.

Vouvray - will peak at 118, has 51.5 both Cups. Keen on her in Caulfield too. 118 will go very, very close with 51.5. Obviously set for it, goes well there.

Dizelle - will peak at 119, has 51.5 both Cups, better suited the Melbourne Cup, pretty sure she'll do 119 there, however gives Accumulate 1.5 kgs.

M.Diva - 126, but with 58 kgs I reckon she'll get beat. In fact, I don't reckon she'll run in the melbourne. If she does, I think they've stopped her. However, she's almost over the line in the Cox. There's only one horse that can beat her: Super Kid from Hong Kong. On the ******************** ratings he has rated solid 120's over there and has once gone 125. That's massive. Makye Diva is the best in Aus with 126, the next best currently racing is only about 123 or less. Might even be 120 now with Grand Armee retired.

Lotteria - has a 120 coming someday. That puts her in most Cox plates very nicely (54.5 kgs WFA 4yo mare), however this year's could rate very high and her 120 might still get beat!

That's my thoughts.

Cheers.

At first glance, I'm not keen on Accumulate's form & think he's not classy enough for the Cups. St Leger form is generally iffy, & had no real form around quality opps before that. Personally I wouldnt project its ratings to 119 just yet. Point taken about the trainer though, if it starts stringing together 114's in the lead-up the Cup....you never know.

At the moment I'm a Vouvray fan & also Wild Iris. Both these two have been given plenty of time to mature. Look at Vouvray's WFA form, only 2 to 4 lengths of the nations very best. Did a faster final 200m in the CC last year than Diva. Personally I think the MC is a better target for her.

Ditto Wild Iris. I was quite taken with her 3yo form. Huge finishing sprint & will get 3200m easy. Touch wood she seems to have come back well & Walter is just flying atm. Some rain wouldnt hurt either

How about Xcellent, you have any kiwi figures? Made up huge ground first-up in a race where the leaders kept going strong to line. Forget his Derby run altogether.

Interesting to here about Super Kid's quality....consistently in the 120's??? Experience on Strathayre too.

Yep do have Xcellent form - that rating was a 114 the other day, suggesting he has a 119 coming. Certainly a good rating but I do think there's plenty of 119 horses in the mix with less weight than him. I know he's only got 53 or 54 or whatever it is but Vouvray will peak at 118 (has 51.5), Dizelle will peak at 119 (has 51.5), Confectioner has a peak between 119 and 122 (hard to gage given he's now a Hayes horse, may therefore be a 122, would've been a 119 if still McEvoy) and he has 52.5. Xcellent is an excellent horse (boom boom!) but people are going overboard calling him a champion etc already. Starcraft came out of the same race last year and didn't win the Cox plate. I know Starcraft won overseas etc but point is it's easy to beat moderate horses well. 119 is an excellent rating (boom boom again!) and will win Group 1's though, but whether it wins the elite group 1's is another matter. I think not myself with the weight he has.

Super Kid, super horse!! He rated 120 behind Barely A Moment, first up in Australia, that says something on it's own, and pretty much proves the HK ratings right.

Agree with your prognosis of Wild Iris and Vouvray. Wild Iris certainly has the ability too, however she only rated 112 winning her Oaks which means the has a 117 coming. She has hit around 112 a couple of times since too, what weight does she have in the Cups? She wouldn't want to have more than Vouvray because on ********************'s ratings Vouvray looks a point superior.

Hey by the way - been meaning to post this - Xcellent went 114 in that race 1st up, Starcraft the year before went 117, so comparisons are unfair, Starcraft is clearly the superior horse. Starcraft also went 117 a number of times in Aus, including in the AJC Derby, I would suggest he's going 122's over there at the moment, including tonight where he just won the QEII.

So, again, Xcellent's 114 doesn't really compare to Starcraft's 117 same race prev year.

Clown

Yosman
Yosman, I see you rated all your selections in the 'Yosman's Best Bets' thread yesterday. Congratulations on coming out of the closet.

Wun

yozman must have had a bad day on the punt, or maybe he's a st george supporter , THERE ALL WINGERS

Permaban this tool

Yosman I did say who I thought would win, right at the start of this thread. In fact, that was the POINT of this thread. It was a thread for - pay attention now - who I thought would win the Cups and the Cox plate using the ********** ratings. Didn't you see that bit at the start?

Since then, Accumulate has broken down. (How many Cummings stayers break down???). So, keener on Dizelle now.

Yozman I read in your other thread that you're a uni student/pizzaboy. I am going to assume that you don't therefore have any experience with ratings. You just s**tcanned them in this thread, but you may not know anything about them. I'll quickly tell you why they're not the rubbish you seem to think they are:

Ratings are a means of quantifying how good or bad a horse is. Each run receives a figure which represents how good or bad it is. So on one day one 3yo in Melbourne may win impressively etc etc and one may win impressively in Sydney. We of course want to know which was better when they line up next time. The rating tells you that. When I say "it rated 122, wa wa wa", and the other horse "rated 120, wa wa wa", then the 122 is a length better. They line up at level weights next time, I'm on the 122 horse, all else being equal.

Ratings aren't something you should pour vitriol upon like you did earlier in the thread. I have no idea why you'd need to do that - all they are is a tool to do the form, to attempt to quantify a horse's ability. You said in your other thread that El Segundo was a good thing last Friday night because it was coming back from carrying WFA 57.5 kgs behind Lad of the Manor et al to carrying 52.5 against those listed horses, and it duly won. I agreed that it was a good thing because in that race behind Lad et al it had rated 117. The best rating by any horse in the JRA outside of El Segundo was 113 (on memory) and they all had to give him weight. We came to the same conclusion, just two different ways.

I hope you don't harbour some grudge towards rating methods, because it really is a good way to do the form.

Cheers.

Oh and keep backing El Segundo.