in horse racing, being wrong can provide positive data.

​Yes, I got the King George ever-so-slightly wrong. It is what unites all of us who avidly follow horse racing. No one, not even Tom Segal or Paul Kealy or any of the superstar tipsters and analysts, are right more than 50% of the time. Of course, when one of them is on a good run of winners or tip a long-priced winner, it is trumpeted loud and clear. Yet winning streaks are in fact rarities and long-priced winners even rarer, so the bold type is perhaps a natural reaction by editors and t.v. presenters; akin to when detectorists dig up a large haul of Roman coins or Saxon gold. The general public never get to hear of the Victorian broach or the Cavalier’s broken spur that represents a ‘good story for the finds table’, though does nothing to extend our knowledge of British history.
Even someone with only a modest record of finding winners find winners occasionally. I, though, will not trumpet tipping Thyme Hill at Kempton when all the celebrity tipsters wrote him off and I certainly will make no claim that this rare occasion when I got something right makes me the equal of greater men. I simply stood by the best horse in the race even though he was proving slow at learning the craft of jumping a steeplechase fence. Class will out, as they say.
Of course, I was overly bold in my prediction that L’Homme Presse would win the King George and will not insult your intelligence by claiming he might or should have won. Bravemansgame ran out an impressive winner and even if L’Homme Presse had jumped straight it would be stretching credulity to think the result would have been different. No one could have predicted that as bold and efficient jumper as L’Homme Presse undoubtedly has shown us in every previous race would lose ground at nearly every fence running right-handed. But he did, didn’t he? And did anyone give any consideration for such an occurrence happening? I thought not.
Before Kempton, I had L’Homme Presse down as the most likely British-trained horse to win the Cheltenham Gold Cup this season. My belief is battered, though my conviction remains unbowed and the next run of Galopin de Champ may batter it some more. Cheltenham will, fingers crossed, play to the main strength of L’Homme Presse, his stamina. My fear at this moment is that something physical was amiss at Kempton and that once it materialises Venetia Williams will have no other option than to pull sticks for the season.
In my defence, what wrong-footed me when assessing the King George was the Clerk of the Course confidently predicting soft-to-heavy ground, when in fact the ground raced on was genuinely good-to-soft. I doubted if Paul Nicholls would have run Bravemansgame if the word ‘heavy’ had appeared in the going description, given he pulled the horse out of Cheltenham last season due to ‘soft’ appearing in the going description. And, and here I am grasping at the last vestige of my credibility, if he had not shimmied Charley Deutch out of the saddle at the last fence, L’Homme Presse would have finished a quite close second to a very good chaser better suited to Kempton than Cheltenham. Belief must be bolstered by evidence and since Boxing Day the evidence case-file has become a little light. L’Homme Presse believers will be praying for a wet Mid-March.
At least Frodon, the horse that never lets you down, ran into a place, as I equally boldly predicted.
The question I would like answered by ‘the experts’ is this: in lengths, how superior is Honeysuckle to Epatante? I am going to put forward 6-lengths, though as Honeysuckle only seemingly does all that is required of her, who can be certain that it doesn’t extend to 10 or 12-lengths. I doubt if anyone would tip J.P. McManus’s fine mare to ever beat Honeysuckle. So, here is the thing; if Honeysuckle is 6-lengths better than Epatante (oh, and was she ridden at Kempton to beat Constitution Hill or simply to beat everything else?) and Honeysuckle (unfairly, in my eyes) will be in receipt of 7lbs at Cheltenham, that puts the mare on the tail of Constitution Hill, at the very least, at the last hurdle. As brilliant as Constitution Hill is, and he might be even better as a chaser, I do not believe, at this stage with all the present evidence to hand, he is the shoo-in the betting suggests. In fact, in terms of value, Honeysuckle is the bet of the decade at 10/1.
And yes, none of us know, not even Nico de Boinville, the true extent of Constitution Hill’s ability. Both State Man and Vauban look genuine Champion Hurdle horses, better horses than anything Honeysuckle has yet beaten at Cheltenham, and Willie Mullins could run one or two pace-makers in hope of getting Constitution Hill into a scrap at a time of the race when so far he is hardly out of second gear.
To my mind, Constitution Hill is not Sprinter Sacre. Not yet. He might be Sprinter’s equal. He might become his superior. He might be the Arkle of our time. But he isn’t there yet and shouldn’t be spoken-of, or backed, as if he is. The 2023 Champion Hurdle is no one-horse race. Not by a long chalk.
I, though, cannot even boast of a 50% record of having my thoughts born out as correct on the racecourse.
I am even beginning to believe that Gary Moore’s Desert Orchid Chase winner, Editeur de Gite (have I spelt that right – I have no amplitude or liking for the French language) is a decent bet for the Champion Chase if the ground comes up soft. I’m not even sure Edwardstown would have beaten him at Kempton if he had not unshipped Tom Cannon.