The last three runners matter little as they lacked class and ability. The first four over the line could almost have finished in any order. No real excuses for any of them although favourite Just Terms ($2.50) was held up momentarily a couple of times. Still, thats its bag and box 5 did not help. Its the way it has always raced.

However, all four winners ran slower time than in their heats or in one race earlier than that by 1.5 to 3.5 lengths. All of them. Its a lot to expect from stayers coming off a 7-day break to be at their best.

A further note: good starts were not particularly relevant. All runners ran first sections that were pretty much the same as they usually did. Except that Just Terms ran a bit faster than usual 4.99 v 5.05 and 5.06.

PS: The Watchdog did not put the winner, record breaker and second youngest competitor, Heres Tears, in his first four picks. Funny, that, but it was a difficult race to tip in.

PS2: Four of the ten dogs originally listed were sired by import Kinloch Brae. Does that mean anything?

As I have written before, you are just not seeing it and/or feeling it. Have you had your eyes checked lately?

You are wasting your time...he doesn't know what he is talking about

Bruce, your CHERRY-PICKING again.......otherwise you would have reported on the most recent HT/FNL Group 3 DISTANCE race, the "Summer Distance Plate" which was at Wentworth Park just 5 weeks ago.....But that's right, it's doesn't suit your argument.

Incased you missed it, here are the results.

Heat 1 Blazing Cartier - 42.25
Heat 2 Blue Moon Rising - 42.19

Final
1st True Detective - 41.87 (6 lengths faster than last week).
2nd Blue Moon Rising - 42.05 (2 lengths faster than last week).
3rd Blue Summer Sky - 42.33 (5 lengths faster than last week).
4th Just Terms - 42.37 (1 length slower than last week).
5th Blazing Cartier - 42.44 (checked on first corner and lost over 10 lengths, so time is very creditable).
6th Weblec Eagles - 42.55 (3 lengths faster than last week).
7th China O'Brien - 42.85 (1.5 lengths slower than last week).
8th Show Me Confetti - Still can't break 43 sec.

PS.....Paw note only 6 days between Heat (Sat) & Final (Fri), not the usual 7 days.

Rediculous post, my father always taught me that I should never knock a champion as I would end up with egg on my face, they have a habbit of making that happen.

Quite so. Some can, some can't, some are beaten by circumstances. It is not an exact science but the Super Stayers was pretty fairly run.

The True Detective run and time at Wenty was a bit of a surprise (SP of $5.50). And it did run poorly a week later at Meadows. I still think it is optimised at 650m or so but I guess you have to race where the money is.

The next two at Wenty did what they normally do - or in the range.

You are right Simon

He is definitely trolling different topics to labour the same point which he has proven wrong many times

Its a pathetic way to gain recognition

Bruce,,, just my thoughts, I don't expect a reply but will check back in a few days.

PS Michael,,,, LOVED your link...
Cheers
Rich.

Rich,

Old Torn isn't interested in anything but his own breakfast.
It's clear he now just wants to fish because his credentials have long been blown out of the water.

Like sands through the hour glass, or in Torn's case, like track sand still pouring out his ear, these are the sad days of his life.

You list a number of perfectly valid points couldnt agree more. In fact, I would add that the average dog or any dog cannot be expected to perform like a robot. Different circumstances and natural variations are normal and common.

Similarly, a batsman cannot be expected to score 100 every time he goes out, nor a golfer to hit 65 every time. But we do expect him to have the opportunity to do that. Is that true of distance dogs?

We have long had the ability to assess how far a dog can go before running out of puff whether 400m, 500m, 600m, 700m etc. Trainers do that every day. But the longer the trip the fewer that can do it. We also know that dogs (and humans) require time off to replenish their juices the actual time may well be argued and there will be differences from one dog to another. That will be affected by their fitness, physiology, metabolism and keenness to chase.

Even so, the daily racing scene is littered with dogs which give up the ghost on the home turn or soon after. They have had enough.

My point has always been the same; the evidence shows that some can repeat the 700m run and some cant. Its not an exact science but I suggested roughly one third and two thirds, resp. Moreover, it applies to both mugs and top notchers. I gave the examples of Space Star, Xylia Allen and No Donuts, all essentially leaders and therefore not normally subject to interference, but back-up failures nonetheless. They told us that the petrol tank is not quickly refilled.

I made a few comments about the Super Stayers a fine contest, thrilling finish, good starts, no excuses, difficult race to tip on, etc but 1.5 to 3.5 lengths slower. So be it. Would the results be any different if they put them up again? I doubt it; they all got a pretty fair run. Perhaps the finishing order but not the overall times.

There are always uncertainties about any race but when you insert a non-racing element recovering ability you make life that much harder again. On top of which, there is a welfare aspect to consider. Will the dog over-exert itself in trying to find the bunny? It does happen. Boomeroo with a near-death win in the Nationals over a decade ago. 90% of runners in the old style Marathons over 900m, where their post-race careers were shot to pieces. Or maybe others we never hear about.

14 days might be inconvenient for some but 7 days is a risk. Is it worth it?

It is time to draw a line under it as the same people discussing the same thing and making the same comments get us nowhere and you don't have to be a genius to know the thread is or has ended up the same way.

This thread will now be frozen as will any more started on the same topic within the next 6 months.