I think a couple of these comments should be placed gently into a box entitled visceral!!
Clearly when So You Think got unbalanced, it cost him two lengths, maybe even five, which of course should then be rounded up to ten; Additionally, because it was a small field, because it was a ten furlong race, because it was fairly fast ground, and because the Stoute yard were ever so slightly in the doldrums, it was heavily evident that Workforce had everything in his favour on Saturday and that should be easily worth another five lengths; Then you have to factor in that So You Think appeared to give a mid-race piggyback to a unicorn, which let’s face it, probably cost him another twenty lengths. Plus, despite the visual element suggesting something entirely different, I think we can take it on face-value that So You Think won with any amount in hand, given that connections almost always underplay their statements to the media.
In reality then, we can comfortably conclude that So You Think actually won the Eclipse by thirty five lengths on the snaff and I think we can all agree that he was no more than 20% fit when doing so; Superstar status indeed franked!!

What's funny is that a half-length defeat, and you go from an equine god, to a modest Group 3 yak; Then a half-length victory and your back to the greatest animal ever to grace a racetrack. I don’t think it’s at all a case of the Racing Post having a sizable Workforce fan base, but simply a case of the racing fraternity being split between those who walk around with ‘I SYT’ t-shirts on, and those that are bored to death by the hyperbole that surrounds the O’Brien inmate. Maybe the Ballydoyle theory is that if you say something enough times, it will become true, but to quote someone far more verbose than I, “all that glitters is not gold “.
If connections had cut down on the aggrandising, I can't help but feel people would have been more willing to embrace a hugely talented horse for what he is, but the constant spoon-feeding of superiority, while simultaneously brushing the latest fallen idol under the carpet, will always antagonise and alienate in an opinionated arena.
I actually thought that the race on Saturday was a good one, and that it probably resulted in a win-win scenario given the performances that both horses posted. I echo the dislike of pacemakers, but it should be said that Fortune nailed the pre-race tactics, and Confront was used as effectively as any pacemaker I have seen for a good few seasons. The interesting aspect of the Eclipse, and the part I probably have a problem with, is that it points to Rewilding as being top banana. A line through Sri Putra suggests that So You Think wasn’t undercooked at Ascot, something I think most of us knew anyway; The Godolphin charge is still a lightly raced four year old, so it would be folly to suggest So You Think has improvement to come, yet Rewilding doesn’t and if you make the argument that So You Think took it up too soon at the Royal meeting, you equally have to accept that the same argument can be made about the events that transpired on Saturday. Either all three horses are roughly the same, ability wise, and thus could just as easily win as lose, on any given day, over both ten and twelve furlongs, or that the Prince Of Wales winner has improved to become the top middle distance horse in training, in which case why is he not a stupidly short priced favourite for the King George, given the current favourite was so readily left trailing by Midday at Epsom, a filly who isn't exactly known for lightning quick acceleration.
PS & FYI, such is the difference between both the Derby and the Arc, compared to other top middle distances contests regards European bloodstock, that it would actually be more apt to compare the stud value of a BC winner to a horse that merely placed in an Arc, rather than one who landed the Paris showpiece.

lol What was the winning distance translated into unicorn lengths?

Is it possible that Sri Putra has ran the race of his life? And So You Think has actually posted a better performance even though Sri Putra was slightly closer?

you talk alot of sense DB
in a round about sort of way
but i like it

well sumed up with a side of jazz

think rewilding is under rated though he will give workforce a run for his money in KG

have to ask how did you no what i was wearing

It's a hard one to completely quantify, but if you take the pacemakers out of the equation, at Ascot Sri Putra finished ahead of both Planteur and Twice Over, and at Sandown he finished ahead of Snow Fairy. I think we can all agree that Snow Fairy and Twice Over respectively, failed to fire for differing reasons, leaving Planteur as the only possible gauge. While he didn't run close to the figure posted in the Ganay, he did perform to enough of a level that supports the run of the Varian runner via his proximity. Using that as a base for the figures clocked by Sri Putra in both runs, which were very similar on the whole and tie-in with his performance in the 2010 Eclipse, in my opinion, there is enough credence for Sri Putra to be utilised as both a yardstick for further analysis and as a backbone to the figures posted by So You Think.
I'm not quite caught up yet, so not sure what the official ratings conclude, but on my figures, I have So You Think running to 126 at Ascot and 127 at the weekend (which would be semi-expected given he got taken into the race far more so, than in the Prince Of Wales), with Sri Putra running to the same mark of 117 in both. Workforce performed to a mark of 126, three pound lower than his high of 129, but that's understandable given that both his standout performances were achieved when covered up in big fields over twelve furlongs. It was only a one pound improvement on his Brigadier Gerard run of 125, which I guess is slightly disappointing given that greater improvement was expected, but both the ground and the nature of the race could have been factors as to why that was so. As for the Godolphin inmate, he posted 122 for his Sheema Classic success and duly built on that with a 127 in the Prince Of Wales.
I guess the crux to the thesis would be, that the difference in performance, from Ascot to Sandown should have been far greater than just one pound, if the horse was indeed 'undercooked' at the Royal meeting. Given that it wasn't, I'd suggest the 'undercooked' statement was nothing more than damage limitation to a valuable asset. As a result, my answers to the above would have to be very unlikely on both counts!!

Well, its hard to argue with that. Only thing I would disagree with is your rating of the Brigadier run, I think a rating of 114 flatters Poet and as he is the only angle to rate that race on, I cant have Workforce running any higher than 121 there, at most 122. So in my book, he has improved 4 or 5 pounds on that run and in doing so posted one of the best performances of his short career. Its likely that he can do a bit better on soft ground but looking at the winners Australian form, soft ground would not hinder him in the slightest and he won with enough in hand for me to think he would beat Workforce on soft at that trip. 1m4 on soft is maybe a different story, but maybe not. Workforce is not a slow horse, he stays well but its not as if he is an out and out galloper with no turn of foot and the 1m2 is too sharp for him. Possibly a bigger field where he dosent have to go to the front 4 out is more important than the extra 2 furlongs.

workforce a rogue allright all over the place sad to see rewilding finish up like that

Workforce was injured during the race...