Just saw camelot got a provisional rating of 123. Thought that was a little suprising? I know it wasnt a great renewel of the Nemwarket classic but surely he deserves a higher rating than that. Aidan O' Brien plugging up every horse he has doesnt help although I do feel he's been a bit quiter about Camelot compared to to other horses. Anyway it wasnt the best guineas ever but the second horse french fifteen won the criterium last year with a bit in hand so hes beaten a group 1 winner and is the first horse in 40years to complete the RP Trophy and Guineas double so he's two timer group 1 winner already and thats only his third run.

Timeform pisses me off sometimes anyway. Dont understand how they rate Frankel higher than Sea the Stars. But thats just my own opinion

they lost all respect for their rating when they rated harbinger as highly as they did off the back of one race

Completely agree with this

Good call Zikkofly, Frankel Vs Sea The Stars - in their prime, no contest.

It's becaus he didn't win by far that he is only 123. Also, it wasn't exactly the best renewal ever. They weren't going to give him a huge rating off the back of a 1/2 length win in the guineas. And why is frankel rated higher than sea the stars? Could you really honestly see sea the tars being able to lay up with frankel for a mile? He was good, but not that good. And also harbinger, he may har ony won one group 1 but e had already won the hard woke impressively and winning the king georg by 10+ lengths beating two derby winners and the future Irish champion and Arlington million winner and the future arc winnerin the manner he did was no fluke. I think he was deserving of that rating. If you don't believe me watch the race again. Peslier could have won the race on him at a canter, but he just nudged him and away he went. I believe he didn't have to use the whip on him either.

Harbingers rating was a pure joke
Cameot will be in 130's after derby and 146 after st leger

I think the next horse to get 145 or higher will be frankel. And on that day, I believe nothing would have beaten Harbinger.

Harbingers rating was too high because it was a small field but it was still a cracking performance.

123 is a fair rating at this stage in the season when just getting home racing untested 3 year olds.

far too high it was not a great field if you take into consideration the fact that workforce ran way below par.

Sea The Stars would have walked all over Harbinger, who must go down as the most ridiculously high rated horse since ratings were given.

As for the comment about STS not being able to live with Frankel over a mile, it appears you always seem to use the mile i.e. saying Black Caviar would get killed off Frankel over a mile. You cannot do this to argue that he is a better horse, as I can comfortably say that STS would kill Frankel over 1m4f and Black Caviar would kill him over 5 and 6F.

Out of Frankel and Sea The Stars, the best performance I have seen so far is STS in the ARC - trapped against the rail with seemingly nowhere to go, miles behind the leader, commentator states that he will need to be a 'champion to win from there' and BOOM! Kinane gets him some daylight and he takes off - the horse was electric and you cannot say Frankel is better than him

i agree

Sea The Stars wasn't flashy though, he won his 6 races at 3 by a cumulative 10L. Frankel won his 5 by a cumulative 20L (over a shorter distance so theoretically should win by less of a margin).

If you equate ratings to lengths then you have to rate Frankel higher. If ratings were based on someone's opinion of how much was left in the tank then they would be pointless.

But he is.

Harbinger put up the best older horse performance in a long, long time. Rating horses is far more complex than most see it. A horse can win 5 G1's but might be inferior to a horse who didn't win one, depending on what generation they raced against. Youmzain was on the decline in the King George but he could've been beaten 20L. something which never happened to him before that race. Though it did happen in Workforce's Arc, albeit on soft.

Sea The Stars was a great horse, no doubt. But doubters could argue, who did he beat? Youmzain has already been beaten in Arcs, Conduit was an average winner of a VERY poor King George and Cavalryman?? Also the commentary as I remember it was, as usual, awful. He had 5 or 6 to make up on horses who were slowing to a walk didn't he? BUT he did quicken oh so well 3-2f out, after not having the ideal position or passage, and won in an impressive manner suggesting he was a lot better than the winning distance and his rivals. Youmzain and Conduit finishing so well did not do anything for the form imo, nor did Gosden's filly finishing so close. But as said he was much better than them. Frankel has destroyed fields and beat a previous champion with so much ease. Ok the St James' wasn't a great victory but overall his performances are far better.

Thats not actually my opinion but just an argument against. Though I did rate Harbinger's King George win highly

Yes big bucks would be rated about 300 for most of his races!
I am not saying sea the stars wasn't a great horse, he beat everything(at 3) that was put in front of him. It's just that Frankel demolished everything that was put in front of him.

Do people not understand that ratings are given for that race as a stand alone, Harbinger gave a unbelievable performance ON THE DAY and so he deserved the rating he got, although he was not as good a horse as STS he gave one run that was better than any one of STS so its obvious he should be rated higher

I think it was a perfectly reasonable rating, he originally got 142 but after he didn't run again they cut it to140