- This topic has 31 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 10 months ago by
.
- Posts
The Sovereign Series is obviously destined to failure, but in some ways I think its intentions were honourable.
The main problem racing has is that, to a non-expert who might turn on for the big race, they may as well be watching a seller – i.e there is no way for the man in the street to have a feel for just how well the horses have performed.
If you watch the Mens 100m you know you are watching the very best when they come home in 9.85 seconds and part of the drama is seeing whether records can be broken or personal bests achieved. If you watch the ice-skating, the best bit is seeing the scores flash up at the end – how dull would Torvill and Dean’s "Bolero" have been if you had had to wait 4 days for Phil Smith to tell you how good he "provisionally" made their performance?
So the idea is very simple – we have the scoring system in place already – it is called a handicap mark. The point is in this day of powerful computers, we should be able to feed the result into a computer as the horses cross the line, have two or three BHA handicappers make a quick assessment as to whether the figure needs an adjustment. By the time the horse is in the winners enclosure the rating should be through and announced on TV and on course and mentioned to the winning trainer for comment etc…
It is a very simple idea, but I think it would make the whole experience more enjoyable. As soon as you have the rating, the commentators can put the performance into perspective against previous winners of the race and against winners of other G1s this season. They can put up a list of the top rated performers in training and over the distance so people can become familiar with the top horses in the sport.
The average punter then doesn’t just know he has backed a winner, but he also knows that that winner is perhaps "officially" the best horse seen on a racecourse this season.
I’m absolutely positive this would increase interest in the sport and would also make it far more interesting for the people who currently follow it. Why should we have to wait days to read something in the RP about what the official handicapper made of a performance? By then we have forgotten about it and moved on the next race….
I agree with you, but for it to happen you would need the equivalent of turkeys voting for Christmas.
Algorithmic, computer-assisted handicapping in a timely manner and with minimal human modification is not only possible, it has been possible for a long time and is desirable to rid the system of accusations of bias, imo.
Just don’t expect to find many handicappers recommending it before trudging off to pick up their P45s.
It would be nice TDK, if the horse’s weight was also declared the day before the race there could also provide an even more accurate figures produced.
Surely impossible TDK, if it takes Phil Smith 3 14 hour days to set the weights for the National, when the handicap marks are already known…
I agree with you, but for it to happen you would need the equivalent of turkeys voting for Christmas.
Algorithmic, computer-assisted handicapping in a timely manner and with minimal human modification is not only possible, it has been possible for a long time and is desirable to rid the system of accusations of bias, imo.
Just don’t expect to find many handicappers recommending it before trudging off to pick up their P45s.
I’m not suggesting there isn’t human input though. The computer would spew out a base figure (based on previous ratings achieved by the horses in question) but it would be up to the handicappers to award the final figure.
Of course we would have disagreements and controversy about the figures awarded, but that is exactly what the sport lacks – how many times do you hear arguments in your local pub about whether Hawk Wing was a 125 or a 135 horse? None – these arguments are currently the preserve of the anoraks on Internet forums…
I’m not suggesting Racing is ever going to become the “new” football btw, but I think this would give people a much better appreciation of the top horses.
Surely impossible TDK, if it takes Phil Smith 3 14 hour days to set the weights for the National, when the handicap marks are already known…
Prufrock says it is possible, CH and I believe him
It usually takes about 25-30 mins for the results to come through the system via an intermediary like the PA, but it should be relatively easy to make an exception for major races and input the relevant factors – race time, margins between horses etc – on a one-off basis and to have a meaningful assessment within 5 mins. Just the right sort of time to announce the findings as part of the post-race assessment by the media.
I doubt anyone is going to have a cow if the race is subsequently downgraded/upgraded a pound or two in the light of a slow/fast time or some other factor that was not immediately apparent at the time.
I’m not suggesting there isn’t human input though
And nor am I, or at least not at this stage. However, this is largely in terms of “race-reading” (effect of pace, luck in running, ease of victory etc) rather than the numbers themselves, providing the algorithms are sophisticated enough, as they can be.
Algorithmic handicapping was in place at The Sportsman. The Oracle database rated 5 years of historical racing – Flat and jumps, Irish, British and some French – in 29 seconds in the first instance with few blanks or clear errors. It would have taken a team of maybe half a dozen handicappers approximately 5 years to do the same.
Yes – 5 minutes was the kind of timeframe I was thinking about – I’m sure we would need some technology that would give the distances beaten within seconds but I’m sure it wouldn’t be rocket science.
The real positive of this is that I think it would appeal to novice and expert alike. The fact the horse is rated within minutes means regular followers of the sport start thinking about and debating the race while it is still fresh in the mind.
….and to those who don’t follow the sport closely it is an easy way of developing an interest in the top horses.
An interesting idea as at the moment the only immediate assessment is the time of the race though of course the ground can play a big part plus the race may have been a tactical affair. Just a thought but computer calculation of a rating could let the the tv broadcasters do this without any recourse to the BHA, after all the RP do it.
Surely impossible TDK, if it takes Phil Smith 3 14 hour days to set the weights for the National, when the handicap marks are already known…
Prufrock says it is possible, CH and I believe him
Was meant tongue-in-cheek TDK, of course it’s possible!
…or there is an opportunity for someone like Timeform to give their rating within minutes if the BHA don’t want to do it.
In fact it would be nice if both supplied a rating as it would only add to the debate….
A good and interesting idea that would have been tailor-made for the BHA questionaire, so maybe a carbon copy to them?
Timeform and others supply provisional ‘overnight’ race ratings nowadays so it would hardly be a leap into the technological unknown if similar provisionals were made available straight after the race. As TDK says these would not be set in stone and would be tweaked later on reflection by human handicappers.
You only have to read the "I make that a 180+ performance by Kauto Star" type posts here on TRF to realise the volume of debate the awarding of immediate ratings generates, and once the – basically simple – rating scale is explained to the recreational racegoer and punter they too can enter the debate.
Humans find numbers much easier to interpret than words
You only have to read the "I make that a 180+ performance by Kauto Star" type posts here on TRF to realise the volume of debate the awarding of immediate ratings generates, and once the – basically simple – rating scale is explained to the recreational racegoer and punter they too can enter the debate.
Humans find numbers much easier to interpret than words
Exactly – for argument’s sake imagine if after Denman’s Hennessy that the figure suggested he had performed better than Kauto Star ever had done. The figure being announced would have made great TV and instantly sparked debate as to who was the better horse. (I know that isn’t Group 1 race btw – but there is no reason why the idea wouldn’t work for all feature flat and jump races)
Calculating these rating should not take any longer than 0.0001 seconds.
Sorry to bring up this old chestnut, but the Bollocks part will be :-
Correct Going and Distance.
Until we get this sorted out. Rubbish in – Rubbish out !
Backing two runners is the relentless pursuit of value. Backing each way is a shortcut to the poor house. Only 7% make a long term profit.
Prufrock,
I agree with you, but for it to happen you would need the equivalent of turkeys voting for Christmas.
Algorithmic, computer-assisted handicapping in a timely manner and with minimal human modification is not only possible, it has been possible for a long time and is desirable to rid the system of accusations of bias, imo.
Just don’t expect to find many handicappers recommending it before trudging off to pick up their P45s.
Is there not a case of self-interest to answer for a pro punter / tipster who espouses computerised handicapping? Perhaps such an individual, who has more time and resources available for study than the hobby punter, might hope that he would be financially rewarded by latching on to trends and patterns, created by the computer’s limited range of responses, before the masses do so?
We should all declare our interests imo.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.