The home of intelligent horse racing discussion
The home of intelligent horse racing discussion

A very good example of misleading RPR’s.

Home Forums Tipping and Research Trends, Research And Notebooks A very good example of misleading RPR’s.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 18 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #4795
    Flash
    Member
    • Total Posts 1144

    Just looking through the form for tomorrows races and something hit me by chance.

    Look at the form of Clive Brittain’s filly Wassfa in Newbury’s 3.50.

    This horse has had twelve career starts and achieved prior to her last start a highest RPR of 71. The fily has shown herself to be a high 60’s horse at best so Ok a couple of pounds improvement I can take so I wouldn’t argue too strongly about a 71 rating.

    However, this is the good bit, Wassfa last time out ran in a Group 2 race and got hammered by Turbo Linn beaten eleven lengths finishing last of twelve and yet the RPR have raised Wassfa a whopping 20 lbs for that performance giving her a new RPR of 91.

    Now I understand trying to rate a horse in the context of a face but anyone using RPR as a guide could be hugely misled by thinking this filly is 91 rated filly.

    If ever there’s evidence that you should compile your own ratings this surely is it.

    #110528
    Gareth Flynn
    Participant
    • Total Posts 583

    To be fair, there is a big question mark after her rating (on the result card, not her race record).

    A case of a very slowly run race (winners RPR 110 vs Topspeed 45) compressing the distances at the finish and flattering those out the back?

    #110602
    seabird
    Participant
    • Total Posts 2924

    What were you saying, Flash? :wink:

    Colin

    #110604
    Gareth Flynn
    Participant
    • Total Posts 583

    :o

    #110605
    Cav
    Participant
    • Total Posts 4811

    I guess they can remove that question mark now :shock:

    #110608
    davidjohnson
    Member
    • Total Posts 4491

    I’d suggest they leave the question mark on. Another case of her being flattered in a muddling listed event I think. Not one of her ‘improved’ efforts are supported by the clock and she’s been beaten in handicaps in the high 50’s.

    #110610
    seabird
    Participant
    • Total Posts 2924

    Hmmmmm! …location Halifax, isn’t that where Timeform is based? :wink:

    Colin

    #110619
    Artemis
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1736

    The RPR ratings use a prescribed set of data for converting distance(beaten) into lbs, so once a winner has been given a rating, the ratings for the rest of the runners are fixed. No room for discretion in the rating recorded in the results, which is a measure of performance on that day.

    When it comes to rating future races, there is some discretion about which past ratings to use. So, a very high figure which may be suspect can be changed or even ignored.

    As Gareth says, it is wise to look at the Topspeed rating for evidence to support what looks an unusually high RPR rating.

    I’d certainly agree with Flash that form from many listed races( particularly those with small fields) is often misleading for horses who finish close up.

    #110641
    Prufrock
    Participant
    • Total Posts 2081

    Not one of her ‘improved’ efforts are supported by the clock

    Topspeed has her recording a figure of 94 today. Not that I would claim any great authority for Topspeed.

    #110647
    Flash
    Member
    • Total Posts 1144

    This horse still isn’t a 90+ filly. If ever she runs off that mark in a handicap she’ll finish somewhere out the back. Can’t see it though as surely the official handicapper will take a more realistic view??

    #110659
    Artemis
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1736

    The Topspeed rating of 94 guarantees that the RPR rating for her will be at least the same(both measure the same thing). That’s two RPR ratings of 90+.for her last two races. I think the official BHB rating will be around the 90 mark and we will have to wait and see if she can be competitive in handicaps from such a mark. All about opinions, but if the BHB rating was below 85, she would be interesting in any handicap.

    #110661
    seabird
    Participant
    • Total Posts 2924

    She is a big lump of a thing and could well be improving now that she is strengthening into her frame.

    Colin

    #110664
    robnorth
    Participant
    • Total Posts 4726

    This horse still isn’t a 90+ filly. If ever she runs off that mark in a handicap she’ll finish somewhere out the back. Can’t see it though as surely the official handicapper will take a more realistic view??

    There are now two pieces of evidence which suggest that Wassfa may be a 90+ filly, albeit balanced by lots of previous evidence to the contrary. As the latest place was a second, backed up by an apparent 90+ rating when well beaten previously, there must be a chance that the official handicapper may have to rate her around the 90 mark.

    Rob

    #110665
    the welsh wizard
    Member
    • Total Posts 352

    I am pretty sure that the form of that race yesterday isn’t worth a cockle.

    #110679
    Artemis
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1736

    Welsh Wizard,

    The time says it was decent form if you believe the Racing Post. Other ratings compilers may disagree.

    If you accept the Topspeed figure(which I do), then Wassfa is a 90+ filly, or was in her last two races. The filly that beat her is probably very useful as well.

    If you do not use some kind of ratings to measure form, all you have is subjective opinion in the form of words which are open to any interpretation people care to put on them. I think most people would know what you mean by your statement, ‘not worth a cockle’, but if you said poor or good or excellent, it would be less clear. Sorry if I sound pedantic, but if we use only words, we need to be clear. It might have been helpful if you had elaborated on your short statement.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 18 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.