- This topic has 69 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Might be interesting after much discussion of ridiculous handicap marks particularly in relation to Cheltenham to have a dedicated thread to discuss and highlight any particularly strange looking handicapping decisions
I’m going to open the batting and suggest that Funambule Sivola who has just won a 3 runner handicap with only 2 finishers, will likely be given an utterly ridiculous mark, just because he happened to win that race today by 23 lengths.
Rated 141 going into it, I’m going to guess he’ll be rated 152-154 after that win….let’s see what happens.
Cash To Ash won a 6-runner handicap chase at Ayr recently where only three finished, but the first two were both raised in the ratings.
It’ll be interesting to see what rating Tiger Roll gets from the British handicapper if he’s entered in the Betway Bowl. He hammered Easysland by 18 lengths at Cheltenham when rated 166 and 1lb wrong with that horse.
What mark would Tiger Roll be running off in the Irish National compared to The National?
BUY THE SUN
Irish handicapper has got him on 163 for the Irish National, he was rated 166 for The National.
So the O’Learys have sacked off an attempt at matching Red Rum for the sake of a bag and a half of sugar?
BUY THE SUN
Their stupidity and stubbornness has inadvertently probably done the sport a great favour as the whole lead up to the National would have been dominated by Gordon Elliott if Tiggs had been running and if he had won it would have been ten times worse.
Yes, I think this one of the problems in British racing. Too much racing, too small fields. Ecoutas, Farclas, The Shunter, The Bosses Oscar, Mrs Milner all were placed in 20+ handicaps in Ireland before the Festival and only raised a few pounds because of that. Would they have run in a 6 runner race in Britain then would have probably won easily and raised at least 10 pounds.
So the O’Learys have sacked off an attempt at matching Red Rum for the sake of a bag and a half of sugar?
No; they’ll run him in the Bowl, get thrashed a distance and then cry that they were right.
Totally agree MoyenneCorniche. It seems crazy to think that the possibility of a treble Grand National winner could be bad PR for the sport, but it’s almost certainly for the best that Tiger Roll misses the National now.
It’s such a shame, but what’s done is done. I presume the media focus in the build-up will now be on Rachael Blackmore, not that I’m sure she will be overjoyed about that!
Does the Irish handicapper not like putting placed horses up much? Might explain why big field winners seem leniently assessed too.
Value Is EverythingWhen something wins in a small field by a wide margin it is not always wrong to put its handicap mark up quite a bit. For sure it could mean the placed horses have run below form but could also mean the winner has improved quite a bit. Best judged on the time and sectional times… and if the horses (and trainers) came in to the race in good form.
Value Is EverythingGinger I was trying to find some stats on how much the average winners and placed horses get raised in UK and Ireland.
Does anyone have any info on this?
Ginger
On occasion I wouldn’t have any problem with a small field winner being put up but at the moment the handicapping team work by dogma.
It seems there’s an assumption that the winner has outperformed their handicap mark. There’s very little differentiation between 10 out of form horses in one race as against 10 in form in another. In the former there may be a case for raising none of the field, in the latter 4 or 5 might be raised.
Could you give me an example of what you mean by this? Presumably Irish handicappers at the festival?
Twitter: Jackh1092
Hindsight is 20/20 so make the most of it!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.