Drop horses ratings for consistency ? Good idea?

[clivexx]

Suggested by matt Chapman tonight. Probably not an actual drop but maybe an allowance perhaps?

Should a horse that gets placed seven times out of ten say be given a breather with a 5lb allowance for two races perhaps?

Of course not all placimgs are the same and some horses are not so much inconsistent as unable to just get their heads in front but I quite like this

[He Didnt Like Ground]

I see no issue with the current system , plenty horses are placed before winning next time out , Id be more likely to go after the one win a season after a row of duck egg horses there,s plenty trainer’s who do this

[clivexx]

Not sure I follow that.

Many horses are handicapped to the hilt but always run honestly. Others run all over the shop and oddly they often seem to be with the same trainers

I prefer reward for the former tha the latter frankly

[He Didnt Like Ground]

I’m taking about the one win a season when the money’s down horses , nothing to do with marks more to do with the trainer picking that as the day to win

[Marlingford]

I like the idea of rewarding consistency, but think the devil would be in the detail of working out something that was fair and uncomplicated.

[greenasgrass]

Nice idea but one only has to watch the Irish Pertemps qualifiers to see that there are practised trainer/jockey combos who can drop their horse into any finishing position they choose. A load of second place prize money AND a mark drop before the big day…what’s not to like?

[The Tatling Cheekily]

Worse idea Chappers has had since he suggested moving the Haydock Sprint Cup to the Newcastle all-weather course. 2 weeks ago. The mans on a roll.

BUY THE SUN

[IanDavies]

It’s a fairly clumsy way to try to reward connections for trying every time in face of opponents with a row of duck eggs now below their last winning mark, being smashed in half in price before being smashed in half to win.

Nice guys don’t always come last in racing, but they quite often finish second in handicaps.

I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"

[LD73]

Seems like a bit of a minefield and making the overall job harder to do with bringing in something like that.

I would be more inclined for equal treatment in dropping horses down the weights at the same rate as they do when putting them up for winning, horses shoot up the weights in rapid order after a couple of good runs or wins and then take an age to drop back down the weights despite multiple average or poor runs.

Regardless of all the data/information available now, at the end of the day you still have an individual(s) having to make a subjective decision on the merits of the horse in question based off a number of factors and assumptions of horses in the race running to their mark that don’t always ring true.

[clivexx]

thats a good point greenasgrass but maybe we can look at the negatives a little too closely without understanding the bigger picture

The obvious cons (and thats what they are) are probably less prevalent these days but it amazes me that this way of operating is admired by many.

Like the old C4 racing fawning over the creepy Mark Prescott (am I the only one to find him a bit…odd?) and egotists and fantasists claiming that they are “in the know” (are they fck), its all a bit seedy frankly

[clivexx]

LD73

I dont believe in systems but one of the very few latch onto is that horses never get dropped as quickly as the decline in their ability

Always makes me laugh when some newspaper punter tells us “he hasn’t won for seven years but he’s 2 lb down in the handicaps now !”

[IanDavies]

Look at Firmament – took over a year and something like 16 defeats to get him 13lb below his last winning mark, but the way he won at Newcastle the other day you’d think another 13lb on his back might not have stopped him.

It’s a perpetual minefield.

I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"

[pilgarlic]

I think it should be more about addressing over reactions to winners. Those who run well in behind have to toe the line getting poorly treated.You get scorned for suggesting nothing goes up more than 7 for winning but horses running up a sequence surely generate interest.

[Gingertipster]

What a daft idea.

There is already a reward for consistency – place money…
And consistency isn’t always about being placed anyway. Finishing second or third can sometimes be achieved by running well below form where as a sixth place can be all a horse can achieve from its current rating. This would just make the truly poorly handicapped horse’s chance even worse.

It would make connections even less likely to want a win in its prep race / race before the big handicap; as well as encouraging connections to only try when they’ve got the added 5 lb consistency allowance.

Rewarding connections for not winning is always a bad idea, increases the amount of skulduggery.

Only possible change I can see might be worth considering is Pilgarlic’s; to have a maximum rating increase.
So horses can not go up more than (imo) 10 lbs. But present way of doing things seems fairest to me.

Value Is Everything

[He Didnt Like Ground]

Tweak Sunday series. horse has to to be placed/win to qualify for the first days racing , each winner from the first day automatically qualify for the next series day , horses unplaced unqualified ….. If the money is that good you,ll see plenty trying consistently

[yeats]

Verbal diarrhoea with no logic.
Too many handicaps and too much racing.

[clivexx]

Horses are already “rewarded for not winning” with artificially low handicap marks

[Author]

Posts