- This topic has 3 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
The two day Arc meeting at Longchamp included a winner previously trained by Ralph Beckett and his treatment by the French handicapper is an interesting insight into the differences between our system and theirs.
Bullace started out as a homebred 2yo with Beckett, winning a couple of AW novice events in the autumn, which earned him a handicap mark of 84. That looked lenient when he ran out a clear winner of a 1M Newmarket handicap on his return as a 3yo and his mark was raised to 93.
Beckett then took a chance and ran Bullace in the Listed Heron Stakes at Sandown, where he finished third, only a length behind the winner, Mostahdaf. The handicapper didn’t like that one bit and bumped him up to 106. Bullace didn’t like it much either, as he embarked on a run of twelve defeats, ending with his mark back down to 86 before he was sold for 45,000 gns at the Autumn Sale a year ago.
His new Arab owner saw him run twice at Meydan, where he was down the field in both, and opted to send him to France to be raced there this year. The French don’t accept newcomers directly into handicaps based on marks gained elsewhere, so Bullace first had to run in three conditions events. That’s much easier to do in France than it would be here, as the program provides plenty of options.
Bullace ran twice in events for 4yo+ that hadn’t won a prize of 5,000 euros since July – he won the first over 1700m easily at a country track, collecting a prize of 4,250, which allowed him to have a second bite in a similar race where he finished second. Finally a run over 1200m at Saint Cloud in a better class race to complete his qualification. He was then given a mark of 38kgs – approx 83 UK.
Four runs in handicaps have followed:
14/7 2/16 1M Longchamp beaten 3/4L Prize money 10,070
8/8 3/15 1M Deauville beaten 2 1/2l and a head Prize money 7,420
27/8 2/15 7.5F Deauville AW beaten a head Prize money 10,070
And then to Longchamp on Saturday 30/9 – and despite two seconds and a third in big fields, he’s still running off his original mark of 38kgs.
30/9 1/14 1M Longchamp won by 3/4L Prize money 17,500
Unlike our archaic system, his revised mark has already been published just two days after his win and he’s been raised the standard 2.5kgs to 40.5kgs, effectively 83 to 89 on the UK scale.
Does the French approach work? Well their handicaps invariably get big fields and produce competitive races. Everybody knows where they stand – win and you go up, don’t win and you stay the same or maybe drop 1/2kg if you’ve been well beaten more than once. From that race on Saturday, only the 9th (1/2k), 10th and 13th (both 1kg) have had their mark reduced.
As we all know, if Bullace had produced that sequence of placed efforts in big fields, his mark would have risen steadily and he’d have been running off 88 or 89 on Saturday. We also know that about eight or nine of those finishing behind him would have had their mark reduced. Persistent race by race fiddling is the policy of the UK handicappers.
Of course the French connections have one big advantage – if they feel they can’t win a handicap, they have plenty of alternatives in conditions races like those mentioned above, or in claimers where the claiming price is set at a realistic level, unlike the few remaining claiming races in the UK, that appeal only to low class horses.
Often wondered about whether there is an alternative to our handicapping system, AP.
However, wouldn’t the French system result in more skulduggery?
Horses being held back until the big handicap and / or until the money is down?…And isn’t the French system unfair on winners too? If I’ve got it right: What if the first two are a nose apart in a moderately prized event, both going 10 lengths clear of the third. First three then meet two weeks later in a valuable handicap and only the winner has gone up 20 lbs? Won’t the winner and third have no chance and the second starts odds-on? How would the winner and third’s owners feel? Or is there a maximum rise?
For me, it is only fair that a horse runs off a mark which its form suggests is capable of. Whether that form was shown as a winner, second, third or whatever. Am sure it is frustrating for owners with consistent (but exposed) handicappers – often placed but seldom win – but there is no perfect system.
Rather have our system but I am not an owner.
What about second and third getting a greater share of prize money?… Would owners be in favour of that?
Value Is EverythingMark,
First point is that there are no ‘valuable’ handicaps in the French program compared to here. There’s absolutely nothing like the Ebor, the Stewards Cup or the Cambridgeshire. They have a handicap almost every day to provide for the big Tierce pool bet, which has up to 50k as the first prize. But apart from that, handicaps on the premier tracks offer around 25k max as first prize. If you’ve got a horse rated 100 in the UK, you can run in handicaps – a similar rating in France would rule out handicaps as there are none for horses rated that high.
Second point is that a handicap winner ususally gets put up 2.5 or 3kgs. I have seen 4kgs, but not more than that. So that’s a 9lb rise at most. And a French flat handicap in which two horses finish ten lengths clear would be about as likely as Aidan O’Brien saying in an interview ‘This horse is totally useless and I don’t know why the lads have insisted on flying him over as it’s a waste of money’. Mainly that’s because you don’t get lightly raced horses given a mark after a couple of runs being allowed to run in handicaps in France. And also of course, it’s down to the style of racing in France, the funeral followed by a sprint finish produces closer finishes.
Third – the idea of increasing the prize money for second and third and reducing it for winners, was implemented here two years ago. I collected more prize money with Love Dreams in 2021, when he only won a seller but was placed in most starts, than I did in 2022, when he won handicaps at Windsor and Kempton.
Even with smaller increases in winners handicap marks than we can get in our current system… Still doesn’t seem fair on winners in particular and if the second doesn’t go up for improving it’s hardly fair on the third and fourth either if they meet in future races.
It might work in France AP, but will it work here?
Would it be harder without a betting monopoly?
With our levy system are big handicaps important to how much is brought into the Levy?
Are lower grade (than our) handicaps on the French big racing days as interesting for the punter as our big handicaps? Or do we lose more than we gain from big handicaps?
Would a Tierce type of handicap system work here? Seem to remember us trying one feature betting race per day and it didn’t work – although am not sure why. Seemed a good idea at the time.Making the handicapper’s job easier is a good idea. Stopping as many unexposed horses running by not allowing lightly raced horses into handicaps is something worth trying. Possibly making three races mandatory? Possibly a “Winner of one / two”.
Are there any changes you can think of to the French system that might make it easier to work here?
Sorry Alan / TRFers, too many questions.
Answer as much or as little as you like.
Value Is Everything
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.