Iron Cross Salisbury 7.40

[seabird]

I don’t know if our resident handicapper (Mr. Weedon) is responsible but how did the handicapper involved with this particular case feel he had enough evidence to arrive at a handicap mark of 60 for Sir Mark Prescott’s horse in this race?

The horse had three runs as a 2-y-o and has form figures of 000-. When you actually look at those duck eggs, you find that the horse’s best effort was on his debut when 12/14, beaten over 13 lengths, to Tasdeer at Yarmouth. His subsequent runs were 12/15, beaten 21 lengths, at Newcastle, and 10/11, beaten 20 lengths, at Brighton.

I don’t think Sir Mark could have had any complaints if the handicapper had declined to give this horse a mark on the basis that there wasn’t enough evidence to justify one, I think that would probably been the case if the trainer had been someone else.

Colin

[davidjohnson]

You could say a mark of 60 looks quite harsh considering that Galley Slave who finished five places in front of Iron Cross in that maiden race was only put up to 58 following his run in that contest.

[seabird]

David, I’m not commenting on the level of the mark.

I happen to think that there isn’t enough evidence for the handicapper to arrive at an anywhere near accurate mark for the horse. So why did he feel obliged to allot one?

Colin

[davidjohnson]

Colin

You could say that about approximately 25% of the horses that are given three runs as a juvenile and then obviously flourish in their second season. As the horse has had three runs, was clearly running on it’s merits on all 3 starts, I see no reason why it shouldn’t be alloted a mark.

[Marcus Weedon]

Some general observations:

It is not against the rules to run a horse over an inadequate trip. There was a proposal a while back that a horse should be forced to make its handicap debut over a distance no more than 2f different to the longest / shortest trip it had tackled in its qualifying runs, but this never got off the ground.

It is not against the rules to run a horse that is less than 100% race-fit, as long as the jockey tries his or her best in the race.

I would rather not comment on specific cases, hope that doesn’t come across as too precious.

[seabird]

Marcus, or should that be Mr. Weedon, I wasn’t expecting you to comment on this specific case, and, no, I don’t regard you as being precious for choosing not to, but I was looking at this race this morning with a view to backing a different horse in the race, and it seemed a perfect example of the point I have tried to make.

How can a punter make a decision on a horse’s chance when you have a total wild-card like this in the field?

Can I ask the question "What percentage of horses are refused a mark, when they are first entered for handicaps?"

Didn’t it used to be the case, until ‘fairly recently’, that a horse had to have been placed before it was alloted a mark?

Colin

[davidjohnson]

How can a punter make a decision on a horse’s chance when you have a total wild-card like this in the field?

You could look at horse’s pedigree and look at the trainer’s record in similar events over the last few years. A Prescott 3-y-o with 3 duck eggs and a mark of 60 is hardly a wild card is it?

[Marcus Weedon]

Didn’t it used to be the case, until ‘fairly recently’, that a horse had to have been placed before it was alloted a mark?

I don’t remember that, clearly us young pups need someone old to come along and enlighten us.

[davidjohnson]

There is a period for juveniles before handicap marks are published (Aug 1st I think) that a horse has to have finished in the first 4 in a race to be eligible to run in a nursery.

[gamble]

Curley created an inexact science
and a secret fan club
called miserable monk’s merry go round
from his first raced handicappers.

Marble you rolled out an excellent post
but rather forgot the grey figure behind
often known as the mind

[marko]

That always was the case David, but I believe it was scrapped a year or two ago.

[seabird]

"A Prescott 3-y-o with 3 duck eggs and a mark of 60 is hardly a wild card is it?"

No, David, but I think the fact that you can say that, illustrates the point that I am trying to make!.

"ps, my advice to you Colin, based on the fact most of the two year old maiden form is complete shite, is to back what you fancy and just let the Prescott followers create a price on your horse when potentially there shouldn’t be"

Yes, Marb, but how do I work out what percentage chance my horse has, and, from that, whether or not it is value or not in a 100% book??

Colin

[gamble]

It’s the way you roll ’em

[rory]

By definition, a thrice raced Prescott runner in a 12f handicap is very much a wild card. It’s hard to tell whether they should be 8/15 or double carpet; today’s runner was a big drifter and was well beaten but horses with similar profiles will pop up throughout the summer. Incidentally, a lot of Prescott 3yos drifted like barges before running massive races last summer so be careful!

[seabird]

Another example of the point I was making about Iron Cross can be seen in the 2.40 Bath.

In that race we have Rockjumper, he has raced three times, has managed to beat one horse home in those races, and the closest he has finished is 17.5 lengths behind the winner. One of those races was 11/11 22 lengths behind Dr. Fremantle!!!!

He has been alloted a mark of 52, HOW????…….WHY???.

Marcus I know you have given the official answer to this, but it does seem crazy.

I am not saying the mark is either generous or harsh, just that there is not enough evidence!

Soapbox collapse.

Colin

[absolution]

An interesting point was made on betfair radio which i suppose in hindsight is obvious – namely dont back a maiden on their 3rd outing because may not be trying too hard and harm their handicap mark- maybe im just a cynic !

[Author]

Posts