- This topic has 523 replies, 25 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Just to say, the reason there was no morning update was because I couldn’t get the site up. It doesn’t change the wonderful action we have tonight.
Wednesday’s Qualifer
I have more interest in the following three horses for different reasons.
Ensnare – Dropping until "they" fancy a gamble? If that is the case, tonight is still not the night.
Time Medicean – Would qualify without the last start, and is now a short priced favourite.
Dysios – The next Presvis? Probably not, but three down the field runs in 3 Kempton A/W Maiden runs and now turns up at 100/30 for its first start in a handicap, on turf and at a mile.
Thursday’s Qualifiers
A day like today would be perfect to announce who the "famous five" are.
I don’t think he’s ever made your list, Jose, but I thought you might be interested in the handicapper’s treatment of Tourist over the AW winter season.
He started the campaign on a mark of 89 on 2nd November last year. Here are the lengths beaten and the handicapper’s response:
6.75l = no change
1.25l = -2 (claimer)
4l = -3
6l = -2
14.5l = -3
11l = -4 (claimer)
5.25l = -3
4l = -2
4.75l = -2
4l = no change (claimer)
3.5l = no changePick the bones out of that lot!
The reason he’s of interest to me is that we bought him this morning.
Tuffers, I think there’s some (not a lot) logic, albeit slightly twisted, within their approach to rating Tourist.
89-87 – Seems a normal rating drop.
87-84 – Fair enough, even if I don’t believe it relates to numbers.
84-82 – Ridiculous
82-79 – Ridiculous
79-75 – Fairly sure the 75 figure actually is taken from the 13th Nov 10.The next three drops 75-72, 72-70, 70-68 are fairly consistent for how far Tourist was beat.
3lbs for 5l
2lb for 4l
2lbs for 4lMost of my thoughts are based on calculator fiddling, what the other horses went up and down in the same race, which is why I’d like BHA performance ratings published.
I want to see a horse with a rating of 60 and the 6 numbers, for example, of 70, 68, 25, 34, 21, 25.
And I’m going to enjoy this – there’s no racing today! (Unless you’re interested in SA or USA racing)
I have one topic for today with no qualifiers, no plots or anything else.
Stone Of Folca’s win at Folkestone yesterday. Will Welsh Inlet face the same type of punishment usually reserved for those mad enough to contest a conditions stakes?
When I say that, I’m not expecting a new rating for Welsh Inlet of 95 next week.
The time was 1.22 seconds slower than the 0-80 older horse handicap, which was won by a 76 rated horse.
If they’re going to base it on time, take into account weight and their weight for age scale, Welsh Inlet could be going up 4lbs (or more) for yesterday’s run.
If they rate it through the 46 rated horse…….
and I’ve read the last 5 pages of this thread, totally complexed by the handicapping system, as I’m sure you all are too. Jose, someone mentioned on another thread that you posted about how easy it is to cheat on a PMU system. Could you quote the post? On a mobile device & would take an age to read through it all.
Saturday’s Qualifiers
PANAMA AT ONCE
LIVVY INN
WELLS LYRICAL
ARTHURS DREAM
GOTHIC CHICK
GERTMEGALUSH
LITTLE EAGLETYesterday’s long list do what these types of horses do. Most continue to run awful, some trade shorter in running, fewer than "some" finished placed, and even less win.
I note Towcester are happy to race featuring whips, obstacles and, most importantly, horses today.
Plumpton have four horses that have been pointlessly dropped.
Zhukov, Casual Garcia, Idris, Oranger
Elsewhere, Malcheek might be able to take advantage of a lower Turf mark this afternoon – 84 Turf, 101 A/W – but that’s stating the obvious.
Casual Garcia won yesterday. (Don’t worry, that’s not anything for this thread to claim as a success)
I’m looking forward to the adjustments after the Sandown Classic Trial. Winner rated 110+, 2nd put back to 105, a few pointless drops for those that finished out the back, including the Fielden Stakes winner? Yep, sounds about right.
Warwick today host their annual 7f Conditions Stakes.
90, 90, 102, 92, 87, 73
Usual story from those ratings of the field apply – either win and get the £6k, or finish at least 4l behind Fathsta (102).
Fathsta is the first horse to run out of the Leicestershire Stakes won by Flambeau. Flambeau was only raised to 107 for winning the Leicestershire Stakes by 4.5l, which was a rare sign of caution from our handicapping friends, and even more surprising when you look at what the 2nd, 3rd and 4th are rated.
Now for the rest of today………..
Prince Massini embarrassed Smith + Co in the Autumn of last year and has been well placed since, and is seemingly well placed again today. I do like how the horse is still rated 2lbs lower over fences than hurdles.
Monday’s Qualifiers
THEY ALL LAUGHED
BENNELONG
MELODIZEAnd the others I think are the even more "unlikely" of the no-hopers that have been dropped in typical BHA style.
FREE TO AIR
ALWAYS DIXIE
HEART FELTYesterday was a "fun" day for British racing.
A walkover, a two runner race, Am I Blue won, and even three of the seven horses I listed on here won. Laverre was a worthy winner of a Warwick handicap as well.
The Warwick Conditions Stakes, which was the feature race in Britain yesterday, has probably found a leading Royal Hunt Cup contender.
Sir Bruno "was" rated 73, and on yesterday’s showing, he’s bound to be a big riser. Perhaps big enough to take the horse into the 90’s? That, unfortunately, is up-to Phil Smith + Co to decide……..
(Message to all trainers – running in a Conditions Stakes with a 73 rated horse is not a good idea)
As for today, Phil Smith + Co got the lottery balls out to rate Roxy Spirit. What does possess these people to rate such a horse 30? Do they really believe that if Roxy Spirit was receiving 20lbs off of a 50 rated horse she’d be competitive?
Tuesday’s Qualifier
Heading To First
Strong competition for the most ridiculous handicap change this week, with the Ludlow seller won by Baccalaureate (up 10lbs) from Mut’Ab (up 6lbs) a contender, as was the novice seller at Exeter won by Rolanta (up 25lbs for that).
But the NH prize goes to the unfortunate Agricultural, who finished 4th in a truly awful Kelso maiden hurdle and was somehow adjudged to have improved by 17lbs as a result.
On the flat, spare a thought for the conections of the 4-y-old All Right Now, who had the temerity to finish second at 100/1 in a Southwell maiden contested by backward 3-y-olds, and despite having shown nothing in a handicap off 48 in his previous run, now finds himself rated 65.
And a couple of recent winners mentioned here have been suitably punished – Spanish Bounty up 12lbs to 87, Spruzzo up 18lbs to 60.
A final footnote – Bottman, raised to 134 for his Cheltenham run on April 13th, gets beaten in a two horse race at Ludlow on April 21st, and promptly gets put back down to 130. No, I don’t understand it either ……
AP
I’ve been trying to organise a few thoughts on this subject for a while now. It’s clear that the handicapper’s approach results in any number of unfair outcomes but I think we ought to formulate an alternative approach to put forward to the BHA.
The first issue is how to rate horses that run in non-handicaps. Clearly the ‘lengths beaten’ approach is flawed in these races. What I would prefer is to see the handicapper use a class-based system explained more fully below.
In terms of ratings in handicaps, there must be an accepted principle that horses that have improved should be raised in the handicap until they are required to run in a class of handicap that reflects their ability.
It’s less clear that a horse should be dropped in the handicap for running poorly. We all know there can be any number of reasons for a poor run but an actual decrease in the horse’s ability is the least likely reason on any given day.
What I want to propose is that a horse isn’t given a handicap mark. Instead a horse is given a ‘class rating’ to reflect the level of performance a horse has shown it is capable of producing. In other words a horse given a ‘class 3’ rating can run in any race of class 3 or above.
For non-handicaps a horse running in a conditions race that is above its current ‘class rating’ would only be raised in class for running well if the handicapper feels the horse has shown sufficient ability to win a race in a higher class. ‘Win’ is the important word here. Running to within several lengths of a horse with a higher ‘class rating’ but without ever looking likely to beat that horse would therefore not be sufficient to result in the horse’s ‘class rating’ being raised.
For handicaps all the handicapper needs to do is to handicap the horses declared at the 48 hour stage against each other.
In terms of raising or lowering a horse’s ‘class rating’ the handicapper should raise a horse’s rating when it shows a level of performance that the handicapper believes would enable it to win in a higher class.
To drop a horse by one class rating there would have to be some compelling evidence that either the handicapper had overestimated the horse’s ability having previously raised the horse in class (collateral form of horses it previously ran against could be used here) or that the horse’s ability was actually declining.
Reducing a horse’s class rating as a result of collateral form should happen at any time but reducing a horse’s class rating because of a decline in its ability should only happen at the end of each season.
This last bit is somewhat controversial but I would argue that it should have two effects. The first is that there would be a big disincentive not to run a horse on its merits because of the length of time it would take to drop a horse in class. The second is that the handicapper would be able to make a judgment on much more evidence than two or three poor runs which would hopefully make it less likely that a horse is dropped because it has been raced under the wrong conditions rather than because of a decline in its ability.
Tuffers,
No argument with your ideas, but imo they would only shuffle the deckchairs. They wouldn’t resolve the basic problem, which is that 90% of the horses in training are under the control of the official handicapper and he essentially decides their success or failure.
That’s because there is no alternative to handicaps for the vast majority of horses. Your own horse, Carter, is a prime example – now on a handicap mark decided by a single individual, which is therefore no more than his opinion. But you can’t escape that handicap mark and choose to run in a different type of race, because there are no conditions races for horses at that level, almost no high value claimers, certainly no alternative program that you can opt to try below Listed level.
It is the ever increasing percentage of handicaps within the program that has made the handicapper so powerful, and thus his decisions so important. Trainers are paranoid about handicap marks, because they are so vital.
The six race card at Exeter today includes five handicaps – I checked back ten years and found that the same meeting on Tues April 24th, 2001 had three handicaps on an eight race card.
And the only reason tracks put on so many handicaps is that it’s what the bookies pay for – eight runner plus races with each way betting (not that the formula works on firm ground!)
Until we end the domination of handicaps, the handicapper holds far too much power and yet remains unaccountable.
AP
Tuffers,
No argument with your ideas, but imo they would only shuffle the deckchairs. They wouldn’t resolve the basic problem, which is that 90% of the horses in training are under the control of the official handicapper and he essentially decides their success or failure.
That’s because there is no alternative to handicaps for the vast majority of horses. Your own horse, Carter, is a prime example – now on a handicap mark decided by a single individual, which is therefore no more than his opinion. But you can’t escape that handicap mark and choose to run in a different type of race, because there are no conditions races for horses at that level, almost no high value claimers, certainly no alternative program that you can opt to try below Listed level.
It is the ever increasing percentage of handicaps within the program that has made the handicapper so powerful, and thus his decisions so important. Trainers are paranoid about handicap marks, because they are so vital.
The six race card at Exeter today includes five handicaps – I checked back ten years and found that the same meeting on Tues April 24th, 2001 had three handicaps on an eight race card.
And the only reason tracks put on so many handicaps is that it’s what the bookies pay for – eight runner plus races with each way betting (not that the formula works on firm ground!)
Until we end the domination of handicaps, the handicapper holds far too much power and yet remains unaccountable.
AP
The main problems with the handicappers’ current modus operandi seem to be:
1. Updating ratings too slowly so that easy winners have time to follow up under a penalty
2. Hiking horses for finishing close up behind better horses in conditions races.
3. Dropping horses by random amounts for ‘unrateable’ performances.
4. Constant fiddling with the ratings by one or two pounds.All four would be solved by my proposed system.
Using Carter again as the example for point 1, he was able to run in a class 6 race (in the process showing he was clearly better than class 6) but was able to subquently run in (and win) a class 7 race under a penalty and another class 6 under a double penalty. Under my system he would have been raised to class 5 after his first win.
Problem 2 is solved by the handicapper only being allowed to raise a non-winner in conditions races if that horse has previously won a race in the class immediately below that to which it is raised eg a horse running in a class 3 conditions race cannot be raised to class 3 unless it has previously won a class 4 race.
Problem 3 is solved by the ‘end of season relegation’ and problem 4 is solved by diverting the handicapper’s desire to constantly tinker with ratings into rating each race on an individual basis. By definition that won’t involve any more work as they are already rating every run for every horse.
I am realistic about this thread – it won’t help to see fundamental reform across the board in British racing.
I might consider sending an email to the BHA asking for an explanation on why they use the random dropping approaches they currently do. They are definitely random, as the latest drop for Bottman shows.
Today we have a card at Ascot I’ll be sitting down to watch in its entirety, featuring the Sagaro Stakes, which, thankfully, hasn’t been re-named the Ascot Spring Long Distance Cup – yet!
Wednesday’s Qualifiers
BLOWN IT
HAYEK
HAIL PROMENADERPlenty of puzzling drops for today. I’d be here for a long time if I went through every horse.
I will mention Lucky Dancer, who is like Prince Massini but with a good run last time out.
Thursday’s Qualifiers
BOCAMIX
Wednesday’s Qualifiers
BLOWN IT
HAYEK
HAIL PROMENADERJose, Clear Sailing is one to keep a very close eye on indeed.
In the first 3 for thirteen of his eighteen AW starts before joining Noel Quinlan (including beaten a nose last March off 78), he’s now finished 10th of 10, 7th of 7, 5th of 6 and 11th of 13 in four starts for that individual.
The rides he’s been given on each occasion were nothing short of a disgrace and strongly suggest there will be much more to come when the money is down. The BHA should certainly be monitoring betting patters related to this animal very carefully as I’m convinced he will be heavily backed and win hard held at some point.
From a handicapping point of view it’s hard to beleive how the handicapper has fallen for it. Every trick in the book has been used (slow start, restrained in rear pulling very hard, raced wide, rushed up on outside, steered behind other horses, no effort to ride out) and even a cursory glance at the recordings of each of his last four runs would leave an experienced race reader in no doubt he has lost none of his ability whatsoever.
Tuffers, I agree completely.
Wolverhampton, 11 March 2011
Stevie Donohoe, the rider of CLEAR SAILING, reported that the gelding ran too freely.
Kempton Park, 6 April 2011
Stevie Donohoe, the rider of CLEAR SAILING, unplaced, reported that the gelding ran too free.
All four races follow a similar (ish) pattern. Slow away, travels keenly, switches out wide (repeatedly) and appears to finish off very tamely.I don’t know which effort has been the worst so far. Maybe the forum should have a vote? I’m leaning towards yesterday’s run, for all I admired the Wolverhampton run. That sweeping move round the turn (and not the last one) was one of the best in Wolverhampton’s history.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.