- This topic has 523 replies, 25 voices, and was last updated 13 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
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.
I think I would vote for the one where he did a passable impersonation of the Lone Ranger coming out of the stalls.
Steering behind the horse in front up the straight in yesterday’s race whilst waiting for another horse to block off his run on the outside was a particularly nice touch though.
Compare those four rides with the ride he gave the horse when beaten a nose off a mark of 78. If you didn’t know better you would think he was riding a different horse.
Superb stuff Jose….i wont lie and say i have read in great detail as i not keen on handicappers as a choice. But this thread looks to be the business.
Future BHA Handicapper?
Future BHA Handicapper? :wink:
They’re all highly qualified people!
Friday’s Qualifiers
Herald Angel
Petite MargotMonday’s Qualifiers
YAHRAB
MARJU KING
HOH HOH HOH
LILYANNABANANA
SLEIGHTS BOYIf I’ve missed anything on the Beverley card, I can have the excuse half the runners could be listed. Nightmare day imo.
Wednesday’s Qualifier
And two horses I thought that displayed how wonderful this system is…….
GASELEE
Today’s one of those "Super Saturday’s" where we have 4 meetings in Britain with a Group/Listed race. Not complaining, but it’s ridiculous when Sunday’s remain appalling in Britain. For example, tomorrow we have our typical Sunday diet of 3 summer jump meetings.
I’m looking forward to seeing if I’m right about Flambeau. The market suggests the rating of 107 was on the low side, anyway.
Saturday’s Qualifier
Hi Jose
Following the handicapper’s decision to split Carter’s rating this morning I’d be interested to hear whether you think it serves any useful purpose. Carter’s run last week shows what a minefield the split ratings are IMO.
The winner of that race, Lover’s Causeway, was first given a split rating on 6th June last year of 75/78a after a poor turf run (which followed two wins on the AW). A couple more poor turf runs increased the differential to 68/78a. The split was kept at 10lbs all the way until 14th February this year when it unaccountably widened to 75/91a. The gap had been kept at 10lbs following two further wins on the AW so quite what the significance was of the horse’s third win and a second place at Lingfield in showing the disparity between its turf and AW ability had increased is anyone’s guess.
Carter did not have a split rating before his good run of winter form so his first run back on turf following his winter AW campaign was from a mark 8lbs higher than his mark for his last AW run. Having been beaten just over six lengths the handicapper has decided that this is evidence of Carter’s ability on the AW exceeding that on turf and his reaction is to drop his turf mark to 79 (still five pounds higher than his highest winning AW mark) and keep his AW mark on 82. All the evidence points to the handicapper having overreacted by hiking him 8lbs since his last win (including the extra 3lbs for the dreaded subsequent form of beaten horses) so how he thinks based on the evidence of that one turf run that 82 is still a fair mark on AW is beyond me.
If Carter wins on turf later in the year will the handicapper revert to one rating; increase his turf mark but keep his AW mark the same; or increase both (by either the same amount or some different amount)? The possibilities are mind boggling and certainly won’t have any sensible basis in reality.
Tuffers, I’ll take a look later on. I do know on split ratings going through race-cards at this time of year just for the purpose of looking at ratings isn’t much fun.
Tuesday’s Qualifiers
MARKET MAKER
I’ve just read this week’s thrilling installment of the BHA handicappers’ blog.
If I was the owner of Eradicate I would have been very unhappy with the 16lbs he was raised for his win in the Swinton Hurdle but I would be absolutely furious having read this morning that his new rating was based not on his run on Saturday but a retrospective look at his run in the race last year!
Just be grateful you’re not connected with Forrest Lemons, raised a modest 33lbs for finishing second to 1/4 shot in a six runner Hexham novice hurdle last Saturday.
AP
Somebody mentioned to me that Indian Pipe Dream may be an example of what I think you are trying to show – ie a long run of terrible races causing the rating to drop off followed by a miraculous return to form.
Though to be fair the races this horse has won recently have had very small low quality fields
Split Turf and A/W ratings.
Do they serve any purpose? Only when there’s clear evidence of a substantial difference in ability because of the surface. That’s stating what you would think should be obvious.
From the RP database, Carter has won one Turf race out of 14 starts, which was off a lowly mark of 59. Clearly now, though, Carter’s a better horse, as a best RPR on Turf of 81 shows.
The question is obviously how they – the BHA handicappers – guess in such a situation that makes it both purposeful and fair when a horse shows improved form on the other surface?
Leave the "other" mark alone, horse bolts up = unfair, look stupid.
Alter the "other" mark, horse handicapped out of a chance of winning = nothing said, better option.
I’d make a prediction that if Carter won off his current mark on Turf, the result would be a higher Turf mark than A/W mark, with the A/W mark being upped a small amount as well.
Another drop from a "poor" Turf run, followed by a win, and it could be back to both marks being the same.
Now for Eradicate. That was some of the best after-timing in the history of after-timing in this great sport and shows how much they take into account of collateral form. It’s good to see the 2 X 1lbs drop transformed Eradicate’s performance on Saturday, enabling him to stretch away for a 13l victory.
Wednesday’s Qualifier
My view is that the arival of Polytrack removed the need for separate handicap marks for turf and AW.
It makes no more sense than it would to have separate marks for Chester and Newmarket, or separate marks for firm ground and heavy gound.
The original surfaces placed a premium on early pace and that could produce significant differences in performance levels, but you’d struggle now to find a horse worth a 40lb higher rating on the AW like some in the early and mid 90’s.
AP
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.