- This topic has 49 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
would their be any fact to the matter DJ due to pressure from outside the timeform HZ as in phil smith revaluating arkle and the press seemed complete distastefulness to the greatest champion NH has ever seen that timeform tried to get closer to the arkle fable rating of 212 than maybe a different horse under different external circumstances?
First column is pre-race rating, second is performance rating on Tf figs for 2009 King George first 5
184 188
170 158
157 157
162 154
175 135Though the race was rated as much on a time comparison with the Feltham and on race standards rather than using Barbers Shop as a marker. I can’t bring myself to use the ‘y’ word, sorry!
would their be any fact to the matter DJ due to pressure from outside the timeform HZ as in phil smith revaluating arkle and the press seemed complete distastefulness to the greatest champion NH has ever seen that timeform tried to get closer to the arkle fable rating of 212 than maybe a different horse under different external circumstances?
I honestly don’t think so. If someone wants to provide evidence that Arkle’s rating of 212 is too high, then I’m sure the powers that be at Timeform will listen. Phil Smith was the last man to take up the challenge but I don’t think we are going to get an answer judged on his comments at the 2010 Anglo-Irish Classifications. Arkle pre-dates me by about 20 years and my career here by about 40 so I don’t have any strong views on the rating personally. I do know that we’re told so often we make a big enough mess of comparing horses that run against each other in the same season, so I don’t find comparing figures from forty years ago particularly fruitful.
- Total Posts 102
David, a couple of questions for you if i may
Ratings inflation, When Phil Smith, a few years ago said he was penalising winners more heavily in order to provide more predictable results, did this result in bigger differences between the BHA ratings and Timeform ones??
What rating, given Phils history, do you think he would have given to Desert Orchids 1990 Racing Post Chase victory
As always, thanks for your interesting answers
I have never subscribed to Timeform. From what I have read, in the preinternet age, the Timeform black book was essential reading for form students, and I have always regarded it as having some sort of mystical quality based on superior race analysis. However, I noticed Betfair released more detailed Timeform commentary for the King George. It was interesting but didn’t tell me anything not already in the public domain.
Maybe subscribers get something extra, but I guess, as a lot of Timeform stuff seems to be free, it is no longer as valuable as it once was in providing an edge over the average punter. And finding out that Kauto has been downgraded from 190 to 165+ is not earth-shattering.
Can I live a full life without subscribing? Perhaps I will never know if I don’t subscribe.I notice Ginger seems to find it useful so maybe I am missing out.
Hi Zilzal
I work in the Flat department, so can’t give you an instant answer to the first question, but leave it with me and I will try to get back to you.
With regards the second point, I’m not all that comfortable speculating what other people may or may not have done and I think you may be better putting the question to him, however it doesn’t look unreasonable to think a figure in the low 190’s is unrealistic. I say that looking at the result merely on paper without knowing enough about the horses he beat to have a strong view.
- Total Posts 17716
165 is massively over the top.
Surely Timeform can come up with better than this……..165 plus or no plus puts him below stable companion Poquelin which would have Ruby splitting his sides with laughter.
Timeform’s + is magic…………can do anything with one of those.
.
- Total Posts 17716
I’d suggest Moscow Flyer could run him close. Still imperious when winning the Champion and Melling Chase in 2005, but well below that figure just weeks later at Punchestown then a shadow of the horse he was in 2005/6.
Amazing all these definitive assertions that 190 ish from BHA/RP and Timeform was too surface with 12 months of hindsight behind them.
But did Moscow Flyer post his best ever rating, and by quite a few pounds, immediately before falling off that particular cliff?
A number on this forum queried the 09 rating in the immediate aftermath of the race: I was so sure it was wrong, I also mused he’d never get within shouting distance of it again.If that’s the case reet, then fair enough. Good shout.
For information, but in truth relating Moscow Flyer’s deteriation to that of Kauto Star probably means little either way. Moscow got his career-high on 184 from the 2004 Tingle Creek. He was still earning 181 in the 2005 Champion Chase. He got 169+ for an easy win in the Melling and then recorded 151 at Punchestown in May 2005, 152 at Navan in Nov 2005, 150 at Leopardstown in Dec 2005 in that race that was ‘a distaster for Roger Loughran’ and 151 in the Champion Chase in 2006.
- Total Posts 102
TBF Its a lot harder when a horse has only had 5 outings in two years, Two brilliant, One so so, and Two way below par
I have never subscribed to Timeform. From what I have read, in the preinternet age, the Timeform black book was essential reading for form students, and I have always regarded it as having some sort of mystical quality based on superior race analysis. However, I noticed Betfair released more detailed Timeform commentary for the King George. It was interesting but didn’t tell me anything not already in the public domain.
Maybe subscribers get something extra, but I guess, as a lot of Timeform stuff seems to be free, it is no longer as valuable as it once was in providing an edge over the average punter. And finding out that Kauto has been downgraded from 190 to 165+ is not earth-shattering.
Can I live a full life without subscribing? Perhaps I will never know if I don’t subscribe.I notice Ginger seems to find it useful so maybe I am missing out.
Excellent Post Kasparov,if you compare Max Clifford as the Timeform of publicity you will realise there"s no mystique! Their rating of Kauto star just about sums them up and yet the faithful who took the 4/7 about him achieving the 5 timer will still carry on subscribing,more fool them!
TAPK,
Timeform is not all about the rating. You need their write ups to give the whole picture. I subscribe, but did not back Kauto Star in the King George. My bet on the day was Riverside Theatre each way.
The essay on Imperial Commander in Chasers And Hurdlers says "At nine Imperial Commander is only a year younger than Kauto Star and Denman, but has had a lighter career than either of those rivals and, with the latest crop of novice staying chasers looking to have plenty to prove, he looks a worthy favourite at this stage (meaning end of October) for the Gold Cup".
Which (as Kauto Star was rated 9 lbs ahead of Imperial Commander at the time) suggests, at some point this season, they thought we’d see Kauto Star on the downgrade.
Backed Imperial Commander at 11/2, now down to 7/2.
Value Is Everything- Total Posts 17716
There is nothing wrong with Timeform or anyone else who does their own ratings, when you record a figure for a performance you have to go on the evidence shown on the day because theres no truer performance than what the horse has visually achieved along with the rearguard assurance of time.
The problem with people like TAPK who are a knocker of Timeform don’t realise that the projected rating of the performance whether it’s 90 or 190 is an assesment of that day and doesn’t mean the horse is expected or will run the same figure again.
It’s unbeliavbly tiresom and frustrating to see people complain that horses are not running to what they’ve achieved in the past and it’s more to do with their faults whereby lack of common sense is the problem not Timeform. Without Timeform or anyone else who does ratings the ability to uses ratings for comparison and used as historical data is invaluable only about 5% of the people who do ratings actually use them to predict the future profitably.
Personally I am still covering my edges, there is no way I have time to catch up on 10 years of Racing so only the future can bring better fortunes althought I feel that in my short time as a Racing enthusiast I have improved every year and it’s so vital you catch the horse that’s about to run a big time before the one that already has! although with the later the tend to flop next time out which gives a false impression on the betting public and there’s quite a lot of value to be had.
I used to be a believer.
There is no doubt that they are a very polished outfit, the annuals (except for the font being to small for us wrinklies, do they do a Braille version, David?) and Perspective are very nice products but I no longer think of Timeform as the Holy Grail.
Colin
- Total Posts 17716
Outstanding ratings are acheieved rarely, if they were produced often, they wouldn’t be outstanding. The trouble is that they are likely to be reliant on a particular set of circumstances. and if those circumstances don’t fall right again, then it’s unlikely that a horse will reproduce that rating.
That’s an easy line for those defending a high rating to use, but it’s no less easy than those who doubt the rating when a horse fails to reproduce it subsequently despite failing to accept that they’ve not had similar conditions. It it perhaps a flaw that we will all have to deal with when it comes to handicapping horses in the conventional pounds per length way, and why understanding horses, their profiles and requirements are just as important, if not moreso than one particular rating.
Anyone that relies of Timeform telling them that Kauto Star’s definite level of merit now is either 165 or 190, will find betting on horses an expensive hobby. The truth almost certainly lies somewhere between the two, but there isn’t any point in plucking a random figure from thin air to do so. Since the King George Kauto Star has completed on 2 occasions. Therefore he’s been rated on the better of those efforts, namely Down Royal.
Alot of the points I make here would be just as relevant to that other wide margin King George winner that I forget the name of.
But, DJ, it’s equally valid to query a high rating when a horse (apparently) shows inordinate improvement to achieve it, even more so when that particular set of circumstances militates against those of the beaten horses that the winner is measured against.
Kauto’s 09 KG is relatively straightforward, in that most of the opposition fell into a hole owing to the overly strong pace, but it’s precisely those circumstances that show he didn’t actually improve, rather others ran below what they’d previously shown capable of.
It isn’t just him either, as (IIRC) TF overrated such as Harbinger’s KG, Sea The Star’s Eclipse, and the Irish Champion wins of both Fame and Glory and Cape Blanco for precisely the same reasons, and that none of them have lived up to those ratings since, lends credence to the view that they were overrated at the time, rather than ran out of their skin in unique circumstances[code:qqgbm9bf]you will realise there"s no mystique! [/code:qqgbm9bf]
Do they claim mystique? I think they’d just put it down to hard work and having the systems to be able to comprehensively analyse all racing, something no individual could ever hope to do as well as they do (although individuals who specialise are a different matter).
The problem with Timeform is that everyone has access to it so it’s value as a tool for finding an edge is diminished, but not eliminated. If you were the only one in the world who had access to it you’d clean up.
I’m not sure I agree that such improvement was neceassrily inordinate. Particularly when we are talking about Harbinger. We see horses improving at lower levels at least as dramatically. Harris Tweed winning a handicap off 86 to finishing second in a Group 3 next time against the Leger third. Theology winning a Goodwood maiden then second in the Queens Case next time out. Even Dangerous Midge who made a habit of improving in big chunks last season.
I respect your views, but I think we’re going to have to agree to differ on this one.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.