- This topic has 28 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 6 months ago by
.
- Posts
I was watching Brough Scott’s piece on Racing Post video.
Brough argues that Sea The Stars is the ‘completest’ horse he’s ever seen (he’s seen a few one assumes) and makes a good case for the argument.
One suggestion he made during the video was that races like the King George and the Arc should be run without any age allowance for three year olds. That way the fastest/best horse on the day would win.
Intriguing idea and one that would perhaps see a few more four year olds stay in training. Giving the three year olds an allowance does, in a way, turn these races into a sort of handicap does it not?
However wouldn’t the three year olds simply duck those races if there was no age allowance and thus make the races less competitive and less prestigious than they are now, making such an initiative counter-productive?
I was also wondering, but haven’t had the time to work out yet, how the roll of honour for the Arc would have been different for, say, the last ten years had there been no age allowance.
He never mentioned it but presumably the fillies allowance would go too.
We already have a situation where the 3yo sprinters struggle against older horses to such a degree that we’ve had some retired at the end of their 2yo career or shipped abroad.
As for middle distance 3yos, they get 12 pounds off 4yos in the King George and still not many contest that race. I can’t see how taking away the 12 pounds allowance – and therefore virtually ensuring none would participate – would help the race as a spectacle.
I think the 3-y-o sprinters ‘problem’ is that modern-day Group sprints attract such big, competitive fields (I seem to remember Tin Whistle walking over for the July Cup back in the 1960s) that the 3-y-os are just not battle-hardened enough. We like to look for tough nuts in top handicaps like the Wokingham and the Stewards Cup, and the Group sprints are maybe similar nowadays in that respect.
Maybe an early season (May?)Group 2 over 5 or 6f for 3-y-os might be an idea.
I like the idea of doing away with the WFA allowances, but you’d need to get other European countries, at least, for it to work.
- Total Posts 17716
I was watching Brough Scott’s piece on Racing Post video.
Brough argues that Sea The Stars is the ‘completest’ horse he’s ever seen (he’s seen a few one assumes) and makes a good case for the argument.
One suggestion he made during the video was that races like the King George and the Arc should be run without any age allowance for three year olds. That way the fastest/best horse on the day would win.
Intriguing idea and one that would perhaps see a few more four year olds stay in training. Giving the three year olds an allowance does, in a way, turn these races into a sort of handicap does it not?
However wouldn’t the three year olds simply duck those races if there was no age allowance and thus make the races less competitive and less prestigious than they are now, making such an initiative counter-productive?
I was also wondering, but haven’t had the time to work out yet, how the roll of honour for the Arc would have been different for, say, the last ten years had there been no age allowance.
He never mentioned it but presumably the fillies allowance would go too.
Corm
1. Never trust any journo who invents his own language (completist?).
2 Never trust any journo that still has to work for a living when he is well past the age when most have their feet up.
3. Never trust any journo that thinks they know better than someone (Admiral Rous) whose ideas were around long before he was born, and will be long after he’s dead.
Apart from that, it was a pretty good article?
If there were no age allowance, then no three year old would run against their elders. A colt who develops in to a top three year old; may retire even earlier if unable to compete for top money against older horses on fair terms. Weight for age has been proven over the years, it might be a pound or two wrong here and there. But don’t we want to see generations running against each other?
I think the main reason why there are so few top 3yo sprinters is not the age allowance; but the way mile races are paramount. Horses like Delegator and Paco Boy could be Champion sprinters given the chance.
Something that might work is a “bonus culture”. Derby and Oaks winners getting £75,000 bonus for winning next year’s Coronation Cup, £200,000 bonus for a King George etc. Am sure bookmakers could be persuaded to put up prices for next year’s King George (over 13 months in advance), immediately after this year’s Derby. So authorities / sponsers can insure against it winning, by taking an ante-post price.
Value Is EverythingDo you think the bookies would ofer much of a price on a Derby winner for the following year’s King George, Ginger, if they knew the authorities were just about to wade in with a six figure bet?
Hopefully Corm, competition between bookmakers to get the bet would mean a reasonable price. Bookmakers include the chance of retirement, so their price shouldn’t be too bad. The "insurance" does not have to be a six figure sum anyway. If they put on enough to get back say two thirds of a possible pay out; should suffice. Could just put on small amounts throughout the next year, when the chance of it running becomes easier to predict (though price will shorten). It may also be possible to bet on betfair if bookies are too stingy.
Don’t think it would unduly harm each race to bring down the normal prize money slightly. To help pay for these bonuses. Looking at this years race, Conduit could have won a bonus for winning the St Leger and King George. Look Here and Frozen Fire could’ve won it. Who knows who else may have turned up with a chance of a bonus
With a horse like Sea The Stars, a six time Group 1 winner.All these bonuses added up could mean him running for a very considerable sum.
e.g. If there were bonuses for winning the Derby and next years King George. Eclipse and next years King George, International and…., Irish Champion and…., Arc and….
The King George could be worth over a million pounds to connections. Well worth staying in training for, especially when there could be bonuses for all Group 1 races.Am sure the BHA could persuade racecourses and sponsers to co-ordinate their bonuses.
Like to know from Barry Dennis a bookie’s opinion whether he thinks this could work.
Value Is Everything
Apart from oddities such as the Nunthorpe and Scarbrough Stakes 2yo don’t race against 3yo, so don’t allow 3yo to race against their elders either2yo racing
3yo racing
4yo racing
5yo+ racing for the grown-upsEach tier would have its own ‘classics’ and have a comparable programme of races of similar merit and prize money
I have a dream that one day…
Apart from oddities such as the Nunthorpe and Scarbrough Stakes 2yo don’t race against 3yo, so don’t allow 3yo to race against their elders either2yo racing
3yo racing
4yo racing
5yo+ racing for the grown-upsEach tier would have its own ‘classics’ and have a comparable programme of races of similar merit and prize money
I have a dream that one day…
So you don’t want generations to run against each other then Drone? Sea The Stars not able to take on Zarkava? Thought the hole point of encouraging them to race on was to get them running against each other.
Value Is EverythingSea The Starts not able to take on Zarkava – that is possibly the worst example you could have used to try and make your point. Their clashes under the current system have hardly been epics.
Sea The Starts not able to take on Zarkava – that is possibly the worst example you could have used to try and make your point. Their clashes under the current system have hardly been epics.
That is the whole point David.
We are trying to find a way of encouraging three year olds to race on at four. e.g. Sea The Stars and Zarkava racing in the same year. Yet under Drone’s plan they would never be allowed to meet anyway. But at least Drone has a plan.Value Is EverythingThe idea of level weights races makes a lot of sense. The fastest horse should win on the day. But people aren’t completely stupid. Flat racing has basically moulded itself round the 3yo horse. Stallion prospects are made out of top 3yo’s more than often enough, those that do well in the Guineas and the Derby – the early season Group 1 3yo races in general. And this won’t change because of removing wfa allowances. Would anyone value STS any less for example if he was defeated in open company in any of the races he won in this year because those races were run without the wfa allowances? It wouldn’t help racing sadly if wfa allowances were taken away.
The removal of WFA would have to be only one of several measures to put racing on a sensible footing intended to reward merit rather than precocity. A class of races above Group One perhaps called Championship races is one idea eg the Eclipse, ARC, July Cup etc which would be only open to 4YOs and over. Prize money would have to be adjusted so that Championship races were worth much more than Group Ones. Handicap ratings would not include credit for ability assumed but not yet proven, so Sea The Stars would be 135-8= 127 or whatever it is. Raceform, Timeform and other handicappers would ideally fall into line. All measures to establish a true meritocracy and worthy champions rather than youth champions. Sea The Stars would have to race the next year to be established a champion and his value would reflect that.
Our sport must be just about the only one to hail youth champions as the best. It is ridiculous when you think about it. What is worse it deprives us of seeing many of the potential stars for more than a year. It is like Federer giving up after one Wimbledon, or Tiger Woods saying thanks for the memories after the 1997 Masters.
Nothing left to prove? Don’t make me laugh.
I, as much as the next man, would love to see horses race at 4yo and beyond. However, was not the ideal of 3yo Classic races, when they were introduced 200+ years ago, to determine who the top 3yo stallions were so they could be sent off to stud and get an early start on their breeding careers, all for the betterment of the Thoroughbred as a breed?
Granted, with huge book sizes nowadays, and no lack of stallions, the whole "betterment of the breed" reason is no longer really valid (except in the case of a fillies, like Zarkava, because of their limited offspring). But the concept of young horses retiring to stud is a couple of centuries old.WFA races are in essence level weights. You give the 3yo an allowance to level the playing field, and likewise with fillies and mares. Now, one could argue that the scale could be tinkered with a bit, and that maybe the 3yo gets a little too much, esp at the end of the season when they are almost 4yos. The 8lb allowance 3yo colts get in the Arc is too much in my opinion. I think the 5lbs the Americans give is fairer.
Yet under Drone’s plan they would never be allowed to meet anyway. But at least Drone has a plan.
Teenage rumpy-pumpy resulting in pregnancy is generally to be frowned upon; therefore I would ban breeding in the Thoroughbred until they are 6yo, by which time they will have had 4 or 5 years racing and we would be able to determine reasonably objectively from a population of thoroughly exposed Pattern performers just how good they are on the racetrack and – probably equally importantly from a breeding point of view – just how they’ve matured both physically and mentallyNot an entirely serious or thoughtfully-considered plan Gingertips, just a pie-in-the-sky and no doubt deeply flawed wish that doesn’t stand the remotest chance of being implemented.
As mentioned in a recent post, I find it heartening that the majority do seem dismayed and annoyed at 3yo retirement, catalysed by the case of STS.
Until now I genuinely believed the majority of Flat fans were quite content with a star that burned bright for a single year and sanctioned the summary October extinguishing as a necessary ‘part of the game’
The removal of WFA would have to be only one of several measures to put racing on a sensible footing intended to reward merit rather than precocity. A class of races above Group One perhaps called Championship races is one idea eg the Eclipse, ARC, July Cup etc which would be only open to 4YOs and over. Prize money would have to be adjusted so that Championship races were worth much more than Group Ones. Handicap ratings would not include credit for ability assumed but not yet proven, so Sea The Stars would be 135-8= 127 or whatever it is. Raceform, Timeform and other handicappers would ideally fall into line. All measures to establish a true meritocracy and worthy champions rather than youth champions. Sea The Stars would have to race the next year to be established a champion and his value would reflect that.
Our sport must be just about the only one to hail youth champions as the best. It is ridiculous when you think about it. What is worse it deprives us of seeing many of the potential stars for more than a year. It is like Federer giving up after one Wimbledon, or Tiger Woods saying thanks for the memories after the 1997 Masters.
Nothing left to prove? Don’t make me laugh.
One year where three year olds do well and what happens?
Blackheath,
Group 1 races are already essentially level weights. With 3 year olds only getting weight for immaturity. If there was no weight allowance then all three year olds will be effectively giving weight. Not a true meritocracy at all. Three year olds are not youth Champions, two year olds are youth Champions. If Roger or Tiger could spend their days being paid astranomical sums in the breeding shed, then am sure they would. But sadly for them it doesn’t work like that. Without an allowance three year olds will not run against older horses, it would be unfair and foolish to do so.You say it deprives us from seeing potential stars. Well horses like Sea The Stars and Zarkava proved themselves before "retirement". Running in and winning many Group 1’s. If a horse is still improving at the end of his three year old campaign, or likely to win races he failed in at three; he will be kept in training as a potential star.
To effectively prevent three year olds from showing what they can do, just so they might race at four; seems unfair and selfish.
We already do have Championship races, so it is a waste of time grading them as such. The Arc is thought of as a better race than the King George which is in turn better than the Coronation Cup. The Eclipse is not usually the best 1m2f race.
If handicappers were not allowed to rate horses on what they might have done, then all trainers will instruct jockeys to come late as possible and only win by the shortest of margins. We’d also get jocks dropping hands and losing races every week. With so many hold up horses, there’d be unlucky in running every race. A cheats charter, won’t work.
Value Is EverythingGinger
There must be something about horse racing that makes people look at it in a different way to all other sports. You wrote
Group 1 races are already essentially level weights. With 3 year olds only getting weight for immaturity. If there was no weight allowance then all three year olds will be effectively giving weight.
So let’s take a human equivalent. It is the 100 metres final at the Olympic games. The 18 year old World Junior Record holder gets 5 metres DFA allowance from Usain Bolt because otherwise he would effectively be giving distance (your logic). He beats Usain by a metre in 9.48 seconds, is proclaimed the greatest sprinter in the world, scoops all the lucrative contracts, never having to prove he would have progressed by that 5 metres to justify the adulation. It’s ridulous, but that is what happens in horse racing.
Who knows whether Sea The Stars would have improved a single pound. I know of brilliant 3YOs who did not improve at all (the euphemism is "not trained on") and useful ones who improved by stones until they were 6YO and beyond. It is a mistake to assume horses will make "normal" improvement.
You say it deprives us from seeing potential stars. Well horses like Sea The Stars and Zarkava proved themselves before "retirement". Running in and winning many Group 1’s.
It deprives us of seeing which are the best and fastest, because as 3YOs they are not. They invariably receive more weight than the equivalent of their winning distance. As mature horses would Sea The Stars, Rip Van Winkle, Zarkava or some other horse be the best, and in what circumstances. The pecking order is often quite different at 4YO and 5YO. Which, of course, is the point of getting your champion 3YO off to stud before the horse is properly tested and perhaps an inconvenient truth revealed.
The whole point of my argument is that the sport could be better for adopting measures which strongly encourage good horses to be kept in training. Horse racing competes with other sports for public attention, TV and press. The flat racing part of the sport haemorrhages it’s stars and potential stars every year, and it doesn’t help.
In the ROA magazine this month John Gosden expresses the opinion that flat racing is on the brink of major decline. One of the reasons being that racing is not promoted as a sport with its stars, the horses, given exposure in the popular press and TV. The concentration on betting and centuries old traditions does not attract a younger audience. How can the stars and the clashes of the giants be promoted when they’re here today, gone tomorrow.
We are trying to find a way of encouraging three year olds to race on at four. e.g. Sea The Stars and Zarkava racing in the same year. Yet under Drone’s plan they would never be allowed to meet anyway. But at least Drone has a plan.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.