- This topic has 11 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Looking at the 8:20 Sandown the official ratings on the Racing Post web site differ to the official ratings on The Sporting Life & ATR web sites.
Doing a Google reveals nothing except that Raceform are responsible for compiling the official ratings. Raceform have the ratings for the 8:20 the same as the RP. I would assume these are correct, so why should The Sporting Life & ATR be different?
Raceform are not responsible for compiling official handicap ratings, they are compiled by the BHB Handicapping team.
I’ve not looked at the race in question but it seems that you may be looking at each publication’s own private handicap ratings?
Just had a look and Dolus is correct the OR’s are different
Moss Valle 116 (RP) – 114 (SL<br>Red Clubs 113 (RP) – 114 (SL)
You are right they are different and I think it is the Post is actually wrong.
If you click on one of the individual horses and look at the BHB rating in far left column it is the same as the Life not what is printed in the RP.
On BHB update list of hcap marks Moss Vale and Red Clubs are both 114 so it does look as if the Post OR printed figures for that race are not correct and that the Life/ATR ones are.
Correct Richard, The Rp ratings are incorrect for some of the runners like Sierra Vista, who beat a very solid yardstick in Borderleescot who is a 110 all day long imo and then she wins well off 102 in a handicap last saturday and then she’s put back to 100, i don’t think so.
<br>The difference in the figures given stems from the fact that the Racing Post gives the figure that would apply in a handicap run today.
The Sporting Life site gives the amended figure published by the BHB on Tuesday this week, which takes effect in handicaps from Saturday.
Obviously if the Post automatically updated all official handicap marks on a Tuesday, the figures given for all handicaps would be incorrect for the rest of the week.
The changes published on Tuesday included a drop from 116 to 114 for Moss Vale, a 1lb rise to 114 for Red Clubs and a 6lb rise to 108 for Sierra Vista.
So both websites are correct in one sense!
AP
Thats what I thought at first Alan but in my BHB lists there is no change to Red Clubs this week and Sierra Vista was 102 when winning at Haydock yet is down as 100 on RP site.
They appear to have got a glitch in somewhere.
I noticed a similar issue with some of the handicap marks for fridays oaks meeting.. From memory it was the second handicap on the card..
Thanks for all your efforts chaps. Maybe I’ll add them together and divide by two.
I feel quite important having both Richard Hoiles and Alan Potts replying :biggrin:
<br>Dolus,
Merely confirmation that even two anoraks won’t always keep the rain off!
AP
Perhaps these are ‘future echoes’ and have already been adjusted for tonight’s result? Feel free to PM me with Saturday’s full results. ;)
Just to make it even more confusing, looking at The Oaks today:-
The official ratings are not different but from 14 runners the Post only list 6 horses with an official rating while the Life has 12 with official ratings.
Clicking on the horses name in the BHB box in the Post reveals the BHB rating as given in the Life.
So why have the Post not listed the ratings while the Life has?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.