PHIL SMITH – BHA Head Of Handicapping – Q&A

[albrookes]

Firstly, thanks to all who participated in the Bill Pressey Q&A (still available on the Celebrity Q&A section of the site) and thanks to Bill for participating.

Joining us this week is a man you will all be familiar with – [b:yvqeawcc]BHA’s Head Of Handicapping Phil Smith[/b:yvqeawcc].

Please post your questions here as this is the only way you’re guranteed your question will be put directly to him.

Many thanks in advance

[moehat]

Is it a nightmare having Denman constantly threatening to run and then pulling out, given that he would push most horses out of the handicap? And, is it a dilemma wanting horses to run over the National fences with the risk of their weight shooting up as a result of putting in a good performance? And, do you realise how excited us sad National followers are on the eve of the weights being announced [although not quite as excited as the night before the race itself] Many thanks in advance, but also thanks for being part of being what is not just a National Treasure but an International Treasure. [Oh, and is there a horse that never ran in the race that you really wish would have done so?] Sorry, am I allowed so many questions?

There are positives and negatives. It adds to the interest and drama of the race but it does mean I have to take time to frame the race with him in only to have to unpick it when he drops out. On the one hand it would put lots out of the handicap which I think has been a big success for the race in the last few years but it would attract lots of the better horses as they would get a light weight. A good run over the National fences last November by Black Apalachi didn’t stop him running brilliantly in the big race. I would have liked Exotic Dancer to have run in the race.

[jose1993]

Jeu De Roseau was rated 100 over hurdles after the following 4 runs.

20Nov07 Fol 18Sft C43yMdH 3K 11-0 PU/9 Russian Invader[40/1]11-0

11Nov07 Mar 18Gd C43yMdH 2K 10-12 5/10 44L, Mamlook[25/1]10-12

31Oct07 Hun 17Gd C43yNvH 3K 10-12 10/12 83L, Peredur[5/1]10-12

07Aug07 Ros 16Y 3yMdH 4K 10-12 3/15 3L, Won In The Dark[9/4F]10-12

The first question is how do you possibly conclude this horse is worth a rating of 100, or anything in positive numbers, after the 4 runs listed above?

28Apr08 Tow 16GF C4HcH 2K 10-6 11/12 54L, Double The Trouble[25/1]10-8

23Mar08 Tow 16Sft C4HcH 3K 11-0 11/12 89L, Pacco[20/1]10-11

The horse was then dropped 5lb (of all the numbers that could be chosen 5 was) for finishing 89l behind a 90 rated horse, whilst giving the winning horse 3lb. Why was the horse dropped 5lb when the horse hadn’t demonstrated that it was a 5lb worse horse? Surely there is also a distance where how far a horse is beat becomes irrelevant to whether the horse ran to its’ rating?

30May10 Utt 21Gd C4HcH 2K 11-2 2/11 6L, Red Not Blue[9/2]11-7

10May10 Tow 16GF C4HcH 4K 10-6 1/13 1L, Ruby Crown[6/4F]11-5

The horse then reappears on the 10th May 2010 rated 82. Yes, the horse was dropped 13lb. Why is it the BHA’s handicapping teams policy to drop horses any random number on the basis of how long off the track a horse has had? And why was a 13lb drop appropriate for a horse who had barely shown it had 13lbs worth of ability judged on its’ last 5 runs over hurdles?

Was it even appropriate or necessary to give this horse a rating?

Why was Workforce dropped 2lb after the King George for the Derby form "not working out." Was the form not working out on the Saturday night or the Saturday morning?

The decision has to be made at some time. All my International colleagues had dropped the horse and as his end of year rating depends on getting majority approval from them. There didn’t seem any point in preserving a rating that had not been supported by the form of the beaten horses up to that point.

[Prufrock]

Dear Phil.

Many thanks for undertaking to answer our questions. Mine are as follows:

1) What is the approximate budget of the handicapping team, including benefits and travel to foreign meetings and conferences, and which department holds the budget?

2) Following the announcement of the need for cuts in race day and other services at the BHA, and against a backdrop of falling income from The Levy, what changes can we expect in the BHA’s handicapping division?

3) What reason is there for failing to publish nursery marks in the first few weeks of the nursery season, information that many punters wish to acess in order to have a bet?

4) Why, in this age of instant communication, is there so much lag between a horse running and being awarded a new mark? What reason is there for updates not being almost immediate?

5) Can you explain the clear “digit preference” in evidence with BHA marks – whereby it is more than twice as likely that a horse will be rated 80, 90, 100 etc than 81, 91, 101 – and do you concede that this undermines the authority of the BHA’s ratings?

6) Do you think the whole handicapping process would have more integrity if owners, trainers and the like were not allowed to lobby individual handicappers for preferential treatment but were instead expected to appeal (and not frivolously or repeatedly) to a handicapping overseer?

7) What is your view on the proposition of replacing most handicaps with claimers?

8 ) What, in approximate terms, are your pounds-per-length (or pounds-per-second) scales, and are you confident that they are accurate and sensitive enough to differing circumstances?

3lbs. at 5f.
2.5lbs. at 6f.
2lbs. at 7f-9f.
1.75lbs. at 10f.
1.5lbs. at 12 f.
1.25lbs. at 13f-14f
1lb per length at 2miles.

We change them according to ground. I am sure they are accurate and sensitive as otherwise we would not have such close finishes and racing would be uncompetitive which it isn’t.

9) Can you justify the BHA handicappers’ frequent references to “yardsticks” and “rating races around” certain horses when extrapolation of this ilk is scientifically questionable?

10) What do you think the future holds for official handicapping in Britain? What improvements and initiatives are on the horizon?

Many thanks.

Simon

[Romney Marsh]

Hello Phil, and thanks for putting your head on the block.

When discussing the rating awarded to Harbinger in the King George, you said you based his rating on Cape Blanco ‘running to form’. What do you look for when trying to interpret which horses have ‘run to form’ and what, if any, do you think the shortcomings of this approach are?

In handicaps three-year-olds are shown by results year after year to be favoured by the weight-for-age scale at certain times of the year at certain trips, while at other distances at other times of year are disadvantaged. You seem to refuse continually to refuse to accept that these inequalities exist and frequently say you have no plans to amend the scale. Why is this?

Looking back at the handicapping of Tusculum who landed a gamble for Curley Leisure in 2009 in a 0-45 classified event at Kempton, why was it that this horse was allowed to drop 50lb in four runs prior to that race? Was it because the handicapper was swayed by the distances the horse had been beaten, and took the view that because the horse was beaten 58l, 44l, 53l and 89l in those races, his performances were worse and merited more of a drop in his mark than if he had been beaten 43l, 25l, 36l and 73l in the same races, for example?

http://www.britishhorseracing.com/goracing/blogs/head_of_handicapping.asp

Following on from that last question, do handicappers ever undergo retraining, and if not, why not?

How much attention do your handicappers pay to time compared to form?

It is particularly useful in maidens when horses can be flattered by a slowly run race or in Group races if you are going to give a horse a particularly high rating. We all often use time comparisons when there is little form evidence to go on.

It is commonly acknowledged that over 5f, a length roughly equals 3lb. Are there any circumstances in which that length might equal 6lb or 7lb, and if so, what are they?

Why are your handicappers content almost without exception to allot a horse a handicap mark after three runs, virtually irrespective of circumstance, even if that mark has a good element of guesswork about it? When these situations occur, how heavily are your handicappers encouraged to err on the side of caution?

Why are nursery marks not published for the first month or so after the first nursery has been run?

Why is it that the BHA needs 13 domestic handicappers when the Racing Post or Timeform have traditionally needed only 4 or 5? What do the other 8 or 9 handicappers offer that the much smaller number employed by the Racing Post and Timeform don’t?

And finally, and on a related question, what justification can you give for spending a month compiling a handicap for the Grand National when it is just another race in the Calendar for which ratings are already available? Is this a consequence of having 13 handicappers?

Thanks very much

[The Eye Of Sauron]

Phil- thanks for finding the time to answer this Q&A.

1. Why does a win have to be penalised with a rise in the weights ? Is there a case with, say, a winning 11yo or 12yo chaser to stay on the same mark with beaten horses lowered accordingly. My point here being that horses of that mature age are not improving in the vast majority of cases – they have just struck lucky or the right opportunity has been found via excellent placement.

2. An impressive win by, say, 10 lengths is often rightly rewarded with a big rise of 10lb to 14lb in the weights. However when beaten the same distance the same horse does not get dropped in such large chunks. It seems far easier to go up than come down the handicap. Why do it take so long to get dropped yet one win to get a huge raise ?

3. With the valid argument that carrying big weights over marathon distances has a more tiring effect on a horse you design a special handicap for the Grand National. Why therefore is there not a special handicap designed for other marathon chases such as the Welsh National (often run on very heavy ground, so possibly more important than Aintree regarding top weights carried) or even the Eider Chase ? The ‘Aintree Factor’ in terms of the fences being far stiffer than anywhere else is in reality a thing of the past- it is a high quality marathon chase run on a flat track, the only unusual feature apart from its length and 40 runners, being the composition of the fences.

4. Example- a horse has shown a proven (albeit low) level of form over hurdles, over a lengthy period of time, so it then switches to fences. The horse duly improves by jumping fences & goes up the chase handicap accordingly. However the hurdles handicapper also raises it’s hurdles mark to a comparable level, despite it being proven the horse is a far better chaser. Why ?

5. Do you make handicapping assessments based on your own opinion of a horse’s preferred ground. In other words if a horse with winning form on fast ground subsequently runs badly on soft ground do you drop the horse by standard method or do you personally arbitrate to say " hated the ground" so I’ll leave him alone / lower by less ?.

6. On a similar tack, say a horse handicapped to finish level with the horse which eventually finishes second wins a 3 mile chase on heavy ground by 20L. Assuming the second ran to its mark, how much more (if at all) would you increase the winner’s mark had the race been run on GTF?

7. Do you look at the time of the race in conjunction with overall form? For example in a juvenile / novice hurdle on decent ground a 100 rated hurdler can often finish far closer to a good 125 rated novice than he should on pure ratings. Clearly the differential in class will be less apparent when a race only quickens up with half a mile to run. This is particularly relevant in small fields.

However I’ve noticed that the 100 rated novice can get it’s mark adjusted upwards which, in the eye of an owner, can seem unjust. This system encourages conservative riding, jockeys not riding out to the line etc. Do you look at race times ?

8. Fancy handicapping a few bumper races?

Thanks in advance.

[Prufrock]

A few easier questions:

What characteristics make a good handicapper?

What career path brought you to handicapping and how much experience did you have of handicapping before it became your job?

What events or initiatives have made you proudest in your role as Head of Handicapping at the BHA?

And a couple of tougher ones, though they may be ones that the BHA more widely should answer:

What justification was there for not a single handicapping position coming up for renewal when the BHB was discontinued and the BHA was instituted? From the outside this sort of thing made the "change of leadership" in a publicly accountable body appear a sham.

All handicapping vacancies that arise are advertised and subject to a thorough recruitment process.

And why has handicapping at the BHA/BHB/Jockey Club never been put out to tender, or at the very least scrutinised by an independent party, such as happened recently in New South Wales?

Same answer. It is currently being scrutinized by an independent party

[jose1993]

Is there ever a time when you look at a race beforehand and think something is "well in?"

In recent times we’ve seen adjustments made to stop NH trainers exploiting different hurdle and chase marks. Do you think this is working and does it now limit a trainers’ opportunity to use the system fairly?

We’ve also seen a minimum rating introduced to stop "no-hopers" at the Cheltenham festival in championship. Do you think the minimum rating is high enough when you relate it to the likely rating needed to win?

And is it possible we will see such a measure introduced for Group 1 flat races?

The Ebor entry system is based on weight-carried and not the official rating of a horse. This leaves 3yo’s whose connections are trying to get into the race at a very big disadvantage when factoring in weight-for-age. Why is the system based on weight carried when it is clear that 3yo’s will always carry significantly less weight?

http://www.britishhorseracing.com/goracing/blogs/default.asp

[Drone]

Two questions:

The first of which is related to this one in Prufrock’s first post:

Why, in this age of instant communication, is there so much lag between a horse running and being awarded a new mark? What reason is there for updates not being almost immediate?

1) Venetia Williams, for one, is adept at getting wins from her handicappers on Sundays, meaning she then has the best part of two weeks to run them under a penalty or, not infrequently, a succession of penalties. Admittedly these penalty carriers can be a boon to the punter and do add a little intrigue to races, but surely such a long wait until being required to race off a revised OR cannot be justified nowadays, unless one rationalises it by invoking the phrase ‘it’s the way it’s always been done’

2) The current system of awarding an OR (handicap mark) after a maximum of three runs is open to abuse, be that ‘wrong tripping’, ‘considerate rides’ or by whatever other means connections have of hiding a horse’s true ability from you and the public

Would you favour a system (as I do) that demands a horse wins before being permitted an OR, however many runs that may take; and furthermore that win should be in this country.

Thanks

[cormack15]

Many thanks for this Phil –

A couple of slightly less technical questions from me :

When did you first get interested in horse racing and what was it that attracted your interest?

If you weren’t doing what you are doing now what occupation do you think you’d be in?

Probably still teaching or retired now keeping my own ratings and backing horses with some golf at weekends

[Gerald]

cormack, you had better get Kendal Cavalier out of hibernation, and also send an email to pablo.

[Gerald]

First one is a bit of an aside. Why is it that for certain early-closing h’cap races, for example the Hennessy I think, the entries are early, but then the weights don’t come out for another couple of weeks. I don’t think there is too much betting activity, with people not knowing the weights, and more money doesn’t come in from an acceptance stage before the weights are out, so either the entries could be made later, or the weights come out earlier.

Do you feel you are losing the battle of the Becher Chase? Some punters and aficionados, who ought to know better, think that any Becher Chase winner will automatically get clobbered out of contention. If they think that, does that mean that trainers, who are of far more limited intelligence, think the same, and won’t bother entering their serious contenders?

Ireland. Okay you can’t speak for them. You’ve explained the situation in terms of slippage. However, I came across something from their side in terms of "giving horses a chance", or suchlike. I think we used to raise the NH ratings 10lbs every 3 years or so. If it is still slippage that is happening in Ireland, will they be raising all of their ratings sometime in the near future?

Forgotten the term that Prufock uses for when you use what happened in the same race in previous years to give the winner a rating, and you also use the ratings given to the 2nd, 3rd and 4th etc in previous years as well. Did this come into play in the King George (Flat)? Is there any chance that all the horses ran to 10 lbs lower than the rating allocated to them?

Would like to second the request for disclosure of the pounds per length scale, plus how confident you are in it, and what work is done to substantiate it.

See earlier answer. I suppose the key way it is substantiated is by outcome if we were having races (particularly on the flat) where the horses were all over the place we would have a problem. However we are pretty happy with the closeness of our finishes which we monitor so have no plans to change although as I said earlier we are fairly flexible at times with our use of it. It has been available in the handicapping section of our website for some time.

[Adrian]

Do you ever discuss with American/Canadian racing secretaries the possibility of them implementing a standardised weight-for-age scale?

What do you think about Grade 1 races in the States having allowance conditions? For example if you have not won a Grade 2 in 2009/10 then you’d receive 7 pounds in the Sword Dancer (Gr.1) at Saratoga tomorrow!

Personally I am totally against it and much prefer the European system.

[eddie case]

Dear Phil,

1.
Why don’t penalties incurred for winning group races last longer, surely penalties should last for a minimum of 12 calendar months. For instance Hearts of Fire ran in a G3 this week with no penalty despite winning a G1 only last October, that being near the end of the season so in effect that penalty only lasted 4 months at the start of this season.

2.
Why do fillies/mares receive 5lb in maiden races but 3lbs in group races?

3.
Why do horses receive no penalty for winning an apprentice/conditional race but still go up the handicap the same as any other race?

4.
Why isn’t which horses run in races like The Ebor dictated by rating rather than weight as happens in group races.
3yo’s rated above 105 would not be eligible for The Melrose and could miss the cut in The Ebor, in any case the Ebor is worth a lot more money and has always been a more interesting race with a few improving 3yo’s in it.

Thanks
Eddie

[thedarkknight]

Perhaps not so much a question, but I would like your view on the following idea….

The BHA (and/or Timeform) should produce a provisional form rating for televised Group/big handicap race winners within minutes of the conclusion of the race, with the figure displayed on television and then perhaps compared to previous winners of the race/season’s best divisional performances/greatest horses of all time etc

The logic is that – to the uninitiated, racing is just a set of animals running around a field and it is very hard for a newcomer to get any kind of handle on the significance of the performance they have just witnessed.

We need to educate and in the process, potentially fascinate the viewer. What would Torvill + Dean’s Bolero have done for anyone without the judge’s perfect scores at the end? Or Bolt’s Olympic 100 metres without the world record time?

I appreciate that the handicap figures would inevitably need revision after the event, but I don’t think that would be a legitimate excuse not to produce them.

As James Willoughby suggested in a recent RP article, in order to find a new following, racing needs to sell itself on quality and the intellectual challenge of finding winners. I think bringing the ratings to life and in the process stimulating debate around the great horses would go a long way to aiding this cause.

I think a better way is to tell viewers the rating before the race. To this end we now offer a free service to racecourses offering our ratings to be published. Not every racecourse has taken the offer up. I personally would be against immediate post race reaction as ratings are too important to guess. See my point earlier about Harbinger. I think we would lose credibility if we said X on a Saturday afternoon and then Y a short while after.

[Irish Stamp]

Thank you for agreeing to answer our questions Phil.

In light of the results of last winter (mainly the performances of Sanctuaire, Notus De La Tour and the Irish trained Son Amix in the Fred Winter) and the various horses that George Baker, Barney Curley etc have imported from Germany will the BHA be looking towards a system whereby a horse can only qualify for a handicap mark after a certain amount of runs on BHA controlled tracks?

More of a question on race planning but having seen a high class 4yo Chase at Warwick a couple of seasons ago (Araldur, Chapoturgeon and Songe were amongst the four runners) and with the import of more and more French-breds, many of whom will be more precocious than their British and Irish counterparts are the BHA looking at or likely to look at staging more of these 4yo only Chases pre-January or 5yo only Chases in the latter part of the season now that the old 5yo allowance has been severely reduced?

Thanks

Martin

[Glenn]

Hi Phil,

Horses go up and down the ratings much faster than they used to due to the competitive racing initiative and the recent inflation of winning margins (while your pounds per length coefficients apparently remained the same) – today’s psychically punted 17 length winner would, for example, have been classified a 14 length winner three years ago.

As a result last time out winners follow up much less than they used to. Surely this is a disaster for integrity and racing’s image to newcomers to the sport, with horses beaten out of sight on their last few runs winning left and right and LTO winners often not even trying to follow up.

How much of your job do you see as pre-empting integrity issues and how much has this fallen by the wayside with the competitive racing initiative? The rewards for non-trying, from a handicapping perspective, have never been higher. Group horses can now drop to bandit class in a dozen races or less. Have you not gone too far in trying to equalize horses’ chances when you should really just accept that in-form horses are going to win at a much higher rate in any system with an ounce of probity?

Also, it’s been touched on above, but I’ll repeat. Why do horses with no meaningful form, or even no British form at all, get alloted ratings? You have the power to withold marks, why not use it much more widely?

If a horse has a rating in another country from meaningful form we will rate it. If it hasn’t then we can refuse it. See my earlier answer but hundreds of horses are refused every year including about 40 from abroad do not get allocated ratings. You never get to see them obviously as they cannot then run in handicaps.

[Author]

Posts