- This topic has 44 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
I just dont see the point in them at all, maybe on the flat over the shorter distances?
Putting horses into any kind of list like that is pointless to me, as there’s so many variables in how a race is run it can get ridiculous.
In a kind of contradicting way to myself though, I find Dunguib’s rating in that list rather strange to work out considering he’s never come out of 1st gear in any of his races?
The figures are descriptive. They are not an expression of which horse is "better" than another – whatever some might imagine – just one person’s belief of which horse has run faster to date.
To rail against it is a bit like railing against the fact that Lough Derg is well ahead of Dunguib in the prize money table. "That’s ridiculous! Everyone knows Dunguib is a better horse than Lough Derg. How can someone publish a table stating that the latter has won more prize money than the former?"
If you think speed figures are irrelevant why not say that rather than ridiculing this person’s work and managing to achieve little other than revealing your ignorance of the subject matter?
On second thoughts, I will simply echo Rory’s post above and find something better to do with my life.
I’m sure there was some that said the same for Ken Hussey’s ratings
Let ’em…that’s what I think…
The figures are descriptive. They are not an expression of which horse is "better" than another – whatever some might imagine – just one person’s belief of which horse has run faster to date.
To rail against it is a bit like railing against the fact that Lough Derg is well ahead of Dunguib in the prize money table. "That’s ridiculous! Everyone knows Dunguib is a better horse than Lough Derg. How can someone publish a table stating that the latter has won more prize money than the former?"
If you think speed figures are irrelevant why not say that rather than ridiculing this person’s work and managing to achieve little other than revealing your ignorance of the subject matter?
Sorry you’ve lost me completely
:?:
My name is John and I think speed figures are irrelevant…
Keep up the good work with your stopwatch and lists Mark.
Ah, as far as I’m concerned, speed ratings are yet another thing I can look at & then blame for my failure to pick the winner yet again.
A genuine conversation between my wife & I last time we went to the races:
Me: Who shall I back in the next?
Wife: (Points to the parade ring) Well that one looks pretty fast.
Probably as accurate a speed rating as anything you might get in the papers.
Would it be fair to say you have a problem with the RFO ratings in particular, rather than the concept of the usefulness of speed ratings as a whole CS? If Duinguib was well clear on Nelson’s ratings would you then be a believer?
Would it be fair to say you have a problem with the RFO ratings in particular, rather than the concept of the usefulness of speed ratings as a whole CS?
100% Correct …although they are something I’m not highly influenced by personally but each to his own method, far be it for me critisise anothers method, but I feel very sorry for folk with a scant knowledge of racing form who are paying for the sort advice published in this column. I also feel speed ratings would be of far more use in flat race sprints
If Duinguib was well clear on Nelson’s ratings would you then be a believer?
It would be a start but the whole RFO list of twenty hurdlers look as if they’ve been shuffled like a pack of cards them printed in the order they were dealt out, the order could just as easily be selected with the preverbial pin………….and I can’t forgive the omission of For Bill of Voler La Vedette from the top twenty when a Menorah (for instance) is included and to rate Big Bucks and Zaynar as equals is sheer fantasy
It would be a start but the whole RFO list of twenty hurdlers look as if they’ve been shuffled like a pack of cards them printed in the order they were dealt out, the order could just as easily be selected with the preverbial pin
So if your top 20 lined up exactly with the RFO’s Top 20 speed rated, would speed figures then be OK?
It would be a start but the whole RFO list of twenty hurdlers look as if they’ve been shuffled like a pack of cards them printed in the order they were dealt out, the order could just as easily be selected with the preverbial pin
So if your top 20 lined up exactly with the RFO’s Top 20 speed rated, would speed figures then be OK?
As I said It’s these RFO ratings I have a problem with, not
speed ratings, or any other type of ratings, just misleading and ill judged ratings which the saturday punter might take at face value. Have you seen the whole list?If the hurdle ratings in RFO had been more in line with their chase ratings I wouldn’t have started this thread
Perhaps Lough Derg has run in races more conducive to running a fast timefigure than Dunguib’s romps in small fields. Just a thought. But you probably knew that.
I was reading between the lines Pru…
I find the whole function and purpose of speed ratings in general irrelevant, just another circumstantial and one dimensional perspective to try and find a winner.
As I said It’s these RFO ratings I have a problem with, not
speed ratings, or any other type of ratings, just misleading and ill judged ratings which the saturday punter might take at face value. Have you seen the whole list?Fair enough, CS. No problem with that opinion whatsoever.
I can’t forgive the omission of For Bill of Voler La Vedette from the top twenty when a Menorah (for instance) is included and to rate Big Bucks and Zaynar as equals is sheer fantasy
You’re still missing the point. These ratings are not a reflection of horses’ abilities, but of the time figures they have achieved.
Still, if you’re missing the point, many others may be too – and that, as I understand it, is your main argument.
I can’t forgive the omission of For Bill of Voler La Vedette from the top twenty when a Menorah (for instance) is included and to rate Big Bucks and Zaynar as equals is sheer fantasy
You’re still missing the point. These ratings are not a reflection of horses’ abilities, but of the time figures they have achieved.
But they are way out of sync whem compared with Racing Post time figures
PFO Solwhit 7th with 75 : RP TS 167
PFO Celestial Halo Top with 82 : RP TS 166
PFO Lough Derg 8th with 74 : RP TS 143
Quite a variationStill, if you’re missing the point,
Not really, see above
many others may be too – and that, as I understand it, is your main argument.
Agreed, and my main argument
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.