Ratings rather than weight for the big handicaps?

[yeats]

3 year olds just don’t get a run in the big handicaps these days and surely it’s time to change the policy of giving preference to horses with a higher weight rather than a higher rating.

A 3 year old would have to have been rated over 110 to even get a run in the Pitman’s Derby last month and very few 3 year olds have run in the race in recent years. The same applies to other big handicaps including The Ebor, where farcically in the last few years 3 year olds have been too lowly rated for The Ebor but too highly rated for The Melrose.

I have heard it argued that there are races confined to 3 year olds but the same applies to older horses.

All these big handicaps were enhanced in the past by having plenty of 3 year olds in them and to have few if not any 3 year olds in them, detracts considerably from the races for me.
Surely the runners for these races should be decided on merit and rating, not weight.

[Gingertipster]

I used to be of the same opinion Yeats, but without so many three year olds makes the race more competitive. ie Fewer improvers and therefore more horses in with a chance of winning. It also gives a better chance of a big win for older handicappers.

Although I do think there aren’t enough big handicaps restricted to 3 year olds.

Value Is Everything

[Author]

Posts