- This topic has 40 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 8 months ago by
.
- Posts
You don’t see every U.S. claimer having an odds-on favourite. The current cosy arrangement where nobody claims horses would be different if there were no low grade handicaps. I can’t see everyone then saying "after you" when a horse is run below its class.
The graded racing idea would be no improvement on the status quo. If it were modelled on greyhound racing you would move up the grades for winning and down for perhaps 3 losses in a row- still a cheat’s charter.
as I’ve said countless times, the only way forward is the U.S. system of claimers, from the cheapest (say 5k) to the dearest (say 200k). That way if someone is trying it on they risk losing their horse too cheaply, a perfect deterrent. It also allows talent to get rewarded as good trainers claim horses from bad ones and proceed to win with them- the free market at its best.Brian Ellison was interviewed on ATR a few months ago and said that he makes the effort to call the trainer of any horse he likes the look of in a claimer; if they don’t want to lose the horse, he doesn’t make a claim. If trainers are already talking to each other in this way, with some unrepentant in their breaking of the rules, why would claimers be run any more honestly? Would there not be scope for unprecedented collusion?
And who in their right mind would pay £20,000 a year to keep a horse in training if they could lose it at any time? Can you see Godolphin running their currently 80 and 90-rated handicappers in claimers?
Godolphin and Darley already run their horses in claiming races.
Owners gladly keep a horse in training for that much money, because it’s a win-win situation. The average American horse owner/trainer (at the lower levels they are often the same person) makes just as much money from horses claimed from them as from the actual purses.
I think the big difference is that purses are larger in the US. and people will only enter a claim on a horse if they believe that they can do a better job than its current connections, either in fixing medical or temperamental issues, messing with equipment, changing surfaces/distances/flat to jumps, or finding a track with bigger purses for lesser competition. So plenty of horses run in claiming races for years under the same connections.
There’s a line in Ted McClelland’s great book "Horseplayers" that sums up the American approach to claiming races…
Owning claimers is not a sentimental pastime. You claim horses the way a cattleman claims cows, so you can’t treat the stock like pets.
Thankfully the UK/Irish owner/horse relationship seems to run deeper than that most of the time and its for that reason the claiming system would never work over here. RUK flagged up Fremen winning at Redcar the other day. He’s won 7 claimers and never been claimed. Who’s going to take the Nicholl’s stable pet away from them?
A claiming system where the amount of prizemoney connections could claim depending on weight carried in the race, might work. You’d see very quickly who was in it for the prizemoney.
I tend to agree with Carvillshill over this issue, in that we should have a wide range of claiming races.
If we also got rid of the bookmakers and had a PMU type system then there would be reduced scope for sharp practice, and racing would be able to keep more of the money that it generates.
I am so disillusioned with the handicap system generally that I now tend to try to avoid them totally as a betting medium. It comes as little surprise to me to see the proportion of handicaps that are sponsored by bookmakers, relative to other types of race.
Whilst admitting that there is skill in manufacturing a suitable winning handicap rating, I wonder how many newcomers we lose to the sport as they see this skill manifest itself ?
- Total Posts 17716
It’s a fair bet that the incidence of winning favourites is no better in the US – with 50% claiming races, – Hong Kong or France – with their pool betting only – than it is in the handicap and bookmaker oriented UK.
Trainers the world over prepare their horses on the racetracks and lay out touches for their owners, and the majority of punters still do their pieces whichever way races are framed.
Scrapping handicaps will change nothing, imvho.Mark Johnstons idea may now hold some merit.
Think he’s on about horses of equal ability (a small range of ability). Not to have uncompetitive graded races where one or two are so much better than the others.
It would not have worked 30 years ago, as there weren’t enough racehorses of each level. These days, there may well be enough horses around for all runners in a race to be rated within 3lbs of each other. So some level weight graded races could be as competitive as handicaps in all but Pattern company. Although you would get rivals meeting time and time again once their merit became “exposed”. Can’t see it stopping skulduggery, as trainers will try to get in a lower grade race, one he can win. I don’t dismiss the idea but think the status quo is good enough for me, just try and improve the quality of lower level handicaps.I don’t like Claimers. At the moment I stay well clear of them. Trainers can still allow their horse to run 3 poor races, and then well when the money is on (which more than pays for buying the horse back). Also, a horse might look to be running off a winning weight, yet all too often it’s because the trainer knows the horse has had a problem and/or lost it’s form. Much prefer handicaps.
Punters should learn how to spot green horses who may well improve for a run or two; these are babies learning their trade (first / second run). Or one who will improve when upped in trip (breeding and temperament). It’s too easy to blame the trainer, these things are natural in horse racing, there isn’t (imo) much skulduggery in British racing. Mark Johnston is one of the most genuine trainers around. He first enters horses at trips short of their expected optimum. Not because he isn’t trying, but because they can win at trips short of their best, at lesser grades, off one handicap mark. And when exposed at that trip steps them up, to improve and win again. It’s called “good placing”. If a trainer races his horses at the optimum straight away he/she runs the risk of exposing a horse’s ability too soon. One win and that’s their lot.
Value Is Everything
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.