Home › Forums › Horse Racing › Timeform or BHA ratings?
- This topic has 21 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 4 months ago by
Gingertipster.
- AuthorPosts
- January 11, 2012 at 14:54 #386441
It’s far more depressing not to come to terms with one’s mortality, such a blinkered outlook causes too much prevarication when living is the order of the day!
January 11, 2012 at 15:26 #386449I wouldnt say I am blinkered Eclipse. I am quite aware I am going to die but would still take up Corm’s generous offer of another 10 years!
Anyway,as Paul said, this is more a conversation for the morgue I mean lounge.

"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
January 11, 2012 at 19:51 #386474Anyway,as Paul said, this is more a conversation for the morgue I mean lounge.

Thread added in the lounge so don’t read it if you don’t want to get depressed
January 12, 2012 at 18:57 #386612BHA
However Superform was better than the pair of them. How I miss Superform
January 13, 2012 at 12:10 #386716Rating is only one part of why someone should back a horse. People should not judge Timeform or even the BHA on just the ratings.
eg If a horse puts up a 167 rating in a strongly run race on good going… Punters should not rely on him putting up the same standard of performance in a slowly run race on soft ground.
There is far too much attention given to the "Timeform Top Rated" by punters. It is frequently NOT the horse Timeform themselves believe to have the best chance of winning. And even if it was the horse with "best chance", does not mean it is the "Timeform tip", as VALUE is key.
To show a profit a punter needs to enterprate Timeform (or any other form book publication) to identify value. Even with Timeform, if he/she is no good at identifying value he/she will not show a profit.
Sorry Reet, more value talk.
Value Is Everything - AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.