The home of intelligent horse racing discussion
The home of intelligent horse racing discussion

weight for age

Home Forums Horse Racing weight for age

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 18 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #19262
    johnledi
    Member
    • Total Posts 1

    Hi with frankel receiving 8 pounds tomorrow, does this mean that he has got a three length lead over a mile on the weight for age?
    if frankel won by say two lengths they would be calling him the best in the world, however off level weights canford cliffs would win by a length.

    thanks
    john.

    #365935
    GingertipsterGingertipster
    Participant
    • Total Posts 26575

    John,
    Frankel’s ability (being a three year old) is measured against a lower weight than Canford Cliffs (being a four year old) would be. It’s only right that Frankel gets an allowance for his immaturity. Although to make a level playing field it is questionable whether 8lbs is a little too much.

    value is everything
    #365945
    Nathan HughesNathan Hughes
    Participant
    • Total Posts 22577

    Canford has improved physical/matured from 3 to 4 and is probably in his prime but it’s not the same transition for every horse some mature faster than others and peak at 3 so it’s a concession that favours the faster maturing horses.

    Member since March 2008
    #365965
    TuffersTuffers
    Member
    • Total Posts 1402

    I’ve always found the weight for age allowances a very blunt tool. Early on in the season, 3yos are at a real disadvantage against the older horses and I’m not sure any weight allowance really caters for that. The classic example of this is how many 3yo sprinters struggle in all age handicaps. One of my favourite betting strategies used to be backing 4yo sprinters who had dropped in the handicap as a result of running against older horses as 3yos.

    There is an argument that there should be no weight for age allowances at all. If an owner wants to race their 3yo against older horses then they should be entitled to but as has already been pointed out, horses all mature/develop at different times so assigning a blanket allowance for all 3yos at a certain point in the year is not really satisfactory.

    #365974
    TheBluesBrotherTheBluesBrother
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1078

    Simon Holt in the Weekender this week talks about the out of date WFA allowance chart.

    If you look at the two WFA charts which Dave Edwards sent me, http://tinyurl.com/6ypkofh you will note the difference between the out-of-date BHA WFA chart and the one used by Raceform.

    Sometimes you will comes across WFA handicapping that just makes you shake your head with disbelief. :shock:

    #365980
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Total Posts 17718

    What are Mr Holt’s arguments for claiming the WFA charts are "out of date"?

    They’ve worked perfectly well since 1855. Why is 2011 so different?

    Is he trying to sell you something?

    #366041
    Venusian
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1665

    What are Mr Holt’s arguments for claiming the WFA charts are "out of date"?

    They’ve worked perfectly well since 1855. Why is 2011 so different?

    It’s not the same scale as that devised by Rous, it’s been updated a number of times since.

    The phenotype of the thoroughbred has changed noticeably over that last 50 years, never mind the last 150, and the official scale needs to be kept up-to-date to reflect that, especially over shorter distances.

    The blocky, heavily-muscled sort of animal that we see so often today matures much faster than the leaner, perhaps more elegant, traditional kind of thoroughbred.

    #366058
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Total Posts 17718

    It’s not the same scale as that devised by Rous, it’s been updated a number of times since.

    The phenotype of the thoroughbred has changed noticeably over that last 50 years, never mind the last 150, and the official scale needs to be kept up-to-date to reflect that, especially over shorter distances.

    The blocky, heavily-muscled sort of animal that we see so often today matures much faster than the leaner, perhaps more elegant, traditional kind of thoroughbred.

    The scale has only undergone very minor alterations since 1860. Very minor alterations indeed.

    As for the phenotype changing, I would take major issue with that. Look at the famous painting of

    Ormonde

    (1886, 3yo) and you’ll see no difference. [Remember that Fred Archer (up) was taller than Piggott]. Before the late 19th c., images of the horse (Stubbs et. al.) were stylised to a great extent: those slim lines, long necks and pencil heads don’t equate with reality. They are a stylistic stereotype.[attachment=0:1vxsh5mg]Ormonde.jpg[/attachment:1vxsh5mg]

    #366216
    bascule
    Participant
    • Total Posts 13

    Long been unhappy with the whole wfa system,
    ever since the US breds started to clean up in the
    late 60’s/early 70’s.
    A horse bred(as they used to be)to prep 3 times
    before the US triple crown in May/June could & did
    have a clear advantage over their european bred 3yo
    counterparts & the wfa did not(could not)reflect
    this when they took on the 4yos.
    Of course the blood lines are more mixed now
    but the system still favours the precocious champion who
    can be packed off to stud at 3 having only beaten 2
    generations.
    Without it racing would miss great clashes between
    the generations but also we really need to see champions
    racing at 4.
    So if Frankel does race next year l’ll raise a glass
    to a sporting owner with little to gain & plenty to
    lose

    #366257
    Venusian
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1665

    It’s not the same scale as that devised by Rous, it’s been updated a number of times since.

    The phenotype of the thoroughbred has changed noticeably over that last 50 years, never mind the last 150, and the official scale needs to be kept up-to-date to reflect that, especially over shorter distances.

    The blocky, heavily-muscled sort of animal that we see so often today matures much faster than the leaner, perhaps more elegant, traditional kind of thoroughbred.

    The scale has only undergone very minor alterations since 1860. Very minor alterations indeed.

    As for the phenotype changing, I would take major issue with that. Look at the famous painting of

    Ormonde

    (1886, 3yo) and you’ll see no difference. [Remember that Fred Archer (up) was taller than Piggott]. Before the late 19th c., images of the horse (Stubbs et. al.) were stylised to a great extent: those slim lines, long necks and pencil heads don’t equate with reality. They are a stylistic stereotype.[attachment=0:2wk1do3q]Ormonde.jpg[/attachment:2wk1do3q]

    You’ve put up a

    painting

    to try and prove your point?

    If you had put up a

    photograph

    of Ormonde, of which there are several, you might have a different view. One like this perhaps http://www.tbheritage.com/Portraits/Ormonde.html

    In fact, it would have made more sense for you to have posted a photo of his sire, Bend Or, http://www.tbheritage.com/Portraits/BendOr.html who looks very modern indeed, powerful, muscular and speedy-looking.

    Blocky, beefcakey horses, although rare, were not totally unknown in the second half of the nineteenth century, it’s just that they are far more common now than then, in fact more common than 60 years ago. A couple of examples who were important stallions in the late 1800s are Gallinule http://www.tbheritage.com/Portraits/Gallinule.html
    and, more strikingly, Springfield http://www.tbheritage.com/Portraits/Springfield.html

    What is interesting about Springfield, is that Bromus, the dam of Phalaris, the greatest stallion of the 20th century, is closely inbred 2X3 to him. Phalaris was much more Springfield than his sire, the leggy Polymelus, and it is from Phalaris, more than any other stallion or mare, that the modern thoroughbred owes its physique.

    Lastly, if you look closely at that photo of Springfield, which modern day mega-sire is he a dead ringer for?

    #366266
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Total Posts 17718

    You’ve put up a

    painting

    to try and prove your point?

    If you had put up a

    photograph

    of Ormonde, of which there are several, you might have a different view. One like this perhaps http://www.tbheritage.com/Portraits/Ormonde.html

    Yes I did. Because (aside from being a famous and finely realistic painting which beautifully evokes the great horse and jockey) it is a dead ringer for the photo you’ve kindly provided the link for. You’ll also recall that part of my argument was that

    earlier

    paintings were not to be trusted!

    The rest of your post is so clear and perfectly worded, in support of my contention that your point about changing phenotypes is dubious, that I’m really baffled as to why you think we’re on opposite sides at all! Perhaps I’m missing some subtleties here…

    #366268
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Total Posts 17718

    Lastly, if you look closely at that photo of Springfield, which modern day mega-sire is he a dead ringer for?

    Indeed – very striking!!

    Of course Galileo goes straight back to Phalaris (six generations) through the direct sire line (Sadlers Wells – Northern Dancer – Nearctic – Nearco – Pharos – Phalaris) so not too surprising after all.

    #366271
    Venusian
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1665

    Pinza, what I’m trying to say is that the horses I’ve highlighted are

    exceptions

    to the rule, that they were very untypical of the breed until 50 or 60 years ago, since when stallions like Native Dancer, Bold Ruler and Springfield’s double, Northern Dancer, have profoundly changed the appearance of the thoroughbred racehorse.

    Most breeders and trainers would probably agree that the thoroughbred of today is a markedly different-looking beast to what it was only half a dozen generations ago.

    #366281
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Total Posts 17718

    But so far you haven’t mentioned any of the

    non

    -exceptions which would apparently support your point. If there’s photographic evidence of these rather strange looking beasts we see in Stubbs et. al. then I’d be fascinated to see it. I myself have seen none.

    That’s partly why I chose the

    painting

    of Ormonde: although you are fair enough to qualify your point as to expert opinion with "most" and "probably" I personally feel that in trying to make claims for a change in phenotype too much emphasis has been put on 17th c.-early 19th c.non-representational art, from before the photographic age.

    If there’s no photographic evidence from the 1860’s or 70’s, say, I’d be inclined to say that the theory was wrong.

    #366288
    Miss WoodfordMiss Woodford
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1351

    Man O’War was naturally a muscular, compact individual, even though he and his offspring were routers. http://media.smithsonianmag.com/images/ … orse-1.jpg
    His son Battleship, a bulldog of a steeplechaser http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3b/Battleship_(USA).jpg

    As far as horses of the 19th century being much leaner than those of today, here is a photograph of Lexington (foaled 1850, photographed in the 1870s) http://www.sporthorse-data.com/horse/27 … -_2big.jpg
    compare to this print showing him as a 5yo http://prints.encore-editions.com/500/0 … il-2nd.jpg
    and this painting also done in his younger years http://www.sporthorse-data.com/horse/27 … on-big.jpg

    His sire Boston http://www.sporthorse-data.com/horse/54 … on-big.jpg

    Boston’s sire TImoleon, realistic except for the head http://www.sporthorse-data.com/horse/56 … on-big.jpg

    Timoleon’s stocky sire Sir Archy
    http://www.sporthorse-data.com/horse/25 … -_3big.jpg
    http://www.sporthorse-data.com/horse/25 … -_2big.jpg

    Finally we come to Diomed, a 1777 model. The first is much more stylized, but in both there is no hiding his short coupling, muscular shoulders, strong hind end and thick gaskin
    http://www.sporthorse-data.com/horse/73 … ed-big.jpg
    http://www.sporthorse-data.com/horse/73 … -_3big.jpg

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 18 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.