Go to Villagebet.com.au for free horse racing tips - Click here now |
|
HANDICAPPING |
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Author | |
djebel
Premium Joined: 07 Mar 2007 Status: Offline Points: 53960 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: 01 Mar 2014 at 2:55pm |
We just saw big Richie talk to Lee Curtis about the magnificent run of Press Report.
He mentioned all the quality 2yos she just beat. She has been beaten 4 lengths by Memorial and now a similar margin in a group 2 race. How will the handicapper respond ? How should the handicapper respond ?
|
|
reductio ad absurdum
|
|
djebel
Premium Joined: 07 Mar 2007 Status: Offline Points: 53960 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Gun Case is another case in point.
Why start him off in such a race ? |
|
reductio ad absurdum
|
|
djebel
Premium Joined: 07 Mar 2007 Status: Offline Points: 53960 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Opinion should rise to 98/99 ?
|
|
reductio ad absurdum
|
|
Mr Chan
Champion Joined: 11 Feb 2014 Location: Annandale Status: Offline Points: 932 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Bizarre. Just bizarre. Reminds me of Great Condor, about 20 years ago, who made his debut as a late-season three-year-old in a Saturday race at Rosehill and ran second as favourite to I'm A Freak. Not content with that, a fortnight later they took on Brawny Spirit at weight-for-age in the Missile Stakes! Finished midfield. Still, Great Condor was a talented horse. Eventually won five races, most down the straight at Flemington, including the Bobby Lewis. |
|
djebel
Premium Joined: 07 Mar 2007 Status: Offline Points: 53960 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
http://www.risa.com.au/FreeFields/Acceptances.aspx?Key=2014Mar08,VIC,Flemington
Fiorente won today off a rating of 118 , He beat Green Moon 115 by 0.5 lengths and Foreteller 112 by 0.7 lengths. In a handicap the weights would be 60, 58.5 and 57 Given todays margins What rating should Fiorente go to ?
|
|
reductio ad absurdum
|
|
ExceedAndExcel
Champion Joined: 20 Dec 2008 Status: Offline Points: 16226 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
120 I reckon.
|
|
Geraldo
Champion Joined: 14 Jan 2014 Location: Kent, England Status: Offline Points: 5818 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Similar distances between Fiorente, Green Moon and Foreteller in the Peter Young too.
They are likely to have improved, as they're being brought to a peak. The ratings igven are master ratings, rather than what they ran in the Peter Young. How about keeping Fiorente the same, raising Green Moon to 116, and Foreteller to 115. |
|
Geraldo
Champion Joined: 14 Jan 2014 Location: Kent, England Status: Offline Points: 5818 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Was gonna ask whether I could have another go.
The horses finished close together, so lots of the field will be rated 106-110 or so. I'll stick to what I wrote first. I'm not clever enough to justify changing it. I'm happy enough with the whole field being goodish figures - it's a Group 1, the two 3yos had come 1st & 3rd in a 3yo Group 1 the previous week, and the first five are mercenary horses with guns for hire. |
|
Browndog
Moderator Group Joined: 30 Oct 2009 Location: Brunswick Hds N Status: Offline Points: 35559 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
119
|
|
|
|
djebel
Premium Joined: 07 Mar 2007 Status: Offline Points: 53960 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I don't know how the handicapper can justify raising Fiorente half a kilo in relation to Green Moon and Foreteller. Handicapping is not about penalising horses its about evening them up. If anything the gap in "rating" between Green Moon and Foreteller should have closed as Geraldo said. So now in a handicap the weights would be 60.5, 58.5 and 57. On exposed form what would the result be ? |
|
reductio ad absurdum
|
|
Browndog
Moderator Group Joined: 30 Oct 2009 Location: Brunswick Hds N Status: Offline Points: 35559 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Second third and fourth horses ratings remain as they were
|
|
|
|
djebel
Premium Joined: 07 Mar 2007 Status: Offline Points: 53960 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
He is penalising Fiorente rather than evening them up. I guess they will never meet in a handicap again so he does not need to justify himself.
|
|
reductio ad absurdum
|
|
Browndog
Moderator Group Joined: 30 Oct 2009 Location: Brunswick Hds N Status: Offline Points: 35559 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
As these are not primarily handicap horses, it will be interesting to see how he adjusts their international rating on Tuesday.
I think for official handicapping he has to remain faithful to the template The other ratings(Longines, Timeform) are more subjective
|
|
|
|
djebel
Premium Joined: 07 Mar 2007 Status: Offline Points: 53960 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Not sure what this means ? The template simply tells us what each rating will carry in a certain class of handicap doesn't it ?
|
|
reductio ad absurdum
|
|
Browndog
Moderator Group Joined: 30 Oct 2009 Location: Brunswick Hds N Status: Offline Points: 35559 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
|
|
|
djebel
Premium Joined: 07 Mar 2007 Status: Offline Points: 53960 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
That does not explain what weight he must penalise a winner of certain races. And when I post what weight they would get in a handicap I am not suggesting a "group 1 handicap" I am simply implying a open handicap which could for all intense and purposes be any class we wanted it to be. By the way, thanks for that template Browndog. |
|
reductio ad absurdum
|
|
Browndog
Moderator Group Joined: 30 Oct 2009 Location: Brunswick Hds N Status: Offline Points: 35559 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
|
|
|
Geraldo
Champion Joined: 14 Jan 2014 Location: Kent, England Status: Offline Points: 5818 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
m. One of the advantages RBH has is that it recognises there are times when two or three rating points equate to the same weight at the higher level but divide into different weights at the lower end. |
|
djebel
Premium Joined: 07 Mar 2007 Status: Offline Points: 53960 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
HANDICAPPING PRINCIPLES • A Handicapper’s role is to ensure racing is delivered at a competitive level through the allocation of weights to be carried by each horse in a race with the purpose of equalising their chances of winning. • In Victoria we handicap from the top weight downwards to the required minimum. The credentials of the top weighted horse ultimately determine the spread of the weight scale in a race. In some circumstances horses who are rated on the minimum will be racing out of their class and will seemingly be disadvantaged by the scale of weights. However, these horses are eligible and have an opportunity to nominate and compete in lower rated races. Horses weighted above the minimum are eligible only for that class of race or have proven to be competitive at that level. • In Victoria the Handicapper will issue a set of weights for all Handicap races with a minimum top weight of 60kg with the exception of Group Races and 2yo races. • The Ratings are an indication of what weight a horse may be allotted in a particular rating band. The eventual spread of weights is determined by the field strength, and is at the discretion of the Handicappers , however a minimum spread of 5kg will generally be provided. • Once a horse has competed in a race their Rating will be assessed within 24 hours. In Maiden races only winners will be given a rating assessment during this time period. • A winning performance generally attracts a penalty. That is a horse which wins a race will on most occasions have its rating, within that particular class or level of competition increased in terms of those horses which have finished behind it. The severity of the penalty is at the Handicapper’s discretion and is based on a number of factors which include: strength of opposition, authority and merit of the win, the weight carried, and winning margin and time. • In assessing rating movements Handicappers do not factor in apprentice claims due to the relative inexperience of the junior rider compared to his more senior counterpart. However, all overweight is accounted for in re-weighting as this is a discretionary judgement of the connections in addition to the Handicapper’s specific analysis. • Generally speaking winning performances will attract a re-handicap between 1 ½ and 2 ½ kilograms. Wins by greater than average margins and / or by very lightly raced horses may attract a slightly larger re-handicap. Horses placed second or third could have their Rating increased, depending on the merit of performance and their proximity to the horse(s) ahead in the finishing order. |
|
reductio ad absurdum
|
|
djebel
Premium Joined: 07 Mar 2007 Status: Offline Points: 53960 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
My point is, a winning performance should not attract a penalty - simply a re-evaluation.
|
|
reductio ad absurdum
|
|
Geraldo
Champion Joined: 14 Jan 2014 Location: Kent, England Status: Offline Points: 5818 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
hmm, Green Moon remained on 115, and Foreteller remained on 112.
|
|
djebel
Premium Joined: 07 Mar 2007 Status: Offline Points: 53960 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
reductio ad absurdum
|
|
djebel
Premium Joined: 07 Mar 2007 Status: Offline Points: 53960 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I see the Sydney handicapper has the balls of a mouse.
Why would he let Grey Lion into todays race 1 kilo light ? In Melbourne where all his form is he is rated 92, Why wouldn't the Sydney handicapper just reciprocate that assessment and make a better race of the 4 horse dross that has been dished up ?
|
|
reductio ad absurdum
|
|
3blindmice
Champion Joined: 22 Oct 2012 Status: Offline Points: 18105 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Acknowledgement that Sydney racing is slightly stronger overall perhaps? Or that he deserved more than a 1kg drop given his form? I didn't bet but that was one of the weakest fields he'll probably ever meet
|
|
Tontonan
Champion Joined: 13 Oct 2007 Status: Offline Points: 3898 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
• A winning performance generally warrants a
re-evaluation. That is a
horse which wins a race will on most occasions have its rating re-evaluated, within that particular class or
level of competition increased in terms of those horses which have finished behind it. The severity of the
re-evaluation is at the Handicapper’s discretion and is based on a number of factors which include:
strength of
opposition, authority and merit of the win, the weight carried, and winning
margin and time. Better ?
|
|
djebel
Premium Joined: 07 Mar 2007 Status: Offline Points: 53960 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Grey Lion has a rating of 92 in Victoria and 90 in Sydney. Neither need to be adjusted after today.
|
|
reductio ad absurdum
|
|
djebel
Premium Joined: 07 Mar 2007 Status: Offline Points: 53960 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Roger Fell fuming over 'bizarre' handicapping of Guardia SvizzeraBy Richard Birch Roger Fell has hit out at the handicapper’s treatment of his four-year-old sprinter Guardia Svizzera, who rattled off a quick-fire hat-trick in moderate company last month. The son of Holy Roman Emperor launched his winning spree on August 21 with a four-and-a-half-length victory over One Boy in a Class 5 Hamilton handicap. He followed up in Class 6 company at Catterick the following week, and then was turned out fresh as paint by Fell two days later to complete the treble in a Hamilton Class 6. Guardia Svizzera scored off a mark of 59 when starting the sequence, but the handicapper has now bumped his rating up by a crushing 23lb to 82. Fell, who has won two major 7f handicaps with stable star Burnt Sugar this summer, believes Guardia Svizzera – and the gelding’s owner – has been treated unfairly, and blasted: “It’s an absolute joke, and a bad advertisement for the BHA. “The horse has won three low-grade races for hardly any prize-money. The money he has won won’t even cover the costs of keeping him in training for a year. “The first race he won was the hardest of them all; the other two were down in grade. His owner believes it’s an unfair amount to put the horse up, and so do I.” Fell added: “It’s bizarre what they’ve done to Guardia Svizzera. It’s just wrong.” |
|
reductio ad absurdum
|
|
djebel
Premium Joined: 07 Mar 2007 Status: Offline Points: 53960 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Handicapper Smith responds to Fell blast following Guardia's 23lb hikeBy David Baxter BHA handicapper Graeme Smith has explained the reasoning behind raising the Roger Fell-trained Guardia Svizzera 23lb after a hat-trick, a decision that left the trainer fuming. Fell described the cumulative rise as "an absolute joke" on Thursday, but the logic behind hiking Guardia Svizzera to a mark of 82 from 59 was on Friday outlined by Smith. In a statement, he said: "Formerly trained in Ireland, Guardia Svizzera started out for Roger Fell in May off a mark of 72. That had dropped to 59 by the time he won by four and a half lengths at Hamilton in August. "That winning margin was always going to incur a hefty rise and, with the runner-up having won since, the run currently looks to be worth a figure in the high 70s on its own. "Further to the value of that form, two subsequent wins off marks of 66 and 72 underline the fact Guardia Svizzera is currently ahead of those figures. "His latest Hamilton success off 72 came from Rockley Point who was actually 2lb well-in at the time. Guardia Svizzera beat him by an easy length and a half with the pair a further length and quarter clear of the third. The bare maths alone has Guardia Svizzera running 7lb above his mark at 79, and we felt he had more in reserve and rated him as value for an extra length and therefore 82. "Incidentally, Guardia Svizzera’s peak mark when trained in Ireland was 82." Fell also felt the raise was unjust as Guardia Svizzera's winning efforts had only banked a little over £11,000, but Smith added: "BHA handicapping decisions are based entirely on the value of form rather than prize-money won. All horses are handicapped to make their next race as competitive as possible, which is in the interests of horsemen, spectators and punters alike." Trainers and connections often take issue with the handicapper, but Smith invited them to air any grievances directly to him and his colleagues. He said: "The handicapping team encourages any trainer unhappy with a decision to contact the handicapper responsible to discuss how that decision has been arrived at. If the trainer continues to have concerns they are encouraged to utilise the independent appeals process." |
|
reductio ad absurdum
|
|
djebel
Premium Joined: 07 Mar 2007 Status: Offline Points: 53960 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
And of course we have the self interest of the trainer.
COMMENT RICHARD HUGHES Let's follow the French model and limit handicap ratings rises to the winnersI have major issues with our handicapping system. In my opinion it would be improved by radical change. More horses should have more chance of winning – and for that to happen I believe only handicap winners should have their ratings raised. The main problem with the way we handicap horses in Britain and Ireland is the system encourages people to cheat. That's what it does, and I think most people can see that's what it does. It is obvious the lower the rating the better is the general rule in handicaps, unless you're trying to force your way into a race like the Grand National, Ebor or Hunt Cup. Moreover, it pays to start a horse in handicaps off the lowest possible mark as that gives you the greatest room within which to rise. There are ways of getting down to the sort of rating you want. One might be that a horse goes to the track after spending more time on a walker than on the gallops. That horse therefore arrives at the races a little like me – bigger around the belly than he should be and short of peak fitness. People can easily play the system. They might be staying within the rules, but are operating outside of the spirit of the rules. Compare their horses with those who are campaigned with hearts on sleeves. It is hard to win handicaps, particularly if you openly show your hand every time. You can consistently perform honourably, finishing second, third or fourth, and nudging up one, two or three pounds each time. After four runs you can be 8lb higher but do not have a win to show for it. At the same time, a horse campaigned in a less transparent manner could have dropped 8lb over the same period. That's a 16lb swing. Let me make it clear that I am not criticising handicappers. They have a horrendously hard job, one I would hate to do. There must be many occasions when they would love to give a horse a bigger figure but are unable to do so. I hate to see the frustration and disappointment felt by countless owners whose horses continually run well and are continually punished for doing exactly that. It is incredibly disheartening for them when their horses are sometimes beaten by rivals who were not previously campaigned with integrity. It is really dispiriting for owners whose horses give their all every time but can't quite win – and, believe me, this game is all about winning. Owners are involved in the sport because they want to win. Not enough get to win, or feel they have a realistic chance of winning. That needs to change. My way of changing it would be rebuilding the handicap system so that in handicaps only winners can have their ratings increased. Some will think that is far too bold and that no racing nation could operate such a system. However, it would be wrong to think that because what I'm calling for is what already happens in France. There, if you finish second in a handicap at Longchamp, Chantilly or anywhere else, you don't go up in the weights. The same applies to all losing horses. It is only the winner's mark that can be increased. If a horse beaten a nose into second then reopposes an opponent he beat into third by six lengths he'll reverse the form. To my eyes that's good, not bad. It will then be his turn to be hiked in the weights and those who finished behind will have a greater opportunity next time. Critics will say this is unfair on horses who win a handicap. However, the connections of those horses will at least have won a race and, as I said earlier, winning is what counts. Part of the problem is the prize-money dished out to placed horses is so poor. Prize-money in general isn't great, but the overall situation would be made much better if the cake was split differently. Take the nursery Dandy Lad contests at Wolverhampton on Saturday night. The total prize fund is £7,521. The winner gets £3,752, the second £1,116, the third £557 and the fourth £400. Wouldn't it be better and fairer all round if the winner got perhaps £750 less and that money was divided proportionally among the placed horses? Again, the system for divvying up prize-money is better in France, where the second can often expect to collect 50 per cent of what the winner earns. My concerns about the handicapping system might not even exist if horses finishing second were regularly winning £5,000. In my opinion, prize-money for finishing second in two races should be the same as winning one comparable race. As things stand, horses rated 70 or under – the majority of the population – can finish placed in a fair race but the money collected might not even cover the day's expenses. Owners continue to support the sport by buying horses and keeping them in training. Given the likely financial returns, I sometimes don't know how or why they do it – but they do. They want to win. I believe an overhaul of the handicap system would give them a better chance and it would therefore encourage them to stay in the sport. My first preference would be to limit ratings rises in handicaps to winners. If that cannot be done I would love to see prize-money distributed more fairly, so there is no longer such a chasm between what you earn when you win and what you earn when you nearly win. If we could do both, so much the better. |
|
reductio ad absurdum
|
|
ThreeBears
Champion Joined: 13 Apr 2017 Status: Offline Points: 2911 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Totally agree with the trainer. 23lb rise for those three races beating trees is a farce. How the handicapper could justify a rise of anything beyond fifteen pounds is beyond me and even that would have been pushing the envelope.
|
|
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Tweet |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |