Calling the Handicappers or Vee or any experts?!

Celtic fire won on the snap , value fir the win

Sham Racing Wrote:

---

> Pirates, we would appreciate your opinion on the
> following race...
>
> Look at The Memorial Mile in PE a few weeks
> ago...
>
> Won by Celtic Fire (mr101) no points
> 2nd Silent Partner (mr96) no points
> 3rd Two Gun Kid (mr91) 3 points
>
> Rest of the field finished more or less on mr
> except for Changingoftheguard who ran way below
> form

How can Two Gun Kid compete with Celtic Fire & Silent Partner being beaten by them and will also have to carry 1.5kg more. It appears that Celtic Fire was the 'line horse' now what would happen if Two Gun Kid 'was used instead.

I am not a H'Cap wizard but to me there is too much SUBJECTIVITY with the MR system.

Hibs it not closing the distance but opening it by giving him points ,in others words we must not run him in features

fogwils Wrote:

---

> Sham Racing Wrote:
>

---

>

---

> > Pirates, we would appreciate your opinion on
> the
> > following race...
> >
> > Look at The Memorial Mile in PE a few weeks
> > ago...
> >
> > Won by Celtic Fire (mr101) no points
> > 2nd Silent Partner (mr96) no points
> > 3rd Two Gun Kid (mr91) 3 points
> >
> > Rest of the field finished more or less on mr
> > except for Changingoftheguard who ran way below
> > form
>
> How can Two Gun Kid compete with Celtic Fire &
> Silent Partner being beaten by them and will also
> have to carry 1.5kg more. It appears that Celtic
> Fire was the 'line horse' now what would happen if
> Two Gun Kid 'was used instead.
>
> I am not a H'Cap wizard but to me there is too
> much SUBJECTIVITY with the MR system.

Too true8-)

Sharky Wrote:

---

> fogwils Wrote:
>

---

>

---

> > Sham Racing Wrote:
> >
>

---

>
> >

---

> > > Pirates, we would appreciate your opinion on
> > the
> > > following race...
> > >
> > > Look at The Memorial Mile in PE a few weeks
> > > ago...
> > >
> > > Won by Celtic Fire (mr101) no points
> > > 2nd Silent Partner (mr96) no points
> > > 3rd Two Gun Kid (mr91) 3 points
> > >
> > > Rest of the field finished more or less on mr
> > > except for Changingoftheguard who ran way
> below
> > > form
> >
> > How can Two Gun Kid compete with Celtic Fire &
> > Silent Partner being beaten by them and will
> also
> > have to carry 1.5kg more. It appears that
> Celtic
> > Fire was the 'line horse' now what would happen
> if
> > Two Gun Kid 'was used instead.
> >
> > I am not a H'Cap wizard but to me there is too
> > much SUBJECTIVITY with the MR system.
>
> Too true8-)

The greatest inhibitor to the system is that it relies on all horses running sound ,fit and to their best ability!!!!!!

mark i dont say it is fair i say on paper the handicapper get it spot on

Sham Racing Wrote:

---

> It's not that we don't understand the merit rating
> system.
> Can't race in handicaps because of Mr benchmark
> ,race in pinnacles always under sufferance, can't
> race in features if you going to get points for
> running a place.They are just opening the gap
> between placings .
> So where do you race ?

E-Cape in the 2012/2013 season:

(excluding any feature events - my numbers should be close)

32 races for 2yo's (of which 14 restricted to fillies, and 9 plate races)
176 maiden races (of which 77 for fillies)

60 plate races (16 for f&M)
242 MR races (of which 81 for f&m)

total 510 races, over all distances

It doesn't take any math to see that the opportunities to win are limited, given the horse population.
That's the program, not the handicapper's influence.

It seems to me that trainers should, as much as possible, run their horses over a suitable distance, when they are 100% ready, and let the system take care of the rest.
Don't try to anticipate 'what may happen' or beat the system.
The MR system as a whole is a fair and just one.
Horses will have the opportunity to earn as much as they're entitled to given the conditions and limitations.

If a trainer can't find suitable races, then attempts should be made to get the program changed, or the horses sent somewhere else.

Sharky Wrote:

---

> Karel, would you mind giving your opinion on
> ZHIVAGO? Thanks


Zhivago got 5 points for beating Aegis-Fang by half a length in March, giving 2kg, his MR going from 79 to 84.
Aegis subsequently won 2 in a row and ended up at 78.
So Z at 84 and A at 78 is more or less right, based on when the two met in March.

Z subsequently didn't run from March to Sep, then Dec. He ran way below best both times, but could hardly have been expected to be dropped for those runs.

Will he be dropped for his effort last Saturday, when beaten 6 lengths (at 33/1)?
I've no idea, but if he is it'll probably be a token decrease if at all.

A was off the track from Oct to Dec and ran two crap races, way below form, and is now 75, which I think is rather generous. On that basis maybe Z. might come down by 3 as well, certainly not more.

Just an opinion!

Cape Race 9 on 4th January illustrates 2 other important points for handicapping:
1. Draw : This was a large field over 1400m which made the draw critical for a number of runners. For example, Captainofmysoul went handy to try to overcome her wide draw, and as a result of doing hard work for the first 1000m, faded in the finish. There was nothing wrong with the tactics, as dropping out and trying to come from many lengths back over that trip even more difficult. Reverse the draws between her and the winner and you most likely get a completely different result. When theses two fillies run against each other again, do not use this race in deciding their relative strength.
2. Apprentice Allowance: in addition to the points made by Karel about Jeans Pride ( which has always had soundness issues and hence has often run inconsistently in the past) she was the beneficiary of a 4kg claim. In this instance the appie rode a very smart race, and she got the full benefit of the claim. The handicapper ignores the claim, on the assumption that the level of skill ( or lack thereof) of the appie offsets the claim. In general that is true. One of the judgement calls to be made by punters is how to treat appie allowances in past form. For this race you have 8 MR points to play with for Jeans Pride.

My comment on the Turf race:

Love Vivien improved a few lengths / points on her first try over a little more ground; not really a 'strange' result :S

I have rated the race as follows:

Love Vivien - 80 (was 75)
Break of Dawn - 91 (Off MR 94)
Undercover Cat - 78 (Off MR 76)
Elusive Spirit - 84 (Off MR 81)
Uptothemoon - 81 (Off MR 86 - but lost quite a few lengths at the start)


The Cape race I believe was affected by a few incidents of 'careless' riding - agree that Captainofmysoul would be hard pressed to run to her rating from that draw - so I came up with the following:

Gold Academy - 91
Jean's Pride - 78
Razzle Dazzle Rose 98 (Off MR 104 - but this trip short of her optimum)
Pure Power - 91 (Off MR 93)
Captainofmysoul - 89 (Off MR 98)
Sea Cat - 86 (Off MR 93 - but apparently suffered interference)
Sweet Aria - 84 (Off MR 85)
Theme Song - 81 (Off MR 80)

PeterD Wrote:

---

> Cape Race 9 on 4th January illustrates 2 other
> important points for handicapping:
> 1. Draw : This was a large field over 1400m which
> made the draw critical for a number of runners.
> For example, Captainofmysoul went handy to try to
> overcome her wide draw, and as a result of doing
> hard work for the first 1000m, faded in the
> finish. There was nothing wrong with the tactics,
> as dropping out and trying to come from many
> lengths back over that trip even more difficult.
> Reverse the draws between her and the winner and
> you most likely get a completely different result.
> When theses two fillies run against each other
> again, do not use this race in deciding their
> relative strength.
> 2. Apprentice Allowance: in addition to the points
> made by Karel about Jeans Pride ( which has always
> had soundness issues and hence has often run
> inconsistently in the past) she was the
> beneficiary of a 4kg claim. In this instance the
> appie rode a very smart race, and she got the full
> benefit of the claim. The handicapper ignores the
> claim, on the assumption that the level of skill (
> or lack thereof) of the appie offsets the claim.
> In general that is true. One of the judgement
> calls to be made by punters is how to treat appie
> allowances in past form. For this race you have 8
> MR points to play with for Jeans Pride.

Very good summation and one extra factor not taken into account on the day was the strong tail wind which helped some of the pacier runners slip the field in the straight.....Jeans Pride was just such an example.....I ignored her PE stint and thought with a trip back to the Cape was in with a squeak..... the draw did not phase me as she is normally quick out of the machine....swingers with the winner a rather pleasant surprise.... as the lack of internet tote odds on the day..... should have exposed her as a no hoper.....:S

The following refer -

Flash is correct - takes the honest, consistent horse/trainer forever to get the horse back to the correct rating, once it has been overrated. This, more than anything, creates an exodus of Owners, for obvious reasons.

This "GREAT SYSTEM" creates the following -
1)more lower rated multiple winners than higher rated multiple winners - it stops horses.
2)it rewards mediocrity.
3)it results in horses going through the divisions without winning a race, just by being consistent.

And if thats what you want - a system that stops good horses, then so be it.