FORUMITES RESPOND - HANDICAPPING DEBATE

Black Pepper is different IMO............. he can be a 62 depending on the line horse(looks like they chose the 4th horse) so although we might not all agree ,there is at least evidence.

Rob, lets see how he shapes, up here, after 2 runs in Kimb and 10 points later... as I mentioned, he is very well and has a top class rider again....

louisg Wrote:

---

> Rob, lets see how he shapes, up here, after 2 runs
> in Kimb and 10 points later... as I mentioned, he
> is very well and has a top class rider again....

Louis ,personally I did not put him up to 62 ,I have him 60,but I would not have argued with 58 or 62 cos it is a bit subjective,particularly on sand.I often find my sand ratings unreliable ( I think that inconsistent surfaces are as much to blame as inconsistent horses!)

I wish there was a way to measure the going more accurately, as "standard" can mean very many different things.

Is there not a computerised system that can work out a merit rating sytem and the line horse cause it seems like most of the time everyone has a different opinion who the line horse should be??

Rob, I agree wholeheartedly re the surfaces. Vaal Sand is a nightmare, most of times, in terms of "standard"....it does have a large variation.

Greg, the whole handicapping system is computerised. The line horse is the problem.... but, once selected, the handicapper could, theoretically, be lying on a beach in Miami, the system can and will work it out. Not only is the line horse maybe always debateable, but each possible or alternative line horse results in radical differences, in terms of the relevant penalties allocated after each race. And if the mindset is to stop horses, the best way to do that is to take the furthest back horse possible, as the line horse.

thank you Louis, i didnt realise a computer selected the line horse.

No, Greg, the computer doesn't select the line horse, the handicappers do that. Sorry for not being clear on that one.

louisg Wrote:

---

And if the
> mindset is to stop horses, the best way to do that
> is to take the furthest back horse possible, as
> the line horse.

The mindset (and what is that?) cannot be to stop horses. You are like the Malema of handicapping, promising everything but delivering nothing. It's bullshit to keep repeating that till you think someone will believe you.

The handicapper can't "stop" all horses! Show me one example of a horse that has been stopped that isn't trained by you. I understand that your horses have been stopped, it's a given now. In other words, what was done that shouldn't have been done or that wasn't rectified shortly after.

It's pointless going through the principle of the handicapping rule, either you don't get it or nothing anyone says will ever convince you. I handicap every single race, and sometimes my line horse is different. But most of the time when I am different, it's because I am not accountable to the beaten horses the way the handicappers are. I have no agenda, i'm just trying to find the winner of the next race.

King Of Pain is going to be a good example. No one is really convinced K.O.P is suddenly "better" than Beach Beauty and Yorker. He's beaten Capetown Noir a couple of times, but never in Grade 1 races. But K.O.P will probably go to about 117 and carry 59.5kgs in the July.

Now what would you do, seeing as you don't "stop" horses?

Again, Jack, you refer to the top horses. Why not refer to the normal horses, for whom MR was brought in originally. Have a look at Salute the Sun, then, if you don't want to look at my horses. Or Break of Dawn.

Also, Jack, if the system and the handicappers are so good, I wonder why there is a committee involved in lookng into the problem and why nhra are inviting input from members......?

louisg Wrote:

---

> Again, Jack, you refer to the top horses. Why not
> refer to the normal horses, for whom MR was
> brought in originally. Have a look at Salute the
> Sun, then, if you don't want to look at my horses.
> Or Break of Dawn.

I had a look at these. They are quite different. Moggy has received 4kgs from Break Of Dawn twice and beaten her twice, so you have certainly benefitted at Break's expense. It looks like Moggy has been treated better than Break, but I know you are not happy with Moggy. Break's ratings are quite complicated at first glance, as is the sequence of races chosen for her and it looks like you did a better job placing Moggy. Having said that both have accrued many wins from a very finite supply. Salute The Sun looks ok to me. I realize that we look at the same things and see things quite differently.

My expectations of what horses should achieve "in general" is framed by the facts. I know that Maiden races amount to (very roughly) half of all races offered. So most horses have to belong to the 0-1 time win category. After that, we know that the average field has 11 runners and only 1 winner per race, so the number of possible winners in much smaller than the population. Of the examples you have given, one is above average and the other is very above average. I guess you have to make your perspective a little clearer to me and tell me what you would expect and what you think is not happening.

louisg Wrote:

---

> Also, Jack, if the system and the handicappers are
> so good, I wonder why there is a committee
> involved in lookng into the problem and why nhra
> are inviting input from members......?


Louis , was that proposal to abolish the WFA scale discussed in the meeting you attended?