Application of MR Handicap System

rob faux wrote: There is a strong view by some that young early winners are overrated and these discrepencies suggest that it may sometimes be true.Is that not because the system determines a horses ability on too little data?? I know that 3 runs are required to earn a rating,but they are not averaged ...........the best of the 3 is used????? thereby determining a horses ability,in fact, on one performance.Would it not perhaps be fair,therefore, to have a system which does a zero based re-assessment of each runner after another 3 or so runs??....and then be less inclined to reduce ratings ,thereafter,so readily???
A number of the exotic upsets have come about due to horses "bouncing back" from their lowest rating, suddenly!

Young horses are rated higher after winning maidens simply because they are under sufferance at weight for age terms in maidens.
The handicapper gets the blame but what is he supposed to do if for example a three-year-old in October beats a 4yo over 1600m when getting 2kg whereas in weight for age terms he should have been getting 8kg.
The idea of making maidens wfa or at least closer to wfa never seems to even reach the discussion point and people just continue to lambast the handicapper.

Merit Rating is not there to create winners or to be fair or to create multiple winners. Merit Rating is there to prolong a horse's career, thus keeping fields full, thus ensuring turnover and lots of racing.

So, does anyone really think that the Operators are going to want to change the system ?

Tipster wrote:

rob faux wrote: There is a strong view by some that young early winners are overrated and these discrepencies suggest that it may sometimes be true.Is that not because the system determines a horses ability on too little data?? I know that 3 runs are required to earn a rating,but they are not averaged ...........the best of the 3 is used????? thereby determining a horses ability,in fact, on one performance.Would it not perhaps be fair,therefore, to have a system which does a zero based re-assessment of each runner after another 3 or so runs??....and then be less inclined to reduce ratings ,thereafter,so readily???
A number of the exotic upsets have come about due to horses "bouncing back" from their lowest rating, suddenly!

Young horses are rated higher after winning maidens simply because they are under sufferance at weight for age terms in maidens.
The handicapper gets the blame but what is he supposed to do if for example a three-year-old in October beats a 4yo over 1600m when getting 2kg whereas in weight for age terms he should have been getting 8kg.
The idea of making maidens wfa or at least closer to wfa never seems to even reach the discussion point and people just continue to lambast the handicapper.

Of course,in your example, it depends how good the 4yr old is surely.................is that not a very important point?..................as a clanner said the other day............handicapping is a relative thing!................lol

The fact is ,that a system that has horses frequently starting their handicap careers rated 20 or more points higher (GROSS) than 2 yrs later, needs a review of some sort!

(I would prefer to have ability ratings never being reduced except in exceptional circumstances,thereby reducing manipulation,but that would need a more accurate measure of ability,initially!)

Considering a few of the common areas of concern ,including by those that support the MR system:
a)not enough plate races in the programme
b)sufficient evidence of an initial MR.

How about this compromise proposal:

All maiden winners are rated THE SAME (as per the RF system) All winners must race run their next 3 races in a novice, graduation or advanced plate race.
Thereafter a MR,using much better evidence, is established for racing in handicaps, and all handicaps are then run as merit rated races,as they are now.

Is that perfect .........no, but probably more fair than the present system. Programmes would have to include more plate races,connections would have to support them (and would probably be more willing to at that early stage of a horses career because "sufferance" may be more subjective.)

A really good,but not classic, horse could win at least 4 races before being handicapped out of a fair and appropriate return!
If the initial MR is more accurate the volatility should be reduced.................I think????

rob faux wrote:

Tipster wrote:

rob faux wrote: There is a strong view by some that young early winners are overrated and these discrepencies suggest that it may sometimes be true.Is that not because the system determines a horses ability on too little data?? I know that 3 runs are required to earn a rating,but they are not averaged ...........the best of the 3 is used????? thereby determining a horses ability,in fact, on one performance.Would it not perhaps be fair,therefore, to have a system which does a zero based re-assessment of each runner after another 3 or so runs??....and then be less inclined to reduce ratings ,thereafter,so readily???
A number of the exotic upsets have come about due to horses "bouncing back" from their lowest rating, suddenly!

Young horses are rated higher after winning maidens simply because they are under sufferance at weight for age terms in maidens.
The handicapper gets the blame but what is he supposed to do if for example a three-year-old in October beats a 4yo over 1600m when getting 2kg whereas in weight for age terms he should have been getting 8kg.
The idea of making maidens wfa or at least closer to wfa never seems to even reach the discussion point and people just continue to lambast the handicapper.

Of course,in your example, it depends how good the 4yr old is surely.................is that not a very important point?..................as a clanner said the other day............handicapping is a relative thing!................lol

The fact is ,that a system that has horses frequently starting their handicap careers rated 20 or more points higher (GROSS) than 2 yrs later, needs a review of some sort!

(I would prefer to have ability ratings never being reduced except in exceptional circumstances,thereby reducing manipulation,but that would need a more accurate measure of ability,initially!)

But the point is that in the example used the handicapper would have to add 6kg to the winning margin, whereas if the same horses had faced on weight for age terms it would have probably won by the same margin anyway.

It is just the way races pan out, a jockey will judge his ride to win by one length not by five.

The usual response given when wfa maidens are suggested is that it would make it to hard for battling older horses.

Tipster wrote:

rob faux wrote:

Tipster wrote:

rob faux wrote: There is a strong view by some that young early winners are overrated and these discrepencies suggest that it may sometimes be true.Is that not because the system determines a horses ability on too little data?? I know that 3 runs are required to earn a rating,but they are not averaged ...........the best of the 3 is used????? thereby determining a horses ability,in fact, on one performance.Would it not perhaps be fair,therefore, to have a system which does a zero based re-assessment of each runner after another 3 or so runs??....and then be less inclined to reduce ratings ,thereafter,so readily???
A number of the exotic upsets have come about due to horses "bouncing back" from their lowest rating, suddenly!

Young horses are rated higher after winning maidens simply because they are under sufferance at weight for age terms in maidens.
The handicapper gets the blame but what is he supposed to do if for example a three-year-old in October beats a 4yo over 1600m when getting 2kg whereas in weight for age terms he should have been getting 8kg.
The idea of making maidens wfa or at least closer to wfa never seems to even reach the discussion point and people just continue to lambast the handicapper.

Of course,in your example, it depends how good the 4yr old is surely.................is that not a very important point?..................as a clanner said the other day............handicapping is a relative thing!................lol

The fact is ,that a system that has horses frequently starting their handicap careers rated 20 or more points higher (GROSS) than 2 yrs later, needs a review of some sort!

(I would prefer to have ability ratings never being reduced except in exceptional circumstances,thereby reducing manipulation,but that would need a more accurate measure of ability,initially!)

But the point is that in the example used the handicapper would have to add 6kg to the winning margin, whereas if the same horses had faced on weight for age terms it would have probably won by the same margin anyway.

It is just the way races pan out, a jockey will judge his ride to win by one length not by five.

The usual response given when wfa maidens are suggested is that it would make it to hard for battling older horses.

Even more reason to establish the initial ability rating by utilising more data!

Karel's figures show that the WFA scale remains valid and reasonably accurate so if a 3yr old beats a 4 yr old in the maidens,and then ends up overrated ,it follows that the fault is not the scale ,but that the older maidens are overrated(and I am sure they are)..........and that is the root of the problem in our ratings.

Richie77 wrote: I don't know enough about mr but surely the question is if the ratings are wrong surely from a punting point of view, those that have knowledge of how to rate a horse should have the upper hand?

This doesn't help the trainers and owners though.

Richie,you are right ,but lack of consistency often makes the "right" run hard to predict.

(today (31/10/14) 2 horses should take advantage of their ratings .( hard to be confident about the first though!)
Fairview race 9-New Spring
Greyville race 4-Leven Point

Lets see!

rob faux wrote:

Richie77 wrote: I don't know enough about mr but surely the question is if the ratings are wrong surely from a punting point of view, those that have knowledge of how to rate a horse should have the upper hand?

This doesn't help the trainers and owners though.

Richie,you are right ,but lack of consistency often makes the "right" run hard to predict.

(today (31/10/14) 2 horses should take advantage of their ratings .( hard to be confident about the first though!)
Fairview race 9-New Spring
Greyville race 4-Leven Point

Lets see!

Rob, i think Olma can be added to the list.

bayern wrote:

rob faux wrote:

Richie77 wrote: I don't know enough about mr but surely the question is if the ratings are wrong surely from a punting point of view, those that have knowledge of how to rate a horse should have the upper hand?

This doesn't help the trainers and owners though.

Richie,you are right ,but lack of consistency often makes the "right" run hard to predict.

(today (31/10/14) 2 horses should take advantage of their ratings .( hard to be confident about the first though!)
Fairview race 9-New Spring
Greyville race 4-Leven Point

Lets see!

Rob, i think Olma can be added to the list.

I make Olma the best of the day ..........but because of the subject of the thread,the 2 I mention are underrated in handicap races ..(IMO)

rob faux wrote:

bayern wrote:

rob faux wrote:

Richie77 wrote: I don't know enough about mr but surely the question is if the ratings are wrong surely from a punting point of view, those that have knowledge of how to rate a horse should have the upper hand?

This doesn't help the trainers and owners though.

Richie,you are right ,but lack of consistency often makes the "right" run hard to predict.

(today (31/10/14) 2 horses should take advantage of their ratings .( hard to be confident about the first though!)
Fairview race 9-New Spring
Greyville race 4-Leven Point

Lets see!

Rob, i think Olma can be added to the list.

I make Olma the best of the day ..........but because of the subject of the thread,the 2 I mention are underrated in handicap races ..(IMO)

Apologies, forgot about that.

As pointed out in the initial post ,its the plate races that expose the shortcomings ....................Bravo Maya in the Pinnacle at Turf................another great advert for the ratings!!!!!