WL great sire prospect and crazy ratings

Had a great whatsapp conversation about William Longsword and Crazy ratings

It started when i shared this tweet on WhatsApp





Here goes the replies i got( deleted my comments), comments welcome !


I do agree that William Longsword was a top horse though, so any collateral form is worth looking at!

Was talking to someone about this again last night. He feels whoever assigns our ratings is doing a poor job.

Janoobi finished just over 2 lengths off William Longsword in the CTS Mile in 2017

In that same race, Janoobi was about half a length behind Singapore Sling

So essentially, William Longsword beat both Singapore Sling and Janoobi fair and square at equal weights.

William Longsword retired to stud on a 104 or 105 (I think ?) but the horses that finished behind him have both won on the international stage and both are now rated higher than WL.

In the 2016 Guineas, WL beat all of Gold Standard (ok, he has problems, but subsequent 2.8 lengths 2nd to Whisky Baron in the Met), Edict Of Nantes (subsequent Derby & Gr1 Daily News winner), Singapore Sling, Heavenly Blue and I Travel Light

it's very strong form

and of course forgot WL also beat Copper Force (subsequent hair's breadth 2nd in the 2018 LQP) into 2nd in the CTS mile.

Just doing a quick ratings comparison

At each of their last starts in SA:-

William Longsword 109
Whisky Baron 110
Gold Standard 115 (half a length 2nd to William Longsword in the Guineas, 2.8 lengths behind Whisky Baron in the Met)
Edict Of Nantes - 113 (beat Gold Standard half a length in Selangor, over 4 lengths behind William Longsword in Guineas)
Copper Force 109 (1.75 lengths 2nd to William Longsword in the CTS mile, finished a nose hair 2nd to dual horse of the year rated 123 in LQP)
Janoobi 103 (2.3 lengths 4th to William Longsword in the CTS mile)
Singapore Sling 98 (1.8 lengths 3rd to William Longsword in CTS mile)

According to Racing Post Ratings:-

William Longsword - 108
Whisky Baron - 112
Gold Standard - 107
Edict Of Nantes - 110
Copper Force - 99
Janoobi - 113
Singapore Sling - 112

how is anyone supposed to make head or tail out of any of that?

but if you take RP out, the SA Ratings look a little mad, don't they? Copper Force (109), who finished just behind WL (109) in the CTS mile, runs Legal Eagle (123) to a short head at WFA in the Queen's Plate. So is LE too high, or is CF too low? And what then of William Longsword ?

And Gold Standard (115), who was 2nd to William Longsword (109) in the Guineas, is rated 6 points superior ?

Dear Mike
Congrats on Janoobi's top class win in fast time ( 1min 35,27 ) in the Zabeel
Attached please find 3 pages from an 11 page letter which was sent to the NHRA in March 2017 asking them to please refrain from portraying their ORs as ratings of merit
You will see that FORM MERIT RATINGS ( FMR ) rated WILLIAM LONGSWORD the best miler in the country at 125 , and such as his contemporaries

JANOOBI 122+
COPPER FORCE 121
EDICT OF NANTES 122
GOLD STANDARD 123
SINGAPORE SLING 122

ALL IN THE SAME CLASS AS LEGAL EAGLE and close to WHISKEY BARON ( FMR 122 )

Their SAF ORs were

LEGAL EAGLE 123
WHISKEY BARON 121
WILLIAM LONGSWORD 109
GOLD STANDARD 115
EDICT OF NANTES 102
JANOOBI 103
SINGAPORE SLING 104

COPPER FORCE was unlucky in the LQP
JANOOBI and SINGAPORE SLING are now G2 Winners in the Northern Hemisphere

Prior to the SUNMET a number of racing professionals stated on Telletrack that OH SUSANNA was "so far out at the ratings " that they couldn't give her a chance
And these ratings were published in THE RACEGOER

THE NHRA needs to sort this out as consumer confidence continues to erode.



TY CF

Imho ... there are also examples to show that the 'ORs' are not that far out - not saying that WL is /was not a very good horse, however taking those ratings from the Cape Derby at face value, would also mean the following:

Zodiac Ruler - 119 :ohmy: :ohmy: :ohmy:
Captain's Gambler - 112 :ohmy:
Newlands - 117 :ohmy:
Horizon - 116 :ohmy: :ohmy: :ohmy:

So the 'real' answer probably lies somewhere in between - and we all know that horses do not all improve at the same rate - and also not to the same 'ceiling' - so you will get runners like Edict of Nantes that will improve much more than runners like Zodiac Ruler and Horizon - that's what makes handicapping a somewhat subjective art - and some horses will prove one's theories 'spot on' - while others would leave one scratching one's head