Visions of Grandeur Queens Plate

Not that the MR matter for SAT. But could dashing jack please explain last ran off 94 now runs off 104 for a second to Surfin USA.

Similar query in Dancers Daughters race.

River Jetez off 102. runs within 2 lengths of DD 114 rating level weights no penalty.

does anybody know what penalty surfin got for that win.

Surfin' USA still MR 107 (his previous highest was 109)

Sylvester Wrote:

---

> jack please explain last ran off 94 now runs off
> 104 for a second to Surfin USA.

Not that the handicapper would ever descend from their lofty heights to show their workings, but perhaps Karel can confirm my calculations:

1. Surfin USA 107 wins by sh/hd 57Kg new rating: stays the same
2. Vision Of G 94 2nd by sh/hd 57Kg
3. Bill Of Rights 107 3rd by 2.35 58Kg runs a 105
4. Nania 102 4th by 2.60 54.5Kg runs a 97

If Vision can dead heat (+- a few inches) Surfin USA(107) at level weights
AND beat the 3rd horse (107) by 2L (recv a Kg) ..so Vision here also = 107
then it's very, very hard to deny that Vision ran a 107, as it is franked by the horse both in front and behind him.
African Appeal (103) ran about 101
Wonder Lawn (101) ran about 103
Thundering Jet (103) ran about 100

Any horse can run below it's rating, but how do you fake real ability (merit)

So is the question why did Vision only get 104 insteat of 107,
Or how could he go a whole 10 points from 94?

Maybe there some rule or other to skew the arithmetic

Vision of Grandeur had a rating of 110 (Timeform), 106 (Racing Post) and 104 (Official handicapper) when he raced in Ireland.
Our Official handicapper must have known that, too.

Can't argue with the new MR - if anything, it is too low.

Problem is, we don't know who the handicapper took as the line-horse in the race.
It is about time they came public with their race-ratings, easy to do on their NHA website.
Why the current secrecy? Publishing it would probably be highly educational for everyone in SA, punters, trainers & stipes alike, and remove all these (mostly perceived) irregularities. It would also stop trainers phoning and abusing the handicappers all the time

The handicapper has very little to say about anything these days and it may have something to do ith the fact the unhappy people complain whilst happy people stay quiet (obviously).

As a result, all they do is get criticized and they seem to be in siege mode most of the time.

The bottom line is they have little credibility left and are poor in the respect dept.

The issues with Vision Of Grandeur are now:
1. He has improved dramatically as he has stepped up to have a go at the features;
2. It looks like the handicapper is reluctant to dish out the full rating (for reasons of their own)
3. While I would rate VoG at 107, or perhaps 106 to give him the chance to turn the tables against Surfin US...I think that the handicapper is acknowledging that Surfin did WIN the Gr2 and is giving VoG a bit more ammo to win next time should the same 2 meet in a hcp.

Having said that, has anyone got an opinion on Pinnacle Pax??
I have to say the last time anything as radical Pinnacle Pax happened, that it would have to be Desert Falcon.
R2.00 to the first bloke to spot the connection.

Pinnacle Pax is an example of how ridiculous rating increases are for performances in non-handicaps.
Backed from 4/1 to 13/10 at his last run (he won), where his rating was, what, 20 points too low? Or perhaps the weights were already out when he ran the high rating the time before, and it missed the adjustment?
Wonder what they did with him now.

Desert Falcon looks a bit different - back in 2007. Never ran 2 races the same; maybe the big win was a fluke? Although 25/1 in to 8/1 when he won that one (running 20 points above his rating) looks a bit suspicious.

I phoned Rob De Kock about 5 minutes after Desert Falcon won that race,and to this day I am awaiting his promise to phone me back with the results of the investigation he assured me would take place.If I recall correctly,Desert Falcon was a full 36 pounds out @ the MR,and yet they lumped it on.Interestingly I don't think the owner was included in this move,as the horse left the Wiese stable straight after the run.It would be interesting to hear his side to the story.

The biggest joke for me is the placement of Pinnacle Pax in the feature.What was the upside?The horse was patently looking for a mile,but instead of simply placing this horse in a MR mile off a 67 rating he places it in @ race off level weights with horses rated 90+.

They got the money in the novice next time,but the horse is now exposed and it's rating has to go through the roof.Anyone with half a brain cell would simply have let it work it's way up the ratings through the MR races,and they could have punted it every single run,until it had reached it's true mark.Now the opportunity is burnt.

Now I'm v happy to get away with paying up the R2.00, although Jap did everything except mention the inestimable trainer Mitch Wiese so your cheque is in the post.

As far as I can tell, no trainer has improved horses by 25 and 36 points since the system started, or to put it another way, I have not seen horses so out at the weights, do so well.

But miracles abound at Christmas time, and Pinnacle Pax has gone to ... 73!

The next joke is they ran in a Novice next, taking no advantage of the low MR, and still walk away unscathed by the handicapper, even though it beat a MR84 horse in 2nd.

The poor chap who ran 1/4 length behind Pinnacle Pax in that feature carrying the same weight is Fox Loot (MR99..gone down by 1 to 98). If they meet in a hcp soon, Fox Loot MUST GIVE Pinnacle 12.5Kgs. I wonder if the handicappers have read their own definition of 'handicap'..something about every horse having the same chance to win?

I wonder if they noticed Pinnacle Pax double claimed in that Novice after the memorial mile and it seems every punter saw Pinnacle's mmmmm.. sterling performance except our official experts.

I hate to say this, but the Official Handicapper may as well start signing the stakes cheques as they are beginning to decide who gets the money with their tampering by NOT giving certain horses their proper ratings.

A case of too many trainers knocking @ their door me fancies.Trainers should not be allowed to talk to the handicapper imo.The handicappers job is to independently assess a race with the form @ hand,rate horses according and so be it.The pressure from trainers is only there to serve the trainers own purpose,so they should have no communication in my book.

I cannot recall how many times I have heard a trainer say in the winning interview(after a MR race that is) that their horse was too high in the ratings.

Amazing.

Good suggestion,this has been suggested previously but it seems to fall upon deaf ears.

Wiese also achieved a 20 plus penalty with Only She Can - but the filly has never raced since.