Search results

Funnily enough, that is precisely what I am doing this morning for US. The delights of comparing an automated odds line based on ratings with the existing and subjective Morning Line, and both with SP, is not quite enough to keep my attention from wandering...

The current odds suggest it is about 3.3 times more likely that Manighar will win than Opinion Poll. 48.5% against 14.7%.

An automatic rating-to-odds converter could factor context in, obviously. At present, I prefer to keep it basic and to use it as a starting point for a more subjective approach.

Current BF odds: 2.02 Manighar, 7.2 Opinion Poll, 8.8 King of Wands, 9.4 Aajel, 13 Illustrious Blue, 14 Samuel, 29 Ringaroses.

Petara Bay a NR Pro-rata odds: 2.34 Manighar, 5.6 Opinion Poll, 7 King of Wands, 11 Illustrious Blue, 12.5 Samuel, 18 Aajel, 38 Ringaroses

Just as a matter of interest, my automated odds-from-weighted-ratings came up with the following: 2.6 Manighar, 6.2 Opinion Poll, 7.8 King of Wands, 9.4 Petara Bay, 12.5 Illustrious Blue, 14 Samuel, 20 Aajel, 42 Ringaroses. Though I had to cheat with Samuel, who has not run since 2008. Aajel...

Donn McClean is someone I have a bit of time for, too. But he needs to get himself a proper editor judged on that piece.

This keeps coming up in any discussion of the merit of horses. The levels of ratings of the BHA/ITC, Racing Post and Timeform are all different. 119 official for Cape Blanco is slightly higher in relative terms than either Racing Post or Timeform has gone.

I am hoping to have a runner in the National Lottery Stakes, but need some rain. Would appreciate it if anyone nearby could yell at the first sign of darkening skies!

And how would that compare with Timeform's race standards or first-5 standards, DJ? Is 125 a notably positive or negative view in the context of the race historically and of the specific horses running in this year's race? :)

Two Thousand Guineas Year...Horse...............Form/Time 2010...Makfi...............125/121 2009...Sea The Stars...128/124 2008...Henryhthenav....124/117 2007...Cockney Reb.....125/124 2006...Geo Wash.........129/122 2005...Footstepsint......120/110 2004...Haafhd.............129/129...

As a matter of interest, what did the speed freaks make of the going at Royal Ascot on day one? I would describe it as "Good to Firm" (going allowance 74 for races on straight course: range for GF is 70 to 90). The wind, behind them in the straight, will have been a factor, but probably not...

People who back horses like this deserve no symphony. Sorry, sympathy.

If Findlay had not admitted that horses running in his mother's name were effectively his - something which he did in a spirit of openness and may now be regretting - would he have fallen foul of the ruling? Why were the BHA happy for Findlay to continue to run his horses under someone else's...

Sorry, but I have no idea, and I am fast losing the will to live.

So, as I understand it, as a 1/4 owner of a horse who does not even run in my name any longer, I am not allowed to lay any horse in the stable in which my horse resides, but - I think - I would be allowed to back another horse in a race in which a horse in the stable at which my horse resides is...

While - remarkably - it gets no mention in the above, I have just stumbled across the following elsewhere in the BHA's Rule Book (I draw particular attention to point 4): SCHEDULES Schedule 3 - Integrity codes of conduct: owners 1. This integrity code of conduct applies to any...

Somewhere deep in the recesses of the BHA's Rule Book is the following: 92. Restrictions on laying to lose 92.1 In Paragraph 92.2, Listed Person 92.1.1 means any owner of a horse (see Rule 96), and 92.1.2 additionally, includes 92.1.2.1 where the owner is a Recognised Company, any director or...

:blink:

I would just like to repeat that I think it is legitimate to ignore weight-for-age (as opposed to weight) in form and time figures - not that I do - though any organisation judged on top-rated winners and the like is unlikely to do so for commercial reasons. If you ignore it then you need to...