A thought on the Festival Handicaps

and these are "placed" horses that hadn't won that year.

[TABLE="width: 212"]
<colgroup><col><col></colgroup><tbody>[TR]
[TD]A New Story[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]4093070454[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Andreas[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]333[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Barna Boy[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]43364[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Chance Coffey[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]73[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Creon[/TD]
[TD]380P6[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]High Chimes[/TD]
[TD]43P[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Kelami[/TD]
[TD]8803F43[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Non So[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]433[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Oiseau De Nuit[/TD]
[TD]U6483[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Savello[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]3439[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Space Trucker[/TD]
[TD]4F3[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Sunnyhillboy[/TD]
[TD]37P9[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Tiger Cry[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]36[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Tindari[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]453[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Uncle Ernie[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]434[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Bensalem[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]52[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Big Shu[/TD]
[TD]F742[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Buena Vista[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]728700[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Dabiroun[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]225[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Dizzy[/TD]
[TD]06222[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Elfast[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]224[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Generosa[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]250[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Holywell[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2222[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Maximise[/TD]
[TD]42P9[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Oscar Park[/TD]
[TD]2F0[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Pigeon Island[/TD]
[TD]2F222F5[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Rooster Booster[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]55422[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Something Wells[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]20272[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Terao[/TD]
[TD]6P492[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Unguided Missile[/TD]
[TD]642F4[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Fingeronthepulse[/TD]
[TD]3F22[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]In Truth[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]23242225[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Irish Cavalier[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]323[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Junior[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]32[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]King Lucifer[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]3322[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Liberthine[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2384[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Rough Quest[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]332[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Silver Jaro[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]22233[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Snitton Lane[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]43342[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Sporazene[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]238[/TD]
[/TR]
</tbody>[/TABLE]
 
Lets reorder them to try and see more clearly what's happening based on wins as it's usually a win that affects the mark most

Martin Pipe 86%
Fred Winter 82%
Novices Hcp Ch 82%
Coral Cup 76%
Festival H'cap Chs 71%
County 67%
Kim Muir 62%
Festival Plate 57%
Pertemps 57%
Grand Annual 52%


As I suspected, the Grand Annual is the worst offender, and despite having bigger fields and thus theoretically being more competitive, hurdlers win with greater frequency than chasers. Why? well I'll speculate that it owes something to hurdles being over subscribed and trainers needing to show a bit of what they've got to get in. Show too much though and they don't win. Also intrerested to see juveniles and novices at the top of the pile too. Again, probably find that they a minimum of one win to get in. Three of the lowest four were chases, yet the the hurdles race that breaks them is one that requires qualification, if not quite of the sort that Maruco is proposing, something that comes from the same stable. Now in fairness, the Pertemps has only recently tightened the performance qualification procedure and the survey period will cover a whole swathe of horses who qualified by dint of simply entering
 
Warbler said:
When Phil Smith took over handicapping he was notably harsher on a win than his predecessors. The likes of MCP and even VMW following him, would get a horse fit, run it every 10 days, and run up a 5 or 6 winner sequence only getting raised 3Ibs at a time. You'd be raised about 30Ibs if you achieved that today.

If you want a quick 'case study' just look at Next Sensation and Croco Bay raised 15Ibs and left his festival at Ascot. Next Sensation 3 unplaced runs, dropped 3Ibs and wins
Click to expand...

Nail on head, and not just at Cheltenham. The majority of h.i.t. are handicappers, and have a shelf life of maybe 3 wins if raced honestly. Why would trainers work themselves out of a job in this manner.
Like much else in our sport, it's done under the aegis of competitive racing, and it's there at the behest of the bookmakers
 
Last edited:
Maruco said:
No I'm saying my suggestion addresses two issues. Had Mullins decided Arctic Fire was going to have an easy season he could have got him into the County in the high 140's when he's a 170 horse. I can only assume you're comfortable with that?

The Package was third at last years Festival not tailed off, so let's use facts. He was beaten 49 lengths and pulled up this season. The handicapper dropped him to a mark 4lbs lower than being touched off at the Festival last season and he absolutely hosed up. You're comfortable with that too?

If a win is required to qualify it goes some way towards preventing a trainer blatantly handicapping his horse by forcing the handicapper to drop him which is precisely what happened with The Package. I'm guessing you're comfortable with that too?

My suggestion addresses two key issues. Cheating, and also poor horses getting a run and blocking others that deserve to take their chance.
Click to expand...

So what you are saying is that the 8 horses who had not won a race beforehand that ran in the Pertempts.......none of who were even placed.......should have been kicked out on their a$$es and replaced by what? Something that might be miles out of the handicap because very few below 135 have won a race that season.

You're idea sucks. Horses are not machines. More than half the horses who get put up by 10lbs or whatever never win again for years.

You are right about the Package it was the year before he was pulled up off 146.came back and was beaten 7 lengths into 3rd off 141..............ran in the National, a Grade 3 at Cheltenham and a 78,000 pounds race at Aintree and was dropped a total off 4lbs..........any of the 3 races he ran in David Pipe would have been delighted if he won any of them.

But you reckon he cheated.............he stopped him in a 78K race to win a 35k race.

The very fact you would have him eliminated from the race because he couldn't win the Grand National or the Beecher chase or a competitive Grade 3 is laughable.

We all know that trainers train horses for certain races but is it them we should having a go at or the Handicapper.

The Handicapper sticks horses up for winning shyte races by about 10 lbs and makes it impossible to win again.

There are many horses trying their hearts out and never win again because the entire handicapping system is a heap of bad guesses.

Take The Tourard Man gets put up 9lbs to 132 gets beaten into 3rd by a 129 and a 131 horse which to me it meant the 132 was possibly a couple of pounds too high.

However the handicapper doesn't drop him a couple of pounds..instead because the horse who finished behind him was rated a 140 he bumps the The Tourard Man up another 3 lbs to 135

The very fact the horse he based that rating on hasn't won a hurdle race since 2013 never crossed his stupid mind. I bet you Alan King was delighed that the 3lbs may well have cost him the race.

The handicapping system is flawed and it's impossible to correct it.....the trainers know what their horses are capable off better than the handicapper does.

There job is to win races and if they are forced to train horses to win a certain race during which time they get their horses down to a reasonable mark then fair play to them.

David Pipe did a fantastic job getting The Package spot on for Cheltenham. He should be applauded not have his horse kicked out of a race like you would have done.

PN saw a chance where he could possible win a race at the Festival with Aux Ptits Soins 139........ If he had the time and had run him and won at say Newbury he'd have been hammered by the handicapper and all chance would have been quashed.......He as a trainer did the right thing for all concerend......You would have him doing the wrong thing and robbed the owner who bought him of a possible lifetime dream.

Sorry but I think your idea needs a rethink.....big time.
 
Last edited:
Under what I'm proposing I'm not stopping The Package running at the Festival, David Pipe would be. He can choose to run anywhere in the preceding 12 months. If he thinks the Festival Handicap is his destination he can campaign him accordingly. And your argument forgets that I'm not saying The Package is the only horse that is required to win during the season, I'm saying 'every' horse is required to win during the season. If that were the case they can't hide under a bushel and it becomes a genuine leveller.

The Tourard Man is a complete red-herring. He won this season and finished third behind two horses that also won this season. Seems fair enough to me, and what I'm suggesting would have had no impact on the result whatsoever. But I do take your broader point about the handicapper. That said I'm not sure he's been overly harsh given The Tourard Man has run seven times in the season and won or placed each time. To be honest being beaten two and half lengths suggests the handicapper hadn't gone overboard with him, and you've used a bad example. In the interests of a the debate the first horse home in The pertemps that hadn't won all season was Night of Noir (for Pipe shock horror!) in 9th, so the result wouldn't have been remotely effected but when you take out the six that hadn't won, six others with current season form would have had a deserved run for connections.

As an additional point which crosses over to another thread, if you want honest handicapping, you can potentially take things one step further and separate out handicaps and novice handicaps, just as is the case with the Championship races. We're careering towards a 5 day Festival anyway and there's all the races you need right there, with the added bonus of creating a more level playing field.

As a final point you say more than half of horses that get put up 10lbs or more never win for years, so you're contradicting your own argument. If they can't win for years what are they doing in the Festival handicaps, which is exactly my point.

The thrust of your argument above is with the handicapper being too harsh and there's not a thing that can be done about it. I've not said otherwise. But to some degree what I'm suggesting addresses those concerns, at least for four days of the year, because a horse like The Package finds his win but so do all the others notionally leaving The Package still as the best handicapped horse. It still takes out those horses that fit your profile that simply can't win which if you remember from my opening post I believe needs addressing.

If you read what you've written you've basically agreed with me if you join it all up and follow it to its conclusion, but still concluded it needs a 'big time' rethink.
 
David Pipe can chose to run The Package anywhere? That is really intelligent!!!!

And what? He still has to win and if he's not well enough in himself at that time and loses you still toss him out of Cheltenham?

When the Package ran in the Becher Chase only 4 out of 25 horses had won a race this season.

There were still 21 out of 21 who hadn't won a race this season after the race

So for all of them to qualify to run at Cheltenham under Mr Wonderful's new rule they all gotta go and find a race they can win and avoid each other over the following months?

Never read so much shtye in all my life and you wouldn't know a good post if it jumped up and bit ya on the ass Benny
 
100s of very good horses fail to win in a season. This will once again favour horses in the south where there are 500% more chances to win races at the grade and level needed for those handicaps.

Sorry Paul - but its a daft idea. :)
 
The other thing that would happen is these decent level horses would have to find a race somewhere that they can 100% win. So they would be entered in "lesser" races, which would result in other horses being pulled out and probably back to 3 runner chases...
You wouldnt risk a race in a top end handicap, as you'd be wasting a run in a race where they have less chance of getting the must have 1 in the form book.
 
I wouldn't be so certain that would happen Digger. Southern tracks might have more fixtures, but their racing is also more competitive. I suspect the beneficiaries might be the rural tracks at places like Ludlow, Huntingdon, Southwell, and Bangor as trainers seek out 'soft' assignments, and that wouldn't preclude a few southern trainers going north to pick up soft targets.

Also I wouldn't necessarily say we'd be "back to 3 runner chases" because that's the position we're at now, so it's not a regression

What I think the more likely outcome is that trainers will identify 'soft' early season races in September and October to notch their win, and get the horse qualified. Early season fields this year were particularly poor and this would do something about that. I think it's possibly open to collusion however as you suggest, and one suspects betting markets could look very interesting as horses take it in turns and go heavily odds on. You might get an issue if we run into a particularly bad February and cancelled fixtures etc in which case this will probably apply greater pressure to qualify your horse earlier in the season.

There would also be an issue about how you'll treat overseas runners of course, but we can save that

The principal that Paul's applying actually isn't too far removed from the existing structure in that he's requiring a horse to demonstrate a level of ability before they're allowed to enter. It's the same concept as a handicap mark. The primary difference is that it's based on the horse showing that level of performance rather than one persons interpreptation of that performance.

I don't think the idea has quite got it right, but I wouldn't bin it yet. Making it fairer however risks complicating things as you'd inevitability end up moving to some kind of sliding points based system with horses allowed to count a specified number of best results. You might also allow the handicapper some latitude with 'wildcards' as they do in tennis and golf tournaments. Come to think of it, I'm pretty certain the handicapper is allowed two wildcards for the Foxhunters? And now I mention of that of course, the Foxhunters pretty well applies something that Paul's suggesting already, so it's not as if it's completely without precedent
 
Last edited:
Tanlic said:
David Pipe can chose to run The Package anywhere? That is really intelligent!!!!

And what? He still has to win and if he's not well enough in himself at that time and loses you still toss him out of Cheltenham?

When the Package ran in the Becher Chase only 4 out of 25 horses had won a race this season.

There were still 21 out of 21 who hadn't won a race this season after the race

So for all of them to qualify to run at Cheltenham under Mr Wonderful's new rule they all gotta go and find a race they can win and avoid each other over the following months?

Never read so much shtye in all my life and you wouldn't know a good post if it jumped up and bit ya on the ass Benny
Click to expand...

The season starts and ends in April. In an 11 month period if you've got a horse handicapped well enough to win why can't you place your horse accordingly. In the case of The Package he's considered well enough to run, but strangely he runs desperately and his handicap mark comes down below that of the mark that he went close the previous season behind a horse that was considered a contender for this years Gold Cup. Then by a minor miracle he happens to put that behind him for one day in March, Not only that he goes off in a Festival handicap in the top three in the market at a single figure price, when on all known form he's gone at the game!!!

Let's also add Buddy Bolero. Unsighted twice in the season after falling when with every chance at the previous seasons Festival. finishes 3rd after the handicapper has also dropped him to below his mark from the previous season. He also shows miracle like improvement and finishes third. Guess what? Trained by Tony Martin and ironically previously by Pipe!

In the same race there were almost a dozen horses that haven't shown any worthwhile form for some considerable time and clearly looked on the downgrade. Surprise, surprise, they were unsighted. At the entry stage the were 130 horses declared, at the 5 day stage there were still almost 70 engaged. At final decs bottom weight was almost within a stone of top weight. Of those below a whole host had been running on merit during the season, were winners at some stage, and were capable of doing themselves justice. Instead of owners getting a run they're blocked out by no-hopers and trainers who manipulate handicap marks. The race could easily have been filled with seasonal winners and would have been oversubscribed.

I'm struggling to see the relevance of the Beecher Chase and the result. What does it have to do with it other than the fact that the winner qualified for The Festival, and 7 more horses in the race also qualified as seasonal winners well ahead of the Festival, assuming they chose to take up an engagement? That's 8 horses from one race pinpointed already qualified several month in advance. Are you trying indicate The Beecher as a reason why you think my suggestion is a bad one or are you trying to make my case again?!

In addition, all of the points you raised in your previous post add to the argument and don't take away from it. In fact in this post I'm struggling to see what your point is at all! The only thing you really seem to have done is call me Mr Wonderful and accuse me of writing unintelligent shyte. Perhaps I could suggest you add some genuine debate rather than go off at nonsensical tangents and revert to namecalling. If you disagree, fair enough, but is trying to make it personal yet again really necessary?
 
Tanlic said:
David Pipe can chose to run The Package anywhere? That is really intelligent!!!!

And what? He still has to win and if he's not well enough in himself at that time and loses you still toss him out of Cheltenham?

When the Package ran in the Becher Chase only 4 out of 25 horses had won a race this season.

There were still 21 out of 21 who hadn't won a race this season after the race

So for all of them to qualify to run at Cheltenham under Mr Wonderful's new rule they all gotta go and find a race they can win and avoid each other over the following months?

Never read so much shtye in all my life and you wouldn't know a good post if it jumped up and bit ya on the ass Benny
Click to expand...

You really need to moderate your tone.

The fact that someone puts forward an opinion or idea that you disagree with does not warrant you replying in full attack mode. Such posts will only discourage new members in daring to voice an opinion, something which all will agree is harmful to the forum as a whole.
 
Totally agree with The Bear. Whether you agree with him, or not, Maruco has put forward some interesting and though-provoking comments on this thread. It really is this sort of contribution that enhances the forum. I do wonder at Tanlic`s motives in making such personal and unpleasant attacks. He really demeans his own arguments, and himself, with these unpleasant attacks. But, as he says, criticism of him is like water off a ducks back. Rather sad and unnecessary and, as The Bear rightly says, harmful to the forum.
 
Little surprise that attacks on Tanlic are mainly conducted by the same sycophants who never utter a word when it's another poster, with a far worse record of belligerence on this forum? :rolleyes:
 
Interesting discussion.
I can reveal as all participants are dead the following;
An Irish horse was runner up to a "controversially " handicapped horse at a recent Cheltenham Festival handicap.
He was put away for the same race the following year.
On his prep run the following year he was , I was told , "stopped " so as not to get too high a rating in said handicap.
He missed the cut as his rating though roughly what it was the year before was not enough to get a race.
He ran instead in another (presumably more competitive) handicap finishing third having run the race of his life.
He later won a major Irish handicap after getting in as a reserve, foiling a gamble on a JP owned stable mate who got got in as a reserve.
The horse, owner and trainer are no longer with us .
The moral is that cheating in handicaps is not as easy as it looks.
 
This doesnt need to turn out the same way as all the other threads tbh. Paul can more than handle any verbal pish from Tanlic.
 
reet hard said:
Little surprise that attacks on Tanlic are mainly conducted by the same sycophants who never utter a word when it's another poster, with a far worse record of belligerence on this forum? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

i'll just record... thats another biased and uncalled for negative comment aimed at me..i think thats 5 negative posts you have aimed at me in a week without any good reason. Yet ..its me that has a problem...really??

I told you last time you posted an insult on the what you backing thread....forget about me..i don't really take much part here now..so get yourself a life and some medical help with the username obsession you have developed.

To the mods...whilst people like this are allowed to get away with this stuff..the board will suffer..banter is fine with me..being stalked by obsessives isn't.

Marble..Tanlic doesn't do anything really positive with his manner does he?...its not making the forum exciting is it?..whatever you think that is...but its like i said a week ago..a forum gets the members it deserves...this one is getting the laddish.. don't give a toss about anyone....flavour now..where if anyone objects they are subjected to more insult. Its a bit like when you go to the airport and there are twenty odd baldy 40 year olds all p1ssed on their way to Spain..everyone apart from them is deemed muppets or girlies and aren't real men because they don't act like them.

If such as Reet Hard and Tanlic are whats admired here then i think you will find over a period of time there will be less and less people take part..just my view..maybe its me and everyone loves it..i don't know ..

maybe we should have a poll..see if stalking like RH ..or talking to folk like tw@ts as Tanlic does ...is acceptable..lets see what the forum thinks as a whole.

just my opinion..which i will pass no matter what abuse comes back..its irrelevant to me what comes back anyway now..i'll just keep highlighting the bullying posts from Reet Hard anyway..he alone is enough to make sure i never post anything with meat on again here.
 
Last edited:
Diamond Geezer said:
With the possible exception of Martin, there are no mods EC.
Click to expand...

well..maybe the board should have a poll to see if some are being sensitive or if stalking and abuse is ok

that way everyone has a say and those stalking or abusing might then see if their behaviour is supported or not..if it is supported then the forum has its identity..if members think it isn't..then maybe the individuals might have a look at themselves

just a thought..i'm not bothered either way tbh...i've lost all interest apart from highlighting every time i get attacked for no reason whatsover..so its quite clear then that stalking is actually taking place..i think i've highlighted enough posts now for that to be obvious to anyone

To everyone that values this forum..i'd be acting soon..because the posts on here are shrinking in numbers over the last week in particular
 
Last edited:
marble said:
The 'talking shyte' thing gets way-overplayed on here.

I think the key is to understand Tanlic's tone not try and character assassinate him because of it.

I've chatted to the man on and off here every so often and he's told me I talk shite plenty of times, but I never take it personally and just accept if he doesn't agree he'll say you (or I) am talking shite!!

Tanlic is a credit to this and any other forum, unless you want the place to be completely mind numbingly boring?
Click to expand...

I agree. A lot of what he posts is interesting stuff. It's just ruined by the odd comment here or there which is meant to disparage the person with the opposing view. Paul can easily fight his own battles but that's not the reason I highlighted it. The comments are uncalled for and are harmful to the forum for reasons already stated.

People adapt how they speak all the time depending on what social circle they are in. Some groups of friends find it perfectly acceptable to be abusive towards each other but that comes with knowing where the boundaries are through experience with those around you. On here it is unacceptable to engage with others you don't know in such a way.

As originally stated, if the tone was moderated his views would become significantly more credible. For the amount of words he tends to type it isn't asking a lot for a few to be omitted is it.

Anyway, we're discussing this like Tanlic isn't here which is rude in itself. I'll say no more.
 
Agree. Tanlic can call me what he likes. The words speak for themselves and others judge as they see fit. I don't need an argument I haven't got the energy. If he or anyone else disagree with my suggestion I don't have a problem, I just thought it would make for a healthy debate.

The broader point about newcomers being put off posting is a good one though. If new posters are likely to be put off by all this stuff it needs toning down.
 
Back
Top