Betfair Hurdle

The front two were absolutely cantering all over everything else, all the way up the straight - Clyne included.

The only reason the distance back to the rest wasn't greater, was because neither STD nor Geraghty wanted to pull the trigger until after they'd jumped last. If one or other of them had gone for it earlier, they would have finished even further ahead of the rest.
 
Aughex said:
Yes but miles? left him for dead?
Click to expand...

I think we're talking about different things, Aughex.

You don't win a handicap unless you're ahead of your mark. You don't win a good Saturday handicap unless you're a good bit ahead of your mark. And you don't win a Betfair Hurdle unless you are a long way in front of your mark. And you don't put distance like those two did between yourself and other good horses who would otherwise mop up good Saturday handicaps unless you are miles ahead of your mark.
 
It'll be interesting to see what the handicapper gives MWTT.

Ballyandy will get spanked.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Eddiemaurice will have pleased his connections I reckon. He made up ground from the rear, especially in the middle part of the race, on ground that probably wasn't ideal. Finishing 9th in one of the hottest 2 mile handicap hurdles in the jumps calendar shouldn't be dismissed lightly. Currently on a mark of 126, he must be at least 7-10 lb well-in for future handicaps by my reckoning, assuming (or hoping :)) the assessor leaves his mark unchanged after yesterday.
 
Last edited:
What do we reckon the winner Ballyandy will go up to? Whats our best guesses? Something like 155?

Edit- The 155-160 bracket is my best guess of where he'll go, so maybe somewhere in between, 157, or 158, could be the answer.
 
Last edited:
I can't see it being anywhere near the 20lbs that would imply, Marble.

Clyne was 5lbs well in, so will probably be deemed to have run to his new mark of 148 (since he was technically nowhere near winning) so the winner will, I would guess, go up to more or less that mark. I'll be very surprised if it's more than 13lbs. But that's still quite a hike.

For what it's worth, your 155 is more like the new rating I'll be giving it!
 
Haha, lay me even money on 155+ please!

I was always good at arithmatic at primary school, it was simultaneous equations that caught me out at Secondary.

But anyways, if Ballyandy should go to the 155-160 bracket, as I expect, your namesake DO, Eddiemaurice, who was beaten 22 lengths, at a 1lb per length, has performed somewhere between 133-138, (he'll be worth a pound or two more on better going too, based on flat and jumps form).

I'm just hoping the handicapper does the decent thing and leaves him on 126...:)
 
Last edited:
Just to out things into context, the last horse to carry more than 11-9 and come as close to winning it was 13 years ago Rooster Booster, he was carrying 11-12 came on shd 2nd. He was the defending Champion of the hurdling division and lost his title a month later but still 2nd to Hardy's first CH.

The next to carry similar weight was Copeland 15 years ago 11-7, beat the younger Rooster Booster by 6 lengths and was raised to 156. Copeland was so progressive that the connections didn't had him entered for that season CH. In his next race the Kingwell he gave Hors La Roi 4lbs and was 2nd only 3 lengths which put him 1lb higher than HLR, which the handicappers did and raised him to 157. HLR won the CH next time out.
 
That would be generous, imho. When can we expect an update on the ratings?
 
Last edited:
I don't think a handicapper duty is to raise horses so far back in a race. He should drop the mark for some or keep it the same. They usually expect 2-3 horses of any handicap race to show improvement. They are human so they don't judge just this big handicap race in isolation, they look who's the best in the country and where would the winner of this race fit in the upper echelon. If MTOY would've finished 3rd in here, they would raise the race up to 155+ standard but otherwise they look for another marker like for instance Kayf Blanco who's on a decent yardstick so they'll probably rate the race around him and make it 150+.
 
If Ballyandy ran off 135 I'd be staggered if he was lifted to anything more than 149.

I think he'll probably get 10 to reflect the distance between them and Clyne in 3rd.

I'm going to say 145. Movewiththetimes to go up 6.
 
Listen fellas, one thing we can agree on, is that Clyne will be at a minimum of 148, (which technically speaking he was already beforehand).

There is no way on this green earth, IMHO, that he raises Ballyandy, (who has just smashed up Clyne 6 lengths), to the same mark, as Clyne.

I'm not arguing Ballyandy is a Champion Hurdler in waiting, this year, next year, or the year after, far from it.

I'm just saying that, I'm quite confident, based on the above, the minimum your looking at for Ballyandy is 155.
 
Last edited:
DanB88 said:
If Ballyandy ran off 135 I'd be staggered if he was lifted to anything more than 149.
Click to expand...

The consequences of beating a 148 horse 6 lengths will outweigh what Ballyandy was before the race (135), in the handicappers head Dan. Imho.

He will adjust the figures based on overwhelming factual evidence, imho.
 
Last edited:
Marble said:
The consequences of beating a 148 horse 6 lengths will outweigh what Ballyandy was before the race (135), in the handicappers head at least Dan. Imho.

He will adjust the figures based on overwhelming factual evidence, imho.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with the logic but I think he'll bottle it. Won't want to two angry trainers on the phone when they get 15-15-20lb.
 
I'm surprised you fellas feel this way, I wish we was all in a bar together discussing this over a pint, with adjusted ratings to be published imminently, and you could all lay me a score at even money on 155+. :)
 
Last edited:
DanB88 said:
Won't want to two angry trainers on the phone when they get 15-15-20lb.
Click to expand...

They laid the pair of them out good and proper, too good in fact. They should both go up big style, and rightly so, with Ballyandy getting it the hardest.
 
Last edited:
Marble said:
There is no way on this green earth, IMHO, that he raises Ballyandy, (who has just smashed up Clyne 6 lengths), to the same mark, as Clyne.
Click to expand...

Ballyandy was getting 8lbs. The six lengths quoted would equate to 7lbs. Technically and purely from a mathematical perspective, Ballyandy should be rated 1lb behind Clyne. After that it's the handicapper's discretion to adjust it beyond that. I think it's hard to see it being anywhere near another 8lbs beyond that.

I had the biggest bet of my life on a certain team winning a certain league this season. I got 1/3 at the start of the season. They were 1/1000 when the bookies stopped offering the market. I would be willing to bet more on the handicapper not putting Ballyandy up to 155 :)
 
Last edited:
That's a fair point, DO.

There is a possibility the handicapper might actually raise Clyne from 148 for his third aswell.

I've enjoyed debating this one, look forward to finding out what the BHA do.
 
Last edited:
While I don't mind using the 1lb per length ratio for well beaten horses like Eddiemaurice, for those leading the field, at full pelt, at two miles over hurdles, like Ballyandy was yesterday, and pulling away at the business end, I feel 1lb per length doesn't do him justice.

In other words, if you subtracted 8lb from Clyne's weight yesterday, or added 8lbs to Ballyandy making them level weights, the former would not have dead heated with the latter.

I'd say each winning length is probably worth 1.5lb or even 2lb, in real terms, when measuring the winner up against the placed horses in a race like that.

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on that particular idea.
 
Last edited:
It's slightly-dangerous to put a definitive figure on the superiority in such scenarios, imo. Better just to mark-up the horse with a '+' or 'p', and assess it next time with that in mind.
 
Grasshopper said:
It's slightly-dangerous to put a definitive figure on the superiority in such scenarios, imo.
Click to expand...

Point taken. I feel 1lb per length may be too definitive (and generic) when measuring superiority.

The established method you highlight is one way of doing things though.
 
Last edited:
Grasshopper said:
It's slightly-dangerous to put a definitive figure on the superiority in such scenarios, imo. Better just to mark-up the horse with a '+' or 'p', and assess it next time with that in mind.
Click to expand...

So why on earth do they **** about with the Irish horses when they come over here? Not sure how Phil Smith justifies plucking figures out of the air entirely based on potential.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
A little bit harsh on Phil Smith, Bear. :)

I understand why he does it for flat sprint handicappers (middle distance flat handicappers included), and handicap hurdlers/chasers over minimum distances, (2 miles etc)...but I don't understand why he does it in the Cesarewitchs or Grand Nationals.

I see this predominantly as a speed issue which involves shorter distance runners and races, over flat and jumps, as opposed to longer distance races.

E.G, a six furlong sprint handicapper that shows a turn of foot, or a Ballyandy over two miles, deserves a +, (or is worthy of altering the 1lb per length ratio), more than a Persian Punch or Grand National winner.

Horses that show a turn of foot towards the finish, over shorter distances, should improve more on their official ratings, or be worth more than the bare rating, than staying types, imo.

This isn't because they are better or superior specimens, but because they have beaten other horses, that should have had more chance of stopping them pull away at the finish, over a shorter distance covered.

So Phil Smith.....stop fiddling those four mile Irish Chasers!
 
Last edited:
Back
Top