I will try to explain what I meant.
UTPT and SFP have self-evidently run as the handicapper expected they would (his job is to try and manufacture a dead-heat) and Noble Endeavour is only 3lbs off where the Handicapper expected him to finish. That's the point I was trying to get across, though I could perhaps I could have worded my previous post more elegantly/clearly.
OK, Buywise is well off, so I'll give you that. My bad - it's been a busy morning. :lol:
Now.......if you think UTPT has improved past his 153 rating in the Ultima, that's fine. It's a fair enough position to adopt, and the handicapper agrees with you (has put him up a half-stone).
Equally, if you want to back UTPT for the Gold Cup, that's fine too, as you clearly see some prospect for even more improvement.
And if you think UTPT is already a better horse than both Might Bite and Our Duke, that is also fine.
I just happen to disagree with all of these assertions, and I think it's perfectly fair to call them out, when statements like "will eat them for breakfast" are bandied-about. For my money, it runs-down what Might Bite and Our Duke have achieved, and needs tempered.
No dispute here - just a difference of opinion.
No problem. We obviously assess things differently, which is pretty much what it's supposed to be all about.
The basic premise I work from - and no condescending or patronising intended - is that the handicapper's aim to get the whole field to finish in a dead-heat. Therefore I want to be able to draw an imaginary line across the track at where that dead-heat should have been. Obviously in 99% of cases the winner of a handicap will be better than the handicapper has rated him. As we work back through the field [at the finish] at what point do we get to the horse(s) that has/have run closest to their ratings.
My basic contention is that the better or more valuable the handicap the more likely it is that the winner is further ahead of the handicapper. I learned that very quickly in the early days of my studying when I didn't really take the class of race into account. Most of my punting success is in handicaps and until this poor season for me on the betting front I was, if anything, doing better year on year as my analysis got better and better.
My belief is that in the very best handicaps the imaginary dead-heat line is well down the field. I honestly reckon in such a race a horse can run to its OR and still only finish 12th or 13th or worse.
I'll watch the lead-up to the Ultima again as I haven't done so since before Aintree but I'd almost guarantee someone said something about UTPT not being able to win because a] he was 7lbs higher than last season and/or b] he was top weight.
I had gone very high with his form the year before and had him highly rated and ahead of what it takes to win a normal running of the race. The only ones above him were Holywell (since retired) and Henri Parry Morgan (disappointing so far). I was expecting improvement some improvement as he appeared to have been laid out for the race but feared Singlefarmpayment, Buywise on his best form and any improvement from Go Conquer and The Druids Nephew.
The big risk I've taken in evaluating the form is in taking Buywise as running to his best form. This was because he didn't make any mistakes of note, held a reasonable [for him] position through the race and ran on well up the hill. It looked to me like the form then made a lot of sense even though the figures were very high. I was very aware of that but it's the kind of thing that has paid off in spades in the past.
I then went down the "take ... out" route.
Take out UTPT and we have SFP landing one of the gambles of the meeting. Take out both of them and we have Noble Endeavor franking the form of Native River, Vicente, etc and the Irish National. Take all three out and we have Buywise celebrating a return to his best. Take him out too and we have a progressive - possible job - horse in Go Conquer dishing out a hiding to the two Mulholland horses and Theatre Guide. It all looked so solid.
I don't deny there's an element of risk in going so high but if I hadn't gone so high with the race the year before I'd never have had UTPT as a bet in the race. These are the decisions our betting prospers or dies by. I have to say this season I'm getting a lot wrong but I'm my own biggest critic and I don't think my ratings are the problem. It's my selection process. I'm narrowing it down to likely winners and backing the wrong ones. I got it right going into this race so I'm reasonably happy to conclude that I'm not far wrong coming out of it.
I fully expect Singlefarmpayment to win or go very close in the Hennessy. I think I'm right in saying he's gone up 4lbs for this. I reckon his natural improvement will take him past that level. Alternatively, they might want to preserve his mark for the Grand National. He'll just about get in off 146 next year. If they went down that route with him he'd be one of my all-time biggest bets in the race. However, I reckon Native River set an interesting precedent this season in winning the Hennessy before getting to run unpenalised in the Welsh National. That's two huge pots and a tempting alternative to Aintree.
Different strokes for different folks and all that, I suppose, but UTPT is a Grade 1 staying hurdler who is relatively unexposed over fences because they've targeted the Ultima at this stage in his career. I suspect, though, that they won't aim for the Gold Cup with him other than as a prep for Aintree. Then again, they'd be entitled to fear significant improvement, relative to UTPT, from Singlefarmpayment through next season.
PS - I admit 'eat them for breakfast' was a bit OTT