King George (Ascot)

J Alfred Prufrock said:
This is an automated response, prompted by an incidence of comparing apples with pears:

The respective levels of ratings of Timeform (est 1947), Racing Post (est 1986) and BHA (est as BHB in 1993) are all different.
Click to expand...

Indeed they are. On this occasion 7lb difference between Timeform and the OR (revised to 5lb difference)... which is much greater than usual. Since they are calculated using the same universal scale, you would have thought there would be more consistency.

I'd go as far as to say that Timeform has readjusted in light of the discrepancy.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, that was my Forum Bot that posted that.

The usual difference between BHA and Timeform for older horses is currently 8 (I have spent far too long looking into such matters, believe me), but it tends to be less with the better horses.

The point is that they are not on the same universal scale. The Jockey Club (RIP) started off on just about the same scale back whenever, but, due to more slippage than would be experienced by a Scarborough clifftop bungalow, the BHB (RIP) and now the BHA operates at a lower level.

I don't know why that should be so: perhaps we could ask them.
 
Euronymous said:
From a Historical standpoint Timeform ratings are the only ones that really matter.
Click to expand...

Since it has already cut its initial rating it doesn't leave me brimming with confidence that it has got it right now. They would have appeared ridiculous to cut by more than 2lbs so soon after putting out their initial rating of 142, although they may well on quieter reflection have wanted to cut further. Timeform will be regretting that they have overshot so much.
 
J Alfred Prufrock said:
Sorry, that was my Forum Bot that posted that.

The usual difference between BHA and Timeform for older horses is currently 8 (I have spent far too long looking into such matters, believe me), but it tends to be less with the better horses.

The point is that they are not on the same universal scale. The Jockey Club (RIP) started off on just about the same scale back whenever, but, due to more slippage than would be experienced by a Scarborough clifftop bungalow, the BHB (RIP) and now the BHA operates at a lower level.

I don't know why that should be so: perhaps we could ask them.
Click to expand...

That’s okay… and I take your point about slippage on the universal scale (although BHA ratings can also be higher than Timeform ratings, despite being typically lower). Weight for age and weight for sex are of course constants.

The World Thoroughbred Rankings will of course mediate on the fluctuations between various official and rating agency ratings (which are more fluctuations of application than scale) at the end of the season and provide an internationally recognised rating on the same scale… I’m willing to bet this rating will be lower than the knee-jerk 142.
 
Last edited:
A similar thing happened with Hawk Wing after his Lockinge. If we'd taken it as read that Where or When had run up to his best then the former would have been well over 140. Subsequent events proved WoW wasn't the same horse as a 4yo.

I think 135 is way too low and 142 too high - 138 seems about right to me. Cape Blanco wasn't suited to how the race was run and managed to hold on for second because Youmzain is basically past it and the French filly was feeling the ground.
 
Euronymous said:
A similar thing happened with Hawk Wing after his Lockinge. If we'd taken it as read that Where or When had run up to his best then the former would have been well over 140. Subsequent events proved WoW wasn't the same horse as a 4yo.

I think 135 is way too low and 142 too high - 138 seems about right to me. Cape Blanco wasn't suited to how the race was run and managed to hold on for second because Youmzain is basically past it and the French filly was feeling the ground.
Click to expand...

I remember it well. On the face of it Hawk Wing ran to an astonishing rating (and I think DO will give you an argument that he achieved it!) akin to a Tudor Minstrel. Personally I think they may have cut him back too much in the light of subsequent inferior performances.

As to Harbinger who knows. You may well be close to the mark. But if he's beaten 10 lengths in the Arc by Fame And Glory and/or Workforce, the sharp scissors could come out.
 
Ardross said:
I find the idea the horse is superior to STS on Timeform's ratings simply absurd.
Click to expand...

I suspect STS could have on any given day have run to an equal if not better rating but Kinane only ever let him do enough which holds him down purely from a ratings perspective.

Personally I think STS would have mullered him.
 
Ardross said:
I find the idea the horse is superior to STS on Timeform's ratings simply absurd.
Click to expand...

I suppose you're right there. Although as we've said STS wasn't about clocking up monster ratings. Personally I think the Timeform 140 a bit too high on what he did. But in terms of overall class I wouldn't deny it him.
 
Ardross said:
I find the idea the horse is superior to STS on Timeform's ratings simply absurd.
Click to expand...

totally agree

a rating of 130 - 132 in line with his speed figure will be the more likely end rating for Harbinger

the fact that the 2nd horse ran the last 3f slower than a handicapper has to be thrown into the mix..he was either very tired on the ground..or there is something wrong with a horse that completes a G1 final 3f in such a slow time..on top of that not one horse could pass the 2nd even though he only ran that fast.

something isn't right here..someone suggested they all haven't run below form..i wonder how that conclusion is reached..its not like its not possible.

what logic leads us to believe that a race could not have just one horse that runs near his form

the 2nd horse's puzzling slow final 3f time is key to rating this race imo.

at the end of this season H's mark will drop to low 130's..because the study of the placed horses here hasn't been done thoroughly enough imo by those rating him 140+.
 
Last edited:
Harbinger's Timeform timefigure is 135, 5 below his form rating.

The fact that the beaten horses finished slowly, and that the timefigure is good but not sensational, has been taken into account in compiling the form rating. Or so I am led to believe.

As has race standardisation, first-5 standardisation and other things that the BHA and RP don't seem to bother about or possibly understand.

I think it is commendable that people on this and other forums agonise over the smallest details of a horse's performance. It would be welcome, however, if they acknowledged in return that some of the people tasked with coming up with ratings do the same themselves.
 
EC1 said:
something isn't right here..someone suggested they all haven't run below form..i wonder how that conclusion is reached..its not like its not possible.

what logic leads us to believe that a race could not have just one horse that runs near his form

the 2nd horse's puzzling slow final 3f time is key to rating this race imo.

at the end of this season H's mark will drop to low 130's..because the study of the placed horses here hasn't been done thoroughly enough imo by those rating him 140+.
Click to expand...


High 130s EC. Cape Blanco hasn't run that far below form, maybe three or four pounds. It's surely obvious this animal was close to 135 if not above it after the Hardwicke. If he'd been trained by anyone else he would have been a job bet on Saturday.
 
I've given him a Beyer figure of 122, it converts to about 136 as a Timeform if you go by the rule of adding 14 points to an older turf horse to achieve a Timeform figure. The task is made arduous by the apparent slower than average first two races so the rating isn't as solid as I'd like.

I gave Workforce a Beyer of 121 for his Derby win and I was very confident with that figure at the time, equates to a Timeform of 136.

You have to remember that the Beyer figs are 100% based on the time and nothing else, many don't like it but it works for me.
 
Also, whilst on the Youmzain topic. He definitely runs below form away from the Arc.

I gave him 114 Beyer for the Coronation Cup, 112 for this effort and a 123 for last year's Arc.
 
Back
Top