Minimum Rating In The Uk?

353 horses affected when approx. 10,000 horses ran in 2007. This is a non-story. No need to ban such horses, just ensure a Racing Calendar that doesn't put any suitable races on for them, and if any owner is foolish enough to shell out 12k+ a year to keep them in training, then more fool them.

What will Donal Nolan do anyway if such a rule was enforced.
 
Bankrupt was a slip of the tongue or a wrong turn of phrase. Clearly the sport is not bankrupt but what is clear is that the UK is slipping further down the prizemoney levels internationally…struggling to find sponsors for many of its major races, major difficulties in confirming levy payments etc.

Davidjohnson made a good point, alone this will have little or no impact on the situation. But it has to go hand in hand with other policies. The removal of these horses plus the pruning of the fixture list will only prove to be a good thing for the sport.
 
The big problem is with those horses which do well on the gallops but for some reason don't put it in on the track. They tend to have very lowly marks whilst the trainer is trying out a variety of regimes, distances etc [Stargazy is an example]. Are they to be banned before they've had a chance to prove themselves? All three I've had a share in were mustard at home - the first one in particular: he'd gallop all over some very good horses, which is why we all persevered so long.

I agree there is far too much low-level racing at the moment but cutting fixtures rather than culling horses is the answer to that, esp in terms of prize levels. This would filter though in terms of horses which can't get runs being retired.

Great Leighs won't 'add' to the problem, it will help, in the sense it will distribute the fixtures around a bit more. It's located in an area with no other racetracks at all, and a very high density of population nearby. Most casual racegoers won't go far from their own area. It's being set up to be a leisure centre in a wider sense too, to serve it's area, and I think it will do well and bring new people to the sport.

The problem of low attendances recently at the other a/w tracks has been greatly exacerbated by them taking over the GL fixtures, so staging racing far too often to support attendances from their local cachement areas. Wolves twice a week? No thanks, even if I lived round the corner!
 
Originally posted by Headstrong@Feb 6 2008, 03:07 PM
I agree there is far too much low-level racing at the moment but cutting fixtures rather than culling horses is the answer to that
Click to expand...
Surely the 2 are bound to go hand in hand.
 
The biggest problem with racing at present is not the level of horses running but supporting cards;

3 weeks ago on a Thursday night, Wolverhampton was heaving with 4 class 7 races, a claimer, a seller and a class 5 handicap.

If anyone cares to look; the biggest problem with Kempton is they have a 7 races card with 3 - 6 runner races and one class 7 race, the class 7 race is always of maximum field, but is either the first race or the last race on the card.

No one will pay £16 to go to a course like Kempton and see races of 4 or 5 runners regardless of class.

Small fields do not interest punters or bookies, not lesser graded racing.

I must say my opinion of the handicapper is he is a complete arsehole who wouldn't know how to grade low class horses if he tried.

Stargazy is a prime example of a horse that when purchased rated 60, ran okay at Chepstow, and ran no race at Bath, how he judged him to drop him 11lb for only getting beat 8L at Chepstow in a hcp I don't understand. He looked into the Bath run too much.

Next time he returned off a break and was carried really wide when moving forwards and was then eased down. No change in mark.

Then he showed alot of pace, looked good, didn't stay and far from disgraced beaten 12L in a seller, where the winner was rated 65 off level weight with a 49 horse. Can some please tell me how the horse warrants a 10lb drop again.

Basically when Stargazy went into his grade, he was 2nd over a trip too short and then outclassed the same class of opposition. At Kempton he felt the affects of too many races too soon, and didn't handle the surface.

Stargazy is now rated 49, but is still well handicapped.

The problem I'm getting at here, is because he dropped us 10lb for what we thought was a good run meant one thing, under the new rule we wouldn't have been allowed to race.

It's criminal, the horse didn't warrant the drop he got yet the handicapper will be punishing horses for his bad judgment.

There needs to be some stability. i.e. when u get to 50, you can be dropped to a maximum of 45. Then you get 3 shots, i.e. in 0-45 if you cant win or placed, then your out.

I think that is a fairer system.

the problem is people say this rule is for the good of racing but I actually state its not at all. What is ruining racing is 4 or 5 runner races everywhere because to be honest there is so few 70 - 90 horses running on the all weather.

More of these lesser races should be created and you would get bigger fields. The problem with all weather racing is people think its for the lower scale horses, the problem at present is there aren't many low grade races and too many class 3,4,5 races which have 4 or 5 runners in for double the prize money of a banded race.

Why have 3 1m 4f 0-75 handicaps a week with 4 runners?, it makes no sense to me. Yet there is 2 0-45 6f - 1m races a week, with a ballot.

Don't forget under the new system, a horse like Young Mick would have never existed, because he would have been kicked out.

Addressing the problem would be to limit the all weather meetings, but by eliminating the races that aren't filled, not getting rid of the races that are oversubscribed.

If you had a class 6/7 meeting, say a 6f, 7f, 1m, 1m 2f, 1m 4f and 2m race on a card all 0-45 or 46-55 I guarantee you that there would be maximum fields, there would also be a good on course turnover and good attendance.

The problem with Kempton is its too expensive for what you get.

The bars are expensive. £1.80 for a can of coke. Admission is ludicrous, £16 for a max of 35 runners. Plus to charge for a race card like that, well that’s just idiotic.

You will not get people paying £17.20 just to come through the gate with no runners and expensive bars and so forth.

If they scrapped admission fee and a £1 race card, the place would draw in plenty, plus they would make up the money on the bar and on food.

At Kempton last Friday (1st Feb), they had 8 paying people through the turnstile at £16. Now for the sake of £128 is it not worth risking, saying free entry one Friday night, make sure its a card where you will get decent fields.

I guarantee they will be much busier.

Its not the horses which are the problem, its the crap racing calendar and a handicapper who is far too quick to drop horses without giving them a serious chance.
 
Horses I have been part owner of have been those lower rated types - and I loved them to bits, racing, wonky legs, clumsy actions, difficult temperaments .....

The danger is that as soon as any concern sporting or otherwise tends towards elitism, it chasers away the very people who are willing to put the money in.

Is this just another influence of those who support sterile racing, such as that on the all weather surface, and yes a couple of my horses won on these surfaces.

Next, it will be closing of the lesser rated racecourses, to improve the image of racing.

The authorities should leave well alone and let the nature of the sport remove less able horses. If the problem is image and caring for the lesser types who cannot compete then put the money into 'retirement' agencies and win some proper PR.

MR2
 
If anyone cares to look; the biggest problem with Kempton is they have a 7 races card with 3 - 6 runner races and one class 7 race, the class 7 race is always of maximum field, but is either the first race or the last race on the card.
Click to expand...

Indeed, Chris, and the irony is that all these Class 7 races from 5 furlongs to 2 miles are generally more competitive than the races around them. I fully accept your comments about Kempton - I go to Lingfield on a winter Saturday and pay £10 with the Racegoers Club and I reckon that's fair enough for a card with a couple of Class 2 handicaps.

A few years ago, Lingfield did have a few "free" days - Barry Dennis supported a couple, I believe. The attendances were much higher and Towcester has shown that free admission works well in the NH sphere BUT we're not comparing a meeting every three weeks with three meetings a week. Even if Kempton had free admission for every meeting, would people keep turning out ? I'm inclined to think not and the course has a set of costs (safety, stabling etc) which it has to meet whether 20,000 turn up or just 8.

Lingfield also staged a few all Class 6 cards and you are right in saying these were very well supported with maximum fields across the card. I don't know why this hasn't been repeated.
 
Aren't the lowly attended a/w weather meetings like the afternoon greyhounds? That it to say, there has never been an expectation of large crowds, and the racing is simply put on for the benefit of the off course betting industry?

I am presuming the racecourses have factored this into their plans, and that the poorly attended meetings are adequately subsidised by the better attended weekend meetings?

Kempton is possibly an exception as they seemed to think they could attract the "city" crowd to their evening meetings but this has simply not worked. This is good from an NH perspective as they at one time considered dropping NH altogether, and yet I imagine NH racing is now keeping their show on the road.

I am guessing Southwell and Wolverhampton have got it right as both seem to have built a good business model, with Lingfield's a/w arm being linked to the richer turf meetings, and a/w Satrudays with group and listed fare?
 
Chris I think everything you have written there is totally correct, and I hope you'll write it up and send it to the Racing Post or the Throroughbred & Breeder - can assist with expending it if you need but I'm sure you can do a good piece! there are any numbers of egs to bear out what you are saying. At least send it to the ROA and the BHB even if not published
 
Yes, thought provoking stuff Chris and I totally agree with the bizzareness of the handicapping system at times. At the end of the day, the handicappers will be playing a racing god. The handicap they chose for individual horses based on a run may decide whether a horse continues to race or not or maybe even whether it lives or not. :rolleyes:
 
I can't imagine they will want that responsibility either!
Far better to curtail the programme a bit and let natural wastage take its course
 
"...At Kempton last Friday (1st Feb), they had 8 paying people through the turnstile at £16...."

A "crowd" of eight?! There is absolutely no purpose whatsoever in putting on such meetings, regardless of what the off-course bookmakers say.

It's not as if Kempton can't attract decent AW crowds on suitable occasions - there must have been nearly a thousand times that number when I went there for a competitive midweek evening card last August. Useful, the "attracting the city crowd" policy was dropped a long time ago in favour of targetting locals. This has been reasonably successful, but putting on meetings like the one last Friday just make the sport appear ridiculous.
 
Ven the difference is your talking about summer, not mid winter;

If they scrapped the admission fee they would get 100 x that total.

People say they have staff to pay and that but they only generate £128; so its not as if they have much to lose from going free entry.
 
Exactly - and on a Friday night... where are all the Birthday Parties, Hen Parties etc etc!!
Free entry would def attract that sort of crowd, and they wouldn't interfere with the racing at all as they'd never go outside! They need a new marketing team imo - they should at least be filling the boxes for private parties
 
Originally posted by chrisbeekracing@Feb 7 2008, 07:09 AM
I must say my opinion of the handicapper is he is a complete arsehole who wouldn't know how to grade low class horses if he tried.



Basically when Stargazy went into his grade, he was 2nd over a trip too short and then outclassed the same class of opposition.
Click to expand...
I find this statement puzzling. You seem to be suggesting that class 7 is indeed Stargazy's grade, but then are moaning that he'd been dropped to that grade. If he hadn't been dropped from a mark of 60, he couldn't run in class 7's.

The handicappers (there are about 6 of them on the Flat) do a pretty good job in the main imo.
 
Originally posted by chrisbeekracing@Feb 7 2008, 08:09 AM
At Kempton last Friday (1st Feb), they had 8 paying people through the turnstile at £16.
Click to expand...
Chris, where exactly did you get such information? I would be willing to pay good money to bet that there is no truth in that statement - and I say that as someone who is against these crappy AW meetings! The crowd was dismal I know - but the attendance figures being bandied about (according to a journalist who would have some idea) was around 350+. Now, I appreciate that not all of those were paying customers but a good deal more than 8 people will have paid to get in.

As for lowering the standards of racing on the AW, I don't get that either. For starters, a fairly obvious point is that a hell of a lot of these horses rated so lowly are still maidens - so why are the maidens (with no lower ratings limit) consistently producing fields of 6 runners, for example? Last night's claimer (again, no lower ratings limit) had 4 runners - how much of a poorer quality do you want these races to be?!

There are many 0-65s or 0-60s that have small fields as well - these races aren't closed to horses that are rated in the 40s and there is plenty of room for them to get in. Ergo if going by your argument that people are tearing their hair out that their 45 rated beast has been treated harshly by the handicapper in being dropped so low, run it in one of these 5 runner 0-65s, get your handicap raised enough to get into races (and to a level you think your horse deserves) and everyone's happy. Putting on cards of 0-45 races and lowering the already crappy level of British racing is not the answer IMO. They tried that before with banded racing remember - and scrapped the plan pronto when they realised people didn't want it and it was as bent as you'd like.
 
The person who told me that Shads was someone on the gate as we left, i asked him if he had a good night and he said no;

we've only had 8 paying entry's tonight.

Now that doesn't say there wasn't a fair few maybe advance pay or resturant, but I can clarify that the man on the gate said 8 paying and he would have a better idea than me or you so I would go with his word.

To the comment above, I meant his winning grade, not his grade. He is about a 60 horse in truth and will win more races.


You say about running 40 horses in 0-60s or 0-65s, but why run 15lb out the handicap, it makes no sense.

Also you say lower teh level of Brittish Racing.

I've seen much worse over the jumps than on the flat. Half the horses in the claiming hurdle and the maiden hurdles at Taunton today, wouldn't win a gymcarna let alone a race.
 
Well the way he ran Collin, he's on a downhill slope quickly, he has been purchased to go hunting and pointing however so least he will get a good home.

Look at all the pulled up's in that claimer. They were strung out all over Somerset.

Bar the front 3 in each of the maiden hurdles they were poor, yet some horses were getting beat a flight of hurdles. There are more rubbish races over jumps than on the flat, most jump racing is boring to be honest.

I would rather watch the 9.20 at Kempton than a 2m 1/2f 0-85 handicap hurdle, its like watching the future residents of potters.
 
Originally posted by chrisbeekracing@Feb 7 2008, 10:10 PM
You say about running 40 horses in 0-60s or 0-65s, but why run 15lb out the handicap, it makes no sense.
Click to expand...
Chris, in your first post you seemed to be claiming that your horse was dropped no less than 21lbs (11lbs on one occasion then 10lbs on the next) which you felt was unwarranted and unfair. Ergo, if you believe he should really be rated 21lbs higher then you are effectively dismissing what the handicapper says anyway so you wouldn't be worried about running 15lbs out of the handicap if you think you are 21lbs well in! Not least that it would solve the problem of not getting into races.

As for the person on the gate - there are two gates at Kempton for starters, and they may well have been joking/exaggerating. Out of an attendance of 350+ (from memory I believe the figure quoted was around the 380 mark) I find it hard to believe that 370+ people got in gratis!
 
How can a horse like Celtic Son go downhill so quickly, he still has masses of ability but he just doesn't want to know.

Do you think that being in a smaller yard, and getting some personal TLC, will help him get to like racing again?
 
At least over the jumps you have large fields of runners in that lower grade, and they tend to drum up a crowd far larger than that which Kempton attracts to one of its far too frequent days of dross dog racing. Two or three fixtures per week at that one track alone of crap, lowly racing full of four and five runner races does the sport no favours whatsoever.
 
Back
Top