Only Nick Mordin...

A bit off topic - but does anyone know that min-ave-max weights of thoroughbred race horses? I'm not talking about record-breakers, just a feel for how much the weight of horse can differ. Presumably there is a difference between fillies and colts and also flat, hurdle and jumps horses.
Click to expand...
Following are average body weights of a random selection of Hong Kong horses on race day:

3yo 1074 lb (sample size 15); 4yo 1088 (57); 5yo 1090 (65); 6yo 1078 (49); 8yo 1116 (9); 9yo 1072 (5).

The range was from 858 to 1302.

Small sample of in-training 2yos in UK recently had an average of 986.
 
And up to around 1500 lbs for chasers. Wasn't KAUTO weighed by Nicholls at some point, and came in around the mid 1400s mark?
 
Gamla Stan said:
It just amazes me that people choose to knock him when you have c**ts like Winstanley and Matt Williams in the RP every week and on the website all the time. Winstanley probably doesn't even know how many furlongs are in a mile.
Click to expand...

Winstanley thinks Tricky Trickster is too short for the National even though he backed him at 20s for the Gold Cup when in reality the animal should have been 200s for that race. Useless fat tosser.
 
Last edited:
Winstanley should be a good weight carrier then? :rolleyes:

2lb maybe only a small amount compared to 1500lbs but then again so is half a length compared to a mile.

not an exact science obviously but small amounts of weight have to have some relevance.
 
A 1,000lb horse carrying 11-12 has an extra 16% of its body mass on it's back.
A 1,500lb horse carrying 11-12 has an extra 11% of its body mass on it's back.
Yet in a handicap if both carried 11-12 it is because they are equally as good.

This is why big horses like Denman can win handicaps but get slammed by great horses like Kauto Star in Gold Cups.
 
If Kauto weighs 1400lbs then at 11-12 he carries an extra 11.85% of his body mass
If Denman weighs 1500lbs then at 11-12 he carries an extra 11.07% of his body mass

The difference between those two figures is 7%

7% of 3m1f is 1.75 furlongs or 350m

350m at 2.4m a length is 145 lengths

Are you surprised he is 2-1 up given a 145 length head start every race? :D :D :D
 
betsmate said:
A 1,000lb horse carrying 11-12 has an extra 16% of its body mass on it's back.
A 1,500lb horse carrying 11-12 has an extra 11% of its body mass on it's back.
Yet in a handicap if both carried 11-12 it is because they are equally as good.

This is why big horses like Denman can win handicaps but get slammed by great horses like Kauto Star in Gold Cups.
Click to expand...

You can get a lot of info on a horse's weight etc in Hong Kong which can lead to whole new approaches and angles to betting.

I can't understand why this can't be made available to the british betting public.
 
I'd guess its a much easier prospect in Hong Kong where there's only two tracks and all the horses are trained there.
 
The horse's weight isn't what is important - it's the horse's optimum weight when fit that is. Just looking at horses' weights is like looking at human weights. Without knowing that of two men both at 20st, one is a blobby slob, the other is an American linebacker, the information is useless.

Additionally, the weight on the horse's back won't represent X% of his body weight if it's dead, rather than live, weight. A horse's weight is all live weight. A jockey's weight is all live weight. Lead isn't. Figure the difference for how much of the weight on a horse is dead versus live weight, and you might find that more useful when trying to compute Bozo, weight 1,479lbs with 10st 11lb of which 7lbs is lead, versus Dozo, weight 1,483lbs with 11st, all live weight, than just thinking weight is weight is weight - it isn't.

The information could be made to the British betting public, provided it's happy to realise that every racecourse would have to budget for very expensive scales, a maintenance contract, a cover built to protect the scales, and a paid person authorised to weigh the horses. There'd be those costs to pass on to the attending public, betting or not. If you think every yard's going to buy scales, forget it. Far too expensive for small ones and largely irrelevant when trainers worth their salt know how their horses should look.

If you haven't managed to make a profit yet out of using ratings, form, trainers' reports, changes of tack, analyses, expert opinions, noting TimeForm, RP, newspaper, racing channel and even forum information, I'd be inclined to think that knowing horses' weights would be of no use to you (that's a general, not a specific you) at all.
 
betsmate said:
This is why big horses like Denman can win handicaps but get slammed by great horses like Kauto Star in Gold Cups.
Click to expand...

...shouldn't that be Gold Cup (singular, i.e. 2009 - when Denman was below form)? I don't remember Kauto slamming Denman in the Gold Cups in 2008 or 2010, infact wasn't it Denman who was slamming Kauto Star in Gold Cups (plural)?
 
Last edited:
Steve we never really did get your views on Denman in the Gold Cup. Granted he was beaten by a fair horse but disappointed given your level of confidence prior to the race?
 
The information could be made to the British betting public, provided it's happy to realise that every racecourse would have to budget for very expensive scales, a maintenance contract, a cover built to protect the scales, and a paid person authorised to weigh the horses. There'd be those costs to pass on to the attending public, betting or not.
Click to expand...
This particular red herring has been shown up for what it is many times previously.

The BHA based its gargantuan costing on just such a premise, but has failed to respond when the awkward truth has been pointed out to them: you would no more need 60 sets of scales, with 60 different sets of staff to operate them, than you would need 60 sets of starting stalls, and 60 sets of staff to operate those.

Mobile scales of great accuracy exist. Half a dozen of those, transported round the country along with starting stalls, would do the job nicely.

There may be valid objections to weighing horses in Britain based on logistics, but there are none on the grounds of cost. Unless you think British racing is so strapped that it cannot afford a fraction of the £2m+ a year the BHA laughably quoted.
 
Back
Top