The Road to the 2017 Champion Hurdle

Tanlic said:
I don't think he did realise DO or he would have tucked him away and backed him for squilians of 149 in the old Schweppes like Ryan Price used to.

He did it with MTOY and Darlan 146.

Actually when you think about it the Betfair could be a possibility as Nicky loves the race. Punjabi carried 11.5lbs and finished 2nd and went on to run 3rd to Katchit and then won the following year's CH.

One way of finding out how good he actually is before Cheltenham
Click to expand...

I'm not sure of the entry conditions for the Schweppes but I think there is a ratings ceiling and I think it is below 160, in which case BP would have to carry 12-2 or more. Maybe someone can put us right.

I think Consul De Thaix might be his Schweppes horse (for the same owner as MTOY and Darlan) as it only went up 5lbs to 140.
 
Not sure that's the case, DO.

Rooster Booster ran in it years back from a mark of 166, and carried 11-12.
 
From the Nicky Henderson stable tour:

BRAIN POWER

"He had a good year but he has got a lot of things to learn in life. He jumping was not all it should be. He is perfectly capable of it, but he is just a bit wayward at times. It was a very good run he had at Punchestown. He has schooled very well over fences and he will go novice chasing. I would have thought we would start him off over two and a half and he is not slow, either."
Click to expand...
 
Grasshopper said:
Not sure that's the case, DO.

Rooster Booster ran in it years back from a mark of 166, and carried 11-12.
Click to expand...

Indeed he did... Thanks for reminding me :) I've checked back through recent renewals and I see Brampour was off 11-12 / OR 162 a couple of years ago. I never saw him as a CH type, though.

Colin Phillips said:
Oh! No, not the Rooster Booster saga.......think DO might have something to say on this (and Ardross, of course).
Click to expand...

Those were the days :lol:
 
Grey said:
From the Nicky Henderson stable tour:
Click to expand...

A lot has changed since the Grey but after he was put up not knowing he wad already been schooled over fences my first thought is that is where he would need to go.

It's what do you do with him between now and Next Years Arkle ? On reflection there could be an ideal race for him if they don't fancy the Betfair which Nicky has won a couple of times with Binocular and also ran Peace and Co in.......The Contenders Hurdle at Sandown

Can I have 7/2 with a run please? it is Xmas
 
I've gone over the figures in a bit more detail and this is an extract from my review of the day:

There were only two hurdles races of any note since no time was taken for the first race, a novices’ handicap, and with the disparity in trip and Standard times getting meaningful time ratings is almost impossible. However, it would seem that both races were strongly run. On my figures, if Brain Power’s race was fast then the staying hurdle was extremely fast and would put UNWIMH in Big Buck’s territory. If the going allowance can be extrapolated from the latter’s race then BP was fast but not Champion Hurdle class.

I took Brain Power for the Champion Hurdle (25/1) on the strength of this run. I find it really difficult to get away from the conclusion that this was maybe the strongest handicap hurdle form we’ve had since Wicklow Brave’s County Hurdle. The group placed third to seventh all appear to have run very close to their respective differentials in what was a strongly-run race but the winner was pishing all over them while Consul De Thaix has posted the kind of mark you’d half-expect to see a good second-season juvenile put up. Consistent handicappers like Sternrubin and Wolf Of Windlesham were well beaten. I’m sure people will put forward the third home Fergall as evidence that the form cannot be that strong but he had looked on the way back last time when just a length behind Sternrubin and was back on the same mark off which he had been a clear daylight (4½ lengths) winner of a decent handicap in his previous best season and was lightly raced in the interim.

My figures for the race will be uncomfortably high for a lot of people but I’m reasonably confident that if I am out it isn’t by very much at all. Brain Power’s figure equates to 166 on a non-handicap level and that would have been good enough for a close fourth last year, third the year before, a close third in 2014, fourth in 2013 and third in 2012. That’s all before allowing for whatever he may have had in reserve or whatever further improvement he may have. A figure of 173 would have won just about every Champion Hurdle since Istabraq so if he can find 7lbs between now and March he would be no 25/1 shot. I also now wonder if he is the real reason Altior went chasing this season.
Click to expand...
 
Interesting stuff, DO.

What does "equates to a mark of 166 on a non-handicap level" mean?

Does this mean you rate Brain Power at 166, or something slightly different?
 
Grasshopper said:
Interesting stuff, DO.

What does "equates to a mark of 166 on a non-handicap level" mean?

Does this mean you rate Brain Power at 166, or something slightly different?
Click to expand...

This is something I've been experimenting with for at least a year now, GH.

I've learned - the hard way - that the way I calculate ratings doesn't translate directly between handicap and non-handicap races. It accounts for why, for example, Rooster Booster was 178 on my figures (for his nose second in the Schweppes*) yet couldn't run to that in non-handicaps.

I think it goes back to when I started compiling my own ratings and was using the ORs as the basis for my calculations. For a long time now I've felt my non-handicap ratings are about 5lbs too low pretty much across the board. I was losing money, frankly, backing handicap form to stand up in non-handicap races and also found non-handicappers out-performing my figures when they dropped into handicaps.

It was occurring to me over the same period that I was on here bemoaning a lack of quality in the better races so I've been running two sets of ratings side by side for a while now, making a 5lbs adjustment either way accordingly. It has so far been offering very strong evidence that my non-handicap figures ARE 5lbs low. I haven't got round, so far, to committing 100% to the change but expect to do so sooner rather than later.

Of course, along comes an animal like Frankel and on my normal calcs he's up there with Brigadier Gerard and Mill Reef so I'm thinking I'm right all along but I haven't discounted the distinct possibility that Frankel was simply that little bit better than them, which would put him in front of Sea Bird II too.

My handicap rating for BP is 171. If the 166 is uncomfortably high for people, that will have them extracting their appendages ready to shower me from all angles. But I had a whole host of that field handicapped to win a really good Saturday handicap and a lot of them on steep curves too. I don't think it is a coincidence that these types end up running in these races.

BP's new OR (162) means the handicapper's opinion isn't that far behind mine but maybe convention requires him to be conservative. I haven't read his blog yet this week. It also means BP will have to improve again to win a good Saturday handicap.

I don't expect many people to agree with me but at least I'm offering a different perspective to the lazy type the racing media offer :lol:


* I should remind people that BrianH had given me 11/2 or 13/2 (something like that) earlier in the season against RB for the CH but he messaged me after the Schweppes offering to pay out at something like 11/4, which I accepted, thankfully. But he was clearly happy to accept that it was a CH winning performance.
 
Last edited:
Too true Rooster Booster couldn't run to that mark outside of handicaps. that's higher than Persian War was given and he beat Major Rose carrying 11st13lbs and I think Sempervivum and Spartan general both top class hurdlers were also in the field.

I don't mean to offend but it's these kind of crazy rating that leave me scratching my head.

Rooster Booster won what I would consider 2nd only to Sublimity's year as the worse champion hurdle of all time.

I will never forget Jonjo saying that is RC won it it would have to be the worst CH he had ever seen.

As for the Schweppes that was worse. Geos had won the race 5 years beforehand, had been chasing and was way past his best and never won another race.

I looked back the rating just now Rooster Booster 166 Geos 149 and if 1lb = 1 length there's 17 lengths between them

The weights on the day 11st12lbs and 10st9lbs 17lbs difference distance a sh hd

A brilliant piece of handicapping right on the button.,..........The 3rd horse was Monkerhostin who improved later to become very decent but he pretty much had run to his rating too.

This is where I get bamboozled..................2 horses run to their exact mark within an inch and the handicapper put one up 5 lbs and 1 up 4 lbs..........why on earth would he do that? Surely to God he should have left both on the same mark they ran off because putting them up is like saying I was wrong to give them the marks they all but dead heated on....ROBOT handicapping perhaps?

I would love for you to explain how on earth did you get to 178 in the first place? Sea Pigeon 175 must be turning in his grave:lol:

Is it because your entire book of ratings is a 10 lbs higher than the OH that got you to that figure? I would honestly struggle to give him a 170 which the OH did
 
Last edited:
Rooster Booster is the best champion hurdle winner since Istabraq
the performance in the Tote was the reason why he lost his next champion hurdle, most horses are not able to run to his best after such a mighty effort
 
Last edited:
I have a paper upstairs which I wrote back in something like 1995. It was typed using a Canon Starwriter, which tells you how old it is. And the operating system wasn't/isn't compatible with Microsoft stuff. So to reproduce it I would have to re-type it, which I don't plan to do. That one copy is the only one I have. A friend for whom I photocopied it has the only other copy outside of whatever Raceform might have on their files.

The paper was serialised in what was then the Handicap Book and I got a letter from the publishers praising me for it, followed by another explaining why they were pulling it with one or two instalments still to go - it was too close to home for their own handicappers.

Ask yourself these questions, Tanlic, and they might come across as patronising but they're not meant to be:

1. What are handicaps?
2. Why do horses win handicaps?
3. Why are handicap races graded?

Those are just for starters. I know you know the answers but I just want you to follow through the logic of them.

Why does a horse coming from a Class 4 handicap seldom win a Class 2 next time?

It actually took me years - and I mean years - to get my head round some aspects of this. Once I worked out that my basic working principles were flawed and in what way my whole approach to handicapping turned around.

I simply could not believe how blind I'd been to the obvious.

It's almost crucial that you don't confuse my ratings with Timeform's, for example. There wouldn't be much point in citing any other organisation's since they didn't publish ratings at the time I started out doing mine. Haig (later Superform) ratings were very much in their infancy at the time and Dick Whitford was ploughing his own furrow a the Sporting Life. So to compare my rating for Rooster Booster with Timeform's rating for Sea Pigeon is like comparing Frank Sinatra with One Direction. The Racing Post came along and started publishing their own ratings but, as I understand it, most of their compilers were ex-Timeform employees so there was a broad similarity.
 
Last edited:
sunybay said:
Rooster Booster is the best champion hurdle winner since Istabraq
the performance in the Tote was the reason why he lost his next champion hurdle, most horses are not able to run to his best after such a mighty effort
Click to expand...

I still blame Dickhead Johnson for giving him too much to do at Newbury, resulting in his having a far harder race than necessary.

Geos, by the way, was 16lbs lower than when he had won the Christmas Hurdle at his peak and 13lbs better off with RB for a 4lbs beating in the 2002 Bula Hurdle. And RB should really have beaten him cosily at Newbury. :(
 
Coming back to Brain Power - and bearing in mind that I try not to take too much notice of trainers' blogs - I was nevertheless interested in NH's take on BP:

BRAIN POWER obviously deserves a step up in grade after winning so nicely at Ascot and we’ll have to start aiming a bit higher now. I see StanJames.com have quoted him at 20/1 for theChampion Hurdle and that is a long way off but he’s now rated 162, 7lbs lower* than My Tent Or Yours (155), and I’d like to think there is still some improvement in him, so that tells its own story
Click to expand...

* He obviously means higher.

What catches my eye is:
I’d like to think there is still some improvement in him
Click to expand...

So the fvck would I!!!
 
Desert Orchid said:
I still blame Dickhead Johnson for giving him too much to do at Newbury, resulting in his having a far harder race than necessary.

Geos, by the way, was 16lbs lower than when he had won the Christmas Hurdle at his peak and 13lbs better off with RB for a 4lbs beating in the 2002 Bula Hurdle. And RB should really have beaten him cosily at Newbury. :(
Click to expand...

Sheer and utter tosh!!! Rooster Booster was getting cuffed right left and center by just about everything before and after Newbury and only finished 2nd there because it was a crap renewal. In 18 races before and after Hardy Eustace kicked his ass he won a grand total of 3 races.

At least we agree the handicapper's an idiot.he must be :blink: he rated Hurricane Fly Binocular Faugheen Annie Power Rock on Ruby and Jezki all superior to Rooster Booster

He wouldn't get into the top 20 best winner of the Champion Hurdle on a bad day unless you were 12 to 20 years old at the time and just started watching racing then you will have seen him through rose coloured glasses.... which happens to everyone when see their first champion

You guys are looking at him and forgetting what he beat was a bunch of middle of the road hurdlers. There were no Hurricane Fly or Jezki's and certainly no Faugheens during those years...It was in fact one very poor hurdling era
 
Last edited:
Tanlic, this is a tremendously game and late-breaking tilt at the Bullshi*t Post of the Year prize. :lol:

Rooster Booster needed an end-to-end gallop, and it is no coincidence that his best performances came in strongly-run races like Champion Hurdles and high-end handicaps like the Tote Gold Trophy. They were the only races ever run to suit him, and he eventually became ungenuine (there were always mild traces of this throughout most of his career) when he found himself facing a handful of rivals, in tactically-run Graded races.

Top-end handicaps allow for a much more accurate assessment of superiority, than any of the sh*itbox so-called 'trial' events like the Fighting Fifth, Xmas Hurdle do, and RB was miles ahead of his peer-group. Your argument seems to be that running in handicaps made him no better than a handicapper, which is complete bollocks. Over the last 20 years, I reckon only Faugheen and Istrabraq would comfortably have dispatched Rooster Booster at his best. Jezki and Hurricane Fly might have done so - but I wouldn't be rushing to back either to do so.

As for the remainder, old Foghorn Leghorn would have wiped his arse with every other Champion Hurdler, and if you seriously think the likes of Hors La Loi III, Sublimity, Katchit, Punjabi etc are in remotely the same league as him, then you should really give the game up.

PS. He would have humped the ponce Binocular too. Just so you know.

Merry Xmas, you slavering old twat. :<3:

:cool:
 
Last edited:
DO, I haven't found the time to properly assimilate your reply, beyond the very obvious fact that you are holding two sets of ratings; one for handicaps and another for non-handicaps.........which sounds like an awful lot of work to me!

As we know, the awarded ratings themselves can be argued either way - up or down - depending on perspective, so I'm more interested in the mechanics of how you police the difference between the two. An across-the-board "5lb extra" seems a little less scientific than I'd expect from you - though I suspect that there's more to it than this.........I just need to have a deeper think about your approach.

I may have follow-up questions in a few days, once all the shenanigans is out the way, and I've had a proper chance to think about it. :cool:
 
No problem, GH, although there are elements of the nitty gritty I'd rather not go public with.

I don't really see it as running two sets of ratings. I really only follow the one method; it's just that I've learned that when a horse with a rating achieved in a handicap takes in a non-handicap I need to lower its mark by 5lbs. The 5lbs 'across the board' does sound unscientific but it's really a ball-park figure. I don't believe any rating can be absolutely exact, it's really just a best possible evaluation given the evidence.

And obviously since these ratings are purely subjective explaining all the nuances wold take more than a couple of Guinnesses.
 
Understood, and agree with your assessment on subjectivity of ratings.

It's perfectly logical too, and thinking about it, is perhaps something I do subconsciously myself. When it comes to Grade 1 horses running in handicaps under stopping-weights, I certainly do look beyond the bare rating, and almost always add a 'degree of difficulty' penalty for the top-weight(s), in an attempt to reflect factors not accounted for in the bare ratings/weight equation. It sounds to me like you do exactly the same, and that 5lbs is the 'degree of difficulty penalty' that you apply as a general marker, and then work around that to determine a final rating.

It sounds like more or less the same thing, but with yours being the more analytical approach, and mine being the lazy-guesser approach! :lol:

Understand fully why you would perhaps like to keep the deeper mechanics of your approach to yourself. No worries.

PS. FWIW, I mailed a couple of pals yesterday morning, about one I think might get plotted-up for the Betfair Hurdle - and my thought-processes are partially reflected in the above approach - plus some added straw-man conspiracy-theorising. As a result, it's a bit of a haymaker, and I won't know whether it has passed the first test, until the end of the Festive meetings. After that, I just need to see an Entry for it in mid-January, at which point I hope to fill my booties full of 20/1+, and then bung it on here, with the rationale.
 
Back
Top