REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do much without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view all discussions - and most importantly, you haven't joined our community. What are you waiting for? Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Join Talking Horses here!

Reply to thread

Message

To be fair to the handicappers, they are entitled to, actually they should, handicap the race using the same methodology if this were a handicap. If Sprinter Sacre were a 95-rated handicapper at Ludlow that gave a 15l beating to the runner-up in the same fashion, the handicapper would be entitled to put him up by more than the bare margins suggest.

Anyone that watched the Tingle Creek, and has an iota of racereading skill about them would treat that as more than 15l, so I'm not sure castigating the official assessor for doing the same is appropriate.

I would agree with Grasshopper though in that in a blog to explain it, it's poor he doesn't even attempt to justify how he's decided there was 29 lb between Sprinter Sacre and Kumbeshwar on Saturday.

[QUOTE="davidjohnson, post: 2415350, member: 65362"] To be fair to the handicappers, they are entitled to, actually they should, handicap the race using the same methodology if this were a handicap. If Sprinter Sacre were a 95-rated handicapper at Ludlow that gave a 15l beating to the runner-up in the same fashion, the handicapper would be entitled to put him up by more than the bare margins suggest. Anyone that watched the Tingle Creek, and has an iota of racereading skill about them would treat that as more than 15l, so I'm not sure castigating the official assessor for doing the same is appropriate. I would agree with Grasshopper though in that in a blog to explain it, it's poor he doesn't even attempt to justify how he's decided there was 29 lb between Sprinter Sacre and Kumbeshwar on Saturday. [/QUOTE]

Verification: 5 + 3 = ?