When should you draw a line

M

montyracing2

At the Start
Joined
Apr 17, 2005
Messages
763
Location
Blackpool
In no way do I wish to sound critical of trainer or owners who love their racing way of life but I just cannot see any reason to persevere with Arc Warrior (3:15 Ayr) its last six runs read PU,PU,PU,PU,PU,PU.

It has 'mis-use of whip ban' written all over it?


MR2
 
Not with James Reveley and Richie McGrath on board, I would have thought. If you read all of his races' analyses, he's very slow, he jumps very slowly, he's always tailed off, and even when in one he gets a bit animated, he's blown up by the third fence. You can not ask a horse to quicken, of course, and it will therefore appear to be slow, but it's quite a trick to repeat it over and over again. There is nothing in any analysis to suggest that he has the slightest talent for the job and is dogging it. His entire racing record, including ptp, sees him get round just three times - there are two other PUs not under Rules, so I think it's a case of the owner just liking to see his horse run.
 
I've no knowledge of the horse or the connections and whether it's a case of trainer leading the owner on, but I do have one comment regarding the horse.

Why has the handicapper been so slow to bring his mark down ? Prior to his his new rating for today, his marks during those runs over 21 months were:

100,100,105,105,105,105

Take look at Hunt Ball who has won 3 chases and was raised a massive 17lb for his last race when finishing 2nd, yet raced off 102 ?

I know h/capping is open to interpretation, but have I missed something here, apart from the fact the h/capper can claim he has little completed runs to assess.
 
I think you've provided the answer to your question in the "apart from" bit of your last sentence.
 
Yes, that's quite right, Grey. The handicapper can only revise on the basis of completed runs. You can PU again and again - as is proved by this nag - but you can't be raised or lowered on the basis of not completing the course. Which is exactly the obverse to the discussion we were having elsewhere about forcing tired animals to complete at all costs. Although I'm not sure that this one ever got going enough to get tired!
 
I think you've provided the answer to your question in the "apart from" bit of your last sentence.
Click to expand...

I think it's hard to justify and he has been dropped 10lb for his last p/u. Surely the h/capper has to go back to the original rating and accept it's wrong.

I can think of plenty of adjustments on horses with a sequence of p/u's ( I remember a Sherwood horse years ago tumbled down the ratings), although they probably had established h/cap form at some stage.

As Krizon states he's a slow horse, so why not give him a rating accordingly.
 
There have been horses who've been pulled up but still given beaten lengths in the formbook, I've seen up to 195 lengths before.
 
Doom: can I read your posting as the ratings were adjusted, but the horse's actual weights weren't changed? Or, if they were, it was on the horse subsequently being entered in a lower-rated race, where the weights were lower than previous classes?
 
Sorry Krizon, I'm trying to change insurance online at the same time as posting the reply.

I meant official rating adjusted. A similar situation arises with horses who have long lay offs. Some are arbitrarily dropped after a long absence and some remain on the same mark.

I realise the h/capper will have some justification, which is fine, but the rating Arc Warrior does baffle me, even though I acknowledge the reasoning.

I'm probably going to cause a few sharp replies, but Kauto's rating has dropped 19lb in a similar time frame to Arc Warrior, who has only come down 15lb (10lb for last run). Kauto has picked up 3 G1's along the way ?

I accept KS's rating is in effectively the easiest assignment with plenty of collateral form, but there does look like a conflict in consistency.

It's not as if Arc Warrior should have a "careful", marked besides it. It will probably win in a canter now I've said that.
 
Hope you got that insurance form in all right! "How many points do you have on your licence, if any?" Answer: 19 (when you were typing about Kauto's rating)!

Thanks, Doomster, I thought that was what you meant. The point you make about those dropped or not dropped after long lay-offs is an odd one, too - does it depend on whether they went off just for a holiday, or through injury, I wonder? It's an interesting line of discussion, though, something that perhaps we don't think about that much when looking at horses of ARC WARRIOR's calibre.

I, too, have a sneaky feeling about his next result! Should we be lumping on at 80-1 when he next runs?!
 
Hope you got that insurance form in all right! "How many points do you have on your licence, if any?" Answer: 19 (when you were typing about Kauto's rating)!
Click to expand...

Got the insurance sorted but layed some bloody horse in running for a £600 million liability :lol:

Looked into the owner of Arc Warrior and he looks a loyal owner with an optimistic streak.

AW is the only horse he hasn't bred, but out of his other five other horses, four of them were even worse than AW.

The only success was Em's Royality who managed to win a h/c hurdle off off 95, by 13 lengths at 40/1.

If you take a look at the horses five runs prior to that win, it may possibly answer the original question.
 
Interesting reading, folks. I, too, needed a second look at his handicap ratings regarding the weight 'Arcy' was carrying.

Surely, if 'Arcy', won the stewards would hold some sort of enquiry?

A potential gambol would be planned with a 'reason for sudden improvement' pre-planned. Six PU's seems a bit of a problem to explain away.

MR2
 
He came 2nd in a 24f ptp at Necarne on Heavy but failed to complete a 25f chase on Heavy. He's run on everything bar Good, which is a weeny bit unlikely in a chase (unless in the middle of dry summer jumping), so the old "unsuited by the going" excuse only fits inasmuch as he doesn't like any of it! I can't seriously think of a coup for the reason you say, Monty. Darn difficult unless it's a hitherto undiscovered condition like a sore back (cue miraculous recovery after physio and rest).
 
krizon said:
Yes, that's quite right, Grey. The handicapper can only revise on the basis of completed runs. You can PU again and again - as is proved by this nag - but you can't be raised or lowered on the basis of not completing the course. Which is exactly the obverse to the discussion we were having elsewhere about forcing tired animals to complete at all costs. Although I'm not sure that this one ever got going enough to get tired!
Click to expand...

That's not actually true, the Handicapper can adjust ratings whenever he likes for whatever reason. We once had one raised without even coming out of the stable, and we have had them dropped when pu
 
What was the reason for the PU, cj? Presumably your horse was a bit better than ARC WARRIOR's totally out of contention, help-me-St-Jude runs? The handicapper doesn't adjust ratings 'whenever he likes' - you make it sound like he gets out of bed and just makes it up as he goes along.
 
I really don't know why I can't let this horse get out of my head but I took a look at his 3rd run to see if his mark was justified.

The time in relation to other races of a lesser grade was poor that day. I would have guessed at a mark of 95, but he was allotted 105, possibly on the basis of him finishing in front of the 4th, who was on his 2nd hurdles run but may have been given a "p", being out of the Johnson yard and a flat rating of 89. Checklow went on to get a rating of 102, but has never raced since.

The winner of the race had already won two bumpers and a novice and had a rating of 120 (5yo), but was then pulled up in his next two races, a h/c hurdle and chase and given a revised rating of 119(h) & 112(CH).

The 2nd also got a win later on in a novice, but even if you accept his initial mark was correct at the time, surely it should have been adjusted retrospectively.
 
Dooms, seriously, you could always email Phil Smith (the BHA's Head Handicapper) about this! If you go to the BHA's main site and then search on Handicapping, his blog and those of other handicappers pop up, and on the main site there are all the Rules of Handicapping nicely explained. There's masses on the subject and you really can contact them. You'll see that horses who've won bumpers and ptp's are still considered Maidens until they win a Novice Hurdle or Chase under rules. The winner you mention would've/should've been rated on his Novice race only - explaining the 120 mark, and then revised downward as - as is mentioned on the BHA site - his performance was dwindling.

It's a fair old puzzle we're set here! But if you do email Smith, it'd be fascinating to know what he explains about it.
 
I will send a message in defence of the underdog.

I realise the ratings are based on actual form, but the winner of that race, Turbo Island won two novice hurdles to get his rating of 120, which was subsequently reduced, before any change to Arc Warrior who achieved nothing.

The beauty of the game is trying to find ricks in the ratings, but this example just looks plain unfair.
 
You're looking for the logic, the thinking process, behind it. And finding that a bit wanting! Some handicapping does look inexplicable, and it's a rich vein for racing pundits on tv to mine if they have the stamina for it. Regrettably, it's usually a brief rant by someone like Big Mac, which goes unanswered. If Racing for Change wants much more transparency in racing, then getting the handicappers in front of the cameras would be a good idea. (It might even be interesting to draw this to a sensible member of ATR's attention, like Sean Boyce. He likes puzzling things out and if you asked him if they could get Smithy or one of the other twelve apostles on the line or in the studio, it could make for a very interesting, if convoluted, half hour!)
 
Last edited:
Another horse that would probably be better employed doing something else is Ringsend Rose.
Don't be fooled by the one win & numerous 3's & 4's. The one win came when she finished alone at Chepstow & although a few decent finishers in points in early '09 the rest of her form is littered with PU,R or back of the field finish's. Surely the jocks that have ridden her cannot come back & say, 'oh,she's worth perservering with/she can pick up a small race somewhere'!
 
The two best post race jockey comments I've heard were
1) After a now retired amateur got off a blatantly uselessMaeterlincke after finishing 60 lenghts last of 5 finishers caught the trainer's stare and looked the owner in the eye saying "they went too slow altogether, if they had gone off a bit quicker they would have been coming back to her"

2) Paul Carberry got off a horse owned by a friend of mine after running and finishing in the places for the fourth time in row, seventh time of the season and exasperated by this asked Carberry what should they do to get a win out of the horse Carberry over his shoulder as he walked back to weigh in nonchalantly whispered "keep running him".
 
I see RINGSEND ROSE is an owner/trainer combo, which would make the post-race discussion rather interesting! "Okay, Mr Sadik, do you think she's worth another try?" "Well, frankly, Mr Sadik, she's not much good, but she helps to keep my trainer's permit valid!"
 
'Arcy' runs, sorry - pulls up tomorrow, at Newcastle.

I'm probably not working so I might go and watch, first time I've gone to spot how not to spot a winner but its been a long time since I've seen P/PPP-PP on a racecard.

If the miracle happens:

(1) I can say I was there, and,
(2) the racecard might grow in value.

Could 'Arcy' be Mr Bittar's first, oh FFS moment.

MR2
 
Back
Top