The thoughts of the handicappers.

[Eleanora Duse]

There was a Skelton horse fell a week or two back, two or three out.

The trainer said something after the race about the handicapper not being able to put the horse up because of when it fell.

Shan Blue, at that time he was thinking of the Hennessey

[Desert Orchid]

[Quoting the handicapper]

If our performance figure indicates that a horse has achieved less than its current handicap mark, we consider whether to drop that rating.

When a horse performs below its rating, that does not automatically mean it is badly handicapped. There are many other factors at play – such as ground conditions, draw, race distance, the pace of the race, what the other horses did, luck in running, etc. Few horses run to exactly the same level every time.

We do not normally drop a horse’s handicap mark for a single disappointing run, especially if it ran well on its previous start.

Every time a horse runs we review its previous races to ensure our assessment of them remains appropriate. Where evidence emerges that suggests our assessment is too high or too low, we will revise those performance figures. As a result, some horses from that race may have their handicap mark changed without even running.

Around two thirds of all our collateral changes to handicap marks are downwards and only one third are increases (looking at the most recent data at the time of publishing, in July 2018, 65% of all collateral changes resulted in a drop of the horse’s rating).

Loosely translated: "we suit ourselves"

[barjon]

Loosely translated: "we suit ourselves"

[G-G]

If our performance figure indicates that a horse has achieved less than its current handicap mark, we consider whether to drop that rating.

When a horse performs below its rating, that does not automatically mean it is badly handicapped. There are many other factors at play – such as ground conditions, draw, race distance, the pace of the race, what the other horses did, luck in running, etc. Few horses run to exactly the same level every time.

We do not normally drop a horse’s handicap mark for a single disappointing run, especially if it ran well on its previous start.

Every time a horse runs we review its previous races to ensure our assessment of them remains appropriate. Where evidence emerges that suggests our assessment is too high or too low, we will revise those performance figures. As a result, some horses from that race may have their handicap mark changed without even running.

Around two thirds of all our collateral changes to handicap marks are downwards and only one third are increases (looking at the most recent data at the time of publishing, in July 2018, 65% of all collateral changes resulted in a drop of the horse’s rating).

So so so would BBB- aka Schiehallion Munro's mark have changed based on fall at second last when tanking? He would have won honest. Jockey - first time in a race ride on him so..... coming to fence went go on go on put in big one, Rowley said err no no wait...jumped too low didn't quite get front carriage down.... jock gutted ( said had 'tonnes of horse left under him' ), told by nanny breeder before race to WAIT 'til last fence and then go for it but hey what do I know!!!
Hopefully next time.
Thank you for the posts very informative.

[Tanlic]

I thought I would have a look at a handicap at random. I came across one at Ascot today and went straight to the top weight.

The horse in question is Red Risk trained by Paul Nichols. Off 135 he was beaten 5 1/2 lengths carrying 11.12lbs by a horse called Fidux who lost his next 4 out of 5 winning a nothing race at Worcester

Red Risk's claim to fame is he won a shockingly bad race at Ludlow off 135 and was put up 9 lbs and hasn't looked remotely like winning since.

He was even beaten by a 134 rated horse at lowly Market Rasen and now finds himself carrying top weight at Ascot

In a year and eight months he has been dropped 2lb and as far as I can see the only reason he hasn't dropped about 5lbs is he is trained by PN.

No doubt PN could improve him but in all that time there is no real evidence of that.

It's fine and well to say he ran to his mark last time but the fact is he never won has no chance of running up a sequence becase the minute you win a donkey race in the UK the handicapper goes nuts.

Had he been put up 4lbs instead of 9 lbs he may have had a chance to win again but up 9lbs even the brilliant PN couldn't win in 4 tries in 20 months

As a matter of interest Red Risk was beaten a distance by the winner who he was conceding 15lbs to..........How the handicapper can justify not dropping him 8 of the 9lbs he put him up nearly 2 years ago and 5 defeats ago is beyong me

[Perpetual]

Been a little slack updating this thread but a super busy time of year unfortunately. Two posts in-coming...

Cheltenham November Meeting Handicappers Blog
23 Nov 21
Irish challenger A Plus Tard passed his first exam of the season in exhilarating fashion, writes Martin Greenwood…

An obvious favourite for the Betfair Lancashire Chase at Haydock following his second to Minella Indo in last season’s Cheltenham Gold Cup, A Plus Tard didn’t give his supporters an iota of worry.

A rare runner in this event from across the Irish Sea, A Plus Tard was patiently ridden as Betfair hero Bristol de Mai and Royal Pagaille duelled for the lead. Nothing much changed until Imperial Aura fell halfway down the far side on the final circuit when close up, at which point the favourite had moved smoothly into contention. Still tanking as he took over the lead at the third last, A Plus Tard accelerated away to score in style, barely coming off the bridle. Royal Pagaille did much the better of the pacesetters (with Bristol de Mai dropping away quickly) but was still some twenty-two lengths adrift of the winner at the line.

Early-season form is often full of potholes and it’s usually – but not always – best to take a pragmatic view, at least in the short term. The time comparison with the later handicap is very impressive, suggesting a figure in the high-180s, but an average of historical standards suggest a mid-170s number. The latter approach seems the most sensible course of action at this stage, while fully acknowledging that the ‘actual’ figure could be much higher.

Now rated 175, the same as his Cheltenham conqueror Minella Indo, that pair have only Clan des Obeaux and Al Boum Photo anywhere near them in the staying division as things stand. Still unexposed over staying trips, this was only A Plus Tard’s fourth run at around three miles plus. He seems to have the unique blend of relative speed and ability to stay the trip, the only caveat being that he has yet to prove his stamina in very searching conditions and races almost always left handed.

Nube Negra fires the first shots of 2m campaign

The best 2m chase of the season so far was run at Cheltenham last Sunday in the shape of the Grade 2 Shloer Chase, writes Chris Nash. Although only four went to post, the field included the first and second from last season’s Champion Chase, Put The Kettle On and Nube Negra, as well as the 2020 winner of that race, Politologue, so it looked a strong renewal.

It was the latter who set the pace and he appeared to make the race an honest enough test. Nube Negra raced in last, travelled best for longest and saw it out well up the hill to win by six lengths from Politologue, with Put The Kettle On a further four and a half lengths back in third.

The winner has a very good record fresh and I rated this a career best effort at 168 (up from his pre-race rating of 165). Politologue also has a very good first-time-out record but was a touch below his very best here – I had him running to a figure of 162 and I trimmed his official rating from 167 to 165. Put The Kettle On was unbeaten on her four previous visits to the track but surrendered that record here. She actually looked a little tapped for toe down the back straight and was the first to come under a ride but she did stay on gallantly up the straight.

The 2m chase division promises to be very exciting in 2021-22 with the aforementioned trio joined by the leading horse of the last jumps season (Chacun Pour Soi, rated 176) as well as the two leading

novices (Shiskin and Energumene, both rated 169). The next meeting point for this group is the Grade 1 Tingle Creek chase at Sandown in early-December.

Corker for the Skeltons

The feature handicap on the final day of Cheltenham’s November Meeting, the Unibet Greatwood Hurdle, attracted an ultra-competitive field of 19 and the success of West Cork was a notable feather in the cap for trainer Dan Skelton, with the gelding defying an absence of some 631 days, writes Andrew Mealor…

Recent renewals of the Greatwood have typically seen rises of between 5 and 7 lb for the winner and between 3 and 5 lb for the runner-up. With West Cork chased home by another pair of unexposed sorts in second-season hurdler Adagio and novice No Ordinary Joe in a big field (the biggest for the race since 2019), and the form also underpinned by recent winners Camprond (fourth) and Glory And Fortune (sixth), I’m happy to take a positive view and rate at the high end of recent standards. That results in a rise of 7 lb for West Cork (to 141) and he’ll presumably be targeted at the other big 2m handicaps, starting with Ascot’s Betfair Exchange Trophy just before Christmas.

Beaten just half a length in second, Adagio clearly ran a belter off top weight and is up 5 lb to 152. He still has work to do in order to become a genuine Champion Hurdle contender but further progress is far from out of the question given his overall profile. Adagio was second only to Monmiral (153) amongst last season’s British-trained juveniles, and the latter may get a further chance to land a blow for the four-year-olds in next weekend’s Fighting Fifth Hurdle at Newcastle.

No Ordinary Joe (up 3 lb to 136) didn’t settle fully and deserves plenty of credit for hanging on for third, especially given his overall lack of experience. He’s another who will presumably be aimed at the top 2m handicaps.

In contrast to the Greatwood, the Grade 2 Sky Bet Supreme Trial thirty-five minutes later attracted a field of just three, and only two completed with Pikar falling at the last when looking outpaced in third. Runner-up Washington (129) looks promising having won well in a novice at Bangor on his sole previous run over hurdles, but the likelihood is that I Like To Move It (138) didn’t need to better the form he had shown at the previous Cheltenham meeting (when beating Greatwood fifth Tritonic) to prevail by a comfortable two lengths.

[Perpetual]

Fighting Fifth Redemption for Not So Sleepy
30 Nov 21


The latest edition of Newcastle’s Betfair Fighting Fifth hurdle saw a thrilling conclusion after the front three had jumped the last in unison, with the judge ultimately unable to split Epatante and Not So Sleepy in a photo finish, though the race also provided more evidence the home team will struggle once more against reigning champion Honeysuckle in the Champion Hurdle next March, writes Andrew Mealor…

Five of the six who went to post in the Fighting Fifth had also run in last year’s renewal, evidence of the lack of fresh blood at the top of the 2m hurdling division. Not So Sleepy had well and truly blotted his copybook that day, jinking and unseating his rider at the first and then proceeding to carry out Silver Streak, but he redeemed himself with a very game effort, rallying to share the spoils despite jumping errors at each of the last two flights.

Although rising ten, this was only Not So Sleepy’s twelfth run over hurdles and he’s improved with each season. A second win in Ascot’s big pre-Christmas handicap and a fifth in the Champion Hurdle were his highlights last campaign, and he bettered even that form in recording a figure of 160. Although he was a big price, the Fighting Fifth result makes a fair bit of sense otherwise. Epatante and Sceau Royal, last year’s one-two, were the other pair involved in the close finish, whilst fourth-placed Silver Streak (154) performed similarly in relation to Sceau Royal (158) as he had when chasing that rival home in a listed race at Kempton last time.

Epatante (153) looked the pick of the weights beforehand in receipt of the mares’ allowance and that she didn’t win outright having moved best and led narrowly after the last was perhaps a little disappointing, though in mitigation she was reappearing against two match-fit rivals. That said, she’d made a successful return on each of her previous three campaigns and the overriding impression is that she simply isn’t quite the horse she was when winning the Champion Hurdle back in 2020. Rated 162 at the end of that season, Epatante has run to no higher than 154 in her five subsequent runs, and that sort of level usually isn’t good enough to win a Champion Hurdle, even once her mares’ allowance is factored in.

The disappointment of the Fighting Fifth was Monmiral who wasn’t travelling from a fair way out. A line can be put through the run given he was subsequently found to be lame and his juvenile form was given a big boost by Adagio’s fine effort in the Greatwood two weeks ago.


Another to have his Champion Hurdle hopes dampened over the weekend was Soaring Glory (149) who finished last of four in a muddling Gerry Fielden at Newbury. The small-field scenario certainly wasn’t suitable for last year’s Betfair Hurdle winner, though he has a fair bit to find with the leading two milers in any case.


All in all, events on Saturday only served to strengthen Honeysuckle’s (165) claims of retaining her crown, and right on cue she reappeared twenty-four hours later with a commanding eight-length success in the Hatton’s Grace Hurdle at Fairyhouse, completing a hat-trick of wins in that Grade 1 event. She’s now odds on with most bookmakers for Cheltenham and at this stage it’s hard to see who will trouble her should she turn up fit and well.

[Tanlic]

I thing UK commentators are second to none but I was just watching Danilo Dairy hack up

The commentator said..The handicapper just cant keep up with this horse.........The owner hearing that must be pulling his hair out saying thanks a million mate.

How much do commentators comments influence the handicapper?......any thoughts?

[granger]

https://www.timeform.com/horse-racin...asers-30122021

[reet hard]

https://www.timeform.com/horse-racin...asers-30122021

A shock result's a shock for a reason, and both Timeform and the OH appear to have failed to fathom the KG rationale, miserably.

[Desert Orchid]

https://www.timeform.com/horse-racin...asers-30122021

I don't fully understand the rationale behind dropping a horse's rating on the back of its not running to form, especially when there's an obvious excuse for it.

I'm trying to think of an equivalent in other sports. If I could regularly run the marathon in 2h59m I'd be called a sub-3hr marathon runner. If, one day, I wasn't feeling 100% and only managed 3h05m would that make my previous achievements null and void? Would I no longer be a sub-3hr runner? I think that's a weird approach.

It wouldn't happen in golf, would it? I don't know enough about golf handicapping but I understand it's very difficult to get your handicap changed on the basis of one performance.

Alternatively, is it tantamount to admitting a previous higher rating was a miscalculation? With all their computer power that they tend to boast about?

I'd have more respect for them if they held their ratings for longer, until further evidence offered definite evidence that a previous mark was inaccurate.

[barjon]

The official handicapper (https://www.talkinghorses.co.uk/foru...l=1#post761948) is a bit more circumspect than Timeform who are more interested in current form.

If you were running next week in a marathon the official handicapper would still have you handicapped at 2:59 whereas Timeform would reckon you probably couldn’t run up to that at the moment.

[Desert Orchid]

The official handicapper ... is a bit more circumspect than Timeform who are more interested in current form.

If you were running next week in a marathon the official handicapper would still have you handicapped at 2:59 whereas Timeform would reckon you probably couldn’t run up to that at the moment.

Yes, that's what I mean. But that 3h05m run could have been because I didn't eat enough pasta the night before, or didn't sleep as well as I should have, or any other minor reason, and maybe tomorrow I could easily mange the 2:59 again.

Did they drop Brigadier Gerard's rating when he was beaten by Roberto, or did they suddenly rate Roberto higher?

It doesn't make sense to take such a short-term view, I don't think.

Edit - just for clarification, there's no way I could run a 3hr marathon. Six hours would be an achievement for me.

[reet hard]

My rationale:
2 horses (Minella Indo & Frodon) both short in the market, patently failed to live up to market expectation owing to going to going too quick, too early. The same logic dictates that another 2 (the 1st and 3rd) both outran market expectation by dint of the exact opposite; ie they were slowed by circumstance earlier in the race.
Truth be told, it was probably the scorching early pace that did for Chantry House too.

[barjon]

There are so many imponderables in handicapping which I suppose is just as well since there would be multiple dead heats otherwise . Tinkering about with a pound or two here and a pound or two there seems pretty meaningless when you’re seeing races with fifty or so lengths between first and last (forgetting those who couldn’t even finish) in handicaps that are supposed to make them all equal. Similarly, is it really likely that a horse can improve by 20 or 30 pounds in a few months? It’s rating might, but I doubt that the horse has.

[Desert Orchid]

There are so many imponderables in handicapping which I suppose is just as well since there would be multiple dead heats otherwise . Tinkering about with a pound or two here and a pound or two there seems pretty meaningless when you’re seeing races with fifty or so lengths between first and last (forgetting those who couldn’t even finish) in handicaps that are supposed to make them all equal. Similarly, is it really likely that a horse can improve by 20 or 30 pounds in a few months? It’s rating might, but I doubt that the horse has.

Yes, I think we're pretty much on the same wavelength in this regard, barjon. When I do my ratings, the idea is to get as close a handle as possible on a horse's ability while accepting that it won't always run to it (distance, ground, jockey, future targets, etc) and my reason for laying out my ratings in tabulated form is to get a bigger picture of relative handicapping. Of more importance to me than the actual ratings are improvers and targeting. Anyone with a bit of time and intent can come up with a way of rating a race but working out which will run its race in any given event is, for me, more important.

The more valuable the race the more likely more of the runners are going to be targeting it so relative handicapping starts to take on importance again.

But if the ratings are nowhere near accurate to start with, you're in trouble. The old GIGO principle.

[an capall]

It wouldn't happen in golf, would it? I don't know enough about golf handicapping but I understand it's very difficult to get your handicap changed on the basis of one performance.

Golf handicapping has been radically altered in the last year or so, Mo. Previously a failure to meet or beat standard scratch (a kind of weighted average for that days play) would entitle you to .1 of a shot back. Now with the new world handicapping system looking back over your last 20 rounds, and customising your handicap to the course you are playing that day (degree of difficulty index) it has become much more fungible. As a high handicapper it has made me much more likely to win a prize, despite still being shoite at golf.

[barjon]

Yes, desert, I’m with you on the improvers and targeting front. Trainers tend to be creatures of habit and prepare their horses for their target races in tried and trusted fashion. There used to be an invaluable publication years ago (can’t even recall it’s name now) that was all about the trainers and their individual methods. Gold dust that was.

[Desert Orchid]

There used to be an invaluable publication years ago (can’t even recall it’s name now) that was all about the trainers and their individual methods. Gold dust that was.

Green cover?

If so, I had a copy or two of that. They would have been binned when I moved house.

[Desert Orchid]

As a high handicapper it has made me much more likely to win a prize, despite still being shoite at golf.

At least you get more hits at the ball than most people