I usually try to not limit my ratings to one 'line horse' ; in this case I assumed that both Attenborough and Queen Laurie ran close to their ratings; with Rebel's Champ and Down to Zero seemingly lending some merit to this view
Will post ratings for you guys afternoon if you take 3rd 4th or 5th horse as linehorse and who is probably the best indication and if handicapper made a mistake in my opinion.
I guess there is many takes on this. Just by eyeballing the results Rockey Valley is the obvious line horse choice for the rules( line horse not further back than 5) which makes the winners and his own rating sensible. That would make Pinnicle Peaks rating accurate at level weights not carrying the 1.5kg less that he was (Wfa), so the rating should be in my estimation 109 for Pp .But that's just eyeballing .
The ratings are low for the race overall because of the ratings of the winner and placed horses and they all escaped a big hike which often comes with a G1 win/ place. The CFC winner was given 123, The diadem winner 117 ( both were in this race), so these horse can be thankful neither of those 2 made the frame or the numbers would be much worse.
Attenborough won by 1 length and his new rating is 114.
The rating for Pinnacle Peak is 112.
As it was a WFA race, 4yo Attenborough gave 3yo Pinnacle Peak 1.5kgs over 1000m in May. So if the weights are cancelled by WFA (some argue not so), then we have 1 length is 1kg (2 points) and the ratings are 114 and 112.
The 5 3yo's in the race ran 2-3-7-10-11 beaten 1.00, 2.2, 3.7, 4.45 & 4.55 respectively.
So the ratings of the 3yo are
112 up 9,
109 up 11,
110 down 3,
99 (no change)
98 (no change).
It's seems that the official allocation for 1000 is the same as for 1600m, that is 1 length = 1kg.
That's a pity because it means that the 3yo's 10th & 11th runners at 4.45 L behind at 99 & 98 run 105 & 104 for no change. That effectively means that Pinnacle Peak becomes disadvantaged about 6 or 7 pounds to the general population of 3yo's.
There are so many problems with what we do that explaining it to casual players is a problem.
-It's not that high performers are penalized per se, but that the balance of the system is blocked by rules. But that does effectively penalize good horses;
-It doesn't look like the length handicapping measure is fair;
There are many more, but a Gr1 WFA race is relatively simple most often.
Off the top of my head, Pinnacle Peak & Speedpoint ran 1 and 2 lengths 2nd and 3rd in a Gr1 at WFA in their 8th and 12th runs. They were always going to pick up a handicap rating for that. Runners in 5th, 6th & 7th were 107, 112 and 113 2.5L behind Pinnacle Peak at WFA, so 112 isn't impossible IF you go 2 for 1 scale...107+ (2.2 L x 2 = 4.4) = 111
I use more than 2 points for 1 length over 1000m, so I can't get the 112. All serious handicappers have their own calculations for this and WFA anyway, changing for distance, age and months. Traditionally the concept was 3 bricks in your backpack is annoying over a short distance and crippling over further. 3 bricks is annoying when you are a teenager but crippling when you are in primary school.
But the way we do it now arguing a rating would be like arguing with a traffic cop that you weren't speeding because a kilometer is measure wrong and should be 1100m and his machine is calibrated wrong.
IF they used more than 2, then the rest of the field lines up better and younger horses are better off against 4yo (whose ratings are more established). IF we rated all the way down, then ratings of other horses would be different and then everything changes coming into this race.
But there are so many things we don't do right that by the time you get here the layers of mistakes are embedded. If you scales are wrong, if your handicappers are limited, if rules change stuff arbitrarily, then most numbers are wrong for a start. There are many artificial rules trying to do the job of a program because every rule has an origin and a goal... every rule is trying to do something different from what "would have" happened without it.
I don't know how anyone has a rational discussion about this anymore. As a breeder I despair, as a racing enthusiast I've given up, as a punter I cheer.
Although I warn racing, the casual punter hates this and will leave. Punters play for fun and expect to lose...but when it looks like the show is run by idiots and they lose, they just leave. I guess owners will feel the same.
Interesting.. as nobody can tell us the name of the handicapper who worked out the MRs after this race.. I invite him/her for the purposes of transparency to publish their workings including the reason they chose the particular line horse on this forum. If they are unable to, then I ask the RA to, on behalf of the owners and trainers get hold of the handicappers workings so we can all understand how they think.. or try to understand.
I chuckle every time we get these MR scenarios. This system DOES NOT WORK. End of story. How many examples must be given before changes start occurring and either the RF system is returned OR at least 50% of races outside of maiden plates become plate races with fixed weights allotted to performance?
Here we have Johno with a talented horse that runs at a distinct disadvantage because it performed at the highest level. Here we have a former champion trainer not prepared to run his top 2yo's because he rightly acknowledges that it destroys their careers. Is this really what we want in South African racing?
Johno to answer your question about why the handicapper is not named - simply put they cannot defend their decision because using 5 different line horses produces 5 different results in ratings. What a fabulous system.
Johno ..... phone me asap ....i will help you and you have a very good chance of winning this appeal . I told you in the box in front of zoro mac sylvester and dave that he will probably get max 2 points and im sticking to my guns and its quite simple explanation .
54.16 ADJUDICATION OF APPEALS AGAINST MERIT RATING
54.16.1 In the event of a TRAINER and/or OWNER being dissatisfied with the published adjusted merit rating of a HORSE owned or trained by such TRAINER or OWNER, then either of them may lodge a written appeal with the CHIEF EXECUTIVE within 10 DAYS of the date of the published adjusted merit rating.
54.16.2 The written appeal shall be motivated and set forth the grounds upon which such appeal is based. A fee, as determined from time to time by the CHIEF EXECUTIVE, shall accompany the written appeal.
54.16.3 On receipt of the written appeal, the CHIEF EXECUTIVE shall forthwith forward the written appeal to the handicappers with a request that their response be furnished to him within 24 hours.
54.16.4 On receipt of the written response from the handicappers, CHIEF EXECUTIVE shall convene an Appeal Panel of not less than three persons to adjudicate upon the written appeal. The Appeal Panel shall reach a decision within 48 hours of being convened and shall notify the CHIEF EXECUTIVE of their decision. The CHIEF EXECUTIVE shall then act thereon and shall be entitled to issue a directive as provided for in RULE 54.2.5.3. If the Appeal Panel is of the view that the appeal was unwarranted, they may declare the fee forfeited.
54.16.5 The CHIEF EXECUTIVE shall be entitled to delegate his powers in terms of RULE 54.16.3 and RULE 54.16.4 to any person so authorised by him.
DECLARATION OF RIDERS
for fucks sake the gauteng handicaper is roger smith the natal handicaper is mathew lipps i would expect all on here to know this ...roger one of the nicest guys i have ever dealt with regarding handicaping and his door is always open along with mathew ...
