Blakeney - Henbit

[Garry]

In Spells It All Out VDW wrote about the difference between the official ratings and Timeform with respect to the two Derby winners Henbit and Blakeney. He wrote “The official figures show the latter to be 8lb superior, but Timeform go completely opposite making Henbit 7lb better.”

According to Wikipedia, Henbit had a Timeform Rating of 130. Whilst, Blakeney had a Timeform Rating of 123, their lowest rating for a Derby winner. Henbit 7lb better.

Now, official ratings did not exist in 1969 when Blakeney won the Derby.

At the end of each season a 3-y-o Free Handicap was compiled for information purposes only as opposed to the 2-y-o Free Handicap which was a proper race to be run early the following year, when the horses would then be 3-y-o’s.

I don’t have a 1969 Flat Annual but the 3-y-o Free Handicap, compiled by Mr D G Sheppard was published in the Daily Express on Fri, Nov 14, 1969. It can also be found in Jess Ward’s book “The Manual of Racehorse Handicapping and Form Assessment”.

The top 4 were;

Intermezzo 9-7
Ribofilio 9-6
Blakeney 9-4
Welsh Pageant 9-3

The 1980 3-y-o Free Handicap, weights published on Dec 4, 1980, can be found in Timeform Racehorses of 1980.

The top 4 were;

Moorestyle 10-0 OR91
Known Fact 9-12 OR89
Henbit 9-11 OR88
Posse 9-11 OR88

I am at a loss to see how Blakeney is 8lb superior to Henbit on these figures.

 

[JennyK]

G Garry

I think you may be wrong about official ratings not existing in 1969.

There used to be, and for all I know there still is, something called the International Classification, covering the UK, Ireland and I think France, published each year by the racing authorities, from which one could get ORs, and I have the 1978 version. I don't know when they started but if they were as early as 1969 my guess is that they are what VDW used when comparing Blakeney and Henbit.

I am pretty sure the International Classification was published in the Racing Calendar.

 

[Chesham]

• Blakeney (Derby winner 1969): Official ratings in the modern sense did not exist in 1969. Instead, a "Free Handicap" was compiled at the end of the season. Blakeney was assigned a weight of 9-4 in the 1969 Three-Year-Old Free Handicap. His Timeform rating was 123 as a three-year-old and 126 as a four-year-old.
  
  
  
• Henbit (Derby winner 1980): The official ratings system was not yet fully established in the same way it is today. Henbit was given a weight of 9-11 in the 1980 Three-Year-Old Free Handicap. His Timeform rating was 130.
  
  

It's important to note the difference between official ratings and Timeform ratings. Timeform is an independent rating system that has been in place for many years, providing a consistent measure of a horse's ability. Official ratings are those issued by the official governing bodies (like the BHA) for the purposes of handicapping races. For historical horses like Henbit and Blakeney, the Timeform ratings are often the most cited measure of their performance.

 

[Garry]

G Garry

I think you may be wrong about official ratings not existing in 1969.

There used to be, and for all I know there still is, something called the International Classification, covering the UK, Ireland and I think France, published each year by the racing authorities, from which one could get ORs, and I have the 1978 version. I don't know when they started but if they were as early as 1969 my guess is that they are what VDW used when comparing Blakeney and Henbit.

I am pretty sure the International Classification was published in the Racing Calendar.

The International Classification was first introduced in 1977.

In 1969 there were 13 official handicappers whose job it was to allocate weights for the handicaps at the different courses. Each course had a different handicapper with some of the 13 being responsible for more than one course. Each handicapper had their own opinions on the merits of particular horses. So, two horses could and did have different weight differences in handicaps at two different courses over the same distance. The horses were handicapped by weight not by numbers (an official rating).

Computerised official ratings were introduced for the start of the 1973 Flat Season.

 

[Chesham]

Agree with you gerry . Impossible to know the official rating for either as the 3 European Handicap was framed for the three year olds of that year only and a hypothetical weight that each horse on the list would carry if they were to race against each other in a hypothetical race.

The Timeform Ratings could be compared for each of the two horses mentioned..

 

[Garry]

Does anyone have a 1970 Sporting Chronicle or Raceform Flat Annual or a Timeform Racehorses of 1970?

The part I am after is the 4-y-o and older Free Handicap which should appear towards the end of those books.

I have a Horses in Training with the appropriate 2-y-o and 3-y-o Free Handicaps but the 4-y-o Free Handicap is not there.
The 2-y-o Free Handicap was topped by My Swallow 9-7, followed by Mill Reef 9-6 and then Brigadier Gerard on 9-5. The 3-y-o Free Handicap was topped by Nijinsky on 9-7.

 

[Garry]

O.k. You can stop looking now.

I am pretty certain now, that the 4-y-o Free Handicap did not appear until the end of the 1974 Flat Season. This was after official ratings came into being and the 4-y-o Free Handicap was split into distances, 1m3f – 2m plus, 1m – 1m2f and 5f – 7f. The exact same format was used for the 3-y-o Free Handicap that year. Prior to this the 3-y-o Free Handicap was framed at 1m4f.

These of course were not actual races but were for information only, unlike the 2-y-o Free Handicap.

Because Blakeney ran as a 4-y-o, I thought he might have been listed in the 4-y-o Free Handicap of 1970. But there was no such thing as a 4-y-o Free Handicap at that time.

So, we are back to the original question of where did VDW get his information from to say that Blakeney was 8lb superior to Henbit on Official figures.

 

[markfinn]

O.k. You can stop looking now.

I am pretty certain now, that the 4-y-o Free Handicap did not appear until the end of the 1974 Flat Season. This was after official ratings came into being and the 4-y-o Free Handicap was split into distances, 1m3f – 2m plus, 1m – 1m2f and 5f – 7f. The exact same format was used for the 3-y-o Free Handicap that year. Prior to this the 3-y-o Free Handicap was framed at 1m4f.

These of course were not actual races but were for information only, unlike the 2-y-o Free Handicap.

Because Blakeney ran as a 4-y-o, I thought he might have been listed in the 4-y-o Free Handicap of 1970. But there was no such thing as a 4-y-o Free Handicap at that time.

So, we are back to the original question of where did VDW get his information from to say that Blakeney was 8lb superior to Henbit on Official figures.

Perhaps he Officially invented the ratings or just nipped into his tardis and then after timed them

 

[OnTheNod]

I know with Son of Love the 20/1 winner! one chap asked where to get the form from he replied from the computer mentos, i enquired in London at all the top sports book shops and they said they had never heard of it so what was it.

 

[JennyK]

I can't think of other avenues to explore, G Garry. As you discovered when researching VDW's sf based lists, he was accurate and I expect there is an explanation, albeit we can't find it. Not that it is all that important - the point he was making, that rating is subjective, is beyond argument; the recent discussion about an Irish horse between T Tufnel and ARAZI91 on the Erin numbers thread provides a current example.