Depends how soft but if you mean off level weights on raceable ground then very much so, i'll guess MAYDANNY will be dropped a pound to 89 and ARIGATO will get about 6lb so might be 85 either way DANNY will get better.everyone is allowed an opinion, & although you disagree can you say with certainty that MAYDANNY would beat ARIGATO on soft ground
Yes it would, It was beaten last year .75 length on Heavy ground and its Grandfather was Effissio a soft ground specialist. I will be amazed if the horse is dropped a lb as it “won” the race on the far side. I will have done my ratings by Saturday and It will be interesting to see my time/ability rating fir this race.everyone is allowed an opinion, & although you disagree can you say with certainty that MAYDANNY would beat ARIGATO on soft ground
I wonder now if the ground as gone against MUMS TIPPLE but you never know until they try, LOPE Y DE FENDADEZ brings classic form to the table after a week and adds to the iffs and buts about many horses running this week My fancy is PIEERE LAPPIN who might be top class based on 2 impressive wins at two, I seem to be always tipping varian horses but he is in good form.MUMS TIPPLE tomorrow is top rated (130) weight adjusted to 10stone on my figures. My base time and ability rating for this horse is (116) OR (113).
it is a few lbs in front of PIERRE LAPPIN (126) and GOLDEN HORDE (128) and although GOLDEN HORDE was only Btn a neck in the MIDDLE PARK last year, MUMS TIPPLE was found lame. It was 3/1 for that race and GOLDEN HORDE was 16/1. On breeding it should act on soft. Forget his Guineas run as he didn’t like the undulations at Newmarket will be much happier back sprinting and also won at Ascot last year. Currently 15 on Betfair. It is of course a very competitive sprint but I am happy with this at the price.
Also couple of smart 2yr olds Joint top rated on my figures (88 ). EYE OF HEAVEN and THE LIR JET but half the field are smart so it will be a good watching race. Have a good day.
Yes I agree. I backed KHALOOSY at 9/1 last night and they backed it off the boards. Although I rarely bet in handicaps I have tried to find unexposed lightly raced 2 year olds running in a handicap for the first time at 3. HUKUM yesterday was selected like this. I am going to continue with this method as it seems quite productive at the mo.lol. I will still use my ratings for non handicaps. Have a good day tomorrow and PIERRE must go well it’s not too far off my top 3 or 4 and looks a smart sort. and the stable have come on with a bang. Have a peek at QAADER in the Coventry on Saturday. I have this top rated and it’s win was very impressive. Lots of smart ones in there though Not least Admiral Nelson.I wonder now if the ground as gone against MUMS TIPPLE but you never know until they try, LOPE Y DE FENDADEZ brings classic form to the table after a week and adds to the iffs and buts about many horses running this week My fancy is PIEERE LAPPIN who might be top class based on 2 impressive wins at two, I seem to be always tipping varian horses but he is in good form.
I don't know about the ground re MUMS TIPPLE but what Sean Levy was doing going off at such a rate beggars belief. Its lucky it stayed 3 furlongs without collapsing in heap. Still my second top rated won. Golden Horde although I didn't have a saver on. I had a good day with DANDALLA clear top at 9/1 and The Lir Jet joint top at 5/1. I didn't do the double as I usually find it hard enough to get one winner never mind 2. Tomorrow I have already mentioned QAADER in the Coventry but on its AW rating TALBOT is top and is 12/1 at the mo. Of course the problem is that some of these 2yolds have had an "easy" FTO like ADMIRAL NELSON who coasted in and hasn't recorded a decent time, but there's no value to be had with it now. We'll see.I wonder now if the ground as gone against MUMS TIPPLE but you never know until they try, LOPE Y DE FENDADEZ brings classic form to the table after a week and adds to the iffs and buts about many horses running this week My fancy is PIEERE LAPPIN who might be top class based on 2 impressive wins at two, I seem to be always tipping varian horses but he is in good form.
B Bertie123 on the subject of our brief discussion on factoring weight into speed figures or not I have done a study of my ratings with and without weight over the last 3 weeks or so and I am now 100% in the no weight camp, I will never factor in weight into my figures ever again , the results are noticeably better, the no weight ratings throw up many many more winners , the best results I’ve had since I started over a year ago . I still don’t understand why ignoring weight is the best approach it makes no sense to me.O Outlander Firstly your humility is to be admired. None of us has the answer as this rating business is subjective apart from time which I guess is the absolute. I experimented with my Raw time figures but a raw time figure doesn't tell you anything more than how fast the race was run, which in itself lacks that very important factor : class. I have gone back to my time and ability ratings and they are now showing positive returns.
As I said, I rarely bet in handicaps as finding one "well in" doesn't happen all that often as the Official Handicapper who I have the greatest respect for, don't usually make many mistakes. Its difficult for them to assess whether a horse has run to its ability or waiting for another day. This doesn't happen too much in non handicap races but might do if a trainer is looking for a lowly mark. They run it over the wrong trip, unsuitable going etc. Did I say Sir Mark Prescott? Well, you know what I mean. Handicap genius?
By confining my betting to mainly non handicaps the weight ranges are negligible and the race is usually won by the horse with the best ability. If I can tie in an ability rating with a time figure it gives me a good basis from which to start.
So. As you quite rightly say, Weight is a factor, but I look at it like this. If a horse is rated say 80, it will be assessed by the official handicapper as an 80 rated horse no matter what race it competes in. Its weight will be allocated by the conditions of the race. Higher class, lower weight and vice versa. In a handicap , when its mark is re-assesed it will be re handicapped from that figure of 80 and NOT the weight it was carrying. The weights may have been raised overnight by 7lbs but the horse is still an 80 rated horse. If it won well by say 2 lengths in a 6f race it might be raised say 6 or 7 lbs. so its new rating would be 86. But if it carried 9:10 it's rating wouldn't be 96 , which is what speed handicappers have to do when using weight in their ratings as they are usually working to a base of a horse rated 100 carrying 9stone. The official handicapper will then rate the rest of the field behind the winner with weight adjustments from the winners new rating and subjective opinion from the handicapper. I am sure you are aware of this but it leads me on to my reasoning behind my ratings.
I know Time handicappers who are way more experienced than me say that speed figures and official figures are not comparable as obviously speed figures are based on time. But then if thats the case why do they use say 3.5lbs per length for 5 furlongs, 3lbs for 6f etc. They should be calculating their ratings on lengths per second and weight shouldn't have anything to do with it. Admittedly there needs to be some adjustment on the lengths per second as a horse can't run 5 f speed for 8f. But there are many ways of calculating this. Some Speed handicappers adjust everything to 8f and some to 5f which I believe Timeform do.
Now, if you rate a race purely on time it is misleading, as I have found out to my cost, as this 80 rated horse may well run within a few fifths of a second to standard, in a very poor race, but its final time doesn't reflect the Class of the race. So do you take that at face value? I did for years without success. Class is of course extremely important. So I always wanted to be able to calculate a rating that was comparable to the OR if I could. I could then look at my figures and see if a horse was improving or running to its Official Rating
A few years ago I read an article somewhere by a previous employee of Timeform who stated that pure time figures by themselves were really of limited use and it was very important and essential to have an ability/form rating which would reflect "class". (Hence Time-Form)
I could have subscribed to Timeform, but where's the fun in that !
So I set about trying to come up with something of my own that would give me this combination. It is a very simple formula and no doubt the purists will think it doesn't make sense but it works for me. My base rating is not 100 but an ability rating I use based on "form" and "class". This is not the Official Rating . My speed rating is based purely on lengths per second with adjustments for different distances , GA, and deducted or added to my ability rating depending if the time the horse ran either was fast or slow. The figure for the winner is put into My Ratings page and calculated automatically although I change the lbs per length to coincide with the official scale. I do not make any adjustment for weight from the winner once I have my rating. It is what it is, whether it carried 9 stone or 10 stone. I understand that there will be a lot of disagreement suggesting it is illogical and doesn't make sense and has to be weight adjusted but I am only doing what the Official Handicapper does. Initialy. The rest of the field are rated with weight adjustment from the winners RATING and weight carried. There will be little weight adjustment as the races are all non handicaps.
I also only rate up to 8f and do not bother with NH. To me any race over 8f is more about stamina and ability rather than "time". I don't get involved with NH for various reasons, and of course you are going to get fast times at big meetings like Cheltenham but egg and spoon races at somewhere like Market Rasen are a waste of time for Speed rating assessment, but thats only my opinion and I am sure there are many speed handicappers who love NH.
I am pretty confident now that if I rate a horse to be 75 it won't be too far away from the OR. If the OR for that same horse is 69. it will be certainly worth looking at for betting purposes. I have a pure speed figure adjusted for distance plus a good ability rating. I hope you enjoy the read but of course this is only my way of rating a race. There are countless others, many better and lots worse.
You might need to tell me how you calculate your figures!! if you are getting all these winners!!
I am sure that you and lots of posters may well do their own standard times but how much more accurate and how much difference do they make to final ratings.
I totally agree but judging by the fact there are regular odds on shots and 100/1 shots in handicaps every day and those races most of the time the camera man can’t get more than a couple of horses in the finish because they are strung out over 50 lengths down the course, when they are all theoretically supposed to have equal chance of winning and be weighted to finish together. Then you could make an argument that the whole handicap system is wrong quite easily.I know we have discussed "weights and times" before on here but i'm unable to get past what ratings and handicapping is all about, if a horse bolts up in a dcent time stick another stone on it's back to slow it down, if that simple logic is wrong then the whole handicapping system is wrong and has been for a very long time.