Topic of the day " Merit Ratings"

There will always be those who disagree with handicaps - as an owner you have to love them. You can not always have the same horse winning - like Usain Bolt - that will mean that the other runners in the race have no chance of winning and why would you want to own a horse that never has a chance of winning a race? Also there are plate races where the 'best' horses can run at an advantage.

I take Racing Guru's point about the MR's having less relevance in the weaker centres - but I would not go so far to say that it has NO relevance.

As per hibs' most excellent cut and paste article, Merit Rated handicaps in theory are the best thing since slice bread for the majority of horses - it is supposed to give every horse in the race a chance to win - the fact that it sometimes does not work as well in practice, should be a pointer that 'we' need to be more accurate in applying the theory to practice.

As for the handicappers, I think they have a very difficult job - they are always being told they are wrong by somebody - and sometimes they are - nobody's perfect but imo they do a good job overall.

Just to comment on one of Callatus' questions in his original post; taking weight for age (and sex allowances, etc) out of the equation - normally (there are exceptions to almost any rule) a horse set to carry 53 kg's in a MR 90 handicap, would carry 58 kg's in a MR 80 (1 MR point being equal to 1/2 kg) if his MR stays the same in both races; so it could be argued that he would go 'down in class' if he runs in the MR 80 after the MR 90 (and conversely 'up in class' if her runs in the MR 90 after the MR 80) - however in theory he would have an identical chance in both those races as his MR stays the same and the horses he competes against will also be allotted weight according to their MR's

@ frodo...

and i dont know if this makes any sense;

but a merit rated 72 for example....in different centres have different possibilites....what i am trying to say without getting my knickers in a knot is....there r strong merit rated 72's and a weak rated 72's.....in a five horse field...i have a horse in this 72 that is up and coming....the other 4 were rated as high as 85 or 90.....have come down the ratings but have lost their form totally....whereas the other 72 meritted race is very much more competitive....i win the first one by 5 lenghts....i get 6 points penalty....if i had run the second mr72...i run 4th(competive)..dont get a penalty...i think thats were formgrids help...and this is where values ought to be sought....not looking at a bookies board for that 10/1..and think that thats value....15/10 in a weak race is more value

@ frodo...

and i dont know if this makes any sense;

but a merit rated 72 for example....in different centres have different possibilites....what i am trying to say without getting my knickers in a knot is....there r strong merit rated 72's and a weak rated 72's.....in a five horse field...i have a horse in this 72 that is up and coming....the other 4 were rated as high as 85 or 90.....have come down the ratings but have lost their form totally....whereas the other 72 meritted race is very much more competitive....i win the first one by 5 lenghts....i get 6 points penalty....if i had run the second mr72...i run 4th(competive)..dont get a penalty...i think thats were formgrids help...and this is where values ought to be sought....not looking at a bookies board for that 10/1..and think that thats value....15/10 in a weak race is more value

RACING GURU Wrote:

---

> @ frodo...
>
> and i dont know if this makes any sense;
>
> but a merit rated 72 for example....in different
> centres have different possibilites....what i am
> trying to say without getting my knickers in a
> knot is....there r strong merit rated 72's and a
> weak rated 72's.....in a five horse field...i have
> a horse in this 72 that is up and coming....the
> other 4 were rated as high as 85 or 90.....have
> come down the ratings but have lost their form
> totally....whereas the other 72 meritted race is
> very much more competitive....i win the first one
> by 5 lenghts....i get 6 points penalty....if i had
> run the second mr72...i run 4th(competive)..dont
> get a penalty...i think thats were formgrids
> help...and this is where values ought to be
> sought....not looking at a bookies board for that
> 10/1..and think that thats value....15/10 in a
> weak race is more value


I think I get your drift and I agree - also I have my doubts if a MR 72 Kimberley horse has the same ability as a Joh'burg MR 72 horse - in theory they should be of equal ability but in practice they are not.This needs to be addressed imo.

I'm not saying that MR's and MR handicaps are perfect (far from it), but it's the best method to date (and certainly better than the old 'win a race and your race figure increases by 6 points'' method)

Frodo Wrote:

---

> RACING GURU Wrote:
>

---

>

---

> > @ frodo...
> >
> > and i dont know if this makes any sense;
> >
> > but a merit rated 72 for example....in
> different
> > centres have different possibilites....what i
> am
> > trying to say without getting my knickers in a
> > knot is....there r strong merit rated 72's and
> a
> > weak rated 72's.....in a five horse field...i
> have
> > a horse in this 72 that is up and coming....the
> > other 4 were rated as high as 85 or 90.....have
> > come down the ratings but have lost their form
> > totally....whereas the other 72 meritted race
> is
> > very much more competitive....i win the first
> one
> > by 5 lenghts....i get 6 points penalty....if i
> had
> > run the second mr72...i run
> 4th(competive)..dont
> > get a penalty...i think thats were formgrids
> > help...and this is where values ought to be
> > sought....not looking at a bookies board for
> that
> > 10/1..and think that thats value....15/10 in a
> > weak race is more value
>
>
> I think I get your drift and I agree - also I have
> my doubts if a MR 72 Kimberley horse has the same
> ability as a Joh'burg MR 72 horse - in theory they
> should be of equal ability but in practice they
> are not.This needs to be addressed imo.
>
> I'm not saying that MR's and MR handicaps are
> perfect (far from it), but it's the best method to
> date (and certainly better than the old 'win a
> race and your race figure increases by 6 points''
> method)


frodo...i think merit raings helps a horse older in his carreer..to get competive again...and i think as bread and butter owners..this is better than race figure system...and sure there are more horses to be suited by the merit rating system than the race fig. system...but lets say we crack a top 2 year old...imagine the dissappointment.....we could have won 6 in row...a..senor santa...and could have struck it rich...but now will have to wait 4 years to win 6 races...and py vet bills and keep....aaagggg not to good............this is where the dream is dying...even before we sleep

the race programme in this country needs to cater for both mediocre to average horses who need mr handicaps to be competitive and then progress condition pinnacle plate races for your so called better feature race type of horses to come through

pirates Wrote:

---

> the race programme in this country needs to cater
> for both mediocre to average horses who need mr
> handicaps to be competitive and then progress
> condition pinnacle plate races for your so called
> better feature race type of horses to come through


you are well versed...with the programming....dont u think...there should be more conditions races for 3 year olds...build up to the features...and some 2000 m condition races as well....this catergory is not catered for...in overseas plenty of 1 ans 1/2 mile races with conditions...albeit some only attract 3-4 runners...

Yes, the problem is not 'cracking a top 2 yr old' - probabably not enough plated races around for that top 2 yr old when he/she turns 3 - that is not a MR problem as such - it is race program problem - and dont get me started on that - will just spoil my weekend

had similiar conversation with louis goosen on other site and he says that the handicapers sit in on the programming commitee in gauteng im not sure abt the other provinces and they have a big say in the programme and so they they should as they have a breakdown on the horse population and their respective ratings ...in natal at the moment it is our out of season racing and imo we are having far to many plate races as the majority of horses in them surely cannot be considered feature race material for ex the race tonite with six blue notes and bay leaf...

it is not the number of plated races per season....but the positioning of thes races on the calender in each centre...now that u mention that the handicappers sit in on the committee...itmakes perfect sense...they do seem to have more plated races just before and early season

Pirates here's one for you - If we make a fuss about say a 3kg pull in the weights then why do we ignore a horse that has put on/lost 10 kg since it's last run ? My experience as an owner was that my horse ran to his best when he was about 490kg regardless of the weight he carried

Mr h ,a Greyhound can`t race if 1kg over or under from it`s last racing weight