Its simple. SA is unique we have gazillions of horses bred and most are quite lowly rated.
There is no avenue for moving horses along unless you race in weaker centres, in other words there are no selling and claiming races
stakes are too HIGH for lower rated handicaps you there is a MR66 at the Vaal on Thursday with R76k prize money. Halve that and quick quick lower rated horses are sold/destroyed/retired.
MR and or Handicapping works but there has to be a link between the race programme and the ratings. Mr Zietsman told me I'm absurd but thats because he verstaans racing and English not so lekker. After all the July is a handicap and is programmed 365 days in advance.
Training horses to win handicaps is an art, not many do well at it. Sir Michael Stoute and Henry Cecil and even Barry Hills (now Charlie) are trainers that seldom go for handicaps, they just don't have those horses. Richard Fahey on the other hand does as does a guy called David OMeara.
South African trainers are at a disadvantage because the programme is handicap heavy and conditions races light. this will be blamed on
Name the horses you owned and currently owned (because i cannot find your name under any ownership on formgrids)?, would love to see if any was any good or good enough ,for you to pull a coup and win the JULY !!!
Come now , let's be realistic . Your theory/demand is absurd and that you know.
Stan James ( remember)
Simply Royal ( handicap certainty for the July)
Ozymandias bought in excellent condition from your mentor
You arguing with me for the sake of arguing when clearly you exploit the handicaps
( and rightly so) but don't blame the lack of programme for the lack of forward thinking
As for owners paying and waiting it's perfectly acceptable
If there is a plan in place.
So many different opinions , which is what makes racing so interesting. Here are some basic points, based upon my opinion-
1)SA now sits with more than 70 percent of the population rated at 70 or lower (thumbsuck)
2)Once again we are faced with either lifting the population by about 6 to 10 points or bringing in a H division....
3)When I talk about the "good" or "nice" horses, I am talking about the old fashioned middle division types. The R22M import which wins first time out and then the Nursery, is a"Top" sort. Those are fine, in the MR System, as they will go to set weight Feature races or to Dubai.
4)Having grown up in Racing, I have witnessed two things that these "good" or "nice" horses brought to Racing -
- Punters who follow "their" horse
- Owners excited and happy to buy more horses as they now believe that they have a chance at finding a "Top"
sort. Just a lot more fulfilling than a maiden winner....and not languishing in a minor centre at a sub
standard MR.
5) Owners race to win. Not for bragging rights as to what their horses highest achieved MR was...
So, the handicapper's stuffed up the application of MR badly. Then the powers that be had to step in and put restrictions on the handicapper's. And then more restrictions and then again more. Now we have a total stuff up.
What is happening is that the good old fashioned Middle Division horse is getting whacked, winning less races than it should and the Owners cannot understand why they are winning less races with their nice horses than with their weak horses..
And running second nowadays is like a jail sentence. Consistency is punished and running a few bad races after winning is rewarded. These are FACTS people. The system is saying to us - RUN BADLY AND WE WILL DROP YOUR HORSE'S RATING !
But the biggest reason that the Sales prices of the majority of horses is down is because the "normal" Owners are walking away. No normal Owner wants to eventually find a nice sort and be punished for it. There are much less expensive ways to have a good day out and to have a good lunch. Simple.
What we need, at the very least, is a system which allows the nice horses to win their first 3 or 4 races on ability, in as quick a time as possible. At the same time, we cannot discard MR and we must allow the weaker horses their place in Racing. But Yes, we need a cut off , a bottom line.
I will post my suggestions for what 5hey are worth. This document has gone out to people in power. Maybe it's way off the mark bit maybe it has merit..
In closing, I hear all of you. It's a tough issue. But to two of you -
1)Easy- you are spot on, IMHO - I would not raise the population, I would rather bring in the very low races at very low stakes.
2)Ziets - you are an exuberant young man who loves racing, as you know it in these modern times. But, Yes - we do still tell certain Owners to wait a year like we used to years ago. And then we fire !! Easy does the business for us , from the UK....and our prices don't shorten here...
I will post my handicapping suggestions asap
Last edit: 8 years 2 weeks ago by Bob Brogan.
The following user(s) said Thank You: dashing, alterego, Floyd, MAJMU
Great reply Goose you are on very similar ground to what I believe in.
Zietsman I dont begrudge you your views, you need to earn a living after all. Where I have a problem, is you and all the others in your position, look at what suits YOU and not always what will be the best for racing.
We often bemoan the state of racing when compared to previous decades. We can make many excuses for the downgrade. One thing we cannot argue against is no one without vested interests is interested in mediocrity and this is clearly seen in the betting volumes.
The one thing that is very true is the fact that consistent horses get hammered. How can in a race a winner pick up a 4 point penalty and the runner up get 3 points. The runner up gets virtually a winners penalty without winning and now costs them a chance of winning the next time out.
Louis if I understand your reasoning correctly, you are advocating a Race Figure type system to be implemented in the early stages of a horses career to assist the better horses to win a few races before they are nobbled by this idiotic MR system?
If this is true, I support it 100%. I owned a share in a young horse who ran third in debut and then won easily second time out. The horse received a 84 MR for the win/place. Subsequent form behind his win was poor and only 2 of the 13 ever won a race. It took 20 months for his rating to be dropped to a 74 when he won again, and promptly got raised to a 79. We ran him twice more and retired him. My point is it took 2 years of paying keep to determine that the handicapper got it wrong. Why is retrospective adjusting not done particularly with younger horses that are not running with exposed and tested form?
