MR Appeal Over Turned

Frodo wrote: No we certainly do not agree - even as a punter I prefer to be challenged

.....actually being a punter is an even bigger challenge.....we poor handicapped bastards...no merit and hardly ever rated..... :blush:

Frodo wrote: No we certainly do not agree - even as a punter I prefer to be challenged

You do appear challenged I will not argue with you on that one.

The days of the RF system did not result in clear cut contests as you make out. What did however happen is every now and again a bomb would be entered and suddenly there were only 5 legs of that p6 to worry about.

Each to their own

The problem that any handicapping system is trying to solve is (ideally) to have finishes that are short heads and necks and not lengths (in handicaps).

What the race figure system did in handicaps was to allow horses clearly lengths superior to carry similar weights as horses with similar records or form. The result was that horses would be odds on in handicaps and win by huge margins.

Evidence, rather than belief, shows introducing merit ratings reduced that very significantly.

It's entirely different discussions about "stopping" good horses, or how unpredictable results became, or the fact that the plated race program beyond Maiden Plates is all but destroyed compared to what existed before.

Even if you are terrible at choosing a line horse, the rule that forces the handicapper to use a horse in the money as a line horse provides a consistent outcome over time.

No arbitrary points system will compete with a dynamic computerized handicapping system for assigning weights for handicaps. At least not one I have been able to find.

As a novice racegoer I remember Mark Anthony in a B Div Hcp carrying 51kgs, receiving weight and win by 7 L. In his next B Div he won by 12 L. In his next A Div, receiving weight all round again he won by 8 L. All this after 2nd in Guineas and winning the Derby. He went on to win the Queens Plate, the Met and The Administrators. Whatever outcome you might want, you can't say 7L,12L and 8L in successive handicaps was a good job at accessing his ability and giving the other runners any chance, as happy as I was to watch.

It reminds me of the quote: "No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those others"

Over the Air wrote:

Frodo wrote: No we certainly do not agree - even as a punter I prefer to be challenged

You do appear challenged I will not argue with you on that one.

The days of the RF system did not result in clear cut contests as you make out. What did however happen is every now and again a bomb would be entered and suddenly there were only 5 legs of that p6 to worry about.

Each to their own

Each to their own as you say - just don't talk utter rubbish like 'The days of the RF system did not result in clear cut contests' and expect people to agree with you

Frodo wrote:

Over the Air wrote:

Frodo wrote: No we certainly do not agree - even as a punter I prefer to be challenged

You do appear challenged I will not argue with you on that one.

The days of the RF system did not result in clear cut contests as you make out. What did however happen is every now and again a bomb would be entered and suddenly there were only 5 legs of that p6 to worry about.

Each to their own

Each to their own as you say - just don't talk utter rubbish like 'The days of the RF system did not result in clear cut contests' and expect people to agree with you

Frodo I have no idea how old you are but I assume that you are older than 20 despite the content of your reply.

Whilst Tony M is correct in pointing out a champions easy victories, he enforces the point that I make. When a horse like him ran, the jackpot became three legged and the pick six 5 legged. I have no stats to prove what I am saying now, but common sense may dictate that more participation in difficult bets occurred due to this. You may spend some cash on a bet where the outcome appears easy, or maybe you a rocket man that wants to have a stab at an impossible card and ultimately be a loser.

Tony's example illustrates only what he wants to illuminate. The RF worked without issue for years and continues in a bastardised form today by means of isolated Plate races. In the RF days, there was on many occasions carry over Jackpots and at the Vaal bipots. I concede there was no fractional betting in those days and the cost per line was 50c.

Lets not let emotions ruin a good story.

'Common Sense' :ohmy:

I can't draw you a picture :kiss:

Over the Air wrote: I can't draw you a picture :kiss:

do it on paint copy to word pad and you should be good

OTA, you really are a 'klippie in my skoen', you just can't seem to make a point without in some way throwing in a snide remark.

You say (I think) you prefered the way races were run under the RF system, because it gave you an opportunity to find bankers - today there are still plenty of those around - if that was indeed the only benefit of the RF system, I say good riddance

MR was introduced to level the playing fields and you seem to have some objection to that - luckily you are in the minority - because I believe (it makes common sense ) that there would be less horses racing today (and far fewer owners) if it were not for the MR system. The application can be improved, but the fundamentals are sound.

Even when Tony makes a crystal clear point, you find some way of twisting the facts to suit your view.

And by the way, I believe I am at least as old as you - if you are indeed in some way insinuating that I am some young snotkop who has no idea about anything

And this is the last time that I am going to debate something with you, as I have better things to do than to be subjected to what you clearly believe is your superior intelligence

Have a good night

Frodo there are none so blind than those that cannot see.

People justifying the MR system do not make it crystal clear, they merely enforce their views. I will never be comfortable with a system that can be manipulated and is done so on a regular basis.

Let's agree to disagree.

Frodo there are none so blind than those that cannot see.......yes blind people cannot see..


A better way of putting it would have been :

There's none so blind as those who will not see

Long live Sporting Post’s Ability and Race Ratings.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk