There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 123 comments are related to the topic:
Jamie Lynch from Timeform
Jamie Lynch from Timeform
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 123
|
By:
bazzar 23 Jun 12 13:21 Occasionally the international handicappers get it wrong and if you are awake you can spot the flaws and make them pay. Several years ago they rated OASIS DREAM as the top 2yo, yet if anyone went through the beatings of other horses, then SOMNUS MUST have been rated the top at about 5lbs superior to OASIS DREAM, check my assertion out, they both met and beat the same horse but SOMNUS gave 6lbs when beating that horse. Handicapping is not simply about collateral form....they may have beaten the same horses at 2 but they will have beaten them at different stages of development/improvement and possibly under different conditions too....for all Somnus beat Oasis Dream on only occasion they met, that was on soft ground over 6f at Haydock and i dont think there was much doubt that Oasis Dream was the top sprinter of the year based on his 5f form |
|
By:
Difficult and pointless in comparing horses of different generations, I know we have to have ratings but it really means nothing over the years. It is the impressive way that Frankel keeps winning that marks him as the best miler. I f and when they do step him up to 10f who is going to take him on? We seem to be living in a moderate era with the 4yo's and this years 3yo's and so Frankel and Camelot seem so far ahead.
|
|
By:
Filante_ 23 Jun 12 13:28
Difference between Timeform and BHA is 7 points? ------------------------------------ Yes - around that - The TIMEFORM ratings have always run at an OVERALL level higher that Official Ratings - So comparing the two sets of Ratings - against each other - is FUTILE. However - Comparing Each set against THEMSELVES - is, of course, RELATIVE. |
|
By:
Mr Magoo 23 Jun 12 13:29
Do Timeform publish historic timeform figures anywhere? e.g. if I wanted to find the timeform ratings (at that point in time) for all runners of a particular race in the past year, are these numbers available ----------- NO - and they NEVER have been, either. The ONLY way to find those figures out are by your own 'mechanical assessment/handicapping' - retrospectively, too - which can be done - BUT takes great expertise. |
|
By:
They used to do the Annual Timefigures in a book around 25 years ago Onlooker for every race the horse had ran in, dont they still do something similar?
Seem to remember seeing last three Timefigures next to a horse in the racecard as well |
|
By:
Timeform have kept consistant for 60 years but the BHA have changed methods, lowered their scale and even recent changes have been using different lengths per second dependant on ground conditions so official figures from years gone by are like for like lower than they are today.
|
|
By:
Correct, zilzal - But those are TimeFIGURES - and NOT their RATINGS, though.
|
|
By:
Have already posted on another thread that I believe that the handicapper has erred with SEA MOON, he should be rated lower.
|
|
By:
Equally correct, grendel.
Now that we have moved on from the likes of Major Anthony Arkwight - and his military mob. |
|
By:
when i say that i mean officially Frankel would have been rated higher for the same performances years ago on the old methods, closer to Timeforms 147 assertion.
|
|
By:
the official handicapper was reluctant to put Frankel above Dancing Braves Arc so effectively he wasn't being unbiased or dispassionate in his assessment
|
|
By:
Mystery solved,
Richard Hills says it's the greatest horse he's ever see so that's that, well done Timeform for proving the doubters wrong. |
|
By:
Do Timeform publish historic timeform figures anywhere?
e.g. if I wanted to find the timeform ratings (at that point in time) for all runners of a particular race in the past year, are these numbers available ----------- NO - and they NEVER have been, either. The ONLY way to find those figures out are by your own 'mechanical assessment/handicapping' - retrospectively, too - which can be done - BUT takes great expertise. Well that's not quite true, they will have published them in the racecard for that race. Now, to get current timeform ratings for a race, you have to pay (fair enough!) But what I'd like is to get hold of their old ratings for past races, I just wondered if these were archived anywhere. After all, if someone is going to pay for timeform ratings there should be a way of looking at past ratings to see if they are any good. |
|
By:
80% of the people on this thread, starting with stewarty b, genuinely have no clue how handicapping works. So i have to ask, why comment? To talk about collateral form and take it as a concrete guide is absolute rubbish - each race has it's own circumnstances, different conditions, trips, pace, time etc. etc. etc.
stewarty b - Jim Mcgrath ran a failed tipping service (losing about 350pts over 3 years - i know because i stupidly subscribed (we all make mistakes!!)) yet you think he has a clue. Jim would be tipping you Black Caviar today - believe me. slag timeform by all means, but don't hail Mcgrath. |
|
By:
Mr Magoo 23 Jun 12 14:10
Do Timeform publish historic timeform figures anywhere? Well that's not quite true, they will have published them in the racecard for that race. ------------------ Mr Magoo - You are going even FURTHER down the WRONG road - with that assertion. That can ONLY be true - when the individual horse has achieved it's HIGHEST EVER Rating LAST TIME out. - and, even then - The Racecard Ratings are adjusted to 10 stone - and for Weight-for-Age - so you would have to RE-calculate from that to get the horse's BASE rating. .... - and Timeform use a DIFFERENT Weight-for Age scale than the Official Scale - and Timeform - just like Racing Post do - even 'FUDGE' their RACECARD RATINGS - in order to 'Top Rate' and 'Tip' the horse that they favour ... So, even a 'Highest Last time out' horse can have an artificially inflated Rating, too. Therefore, the Racecard Ratings are NOT ALWAYS a TRUE representation of what is actually held on the MASTER LEDGER. ------------------------ Do not doubt anything that I post on Handicapping and Ratings. |
|
By:
Do Timeform publish historic timeform figures anywhere?
e.g. if I wanted to find the timeform ratings (at that point in time) for all runners of a particular race in the past year they would be the ratings in the racecard, onlooker..albeit adjusted |
|
By:
I didn't know that, onlooker. I had always assumed the timeform ratings were 'pure' and not adjusted for the race!
I don't suppose they give any explanation anywhere about how they do this? |
|
By:
Grendel: Timeform have been consistently wrong for 60 years in many cases.
How can Excelebration (1 Group 1 win) be 2lbs higher than Royal Palace (2000Gns, Derby, Coronation Cup, Prince of Wales, Eclipse beating Sir Ivor and King George)? How can Excelebration be 1lb behind Lammtarra ( unbeaten winner of Derby, King George and Arc)? How can Excelebration beat a 113 rated horse a neck with a 108 rated horse a length behind and a 104 rated horse a length behind that and still be rated 119? I think Frankel has f ook ed them completely. This is thier obituary year. |
|
By:
mr magoo, all ratings have to be adjusted for weight carried and are usually done so to 10 stone, as onlooker states
|
|
By:
How can Excelebration beat a 113 rated horse a neck with a 108 rated horse a length behind and a 104 rated horse a length behind that and still be rated 119?
Hell's teeth, brigust...how long have you been watching racing? Did they drop Brigadier Gerard's rating the day after he got beat by Roberto? Did they drop Dancing Brave's rating after he flunked in Breeder's Cup? Excelebration had an off day...that has no bearing on what he achieved and was rated previously. |
|
By:
Duncan if you watched the Morning Line it is that race they used to get Frankel's 147.
You don't read the thread Dunc. Excelebration ran to 114. Frankel according to Timeform ran +29 the equals 143. But Timeform know the figures do not add up so they say Excelebration ran to 119 in the QA and not the 114 he actually ran to. I know he ran below what they originally rated him. I have been syaing for ages that 133, a figure they gave him to substantiate the 143 they had given Frankel, was wrong. |
|
By:
And Timeform may include many factors but they do not include the fact that this is a shocking era for British racing. The Arc was won easily by a German filly with the Derby and St Leger winners tailed off. And the majority of middle distances races are now dominated by a 6 year old Aussie horse ffs.
|
|
By:
onlooker newbie question here..
with WFA racing say a mare carrying 2kg less 56.5 vs a stallion 58.5 and winners a mare and wins by 2L over 1200m and say you give her a 120 rating so assume you give the stallion 115 which is 5 points less for a 2L beating does that mean the Mare gets a 120 vs stallion 115 or do u add 4 points because the stallion carried 2kg more and rate the mare 120 and stallion 119? |
|
By:
Filante -
You are confusing Weight-for-AGE ... with the SEX Allowance. Weight-for-AGE --- ie: 3-yr-olds running against OLDER horses is far more complicated - and the ALLOWANCE varies/changes EACH TWO weeks - to accommodate the 3-yr-old maturing. ------------------ In your example - Of course you add the WEIGHT GIVEN by the Colt (they are only "Stallions" when they stop RACING  ) to the filly ....Just as you would if one COLT gave weight to another COLT ... or Filly to Filly. |
|
By:
onlooker yep i meant colts sry
So if filly and colt are same age say and the filly beats the colt 1L only over 1600m and the filly gets a rating of 120 while the colt gets a ratings of 118 but because the colt gave the filly 2kg in weight he gets 4 points extra added to his rating meaning he registers a rating of 122 while the filly is 120 is this right? |
|
By:
YES - But, dependent on the race distance, and going - we could say that 2kg = 5 pounds (points} here.
|
|
By:
onlooker is there a chart i can find online where it shows the difference in weight for each distance? I have the margins one but cant find the weight one
|
|
By:
Here is a pdf - from the BHA - British Horseracing Authority - showing scale.
http://www.britishhorseracing.com/inside_horseracing/media/WFA_Flat.pdf ---------------- Unfortunately - some incompetent has re=typed 'Jan-15 16-31' under EVERY fortnight of every month. Needless to say nobody - apart from ME - has noticed this nonsense. Just IGNORE the 'JAN' bit - and take it as 1-15 and 16-31 for each successive month. The FIGURES shown - are the ALLOWANCE in POUNDS that the 3-yr0old would receive, in the conditions of the race, from an older horse. Note - 2-yr-olds only ever meet older horses in a MERE HANDFUL of late season races - so don't bother about 2-yr-olds. Likewise - 4-yr-olds still get a small allowance from older horses in the early part of the year - in longer distance races ONLY - on the All-Weather. |
|
By:
Good man onlooker much appreciated!
|
|
By:
onlooker
23 Jun 12 15:14 Joined: 18 Feb 03 YES - But, dependent on the race distance, and going - we could say that 2kg = 5 pounds (points} here. Going care to explain onlooker? |
|
By:
Yes - 2 kb = 4.4+ lbs - So you have to go 'one way or the other' - to end up with a FULL Point
All part of the subjectivity, and experience, of Handicapping. - and if the distances between the horses are not a FULL length - and do NOT, therefore, readily convert to a FULL point - then you can adjust to accommodate the differences in both by combining the two. |
|
By:
wow onlooker feel embarrassed to ask but might as well ask as stuck here lol doing yesterdays races and trying to learn this handicapping stuff :-) got all the rest OK just stumbled across this one and not sure...
If a 4y old colt at WFA carries 56 vs a 5y old 58.5 over 1200m do i deduct 2.5kgs the difference meaning say 5 points to the 4y olds overall rating for carrying less? |
|
By:
You are very lucky I am here 24/7 - well 18/7 actually
-- and that you would find nobody finer to answer you. ---------------------------------------------------- Weight-for-Age does NOY apply to 4-yr-olds, and upwards - Be they - meeting SAME age horses, or OLDER horses. WFA only applies when 4-yr-old, and OLDER horses, meet 3-yr-olds. So the 56 v 58.5 is a straightforward weight difference. The the 58.5 horse runs to, say 100 - and wins by ONE length, over a 6 furlongs (1200 metres). The 58.5 horse is awarded 100 - and the 56 horse runs to 92 ... That being the 59.5 horse 100 Rating > LESS the 2.5kg/5points weight difference, AND 3 points for the ONE length beating - at a 1200 metres.... = a 92 RATING for the 56 kg horse. |
|
By:
^ * That being the 58.5 horse 100 Rating - Typo.
|
|
By:
and i really appreciate is onlooker
 yes i asked it wrong again was meant to say 3y old with 56kg vs 4y old with 58.5kg March ...in which i didn't deduct any points against the 3y old so OK was doing it right...btw been using this chart as it seems easier to read haven't compared it to other chart yet but thought i try it to start with while a newbie lol http://www.racerate.com/WeightForAge_Scale.pdf |
|
By:
Yes - that chart will suit you better.
TWO other points. 1 - There is Northern Hemisphere Weight-for-Age (Ours) - and Southern Hemisphere Weight-for-Age .... which is, more than likely, YOUR kg Chart. The Southern Hemisphere Weight-for-age application is, obviously 6 months different to Northern.- due to different foaling cycle dates. 2 - You can also get (many_ races where BOTH NATURAL weight difference carried applies - ALONF with Weight-for Age ASWELL. For instance - A 3-yr-old could best set to receive 4kg (9lbs) from an older horse - BUT - the WFA is 2kg (5lbs) at the time of the race ... SO - You would ONLY deduct 2kg (4 or 5 points) from it's new distance adjusted RATING - and NOT the whole 4kg (9 points) weight CARRIED difference - as the 3-yr-old was already ENTITLED to receive 2kg WFA in the first place. Likewise - If the 3-yr-old received ONLY 1kg (2lbs) RACECARD weight - BUT - was ENTITLED to 3kg (7lbs) WFA allowance - then you would NOT DEDUCT anything (for Weight carried) from the 3-yr-old's new distance adjusted Rating - as it had NOT received it's FULL WFA quota. In fact - in this instance - AFTER DEDUCTING the distance beaten Points - You would then have to ADD the 2kg (4 or 5lb) WFA 'Shortfall' - that it should have received - back ONTO it's new Rating. As I said - It all takes expertise and experience - - along with a natural affinity with, and ability to, see into and INTERPRET the RESULTS of races. ------------------ Not many can do it - and STICK AT IT - Even fewer have such a natural affinity and the needed ability. |
|
By:
OK thanks onlooker actually done about 4 or 5 BC races while at it now also and just comparing lol
|
|
By:
onlooker after going over the races i done and i know its no way near enough.. but have always thought 1kg over 1200 which = 2 points a query when handicapping imo A horse who beats another 2L each time they race and now winner has to carry say 4 points more even 5 points more say around 2kg should have them level for that race for example ...not sure about that one though thoughts?
|
|
By:
weights to lengths is my biggest query about rating/handicapping
|
|
By:
You are very lucky I am here 24/7 - well 18/7 actually
|