Phil Smith getting his comeuppance

This is one of the most ridiculous statements I've ever read from a trainer. He's retired a fit horse because of anticipated "unfair treatment". What would he think was fair, dropping him a few pounds to make sure he wins easier next time? Returning national winners are frequently places, suggesting they are treated very fairly. OK, not many win it again, but that SHOULD be difficult.

And as for Don Poli, he looks well handicapped to me. He's giving 2lbs to The Last Samuri ffs, if he'd run against Don Poli & Co last Sunday he wouldn't have seen which way they went. Don Poli is a grade one horse and any grade one horse off 163 is pretty fairly treated. Add that to the fact that he's made for the national, and should improve a ton for the trip and fences, and they would be mad not to run. I don't think this is over, trainer v owner battle looming.

hmm i thought the horse RTW was retired because of an injury.

Not a current one. They mentioned previous injuries when they retired him.
Plenty of races to be won with him imo if they could keep him sound. Perhaps they are plottng him up for next year's foxunters?

Not to mention that compressing the handicap necessarily means most horses will end up with more weight than would otherwise have been the case.

It is enjoyable seeing boofhead showing his ignorance when trying to trip up someone who's forgotten more about racing and handicapping than fathead will ever know.  At least nowadays we're spared him on ATR on Saturdays.

unfortunately he turns it into a battle of egos, in what should be a very interesting program

How embarrassing is Chapman? No wonder Smith likes appearing with him, Chapman makes him look like a genius.

Shame we can't have a decent host to properly take him to task without acting the buffoon every couple of minutes to leave him off the hook.

I only saw the last 10 minutes but I was embarrassed by Chapman's antics. I agree that Phil Smith should be asked to explain apparent anomalies but to keep interrupting, making wild accusations not allowing him to make a rational argument was awful. I didn't expect to ever dislike a racing presenter more than J. McCririck but that went close. Is ATR financed by the Irish racing Industry? That is the only way to explain the line they take these days.

There are few more ridiculous things in racing than the hype over the Grand National weights and Phil Smith having carte blanche to give the horses completely arbitrary marks for one race a year.

One ridiculous thing was unveiling the weights in the evening -- planned by someone with no idea about newspaper deadlines.

get a grip
chappers and smith is like parry and brazil on talksport years ago,good guy,bad guy act, its not meant to be serious chapman says every week although we have some fun he respects the job smith and the other handicappers do

Yes, this should be about serious discussion but it is no more than the equivalent of Punch and Judy. Pathetic stuff.

If Chapman really wanted to make things uncomfortable for Smith he would actually get him to explain that 172 rating for Thistlecrack.

Irish handicapper put Don Poli upto 167 apparently, so 4lb well-in in GN and not going to run cos unfairly treated 

Irish handicapper didn't put Don Poli up.  Just been on HRI website and still on 161

Agree with others, it has potentially the makings of a great show but as usual we get a dumbed down version

The comments in this article are from Eddie O'Leary, the brother of Michael. Yes he is the racing manager but how much of this is tribal politico>? He still sounds bitter about the EU referendum.

"A handicapper is meant to be impartial. What I'd call the National now is a pre-Brexit, post-Brexit handicap.>>"


How can Brexit get a mention in this?

cheers, davieboy...some misinfo to that effect on ATR and Twitter then

Brexit is a polite way of alleging Phil Smith has overburdened the Irish horses.

Which in a sense he has to in order to make it a level playing field with the home-based horses he has been overrating for years. ATR should have some sort of programme to discuss it. When does Chapman go on holiday?

There is a disparity between the UK and Irish official levels. If the Irish horses were allowed to run off their home marks then there would be a disproportionate number of Irish trained handicap winners in the UK.

fook me theyve had the discussion
chappers accused smith of battering irish horses to get a uk winner after irish horses won 6 out of 9,smith said they dont even look at their irish mark,whats left to discuss other than calling smith a liar,the same smith this thread says forgotten more than chappers will ever no,
as smith says uk horses are running races now on heavy ground to get marks to get in at chelt,whilst irish rainers are pishing about in hurdles non events in ireland hoping smith gives them a mark to get in at chelt,as he says complaining their to high for the national and to low to get in at chelt,as smith said if mullins thinks the crafty butcher should be on a mark to get in at chelt, run it in a race to prove it before the chelt weights come out

Surely the goal should be for their ratings to be done on the same scale so we can have ratings that mean something.

If Phil and his team perhaps hadn't let their scales slip so badly in the last few years trying to create artifical champions then then perhaps we would have and there would be no need for these discussions.

complaining the're too high for the national and too low to get in at chelt,as smith said if mullins thinks the crafty butcher should be on a mark to get in at chelt, run it in a race to prove it before the chelt weights come out

As Phil Smith said a couple of years back, to qualify for Cheltenham, you need to run at least one race with the handbrake off.

Another thing to consider is that maybe british racing isn't as strong as it likes to think it is?

Maybe the Irish have better jockeys and better trainers?

Maybe all the uncompetitive dross that is constantly served up by the BHA is proving to the detriment of the sport?

I don't agree with all of Smith's methods but he gets results. He has to deal with vast amounts of non triers and a grossly incompetent handicapper in Ireland. Absolutely right that he comes up with his own marks. There are a couple of dodgy marks handed out by him (and he does unfairly single out Elliott) but people having a go at him for Rashaan's and The Crafty Butcher's ratings are laughable and he gave a very good defense of both of those ratings.

Surely the goal should be for their ratings to be done on the same scale so we can have ratings that mean something.

If Phil and his team perhaps hadn't let their scales slip so badly in the last few years trying to create artifical champions then then perhaps we would have and there would be no need for these discussions.

A few years ago, there was a great panic about slippage -- handicap marks overall gradually slipping downwards. Smith fixed that but at the cost of overrating everything, and more importantly of losing any pretence that there was a constant objective rating so we can compare Kauto Star with Desert Orchid, say.

As you say, if the British and Irish horses were isolated -- or if the good horses were equally distributed -- it would not matter as much but as they meet at Cheltenham, the Irish need to be adjusted up. Of course, if Rich Ricci and the rest moved their strings to England, then the problem would reverse itself and the Irish would need to have their marks reduced.

But we are where we are.

Gallant Oscar rated 146 in Ireland, generously downgraded by Smith to 143 making it doubtful he will get in

More than one way to skin an Irish cat!

Four years ago Smith accused his older handicappers for overrating Dancing Brave then recalibrated everything down because it fitted in with what he thought. He thought Frankel was better than Dancing Brave so he changed to system to prove it when the horse couldn't prove it on the track. Handicapping is not what you think, it is a set of rules. He would have changed the referendum if it didn't agree with what he thought. Then two years ago he appealed to trainers to help him with his handicapping ffs.
In my opinion, Smith is the Clattenburg of horse racing. He thinks he is bigger and more important than the sport. He has a system laid down for his colleagues to use and follow, now they are all getting into the method of rating by public opinion and what you see, not what the facts on the ground say.  The fact is he doesn't trust the system he is working with and he has this fanciful idea that he can guess how much better a horse is than the result gives him. And just like with Rashaan he has proved he is clueless.

In Rashaan's race at Down Royal he rated him through the 2nd and the 3rd who were higher rated and were both having their first run of the season. They clearly never ran to their ratings. Had he rated through the 4th horse who finished close up and who had run and was fit he wouldn't have given him the weight he did. It was an absolutely clueless decision.

Ramruma • February 16, 2017 1:27 PM GMT
One ridiculous thing was unveiling the weights in the evening -- planned by someone with no idea about newspaper deadlines.

look at the date next to your name, news is 24/7 now in your hand, newspapers almost obsolete

Don Poli is favourite but apparently they've been unfairly treated?! seems like the handicapper did a decent job

The BHB made a very reasonable defence I though. 10% of English runners in England win handicaps, 11% of Irish runners in England do. As they reasonably pointed out, the Irish % is entitled to be a bit higher as they are unlikely to run a no-hoper just for experience, but it does suggest the handicapping is very fair.

Conversely, I can't remember the last time an English trained horse won a major Irish handicap.

In any case Mr O'leary, 11-7 for Don Poli seems fair to me. Certainly fairer than charging a £40 debit card charge that wasn't mentioned until the end of the checkout.

The Crafty Butcher has been trying for its life every time he's run this season, he finished second in one of the most fiercely competitive hcap chases run last year so I can't understand what 1st Time Poster is on about above.
I can thoroughly understand connections frustration at the absolute randomness of his UK mark when other thoroughly exposed Irish horses at all levels routinely get 5-8 lbs tacked on to their Irish rating.
Perhaps after two hard races and a fall over hurdles they planned to give him a break until March under the assumption Mr Smith would show an iota of consistency and give him a mark in the high 130's ?
The Clattenburg analogy is spot on,  Smith seems to have a touch of the delusional egomaniac about him, convinced he's cleverer than everybody else and drunk on his absolute power.

Smith seems to have a touch of the delusional egomaniac about him, convinced he's cleverer than everybody else and drunk on his absolute power.


I wouldnt be Smith's biggest fan but if you got a hundred people to handicap a thousand horses, everyone would come up with different ratings and so you could accuse everyone of being 'convinced he's cleverer than everybody else'. The rest of the above is just OTT dramatics which suggests that you have a touch of the delusional egomaniac about you and are drunk.

BarryM  17 Feb 17 00:51

Conversely, I can't remember the last time an English trained horse won a major Irish handicap



Depends what you mean by major..Irish Cavalier, Perfect Pasture, Dream Walker and New Bidder all won £40K+ races in 2016.

Looks like GB horses in all Irish hcps (Flat/Jumps) have operated at an 8.5% SR in the last 3 yrs, slightly above the SR of 8% for the home-trained runners (bigger fields over there, so overall SR lower than GB)

michael o leary, dreadful bloke.

all his trainers must tiptoe around him, worried they'll offend and be the next for the sack.

Smith seems to have a touch of the delusional egomaniac about him, convinced he's cleverer than everybody else and drunk on his absolute power.

I could not agree more with that comment. I have been banging on about the BHA handicapping, and in particular Gardner-Hill and Phil Smith, for years. Pity the media haven't the guts or the nouse to look deeper into it. Sadly O'Leary isn't the best liked but he speaks his mind and knows the time of day.

Lets face it the handicapper is wrong almost all of the time otherwise the races would all finish in a line but that is not the point. More recently the Rashaan rating was just plain wrong and for Smith to defend it was staggering. He should have just accepted it and revised it. That would have shown the mark of the man just as agreeing with it has done.

17 of the top 40 are either owned by Michael O'Leary or JP. I can understand why they are causing a rumpus over the weights. Very few horses can carry over 11st to win the national, Many Clouds was an exceptional horse. In fact last year only 3 houses carrying 11 stone or over managed to even finished the race.

heavens opened last G.N.  and distorted the whole race ..???

In fact last year only 3 houses carrying 11 stone or over managed to even finished the race


5 of the last 8 winners have carried 11 stone or higher

Blimey, thought we'd seen the last of the 11st barrier debate....despite some flat earthers continuing to fight the good fight

brigust you seem quite upset although you only really appear to have one example to support your anger and Rashaan hasn't run off the mark you're moaning about.  So how do you know it's wrong?  (that's rhetorical btw - you don't, cheers)

Thought the worst admission from Smith and that went unchallenged from Chapman was that he started compressing the weights at the behest of Charles Barnett and someone else who wanted to give the better quality horses a better chance of winning. Thought the idea of handicapping was to give every horse an equal chance.

Should one or two people be dictating how a sport is run (or in this case a race) like that, it's a bit like the French imposing a 4lb weight allowance for females because Rothschild wants one.

Don't know why the weights even have to be announced 2 months prior to the race, just state all horses will run off the official rating at the time of the race, sounds fairer all round to me.

Don't know why the weights even have to be announced 2 months prior to the race, just state all horses will run off the official rating at the time of the race, sounds fairer all round to me.

Cos then everybody would do what the Irish do and run them in novice hurdles etc when qualified..........

if the crafty butcher has been trying for his life ,theres no problem then he,s not good enough for the chelt handicaps,people close to the horse or punters seem to think he should be given a mark to get in the handicaps without showing his hand,which tends to suggest they think theres lots more to come

If his arguments for 'compressing the weights' were credible, he'd surely be doing the same for the Welsh, Scottish, and Midland Nationals.

And if his primary concrn was fairness, he'd be campaigning to change the no penalties rule, since there's invariably one runner in the National that is very leniently treated having won after the weights were published. The Last Samurai a year ago ran off a mark 12lbs below his then official rating - so you have the ridiculous situation that the horse ran off 149 in the National, but would have been on 161 in the 3M handicap chase run one hour before the big race.

He was campaigning, TA, as were others in Holborn.  It got derailed by a small group of people that can't see past the end of their own self-serving noses.

TH I suggest you look at the form of the 4th horse My Manikineko, and not through Apples Jade the 2nd horse and Petit Mouchoir the 3rd horse. On My Makeniko's previous running through Sternrubin and subsequent running through Superb Story the placed horses at Down Royal ran around 14lbs below their form.
Added to that Apples Jade and Petit Mouchoir have now run 6 times since this race winning three Grade 1's (should have been four) a second in a Grade one and a fall in a Grade 1. Clearly showing they are far superior to anything Rashaan had shown. Added to that this was at least Rashaan's 4th race this season as it was My Makeniko's and they were fully fit whereas it was Apple Jade's first run since April and Petit Mouchoir's first run since April.
The handicapper should ignore the unfit horses who ran well below their ratings and rate the race through the 1st and 4th horses who were both fully fit and clearly ran almost exactly to their ratings.

Yes, I note that horse, far from being exposed, has subsequently improved by bustling up another who's touted as a champion Hurdle prospect.  I also note the trainer of Rashaan (Irish 139) is happy to take on Jezki (Irish 167) on Saturday at Gowran, brigust.  In addition, Rashaan is giving Jezki 8lbs. 

So that's roughly 35lbs wrong.  You gotta love the Irish. 

In a minute they'll be telling us Don Poli has been shafted being asked to give 2lbs to the Last Sumuri   Oh..hang on

Phil Smith shouldn't be publicly barracked by the bully that is Michael OLeary. Look at his childish tantrum leading to the split with Willie Mullins and this shows that he's clearly a man who has to get his own way.

I didn't hear any complaints about last year's handicapping.

Let him take all his horses out and plod round Clonmel and the like, the race is far bigger than this egotistical maniac.

I would have thought they hoped the race would cut up further TH still they should pick up some prize money and you never know. Stranger things have happened.

Somerset Sam • February 17, 2017 2:55 PM GMT
Phil Smith shouldn't be publicly barracked by the bully that is Michael OLeary

I agree SS, the tone had a pretty nasty element to it from my point of view

it is 1 thing expressing your displeasure at the hcap marks your horses have, it is quite another speaking out in the media and being an utter fkin w@nker to somebody who is just doing their job

Sure - I'd never have a pop at anyone for having a go. It's an orse race not a maths equation. 

But when you've properly shot yer mouth off over a rating of 154, it seems a little strange to then ask your horse to run to mark of 175 - seemingly without a care in the world.

Feb 17, 2017 -- 11:44AM, TheAnorak wrote:

If his arguments for 'compressing the weights' were credible, he'd surely be doing the same for the Welsh, Scottish, and Midland Nationals. And if his primary concrn was fairness, he'd be campaigning to change the no penalties rule, since there's invariably one runner in the National that is very leniently treated having won after the weights were published. The Last Samurai a year ago ran off a mark 12lbs below his then official rating - so you have the ridiculous situation that the horse ran off 149 in the National, but would have been on 161 in the 3M handicap chase run one hour before the big race.

Surely it would only have been "unfair" if The Last Samuri had won off his "lenient" mark?!

Agree Sam and WSB.  Especially when the w@nker has little or no clue about the subject he's debating.

Great man Micheal O'Leary, almost single handedly brought air fares to a third of the price they were 30 years ago.
Forget the National,joke race nowadays anyway.

No mention of the fact that top Irish jumps horses through the 00s were no longer sold to be trained in the UK.

Which explains  both the dominance of Irish jumps horses in the UK and the request by UK trainers for Phil Smith
to not accept Irish ratings and create his own.

It also explains away Phils 'justification' based on historical results that he suffers from no bias against the Irish.

Quite the opposite TH. Why run in a handicap off a mark you think is wrong when you can pick up prize money even if you don't win. Makes sense to me.

And I suggest O'Leary knows exactly what he is talking about. I'm fed up with the cosy, cosy incestuous way racing is run anyway. You cannot criticise trainers or jockeys on television and everything is so lovely, lovely.

I want people, especially well respected and connected people, who think the handicapper is wrong to speak up, I want similar people who think jockeys and trainers are wrong to speak up. Sometimes we need an answer instead we are treated like mushrooms and it is all swept under the carpet.

Phil Smith is like a kid anyway. He will never achieve what O'Leary has.

what spend millions on horselesh to have 17 in 30,grand handicaps hoping one wins

Is running horses in novice hurdles much of a factor these days spyker? How many do you think would rum in hurdles between now and the National if the weights came out the week of the race?

In contrast you need a high rating to get a run and it would encourage running at Cheltenham etc to get your rating up.

How daft is it that a trial is run every year at Haydock a few days after the weights come out rather than before?

Why should an odd horse like The Last Samuri be greatly  favoured like last year to the detriment of the rest?

I have never rated Phil Smith alaways thought he was a guesser and not up to the job.....Finally being exposed at long last.

with a lot of these irish horses all you can do is guess,would love to know what phil smith really thinks about irish racing

I always thought he contradicts himself to often....And then Bullsh1ts his way out of trouble.

Phil Smith may not be prefect, but I wouldn't take too much notice of Mr O'Leary. From his point of view (and to a lesser extent Rich Ricci), they have the divine right to win all of the valuable races in Ireland and as many of those in England as they want to run in. At least JP is a sportsman who accepts defeat gracefully.

The rest of the above is just OTT dramatics which suggests that you have a touch of the delusional egomaniac about you and are drunk.

I'm not a drinker dunc, just a tendency toward verbosity on occasion ! Apologies this has rankled you so, I did qualify it with "a touch" guv.

Any defense for (imo) the absurd rating of 132 Smith has allotted for said Mullins horse ?
Would be interesting to hear others opinions as its contrast to Rashaan's harsh treatment is so striking.
As already mentioned it's apparent to most that Mr Smith just made a bit of a rick ignoring the proximity of the Nash beast, which is somewhat understandable, tho I'd respect him more if he'd have accepted he'd got it wrong rather than going on the offensive trying to justify his opinion.

132 is fair enough, GB chase mark not always higher than Irish chase mark and a 5 pound rise for a 3 and a half length defeat in a big handicap isn't exactly unusual. Remember the horse already had an English rating before that race. And if they want to get into Cheltenham just run the bloody thing, if you really think he's so well handicapped off 132 it should be no problem going to England to win one and get a weight rise. Plenty of bad class 3 races. With Rashaan Smith was clear, they treat these small field conditions races as being a little falsely run so a horse that finishes close up behind is disregarded, fact is he gave 2 pounds and a beating to a horse now rated 153, and a level weights beating to a horse now rated 162. It's one thing saying 1 horse badly needed the run, quite another to say 2 horses badly needed it especially when they were right back to form within 3 weeks. Handicappers are always meant to err on the side of caution with their ratings, he does the same with all the English horses too. It's the Irish rating that's laughable.

That is typical of Smith CC. In another interview he said when a lower rated horse runs close to a highly rated horse he downgrades the race. He wants to make his mind up. The fact that a lowly rated horse gets close to a highly rated horse is not that the lowly rated horse has improved substantially it is because the highly rated horse has underperformed. Even more so if the lowly rated horse has a history to compare with. As the horse is Rashaan's race definitely had.

And that also applies if it is two highly rated horses the race should be downgraded.

I would take the decision to run Rashaan in a Grade 3 tomorrow as being a decision based on connections thinking the horse can't win in handicaps even off his Irish mark and therefore resigning themselves to pot hunting for place money instead.

Rashaan has predominately been campaigned in condition and graded hurdles. So his next entry is in line with his typical profile. Everyone in racing is aware that running in level weight races risks getting landed with an inflated handicap mark, that's exactly why the field sizes tend to be a fraction of handicap races. It's likely it was flattered to some extent, but connections accepted the risk (to the mark) of running in the race. However, it looks like he may be much more suited by the small field hurdles in any case.

My issue is that it must be very frustrating for connections, who I imagine were confident of being rated 6 or 7lbs higher, exactly because of this tendency to 'err on the side of cation'. Its all very well saying run him over in the UK, if you're so well in but they're not machines and that may not be how they wanted to campaign the beast.
The propensity from Smith to 'read between the lines' with Elliot horses like Campeador last year(correctly so as it happened)and put them on ratings miles in advance of what they've actually shown on the racecourse is so marked,  that it's odd to me that in this case he's suddenly decided to go in an entirely different direction. He's ostensibly taken one absolute stinker on its only run for Gary Moore from 127 and gone from there, ignoring all the other reams of evidence that the horse  has shown, that he's much better than that.
He's barely a year removed from performing well off 132 in Class C hcap hurdle for a trainer who has been struggling mightily for years, now having produced a career best over fences under the care of probably the best trainer around, he's sticking rigidly to that rating, the inconsistency is staggering to me.
Irish trainers would want to be Nostradamus to work out what he's going to give them !

I would say both hcappers produce plenty of 'laughable'ratings (Ballyandys 135 was pretty funny) but I at least feel I know what criteria the Irish lads are working from.

CustomCut your 3 week point is irrelevant not knowing how fit these beaten horses were. They weren't beaten far and the races they went on to win were not great races. It wasn't that long ago since Treve was beaten in the Prix Vermielle after a layoff then 3 weeks later bolted up in the Arc.

I was always under the impression that the differences between UK & Irish marks was due to a difference in handicapping theory - in Ireland they seem to try and rate the actual performance whereas there's a lot more interpretation of how easy a horse might have won in UK. 

I personally prefer the Irish method, as there's enough guesswork in working out the value of form in the first place without adding another layer of more speculative guesses.

But if I were an owner I'd probably prefer the UK method - the vast majority of owners dont have horses that run up sequences, and whacking the easy winners up loads stops them dominating the race (and markets) and actually gives more owners a chance.

I was always under the impression that the differences between UK & Irish marks was due to a difference in handicapping theory - in Ireland they seem to try and rate the actual performance whereas there's a lot more interpretation of how easy a horse might have won in UK. 

I personally prefer the Irish method, as there's enough guesswork in working out the value of form in the first place without adding another layer of more speculative guesses.

But if I were an owner I'd probably prefer the UK method - the vast majority of owners dont have horses that run up sequences, and whacking the easy winners up loads stops them dominating the race (and markets) and actually gives more owners a chance.

I was always under the impression that the differences between UK & Irish marks was due to a difference in handicapping theory - in Ireland they seem to try and rate the actual performance whereas there's a lot more interpretation of how easy a horse might have won in UK. 

I personally prefer the Irish method, as there's enough guesswork in working out the value of form in the first place without adding another layer of more speculative guesses.

But if I were an owner I'd probably prefer the UK method - the vast majority of owners dont have horses that run up sequences, and whacking the easy winners up loads stops them dominating the race (and markets) and actually gives more owners a chance.

Apols for 3x posting - slow internet

All designed to extract as much cash from the UK betting public's pockets as possible, db. Including the arbitrary framing of the GN weights.

Anyone care to put a number on Rashaan today?

Adamski 17 feb 17.24 "how daft the National weights are made a couple of days before a major National trial?

Spot on,it really beggars belief.

147 Rashaan? giving 8lb to a 147 horse and beaten just over 5L, personally wouldn't read too much into the proximity of Jezki there.

147 probably what he ran to, think he's better than that though as he's much more of a good ground horse.

Anyone want to propose 139?

^ Surely no one would propose 154?

It is only a 5yo.
As pointed out above a good ground horse,hopefully for a horse that is running on it's merits each run they can get a graded race or two,best of luck to a very small trainer with it.

Thankless task trying to rate that form. Let's put it this way, if he got 139 and ran in a competitive handicap I wouldn't be piling into him. I think he will end up with an Irish mark in the 140s now but I wouldn't be convinced he is up to it.

I wouldn't back him in a big field handicap either but that's because for me he's a small field horse.

Not sure I would back him in a small field handicap either if in was competitive and there were horses against him I felt were well in.

Feb 17, 2017 -- 6:18PM, sageform wrote:

Phil Smith may not be prefect, but I wouldn't take too much notice of Mr O'Leary. From his point of view (and to a lesser extent Rich Ricci), they have the divine right to win all of the valuable races in Ireland and as many of those in England as they want to run in. At least JP is a sportsman who accepts defeat gracefully.

Spot on sageform.  I agree with every word.