Its The Handicappers Fault

Might have won 17 grade ones Hurricane Fly but virtually all his victims were pretty mediocre in the grand scheme of things, struggled to beat Peddlers Cross who hasn't done a tap since, well beaten by Rock on Ruby and Overturn on genuine good ground, struggled to beat Rock on Ruby last year on what was fairly soft ground.

Istabraq would've made absolute mince meat of the above opposition and the consistent but ultimately ordinary Thousand Stars who has been Hurricane Fly's bridesmaid in Ireland when he was picking up many a penalty kick grade one in an uncompetitive field that exaggerates your real standing.

Having said that wildman I totally agree with what you've said about the handicapper, to simplify it in one word "lasy".

lazy

The handicapping of City Slicker is rather interesting.On the basis of his first three runs in maidens he was allocated 119.However in each of these runs he pulled very hard and as they were on heavy ground he emptied quickly.However in his last run on better ground he produged a better performance settling better and beating a decent enough maiden field easily.Quite why the handicapper left him on 119 is beyond me.

Agree with ye,surprising he was left alone after that albeit a maiden,always well thought of,just seemed to need better ground.

Yeah The Fly just beat what he had to on the day and I agree they were not as you may call top Grade 1 hurdlers, considering the unfortunate Darlan didn`t make it there.
I feel the Mullins camp have another Champ in their Camp. Un De Sceaux he was my favourite novice of last season by a long way. Hopefully things are o.k he did miss a bit of work, because in my opinion he could have it all and 25/1 could look nice come March.

Interesting that Alan Sweetman comments on this in today's Post...I wonder if he was reading this thread and got the idea??

what was sweetmans take on it tolmi ?

I think the fairest way of putting it would be that he concurred with most of what was said on here!!

To be fair to me, I gave a very specific if slightly unusual line of reasoning to explain why I both tipped (Racing Post Spotlight) and backed City Slicker.

As I said in the piece I'm not looking for a prize for tipping a 7/4 favourite, but to say I "got the idea" from Betfair forum would not be accurate

What I would say is that having seen the reference here it did encourage me to go into print with it, because it was clear this was a fairly general view.

to be fair.......only the numpties on here of which there are quite a few.......could think that a respected journalist would have gone to print......because of some posting by wildmanfromborneo......
Mr Sweetnam or anybody else for that matter.....were wise enough not to go with his Mullins and Meade theory......yes the one where Willie Mullins leaves Noel Meade win races.......the first journalist that goes with that one will find himself.......firstly out of a job.......and secondly inside in a padded cell......

All the same Wildman highlighted a very pertinent question(why did the rating stay the same when the horse achieved more) on the day of the race,credit to hin there.

The Wildman highlights a lot of stuff pa........not sure too much of it qualifies for the racing post.......more like the 4 courts.....most of it.......

Besides the point really as its off topic but personally think he is very clued in regard his racing and going ons within.
Back to the subject, have a look at City Slickers Punchestown maiden win, it was fairly facile despite a mistake at the last.

My apologies if I gave the wrong idea in my post.I was only referring to you giving it a mention in your column and wondering if it triggered something in your head that might have lain dormant otherwise.Obviously you had spotted the leniency and put your thoughts in print prior to the race.

If I implied in some way that you were trawling the forum looking for ideas to put in print I'm sorry.

The english handicappers have their moments too -  Quick Jack bt Deep Trouble last friday at Cheltenham by a comfortable 2 and a quarter lengths but under the revised handicap marks would be a pound better off with the runner up .

The English Handicapper has Roi Du Mee on or168 after Down Royal despite
the race falling apart.

Willie Mullins played an amazing hand of poker before the Morgiana Hurdle using the entry system

leaving asid

leaving aside individual errors surely it time for the handicapper to ignore grade 1 and 2 form for rating purposes when assesing horses with a mark.
A lot of these races can be small fields ,falsely run affairs and stepping stones for class beasts who might not be 100% tuned so a genuine 130 rated horse could run close to a 160 rated one without meaning it had improved 20 lbs.

If any trainer worth his salt had one improved that much he would be taking a handicap to maximize the potential betting oppertunity.

Ignoring grade 1 and 2 form would encourage better fields , give truer run races and give smaller trainers a chance to pick up valuable place money with the outside chance of an upset through fallers always a possability.

Tolmi, only just looking in again now, apology accepted unreservedly. I'm sorry too for taking you up wrong and for being over-sensitive, not a good quality in a journalist lucky enough to have an opinion column!

Will the handicapper be fooled by the performance of Formidableopponent in the Gowran 3.05 race,more than likely but those who actually watched the race won't.

Agree

I know hindsight is  great but in light of his performance in the Troytown yesterday, was the handicapper very lenient on Cootamundra? In his two previous runs , over inadequate trips, he ran 2nd in a G3 novice chase followed by a 4th of 4 in another decent novice chase, not beaten far (7 and a half lengths). He got dropped 10lb for those two runs. Sometimes explanations are needed to justify these sort of calculations. He is not very consistant.
By the way, delighted for the connections of the winner.

Racing is very much a game of opinions. If you feel that the handicapper has made a mistake then its your judgement again his. If you're correct there's no reason why you cannot profit from this.

A recent quote (23/10/13) from Eddie Lynam comes to mind...

"The Eddie Lynam-trained three-year-old scored over six furlongs on fast ground here in June but he coped equally well with contrasting ground conditions this time over the minimum trip.
Leigh Roche elected to challenge widest of all on the 8/1 chance (from 10’s), and he struck the front in the final 50 yards to beat City Of Culture (12/1) by half a length.
Jumbo Steps (7/1 to 9/2 favourite) was strongly supported in the market, and held every chance another three quarters of a length adrift in third.
Lynam said, “He likes it here and he’s in the sales tomorrow. He’s a grand little horse who has won on fast and soft ground, and is very tough. The handicapper gave him a fair hike when he won before but as usual he was right.”

I think you are missing the point.

The Wildman is saying "don't run in graded races you'll be hammered by the lazy handicapper".
You seem to be suggesting that the handicapper hasn't paid enough attention to the quality of the two races in which Cootamundra ran this year.
My point is that you make up your own mind and back your judgement accordingly. That's punting!

It has nothing to do with punting, you are still missing the point. How did the handicapper come to his decision, that's what I am questioning.

Perhaps he had taken into account that at the age of 10 and after 10 previous attempts over fences Cootamundra had yet to win a chase. Perhaps he had looked at his highest rating over hurdles (129) and decided that a chase rating of 137 might have been a bit high.
Perhaps he had looked at the horse's style of running which indicated that although he can travel well in his races he doesn't find that much off the bridle.
I can only guess...
BTW I thought that horse got a perfect ride yesterday and like you I was delighted that it won.

Will everybody be up in arms tomorrow should Alpha & Omega hack up off 47 on the flat in DD? Or will there be silence should the horse flop? Well handicapped beforehand/pig afterwards.....

hardly the best example you could select PH to prove or disprove this thread's theory-a thrice placed nineteen-time losing flat maiden who's worn all the headgear ? You can hardly say on more recent past flat runs he's well-handicapped?

horse may have turned the corner based on hurdle form and they've gone for Hoban to ride who was 2nd on him off 55 in July '11-he was also 2nd of 61 at leopardstown.

forecast 2/1 doesn't leave much margin for error tho'

I find it funny when lads complain about a horse being well handicapped after they have bolted up. If they are so well handicapped, why not lump on and say nothing. How many horses are poorly handicapped and never win a race. Never a mention of that here. Was King of Brega well handicapped before he went & won pulling a cart(both days) and yet no mention of the handicapper being lazy & letting the horse in light. If a well handicapped horse can be found then fair play, back it as necessary, but highlighting it after the event appears as sour grapes to me. Every horse is well handicapped after it wins!

The main point made my the opening poster is lazy handicapping is killing any chance of competitive novice chase/hurdle race s at this time of year in NH racing and leading to a monopoly of these races my the big owners/trainers. This is especially obvious this season with small field graded races and novice races with long odds on favs . Just look at the last few Sundays . Odds on shots galore from the big crews. Other trainers afraid to get next or near them in case it damages their horses prospects long term.
I go racing most Sundays and as a fairly small punter dont like to bet short prices. I can definitely say the flat season presented me with more opportunities than the first couple of weeks of this NH season. The dynamics of the NH were the small man had the chance to operate at the top level is changing.

fair point. i'm more interested in knowing who the masters of the art are and John Joe Walsh's Clonmel winner 26 days ago is as good as it gets.

Just a bump for this thread, think Pull Hard and Royal Academy are both right in a civilised difference of opinion.