No wonder racings stuffed

[von Smallhaussen 3,226]

Winter cup at Riccarton tomorrow

Haylee Maree 5 wins and $84,000 won

Miss Three Stars 11 wins and $303,000 won

both get the same weight!

[Shad 1,554]

The numbers don't lie, even the 75s and 65s you get 4 to 6 win horses carrying less than some 2 or 3 win horses, especially if they are mares. Very hard to understand.

[Phantom 494]

What about Platinum Command??? Second in the race last year carrying 53kg, has not won a single race since nor filled a place since September last year but is up 3.5kg!!

[mainbrace 12]

The rating system is a shambles.

Judging the end of season rating system, there seems to be many indescrepencies, especially the open class and age goup catagories.

The review of nearly 4800 horses performances rated over 46, indicate a worrying sign of inconsistencies by the NZTR handicappers.

Firstly, the open class (100+) has only 16 horses in the classification. Very worrying.

The NZTR handicappers seem to drop points too quickly. Especially from horses that run un-suitable distances, shows that they dont take this into consideration.
eg. Miss Three Stars lost 2 points running midfield in the NZ Cup (3200m) when second topweight.

Another annoyance is the handicappers not re-rating horses straight after races, especially Group races.

Three-year-old's Gingernuts and Jon Snow seem far too highly rated at 105 and 104 and NZ and ATC Oaks winner Bonneval is the next three year old at 100.

These three were rated after returning from Australia, so we dont know how the NZTR handicappers rated their domestic Group wins individually.

Saracino is another example of this. In his last start in NZ, Saracino won the Group Two Wellington Guineas back in March, but the NZTR handicappers haven't rated his Guineas win; and remains on 92. He raced once in Randwick after his Trentham win.

While there is no disagreement that Bonneval was last season's top three-year-old filly, being rated 100 does seem abit high in comparison to other fillies of her year. Her stablemate Nicolleta, rated as low as 73 - 13.5kgs inferior. Nicolleta beat Bonneval (3rd) in a Group 3 at Hastings, then Bonneval got the better at their next start by a head. Bonneval then beat Nicolleta by 2.5 lengths in the NZ Oaks (then won the ATC Oaks), but does this equate to a 13.5kg?

Again, we dont know how many points Bonneval got from winning the NZ Oaks, she was re-rated after she returned from Australia.

2000 Guineas winner Ugo Foscolo is another that wasn't re-rated after his feature win at Riccarton.

There are far too many other indescrepencies to mention.

[Turny 1,224]

And Miss 3 Stars is absolutely thrown into the WC tomorrow - she is a moral

[Midget 4,489]

Denis Quirke thinks the ratings system is just fine ........ get on .....

[berzerk 107]

You win you go up, you lose you go down. Anomalies will always exist. Miss Three Stars managed only 1 3rd placing between August 2016 and May 2017, 10 months, and 11 starts.

Platinum Command - Last year top rated horse in Winter Cup was 101, this year 94.

Ratings clearly extends the competitive life of a racehorse.

I would like to see it even more liquid, and horses dropping more quickly. For example Il Cavallo today - away from track for nearly two years and completely uncompetitive finishing 2nd last, as it had done in previous start. Imagine the costs involved? Why not drop it 4 points, back to 85, and a chance of being competitive, and thus attracting turnover? Instead goes around today as rank outsider in an Open sprint.

Of note, Racing Australia ratings = Gingernuts 106, Jon Snow 107, Bonneval 107

 

 

[Racing101 12]

20 hours ago, mainbrace said:

The rating system is a shambles.

Judging the end of season rating system, there seems to be many indescrepencies, especially the open class and age goup catagories.

The review of nearly 4800 horses performances rated over 46, indicate a worrying sign of inconsistencies by the NZTR handicappers.

Firstly, the open class (100+) has only 16 horses in the classification. Very worrying.

The NZTR handicappers seem to drop points too quickly. Especially from horses that run un-suitable distances, shows that they dont take this into consideration.
eg. Miss Three Stars lost 2 points running midfield in the NZ Cup (3200m) when second topweight.

Another annoyance is the handicappers not re-rating horses straight after races, especially Group races.

Three-year-old's Gingernuts and Jon Snow seem far too highly rated at 105 and 104 and NZ and ATC Oaks winner Bonneval is the next three year old at 100.

These three were rated after returning from Australia, so we dont know how the NZTR handicappers rated their domestic Group wins individually.

Saracino is another example of this. In his last start in NZ, Saracino won the Group Two Wellington Guineas back in March, but the NZTR handicappers haven't rated his Guineas win; and remains on 92. He raced once in Randwick after his Trentham win.

While there is no disagreement that Bonneval was last season's top three-year-old filly, being rated 100 does seem abit high in comparison to other fillies of her year. Her stablemate Nicolleta, rated as low as 73 - 13.5kgs inferior. Nicolleta beat Bonneval (3rd) in a Group 3 at Hastings, then Bonneval got the better at their next start by a head. Bonneval then beat Nicolleta by 2.5 lengths in the NZ Oaks (then won the ATC Oaks), but does this equate to a 13.5kg?

Again, we dont know how many points Bonneval got from winning the NZ Oaks, she was re-rated after she returned from Australia.

2000 Guineas winner Ugo Foscolo is another that wasn't re-rated after his feature win at Riccarton.

There are far too many other indescrepencies to mention.

Firstly where the fuck have you been all year?!?!

Mainbrace, your racing knowledge is very limited because a lot of what you have said is clearly wrong. Before you offer an opinion, you should really double check your facts first. 

Saracino - It might of slipped your mind that at the start of his 3 year old season he won a group 2 up the straight at Flemington, before that race he was rated 78 after Australia rated him 95. He was also close up in multiple group races at his next two starts. Oh and before the Wellington Guineas he placed 3rd in the NRM sprint which is also a group 1 beating the likes of Kawi (MULTIPLE GROUP 1 WINNER) Signify (GROUP 1 WINNER) Perfect Fit (GROUP 1 WINNER AND MULTIPLE GROUP 1 PLACED). These results clearly don't mean anything 

Now onto Bonneval - The only time Bonneval was beaten by Nicoletta was over 1600m in the Desert Gold at Wellington NOT Hawkes Bay. Since then, when the two horses have raced Nicoletta has been beaten all three times and the last time was in the Oaks which is a group 1 and the Bonneval went on to win the ATC Oaks which is also a group 1. So yes, two Group 1 wins plus a group 2 and a Group 3 would equal the rating difference.

Also your logic behind Ugo Foscolo is mind blowingly shocking. Behind him in the Guineas was Savile Row (Group 1 placed against older horses) Hall Of fame (Group 1 winner) John Snow (who is also group 2 winner in Australia and also a Group 1 winner in Australia and Group placed in NZ) Heroic Valour (Group 1 winner in NZ and Group placed in NZ and Australia). So again, he doesn't deserve his rating at all.

 

 

 

 

[edor 67]

berkers i am sure ill cavallo ran 2nd today what channel were you on 

[barryb 2,064]

4 minutes ago, edor said:

berkers i am sure ill cavallo ran 2nd today what channel were you on 

Yes, I was there and it ran a super race behind one of the best seen fillies/mares seen in a fair while.

[mainbrace 12]

2 hours ago, Racing101 said:

Firstly where the fuck have you been all year?!?!

Mainbrace, your racing knowledge is very limited because a lot of what you have said is clearly wrong. Before you offer an opinion, you should really double check your facts first. 

Saracino - It might of slipped your mind that at the start of his 3 year old season he won a group 2 up the straight at Flemington, before that race he was rated 78 after Australia rated him 95. He was also close up in multiple group races at his next two starts. Oh and before the Wellington Guineas he placed 3rd in the NRM sprint which is also a group 1 beating the likes of Kawi (MULTIPLE GROUP 1 WINNER) Signify (GROUP 1 WINNER) Perfect Fit (GROUP 1 WINNER AND MULTIPLE GROUP 1 PLACED). These results clearly don't mean anything 

Now onto Bonneval - The only time Bonneval was beaten by Nicoletta was over 1600m in the Desert Gold at Wellington NOT Hawkes Bay. Since then, when the two horses have raced Nicoletta has been beaten all three times and the last time was in the Oaks which is a group 1 and the Bonneval went on to win the ATC Oaks which is also a group 1. So yes, two Group 1 wins plus a group 2 and a Group 3 would equal the rating difference.

Also your logic behind Ugo Foscolo is mind blowingly shocking. Behind him in the Guineas was Savile Row (Group 1 placed against older horses) Hall Of fame (Group 1 winner) John Snow (who is also group 2 winner in Australia and also a Group 1 winner in Australia and Group placed in NZ) Heroic Valour (Group 1 winner in NZ and Group placed in NZ and Australia). So again, he doesn't deserve his rating at all.

 

 

 

 

Racing101, I think youve missed my point.

I reckon Saracino is under rated  by the handicappers at 92, like you (I think).  By winning three Group Twos (1 in Australia) and beaten small margin in NRM Sprint.
He should be closer to 100. 
Im saying he wasn't re-rated by the NZTR handicappers after his Wellington Guineas win. He got NO points winning the Group Two Wellington Guineas!!
Remained on 92. How does that happen?

Same for Ugo Foscolo. He has got NO points after winning the 2000 Guineas.  Stayed on 78  points after winning a Group One. How??
Regardless of his sale. NZTR handicapper are obliged give rating points to the winner  - especially in Group races.

In regards to Bonneval. If she was to meet Jon Snow and Gingernuts at WFA, she would be 2kgs less than them. However on the ratings, that have been given by the NZTR handicappers she would get 4.5kgs less than Ginergnuts and 4kg less than Jon Snow.

Do you think this is fair?

No way is it right that there is 13.5kgs between Bonneval and Nicolleta. Nicolleta beat her once (G3) on level weights, just beaten by Bonneval by a head and less than 4 lengths from Bonneval in the Oaks - that does not equate to 13.5kgs difference. If it does - God help us if you were the handicapper.

Even Vople Veloce was under rated by the handicapper at 88, and so she proved today. She won 7 from 8 last season. She won a Group 2, a Group 3 and 2 Listed and could have run in Rating 85 race with 59.5kgs. What a joke that is after what she'd done.

Last seasons 3yo's are very poorly rated. They are all over the place, like the past few years.
Remember Turn Me Loose (NZTR changed his rating to get into the Group One field at HB - what does that show you),

 

[Midget 4,489]

It shows you that Murray Baker is the handicapper because this has been going on for years, back to the days of Twlight Savings who mysteriously got re-rated ten points so she could make the Telegraph field in 2011, without even running in a race, then had the ten points removed straight after the race.

Not that Baker should be blamed, he's only exploiting the system, and taking advantage of the likes of George Strickland.

The presence of Strickland, Quirke and co just shows that NZTR doesn't think handicapping is important, and that in turn is the reason why they forced our last decent handicapper Dean Knowell out of his job.

NZTR should just acknowledge that Murray Baker is the official handicapper, Michael Pitman is his assistant, and George Strickland can be the tea boy.

[gubellini 3,995]

Dean Nowell went on to a very successful stint as the Chief Handicapper in Korea. Another example of kiwi racing personnel not being recognised sufficiently in N.Z. and having to showcase their skills offshore.

[puha 2,177]

Mr Pittman picked the winner of the Winter Cup on radio yesterday but not sure of the reasoning. Reckoned Nashville was thrown in at the weights . Topweight carrying 60 kg? 

[Midget 4,489]

Pitty is an expert in the field and if he ever retires he'd make a great handicapper because he understands how to rate a horse to give its career longevity, especially old geldings.

Given that every time a horse runs it earn the industry about $14,000 in revenue it's critical we keep them racing as long as reasonably possible, yet the fxxxing idiots at NZTR have been busy driving aged geldings out of the game for the last six years, and they're costing the industry millions as a result.

 

[uneasy 497]

Thanks Leo, always respect your opinion, may not always agree but on this occasion I have to

[shaneMcAlister 1,425]

Today without racing, nicoletta has gone up 3 points. Now on 76.
Is this allowed?

I am guessing gNZTR handicappers spend more time reading these forums then Leo :-)

Ps. Her rating is still below what she should be.

[shaneMcAlister 1,425]

4 minutes ago, shaneMcAlister said:

Today without racing, nicoletta has gone up 3 points. Now on 76.
Is this allowed?

I am guessing gNZTR handicappers spend more time reading these forums then Leo :-)

Ps. Her rating is still below what she should be.

Devise drops 2 today without racing. 

I suppose we should expect this if nzta re hire an ex employee on larger consulting pay after he was caught playing with the handicaps to improve his punting chances. 

[Midget 4,489]

2 hours ago, uneasy said:

Thanks Leo, always respect your opinion, may not always agree but on this occasion I have to

Thanks Pitty, good luck over the carnival.

 

[We're Doomed 4,855]

18 minutes ago, Midget said:

Thanks Pitty, good luck over the carnival.

 

Bloody lucky he's there. He seems to be just about the only Riccarton trainer with any horses racing over the carnival.

[rumpole 483]

19 hours ago, shaneMcAlister said:

Devise drops 2 today without racing. 

I suppose we should expect this if nzta re hire an ex employee on larger consulting pay after he was caught playing with the handicaps to improve his punting chances. 

Your post contains lies and serious mis statements...... you are exposing yourself to legal action

learn the truth  it helps .......  the ex employee did not play with the handicaps to improve his punting chances ..... this was established beyond doubt so apologise or face the consequences

[Midget 4,489]

1 hour ago, rumpole said:

Your post contains lies and serious mis statements...... you are exposing yourself to legal action

learn the truth  it helps .......  the ex employee did not play with the handicaps to improve his punting chances ..... this was established beyond doubt so apologise or face the consequences

He had knowledge at his disposal that you can reasonably presume he used to enhance his chances of winning you stupid old fool, and what's more I have the evidence here of when he was punting, what time, on what races exactly, even the grade of races he seems to have a penchant for, and how much money he made.

As always I'm happy to post the details, including his history of gambling and the knowledge the RIU had of his historical activities before he was employed, and the warnings he was given.

The fact he's re-employed at the NZRB is arguably the single biggest indictment of how head office hypocritically ignores breaches of rules and corruption at one level, but relentlessly attacks licencees and drives them from the game for less significant indiscretions.

 

[shaneMcAlister 1,425]

2 hours ago, rumpole said:

Your post contains lies and serious mis statements...... you are exposing yourself to legal action

learn the truth  it helps .......  the ex employee did not play with the handicaps to improve his punting chances ..... this was established beyond doubt so apologise or face the consequences

I only got my information from here, so I maybe misread what stuff tried to project.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/racing/76604529/horseracing-handicap-chiefs-three-bad-days-caused-unprecedented-local-scandal

Maybe it is incorrect to say playing with handicaps (for that I apologise, but it is hard to imagine a punting handicapper not).  However a punting handicapper being reemployed by the NZTA is beyond beggars belief.  I personally can't believe how they get caught punting when there is so many avenues to get your money on. 

[rumpole 483]

52 minutes ago, Midget said:

He had knowledge at his disposal that you can reasonably presume he used to enhance his chances of winning you stupid old fool, and what's more I have the evidence here of when he was punting, what time, on what races exactly, even the grade of races he seems to have a penchant for, and how much money he made.

As always I'm happy to post the details, including his history of gambling and the knowledge the RIU had of his historical activities before he was employed, and the warnings he was given.

The fact he's re-employed at the NZRB is arguably the single biggest indictment of how head office hypocritically ignores breaches of rules and corruption at one level, but relentlessly attacks licencees and drives them from the game for less significant indiscretions.

 

Thank you for calling me a silly old fool..as if I didnt know  You have told me that so many times