TOM(the other Molloy) 1,774 Report post Posted December 6, 2017 The winner of the 1000 Guineas goes up 17 rating points the third horse 14 points and the fourth horse 11 points. The second horse stays on the same rating. ?? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue 1,084 Report post Posted December 6, 2017 We already know there's no consistency. It's called the luck of the draw. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trump 2,741 Report post Posted December 6, 2017 20 minutes ago, TOM(the other Molloy) said: The winner of the 1000 Guineas goes up 17 rating points the third horse 14 points and the fourth horse 11 points. The second horse stays on the same rating. ?? Who ran 2nd? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insider 3,880 Report post Posted December 6, 2017 8 minutes ago, Trump said: Who ran 2nd? I was going to tell you to look it up, but instead here it is: Dijon Bleu. Tom, it’s simple really. Each horse is re-rated (after the event) to what the handicapper thinks is a fair rating. Dijon Blenheim was already highly rated because of her excellent record in the NI. Because those around her (in the finish) ran well above where they were previously rated they all had to move up accordingly. Tom, I like you, but that was one of the more silly questions asked, as was some of the responses to you, or at least their comments. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
N1MUE 1,877 Report post Posted December 6, 2017 Winner (by 4 lengths) is now on 88 points, runner-up on 80 points, 3rd horse on 77 points and 4th horse on 74 points Seems about right based on the way that race played out. Black Kirrama 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOM(the other Molloy) 1,774 Report post Posted December 6, 2017 18 minutes ago, Trump said: Who ran 2nd? Dijon Bleu. I guess the response could be that she was already highly rated so the big jumps for the others bring them relativity in a theoretical handicap but Prom Queen only dropped one so not sure I could accept that Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOM(the other Molloy) 1,774 Report post Posted December 6, 2017 4 minutes ago, Insider said: I was going to tell you to look it up, but instead here it is: Dijon Bleu. Tom, it’s simple really. Each horse is re-rated (after the event) to what the handicapper thinks is a fair rating. Dijon Blenheim was already highly rated because of her excellent record in the NI. Because those around her (in the finish) ran well above where they were previously rated they all had to move up accordingly. Tom, I like you, but that was one of the more silly questions asked, as was some of the responses to you, or at least their comments. Well Insider why does Prom Queen not drop massively since she was clearly 'outclassed'? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOM(the other Molloy) 1,774 Report post Posted December 6, 2017 3 minutes ago, N1MUE said: Winner (by 4 lengths) is now on 88 points, runner-up on 80 points, 3rd horse on 77 points and 4th horse on 74 points Seems about right based on the way that race played out. Well Prom Queen on that basis should be say 65? If you want to play the know all tell me why not? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turny 1,224 Report post Posted December 6, 2017 It is NZ racing - it is like a Lotto ticket - you win you lose - but you still have next Saturday Black Kirrama, hizzy and elbow 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patiti 274 Report post Posted December 6, 2017 Prom Queen needs to keep her high rating as she will drop back to a distance she can get. It was just the distance that found her out. richie and shaneMcAlister 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
We're Doomed 4,824 Report post Posted December 6, 2017 1 hour ago, Insider said: I was going to tell you to look it up, but instead here it is: Dijon Bleu. Tom, it’s simple really. Each horse is re-rated (after the event) to what the handicapper thinks is a fair rating. Dijon Blenheim was already highly rated because of her excellent record in the NI. Because those around her (in the finish) ran well above where they were previously rated they all had to move up accordingly. Tom, I like you, but that was one of the more silly questions asked, as was some of the responses to you, or at least their comments. Come on, I have seem many sillier comments on here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
We're Doomed 4,824 Report post Posted December 6, 2017 2 hours ago, TOM(the other Molloy) said: The winner of the 1000 Guineas goes up 17 rating points the third horse 14 points and the fourth horse 11 points. The second horse stays on the same rating. ?? Bit tough on the 4th horse who picked up miles less money than it would have got for winning a maiden race at the meeting and doesn't even have the bonus of a first three placing in a group race. Still, when you consider the highest rated horse in the 2,000 Guineas came off a win in an $11,000 race at Motukarara strange things can happen in NZ racing, and SI horses tend to be disadvantaged' picking up ratings points rather than stakes money. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOM(the other Molloy) 1,774 Report post Posted December 6, 2017 8 minutes ago, We're Doomed said: Come on, I have seem many sillier comments on here. I'm waiting for them to come back and explain why Prom Queen's rating didn't drop through the floor WD. After all they seem to think it fair that horses who ran well got hammered(with one notable exception) so why don't ones who run poorly get enormous benefit ratings wise. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
N1MUE 1,877 Report post Posted December 6, 2017 1 hour ago, TOM(the other Molloy) said: If you want to play the know all tell me why not? Always amused at how you share your opinion on here and if it's contrary to someone else's they will often take it personally and start this sort of nonsense. Mate, get over yourself - I was simply responding to your question about the first four placegetters. Handicappers are on a hiding to nothing - always someone with a contrary view. Black Kirrama and Insider 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOM(the other Molloy) 1,774 Report post Posted December 6, 2017 Just now, N1MUE said: Always amused at how you share your opinion on here and if it's contrary to someone else's they will often take it personally and start this sort of nonsense. Mate, get over yourself - I was simply responding to your question about the first four placegetters. Handicappers are on a hiding to nothing - always someone with a contrary view. Well come on explain it. You explained to us that the placegetters were re-rated to reflect their performance in that race so why were the also rans not re-rated to reflect their poor performance? I haven't taken it personally just asked a question of those who profess to know all about these things. If you are not ready for a legitimate reaction and question then don't come on here telling us how much you 'know' The reality is that in particularly the case of the third and fourth horses the re-rating is a vast over-reaction. For the same reason that Prom Queen's rating should not be dropped like a stone those two should not have their ratings massively bumped up until they show a consistent ability to meet the standard of the opposition they are facing. And given that Authentic Paddy and Mime both beat Consensus easily last start how come they are not now above her in the ratings? Using your logic they should be. Carnval ought to have sailed past Scapolo in the ratings based on the Stewards too surely? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
We're Doomed 4,824 Report post Posted December 6, 2017 It seems to be that you can go up in the ratings very swiftly based on one good performance but you can't drop so quickly based on one, or two, bad performances. TOM(the other Molloy) 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
N1MUE 1,877 Report post Posted December 6, 2017 28 minutes ago, hesi said: Must be something to do with the name Nimue A question was posed, you put forward a possible answer and get slagged off for your trouble Exactly Hesi. You express a view in a relatively benign sort of way and it's interpreted as telling how much you know. I actually know bugger all about handicapping - I'll leave that up to the handicapper and the armchair experts like Tom here, but what I believe is that a rating of 74 seems fair for The Sparkle who ran 4th in the 1000 Guineas and 4th in the listed lead up race. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOM(the other Molloy) 1,774 Report post Posted December 6, 2017 38 minutes ago, hesi said: Must be something to do with the name Nimue A question was posed, you put forward a possible answer and get slagged off for your trouble He never got slagged off. He jumped in with an explanation as to why the re rating of those horse was all legitimate then when I asked an equally legitimate question about why the reverse did not apply he went all defensive. And he has still not explained why in particular The Lustre and The Sparkle should be bumped up heavily based on one good run yet Prom Queen should not be significantly reduced for what, on the face of it, was a poor effort(I personally believe she had a lot of excuses and hoped she would win the race for Kenny but maybe the other two got perfect runs and all the breaks - I haven't studied the race and do not intend to). The second last paragraph of my previous post sums the situation up and don't I remember Berri(I think so - forgive me if I am wrong) bemoaning the quality of this years 1000 Guineas field a couple or weeks back. Even more reason not to over react to the result. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trump 2,741 Report post Posted December 6, 2017 2 hours ago, Insider said: I was going to tell you to look it up, but instead here it is: Dijon Bleu. Tom, it’s simple really. Each horse is re-rated (after the event) to what the handicapper thinks is a fair rating. Dijon Blenheim was already highly rated because of her excellent record in the NI. Because those around her (in the finish) ran well above where they were previously rated they all had to move up accordingly. Tom, I like you, but that was one of the more silly questions asked, as was some of the responses to you, or at least their comments. Then if that's you're opinion, here's a question for you. The 2nd horse gets no increase in rating but if it had "won", what rating increase (points) would it have got (in your opinion) ? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gruff 2,778 Report post Posted December 6, 2017 Insider partially answered that question trumpy,Dijon beat lower rated animals nO? Wouldn't expect to much of a change? Princess Rihanna was there maybe so Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pam Robson 1,537 Report post Posted December 6, 2017 Just ask Pitty, he can explain much more eloquently than me. He understands the ratings system well - and no, I'm not poking the borax. It works to a system, it isn't hard to understand and it baffles me how few people get it. richie and TOM(the other Molloy) 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOM(the other Molloy) 1,774 Report post Posted December 6, 2017 49 minutes ago, Pam Robson said: Just ask Pitty, he can explain much more eloquently than me. He understands the ratings system well - and no, I'm not poking the borax. It works to a system, it isn't hard to understand and it baffles me how few people get it. Thats a good point. Compare Savvy Coup who won two at the Cup Meeting and probably similar if not better money to the two Dennis Bros horses but ends up well below them in the ratings. Admittedly one of the two now has black type but Savvy Coup's rating is significantly lower. Pitty is a master at it all right. Anyway while they run in set weight three year old races I guess it is irrelevant but when they step out at four the double whammy of dealing with older horses and higher weights might well come home to roost. Bottom line is it is easy to go up the ratings and bloody hard to go back down. There is something not quite fair in that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaneMcAlister 1,420 Report post Posted December 6, 2017 I don't think Prom Queen should have dropped in her ratings. She is still an 85 horse at 1200 to 1400m. Hindsight shows her run in the Guineas mile may have been too far for her. She will go back to 1200m now. The biggest way to get a horse down the handicap in England is three runs at the wrong distance. Then rating falls, back to correct distance and boom :-) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaneMcAlister 1,420 Report post Posted December 6, 2017 38 minutes ago, poundforpound said: So if your logic is correct how and why did Son Of Maher drop four points for running last in a G1 over 2400 ?? What's the diff with Prom Queen ? Hindsight probably suggests they shouldn't have dropped him. However I think we all knew the distance of a mile was the big unknown for Prom Queen. Tony McCoy (arguably the greatest ever jockey) was asked what was the strangest thing he heard on a racecourse. He said it occurred in a 40 runner handicap at the Cheltenham festival. He asked Martin Pipe how we wanted the horse ridden, Pipe replied "Anyway you want, this horse is the biggest certainty that will ever walk out onto this racecourse'. This was still one of the biggest public gambles ever landed at a racecourse. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tauhei Notts 1,403 Report post Posted December 7, 2017 Flying Ibis was dropped one point, not three points, for that inglorious last at Cromwell. I disagree with you that Strickland is corrupt. An incompetent fcuking loser; I agree with you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...