OZmium Sports Betting and Horse Racing Forums - Evolution of race handicapping

Quote:

Originally Posted by xanadu

As a young pup, I studied and adopted the expert methods of Clif Carey in relation to my introduction to race/weight-handicapping. One of the methods outlined by this master form student with some help from his "off-sider," "Phar-Lap", was the relative differential between particular horses. Using the acknowledged ratio of 3lbs(1.5kg)=1 length , these principles stood the test of time until the more recent era. No, longer can you say that a rise in weight will necessarily adversely affect a horse's anticipated performance by a uniform degree. What I mean is that in a previous race , Horse A carrying 55kg may have beaten Horse B by one length(1.5kg). Next race, they meet again with Horse A raising in weight by .5kg and Horse B lowering in weight by 1.5kg. You would expect that Horse B should win their next meeting but how often does Horse A win again or beat it's rival in finishing order? Has racing changed that much?.
Then in the 80's along came the inimtable Don Scott with his revolutionary "new fangled ratings method."
Again, my methods were refined and today I mainly restrict my investments to opportunities which offer a percentage advantage, whether they are by way of dutch-book, exotics or strategic place betting.
It seems that racing may have turned full circle and the way of the future may once again be the evaluation of a particular horse's anticipated performance in relation to other particular horses.
I'd like to get opinions from a cross-section of forum contributors whether racing has changed so dramatically in such a short space of time.

Cheers.

Dear Xanadu,

I came by your comments by way of searching for factual and interesting articles on Sectional Times.

I agree with your comments to such a degree that I just had to throw in my two bob's worth.

My introduction to handicapping came via one of Don Scott's books and at the time I spent many hours trying to make it all work, but had a family to feed and had to face reality.

In the last two years I have once again gone down the handicapping road but this time tried to broaden my view and I must report that I am having remarkable success.

While Class and Weight handicapping a la Don Scott & Rem Plante remain a cornerstone of my approach I allocate only about 30% importance to it...

Another 30% comes from picking the right races and refining my approach down to just a few races each Saturday... I concentrate only on Sydney Metro so you see the action doesn't stress me out. I believe another 15% or more could be gained by successfully applying a sound Sectional Time method, which is what I'm researching now.

90% of all the punters I know would never put in as many hours doing the assessments that I do, so I guess much of my success is due to the willingness to do the hard yards....

I believe handicapping is not the be all and end all of selecting winners but a significant tool in the process.... Together with a the simplest of class calculations (divide the Earnings by the runs) and when the two agree, I get very interested. Add fitness and all the other variables and you can get some remarkable results.

I am of the firm belief that those using "mechanical" systems based on statistics will never succeed long term as racing is continually evolving and so the stats must also evolve.... Judgment and a feel for current influencing factors are the way to go, but must also evolve. Rem's and Don's hard and fast Class rating figures need to be revised every 3 months or so because racing is continually changing. Since the books were written many changes have taken place.... Minimum weights changed from 48kg (45kg in Rems day) to 53kg...

There's nothing more constant than change....

Kind regards

OzPunter