Maybe an alternative to "openers"
 

Upon reading the thread about the laying of "openers", with the various rules etc, it got me thinking. As I might have mentioned with my sectional time blackbookers, I back them providing they have started within 21 days AND are NOT going up in weight 3kgs or more.

So this made me think regarding the weight bit. I just looked at the 24 races from yesterday from sydney, melbourne and brisbane, and there was only 2 winners who went up 3kgs or more (both exactly 3kgs). One of them was having its first start in 6 months (Real Strike). I never buy a newspaper, do all my horsie stuff on the net, but just how many horses would be going up 3kgs or more on the above program..??

From the 24 races there was only 4 that had not raced within the 21 days. Which is 83%, and I believe thats pretty close to the mark, 80% I think.

There was also 9 of these 24 winners that had won their last start and if you toss in the ones that were beaten by say up to around 1 length, that brings it up to 15.

Not sure where I am heading with this, might keep looking more over the next few weeks, but the weight bit got me thinking. Does anyone know how many horses run around yesterday (3 meetings), that went up 3kgs or more..?

Paul

well paully my boy maybe you need glasses

read my posts and you will be a winner just like me

For interest sake, I just went through todays (Sunday) Cranbourne and Gosford meetings. 17 races, and 22 horses going up in weight 3kgs or more. 1 winner amongst them at around the $5 mark.

Interesting,

Paul

Just make sure your taking the 3 kg rise in weight from the "Limit weight" and include Apptcs allowances.
In my opinion 3 KG is the MAX weight rise any horse can deal with without affecting their performance.

Cheers.
darky

Trying to figure this out. The limit in the previous race is 51. The horse was carrying 51. The limit this race is 53 and the horse is carrying 53. The weight rise is zero.

Is that right?

Not sure about all that. I once bought a book written by a well known author on this subject. I wont say his name as I am not sure of the spelling, but I have since sold the book on ebay. Think his first name was Paul also.

It went into rise in weights over the limit etc. For my exercises I have just been looking at the actual weight increase (exc appr claims). I'll probably get howled down for this comment, but thats how I see it.

On saturday I had 8 blackbookers running around from my sectionals. 2 of them were going up in weight 3.5kgs. Lakonian (started around even money fav) and Mine In Time (also was early fav). I excluded them from my bets and they were both beaten. I've saved heaps of losing bets doing such.

(from my other 6 bets there were 2 winners, Prince Braeman $4.60 and Ortensia $2.25, so a small profit on the day).

Paul

A general well known rule of thumb in basic handicapping is to ignore horses going up more than 2kg. You'll miss a few but not many.

What you are saying would make sense only if all horses were on the same limit wgt. in their previous race, obviously that is seldom true.
The actual wgt. rise is what's important.

You could be right, however individual horses handle wgt. differently. A big 600Kg gelding certainly should handle weight better than a 500Kg slightly built mare, don't you think so?

Hmmmm, maybe we should look at the underlying principles of weights and handicapping and and minimum weights to see what the starting point should be when looking at a starting point to calculate a rise in weight.



http://www.rsb.net.au/publishing/RBH/Policy.htm



Seems that all things being equal, you can't put on more than 3.5 Kg and remain in the same class. If you go up a class, you aren't going to go up 3.5 kilos even if you won last start. You have to drop a class.

Lets use Lakonian as an example, and see what the handicappers are basing their weights on:

Lakonian went up 3kg on a straight weight rise, and 2.5kg from the minimum. I'm going to use the top weight as a guide to field strength.

The top weight in the 16 May race which was won by Shocking (Lakonian 2nd) was Tindal. It was a 3YO open class. So was last saturday's race, but the field strength was way down.

Pinatas was the top weight last saturday and all it had done was win a 30k mid weeker at Sandown. Tindal has won a $151K Listed race at Flem last Oct. Tindal would have way higher class ratings and that implies that the May 16 race had a stronger field strength.

So, the class of the race is the same, but the field strength is down in last Saturday's race by evidence of the records top weights in each race.

Lakonian goes up 3.0kg on account of Tindal being replaced by a lower rated top weight in Pinatas, but stays in the same class . How unfair!!! Basically the handicappers hit Lakonian just about as hard as they could

Re performance: Lakonian gained almost 3 lengths on the leaders in the last 200, was 3 wide for most of the race and was left flat footed around the turn before taking trhem on. Basically a crumby race, all round. Had it been with the leaders and fell back a bit, I could see weight being a factor. Lakonian has won with 57. Who knows.

The winner, Rock Home Late, also went up 3 kg in almost identical circumstances. Go figure.

Was the other horse Rock Home Late?

Well thought out Brendon, and yes the other winner was Rock Home Late, up 3kgs from its previous run (beaten 3.5 lengths) 28 days prior. I'll re read your other comments tomorrow, when my head is clearer, just had a nice glass of sherry while watching a movie.

Paul

There are certain rules to handicapping for weight, but there is also subjective opinion involved that can affect the final weight given to a horse.


For those interested, here is a good article on handicapping by a professional handicapper, Mark McGrath who has been working as a member of the [Australian Jockey Club] Handicapping Panel for over 7yrs.

http://www.ausrace.com/art/handicapping.htm

I like the 3kg increase from the actual weights, or 2kg increase from the limit as the cutting off point.

When I looked closely at 4 races, I could see all kinds of variables (track cond, distance pref, etc..) sticking their beaks in and muddying the waters. But not too many won above the already discussed increase.

Lakonian had peaked against Shocking in the previous race. Three rides in a row with big class increase each time. 3kg was always going to drag it back to the field as it was difficult to see it improve on its previous race. Rock Home Late was also given 3. But there was plenty of room for improvement.

Maybe the lesson to learn is stay away (or lay) when there is a decent weight increase but with little room for improvement?

Rather that trying to work out all the ins and outs of weight penalties, I'll stick to the KISS principal with weights. If a horse goes up more than 2kg I leave it alone.

I like the old saying: 'When one tries to grasp too much [info.], it's easy to end up with nothing'.

Crash, just a simple, unrelated to racing, but very very apt example.

Test yourself everyone:

Are you a person, who will grab every item he needs for the day's work as you go out to the car in the morning and drop some of it trying to shut-open the door?

(works equally well coming back from the supermarket)
if the answer is yes, change!! because you will do it in every aspect of your life, without noticing it!

I agree with you on the 2Kg "leave alone principle", if the handicapper could allocate weights in a wider range it would be easier for us.

Good luck

The plot thickens...! Brendon I cant argue with your comments on that race won by Shocking and so forth. Trouble is I never buy a newspaper and therefore cant really go back and look at full fields on certains days. I used to religiously buy the Sportsman years ago every friday and toss it on top of all the rest, along with the sunday paper results page. Time and time again I would think of a new brainwave and out would come all the sportsmans again.

Now I just use the net. But having said that I once went through all my bets, looked at various things and the 3kgs rise was the thing that stood out. (along with the 21 days), so I just stick to that. Looking again at last saturdays 24 races, apart from the 2 winners that went up 3kgs, there was another 2 winners that went up 2kgs. All the other 20 winners went up less (or down). So I guess it is just ones comfort zone as to where the cut off point is.

Paul

Another KISS simple is defining class: Up in race prize money , up in class. Down in race prize money down in class. Like my weight rule, it's not alway accurate but mostly it is and saves a lot of effort and time.

Fully agree with 2Kg rule it's a GOLD rule and also, not greater than $30,000 increase in race prizemoney is also another GOLD rule.....there are a few others that form the basis of a lot of winners.

Apart from those 2 factors, I would think another 3 "gold" factors with a mechanical type system would be winning last start; the days since it raced; and the win/place strike rate.

Paul

Side thought, the Unitab ratings are based on weight so see if the 100 pointers go up or down by x amount of weight, could give a base figure to look at.

I like the old saying: learn and understand the game backwards. Then you will know when you can and can't break the rules.

I don't like applying the golden rule until I understand it. So, when it has a run of outs or something like that, I won't panic and discard it or jump to some new system only to find out 6 months later if I stayed with the original I would have been ahead.

Place S/R is more imortant than win, days last race is handy............ age and sex are also very important.

You ain't half wrong there Stix old chum!

I always avoid F&M races also.

Good luck

Golden Rule: Front runners rarely win the last at Caulfield. Its a swooper's paradise. The last FR I saw that won the last at Caulfield was Go Missy in Jan this year. She was the dominant runner but even then she needed stable mate Salute the Storm to sit just behind and outside wide to make it hard for anyone to go around and pinch the lead as she stacked and racked them. Lay them if they are in the last a Caulf.

"Place S/R is more imortant than win, days last race is handy....."

In relation to the Place S/R. If you were to use the top ranked place S/R in a selection/mechanical system, how many career starts would you insist on. To obviously avoid small number of starts inflating the S/R stats of course.

This question would also similarly apply to Average Prizemoney ranked stats also.

Paul