Ummm 4 cms?

See I don't think ratings are like that. I think ratings are simple - they are an expression of how well a horse ran under the prevailing circumstances. I think the way a horse went is how it went, and there is only one answer for how a horse ran on a given day. It's like this: if I go out and run four kilometres this morning (I will be knackered) in about 25 minutes, then tomorrow run it in 24.50, I have gone ten seconds better. End of story. A horse goes out and runs one week, then runs somewhere else the following week. Either they were equal runs, or one of the two was better. I think there can only be one answer to how good or bad a run was, because there was only one run. The horse ran, express how it ran in ratings form.

So, when all is said and done:

Case A) a horse runs 6th one week beaten four lengths. The next week, same grade same weight, it wins. Initial thoughts are it went four lengths better.

Case B) a horse runs 6th one week beaten four lengths. The next week, same grade same weight, it runs second beaten five lengths. Initial thoughts are what?

Isn't it possible though, that the same horse could put in exactly the same run as in Case B and win the race? If the answer is yes (which of course it is) then how can he possibly rate any differently???? How can a horse do two runs exactly the same and get two different ratings, if ratings are an expression of how well it ran?

Duritz.