if we are to take these ideas to their ultimate conclusion - i.e. weight is essentially irrelevent, class is irrelevent and we should largely consider the strength of the field then I believe we would find that even that is a very difficult thing to accurately detail.
Perhaps such assessment would be, or should be, most accurate in those more isolated areas where the horses are running at the same track each week, under the same conditions, and against each other. Like at Rockhampton or Port Lincoln etc..

The other obvious factor that renders all other factors irrelevent is a horse with exceptional results, but there arent too many of them around.

It is an interesting topic though - and is consistent with my belief that you should seriously head in the opposite direction to that which excites the general racing public.

finally, I personally find the class system used for horse racing very baffling and inconsistent.

The answer would obviously be to award points to every runner in every race to build your own class system - but that would be a hell of a job.
Even if you set out to try to create such a system for one track where the runners met regularly I think it would be hell to devise - perhaps it would be an interesting excercise to embark on collectively.
Pick one track, with races once a week or once a fortnight where the runners are usually the same and try to build a classification system that pinpoints the better horses accurately.

any takers????

see ya
Every Topic