I have been thinking that by concentrating on factors that the handicapper doesn't factor into his calculations when setting weights, a new angle might deliver some value horses. My own method of handicapping often throws up TAB no. 1 horse, which means I agree with the handicapper.....its when it throws up a number greater than 5 (or at least a horse near the limit) that I get interested. Does the handicapper take into account Jockey, trainer, days since last run etc?

None of the above

__________________
Jose'.

Neither does he have any say in set weights or WFA races either but you can also add track conditions, running style and pace to the list as well.

Recent form and days since last run.

__________________
RaceCensus - powerful system testing software.
Now with over 419,000 Metropolitan, Provincial and Country races!
http://www.propun.com.au/horse_raci...ng_systems.html
*RaceCensus now updated to 31/05/2025
Video overview of RaceCensus here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W821YP_b0Pg

Maybe I should have just asked how the handicapper does his ratings. From your replies I gather that he rates the horses purely on past performance but not recent(last few weeks maybe?) form? If that is his brief does it really stick to it? A friend of mine invited me to the members at Caulfield once and I found myself not three empty seats from the handicapper, should have asked him then......but then again, I'm sure its Not The Done Thing.

That's not quite correct about recent form. The handicapper certainly takes that into account. If the horse won or placed it would receive a penalty and if it failed it could even drop down in the weights. The penalites are explained on the Racing Victoria web site at:

http://www.racingvictoria.net.au/

In part, the handicapping policy reads

"In normal circumstances expect the winner to be elevated by 1½ to 2½kg and in terms of the beaten margins the second horse may go up 1kg, the third horse increased by ½kg whilst 4th and 5th horses may remain unchanged. All other runners may incur a weight decrease."

I think the main factor the handicapper doesn't use is luck in running, if a horse gets trapped three wide without cover, and boxes on gamely, or gets trapped for a runs but flies home and just misses out.

Thanks for the link La Mer, I think I found the reason why I do better mid week and better in Qld than Vic.: Qld and mid week races have a narrower spread of weights than Vic and Saturday races. Also interesting that in Vic (don't know about other states) they allot the top weight first and work their way down and therefore (by their own admission) there will be a group of horses at the limit which will be disadvantaged by the weight scale. Perhaps this is why topweights do well i.e. they are carrying an appropiate weight while those on the limit should be carrying less a lot of the time.

Mr Ed, you raise a valid point but personally I've never been one to back a horse after an unlucky run because I figure maybe that was their big chance this preparation and they blew it. Being hard ridden out wide or whatever must take its toll as well. Do many out there do well out of their "black book"?
Just because the Jock stuffed up last time doesn't mean they'll get it right next time!

Dirk, no different to a horse who has been ridden out fully to win a race, but many people will back it next start even though it is either up in class or weight or both. I am a firm believer that horses are of the most part a consistent animal, i base my selections predicting either an improved showing due to fitness or an equal performance of their last start. I don't subscribe much to over the top or past its peak until i witness it in a race, i don't try predicting it. As for having a hard run, it is not always the case many horses finish full of running because they haven't been given the chance to fully extend, and alot of the time if a horse has had a tough trip and no chance the jockey nurses the horse to the line. Just because its losing margin may be increased a good form student should be able to identify where the horse could have or would have finshed with a decent run. Anyway enough of these coulda, shoulda, wouldas i'm off to bed.


Good night, Ed