Del Mar Online Racing Community
Chat about horses, racing, and the industry.
Let's say you're trying to develop a scale which would rank one level of races versus another.
How much harder is it to go from claiming races to allowance? Twice as hard? Is there a way to measure this somehow?
I'm imagining a list, something like this
Grade 1: 500
Grade 2: 450
Grade 3: 400
Mdn Claim 100
So, in the above table, it's twice as hard to win a claiming race as it is a maiden claiming (200 vs 100). Similarly, it's twice as hard to win a grade 3 as a claiming (400 vs 200).
Maybe I'm saying that, for a horse to go straight from claiming to grade 3, he better be twice as good as the average claimer?
Is this even useful to think about?
Well, this is the dead period of the forum, so maybe this is a useful post just to keep the cobwebs away.
They do it quite successfully in Australia, where they have no claiming races at all, Australia
uses what is called the benchmark system. A board of handicappers hired I believe by the
regulatory body there handicaps and allows placing of the horses through an established benchmark system. This was created so that horses that compete all over the country there
would be able to compete fairly. So lets say a horse with a benchmark 89 in Queensland would be competitively placed if it ran in town @ Sandown in a benchmark 89.I guess it would be the equivalent of having a 10000 claimer @ Anita running for 10000 @ Mountaineer Ideally they are supposed to be the same competitively due to the same benchmark number.
http://www.horseracinginfo.com.au/betti ... -types.htm
That's really neat!
0 - 89 (Class 5 or 6 Provincial)
0 - 78 (Class 4 Provincial)
0 - 72 (Class 2 or 3 Provincial
0 - 68 (Class 1 or 2 Provincial)
0 - 62 (Weak Class 1 Provincial)
I'm guessing Weak Class 1 might be roughly equivalent to Maiden Claimer winners?
Heh...lots to think about now. Thanks!
Really don't think the kind of scale you were proposing is quite right. And also, there is such a wide range of claiming prices, claiming races can't all be grouped together.
Many services give a "par" value for each race. Pretty sure Claimboxx service does, also Beyer and probably some others. This would be the average rating for the winner of a particular class. If using Beyers, a first level alw race might have a par of 88. Second level alw maybe 92. A mdn 40 claimer (older horses) around 80 A G3 stake maybe 100. So a G3 stake wouldn't be twice as hard, or 1.14 times as hard as a first level alw, but say would average 12 Beyer points higher. I think one length is about 2 Beyer points, so if these figures are roughly correct (I don't know, am just estimating from experience) a G3 winner would average 6 lengths better than a first level alw winner.
Claimboxx could explain his par ratings if he has the time.
Here we go again with the horses are machines and run the exact same races each time even though they are made of
flesh and blood. Shaking my head on these ludicrous theories. My suggestion is to keep tabs on the horse's appearance
as the one with the top fig a month earlier may not be the same horse running today.
Yep, we all handicapp looking in a rear-view mirror.
its hard to win any race weather its for a $2500.00 tag at arapahoe or a g1 at saratoga. thats why i get a kick out of all the people who act as if races are fixed all the time.
No one said "all the time" but just a "majority of the time."
Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea.
Avatar: My cuzin Isaac Murphy - a jock I'm tying to emulate in character and winning percentage - almost 47% lifetime.
I actually didn't think about Beyer par numbers! That's probably a good way to go...if I can find them...without paying an arm and a leg.
Actually, I've evolved (degenerated? ) into an almost pure trip handicapper over the past couple of years. I pretty much don't care about time any more. What I spend 90% of my time looking at is who did you beat and who could have beaten you with a better trip.
In my fevered mind, I'm imagining that I can put together a ranking of all the horses that have run in CA. figuratively, list them out in order of who's better. So, for example, it would probably have Game on Dude as #1 and go all the way down to a maiden claimer who's been beaten by 20 lengths in 10 races.
As part of making this list, I want to track how "hard" each race was. So, if you have a $50k Claiming race where the top three horses come back to all win a $70k Allowance, then that $50k Claimer is probably "harder" than your average $50k Claimer.
So, I'm trying to see exactly how much harder it is to win an ALW vs CLM.
And, yes, I do have too much time on my hands...thanks for thinking of me...
For allowance races use whatever the optional claiming price is, you will be surprised how accurate those claiming prices are with the level of quality in the allowance level. In socal its 40k for a non state bred 1x allowance race while the same condition at Monmouth Park the optional claiming price is 22k.
Wide open stakes races will almost always be more difficult than most nw 1x 2x 3x allowance races, but trying to gauge exactly how much difference it is would be extremely difficult. For example Beholder(multiple grade 1 winner of $1.8 million) ran a week ago in a non graded 100k stakes race and she ran like a grade 1 winner.
Pars for each level will be your best bet, building a solid set of pars will lead you in the right direction for each level IMO.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests