Handicapping principles
From AusRace
Contents |
Principles & Techniques of Handicapping
by Mark McGrath AusRace note: This article was written in 1996 so the various weights/margins quoted may no longer be correct, nevertheless it's very important to understand the methodology. Hi AusRacers,
The following is a two part explanation of handicapping principles and techniques that I have acquired over the last 7 years working as a member of the AJC (Australaian Jockey Club) Handicapping Panel. I have gone back to basics and written this for someone who is a racing beginner so I apologize to all those AusRacers who are accomplished form students.
HANDICAPPING PRINCIPLES
Prime Objectives & Outcomes
The object of the handicapper is to produce balanced and competitive race fields. Achieving this objective will produce two prime outcomes that assist the racing industry:
1 The potential for betting turnover growth will be maximised;
2 An environment for owners and trainers with relatively inferior racing stock to remain competitive will be created.
Both these outcomes are equally important to the well being of the racing industry; betting turnover funds the industry so punters must be presented with an attractive betting product and owners & trainers provide the product for punters to bet on so there must be an incentive to keep these players in the game.
Historical Background
The practice of handicapping evolved from the dissatisfaction of the racing public with the set weights based racing that dominated in the 19th century. Back in the first half of the 19th century, weight for age based racing almost exclusively made up the racing calendar in both the UK and Australia.
But as racing become more accessible to the punting masses thereby grew the demand for more interesting and evenly balanced contests. One way to achieve this was to allot racing weights according to the merit of past performances rather than just the age and sex of each individual competitor.
So the first stage of the evolutionary process of handicapping was the introduction of a mechanical system of set weights and penalties based on races won. This type of weighting achieved the aim of having superior performed horses conceding weight to lesser performed rivals in order to create more evenly balanced contests. But as any good form analyst knows this system of weighting will rarely produce weight differences that are commensurate the with the variance in ability between the best and worst competitors in a race.
In response to this flaw raceclubs started to employ an official to determine appropriate weights for nominators based on the quality of past performances. Because this process was judgmental it could not be described as a set weights and penalties race, and as the clear intent of this race was to employ weight handicaps to superior performed horses this race acquired the name 'handicap' and the official who determined these weights the 'handicapper'.
So handicapping can be viewed as the offspring of set weights and penalties based racing, a sort of set weights with discretionary penalties and allowances type system of weighting.
Principles
There are two essential principles to the handicapping process:
1 Horses that race successfully and defeat their counterparts meet them on less favorable weight terms as a result of this contest;
2 The handicap weight of horses that nominate in races of a different class or grade of class change according to the following simple concept:
UP IN CLASS : DOWN IN WEIGHT
DOWN IN CLASS: UP IN WEIGHT
It's important to understand the difference between the terms class and grade. When I use the term 'class' I am referring to the actual type of handicap race, as in the title of the race e.g. 'Class 6 Hcp', whereas when I use the term 'grade' I am referring the actual strength or quality of nominations for a particular class of race. For example, a Class 6 Hcp at Randwick will be invariably be of a stronger grade than one at a country track like Dubbo.
Therefore it can be expected that horses will receive more weight in a country handicap than a metropolitan handicap race of the same class. This may be obvious to many but it leads us into heart of handicapping...the how and why of horses receiving different weights in different races.
Handicapping Techniques
All handicapping techniques are derived from the two principles listed above. The way these principles are applied can be called the handicapping policy. Actual handicapping policy varies from one racing authority to another but is conceptually the same only the degree of application varies.
There are two basic elements that produce a horses' final handicap weight:
1 A weight penalty/allowance adjustment for each performance and;
2 Scaling applied to the whole field based on the grade of the nominations.
WEIGHT PENALTY/ALLOWANCE ADJUSTMENTS
Most handicapping panels have a schedule of weight penalties and allowances that are applied to each horse performance. This schedule acts as a guideline for handicappers to operate with so as to ensure consistency between handicappers and the horses they handicap. It reflects the typical range of weight adjustment applied to each horse performance.
I must stress that it is a guide-line only and not a strict prescription on how a horse's handicap rating is adjusted for each performance. Because the quality of horse performances can vary quite widely so too does the handicappers adjustments to their rating. If there was no discretionary element in this adjustment process then handicapping would be reduced back to its natural ancestor, the set weights and penalty type race.
There are 3 primary factors that effect the value of the weight adjustment for a particular performance of a horse:
1 Place finished
2 Margin beaten
3 The field size
A simple generalization broadly describes the nature of this weight adjustment process;
Winners go up the most, place-getters go up less or stay the same, unplaced runners drop down to varying degrees. But remember this is an adjustment to the horse's handicap rating not necessarily its final handicap weight - it still to be subjected to the scaling process.
How much winners, placegetters and the unplaced brigade have their ratings varied is dependant upon how far they were beaten and how many horses they defeated or were defeated by. Obviously its a greater achievement to defeat 16 horses than say 6 horses (all other factors being similar of course) as it is to win by 5 lengths as opposed to 1, or to be defeated by 2 lengths running unplaced as opposed to 10 lengths.
Minor factors that usually on their own would not cause any great variation in but collectively can influences an adjustment to a horse's handicap rating:
quality of race field prizemoney earned interference encountered in running suitability of riding tactics employed distance suitability track condition suitability stage in horse's preparation overall performance record The following table broadly describes the range of weight penalties and allowances applied to country and provincial performances by the AJC Handicapping Panel.
These adjustments apply to horses nominating for similar class and grades of races that they last competed in, ie a horse that last ran in a country Class 3 Hcp and nominated for another country Class 3 Hcp would have a weight penalty/allowance applied that is consistent with the tables below.
Guidelines to terminology
Fieldsize
The definition of fieldsize terminology applying to all these tables can be considered universal. Definition of Field Sizes Small Less than 8 runners. Medium 8 to 13 runners. Large 14+ runners.
Margins
The winning/beaten margin terminology is specific to each table and general definitions are listed below each table.
Weight Penalty Table For Winners Winning Margin Small (<= 0.9L)
Field Size Penalty small +0.5 to 1kg medium +1 to 1.5kg large +1.5 to 2kg
Winning Margin Medium (1 to 2.2L)
Field Size Penalty small +1.5 to 2kg medium +2 to 2.5kg large +2.5 to 3kg
Winning Margin Large (2.3L+)
Field Size Penalty small +2 to 2.5kg medium +2.5 to 3kg large +3 to 3.5kg
Weight Penalty/Allowance Table For Second Placegetters Beaten Margin Small (<= 0.5L)
Field Size Penalty small +0.5 kg medium +0.5 to 0kg large 0 to -0.5kg
Beaten Margin Medium (0.6 to 2.9L)
Field Size Penalty small +1kg medium +0.5 to 1kg large 0 to +0.5kg
Beaten Margin Large (3L+)
Field Size Penalty small +1.5kg medium +1 to 1.5kg large +0.5 to 1kg
Weight Penalty/Allowance Table For Third Placegetters Beaten Margin Small (<= 0.5L)
Field Size Penalty small 0 to -0.5 kg medium -0.5kg large -0.5 to -1kg
Beaten Margin Medium (0.6 to 2.9L)
Field Size Penalty small 0 to +0.5kg medium 0kg large 0 to -0.5kg
Beaten Margin Large (3L+)
Field Size Penalty small +0.5 to +1kg medium +0.5kg large +0.5 to 0kg
Weight Allowance Table For Unplaced Horses Beaten Margin Small (<= 3.5L)
Field Size Penalty small -0.5 kg medium -0.5 to 1kg large -1kg
Beaten Margin Medium (3.6 to 9L)
Field Size Penalty small 0 to -0.5kg medium -1kg large -1 to -1.5kg
Beaten Margin Large (9.1L+)
Field Size Penalty small 0kg medium -1 to -1.5kg large -1.5kg
Please note that these are the typical range of penalties and allowances and it is not unusual for handicappers to vary beyond the ranges when circumstances dictate.
For instance when a combination of minor factors are all negative for a horse's unplaced run then it may not have it's handicap rating reduced ie if there were plenty of excuses for a horse well beaten then this run may be ignored by the handicapper.
Consistent Horses
One important scenario concerning a minor factor playing a major role in the way a horse is penalized is where a horse consistently runs placings. Horses that have a high placings to wins ratio (a qualifying factor for the recent 'herd horses' discussion on the list) will be penalized much more leniently than horses that have a better record in this area.
In some cases where this ratio is extreme second place efforts are not penalized at all regardless of how many times they are achieved. I remember one country horse in particular I used to regularly handicap at Goulburn, 'Mazz and Me' after something like 6 seconds (this included a metropolitan second placing) and one third in its last 8 starts I had reduced its handicap rating by about 1kg, despite the fact that it had consistently defeated the majority of its competitors and earned several thousand dollars in prizemoney.
By not continually penalizing the consistent placegetter the handicapper provides an incentive for the connections of this type of horse to 'keep trying'.
On the other side of the coin, horses that have exceptional winning records will attract higher penalties than the above tables suggest, simply because their performance record shows that the regular range of penalties are no barrier to successful performance.
The principles and mathematics of handicapping is simple, accurate application of them is difficult. Anyone can follow the guidelines and develop handicap ratings that are in the right ballpark, but the real art of handicapping is knowing when to go beyond the policy guidelines and when not to, that only comes with hard won experience - critically evaluating your performance after every meeting and then feeding this back into your future handicapping. Otherwise improvement cannot be gained.
Regards
MM