Jones on HDG and weight

[PeteMugg]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

What sport gives the "better" athletes/teams an advantage? Handicaps are designed to give all participants an equal chance and if they choose not to accept the weight fine. But it is the attitude that they have been wronged somehow which is so laughable.

I'm not sure, but I think golf and bowling (local stuff, not professional) have handicap events. Your handicap allowance only gets you closer to even. you would still have to raise your game to win.

My point is I don't think a weight allowance should be applied to make all horses even, merely to close the gap. You're right, Porter's attitude is laughable. But hey, some say HDG is unworthy of horse of the year, then turn around and say they should carry so much more weight. Both can't be right, can they?

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by PeteMugg

I'm not sure, but I think golf and bowling (local stuff, not professional) have handicap events. Your handicap allowance only gets you closer to even. you would still have to raise your game to win.

My point is I don't think a weight allowance should be applied to make all horses even, merely to close the gap. You're right, Porter's attitude is laughable. But hey, some say HDG is unworthy of horse of the year, then turn around and say they should carry so much more weight. Both can't be right, can they?

It's not going to make all things even; one horse is still going to win the race. But adjusting weight according to displayed ability is going to, theoretically, give any horse in the race a chance. And for a sport that depends on gambling, that's essential.

I like HdG and I was glad she won HoY. But so far they're campaigning like Rachel Alexandra's 4-year-old year. Yawn.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by PeteMugg

I'm not sure, but I think golf and bowling (local stuff, not professional) have handicap events. Your handicap allowance only gets you closer to even. you would still have to raise your game to win.

My point is I don't think a weight allowance should be applied to make all horses even, merely to close the gap. You're right, Porter's attitude is laughable. But hey, some say HDG is unworthy of horse of the year, then turn around and say they should carry so much more weight. Both can't be right, can they?

Weight allowances are used in non-handicap claiming, allowances and stakes races every day. I ran a 4 year old filly in a maiden special weight race yesterday that was giving 9 pounds to the 3 year olds in the race (most of which were better than her anyway). I wasnt thrilled about it (hell I wanted to run in a maiden 25k but those races never fill going long on the dirt) but the point is that ordinary horses give weight in races every day. There is no reason why the best horses shouldnt be held to the standard as well.

[PeteMugg]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Weight allowances are used in non-handicap claiming, allowances and stakes races every day. I ran a 4 year old filly in a maiden special weight race yesterday that was giving 9 pounds to the 3 year olds in the race (most of which were better than her anyway). I wasnt thrilled about it (hell I wanted to run in a maiden 25k but those races never fill going long on the dirt) but the point is that ordinary horses give weight in races every day. There is no reason why the best horses shouldnt be held to the standard as well.

I didn't say there shouldn't be any weight given, just that it didn't have to make all horses even. Obviously, the amount is up to debate, but fair and even aren't necessarily the same thing.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by PeteMugg

I didn't say there shouldn't be any weight given, just that it didn't have to make all horses even. Obviously, the amount is up to debate, but fair and even aren't necessarily the same thing.

Why else would you have weight differences?
In a handicap race that is the goal regardless of your interpretation of fairness. Why do you think weight is given under allowance conditions? The same reason, recent winners or older horses usually carry more weight. Why you believe this would be considered unfair for handicap stakes but not allowance races is beyond me.

[PeteMugg]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Why else would you have weight differences?
In a handicap race that is the goal regardless of your interpretation of fairness. Why do you think weight is given under allowance conditions? The same reason, recent winners or older horses usually carry more weight. Why you believe this would be considered unfair for handicap stakes but not allowance races is beyond me.

So if weight is assigned to make all horses even, it should make the morning line simple enough, about 10-1 for each entrant. I guess It's just never been my interpretation that a handicap race seemed so even across the board.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by PeteMugg

So if weight is assigned to make all horses even, it should make the morning line simple enough, about 10-1 for each entrant. I guess It's just never been my interpretation that a handicap race seemed so even across the board.

it's not an exact science, they still have to run the race. theoretically, if weighted correctly, the horses would be in a blanket finish.
surely you've heard of some of the more famous races out there, such as citation and noor? people wouldn't still talk about matches like that had citation not been carrying a lot of weight, giving a lot of weight, and still gutting it out to the finish.
you can bet your behind no one will be talking about HDG in that fashion.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by PeteMugg

So if weight is assigned to make all horses even, it should make the morning line simple enough, about 10-1 for each entrant. I guess It's just never been my interpretation that a handicap race seemed so even across the board.

The problem is that they usually are already underweighting the top horses in order to get them to run. HDG should give some of the lightweights that may run against her 15-18 pounds but they rarely will do it. Plus it is hard to find a jockey that can do 105. So Porter is complaining about a process which probably already skewed in his favor because his horse is probably not being assigned enough weight and the lower weights are being given too much.

[PeteMugg]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The problem is that they usually are already underweighting the top horses in order to get them to run. HDG should give some of the lightweights that may run against her 15-18 pounds but they rarely will do it. Plus it is hard to find a jockey that can do 105. So Porter is complaining about a process which probably already skewed in his favor because his horse is probably not being assigned enough weight and the lower weights are being given too much.

Best explanation I've heard yet. Of course, how much weight is what is up for debate. Clearly HDG connections will fight for all they can get in their favor. Thanks.

[Merlinsky]

Originally Posted by PeteMugg

I didn't say there shouldn't be any weight given, just that it didn't have to make all horses even. Obviously, the amount is up to debate, but fair and even aren't necessarily the same thing.

As has been mentioned, making all horses even is kinda the whole point of the weighting system in a handicap race. The reason Man O' War didn't run at age 4 is that a racing secretary basically told Riddle that he'd be topping 140 regularly, and they didn't want to risk Man O' War by loading him up the way he'd need to be to make him equal with other horses. He was already having a hard time coming up with opponents. He carried 130 as a 2yo several times and 138 as a 3yo.

I know Havre de Grace isn't Man O' War but c'mon. If Porter thinks giving up 5-10 lbs is a travesty, I guess he wouldn't do like Mr. Riddle and send his horse to post giving up as much as 32 lbs. Why race this mare if they won't let her run under the weights a HOY should against lesser competition? I thought Porter calling out Pope was inappropriate. He didn't pull that number or the number for any other horse out of his arse. Bravo to Oaklawn for having integrity and calling their bluff. If this is how it's gonna be all year, it'd have been better for everyone to retire her. I can't bring myself to give them a pat on the back for keeping her in under these circumstances. Race her against boys, you'll get your precious weight break, and it'll be more entertaining for everyone.

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by Merlinsky

As has been mentioned, making all horses even is kinda the whole point of the weighting system in a handicap race. The reason Man O' War didn't run at age 4 is that a racing secretary basically told Riddle that he'd be topping 140 regularly, and they didn't want to risk Man O' War by loading him up the way he'd need to be to make him equal with other horses. He was already having a hard time coming up with opponents. He carried 130 as a 2yo several times and 138 as a 3yo.

I know Havre de Grace isn't Man O' War but c'mon. If Porter thinks giving up 5-10 lbs is a travesty, I guess he wouldn't do like Mr. Riddle and send his horse to post giving up as much as 32 lbs. Why race this mare if they won't let her run under the weights a HOY should against lesser competition? I thought Porter calling out Pope was inappropriate. He didn't pull that number or the number for any other horse out of his arse. Bravo to Oaklawn for having integrity and calling their bluff. If this is how it's gonna be all year, it'd have been better for everyone to retire her. I can't bring myself to give them a pat on the back for keeping her in under these circumstances. Race her against boys, you'll get your precious weight break, and it'll be more entertaining for everyone.

But isn't there a chance, that his hissy fit will pay off in the long run? Isn't it almost like a supply and demand type deal, where tracks will cave in to Porter's demand so HVG runs at their track? I'm not saying that she has the drawing power of Rachael or Zenyatta (West of the Rockies ), but you would think that it would be benificial to the track to have one todays stars run at their track. So while Oaklawn is being applauded for standing up to him, aren't they just cutting their nose to spite their face?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by MaTH716

But isn't there a chance, that his hissy fit will pay off in the long run? Isn't it almost like a supply and demand type deal, where tracks will cave in to Porter's demand so HVG runs at their track? I'm not saying that she has the drawing power of Rachael or Zenyatta (West of the Rockies ), but you would think that it would be benificial to the track to have one todays stars run at their track. So while Oaklawn is being applauded for standing up to him, aren't they just cutting their nose to spite their face?

I think that the supposed benefit of having this particular filly run at your track would easily be off set by having a 4 horse field with her a 2-5 fav. The money they will lose in handle as opposed to a larger, more competitive field will probably be greater than the added attendance and extra hot dogs sold. IMO Oaklawn didn't stand up to him as much as Pope simply weighted the race fairly. If Mr Porter feels that the weights are unfair than he can just keep her in weight for age races and stakes run under allowance conditions however to act as though thse weights weren't accurately made is a joke. If anything she may have been assigned too little weight especially considering that many of the lower weighted horses would probably wind up with jocks who are a few pounds over anyway.

[Merlinsky]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I think that the supposed benefit of having this particular filly run at your track would easily be off set by having a 4 horse field with her a 2-5 fav. The money they will lose in handle as opposed to a larger, more competitive field will probably be greater than the added attendance and extra hot dogs sold. IMO Oaklawn didn't stand up to him as much as Pope simply weighted the race fairly. If Mr Porter feels that the weights are unfair than he can just keep her in weight for age races and stakes run under allowance conditions however to act as though thse weights weren't accurately made is a joke. If anything she may have been assigned too little weight especially considering that many of the lower weighted horses would probably wind up with jocks who are a few pounds over anyway.

Amen. You know 123 is ridiculous for a HOY and 5yo mare. What weight should she be carrying? They deflate them so much these days. If she carried what's fair against her own sex in the Apple Blossom for instance, what does she go to post with? There needs to be a term for throwing your weight around over what they assign your horse. Name it after Bobby Frankel.