Play To Win
There are 747 tournaments now open for play totaling 76,532,465 community points amounting to USD $7,653.25 for prizes in our shop.
Recent Winner
Navigation
Poll
Which racetrack is the top racing facility in the United States?
Santa Anita by far - it has all the components from beauty to history and racing schedule to make it the number one choice
27%
Gulfstream Park - with its new renovations and fantastic racing schedule, Gulfstream Park gets my vote.
15%
Churchill Downs - simply because it's the home of the Kentucky Derby.
21%
Saratoga Racetrack - a spectacular summer meet that highlights history while featuring top competitive thoroughbreds.
22%
None of these racetracks qualify as America's premier racing facility.
16%
Total votes: 475
Updated Information on Our Handicapping Program for Breeders' Cup Final Races - Your Input is Needed: PLEASE READ!
Hopefully everyone had a nice holiday weekend. I've noticed several threads going on pertaining to the new handicapping program as well as the new blue restricted tournaments. Let me give you some updates. This post specifically deals with the handicapping program and I want everyone to start on cue. I'll be posting another thread tomorrow on the blue restricted tournaments.
First, on the handicapping program - Overall the handicapping program looks very good. I'm a little concerned with some of the handicappers restricting the weights in the Breeders' Cup final races to a very narrow range. These races will always remain handicapped races, therefore weight allowances will be given and will be required. In order to control this, one of the ideas we are considering is enforcing a minimum weight variance between the best and worst horse in the race according to the handicapper. That variance may be a minimum of 8 pounds or 10 pounds ro some other number depending on the feedback we get and from further conversations with playes for whom I have a lot of respet. One thing for certain, that minimum variation will not exceed 12 pounds. I think the current weight range we offer for handicappers is looking good. Some handicappers use the maximum range if the race calls for it, and others use a more narrow range. All of this should be up to the handicappr as long as they are following basic guidelines. The important thing is, we have guidelines to follow. The interpretation of those guidelines needs to be flexible.
This week we will be eliminating our first handicapper. Any handicapper who has more negative votes than positive votes is thrown out of the handicapping program. This is a feature controlled by the players and when the players speak, we respond.
We're still looking for new handicappers, so if you feel you are qualified, please send me a private message. The more handicappers we have, the better off it is for the community and allows us to pick the cream of the crop over time, stabilizing the system even more. Even if you can only handicap a couple of races per week, if you're eligible and will play fair, please contact me through a private message.
Handicapper's Compensation - We started yesterday crediting all handicappers who successfully handicap a race, receive more positive votes than negative votes and have at least three positive votes. So, if you are a handicapper, start soliciting your races in the forum to get the votes you need to get the points. This is the first phase of our compensation program. Next month, we're putting together a monthly handicapper reward program, which will consist of some bonus fully-nominated horses and other perks.
I expect and insist, when handicapping a race, that the weights coincide with the odds the handicappers assign. There is absolutely no justification for a handicapper to assign more weight to the second or third favorite horse over the top choice.
I'm thinking of implementing a special badge to several players who will act as monitors in the community. This badge will be identified as a racing steward. The racing steward does not have the ability to fire a handicapper. The racing steward's job is to randomly review Breeders' Cup final races and look for races they believe violate or go against the general philosophy of our handicapping program. When a racing steward such a race, it will be his job to bring it to the attention of the community. The racing steward will aggressively ask the community to review the race and vote on how they believe the handicapper performed. By doing this, the racing steward has no direct control, but does have the ability to bring to the attention of the other players in the game any questionable races. In the end, the community will decide by voting either positively or negatively on that particular race. If the racing steward brings multiple races to the attention of the players and the players drive multiple numbers of negative votes because they also feel that the integrity of the handicapping program is in jeopardy, that handicapper's negative votes will exceed his positive votes for the week and that handicapper will end up being excused from the handicapping program.
I'm looking for a lot of feedback here. Keep your feedback on point, be very specific with your comments, and explain in detail your concerns or praises for what is being discussed.
- Puddles
- puddles's blog
- Login or download our free game to post comments
Best Speed Rating : 138.2
Second Best Speed Rating : 136.8
Third Best Speed Rating : 136.5
Second Best Speed Rating : 136.8
Third Best Speed Rating : 136.5
Prebuilt Featured Race
Recently Ended Trainer Tournament Races
Featured VIP Member
Recently Ended Jockey & Bettor Tournaments
Horse Racing Totals
Last 20 Days
Total Horse Races: 28,028,360
Total Jockey Races: 8,859,809
Total Bettor Races: 4,268,930
New Member
sun_spring
Our community welcomes sun_spring!
Our community welcomes sun_spring!
Recently Active Members
There are currently 61 users and 480 anonymous users or guests online.
Online users
- watsonjknights
- fourhorsemen
- kentuckiana
- stevic11
- geanes
- greenhill
- chooka
- manati
- stammie
- 21burns
- rosy60
- camane
- roofer34uk
- little_koonie
- wonder6281
- starfish
- geeza65
- 6millions
- amir1605
- jetjet
- ahijah
- kingkong822
- thegallopingguru
- riderking
- pattaman
- queenofthetrack
- vintagegene
- bobbatt
- miamimike
- sterns
- hannahmaet
- captainmorgan
- ryan01
- alhandra
- nehrut
- yowdvm
- atlantic
- sentanta
- wcwashington
- darkenergy
- raselfedowi
- sivakumar
- tawee57
- barebackrider
- racingroyr
- sunshinerose4ever
- shelbyjoe
- brusko
- excape08
- dav168
- homerpelindario
- nicknac21
- jackii1605
- mysongforyou
- mepetra
- gypsylady
- bigking0505
- realbadwolf
- mrpuff
- hasanraza
- mafisher
Comments
I think he HCappers are
I think he HCappers are doing a pretty good job. You've got to expect some growing pains with a new system like this, and they are all working through those right now.
As far as weight spread, one thing I would like to see, is when we have a big tournament, I mean like one where it costs $5+ for your entry fees and race fees, to have the weight spread between the finalists be fairly small. These large tournaments have always drawn the best horses, since few are going to waste five or more bucks on points to enter a slow one. If you survive the qualifiers and make it to the final, you probably have a pretty good horse. In that case, I don't think I'd like to see the favorite carry ten or twelve more pounds than the 'longshot', which in these kinds of tournaments is often not a longshot, at all.
I don't mean to say I want them all to carry the same weight, but I would prefer to see the weight spread be just a bit closer than on most tournaments.
I haven't seen an example of this yet, but I hope our handicappers are going to impose max weight in a situation where someone has entered an obviously superior horse waaay down in class to try to go for the blue badge. Maybe it has happened... I haven't had time to review a lot of the finals lately.
Voting
Puddles I think a big improvement would to have the members vote on the Tournament without knowing the handicapper.That way they would be judging the results rather than the handicapper,it would not affect your awards program because you know who handicapped the race.It would put aside the dislike some have for individual handicappers and would give HRF a truly non tainted result..JMHO.... Stan
Whaley's Stables
Home to some of the World's Finest Gin
"At Least Temporarily"
Mike, I do agree that we are
Mike,
I do agree that we are going in the right direction with the handicapping and is much better then the previous handicapping done by the computer. As for the range of weights i believe inbetween 7-12 lbs. is right on par in my opinion. I also agree that the weights should coincide with the odds. Racing stewarts would be ok as you have outlined here what they're duties should be as it puts it in the communities hands and i also believe no handicappers race should be altered or changed unless its so obvious and your the one who takes control and have it redone by computer as you have already done as long as its not a common occurence.
-ModGraphix Stables-
I think Whaley's idea is a
I think Whaley's idea is a good one--- there are a lot of vendettas and catfights going on around here. I see no harm in hiding the handicapper's identity from the community, and a lot of possible benefits. It wouldn't allow a handicapper to run amok---he can still get voted out if he's doing a bad job. But it would prevent a lot of down votes they get because someone doesn't like them personally. And make no mistake, that kind of thing does go on here.
Unfortunately it would require changing a lot of code on the site.
Favorites
http://www.horseracegame.com/community/tournament-leader/237894
Frostbite had a few issues before the race. I explained how I came up with the weight. I also noticied that only a few bets were placed on her horse. People probably thought I lost my mind. How can someone have a 3 place prelim horse with 1/2 money earned carry top weight. Its called simple handicapping. Which I explain this to Frostbite in my handicapping page. Ynot Tryit Again was my favorite because of the times it posted and going 3 for 3 in wins. But the handicapping came up with a 2lb deduction in weight off Frostbite horse. Frostbite horse raced the prelims 3lbs heavier than Ynot. So I was forced by my calculations to assign Frostbites horse top weight in this final race. I choose to make Ynot my favorite for dominating the prelims and very good final races in the past. So Mike I disagree with you that the favorite should allways carry top weight. I will say this situation comes up more often in older races where horses carry big differences in weight. This race proves that. Frostbite was very happy at the end of the race and Im me. It was a fair race for all involved.
my idea
If people know who handicapped it they will not always give the truth....i think this is a smart idea to keep the handicapper anonymous when people are voting
but everyone has to expect minor handicapping errors as it is new to the game(i wish i could get my time to handicap but i can tell it aint as easy as it looks)
I think weight should be designed in this way
this is how i would do it anyways
base weights
3 yrs-115
4 yrs-118
5 yrs-118
6 yrs-118
+1 P for every prelim win (in current tournament)
+1 p for breeders cup final wins (not including instas)
+1 p for 2nd and 3rd on leader board
+2 p for 1st on leader board
i think that is how i would do it or something close to that
if your horse has 3 wins in the prelims and 3 breeders cup wins
spotting 10 P should not be an issue
Great Quick Response
I commend you on your quick response to these issues Puddles. With the outline you have
laid out above annonimity of the handicapper might be the best route. Unfortunatley, personalities
do play a part and would be limited in the voting arena with the handicappers identity withheld.
Thank you for addressing the weight / odds issue.
Added
Mike if I made frostbites horse the favorite there would have been alot of confused and upset people asking me why. I would have received countless no votes. They would say how can frostbite be top weight and the favorite when Ynot finished 1st in prelims going 3 for 3 wins, and had 2 final wins allready. How can I explain that. I tried to explain that to Dusty. So I went with the best choice and made Ynot the favorite even though that horse carried 1lb less than the winner. I have been critized alot for my handicapping and I must have been a laughing stock before this final. But I proved that a horse that doesn't fit the favorites roll can win at a higher weight.
I agree
I agree with Stan about anonymity, if it's possible to do.
The reasoning is self explanatory.
My other concern is the weight range. Can you tell us how much 1lb affects a horse's performance? Some have stated that 5-6 lbs. makes little difference, if that's so then I can see the need for wider ranges and minimum variances.
This is a computer simulation, so what is the program's calculations of weight and performance. I think if the handicappers and community knew for certain how much difference each pound affects the horse, there would be a lot less controversy.
Other than that, I think the program has been going pretty good so far. I agree with Mojo about the Top Tourneys, and I was in the final that JB mentioned and can't argue with his methods. He's been almost perfect. And that goes back to Stan's point. John received a lot of negative votes that weren't based on his handicapping, IMO.
I agree with whaley .... it
I agree with whaley .... it would be best run as an overall sysem if the community did not know who the handicapper was.. it will also cut the BS out of forum to because some poeple irritate others more then others do..if that makes sense..lmao......
Your idea and planning is excelent as usual puddles thanks but please consider the invisible handicapper idea for future..it would be huge plus to the voting system...
"Sir Slavedave Stables"
""" We make Donkeys fly"""
Mike your asking people to
Mike your asking people to do this which doesn't make sense all the time and is a disserves to all horses involved.
I will post top weight to the favorite, but thats doesn't mean top weight is the favorite. This is going to make alot of favorites finish worst than ever before. More favorites will lose now. Fine the best horse with the best chance to win the final will carry the lower weight than the favorite. Now if the favorites start lossing all the time, I dont want to here any complaints about favorites lossing all the time. Because I will say I know #1 was the favorite and finished last because it was top weight but the real favorite was #3 but I'm not allowed to make that one favorite because its lower in weight than the fake favorite who has the most weight.
Now Mike thats doesn't make sense. If it doesn't make sense it must be wrong. Most final races about 90% top weight goes to the favorite. In races with 3yr old and up there are alot of different weights to consider and in these races the favorite could be lower than 1 horse or more.
Thank You,
John
Mike
I completely disagree with giving handicappers minimum weight variations. This would basically eliminate the need for handicappers. Might as well let the computer start doing it again. To me what your saying is you don't trust these players to come to there own conclusions. These are supposed to be "knowledgable" players who know handicapping. I think for the most part the handicappers are doing a great job save a few "odd" races. There will obviously be races that do not call for this minimum variation, lets face some races are going to be very close and there will not be a clear cut favorite, or a clear cut underdog. Are you planning on doing this on a race by race basis?? Might as well handicap them yourself!!! You said when you first came out with the idea of this program you wanted to give the control to the players. You have done that by giving them the chance to vote handicappers out if the community feels they are doing a bad job handicapping the races. Don't mess that up by listening to a few unwarranted complaints from players who were mad because there horse didn't do well in a final. You need to trust the players you picked to carry out the job you assigned, and weed out the ones who are not doing it correctly. I do like the Idea of racing stewards.
Thanks,
Chris
Of course I am pleased to
Of course I am pleased to hear about the handicapping guidelines. I think your ideas are logical and fair to all. I also would like to see a smaller weight range for BIG $ tournaments and the Handicapper anonominity sounds great so I hope that can be implimented too. Thank you Puddles for staying on top of the Handicapper program and reacting quickly.
Dusty
I can see where this idea can from
Thats funny Mike, you changed your tune to one person views. I guess we all can assume your knob is getting very shiny with all that polishing.
Favorite this
Ok, I will play this game. The next time a horse wins all its prelims and break track records I will post top weight, thats the highest possible weight I can go and make it really fair 2nd choice will be 5lbs less and last choice with be the lowest possible weight. Everybody happy???
hey dusty your horse lost to racodo horse before in a final barely and you carried 6lbs more that race, the race I handicapped you carried 2lbs more this time. The bottom line is your horse broke a record and won 3 of 3 races in the prelims and you still lost to racodo. Your horse stinks and you should retire it.
Puddles
So we are not giving weight allowances for fillies. Is that correct?
Weight allowances .. good question. And while I'm at it....
This addresses the idea that topweights should always be morning line favorites. If the handicappers are giving weight allowances for age and gender then it's quite likely that you could have very good 3yo filly be favored over a 4yo male which carries a couple of pounds more. As far as the overall handicapping program is concerned, I've got no complaints about the human handicappers or the weight spreads. I'm not sure I support the idea of any mandatory minimum or maximum weight differential, either. I'm just really happy to see finals races where the horses aren't assigned between 95-99lbs, which just seems ridiculous. Regardless of the spread, seeing weights in the 112-126 lb range for finals is a welcome, more realistic change. I've never been one to put much stock in weights anyway. I have a hard time believing that an 1100lb animal- even a digitally created one- travelling at 40mph is going to notice three or four more or fewer pounds in its saddlebag. When your horse loses by a neck and carried 2lbs more than the winner, are you sure it was the weight that did you in, or could it have been the extra two strides your horse had to wait on the far turn because it was impeded slightly, or that it had to swing around three horses instead of two at the top of the stretch? There are so many factors in races that contribute to the outcome, that I think we're placing far too much emphasis on weights in the first place. Call me nutty, but I'll try and stay above the squabbling over the finals weights and just take my lumps as far as imposts are concerned. That said, thanks to Mike and everyone involved in the handicapping program for doing their best to make it work and for listening to all the varied comments from the community.
"May the horse be with you"
pls pls pls
do not let JB capp the tournament i have Chelsea in pls pls pls, i fear he will take his anger out on me, on the other side i do agree with his points and i have stated those before...
bhdcwt1, made a great point, why not let the cappers do what they think is right and learn as they go along, i made a post which got deleted, i stated that NO VOTING on a cappers work until that finals is over NOT before, you cant judge someone's work before the result, these players are being put under too much pressure and you have to think at some point they are going to have enough like some has said already, you need to make this good place to be and want people standing in line to be a capper but as it is right now people saying "no way"
The steward idea is good but on the other side it will end up being a double edge sword, you cant have the cappers fighting against each other then to introduce stewards who will call on their effort is not a good idea, someone suggested letting the computer capp the finals but use higher weights, i could go for that also, I rthink HRF has done a good job and wants the player base to be as engaged as much as possible this is a good thing but what we can't contain is people's emotion, the restricted birth sr tournaments should help or make tournaments with a "suggested" birth sr.
The problem we are now seeing is that even smaller stables who might get lucky and get a decent horse now expects to win and this is not that easy and it will piss them off and take it out on the game / cappers/ other players, the bottom line is that everyone now wants the horses to run closer to their birth sr so the restricted tournies are needed, now this goes to show that if we voice our opinions and NOT argue with HRF but have a decent conversation they are willing to change certain things and listen to us, we all love this game and sometimes our emotion gets the best of us but there's some good points being made here so for once lets have something positive come out of this.
SunnyD
"i got game"
Whaley's Idea
Anonymity for handicappers is the single best idea I've heard, and yes of course it can be done.
I'm sorry to see that handicappers betting on races they themselves handicapped wasn't addressed.
Aside from these two issues I like the way the system is working just fine right now.
Joey
Sundown
I was only joking. I will handicap the best way I know how and thats my way. It figures that now you want to be anonymous handicappers. When I got alot of bad votes none of you were complaining them. Now I notices some of you are getting negative votes and are asking to be anonymous. I say do what I did, work out of a slump in the eyes of the community and show them you can handicap them you wont get no votes.
just a thought
i had a thought that my stable is now all wrong for where the game has gone .maybe i need to look for horses that would barely qualify in finals to keep when i am breeding so they can be the ones getting the turbo installed instead of the lead pack ....a minimum weight difference may be a bit soon why not wait and see if your target percentage is being hit after another month or so ...
Guidelines not written in stone...
I reread Puddles blog above and would like us to consider the following quote...
"Some handicappers use the maximum range if the race calls for it, and others use a more narrow range. All of this should be up to the handicappr as long as they are following basic guidelines. The important thing is, we have guidelines to follow. The interpretation of those guidelines needs to be flexible."
IMO the guidelines should be just that - guidelines - not written in stone. They should be followed almost all the time, except when situations demand otherwise. And I think that is what Puddles was saying in his blog.
Dusty
Ok Dusty
That recent race I handicapped with Frostbite winning. That race was 10F. I used a 8lb gap on posted weight. I probably could have gone to 12lbs for the low, which were the 2 horses in that race. But I was already making a 3rd choice the heaviest horse and thru the betters eyes this horse had no chance of winning. You want me to be a excellent handicapper to figure that out when most of you would have YNOT top weight and would have finished last instead of 2nd.
Racodo of course ever horse has there own allowances in prelims. I use there current weight and adjust off them. If you get rid of horse allowances then its unfair advantage.
Example Prelims
Female 119lbs avg sr 120....Male 122lbs avg sr 120
Finals Weight
Female 122lb......Male 122lb Who has the advantage now?
I have one other question,
I have one other question, for the handicappers. How are you guys doing with the time limit? Last I heard, you had 45 minutes to get it done. If I was handicapping, I'd want to look at the past performances, and also probably download and look at some of the individual qualifying races in that particular tournament. In some cases I might want to watch every qualifying race. How is the 45 minute limit working for you guys?
I thought I needed more time
Mike can probably tell you how long people are using. I have it down to 10-15mins tops on 9 horse finals or below.
JB
i know you were joking, i got 7 negative votes before my first finals was run and i got it right now would i have got 7 negative votes if they saw the results before the vote i dont think so but i also got 18 positive votes at the same time...the point is that some people putting emotions ahead of doing what's right, i think all the cappers are doing a great job, Knb stables and Suncity might need a little help but for the others i see no problem, we should stop fighting against each other and try get this right.
sundown
Sundown STEWARD
I recommend you as the New sheriff in town!
LOL
JB says "I have it down to 10-15mins tops on 9 horse finals or below."
Well that solves that mystery. Believe me, John, it shows! This handicapper has got to go!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Confused
If the weight really doesn't matter, then why are we using handicap weight?
Does the weight matter? If so, how much?
In a low fee tourney, the SR's of the horses could range from 80-140.
In a mid-level tourney, the SRs are probably tighter.
In a Top Tourney, more than likely the SRs are tighter still.
And please, don't comment that a horses birth SR doesn't matter. Tell that nonsense to the horses in the Top 100.
Weight matters and SR matters, so let's be real about this.
So when handicapping these different levels of finals, the handicappers will naturally widen or narrow the weight range accordingly.
There should not be a minimum weight range imposed, unless it's just at the lower level tourneys.
What about the Blue restricted Tourneys? The competition is already
level. Do we even need handicap weights in those finals?
Do we need to insure that the Max weight range is used in Blue Tourneys?
Careful with the answer, because the Top Tourneys are similar to a Blue Tourney, only for the Top horses.
If our goal is to make the finals more competitive, then do it where it is needed. Why intervene where it is not?
FWIW
I don't believe handicapping is a science that you can apply fixed numbers to a formula and come up with a perfectly handicapped race. There are subtleties in horse racing that just won't allow it. That's why the idea to have live handicappers do it instead of a computer was a brilliant move. Now, if you implement a mandatory variance of 8 to 10 pounds (or whatever number is chosen) between the best and worst horse in the field, you take that away. The difference between best and worst might not be 8 to 10 pounds. Booooo to this idea :)
I'm on the side of the high weight is not always the favorite. You can pick up any program from any track and flip through and see that all high weights are not the favorite. Handicapping a race (determining the weights based on tournament performance) is one process and applying the morning line (determining who I think has the best chances to win) is another IMHO. That being said, for the life of me, I can't see what the big deal is. If the weights are close to what they should be, who cares what the odds are. Definitely not worth fighting over, so I'll keep my gun holstered and save my bullets for another day.
I'm not sure if the voting system works. Lots of people don't vote, especially if their horse is not entered and handicappers can't vote anymore. Those that do vote, either they didn't like their horses weight, didn't care for the handicapper personally, or happen to like the handicapper. Doesn't seem like the best way to determine if someone is successful at handicapping. Anonymous voting helps for sure. Bring back the handicappers vote.
I nominate Sundown and jbcri09 as racing stewards.
~~~~~~~~
May they all come home safely!!!
Mrmojok
It takes me between 25-30 minutes to handicap a race with an 8-10 horse field. It will be a nightmare to handicap thoroughly some of these upcoming finals with 20 horses. Should be interesting.
Jaycat for your info
Mike said this " I expect the average race to be handicapped in about 15 minutes max, but we are allowing 45 minutes."
http://www.horseracegame.com/community/content/blogs/puddles/23-04-2010/...
So if you remove me from handicapping, I expect Mike to quit himself. <------- Not Happening!
Jaycat has accused me of cheating
Heres all the races I handicapped. You tell me how I cheated? As I already stated there are many handicappers who's favorites are not top weight. You also heard from others who believe this to be also true.
http://www.horseracegame.com/community/races/14613
http://www.horseracegame.com/community/races/14620
http://www.horseracegame.com/community/races/14627
http://www.horseracegame.com/community/races/14374
http://www.horseracegame.com/community/races/14377
http://www.horseracegame.com/community/races/14360
http://www.horseracegame.com/community/races/14336
http://www.horseracegame.com/community/races/14355
http://www.horseracegame.com/community/races/15032
http://www.horseracegame.com/community/races/14738
http://www.horseracegame.com/community/races/14679
I have been told I have done good handicapping by these people.
Frostbite, vasdef, bhdcwt1, modgraphix, 70carnut, racodo, flyingdaaka, riderking, redterror, micmac, sundown, slavedave, ronwar.
guys, PLEASE.
guys, PLEASE.
Ron
I agree we need to bring back the handicappers vote.
Mike
I cant believe you started this whole thread on 2 peoples opinions that have a problem with me personality not in my handicapping. Its is obvious that Jaycat and Dusty have a issue with me. I am coming to that conclusion because no one else has attacked my handicapping expect them. In fact I have alot of support from fellow community members on my handicapping.
some thoughts
I like the idea of voting on the handicapping anonymously
I think handicappers whose races have 90% of the horses come in within 5 lengths of each other should get an automatic big positive vote from the game based on the good result, regardless of the opinions expressed by the community members.
I think that top weighted horses should be top weighted because that's how the handicapper believes it will most likely keep that horse even with the others at the finish line. Which horse is lowest odds might very likely be a different horse though. I don't think favorite and high weight should be associated, because they serve different purposes.
Not the opinions of an experienced capper here, but for what it's worth, it's here.