Horse Racing Fantasy Community

This is a good post and I would like feedback here. Please no rants just feed back and why you feel the way you do. This will help us as we evaluate the situation. Please keep this thread on topic.

I agree 100% Vas...this would definitely make these trainers think twice about putting their 125sr horses in low level entry fee tournaments and if they still want to they will know they will carry the weight in the final. I'm all for it!!

-ModGraphix Stables-

Yeah Vas, but what if I have a horse with a 110 birth SR, but it runs big.?

Good question, and the answer is.... if your horse runs big then put in an appropriate level or accept the extra weight, it's that simple. A trainer can put their horse in any Tourney they choose, but know that you may get bone crushing weight in a low-level tourney. Bone Crushing Weight....LOL!

here is the problem, there's not enough high level tournaments so trainers end up putting their horses where ever they can, if it comes down to this then HRF has to write 5x the tournaments they are putting out at the moment...Vas, you have a good idea but its for smaller stables, maybe HRF hasn't figured out how to treat/take care of the bigger stables...also keep in mind there's another thread going that states CLEARLY

" What he was saying is your horse will run to the level of its competition. If you enter a nice horse against poor ones, it will run more to the poor ones level"

so you ask yourself do we really need this, as you all know and HRF has said it over and over speed rating #s does not matter that much and this was from Mike / Puddles himself...but you will also run into this problem, lots of trainers do not know how to place their horses, i am not sure i would pad weight on a horses who was place correctly in a tournament perfect surface and distance just so that a trainer who did not do their homework and ended up placing a horse on wrong suface and distance can have a 50-50 % chance to win, in life we pay for our mistakes but that's a good thing because we learn from it in the end.

Sundown

This is a very important thread. All the points made so far are valid! THIS IS GREAT !! This thread can play a big role in what were are doing and will do. Stay on topic please with right to the point information. Let's keep this going!

Vasdef, well said. You are completely on target. An argument could be made that you are stating word for wor....ahem.....re-hashing some of Flyingdaaka's prior posts, but its all good, no need to get into that. Flyingdaaka will now sit back and watch those who like to enter low try to take on your points. Ooopp, there we go, Sundown just made a post.

~~ The Flyingdaaka stable: Low SR horses only ~~

Anyone who has been in the industry knows there is whats called a condition book
in this book is every race for everyday of the month and the conditions(restrictions) are printed in there
for example there is a 6f main track for 2yo's non winners of 3 races wt allowance 115lbs for (f) 119 for (m)
winners of 2 races add 8 lb. winners of (1) add 5 lbs. same thing could go for money earned or age such as 3yos and up and add more weight for older horses ect. plus have you entry fee as well so you still have your class rating to me this makes the game even more realistic, competitive, and very level just a thought

I think the fuss about entering 125s low is really just that a fuss.If a horse is extremely good and u enter him low ur points and earnings income for said horse will be down.This alone does a good enough job regulating the tournament entries .Simply put there are some factors which have caused me to in fact enter horses low and those are . 2yo horses dont always come ready to fire and entering them in a big tourney is sometimes not the best thing to do .I have bred quite a few high sr horses recently and all of them have been late peakers according to their performance reports.Should i spend 25000 to enter their first tourney ..gimme a break ....
Really a lot of this fuss has been made by people who dont seem to full understand some aspects of the game and i dont see entering low as a problem. There is an obsession with speed rating among some players that fuels this fire . All of this fuss about sandbagging really is not necessary because sandbagging is not feasible ...smaller tourneys pay less points ....i have my eyes on the handicap program and really i want it to work i was just in a final that the computer gave all the horses the same low weight and my horse finished fifth behind four horses that should have all given her weight .....its a good program and i think we should all go easy on the brave guys until they work out certain things ....

I think that the Handicapping system is the next best thing to the afore said rating system. And I agree with Vas on the closer if not equal weight in Big Tournies.
But especially when there are big points available for a most race winner in each yr age of a horse I think that low priced races should be harder to win and easier to win for low sr horses.
I.e. If I breed a 130+ horse and enter in a low tournament with 5 races it hacks up in all and wins the final then does the same in 2 others and easy million points in the bag. And a quarter where my poor low sr's have no hope of hitting the top (like they would lol)
I would love there to be a rating system as that would help us with low sr's race against each other without sandbaggers heading us all the time.

Vasdef's idea is worth looking at seriously, but not now. The new Handicapping program needs to run for a while and be evaluated and tweaked and then run for another while. The Handicapping program alone may alleviate many of these problems.

Dusty

I knew it...
Vasdef and Daaka are one in the same...LOL..just kidding guys

Excellent post Vasdef! I think you're on to something here. I'm not sure if the weights you mentioned are what they need to be, but definitely not a bad place to start and perhaps there should be one more entry range between 5000 and 25000.

~~~~~~~~
May they all come home safely!!!

have to keep in mind and go back and search how often does high sr horses dominate low class prelims and finals, this rarely happen,,,what i see is trainers entering tournaments and crying about their high sr not doing well in low class races, they do not dominate please if anyone can post a few links of high sr horses dominating low class races i would LOVE to see this, while they should dominate then pay the price with extra weights it does not happen here in this game, its now known if your high sr horses are placed in low class tournaments they will scale down to the level of other horses and this is clear.

sundown

As I stated ,my main concern is the Top Level horses. And I feel that in these races the influence that weight has on the outcome should be restricted.

As far as the idea, I was just throwing it out there.
I'm not suggesting my weights or class levels be set in stone, it could be 15 lbs for low, 10 lbs. for mid-level and 5 lbs for the Top. The weight assignments will still be at the discretion of the handicappers, only the range for certain classes of Tourneys would be limited. But as far as the Top Horses, Breeding Shed and Quarterly Bonuses go, the determination should not be left up to a handicapper influencing the outcome with weight.

As far as Trainers, placing thier horses correctly:
http://www.horseracegame.com/community/races/8516
Theses were my slowest horses, did I place them correctly? Hell ,2 of them were in low-level Instas.
But after this Tourney a player mentioned to me that low-level Tourneys are generally where newbies run their horses. So how do I look with 2 million available points and 50 horses, dominating a 500cp Tournament? Come on guys, cut the nonsense about correct placement. Anybody can beat up on students in a 500 cp Tournament. As a matter of fact, we should restrict some Tourneys to Students only. (OK, too much at once)

Like I said, Trainers can enter their horses anywhere they choose, but on the lower end of the spectrum, if your horse is blowing away the competition, you should get more weight. If you've correctly placed a low SR horse in a low-level Tourney, you're more than likely not going to win by 10L, and you wouldn't get assigned undue weight. If you like beating students in low-level Tourneys, nobody is suggesting you can't continue that practice. The handicappers decide who gets what weight.

Also, I'm not suggesting that the Max Range be used all of the time,just that the ranges should be tied to the level of Tournament.

And as far as bringing this up now, now is the perfect time to bring this up, because we're in the initial trial phase of the program.
Once things get implemented, it's hard to change them. This isn't really changing anything, except restricting the influence of weight on the Top Level Tournaments.

MY COMMENTS

jbcri09 05/20/2010 01:02AM I will not vote no. But I'm guessing redterror horse will finish last or 2nd to last. Now I wont be suprised if the #2 @ 20-1, #3 @ 40-1, #6 @ 15-1 and #7 @ 10-1 Win the race. I also wont be suprised if all 4 finish at the top. Those four horses I mentioned have a better chance of winning than any of the rest in the field.

jbcri09 05/20/2010 01:13PM Redterror horse should carrying the top weight in this race and that weight assignment was perfect. However horse #1 needs +2lbs, #2 needs +6lbs, #3 needs +6lbs, #4 needs +3lbs, #5 needs +3lbs, #6 needs +5lbs, #7 needs +5lbs, #8 needs +2lbs, #9 is correct with these corrected weights on other horses, #10 needs -2lbs this horse is over weighted.

WHALEYS RESPONSE

whaley 05/20/2010 03:31PM jbcri09 your weight assignments in this race would make no sense if it was weighted that way it would be a blow out for reds horse and not even be a race.My weights balance the race check the Buddy challenge and see how many horses have bets on them

RESULTS

Grade 1 Breeder's Cup Final Championship Race - 05/21/2010 - G1 - KEENELAND - 5.5f (miles) Synthetic - (2-year-olds)
PP Horse Name Age RSD Owner Wt Odds 1/4 1/2 Fin Time SR Earning
4 Arizona 2/M M horsegame267 115 13 (7) Head (3) Neck (1) 1/2 L 1:02.25 117.80 50,160
2 Spring Butterfly 2/F M trechobezor 113 26 (2) 1/2 L (1) Neck (2) 3/4 L 1:02.34 116.40 22,800
1 Ela Mana Mo 2/F M duss860 119 5 (5) Neck (2) 1 L (3) 1/2 L 1:02.46 114.60 10,944
5 Hollywood Golden 2/M M ronron900 118 8 (4) Neck (6) Nose (4) 3/4 L 1:02.54 113.30 7,296
3 Keiko 2/M M kasiax1x 112 52 (8) 1 1/2 L (5) Neck (5) 3/4 L 1:02.68 111.20 0
7 Curliin 2/F M horsegame267 115 13 (10) (10) (6) 1/2 L 1:02.82 109.10 0
8 Emmabelle 2/F M tyolds 119 5 (6) 3/4 L (8) 1 1/2 L (7) 1 L 1:02.89 108.10 0
6 Dyrnwyn 2/F M bthib75 114 19 (9) 3/4 L (9) Head (8) 3/4 L 1:03.06 105.40 0
9 Heroic Heart 2/F M redterror 122 6:5 (1) Neck (4) 3/4 L (9) 4 1/4 L 1:03.19 103.50 0
10 Miss Jj Lime 2/F M kalabrouchie 117 10 (3) 3/4 L (7) 1/2 L (10) 1:03.89 94.80 0

CASE CLOSED

do we have any responsibilities to make sure students win ...this game is now hard for everybody case closed ...the game favors those who work harder ,breed more .spend more so what i say thats the way it ought to be ...i really see no need to restrict this and that to favor or take care of anybody are we bordering on this ?

http://www.horseracegame.com/community/races/4486/17533

Here's a good example of why we needed to switch to human handicappers. The link has, Lord Outstanding winning by 10 lengths on a sloppy track getting a 165 speed rating. This would be closer to a 140 rating on a fast track. Everyone knows the sloppy conditions ratings are over inflated. Some say by 25 points. Others say slightly more.
As great as, Lord Outstanding is, the computer only gave her 108 pounds. Granted, in this race, they all got similar low weight assignments.
At a glance, I noticed that, in her career, she won at least 2 races, carrying 125 pounds. But, as I recall, no more. In most instances human handicappers might at least ask her to carry 125, since she's sooooo good and has handled the weight.
Of course, many different variables are considered when assigning weights in a final. Would she drop dead with 125 pounds???? Absolutly not. Would she cave in with 130 pounds??? Maybe. Maybe not. I kind of doubt it myself. I might change my mind on this at a later date, but I think 130 pounds should be the ceiling. No need to punish a good horse.
If you have a consistent, good horse that always finishs close to, say, Lord Outstadning, but can't beat him, then a slight drop in weight to help the other horse would be great. But, it's important not to have too much of a difference in the weights between these two horses.
I remember when my, Royal Danish was asked by computer to carry 126 pounds in a final and finished last to an inferior horse that only had to carry 110 pounds. A 16 pound difference. This is what we can't let happen with human handciappers. We need a break in weights for some. But it should never be so much that it allows what happened in my example to happen.
This is all new and most like what they're seeing from out human handcappers. Myself included. Slight tweaking might make it even better. But, we must remain patient and give this new addition time to see if this is what we really want.

"the game favors those who work harder ,breed more .spend more so what i say that's the way it ought to be"~Blair

I couldn't agree more, that is why I don't want Handicaps to influence the Top Horses. At that level it's not about being fair, totally agree.
But we also have to think about growing the game and it's appeal. The game costs money to play and most of us who play are adults(Some of us are ancient), but not everyone can breed 100 horses. So shouldn't we accommodate players who go to the shed and pop a 107 SR? Shouldn't that player go to his Mentor and train and find the perfect spot and at least get a shot at winning a few points? If yes, that's where the handicap comes in, whether General or restricted Tourneys.

Also,it's not solely about SR I agree,but no one knows what a horses SR is unless the Trainer tells them. If you have a 125SR that sucks and you stick him in a low-level Tourney and it wins in the prelims by a couple of lengths, a good handicapper wouldn't slap 10 lbs on your back.
This is about horses running 130 SR in the prelims and the field running 100. I could care less what the horse's birth SR is, or if you're a seasoned VIP or a brand new player, the extra weight would be justified.

Look, Puddles has said this handicap program is here to stay. All I'm is suggesting is a compromise here.
Sundown got booted for suggesting he would use scale weights in every Tournament. As I said on his "gettin booted" thread, I don't have a problem with scale weights. But It ain't gonna happen!
Sundown, of all people ,should be for limiting the handicap on at least the Top Tournaments.

John posted a race, above, of what could happen, when a race is influenced by weight. Right now the weight range is 14 lbs for 3yo and up, handicappers don't have to use the Max, but what happens when they do and it cost a trainer a million+ points?

For months, we went around and around about the computer giving whacked weight assignments. I personally sent Puddles PM's crying about it. OK, now we are addressing the problem head on and we can solve it. And sure, if a handicapper sucks, he can get voted out. But what about the race affected by his/her suckiness. Do you think it's fair that a trainer lose out on a shot at a million points, all because a handicapper gave his/her horse 10 lbs over the field?
And on that point, do you think it's right for a Trainer to win the million point bonus by dominating low-level Tourneys?

Some of you who are against the idea are missing the point, I'm not suggesting anything change except limiting the range of weight in higher level tournaments. The weight range can remain 14 lbs. for the majority of the Tournaments. But I like the idea of limiting the range of weight as the level of competition increases.
I'm definitely not suggesting that the max be used in every race, to the contrary.

Just liked we moaned about the computer handicap wrongly influencing the outcome of races, I just want to limit the people handicappers from doing the same thing. Doing this will also limit the bickering, ill-feelings toward a handicapper.
If a Trainer feels wronged in 20,000 Tournament he/she will get over it, but if he/she feels wronged in a 750,000 Tournament, it could get ugly.
Cursing out the Computer was one thing, but player handicappers....not good.

Thanks for adding the examples.
I know that most of us have similar examples of the computer assigning mysterious weights.
I agree that human handicapping is the way to go, just limit the possibility of what you described from happening, that's all I'm advocating.

Vasdef,

So right now we have weight ranges based on the age of the horses. You want to refine it further by adjusting those weight ranges based on the entry fees of the tournaments. Is that the correct read on what you are suggesting? If that is what you are suggesting then I would be all for it provided the size of the weight range decreases as the tournament entry fee increases. I just want to make sure I am not misunderstanding you.

Dusty

That is exactly what I'm saying.
I know I can be wordy, but I like to argue my case fully. (I should've been a lawyer) LOL!

The weight assigments would still be in the hands of the handicapper, I'm simply suggesting that we narrow the weight range as the level of competition increases, precisely.
I really can't see why anyone would be against it, maybe it was the 20 lb range I posted at first.
I just picked entry fees and numbers out of the air. The concept is what is important. It's a win for us players and HRF.

Thanks for understanding and supporting the idea.

The one thing I dont agree with now with the weighting system, is that it will all but eliminate 2 year-olds from breaking a track record in a final anymore. That was a selling point of purchasing PN and FN horses. I predict that a 2 year-old will not break a track record in a final from this point on under this system. All big tournament finals should have no more of a weight difference than 5 lbs either way in my opinion.

Congrats to my students Vasdef and Frelance for their 1st and 3rd finishes in the Big Bad Wolf final. I had to atleast split them. lol .

redterror05/21/2010 08:20PMum whaley how much time i spent ? about 20 minutes all up in spurts of 3 or 4 minutes if i took 30 minutes to have a look (all at once ) i would of got it right for i would of looked at everything i mentioned straight away....your comment about how much time i spent is irellevant for i was not looking at the race to handicap it... you were WRONG admit it and move on . dont get fiesty no grudges held
redterror05/21/2010 08:16PMgreat job whaley :)) holly wood was coming hard ,, if he found a gap he would of been right up there , whaley you were wrong the field was all over the place .....dissapointed but ill live haha till next time ....
ronwar05/21/2010 05:25PM**Sigh**
jbcri0905/21/2010 05:03PMWell I'm 1-1, Redterror finish 9th and #10 who was over weighted finished 10th.
whaley05/21/2010 03:01PMRed,let me give you something to think about you own the horse,you were in the races and when you looked at the weights you thought they were good.Now how much time going over everything have you spent ? We have 45 mins. to do a race,get my point..and I still think I'm right...Stan
redterror05/21/2010 07:11AMalso in the prelim were hollywood came second to heroic by a head hoolywood carried 3 more pounds , now he is 4 less that is a 7 pound turn around over a nose . Im sure you didnt consider this either becasue if you did, you would of had them at even wieght .... considering hh has 9 position....rnall good whaley no grudges , and i oonly vote on handicappers who handicap where my horses are i did give ya a green ,, anyways will see tomorrow
redterror05/21/2010 06:59AMits all part of the game
redterror05/21/2010 06:54AMhollywood will win
redterror05/21/2010 06:36AMmy horse beat hollywood by a nose and hollywood won his other race and my horse starts with 4 more???? actually my horse won his 2 races by a combined total of under 1 length ,,, stepping up in distance and has barrier 9 . tomorrow you will see how wrong you were...i thought you were right but after going thru all the details it is fair to say that your wrong ,,, even if he wins your still wrong ,,,, but its all good whaley :0 i wont hold that agaisnt ya :))
jbcri0905/20/2010 11:15PMI didn't call you stupid Stan, I called your handicapping on this race stupid. For the comment thats these people dont know how to handicap and vote on there pals is probably at true statement. If it wasn't Mike would not have had to request 5 more handicappers because these people would be all signed up already. I apologize if I came on strong, in asking you a question that could benefit all of us.
jbcri0905/20/2010 10:59PMStan I just want you to answer my question, why cant you answer my question?
whaley05/20/2010 10:58PMOne more thing John and I am done with you I think you have proven tonight who the stupid one is...Done with you...stan
whaley05/20/2010 10:55PMI'm sure the members will be happy to find out that they are stupid maybe you should give classes John.Look at the way things are and we all know who is ignorant...Stan
whaley05/20/2010 10:53PMLike I said John you are the only one who has a clue....Stan
jbcri0905/20/2010 10:40PMExplain this Dbacks horse couldn't win with a 5lb advantage how can it win with a 1lb advantage? You haven't explained this? I dont care who is betting who. As far as your votes most of these people are clueless on how to handicap a race. You have shown you are ignorant in the way you handicapped this race.
whaley05/20/2010 10:36PMJohn you can handicap your way and I will handicap my way and we will see who is the last standing and that will determine who is right and who is not,I don't have a problem with the way you do it it is your style but you seem to be saying it is your way or the highway,sounds like Rush to me....Stan
whaley05/20/2010 10:32PMJohn,Final word look at your vote and look at mine,it appears the community prefers my way to yours,you want everything in a formula and it is just like the computer it doesn't work,you want the handicapper to pick winners instead of making even races.It is easy to handicap a race and say look all my horses finished in order,Of course if you don't allow enough weight difference all the favorites will be winners
jbcri0905/20/2010 10:16PMIts crazy Dbacks horse lost twice with a 5lb advantage, and now you only want to give Dbacks horse a 1lb advantage, WHAT? How does that help? This must be reverse handicapping.
jbcri0905/20/2010 10:09PMThe number 4 beat the number 1 twice at carrying 5lbs more, what do you think will happen now if the number 4 only carrys 1lbs this time? You honestly are saying that the number 1 will run better now giving up 4lbs to the number 4 who beat him at a higher weight? That doesn't makes any sense Stan. Thats crazy logic your using.
whaley05/20/2010 10:03PMJohn, not so hard to answer I know you carry all weights forward to final,but each race is different and you have to look at the whole field and get a feel as to how the race will unfold,it doesn't work just to have a set formula and work from that you have to look at all the horses and the way they run and set your weights from that,I swear you talk like a Republican ....Stan

whaley05/20/2010 09:59PMRed I took all that into consideration when I set the weight,if you had a good post position I would have made you a 5 lb favorite,you have to remember you have by far the best horse in the race and anything less and you would have killed them( I know that would work for you) check the Challenge Buddy many believe you are going to be the winner....Stan
jbcri0905/20/2010 09:05PMIn The Mood, The #4 beat the #1 head to head in 2 races. My other point is the #4 achieved his times at a weight of 126lbs. The #1 achieved his times at 121lbs. My questions how can the #4 only carry 1lb more than the #1? When in the prelims the #4 was carrying 5lbs more than #1. Good luck answering that one Stan, lol.
redterror05/20/2010 08:32PMwhaley i think you also forgot to consider that heroic heart has never ran at 5.5 f. Both his prelims were at 5.0 furlongs.... this should of counted when you were setting the wieghts and odds.. with barrier 9 and 122 on his back and stepping up to 5.5 its a whole different ball game ,, top wight is correct but the next toppie 3 less?? I dont see HH winning this
jbcri0905/20/2010 08:29PMSince you put it that way Stan, about we both have are owns way of doing it. I have to agree with that. I also agee your "Home to some of the World's Finest Gin". Saying that you I would gladly send my vote your way!
general05/20/2010 06:47PMI agree that redterror's is the one to beat for sure, but watch out for 4-Arizona, 5-Hollywood Golden, 7-Curliin, and 8-Emmabelle, any one of those could spring the upset. rnHorsegame267 has a 25% win and a 43% in the money. More than dangerous.rnHas dual 10-1 shots 4 and 7.
whaley05/20/2010 05:51PMJohn we must agree to disagree on handicapping.Your style is a chalk bettors dream as only 2 horses have a chance to win in any race,my style is more balance in the field and closer races and more long shots will have a chance to win..To each his own I think my way is the right way and you think yours is....Stan
jbcri0905/20/2010 05:32PMI made a mistakes 5.5F at post 9, I do want Redterror to win. Go Redterror Go!
jbcri0905/20/2010 05:27PMHaha Stan. All I can say if I hope #9 has added rockets before the race. Did you noticied Stan that the #9 had easy post positions in the 2 races it was in and now its way out in post 9 at a 5F race carrying alot of weight?
whaley05/20/2010 03:31PMjbcri09 your weight assignments in this race would make no sense if it was weighted that way it would be a blow out for reds horse and not even be a race.My weights balance the race check the Buddy challenge and see how many horses have bets on them
jbcri0905/20/2010 01:13PMRedterror horse should carrying the top weight in this race and that weight assignment was perfect. However horse #1 needs +2lbs, #2 needs +6lbs, #3 needs +6lbs, #4 needs +3lbs, #5 needs +3lbs, #6 needs +5lbs, #7 needs +5lbs, #8 needs +2lbs, #9 is correct with these corrected weights on other horses, #10 needs -2lbs this horse is over weighted.
redterror05/20/2010 08:44AMwhat i expected !! oh around 96 ..... lmao just messing with ya ..
jbcri0905/20/2010 01:02AMI will not vote no. But I'm guessing redterror horse will finish last or 2nd to last. Now I wont be suprised if the #2 @ 20-1, #3 @ 40-1, #6 @ 15-1 and #7 @ 10-1 Win the race. I also wont be suprised if all 4 finish at the top. Those four horses I mentioned have a better chance of winning than any of the rest in the field.
dustyla205/19/2010 10:50PMNice job, Whaley!
whaley05/19/2010 07:58PMThanks Red,Class horse and I know weight is a lot but really what did you expect ??...Stan
redterror05/19/2010 09:57AMgood job. 122 a little bit high , just a little ,,still should be top wieght thou , green plus button push for you. wish daakas horse could of made the final.... only entered my horse in here just to piss him off....haha
whaley05/18/2010 10:34PMThanks 70Carnut This handicapping thing is not so easy !!! And may I add congrats on your last two weeks winning the challenge buddy you have hung in there when others have not....Stan
70carnut05/18/2010 08:05PMNice job Whaley! This is one of the more difficult races to handicap, since you really don't know if the horses will move forward or backward going 5.5F.

and whaley when i first looked at the race i thought yeah fare enough but then when jbcri came in and gave his opnion i then went and evaluated the race myself like i was handicapping it and found heaps of flaws its all good thou every1 makes mistakes but can you admit you were wrong? nope,,, :) no grudges held and best of luck in your handicapping

PP Horse Name Age RSD Owner Wt Odds 1/4 1/2 Fin Time SR Earning
4 Arizona 2/M M horsegame267 115 13 (7) Head (3) Neck (1) 1/2 L 1:02.25 117.80 50,160
2 Spring Butterfly 2/F M trechobezor 113 26 (2) 1/2 L (1) Neck (2) 3/4 L 1:02.34 116.40 22,800
1 Ela Mana Mo 2/F M duss860 119 5 (5) Neck (2) 1 L (3) 1/2 L 1:02.46 114.60 10,944
5 Hollywood Golden 2/M M ronron900 118 8 (4) Neck (6) Nose (4) 3/4 L 1:02.54 113.30 7,296
3 Keiko 2/M M kasiax1x 112 52 (8) 1 1/2 L (5) Neck (5) 3/4 L 1:02.68 111.20 0
7 Curliin 2/F M horsegame267 115 13 (10) (10) (6) 1/2 L 1:02.82 109.10 0
8 Emmabelle 2/F M tyolds 119 5 (6) 3/4 L (8) 1 1/2 L (7) 1 L 1:02.89 108.10 0
6 Dyrnwyn 2/F M bthib75 114 19 (9) 3/4 L (9) Head (8) 3/4 L 1:03.06 105.40 0
9 Heroic Heart 2/F M redterror 122 6:5 (1) Neck (4) 3/4 L (9) 4 1/4 L 1:03.19 103.50 0
10 Miss Jj Lime 2/F M kalabrouchie 117 10 (3) 3/4 L (7) 1/2 L (10) 1:03.89 94.80 0

Great point,
But the probability is that a horse that has the ability to break a track record is a Top Horse in a Top Tourney, where the weight range would be narrowed to the 5 lbs. you suggest. As far as the base weights for 2 yo, did they increase?

Oh yeah, sorry about dusting Calculated Risk, I remember him breaking a Track Record in his first 2yo Tourney, that was when I first started playing and you helped me out. Oh, the memories.
Did I say dusted, have I no respect?
LOL.

Thanks for keeping it civil, but making my point nonetheless.
By limiting the weight ranges, the disputes will also be limited.

Of courses there will still be some who want to flog the handicapper over a 25K purse, but such is life.
I'm not saying you're doing that here, but what I'm trying to point out is that if the same situation arose and it was over 500K pts., it could get seriously ugly.

As a current handicapper i am doing all i can to be sure i get it right or very close..
In order to define a small problem in my own mind i have done testing and i mean hours of testing..

Due to a simple fact here in game where we may change sex at birth i am sure weights to a degree will not affect a horse..

Lokk any any past 3yr old&up events.. the difference between females and males vary up to 6 pounds allot and results dont alter much or nobody ever complianed about these prelims...

So i have now spent many hours running races in advance mode.. i ran same horses over 6f.. i ran the same track,, same simulation date 8/1 and i used scale weights.. i adjusted the weights from 114 to 120.. i then changed horses and ran more...

Up to this 6 pound difference in weights i can recieve the same result as far as time/final sr of race.. (all grade 1 also..)

At this time i believe 6 pound weight difference WILLNOT affect a result here in our game..... (over 5f-7f)...over longer it might and more then 6 pound might..i have more testing to do yet..

I think we (as community) need to forget what position we finished...
We all need to look at the length behind the winner we finished... then look at how much ground we lost... energy left... race luck.. consistancy and courage..

I feel we are placing to much (bad) on handicappers when in reality the weights did NOTHING to the end result..90% cases.. some may be result of bad handicapping but geezzzzzzzzzzz 6 pound is nothing.. i could run 6f carrying 6 pound...my gut is about 20 pound and i can carry it around all day...

"Sir Slavedave Stables"
""" We make Donkeys fly"""

Once again, you enter low, you will get low results

~~ The Flyingdaaka stable: Low SR horses only ~~

I am fine with the same weights they carry in prelims. When I handicap, I carry the prelim weights to the final and adjust off them. So what ever weight you raced at in prelims is your starting point. In the final race I then adjust up or down pounds on how your horse performed in the prelims.

I also suggested they should let more than one person handicap each race. Which would even out the field and cut down on mistakes. That idea was rejected.

I also stated what Vasef suggested when a big purse comes up and most people see that the race is handicapped wrong there could be some nasty threats being made.

Basically, if we want this game to be as realistic as it could be to real thorougbred horse racing, it is the older horses, that for the most part, set, or break track records. Not 2 year olds. Final times and speed ratings traditionally get faster once you turn three.
I think we're at a good point now and with some modifying, we'll get even better. I don't think anybody could say, the old way was better. Computer handicapping.

Ok, Davo wants to run? Davo get your big gut in post 9. Lets place 6lbs on you. In the other post we will place frogs in them. The race is 5.5 Furlongs turf soft. I will guarantee you will come in last. You probably are saying I can beat frogs to the finish line easily. I would say I agree. However the 6lbs your carrying is not lead weight, its 6lbs of whiskey. So instead of running to the finish line you will be to busy sleeping in the nice soft turf.

i feel sorry for the person who ends up handicapping its mister cielo lmaao haha

LMAO JOHN... but in my own views it is pp9 that will kill me..not the weight..(if less then 6 pounds)

HONESTLY lets look at this from a larger angle and serious angle//

Hrf have a great game here..
a... would puddles do anything to jerpardise the integrity or quality of the game?
b... would hrf intensionaly plan somthing that could cause major arguments amounst the community members??

MY ANSWER TO BOTH IS NO NO NODAMN WAY!!

SO in my opinion weights up to maybe 6pound or so have 0 affect on any grade racing.. therefore hrf handed the responsiblity to us in order to stop the complianing towards the company....
Very simple hrf have placed more involvment amoungst us to allow us more enjoyment in this game... i feel very confident that if weights played huge part then we would never be handicapping these races with a set varation as is.... would have been far more benificial to hrf to update or improve the computer method...

HOWEVER to make the field look right we as handicappers need to do our best and attempt to get it right at the same time....

I am 100% sure that with so many traites ect ect + the pp and tracks tight turns ..long turns.. so damn many fetures to affect an outcome the weights assigned if assigned inteligently will have very little change to the outcome....

PP is my largest concern due to so many leaders racing at the moment... my stable alone is 75% frontrunners...

This is just my opinoin so please dont take any of it as gospel... i say what i see only...

"Sir Slavedave Stables"
""" We make Donkeys fly"""

I just going agree, even though I didn't read your post, haha. I quickly went through your post did you say from now on when you breed a female your going change to a male? If there was no difference in the weights male and females carrys why is HRF paying more for males if they reach the shed?

Case Closed

Good eye, good eye.

Davo I will reopen my case for you, if you have anything more on this. Everybody else thou the case is closed.

Only Kidding Dave!!!

All I can say is, I applaud you guys who have stepped forward to do this. I wouldn't do it for a million HRF points. And I think you are all trying, and discussing how to best get it done. We all appreciate that, and as Doug said, no matter the overall state of the human-handicapping right now, it's still a thousand times better than the computer handicapping which might assign one of the best horses in the game's history less weight than a nag it has to run against in a final.

As an aside, I have a final coming up sometime soon, and I'm gonna be REAL interested in how it gets handicapped, because the material the H'capper has to look at is a bit misleading at the moment. I want to see who is doing their homework. It's going to be a bit of a logic puzzle. Suffice it to say my horse should carry no more than 98 pounds, and I will flay the handicapper alive who assigns more. Just kidding.

All that said, I agree with what has been said about penalizing people who romp in a tournament during prelims with higher weight, but on a curve that corresponds to entry fee/purse. Let the big boys run with the big boys with nearly-equal weights, and in those cheaper tournaments, make one who has dominated carry an anvil plus a starved jockey.

The single biggest problem I see right now with the game is that these days, you often need to be able to run close to a 120 to win a 1500cp/no race fee tournament. No good placement or drop in class is sufficient anymore to be able to have success with slower horses, indeed, even with decent horses, and whether people want to talk about it or not, yes-- for the good of the game, people had better be able to have at least some modest success with those slower/decent horses.

I know some people will say I'm a socialist or something. But what I'm suggesting isn't socialism, it's captitalism, to a T. The more people that join, the more tournaments can be written, the more opportunities you have to win payouts with larger varieties of tournaments. This is supply and demand. There are more members today than there were last month, and next month, there will be more than there are now. Wait until the Secretariat movie comes out. Then it's going to really blow up.

A lot of these new people will come here and breed one horse that's slow, and find that they have no hope whatsoever of competing in any tourney at any level. That is the way it is right now. It's going to have to change. Period. HRF isn't going to stop advertising, their goal, like any company, is growth. More trainers. More horses.

They've made a step in the right direction with the blue restricted races that are soon to come. For a lot of the rest, I say they should line up the anvils and pianos, and put earplugs in because WAH WAH WAHH I CARRY 98 IN ALL THE PRELIMS AND WON 3 OF 4 BY AVERAGE 5L THEN YOU MAKE ME CARRY 112 AND HORSEY LOSE BLEAHH BLUU.

pffft. You should have carried 126, and also been retroactively aborted.

PS: Here is when men were men, and for some reason the computer handicapping program got it right: http://www.horseracegame.com/community/races/1077/3156

I dont know how you think the computer got that weight right. You won by 16L. Maybe you should have carried from 132-134lbs for closer race.

Nice Horse and who doesn't like a romp from time to time.

A continue after I looked

I just looked at the top 3 in the final and looked at the times and weights carried. I think you horse did show a sr130 in prelims and no horse came close to that number. I also believe it was a good performance from your horse, and those weights were fine for that final. If you like closer races then I would say you should have carried more weight.

Can you block me out of threads for the next 24hrs. From now to Sunday at 1am when the system refreshes for the day.
I want to see access denied to threads. See I added this to this post.

Thank You

I haven't changed my mind. To be on the safe I say lock me out of threads for 1 week, I may need longer.

The reason why am requesting a lock out. I am really annoyed with the handicapping issue. I wish it would go away, but it wont. I have to seen bad races after bad races. It is very upsetting to see good people suffer on poor handicapping. What is more upsetting handicappers wont even explain simple questions with answers.

If I screw up, I am not affraid to admit it. We all make mistakes. But when it becomes a pattern final after final and still the same result by certain people that becomes a issue. Mike you say vote them out. How is this possible if they have friends who votes postively ever race and dont care about the results? There are some handicappers on here that have messed up every race they handicapped but some how they have alot more good votes than negatives votes. Figure that one out Mike.

Thank You

He ran a 134 on slop in a prelim, next-best in that one ran a 129. He did 104 and 112 in prelims on fast dirt. He lost one of those by 5 3/4L, the other one he won by close to that amount. The 112 was his career-best at the time. The 16L is deceiving because he was blocked in for a while and then had a late explosion when the door opened in the stretch.

I think the weights in that one were good. Even though they were set by the computer which knew something no handicapper could know about the winner at that time, that he was much the best and primed for a breakout.

Nobody is going to be assigned 132 in a final, not unless the rest of the field is carrying 126.

So what I'm saying is, bring back the computer handicapping. Ha ha.

Mike said this which doesn't make any sense.

This is a good post and I would like feedback here. Please no rants just feed back and why you feel the way you do. This will help us as we evaluate the situation. Please keep this thread on topic.

So you want us to tell you how we feel but you only want to hear positive comments. You will use these postive comments to evaluate the situation. Thats alot of request your asking for.

#1 You want feedback
#2 No rants
#3 Just feedback
#4 Why you feel the way you do
#5 Please keep this thread on topic

I dont know how your going to use all good feedback to evaluate anything.

relax a bit people and watch this monkey take notice of his hand

I think that monkeys hand is the bad handicapper and then when I get smell of the results I fall off the tree limb.

@ SlaveDave, you are correct in your testing at 6 lbs, really makes little difference. How about 10 or 14 lbs?
The fact that you see little difference in a 6 lb range, is precisely why the range in the Top Tournaments should be 5 lbs.!

@MrMojok, In the last couple of weeks, the computer has basically been using scale weights in the finals,the weight range has been very tight. I'm all for your idea, bring back the computer handicap....LOL!

@Blairbleman, you posed a very good question.
" Is it our job to make sure that students or newbies win".......I see your point, and here's my response.
HELL NO
It's not our job as players, our goal should be to win. Win, Baby, Win!
It's not our job as players to do anything but handle our own stables, but HRF is a business. We,as players, don't have to care if HRF makes money, but if HRF doesn't make money, then we will have no HRF game to play. So it IS HRF's job to try and ensure that ALL players enjoy this game.

What we have now is an attempt to "level the playing field" ,at all levels, in the hands of handicappers.
I personally want scale weights used in all Finals, no handicap.
But from HRF's perspective, I can see the need to level the playing field at the low-level,student level.....it helps player growth and retention.

The idea to use the weight ranges as sort of a class system is a compromise.
A compromise between the Sundowners (Scale Weights) and HRF (Handicap weights).
Did I mention I'm a Sundowner......LOL!

It's a Win, Win situation.

Great Post

A comment was made that the game favors those who spend more and breed more, if true is that Right?

Personally I dont feel having to spend 20,000 pts to enter and an additional 32000 pts to run (4 X 8000) so the winner walks away with 61600 and second gets 28000 pts. as value.

So sometimes you are forced to run cheaper or spend more on points to keep playing.

So a small group will continue to dominate and be rewarded. We all spend money to play here and yet dont have equal rights. Why are some allowed to be forum censors? Why are only some chosen to be handicappers?

It is a computer model that does not allow us to ride our horses in races so why are humans allowed to be involved in the handicapping, or any other aspect of the game.

Not trying to be negative here -just asking some obvious questions. Hope I don't get censored again.

I appreciate your input and you bring up valid points.
Mojo, made the comment about socialism vs capitalism.
And that's how I see it.

Capatilism can be unfair, the rich get richer and the poor stay poor.
Socialism brings about some equality.

So using the handicap weights is like socialism. That's fine. All I'm suggesting is to keep the Top Levels Capitalist.
If you want to win big, then you have to have big horses, it's that simple, no handicap.
I mentioned this before, I'm a NY Yankees fan, you hate or you love em, but Steinbrener buys up all of the best players and the Yankees win. Should MLB make the salary (Handicap) low enough to ensure all of the teams are the same?
Should HRF hand out Trophys to everyone, so we're like Little League Baseball?

I completely understand your point of view, and that is why I brought up this thread.
The game should accomodate all levels of players, and I believe that is what HRF is trying to do.
But leveling the playing field at the Top is unfair to the Yankees,it's not accomadating to them.
It's like chopping down every tree in the forest, just so everybody can get some Sunlight.

Personally I like shade, I'm not going to hate on the Trees. I may be a liittle sapling now, but one day I'll grow up and be a Tree in this game.........LOL, wishful thinking.

http://www.horseracegame.com/community/handicapper/62712

Time has come for a change.

I don't know how many trainers are in our game, but it does look like we have around 17,000 "members" total from figures I've see.
I'm wondering why most don't get involved in our forum and apparently aren't even interested in the weight assignment procedures.
I think we need more involvment.

"Hrf have a great game here..
a... would puddles do anything to jerpardise the integrity or quality of the game?
b... would hrf intensionaly plan somthing that could cause major arguments amounst the community members??

MY ANSWER TO BOTH IS NO NO NODAMN WAY!!

SO in my opinion weights up to maybe 6pound or so have 0 affect on any grade racing.. therefore hrf handed the responsiblity to us in order to stop the complianing towards the company...."~ Slavedave

What the are you blabbering about?? LOL
What's with this 6 lb business? The weight ranges are currently up to 14 lbs.
If you are saying you want the range to be 6 lbs, no matter age or class, then I'm on board 100%.
If you're saying you're going to limit your own range to 6 lbs when you handicap,then please grab all of my tourneys.

Lastly, you say that HRF handed the responsibility over to us in order to stop the complaining towards the company.
True or not, where do you think the complaints will go to now?