If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Announcement
Collapse
Fat Jockey Patrons
Fat Jockey is a horse racing community focused on all the big races in the UK and Ireland. We don't charge users but if you have found the site useful then any support towards the running costs is appreciated. Become a Patron!
DDL beat IP 14 and 1/4 l on yielding , level weights
FG beat IP 9 and 1/2 l on heavy , 8lb more
Not a huge difference and not a way of knowing which is the better.
The ground could be more significant maybe?
Yep exactly.
I mean i get the impression DLL is a proper proper horse, but on those 2 runs, hard to know. You'd have to hope and it's likely that WPM has a few sitting there in the wings that haven't met a track yet that would win that Royal Bond with ease. Where that leaves DLL's is interesting.
Jeriko Du Reponet only recording a RPR of 120. Willmount was 128 on debut.
Neither that high, that said, Marine Nationale only recorded a 125 on hurdles debut, so these debuts can be taken with a pinch of salt.
Daddy Long Legs 131 too.
... and following his Royal Bond win, Farren Glory's maiden was increased from 132 to 137. So no doubt if any of the others win well next time out their debut RPR's will get a decent uplift.
What’s the story with revisiting ratings, is it essentially tweaking them to match form of their subsequent runs?
id love to know the process and how they land on a revised number
Yes, it's to better reflect the horses ability and, I guess, to fit a more traditional progression model. I've no idea how they work out how much to add or subtract.
Personally, I'd prefer it to be an honest assessment of the run and not the horses ability. I'd find that much more useful for carrying out assessments with an eye to the future. For example, we all know JDR has done only enough to win first time out so a rating of 120 is fine and an honest reflection of his performance on the day.
Don't forget the Racing Post is a subscription service.
They will want the ratings to look good in relation to the better horses being highlighted.
The revising of ratings is a get out for them.
That's the pessimist in me though.
On the positive side, the revising of ratings provides them the opportunity to put more pieces of the puzzle together for the overall form and collateral form of horses.
I'm not a member but if any ratings are revised they really ought to show this and make it clear i.e (132) 137
Maybe they do, with a reason why, then that's all good.
If they just go back in and just swap the number then that's a bit naughty IMO.
]Don't forget the Racing Post is a subscription service.
They will want the ratings to look good in relation to the better horses being highlighted.
The revising of ratings is a get out for them.[/B]
That's the pessimist in me though.
On the positive side, the revising of ratings provides them the opportunity to put more pieces of the puzzle together for the overall form and collateral form of horses.
I'm not a member but if any ratings are revised they really ought to show this and make it clear i.e (132) 137
Maybe they do, with a reason why, then that's all good.
If they just go back in and just swap the number then that's a bit naughty IMO.
You say this but nobody has to pay for access to rpr's.
That's not what i pay for my subscription for and i doubt the people paying for it are either.
I acknowledge you realise it's you just being pessimistic.
are there any examples of which ones are known of rpr's changing later in the season when said horse has won a grade 1.
i say this because marine nationale for instance is surely a debut rpr they would've upgraded.
I know for a few days afterwards they can be subsequent to change but haven't any examples myself as i don't record them.
Last edited by AaronLad; 4 December 2023, 11:46 AM.
You say this but nobody has to pay for access to rpr's.
That's not what i pay for my subscription for and i doubt the people paying for it are either.
I acknowledge you realise it's you just being pessimistic.
are there any examples of which ones are known of rpr's changing later in the season when said horse has won a grade 1.
i say this because marine nationale for instance is surely a debut rpr they would've upgraded.
I know for a few days afterwards they can be subsequent to change but haven't any examples myself as i don't record them.
Happens quite often from what I’ve gathered in last couple years. Which on the positive side is fine.
The members comments relate to wether they get more details than others that don’t subscribe.
Happens quite often from what I’ve gathered in last couple years. Which on the positive side is fine.
The members comments relate to wether they get more details than others that don’t subscribe.
So what have you gathered?
or do you mean gathered from comments from others?
And as a subscriber i can tell you i have no extra information on rpr's than what is free. maybe i'm missing something
you're probably wondering why i subscribe?
News articles that i often used to begrudgingly be unable to read, digital copy of the racing post every day plus all supplements, a race tracker that is second to none and instant access to stuff like quotes etc (that would take a great deal more time to find) Not to mention access to all stable tours.
It is for some isn't for others but the rpr's are free for all, and have been for as long as i can remember
So what have you gathered?
or do you mean gathered from comments from others?
And as a subscriber i can tell you i have no extra information on rpr's than what is free. maybe i'm missing something
you're probably wondering why i subscribe?
News articles that i often used to begrudgingly be unable to read, digital copy of the racing post every day plus all supplements, a race tracker that is second to none and instant access to stuff like quotes etc (that would take a great deal more time to find) Not to mention access to all stable tours.
It is for some isn't for others but the rpr's are free for all, and have been for as long as i can remember
So when they change a rating it just changes and members get no additional information ?
Obviously the official handicapper publishes amendments and reasoning.
RPRs are pretty pointless for maiden hurdles IMO. I'm not even sure the same person does them as one horse can win super easy and gets 1 pound extra for ease of win and another horse will win just as easily and be given 15 pounds extra above winning distance. They aren't consistent and so they should all be taken with a pinch of salt.
Not relevant for this discussion but in recent years I've found RPRs extremely useful with maidens on the flat, anything that posts a debut of 90+ will invariably be a group horse, anything that debuts 100+ will win a G1 next time/time after.
I have no idea whether any of these get amended along the way.
It's not easy assessing comparable performances...
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Tweet
Comment