I'm not a user of the OR rating but I thought it would be useful to understand how it should be interpreted when examining form. In doing so maybe some others would find it useful. As an example I attach a result from Newbury today and would be grateful for any advice on what useful information can be gleaned from this particular race. I'm guessing that the OR rating is the rating going into the race. So for example, Edgardo Sol was rated 17 units higher than Lyvius. If a unit is equal to 1lb then this means that going into the race Edgardo Sol was rated 17lbs superior to Lyvius. Lyvius was in receipt of 10lbs from Edgardo Sol which would imply that the latter had 7lbs in hand. However he was beaten 2l by the former. On the other hand Edgardo Sol was rated 6lbs superior to Peckhamecho and receiving 1lb from that horse meaning? he was 7lb well in against that horse, and duly finished 3¾l ahead of him. I won't go any further in case what I have said so far is total rubbish. But does this mean that the winner ran xlbs above his earlier form and is likely to receive a higher rating? I'm sure it is much more complicated than that but ignoring the obvious factors such as distance and going am I going in the right direction? Any guidance would be appreciated. The race
The executive summary is that Livius is going up in the weights The official rating is, of course, the rating the horse is given on its performances to date, and of course horses are animals, not machines, so they don't always run to their ratings. To my mind the handicapper is far too eager to put horses ratings UP but very loathe to take them down. My view on the race today is that the 4th and 5th placed horses have run nearest to their OR. The 2nd and 3rd places have probably run a little below their best (probably due to the going) and Livius has probably run to somewhere between 140-145. I'll be surprised if the handicapper gives him anything less than 140. Edgardo Sol, conversely, is likely to be left at 140, or dropped a pound or two at most, as I'm sure the handicapper will take the view that he was beaten by a much better handicapped horse today.
I am by NO means an expert in this, but i'll try to give my understanding. The OR (official rating) is used chiefly by the handicapper to assign weight to horses in handicap races. After a race the handicapper will try to find a reliable yardstick horse to rate the race. The yardstick(s) will be the horse(s) who are judged to have ran to their pre-race ability and therefore sets the standard of the other horses. The horses finishing in front of the yardstick horse will have higher ratings and those behind will have lower ratings. The handicapper will use different ratios of how many lbs will equal one horse length depending on the length of the race (it would be unfair to rate the merits of a 20 length win in a 5F sprint the same as a 20 length win in a 3 mile chase). The formula used will vary but, 2.5 lbs per length per mile of the race, can be used. That means that a horse beaten by 1 length in a 2.5 mile race would be rated 1 lb lower (or 1 OR point) than the winner, or a horse beaten 2 lengths in a 1 mile race would be rated 5 lbs (5 OR points) lower than the winner. As an example i have calculated the handicap ratings using a benchmark of Edgardo Sol in the first example and Peckhamecho in the second. These produce different "new" ratings depending on how you assess the relative merits of how each horse ran. The official handicapper does the same thing and may assess the race differently to you. You will gain a betting advantage if your assessment is nearer the truth in the subsequent races that these horses run. I can explain in more detail how i came up with the handicap ratings if anyone is interested, and i would be interested if other peoples handicap ratings differ from mine. View attachment 19279 View attachment 19280
The attachments do not seem to work If you make Edgardo Sol the benchmark then: Benchmark 2 Horse OR Wt, lbs dist sum dist equiv weight diff Rating assessment dist relative to benchmark New Weightings New Rating Ly 127 10 7 147 0 0 127 2 2.5 130 ES 144 11 3 157 2 2 2.5 141.5 0 0 144 Peck 138 11 4 158 3.75 5.75 7.1875 130.8125 -3.75 -4.68 133 VR 130 10 10 150 8 13.75 17.1875 112.8125 -11.75 -14.68 115 CB 127 10 4 144 2.5 16.25 20.3125 -14.25 -17.81 109 Ven 136 11 2 156 12 28.25 35.3125 -26.25 -32.81 103 However, if Peckhamecho is the benchmark then: Benchmark 5.75 Horse OR Wt, lbs dist sum dist equiv weight diff Rating assessment dist relative to benchmark New Weightings New Rating Ly 127 10 7 147 0 0 127 5.75 7.1875 134 ES 144 11 3 157 2 2 2.5 141.5 3.75 4.6875 149 Peck 138 11 4 158 3.75 5.75 7.1875 130.8125 0 0 138 VR 130 10 10 150 8 13.75 17.1875 112.8125 -8 -10 120 CB 127 10 4 144 2.5 16.25 20.3125 -10.5 -13.125 114 Ven 136 11 2 156 12 28.25 35.3125 -22.5 -28.125 108 dependent on which situation the handicapper is correct can have a large impact on the weight the horse will carry in future races.
The OR is the basis for all form analysts. However you have to remember it is only the opinion of the handicapper. They will be as much wrong as they are right in the vast majority of assesments. Everyone should have their own opinion i personally think some of the official figures are farcical. Its ones personal assesment thats the key. If your good you can spot the horses that are better in than their official figure. Thats basically what AppraiseForm does and thats why it gets a margin. I take it you are aware that Edgardo Sol was set to carry 11'10 but had a 7lb claimer. Thus that was an advantage over his official rating of 144 so he raced with 137 and Peckamecho 138.
Are you saying that I should have based my calculation on the basis of Edgardo Sol carrying 11.10 (ie the 7lb allowance is negated by the inexperience)/the OR has to be reduced by the allowance on the basis that the horse will be 7lb inferior than his OR due to the inexperience of the jockey? Then we can use our judgement to adjust the rating if we believe the jockey is better than the allowance implies.
I think as Ardent states the official rating is no more than the official handicapper's opinion. I used to find it helpful to make notes of horses i felt won well but without a big margin as i would then check in the weekender to see what change had been made and would often find myself with a different opinion to the handicapper with such horses. I think it is quite hard for him to hammer certain horses who will never pull away and so those horses remain well handicapped longer.Although they were obviously not handicappers it's the difference between a Sea the Stars and a Frankel. With regard the race today that is being used in the calculations above i thought the winner won well and has a lot more to come.
The attachment had the way that i calculate OR, which should be the same method (more or less) as the official handicapper. As the other posters have said the handicapper makes a judgement on how he see the race, but will not always be right. The handicappers judgement will be based on which horse they think has ran to their ability but not more or less. If the handicapper judges that Edgardo Sol ran to his pre-race ablility then he would rate the race as follows: Lyvius 130 Edgardo Sol 144 Peckhamecho 133 Valid Reason 115 Call Back 109 Vendor 103 However, if you judge that Peckhamecho ran to his pre-race ability then you would the race as follows: Lyvius 134 Edgardo Sol 149 Peckhamecho 138 Valid Reason 120 Call Back 114 Vendor 108 So your assessment of the race has Lyvius as 4 lbs (4 OR points) better than the official handicappers assessment. So if you have assessed the race more accurately than the handicapper, Lyvius will have a better chance of winning the next handicap race as they will be 4 lbs "well in".
I don't like it when people say that, he didn't race with 137 he raced with 144, even with the claimers removal of weight, because the weight is an allowance to the jockey and not the horse.
Ok, I will try and give my views and the understanding I have. Firstly, Ron, well done for picking a jumps race, they are easier to explain!! "Jump 1lb per length is used in most instances except over very long distances or on very testing ground." BHA Handicapping site Therefore if a horse A is rated 1lb more than horse B, it should beat horse B by a length off level weights, and that is the principle of the handicap, whereby horses of different quality can race each other more competitively. So in regards to the race mentioned - Lyvius 127 carrying 10-7 beat Edgardo Sol 144 carrying 11-10 (jockey took 7lb claim) by 2 lengths Therefore we can assume one of five things happened = Lyvius ran to form, but Edgardo Sol was 2lbs worse than his rating Edgard Sol ran to form, but Lyvius was 2lbs better than his rating Neither ran to form, and Lyvius was just 2lbs closer to his rating form than Edgardo Sol Both ran above form, but Lyvius was another 2lbs better than his rating that Edgardo Sol was Lyvius ran to 1lb better than his rating but Edgardo Sol ran to 1lb less than his rating. So how does the handicapper decipher this? He looks at the form of the race as a whole and finds one horse who he believes ran to about his form, be that the winner, the second or something further back in the field. My view, I would draw the form line through the third home, who ran a creditable race, therefore I would - Raise Lyvius 6lbs to 133 Raise Edgardo Sol 4lbs to 148 Keep Peckhamecho at 138 I then would drop the rest 3lbs, because all ran below their ratings, but possibly they were given tender rides after being beaten and the distances are exagerrated (this is why they come down so slowly in my mind). Hopefully that explains my take on the handicapping and I look forward to seeing what he actually does with their ratings now I have had a look at it! The principle of this is that if you keep your own ratings, you can see which ones you believe the handicapper has got wrong and therefore take a strong view on a race, and this can help your betting strategy. Much like the RPR attempts to do along with timeform et al.
Has anybody tried to produce they own handicap ratings? In the past i have done it for particular races, but i have found the process very time-consuming and of-course there is no guarantee that your figures will be better than the official handicapper.
I don't like it when people say that, he didn't race with 137 he raced with 144, even with the claimers removal of weight, because the weight is an allowance to the jockey and not the horse. You sure Nass? Why would a trainer use an up and coming claimer then? to give him an easier ride because he has less weight to carry? i think not. I have to say your comment was bordering on silly at best. A claimer is used to lessen the weight a horse has to carry, not a jockey as you suggested. Whether he/she is worth that compared to a pro is another question?
I used to play about a little a long time ago New Approach as i mentioned but it was so time consuming. At present it is so easy to actually take a race and re watch a horse's previous runs, this i feel is far more valuable as distance alone only tells half the story and having the visual will display more effectively the difference between a lengh and a half all out or the same distance unasked. I remember reading an interview with Sir Henry recently and if my memory serves he was actually reffering to times rather than weights but the upshot was that he remarked that he knows little about times but if you show him two horses finishing together he will know who was going better every time. I think it's also this ability that makes a good punter, to be able to watch a race look at the handicappers view and see why it may actually be otherwise. Great post Ron
In handicapping terms, the allowance is for the jockey not the horse. You are correct in saying that the trainer/connections use them to lessen the weight carried by the horse, but the allowance itself is for the jockey. To prove it, the handicapper will rate the second on his official handicap mark and not the weight he carried in the race, because the allowance is for the jockey and not the horse. In reality we take into account the merits of the jockey and his claim, but the handicapper does not.
In reality we take into account the merits of the jockey and his claim, but the handicapper does not. and rightly so imo, some jockeys may well be claiming 7lbs but their skill in saddle may well be 10lbs inferior to a pro, on the other hand you get claimers come along who ride as well as some pros and will lose their claim in no time and are worth every pound they receive. In that case they would imo be removing weight from the horse to shoulder. It's up to anyones own perception of form to make their own adjustments accordingly.
Quite right, but in regards the official handicap that isn't the case. It is one area that the punter can get an edge, if they know their claimer/conditionals and their relative merits.
I have always intended to combine my own handicap ratings with other information (like the In-running comments provided by the racing post) to generate more accurate ratings. So, for example, you would change your rating of the winner depending on whether the in-running comments mention "all out" "stayed on strongly" "easily" etc. It is even possible to automate this process with a computer program (like the api bots which work with the exchanges) to gather this information for you, in practice, i have never had the time to do this, but i hope to do so in the future.
Whatever way you cut it (and each to their own) the fact is Edgardo carried 7lb less than his OR... whether he benefited from that is open to debate. Personally I think he did. To me his OR is too high on that basis.
Timeform work on a similar basis. Their adjusted ratings ignore the allowance on the basis that the weight reduction is negated by the inexperience of the rider but they do advise the punter to decide whether the rider is worth more than the allowance (as some are).
