Can see big problems with the idea:

If this counts as their two runs then we will have distance parameter problem.

I could run over 5f (twice) get a Mark then run in 6f handicaps off a false Mark.

To my mind horse have to run at two different distances in maidens to be able to run at two different distances in handicaps.

Using your idea for this to happen they would have to have four races.

I will complete a twelve week schedule and leave number of maiden runs and stewarding to someone else.

Steve

I think forty eight races in week one and forty eight in week two would be much better.

Don't forget each player has 30 horses in their stable, with some of them duplicated over same distances.

I will run half the races if Kenny thinks it is too much.

I can duplicate existing races, re-name and re-track them.

What do you think.

Might not be much to do with me but I think we need two runs in maidens and I dont want to run in exactly the same race twice. For eg I have some horses which I want to run at 1m6 AND 2m to see what their best distance in the league might be.

I think we should run in different races. If you need help with anything as its too time consuming then I can.

I am very keen to pursue the single distance rule for all horses from 5-7f. I don't think that the number of horses that can be competitive at two of those distances outweighs the temptation to "get a mark". Would this make handicapping easier?

I genuinely cannot believe anyone would upload a horse to the league and not know it's exact distance preference?

Its a question of placement/runners for races.

Limiting horses to one distance will significantly reduce field sizes.

For example if I have a 5f sprinter who is rated 79 or below, it can run in only four races plus one maiden. If it could run in both 5f and 6f races it can enter eight plus two maidens.

By having the horse run in two maidens one over 5f and one over 6f its true rating will come through.

If it just ran in one maiden for example at 5f, then it would be confined to race just over 5f.

Scenario:

Horse is really a 6f horse.

Jimmy Eastwood (you know who I mean) runs it over 5f and it runs down the field obtaining a rating of say 70.

Jimmy now has two options, run it only over 5f in the future or run it over its correct distance of 6f in another maiden, in order to race in 6f handicap races as well as five.

As expected the horse improves quite a lot and gets a true rating of 87 - job done.

Steve

I just don't think a 6f horse should ever run over 5f. By bringing in a single distance rule for those three distances we remove the need for a race. It's true rating will only come out for it's preferred distance, it's run over the wrong distance will muddy the water. I would prefer the handicapper to work off one race at one distance than two at two different distances (edit: I mean this for sprint races obviously). In my testing horses are about 5L worse over 1f shorter than their optimum distance and at least 10 lengths worse at 1 furlong further.

I would then rather add more races throughout the season (or replace some of the long distance races with more popular distances) than create a whole load more maidens.

I have to disgaree and Scatters has proved it this week, Sara horizon won the abbaye (5f) and won Haydock sprint cup and golden Shaheen (6f) at group 1 level!!!!

I have horses that trial best at 5f but have needed 6f in the league. If im restricted to one trip it could be a wasted horse. I've also other horse at other trips which need 1f more or less than when I trial them. Some of my 1m6 horses looked like they needed 2m in the league and proved it with a 2nd in the Ces last week.


Trialing is not an exact science. My best 1m4 horse has been the worst of mine in the league

I will create the schedule as I see it leaving the first two weeks the same.

Once that is done, I will make it available for download.

After that I will do the handicapping job for the flat.

Obviously as president you will have the overriding decisions regarding everything else.

Any changes to the schedule after my first draft will have to be made by yourself.

It is a very difficult balancing act.

Small changes can mean big problems.

Thanks

Steve

I have had this Keith in both the seasons i have played, some horses do need slight adjusting in there race distance ( may have something to do with the pace of other horses you compete with in the league rather then the standard pace your used to in your own trials? )... not all horses mind only some need a slight adjustment.

I also have a couple of milers who if running on a track with a bend have no chance over a mile but can still win over 1m1. On a straight track they won races over 1m

I didn't say it wasn't possible but the number of horses that can do it are vastly outnumbered by those that can't. Regardless, at Group level I would be happy to see horses compete at any distance they want to on the basis that their rating doesn't change after the result.

Keith, over 7f then horses would be allowed to compete over 2 distances so 1m and 1m1f would be fine.

Rich, Don't follow your points on your last two comments.

Firstly,

Obviously horses ratings must be evaluated after each run.

Secondly,

7f horses should not be running in 9f handicaps.

6f/7f or 7f/8f fine. Provided they have run in maidens at those distances.

I am going to halt work on the schedule, unitl we are definite about the rules, regarding horse parameters and maidens.

Steve

You cant have a 7f horse running over 1m1f if sprinters can only have 1 distance, thats just contradicting surely? 7f should be 7f and 1m only. cant run over 6f else that means its just 5f horses that are effected.

I think what Rich meant was horses that ran over distances more than 7f.