going by the poll vote the 1000 Guineas winner and 2000 Guineas runner up would not have been
allowed to run in those races and would have run in handicaps taking wins away from the lower tier
something that the new rules was meant to stop.

This is only my opinion and mainly to help to protect new trainers horses ratings but think
the minimum rating should be around 80 this will protect the new trainers.

I hear what your saying Stu but alot of newcomers dont know the score that running in G1s usually ruins
their handicap mark and usually costs the horse any chance of winning that season if I was in that position
I'd rather have a chance of winning a race then having a day out in a G1 again only my opinion as always the majority
will decide

Its good to iron these things out now and talk about them I think the league is in a very good place as a whole.

I think 90 is a bit steep.

There is a good chance smaller trainers will have horses rated 80 or above which will allow entry into G1's. Big fields for G1's are ok , but really small fields or really big fields aren't that great. A happy medium would be good.

If we add G1 handicaps for the same distance of the main race of the day, it will probably split the horses, which will lead to decent size fields. There are 3 6f g1's this week. Seems a lot for one distance. But it does result in split races. I think the main problems are 10 and 12f races especially after they become 3+ The flat schedule probably needs better balancing. Will look at this inbetween seasons.

Great stuff Leon thanks for reply all makes sense

The trouble with the upload window coinciding with ascot is as a smaller trainer I basically have to get a run into my uploads to get a mark and that often means entering a group race knowing full well my horse has little to no chance and therefore making the field sizes increase . Unlike week 1 there’s isn’t a blanket of maidens which is fine but does mean contributing the problem of elite race sizes . Generally on draw bias I’m open minded as it’s all part of the game I have 2 horses pure pierji and defence rests that we’re Outclassed in maidens and then drawn in the car park in their first handicaps both were beaten out of sight but have since taken advantage of the marks given and been very productive . All in all moving the upload window past as it and into a week with more maidens will help the ascot cards hugely in my opinion .

Agree week 7 should have way more maidens and is easier to do in this week as opposed to Ascot where Ascot races limit the number of maidens. I have been in your position in the past this is the first season I have g1 horses for a very long time so understand how frustrating it is for smaller trainers to have throw horses in group races

Maybe we need to swap Week 2 with Week 7?
There are plenty of maidens (from memory) on Week 2. We could put the maidens in Week 6 into Week 2 and put the Group races in Week 2 into Week 6 and then tweak from there.

OR

Then swap out the Week 2 Group races that we put into Week 6 with the Aussie G1 Hcp races?

I think you are all missing my point a little....

It's not the winning but the taking part that counts.


quick edit: G1 Handicaps, the problem with these, a better trainer can also run in them, enters a 110 rated horse (everyone wants their horses to run every week) the 55 rated horse that has no alternative is now out of the handicap which in turns makes the whole process pointless imo.
So cap the G1 handicaps ?? that then demotes the value of the race, I think this may be best left soonest mended.....

No one comments in a 0-80 handicap when they run wide, get blocked off and have a sad story to tell.... "Sh*t happens" in the gaming world as well as the real one!

Exactly why the min rating should be low 80/85 and there should be an as prestigous G1 handicap on the card somewhere.

Can't argue with this.

I would move the 4 maidens from week 6 to week 7 and move 4 handicaps from week 7 to week 6.

The Turf TV Maiden Stakes had 29 runners this week.

Agree that upload window should open after Ascot.

I voted for 85 but leaning towards 80 for G1 entries. Maybe when you get a consensus figure, have another vote with only two options between no minimum and the consensus figure. My main issue was with unknown 75 rated horses going into Ascot G1's without a race, so a 80 minimum would fix that. Although the G1 AJC Derby in week 5 only had 8 runners and my horse, now rated 75 finished in 5th place.

Can't really do that Doug because they are real races and would then be in the wrong place in the calendar. Certain trainers like to plot realistic routes.

However, we have 40 races in Ascot week and in most of the others we have only 38 or even less. Therefore we could add a couple of MAIDEN HANDICAPS from week 3, turn the Ascot week Maidens into MAIDEN HANDICAPS. This would mean more horses have lost their maiden certificate by the time the window comes in. A couple of races could be dropped from week 7 and a couple moved to week 9 meaning there would be slots for six new maiden races in week 7.

Moving the window to week 7 has always been something I have petitioned for as it currently has the potential to ruin some of the Group races and leaves some new horses on inflated marks. For example 3 of my newcomers had to run in G races and are now amongst my highest rated because the handicapper has no choice other than to rate them on their performance in a top race even if they finish down the field.

There are some serious balance issues in the flat schedule. Too many G1's over same distance in a week. NH is way more balanced. Will try balance it a bit better so it is fairer for all distances. 3 G1 's for 3yo for 12f horses in same week isn't right nor is 3 6f G1 sprints in same week.

There are other issues as well I remember there being something like 4 10f maidens in week 2 and no 12f ones. Some races are getting oversubscribed beause of this.

Moving races a week either way and adding a few new would still keep the timeline realistic.

Another possibility is after week 3 all maidens can exclude group placed horses.

You need to remember why we did 3 G1 over the same distance - that was to split and stretch the big stables up from dominating the one G1 race over 12f (for example) and give some of the middle tier trainers a chance to win a G1 race.

This is what you have to remember before you go off and start changing the schedule again.

You can easily enough go back to the old schedule before I made all those changes but then you'll lock all the trainers out of Group races because only the elite trainers will have horses in them and we'll go back to having four or five trainers winning all the G1 races.

That makes sense and explains it well and agree with you. Probably will need to extend this a bit then.

I still have the schedule on my work computer and I am happy to explore it again at the end of the season.

If you go back through these threads you'll see I posted up explanations of the changes I made.
I believe I was quite thorough in balancing distances - to age groups - ratings - and Group races.
It isn't perfect but I am happy in the yacht I am in that has sailed up along side of perfection.

Really - large fields in G1's isn't an issue...especially on a track like Ascot. The big issues are the big fields on the AW tracks that are in the hcp races. That's where we see 8 or 10 horses get butchered on the first bend.

What we need....or more to the point, Gray needs, is the flexibility to make small tweaks to the schedule during the season - like splitting legs of the Betfred Championship into two races instead of 28 runners at Wolverhampton. In fact I believe we see the same issues each season in the same races so maybe we can make permanent changes to these races?

Let's not make changes now - group up new ideas and see if they can or need to be implemented next season.