EPW didnt you do the Handicapping for the NH in season 3?

I could be wrong.

not available right now i will be back this evening and all day tomo

to give my tuppence worth...

but i do agree the US league has to go but not some of the big races

im sure they will get used in the UK league??

c u guys l8r

Paul(LR)

Hey Paul.

What do you think of me u and ryan making a new schedule for the NH next season?

Am sure u use Skype, we could get together on there and get it sorrted if you are up for it mate.

Hi Hemz,

Yes handicapper for NH & US + Stewards Role for all three leagues.

I can remember mate. It is Steve right?

You did a quality job pal. It's deffo what the NH league needs is someone with your knowlegde on handicapping horses.

personally i dont think the flat needs a handicapper as much as nhc - and i think rich could be right in saying that the big handicaps could be assessed independantly to devise the weights for the race!!

USRA should go, make flat into one big flat league.

12 weeks good, altho dont like merging big meets into one at all!!

week 9 should be chelts
week 10 aintree
week 11 punchestown

i think restircted races shud be kept to minimum - numbers were pitiful towards end of season!

Yes, in the context of the league. Maybe I am missing something? If it is an easy question the answer should be quite straightforward as well. For there to be a good plan for a handicap there must be a bad plan, what would the bad plan be? Competing regularly at a level above the horse's ability? Which we can solve by stopping the top horses running in their races before the handicap - but you didn't like that idea.

The problem I have with lots of handicaps is not to screw people who don't have as much time to put into the game (although I believe that people who do put more time into the game are rewarded, that's kind of how society works Steve, as you know I'm not a fan of the benefits generation). People will upload (usually) their best horse at each distance with maybe a couple of distances having a colt and filly.

If we have lots of handicaps, and they outweigh the number of group races, then we will have the instance where the best horses will get entered in handicaps, the worst horses will be out of the handicap (and therefore at a massive disadvantage). The way around this is to have lots of handicap brackets (40-70), (50-80), (60-90), (70-100), (80-110) like Steve says. How many races would there have to be a week if we were catering for every level at every distance? If you are confident in your idea I am not looking to knock it down but I need to see it fleshed out. The rhetoric is great and appeals to the masses but the solution has to be practical. A sample schedule for say Week 6 and 7?

Ryan, Cheltenham and Aintree wouldn't be merged. Many horses run at both meetings.

Rich the problem which l found last season was the oppurtunities for a horse to get a decent mark, after the last upload last season there was hardly any chance of getting a run into a horse without running in a group or a listed race, trainers having to do this to get a mark which was always too high no matter where they finished in the field made this A BAD HCAP ROUTE. Now if the right amount of maiden races where added to the schedule at the right time (example begginning of season and 2 weeks worth after the upload) then a horse running in a couple of maidens and being saved for a 0-100 rather just being run for the sake of it HENCE A GOOD HCAP ROUTE. Totally shocked l have had to explain to the president of the league how to plan a horses schedule


i will add that adding group races and not catering for hcap horses is forcing trainers to enter horses nowhere near good enough to win or place just so trainers get to watch there horses run

Mike has really hit the nail on the head there. The problem lies in players running their horses every week when suitable races are not really there.
When I did the handicapping for the flat it was annoying that players put their horse in a group race, instead of waiting for a handicap race the following week. I would cap the number of runs per horse to say eight in a twelve week season, and only allow the top twelve to fourteen rated horses declared to compete in a group race.
There has also got to be a concrete guideline on distance parameters. As Rich says players know their horses best distance when they put them in the league, so you would have to be very strict with changes in distances.

Handicaps have to be bracketed, or horses will be running out of the handicap too often as Rich says.

My second train of thought, because the season is only twelve weeks long, new players can wait for a new season.

New horse uploads should be kept to three or four maximum, and only be available in week 7, with no retirements. (Personally I would have no new uploads), except maybe a few two year olds. Older horses coming in halfway through a season messes things up big style.

That way there doesn't need to be that many maiden races after week three, just a few in week seven to cater for the new horses.

I would also make a rule that existing players can only upload a maximum of fifteen new horses per season, (retiring fifteen) to keep horses in the league longer.

Rich,
If you let me know for sure how many races per week and for how many weeks I will put together a UK flat schedule and then you can take a look.

When is the new league starting fella's???

Think sometime in May dean.

Welcome to the forum mate.

Just had a brief look at the schedule.

My initial proposal would be to have 26 horse slots available per player, with no uploads at all after week 2.
Just keep your better horses for the next season.

The reason behind this is as follows.

2 Year Olds: (Max Six Horses Only)

5f, 6f, 7f, 8f, 9f, 10f races.

Proper two year old campaign.

3 Year Olds: (Max Ten Horses Only)

5f, 6f, 7f, 8f, 9f/10f, 11f/12f, 13f/14f, 15f/16f, 17f/18f, 19f/20f.

4 Year Olds+: (Max Ten Horses Only)

5f, 6f, 7f, 8f, 9f/10f, 11f/12f, 13f/14f, 15f/16f, 17f/18f, 19f/20f.

I can make a schedule around these figures no problem.

I would also introduce the rule that each horse can only run over two different distances and these must be either the next one up or down.

Example 5f/6f, 6f/7f, 7f/8f, 8f/9f, 12f/13f. etc.

If we are losing the US league - how about 30 races per week for twelve weeks, including international races.

Rich,
Do you want me to make a new schedule?

These are the points we need to agree on.

Stable capacity 26,
Two year old slots max 6
Three year old slots max 10
Four year old+ slots max 10.
No uploads after week two.
Horses to have no more than eight races per season.
Retirements limited to 15 at the end of the season.
Two different distances only for each horse, must be adjacent.
30 races per week including international races, or a set figure above 30.

A firm decision from yourself on whether to have one or two maiden runs before qualifying for handicap. One would be better in view of the twelve week schedule.

If this is agreeable I will do the handicapper role for the UK Flat and produce a combined weekly newsletter for UK and NH using part of my Racing Society League website.

Okay that's were I stand - over to you Rich.

Steve

As I said before, all good rhetoric but it's putting this into practice. The problem we had with uploads allowed whenever is that the schedule wasn't necessarily flexible enough to cater for this. You wouldn't want the schedule to be overtaken by maidens as it's level weights. This isn't a "good" handicap route, this is purely scheduling and having the right number of races. I said at the start of last season that I wanted handicaps to be for those who joined right from the start so any problems for people joining late is unfortunate but I can't create maidens for 2 or 3 late starters. It's important to remember there are limits to the weekly races.

As Steve said though, trainers enter their horses in any race and don't wait. That is the major problem and I can't stop that!

Steve, like your ideas, will address in a separate post.

Will be difficult to implement this rule into TOM. I think a range of 3 for longer distances would be fair (like 8f/9f/10f) too.



Stable capacity - fine
Slots per age - doubt this will be possible to implement into TOM to stop people who don't realise/check the forums.
No uploads after week 2 - I think 12 weeks is short enough to make this fine. I could keep uploads open for 3 weeks (1 week before, then the first two weeks).
8 race limit - I would really like to see this but again I'm not sure about TOM limiting this (would be good to have it prevented automatically rather than doing it manually).
Retirements limited to 15 - another TOM difficulty, this one might be even harder as between seasons there is a hardcoded reset. This also might make it harder to overcome the top trainers. I do understand the logic, and I definitely agree with it as I'd like to see champions returning and defending their crown.
30 races - Yep, I think 30 is a good level.
1 run required for handicap mark - definitely, if it's 12 weeks and if there is a handicapper this should make it a lot fairer.

I can't see any problems with this at all. Sounds good!

Well in this case l would put forward the idea that we dont have any Uploads after week 2. As season will only be 12 weeks it shouldnt be too long to wait for new trainers. I very much like a lot of ideas from Steve and l will volunteer to become a steward again for the sole purpose of identifying wrong distance horses to take some of the workload off the hcapper. I would use same rules as before which is for example


HORSE NAME PREF DIST
Westy Back Marker 6f

This horse would be able to run at 5f/6f and 7f BUT it could not go from a 5f race straight to a 7f race it would need a run at 6f in between and exactly the same in reverse i.e 7f dropped to 5f would not be allowed. This system would only be used for Hcap races only and a step up from 5f to 7f would be fine in a group race.