Horse Racing Ratings
ratings methodologies have been around for many years and have proved
successful, in some cases, for just as long.
why do things change? Why does "the rot set in"?
variety of reasons - not the least of which is the new classification
system for the changing classes in Australia together with the increases
in minimum weights, seven day a week racing, racecourses being re-developed
and rebuilt and the effect of new betting exchanges.
overwhelming factor in a horses price is it's most recent form. The
masses up and down the country will be backing this horse either from
looking at the form figures, or being influenced by a the newspaper
columnist, a tv media pundit, or a leading mainstream tipster. All
of those influences would tend to base their selections on form in
it stands to reason that to get real long term "value" you can't always
be betting with the masses - you have to "stand out" and go in a slightly
different direction from 'the norm" or, like most punters, you will,
in the long run, end up on the wrong side of the books.
What are ratings? They are just an opinion of which horse is the most
likely to win in a race. This doesn't mean that they have to be profitable.
Even if the ratings are generally right and the most likely winner
in the race does win then this is not a sign of profitable success.
could just not bother with ratings at all if you are looking for the
most likely winner: You may as well just look who the favourite is
and back that as you'll get more winners than backing any other horse
and you didn't even need to look up any ratings figures.
course, backing just the favourite will return a loss, as will backing
the top rated horse of any rated method.
why bother with ratings if they don't make a profit?
answer is you have to be more selective.
ratings services will no doubt provide ratings for most races on the
card. This would include 16+ runner handicaps, weight for age classics,
open class sprints and maiden races. It's very unlikely that any ratings
service would be effective in all those races so you need to find
out where and when they are best at.
may be a profitable venture to work out a few over-riding rules from
your own observations and overlay those rules on to any ratings service
you subscribe to to achieve maximum benefit from having someone else
do the initial handicapping work on your behalf.
reason why ratings fail is that the punter does not use them effectively.
He should not think it is so easy and back the top rated horse without
taking into consideration the opposition.
What if the top
rated is 20 points clear of the field? What if the top rated is tied
for first place?
masses of punters are lazy. They just want to 'pick the best' and
back it regardless. They haven't a clue about value, risk or price
and just pick, bet and hope.
who read the newspapers and follow the resident ratings expert will
just look for the black dot next to the rating, or see the summary
box at the bottom of the race field and back the top rated.
the punter should do is look at all the ratings and see if there are
dangers to the top rated, and see how well the favourite is rated
to determine if that danger can be eliminated.
will tend to look at the top rated horse only as this is perceived
to have the best chance of winning.
of course, this doesn't mean the horse is the best value in the race.
You may find that the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th rated is the better value.