Handicapping changes to be considered soon

Press, 26 July 1984, Page 30

Handicapping changes to be considered soon

By

G. K. YULE

Changes to the handicapping system as recommended by delegates to the annual meeting of the Trotting Conference on July 10 will no doubt be considered in part when the new executive holds its first meeting in Christchurch on August 2.

However, the full extent of the effects of any radical change to the system appear to be so vast that it is unlikely any final decision will be made at the August meeting. The recommendation stemmed from an item of correspondence from the Gore Trotting Club. It seeks to allow horses assessed at C 4 and faster to have two wins in each class until they reach open class. This, it was said by the Gore delegate, Mr Peter Burns, would give owners the chance to win more stakes in their own area. It would slow down the progress of horses through the classes and was expected to encourage owners to race horses rather than sell them overseas.

It was unfortunate that none of the delegates or the executive had troubled to work out the actual effect of the recommendation, which is one propounded for some time by Mr Brian Meale, of Auckland, a prin-

cipal of Central Standardbred Agency. That Southland clubs should find the idea fuU of merit is not surprising. Opportunities for Southland horses winning four or more races are extremely limited in their own province and they have to be sent to northern stables or sold in order to avoid costly travel to distant meetings which provide suitable racing opportunities. From the start of the 1984-85 season it will be possible for restricted free-for-alls to combine three classes from C 3 rather than C 4 as in the past. This could mean that a horse could win five races in the same pool in Southland and probably under the same handicap terms.

At present a horse racing solely in handicap events has won 10 times when it reaches an open class rating. This seems to work in reasonably well with the number of racing opportunities available to intermediate and fast-class pacers. Under the proposed system a horse would have had 11 wins by the time it earned a C 8 assessment; and, according to the theorists, it would have had 15 wins by the time it secured an opemclass rating. Nobody has explained where horses would secure

the additional racing opportunities to advance from 10 to 15 the number of wins which would have to be obtained before reaching an open-class rating. The number of racing opportunities for intermediate and fast-class horses varies a little from year to year, but generally the changes are minor.

It could be argued that under the proposed changes the earning capacity of horses could be less than at present for 10 wins. Much of their racing from the time they reach C 4 could be under restricted free-for-all conditions where stakes generally are less for the more tightly assessed horses than when they race in an ordinary handicap. Such conditions could react adversely as far as clubs are concerned when an outstanding horse emerges. It would be possible for a horse like Charles Luca, Our Mana, Derby and so on to win five times against the same group of horses instead of three, as at present. Often such horses dominate betting to the extent that there is a decline in turnover.

Changes, which have proved of immense value, have been made to the handicapping system. In particular two and three-

year-olds have benefited greatly as a result of maximum assessments applying when they have raced only in their own age group. No matter what changes are made to the handicapping system, horses such as Delightful Lady, Hands Down, Armalight, Bonnie’s Chance and so on will advance to the top by the short route. These horses are the lifeblood of racing and it is desirable that the public see them performing as frequently as possible under reasonable handicap conditions; and surely that is the object of any system. “Name” horses attract the crowds and create nationwide interest far in advance of anything obtained by slow-class events. That changes should be made to the handicapping, system from time to time is not in dispute and it could be that a completely new l scheme could be advantageous. But before changes are implemented it must be proved that the whole industry will benefit The • executive and its handicapping sub-committee will face a major task in assessing the proposed changes, especially as speakers at the annual meeting dealt only in generalities with few positive observations.