HANDICAPS COMPARED

Evening Post, Volume CXII, Issue 97, 21 October 1931, Page 6

HANDICAPS COMPARED

WWSTERTON AND CARTERTON

REASON FOR VARIANCE

Th« weight* for the AV'iiiravapa County Cop, to be decided at the Carterton Bacing Club's Annual Meeting on Saturday •week, contain some small deviations from those awarded for last Saturday's Maat#rton Handicap, over the same distauce, but close analysis shows that they are not of an extent to warrant more than passing note.

If the two sets, of weights had been is-j sued by the same handicappcr a question j might be asked why tho horses who did not start at Masterton (Stanchion aud Chopin) should each have been dropped a couple of pounds while the starters have been put up a few pounds or been lett on the same mark. However, as the handicappers are different, the permissible slight variation of opinion will supply an adequate answer to any question of this sort. Handicappers, it must, be understood, are not bound by each other's asaassments, though a sort of unwritten law enjoins that the variance among them be inn more than a pound or two cithcr_ way .When working from the same key position. It may at this point be instructive to consider tho weights allotted tho horses who-.were entered for the two events. The Masterton hnndieapper is \Mr. H. Coyle, and the Carterton Air. J. 10. Henrys. The horMe and their respective weights (Carterton and Masterton) are:— Carterton. Masterton. ■. St Ih fit lb Stanchion ......... » » • 9 2 Ephlaltes ........ S S S. 4 Chopin ........... S li 8 S Speartiit ».-••»:»■••• 7 !> 7 5 Jmateagirl ........ 7 M 7 2 .Dnellona « 7 :i 7 0 Black Mint 7 1) 7 » Cape Gold , 7 0 7 0 'It is not sound logic to reason that because Stanchion was set at 9st 21b at .Masterton and did not start he should still be on the same mark (as he is the key horse) at Carterton. It' J[r. Coyle had been handicapper for both races, then there would have been no justification for Stanchion's being dropped. As two handieappers are concerned, such, a minor difference of opinion should not strike contrary to any so-called sense of justice. Chopin's case is identical with Stan'^hiou's. It is worth noting, too, that Mr. Henrys has set him in similar relative position to Stanchion as Mr. Coyle did at Masterton.

Next there arc the weights of Ephialtea, Spcarfnl, and JJuellonn, the placed horses in that order'at Ma.sterton, to consider. Ephialtes and Speart'ul have, both been raised four pounds, aud Duollona lias gone up three pounds. Surely this must be a i&ir assessment on then1 JMasteilon performances.

Ephialtes may or may not have been' lucky to beat Speart'ul, but in any case ft must be conceded that there was little between them at the post, where Spearful was certainly doing it. the better o£ the pair. So Mr. Henrys has risen them the same poundage—but, be it noted, not by any means the same relative poundage. Four pounds on Ephialtes' Sst 41b is a much, bigger penalty than four pounds on Spearful's 7st 01b. Actually, as Stanchion and Chopin have two pounds less, Ephialtes is in six pounds worse for his win at Mastcrton, and is placed as near Stan(•hion as any handicapper might reasonably set him. . ■ '

In Ihiellona's case, three pounds on 7st may not be arithmetically compared with •four1 p6unds on the1 two higher handicaps, and- in actual estimation is not at all a serious "additional burden. Even admitting tbat'Dueflona iuay justifiably' have been let inT;a t'Carterton with ;7st 21b, fay? will bo prepared to assert that the extra pound is according her harsh treatment. She has now been placed _on two pounds worse terms with Imateagivl, but their Hasterton showings:(lmateagirl finished last) contained all that-difference. As to the horses who remain on the ■minimum, as at Masterton (Black Mint and Cape Gold), neither lias shown any form lately' warranting a higher impost. .Thielloria beat them both decisively ofi the' .same mark at Masterton, and Ephialtes and Spearfiil each showed a superiority folly four pounds aVjove the difference at which they were then meeting.