David Thiselton

The professional handicappers of South Africa have sent out a press release urging stake holders who are attending the South African Trainers Association (SANTA) handicapping workshop on Wednesday, April 15, at the TBA Sales Complex at Gosforth Park, to only consider those decisions made at the workshop that are guided by data and evidence rather than by anecdotal or observational claims.

The handicappers themselves will abstain from the Workshop “for reasons that include the avoidance of becoming persuasive to the attendees, given that all evidence suggests that the current system and its application is statistically functioning as intended and designed.”

However, they sent out the press release to ensure “that all stakeholders have access to current information ahead of policy discussions at the forthcoming SANTA held Workshop.”

It is certainly an understandable lament in South African racing that superior horses find it more difficult to rattle off a number of wins at the beginning of their careers, as they were reportedly able to do under the old Race Figure system, before being weighted according to their true ability.

However, the NHA press release pointed out the dangers of embracing a system that favours superior horses and it also pointed to the current statistics which show that three-year-olds are not at all unduly punished compared to other age groups.

Whilst, purists of any sport like to watch the best against the best, the handicappers have to operate in a way that best sustains the entire racing population as well as the players associated with it.

In the press release they referred to the Handicappers’ mandate which is “to, by handicapping, distribute the stakes pot as equitably as possible.”

They said making changes to aid better horses carried the risk of favouring big yards and effecting field sizes.

They pointed to the experiment of the “Assessment Plate” and put it under the headline of “the risk of uninformed decisions”.

A conclusion on a study of overall racing stats and a study of Assessment Plate stats was that Assessment Plates contained smaller fields and favoured superior horses and they were thus dominated by bigger yards.

The late guru analyst Jay August commented, “If the Handicapper’s assessment of the highly rated horse ex their maiden win was wrong (too high), then the stats should show that. They do not, which leads me to believe that Assessment Plates have little to do with assessment but more to do with helping superior animals to win a few races before their ability is penalised too much.’’

Moving on, three-year-olds have been shown to actually have a higher strike rate in handicap races than any other age group, which falsifies the claim they are punished unduly.

In the current season three-years have had 1448 runs and a strike rate of 13%, four-year-olds have had 2431 runs and a strike rate of 11%, five-year-olds have had 1876 runs and a strike rate of 10% and six-year-olds and older 1,398 runs and a strike rate of 7%.

Statistics have also shown that the top five yards have had 973 runs in handicaps and a strike rate of 13.6%, while they have had 1,637 runs in non-handicaps and a strike rate of 15.3%.

The handicappers are thus concerned that any further adjustment to the existing handicapping system would disproportionately benefit trainers with access to higher-quality horses. Given the limited number of handicap races available, such changes could severely disadvantage trainers outside the top ten on the trainers’ log, creating an uneven playing field and undermining competitive balance.

The Handicapping Team believes that the current system is functioning exactly as designed and the data contained the following key indicators:

Participation: Higher acceptance rates in Handicaps and Merit Rating based races.

Elimination Data: High demand for entry in premier events such as the Hollywoodbets Durban July, Golden Horse Casino Sprint, Betway Summer Cup and the Charity Mile confirm the system’s integrity at the pattern level.

Program Stability: Programmers frequently rely on Handicap formats to ensure adequate field sizes.

Open Betting Market: These races consistently produce closer finishes and a more robust betting market, which ultimately extends the racing careers of the horse population.

Competitive Density: Data indicates that the average beaten finisher in a Handicap is 3.5 lengths behind the winner, compared to 4.8 lengths in non-handicap races. This suggests the system is achieving its primary goal of narrowing the gap between competitors.

Systemic Balance: The National Merit Ratings Update continues to ensure a balanced distribution of ratings across all age groups, preventing structural bias within the population – the handicappers believed any skewing of the current table which shows 45% of horses to be rated 74 and higher (as compared to 2019 when only 27% were 74 and higher) would result in programming difficulties.

Merit Rating Appeals: Since the cancellation of the previous guidelines in 2019, Handicappers have assessed approximately 188,500 performances. Remarkably, during this entire review period, only 14 appeals were lodged of which 11 were dismissed.

They added this was despite operating under some constraints, which included:

The program is currently already skewed towards higher rated horses as there has been a reduction in true handicaps and an increase in merit-rated band races (Pinnacles, A, B, C and D Stakes Races, Middle Stakes Races). These races are not true handicaps and favour horses at the top of each rating band. This creates a structural bias with many horses entering races where they have little chance of success. The handicapper then face a dilemma, with an example being a horse that does not earn because it was at the bottom of a merit rating band and ran accordingly, but does not get dropped in the merit ratings, because at the weights it still did actually run to its rating. Earners, on the other hand, might be at the top of the bands but are not unduly punished because they were firstly at a weight advantage and, furthermore, merit rated restrictions are placed on these races anyway. This results in a cycle where winning horses continue to win, while others are relegated to “field fillers.”

They pointed out that owners and trainers often equate competitiveness with victory, but as there are more horses than handicap races, the handicappers are judged against an unrealistic benchmark i.e. in every season there will be many horses (1365 to be exact for the current season if only handicap races are considered) who will have the same number of career wins that they began the season with, no matter which handicap system was adopted.

In summary the handicappers overall message was that any changes made should be accompanied by a factual analysis that supports it being workable considering the horse population and the nature of South African racing in which turnover and owner participation are important considerations.

The press release can be read on the nha.co.za website under Press Releases.