A Debate on Weight?

[Nosed]

I think horses ought to be given a weight allowance as they grow older. Maybe after they reach the age of 6 or 7.... 7 or 8 ???... especially in the lower claiming races.
It's really debatable how much weight is a factor isn't it? I've never been able to adequately incorporate it in my handicapping, but I do know I love a hot "bug" jockey. Then when they cool off after losing their "bug", you have to figure the weight must have meant something??

[Some_One]

No debate needed, there's nothing there.

[Seabiscuit@AR]

A weight allowance for older horses is a good idea

[Hoofless_Wonder]

I think weight matters, but nearly as much in North American racing as overseas.

Take a look at Hong Kong - most races, the top rated horse in the race must carry 133 lbs, while the bottom rated horse will be toting 113 to 115 lbs. The analysts and race callers often remark when one of the lower rated horses runs well how the "light weight" helped, or if a poor performance from one of the higher rated (and bet) horses occurs, how the "heavier weight" hurt, especially for a horse moving down in class and being penalized with higher weight. However, due their "closed system" of their pool of horses, and the effort put into the ratings, the handicappers setting up the races do a great job in assigning weights, and it's a real factor.

In North America, the weight spread from high to low is much lower, usually from 115 to 121 lbs, with 124 lbs being considered high weight. So, it's no surprise that many handicappers may dismiss weight all together, especially when analyses of weights doesn't indicate any identifiable differences.

The debate continues when one considers the impact of weight on individual horses, and how some can perform consistently or well up to 130 or more lbs, and how others appear to fold like cheap tortillas when asked to tote 121 lbs.

I do pay attention to significant (4+ lbs) shifts in the weights - perhaps not so much for the horses performance, but for the mindset and intent of the trainer.

Just my three cents worth....

[cashmachine]

The debate continues when one considers the impact of weight on individual horses, and how some can perform consistently or well up to 130 or more lbs, and how others appear to fold like cheap tortillas when asked to tote 121 lbs.


I think real problem is how to estimate influence of weight on individual horse? Do you estimate personal sensitivity to all increments of weight from whole interval of possible values or you just trying to find a threshold after which horse breaks down?

[HUSKER55]

you have hit the nail on the head. Maybe, at best, they should even out the weight of the jockeys and gear and let it go.

JMHO

[Nosed]

I think weight matters, but nearly as much in North American racing as overseas.


I do pay attention to significant (4+ lbs) shifts in the weights - perhaps not so much for the horses performance, but for the mindset and intent of the trainer.

Just my three cents worth....

I do like the 4+ lb. factor ( I was trying to use 3+)... sometimes it's hard to find a significant horse with a weight drop off unless it has a apprentice jock.

[cutchemist42]

I actually find the move to an apprentice jock after a decent run in the prior race can help. Used that angle in CT9 last night after liking what the :8: Corinthian Quest had down in its prior race.

I almost like to view the move to an apprentice jock as a last attempt to try out something and see if it works.

[Cratos]

I think horses ought to be given a weight allowance as they grow older. Maybe after they reach the age of 6 or 7.... 7 or 8 ???... especially in the lower claiming races.
It's really debatable how much weight is a factor isn't it? I've never been able to adequately incorporate it in my handicapping, but I do know I love a hot "bug" jockey. Then when they cool off after losing their "bug", you have to figure the weight must have meant something??

The weight you are referring to is “load weight” and this weight in itself has a minor effect on a horse’s performance.

What you might want to consider is “load weight” plus the horse’s “body weight.”

Kentucky Equine Research has done a lot of work in this area.

By the the way, older horses should not get a weight allowance IMHO.

[Hoofless_Wonder]

I think real problem is how to estimate influence of weight on individual horse? Do you estimate personal sensitivity to all increments of weight from whole interval of possible values or you just trying to find a threshold after which horse breaks down?

That's a good question. Since it's been rare to find such weight disparities in American racing, I've really only looked for a critical threshold - say, top weighted horse having successfully carried the weight in at least one prior performance.

Now that we can bet Hong Kong again, it may be beneficial to look at it more closely, though my first thoughts would be to look at weight ranges of 3-5 lbs for each horse, and not every possible increment. If so many handicappers in North America have concluded that weight differences are "lost in the noise" of a performance, I'd conclude the level of accuracy is a range, and not an exact weight.

The bottom line for me is that weight is not nearly as important as the Racing Form or program would have you believe by its prominent font display, but it shouldn't be ignored.

[Hoofless_Wonder]

The weight you are referring to is “load weight” and this weight in itself has a minor effect on a horse’s performance.

What you might want to consider is “load weight” plus the horse’s “body weight.”

Kentucky Equine Research has done a lot of work in this area.

By the the way, older horses should not get a weight allowance IMHO.

Good points. Weight allowance implies the carried weight, but there are differences between "dead weight" of the lead in the saddle and the jockey's weight. It's probably a driving factor for some jockey changes.

Weight of the horse is another factor which comes to light with the info available for Hong Kong. I haven't had a chance to really get a feel for the overall effect, but it certainly would seem that a horse's overall health and form is going to correlate with weight changes, and if that info is available it should be used.

[Capper Al]

I like to weigh in on this. ;>} They can't seem to get rid of a few old claimers. These old guys go off under even money and no one will claim because of their age. A weight allowance would keep more of these old nags around for longer. Fair at the end of the day might not be good for racing.

[Dan Montilion]

No Debate… I'm Fat!!!

[RXB]

I think horses ought to be given a weight allowance as they grow older. Maybe after they reach the age of 6 or 7.... 7 or 8 ???... especially in the lower claiming races.
It's really debatable how much weight is a factor isn't it? I've never been able to adequately incorporate it in my handicapping, but I do know I love a hot "bug" jockey. Then when they cool off after losing their "bug", you have to figure the weight must have meant something??

Nosed, you raise some good points here.

I haven't updated the stats over the past two years but from 1984-2011 in the Breeders Cup (usually early Nov, occasionally late Oct), 4YO's had a large advantage over all other age groups in terms of win % per start. 3YO's and 5YO's have approximately the same win %, with the 6YO+ horses having the lowest percentage.

I've also found that everyday horses are most likely to run their fastest races sometime during their 4YO campaigns, especially on dirt. (Turf horses seem a little more inclined to reach their peak slightly later than dirt runners.)

So I agree with you that there's a legitimate argument to be made that horses should start to receive a small (and increasing with age) weight allowance at least in their 6YO season, quite possibly even in summer/fall of their 5YO season.

As far as ex-bug riders go, the loss of the five-pound allowance will make a slight impact on how their horses run, but the main cause of an apprentice going cold when he turns journeyman is the reduction in live mounts as the trainers react to the loss of the weight allowance.

[Robert Goren]

For what it is worth, every multiple regression study I have ever seen show that an increase in weight slightly increases the increases a horses chance of winning.

[RXB]

For what it is worth, every multiple regression study I have ever seen show that an increase in weight slightly increases the increases a horses chance of winning.

That is because the horses of highest ability and best recent form carry the most weight, not because the addition of weight makes them run faster.

And by the way, horses that are highweighted by a few pounds over any other entrant win 20% of the time but throw about a 25% betting loss-- that's worse than random betting.