122

[keithw84]

Originally Posted by turninforhome10

"Weight is better carried in the jock than in lead in the saddle". Charlie Whittingham

Good point. I am by no means an expert on the physics of this, but from what I understand, the jockey can lessen the impact of his weight.

[gm10]

Originally Posted by OTM Al

No, they win more before they lose the allowance because trainers that believe that weight matters that much give them better horses. 3yos are still immature and untested early in the year, so not sure dropping the weight any further will help them much

I think both are caused by weight.
The 3yo weight allowance is completely wrong in the US. Just looking at a mile race at Belmont tomorrow for 3yo+. Three year olds get an allowance of 6 lbs. In Britain, they would get 14 lbs. That's 8lbs difference, worth about 4 lengths.

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by keithw84

Good point. I am by no means an expert on the physics of this, but from what I understand, the jockey can lessen the impact of his weight.

I remember Pat Day saying the same thing about weight being better in the jockey to my father years ago.
This leads into the question of what each JOCKEY weighs and whether or not higher weight races (probably more than 122) show any statistics indicating "dead-weight" is detrimental.

Agree about trainer opinion being the greatest factor for apprentice success with allowances.

Also agree about small weight amounts being almost negligible.

I think you have to get closer to 140lbs at a route to start making any difference as for the strength of horses unless there are significant differences of weight between handicap horses. We just about NEVER see graded stakes handicaps with the favorite carrying enough weight to make a difference.

And the types of horses who would weaken at 140lbs at a route are the types you feel would generally weaken over that distance. The horse itself and the trip are much more important.

[gm10]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

I remember Pat Day saying the same thing about weight being better in the jockey to my father years ago.
This leads into the question of what each JOCKEY weighs and whether or not higher weight races (probably more than 122) show any statistics indicating "dead-weight" is detrimental.

Agree about trainer opinion being the greatest factor for apprentice success with allowances.

This begs the question why trainers would think this. Are they really that ignorant?

Also agree about small weight amounts being almost negligible.

I think you have to get closer to 140lbs at a route to start making any difference as for the strength of horses unless there are significant differences of weight between handicap horses. We just about NEVER see graded stakes handicaps with the favorite carrying enough weight to make a difference.

Enter Zenyatta. The Vanity 2010 was a clear example of weight making a difference (at 129 lbs). It took her about half a furlong longer to hit her top gear than usual.

Personally I think you start seeing the effect at around 5lbs (on average).

And the types of horses who would weaken at 140lbs at a route are the types you feel would generally weaken over that distance. The horse itself and the trip are much more important.

They are all interdependent imo. A horse carrying a bigger weight doesn't only have to work harder to maintain speed, it's also a bit more likely to have a bad trip (-> it takes a fraction longer to hit top speed at the start that may force it to stalk rather than lead, the horse takes a fraction longer to move into an opening that disappears again, etc). The original effect is perhaps small, but the nature of horse racing seems to magnify that small effect considerably.

[Blenheim]

Below is a link leading to an interesting article discussing "The impact of weight the performance of a race horse." After having read the article and reviewing these posts, gm10 appears to have hit the formula on the head. The question is now, how does the formula relate to the performances of this crop of thoroughbreds and did or did not moving up in weight cause that dozen or so thoroughbreds to lose their last race.

More importantly, what factor will weight have upon this group going ten furlongs?


First time, I hope the link works.

http://www.eccnet.com/fourwinds/horse/weighthorse2.html

[joanied]

Originally Posted by Tom

That coming from Haystacks Calhoun!
Good one.

A hundred years ago when I lived in Ocala, FL. there was a local attraction that was a cave with a spring running through it...it was pretty cool...guess who ran the place? Haystacks Calhoun (true story)

[eastie]

when a hoss works 48 flat with a 146 pound exercise rider, how fast would the work have been with a 116 pound jockey ? weight is not relevent in 99% of the races.

[CincyHorseplayer]

I'm a pretty hyper individual.I always run up steps out of habit.I can tell you right now the only thing that slows me down about holding a 16 oz CocaCola when I'm doing so is that it's in my hand.The weight is meaningless.And so it is with a 1200 lb horse.Unless he's holding it by his hoof trying to complete 6 furlongs.

[jasperson]

Originally Posted by eastie

when a hoss works 48 flat with a 146 pound exercise rider, how fast would the work have been with a 116 pound jockey ? weight is not relevent in 99% of the races.

I don't know who said this first but weight can stop a freight train.

[speldedo]

Seems like the horse that dumps their jockey always finishes first - weight must mean something.

[FenceBored]

Originally Posted by speldedo

Seems like the horse that dumps their jockey always finishes first - weight must mean something.

Or, it could mean that horse has a better idea of what to do than the jockey.