As with all sports, competitors within the sphere of horseracing cover a broad spectrum of abilities. For the most talented individuals, it is the summit of the sport which beckons, whilst others are destined to ply their trade at a far lower level. And just as in other sports, the most exciting spectacle is achieved when competitors – whether they be individual sportsmen or women, teams, or indeed horses – of similar ability are pitted against one another. This then poses the question of how exactly the powers that be determine the abilities of the thousands of racehorses who line up in Britain each year. With the task of producing a competitive programme of races, this is clearly a complex challenge.
The mechanism by which such a programme is devised is the system of Official Ratings (OR). A feature of both flat and National Hunt action, and one of many pieces of information displayed on race cards up and down the country, official ratings are integral both to the ranking of horses in terms of ability, and in the framing of races. And as with many areas of racing, knowledge of official ratings, in terms of how they are determined and what they represent, can only help to increase our understanding of the sport, and hopefully assist in pinpointing those all-important winners. So without further ado, let’s take a closer look.
So What Exactly Are Official Ratings?
In essence, official ratings – also known as a horse’s handicap mark – are a numeric value representing a horse’s ability based upon their previous performances at the track. The higher the rating, the more talented the horse.
On the flat, ratings begin at zero and rise to 130+, with the 140-rated Frankel being the highest-rated flat performer in history. Over jumps, the rating scale again begins at zero and rises to 170+, with Istrabraq (176) being the highest-rated hurdler, and Kauto Star (190) the top-rated over fences.
How Are Ratings Assigned And Who Decides What Ratings To Give?
So, we know ratings indicate a horse’s ability, but where do they come from? In other words, who exactly decides that one runner is worth a rating of 48, whilst another merits a value of 105?
Assigning ratings to runners falls under the remit of the British Horseracing Authority, who employ a team of individuals dedicated to this task. Numbering 11 at the time of writing, these “Official Handicappers” monitor racecourse performances and determine a rating for all runners qualified to receive an official rating.
When initially setting out on their racing career all runners begin without an official rating and are only eligible to compete in specific types of races known as maiden and novice events. Runners will then be assigned a rating by the official handicapper upon meeting one of the following two criteria.
- Winning a maiden or novice race
- Running three times in maiden or novice company
The above stipulations enable the official handicappers to have at least a reasonable amount of information at their disposal before assigning an initial rating to a runner. It is important to note however that official ratings are only an estimate of a horse’s ability, and certainly aren’t set in stone.
All horses are continually monitored and reassessed throughout their careers, with improved performances likely to see a runner’s official rating rise, with a string of poor displays correspondingly resulting in a rating being lowered. When assigning and adjusting ratings, the handicappers will attempt to accurately assess all factors which go into a race, including the quality of opposition, the tempo of the race, the course, the distance, the weight carried, the going, and various other factors.
An absence from the track of a period of nine months or more will result in a horses rating being scrapped entirely. An owner or trainer must then apply to have a mark reinstated should they wish their horse to re-enter competition, with the usual practice being to hand the horse a reintroduction mark slightly below their previous rating in order to account for their prolonged absence from the track.
A new set of ratings for all runners is compiled on a weekly basis, with the complete list published and released by the BHA every Tuesday morning. This process of the continual updating of ratings ensures that all horses are eligible to run in the class of race which best represents their current ability, and – in the case of handicap contests – to carry a weight that reflects their recent level of performance.
Official Ratings and Handicap Races
The area in which Official Ratings have the greatest influence in the sport is that of handicap races – a category into which the vast majority of UK races fall. Whilst the top tier graded and group class events are designed to sort the best from the best and crown the champions of the sport, with handicap races the goal is to provide as level a playing field as possible in order to create an exciting betting contest – one in which, in theory at least, all runners have an equal chance of winning.
And the manner in which this levelling of the field is achieved is via the weights carried by the contenders, with the more talented runners required to carry more weight than their less able rivals in order to slow them down. This is where official ratings come in, as it is a horse’s rating that determines exactly how much weight they must carry relative to their rivals.
In the world of Official Ratings, one ratings point equates directly to one pound in weight. So, for example, in a handicap contest open to all runners rated between 80 and 100 with the standard maximum weight burden of 9st10lb, a 100-rated horse would carry top weight of 9st10lb. A 95-rated runner would then be shouldered with five pounds less than this maximum, i.e. 9st5lb, with a 90-rated performer required to carry five pounds less again, i.e. nine stone, and so on.
Out of the Handicap
Whilst all races have a maximum weight that may be carried, they also all have a minimum weight stipulation. This can lead to a situation whereby certain runners are required to carry more weight than their Official Rating would dictate.
Consider for example a National Hunt Handicap open to runners rated between 0 and 120, with the standard maximum weight of 11st12lb and a minimum weight of 10 stone. A runner rated 120 would therefore carry this maximum weight of 11st12lb, but what about another entered in the race with a rating of just 94?
Under the usual handicapping rules this horse would be required to carry 9st10lb, i.e. 26lbs less than 11st12lb, to compensate for the 26 points difference in rating. However, under the terms of the race, no horse may carry less than 10 stone. Should this 94-rated performer wish to take up their place in the line-up they must therefore carry 10 stone, i.e. four pounds more than their official rating suggests they should. Any runner racing under these conditions is said to be racing from “out of the handicap”.
Ahead of the Handicapper
On the other side of the coin to those runners who carry more weight than their rating dictates, there are occasions when a horse may line up shouldering less of a burden than the official handicapper’s opinion would suggest they should. And the reason for this is the fact that a new list of official ratings is only published on a weekly basis.
Consider for example a horse handed a rating of 90 in the ratings published on a Tuesday morning, who then goes on to win easily on the Thursday. When assessing this performance, the handicapper may opt to raise the horses rating by 10 pounds to 100. However, this new rating will not be released until the following Tuesday, meaning that should the horse line up again before the publication of the new ratings they will still be able to race off a mark of 90.
There is however a penalty system in place which attempts to offset this scenario, as any winner racing again before the publication of their new rating will be required to carry a weight penalty. With this penalty being set at four pounds or six pounds though, it does still leave a window opportunity for some winners turned out quickly to race under favourable weight conditions – such runners often described as being “well-in” or “ahead of the handicapper”.
Official Ratings and the Classification System
In addition to assigning the weights to be carried during handicap contests, official ratings are also useful in defining the overall race classifications system, with each rung of the ladder being restricted to runners falling into specified ratings bands.
Ratings In Flat Racing
On the flat the current classification system is as follows:
- Class 1 – The upper echelons of the sport, further divided into Group 1, Group 2, Group 3 and Listed categories, with the top events including the five Classics, falling into the Group 1 section. Expect to find runners rated 110 and above plying their trade in Class 1 events.
- Class 2 – For runners within the 86-100, 91-105 and 96-110 ratings bands.
- Class 3 – For runners within the 76-90, and 81-95 ratings bands.
- Class 4 – For runners within the 66-80, and 71-85 ratings bands.
- Class 5 – For runners within the 56-70, and 61-75 ratings bands.
- Class 6 – For runners within the 46-60, and 51-65 ratings bands.
- Class 7 – For runners within the 46-50 ratings band.
Ratings In Jumps Racing
And in the National Hunt sphere, the current classification system is in place.
- Class 1 – Much like the top tier on the flat, this section is further divided, containing Grade 1, Grade 2, Grade 3 and Listed Class events. Whilst some Grade 3 and Listed events are run as high class handicaps, the Grade 1 and 2 contests tend to feature runners rated 125 and above.
- Class 2 – High class handicaps for runners rated 0-140+.
- Class 3 – For runners in the 0-120 and 0-135 ratings bands
- Class 4 – For runners in the 0-100 and 0-115 ratings bands
- Class 5 – For runners in the 0-85 and 0-95 ratings bands
- Class 6 – Predominantly National Hunt Flat races.
You may notice that the ratings bands in National Hunt racing are very wide in comparison to those on the flat, with the above list suggesting that a 70-rated runner for example would be eligible to run in any handicap ranging from Class 5 level all the way up to Class 2.
Whilst this is true in theory, it doesn’t occur in practice for two main reasons. Firstly, all races have a maximum field size and give priority to the highest-rated runners amongst the list of entries. And secondly, a low-rated runner wishing to have a crack at a Class 2 or 3 handicap would likely find themselves having to carry significantly more weight than their official rating would suggest due to the “out of the handicap” scenario outlined earlier.
Official Ratings and the Grand National
And to finish, we end with an anomaly from the handicapping sphere. Whilst official ratings are used to allocate weights in almost all handicaps in British racing, there is one exception. And it’s a pretty glaring exception too, coming in the shape of the biggest handicap event in the world: the Grand National at Aintree. A race unlike any other, the Merseyside marathon also requires an approach to ratings unlike any other.
Rather than racing off their official rating, runners in the April showpiece will carry weights according to a special rating granted to them for the Grand National and the Grand National alone. This process allows the handicappers to account for the singular demands of Britain’s biggest race, both in terms of the stamina required and the unique obstacles it features. It should be noted however that the official rating will still provide a base from which to work, with the handicapper then making adjustments to the ratings of those runners who have shown a liking for the Aintree fences in the past, and particularly so should they have previously performed particularly well in the Grand National itself.