masun
17-09-2002, 01:22
There's a new book at the newsstands by retired trainer T P Wong. While there's nothing earth shattering in the book, it's still a good read. Below the translation of a few interesting paragraphs:
To be honest, in the past, the problem of whether it was to be a "go" or "no go" on the day was a real one. But those were the days. Back then, owning a horse was quite a burden because of the small prizemoney. For example, in the 50's, the money one could win from a race was only enough to cover the expenses for one or two months. So in those days, many people owned horses for the purpose of gambling. Thus "go" and "no go" decisions dominated the scene and were key to the results. However, as the Jockey Club progressed, and racing became professional, the money and honour to be won from the races have become ample incentive for both the owners and trainers. There was no need for them to be involved in gambling anymore.
From my perspective, up to the 80's, about 50% of the horses in a race were genuine runners. From the 90's onward, the percentage of triers has increased to 85-90%. The reason there's still 10-15% of horses not driven all out in a race is that they are not in good form and the jockeys/trainers don't want to injure or kill them. The supervisory authority is often notified in advance of such cases. Of course such unfit horses can still win occasionally but often it's due to their superior qualities rather than a ploy by the jockeys/trainers.
I think that racing in HK today is absolutely trustworthy and fair. The reason is the JC's wise policy of offering generous prizemoney. Just think, in a premier class race, the prizemoney for a winner is over a million dollars. Even in an ordinary Class 1 race, the winner can get $910,000, of which the owner will pocket $600,000, more than enough to cover the expenses for the whole season. If a horse manages to have multiple wins or even wins a major stakes race, a lot of fame and fortune will have been won. Many good horses earn their owners really good money. How much can an owner win from gambling?
As for the trainers, Ivan Allan won many major stakes races last season. He pocketed over $6 million in prizemoney. As for myself, on average I won $1 million to $2 million in a year, which was not bad. What's the need to gamble then? In fact, under the JC's strict supervision, most tricks would be easily caught. So it's really better trying to win the races than to risk being caught. As far as I know, less than a quarter of the trainers are still gambling, and the bet sizes are quite small. Everyone knows that there's plenty of generous prizemoney to be won. Moreover, good results will attract more horses to a stable. So I'd say that basically most horses are always running to their abilities. That's why I said that when making selections, you should base your decision on the quality of the horses rather some extraneous factors.
Apart from the prizemoney, changes to the rating system have also forced the trainers and owners to make sure that their horses always give their best. In fact, since last season, the rating system has changed a lot from the past. Previously, a horse that won by three lengths or more would be handed a penalty of 13 to 14 lbs; while repeat losers would have their handicap mark reduced drastically. So many trainers indulged in playing the ratings game. When they judged that a horse was over-handicapped, they would reduce its training until the horse had lost enough races for it to be awarded a low enough handicap mark to be competitive again. Under the new system, such an approach wouldn't work anymore.
There are now more and more horses in HK, over a 1000 of them. The JC's policy is to let the weaker ones eliminated and only the good ones survive. Since last season, the penalties on winners have been significantly reduced. Now a winner will attract a penalty of 5 to 8 lbs. If the winning margins are small, a horse can win three races and still see its handicap mark increased by 20 only. On the other hand, a horse can lose for a whole season and its rating still not be lowered enough for it to run in a lower class. Take Tony Cruz's Danswinner as an example. It was a decent horse that was a bit old. In the past, after losing a few races, Danswinner would have been able to bounce back at a favourable handicap mark. However, due to the lower pace that handicap marks were dropped last season, the horse couldn't compete with the younger horses and was forced to retire.
Under the present circumstances, the best thing to do is to strike while it's still hot. That's why there were so many multiple winners last term, a marked difference from the previous practice of immediately going for a lower handicap mark after a single victory. Whereas in the past, about 20% of horses would win no prizemoney in a season, the figure now has increased to 35% to 40%. The system is now one of survival of the fittest. The JC's policy is not to give the older horses any chances. It now favours the younger horses. So today's racing is dominated by 3- and 4-year olds. So I think punters should adapt to the new system: Don't be afraid to chase winners and don't waste time on the older horses.
To be honest, in the past, the problem of whether it was to be a "go" or "no go" on the day was a real one. But those were the days. Back then, owning a horse was quite a burden because of the small prizemoney. For example, in the 50's, the money one could win from a race was only enough to cover the expenses for one or two months. So in those days, many people owned horses for the purpose of gambling. Thus "go" and "no go" decisions dominated the scene and were key to the results. However, as the Jockey Club progressed, and racing became professional, the money and honour to be won from the races have become ample incentive for both the owners and trainers. There was no need for them to be involved in gambling anymore.
From my perspective, up to the 80's, about 50% of the horses in a race were genuine runners. From the 90's onward, the percentage of triers has increased to 85-90%. The reason there's still 10-15% of horses not driven all out in a race is that they are not in good form and the jockeys/trainers don't want to injure or kill them. The supervisory authority is often notified in advance of such cases. Of course such unfit horses can still win occasionally but often it's due to their superior qualities rather than a ploy by the jockeys/trainers.
I think that racing in HK today is absolutely trustworthy and fair. The reason is the JC's wise policy of offering generous prizemoney. Just think, in a premier class race, the prizemoney for a winner is over a million dollars. Even in an ordinary Class 1 race, the winner can get $910,000, of which the owner will pocket $600,000, more than enough to cover the expenses for the whole season. If a horse manages to have multiple wins or even wins a major stakes race, a lot of fame and fortune will have been won. Many good horses earn their owners really good money. How much can an owner win from gambling?
As for the trainers, Ivan Allan won many major stakes races last season. He pocketed over $6 million in prizemoney. As for myself, on average I won $1 million to $2 million in a year, which was not bad. What's the need to gamble then? In fact, under the JC's strict supervision, most tricks would be easily caught. So it's really better trying to win the races than to risk being caught. As far as I know, less than a quarter of the trainers are still gambling, and the bet sizes are quite small. Everyone knows that there's plenty of generous prizemoney to be won. Moreover, good results will attract more horses to a stable. So I'd say that basically most horses are always running to their abilities. That's why I said that when making selections, you should base your decision on the quality of the horses rather some extraneous factors.
Apart from the prizemoney, changes to the rating system have also forced the trainers and owners to make sure that their horses always give their best. In fact, since last season, the rating system has changed a lot from the past. Previously, a horse that won by three lengths or more would be handed a penalty of 13 to 14 lbs; while repeat losers would have their handicap mark reduced drastically. So many trainers indulged in playing the ratings game. When they judged that a horse was over-handicapped, they would reduce its training until the horse had lost enough races for it to be awarded a low enough handicap mark to be competitive again. Under the new system, such an approach wouldn't work anymore.
There are now more and more horses in HK, over a 1000 of them. The JC's policy is to let the weaker ones eliminated and only the good ones survive. Since last season, the penalties on winners have been significantly reduced. Now a winner will attract a penalty of 5 to 8 lbs. If the winning margins are small, a horse can win three races and still see its handicap mark increased by 20 only. On the other hand, a horse can lose for a whole season and its rating still not be lowered enough for it to run in a lower class. Take Tony Cruz's Danswinner as an example. It was a decent horse that was a bit old. In the past, after losing a few races, Danswinner would have been able to bounce back at a favourable handicap mark. However, due to the lower pace that handicap marks were dropped last season, the horse couldn't compete with the younger horses and was forced to retire.
Under the present circumstances, the best thing to do is to strike while it's still hot. That's why there were so many multiple winners last term, a marked difference from the previous practice of immediately going for a lower handicap mark after a single victory. Whereas in the past, about 20% of horses would win no prizemoney in a season, the figure now has increased to 35% to 40%. The system is now one of survival of the fittest. The JC's policy is not to give the older horses any chances. It now favours the younger horses. So today's racing is dominated by 3- and 4-year olds. So I think punters should adapt to the new system: Don't be afraid to chase winners and don't waste time on the older horses.