Weight in races

[K S Swigart <katswig@deltanet.com>]

On Fri, 4 Sep 1998, Teddy Lancaster wrote:

> Tom:  Comments?
> 
> Now this may not be meaningful since the avialbility of data for endurance
> is pretty poor.  However, data has been collected for TB racing for a
> century, and if you take all that data, you will find that there is NO
> correlation between weight carried and outcome of the race.

After I got done with dealing with my e-mail last night, I trotted out 
to my snail mail box, and, by coincidence, this week's _Thoroughbred 
Times_ was there.  Considering the conversations about weight in 
relation t outcome in races, I turned to the back page where the stakes 
results are just to find out which horses won under what weights.  Here 
is what I found:

Except for the Travers (in which all the horses carried the same 
weight). The horse carrying the heaviest weight won in 4 of the eight 
races.  In all but one of these races the horses that won carried more 
than the horses that finished second and third behind them. 

Oddly enough, in the Philp H. Iselin Handicap (Skip Away's latest forray 
onto the track), Skip Away won carrying 131 lbs., 18 lbs more than the 
horse that finished second, 17 lbs more than any horse in the race and 
20 lbs more than the lowest weighted horse.  If the 1lb=20lbs formula 
that Heidi quoted (with no reference to where that came from) would 
suggest that in an endurance competition Skip Away (or some other great 
horse) would have succeeded carrying and extra 340 to 400 pounds on its 
back. The idea, of course, is patently absurd. 1lb on the track doesn't 
equal 20lb in endurance any more than 1 lb equals 1 length (the "rule of 
thumb" that track handicappers use). Nor does 1 lb = 1/2 a minute as is 
the assumption in the BC judging formula used by the AERC.  And in 
passing, it is interesting to note that 18 lbs is probably not all that 
much more than the weight of Skip Away's breakfast.

As I continued to flip through the TB Times (went straight to the 
Viewpoint section, like I always do), there is an article  by the editor 
talking about the assigning f 131 lbs to Skip Away, and the exalted 
company that this puts him in.  It goes on to mention (not including the 
Iselin, since the results weren't in at the time the article was 
written) that over the past 20 years there have been 21 horses that have 
gone to the post carrying 130 lbs or more in a graded stakes race 
(Cigar's races with this weight were not graded, so they aren't in the 
statistics).  Of these 21 horses, 13 have won anyway. Spectacular Bid won
all his races under this weight.

The effect of weight carried on outcome of a race is far to complicated 
to be able to reduce it to a simplistic linear formula with weight 
carried being the only variable.

People on the track, whether they admit it or not, fully understand 
this.  Not a day goes by if I am at the races, that some horse being 
ridden (usually by Lafitte Pincay) goes to the post "____ pounds over."  
Because the jockey couldn't make the weight.  Owners/trainers, have 
rightly assumed that having Lafitte Pincay ride the horse more than 
makes up for the few extra pounds that it wouldn't have to carry were 
they to get a lighter rider.  Additionally, ANY horse can gain a 5 pound 
advantage (100 pounds in an endurance race if the 1lb=20lb formula has 
any basis in fact) by having an apprentice rider.  Rarely ever do horse 
owners/trainers avail themselves of this advantage…presumably because 
they fully understand that having an experienced rider is worth more 
than 5 pounds.  A good jockey is far more important than a light jockey.

This, BTW, is even more true (I contend) in endurance.  Top competitors 
in endurance are consistently top competitors, no matter what horse they 
ride.  This is, not only, because they are good at picking endurance 
mounts, but more because they are good at training and riding them in 
competition.  In the past, Bob Morris has stated that horses he and his 
wife have raised and trained and competed to top ten, are then sold to 
other riders who...…don't do as well.  I am unwilling to believe that the 
reason for this is that all the horses are now being asked to carry 
heavier riders, and more likely to believe that it is because they are 
being ridden and managed by less capable riders (with the understanding 
that the desire to compete is a significant aspect of being a capable 
endurance racer).

Top endurance competitors are top endurance competitors because they are 
good.  There are a whole host of things that go into making a good 
endurance competitor, and weight of the rider probably falls about 50th 
on that list (if it appears at all).  And the only reason that the FEI 
tries to equalize that ONE of the multitude of "inequities" (as if 
riders have no control over their own body weight) among riders is 
because they appear to be of the same mindset as Teddy, that this is a 
MINOR thing.  All we have to do is put riders on scales and presto, we 
have equalized the playing field.  But they apparently have chosen not 
to ask the all important question (which is how this discussion got 
started in the first place) of "Where am I supposed to PUT all the extra 
weight you are requiring me to carry?"

And one need only look at all the really screwy answers that have been 
provided to this question to realize that it is not a minor thing at 
all.

Is it true that good light riders may do better than good heavy riders 
in endurance…possibly.  But it is also true that good tall players do 
better than good short players in basket ball (although there does 
appear to be a diminishing return on height in basketball), but that 
doesn't mean that the NBA should require tall players to play on their 
knees, just to make the competition more "fair" for the short people who 
want to play basketball.  At the top levels of competition (which, 
supposedly is what the FEI level rides are) participants should have to 
compete with all of their physical handicaps--of which weight of the 
rider is only one.  To try to mitigate that one just because you think 
you "can" and that doing so is minor, while ignoring all of the others 
does not "equalize" the competition at all.

Kat
Orange County, Calif.

p.s.  As a total aside, to answer the original question…because the FEI 
hasn't changed the rule yet.  _I_ have found that the best way to carry 
extra weight is to have a heavier saddle.  Note, that this is not the 
same thing as making your light saddle heavier.  If I wanted to add to 
my weight, I would ride in my western saddle instead of the english one 
that I usually ride in.  The saddle has a nice big bearing surface, the 
quality of the workmanship is impeccable, the saddle is designed to be 
as heavy as it is with good quality materials distributed throughout the 
saddle and properly balanced...…and it weighs 50 lbs.

Yes, there is a horse that I ride endurance in this saddle...because it
fits her better than the English saddle, and it is FAR more important to
have a well fitting saddle, than it is to have a light one. However, I
have yet been able to get the AERC to put me in the correct weight
division when I ride with this saddle.  Despite the fact that I tell the
ride manager, and the ride manager reports to the AERC that I am riding as
a MW, they still persist in reporting in the Endurance News that I rode as
a featherweight.