A VEXED QUESTION

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 464, 20 September 1928, Page 8

A VEXED QUESTION

Uniform System Advocated For Trotting Handicapping

WHO WILL SUCCEED LATE ADJUSTER ?

THE passing of Mr. H. Brinkman, handicapper for the majority of trotting clubs, and racing clubs where the light-harness horse is catered for, has left a big blank to be filled in the immediate future, and it is quite likely that the positions rendered vacant will be filled by some of the present adjusters, while it is safe to conjecture there will be new aspirants for the various jobs.

While admitting that it may be difficult to find anyone competent ably to fill the breach, it will be just as well to face the position blandly, as the work must perforce be carried on. When the late Rt. Hon. Richard Seddon returned his number to the High Steward the cry was raised that the ■“country was settled for want of a King,” but as it was necessary for the administration to be carried on someone was found capable of continuing or attempting to continue, the good work. Whether those who have at different stages succeeded, the rugged and gifted West Coaster have made a sucess of the venture, is a question of opinion, and the same position will arise in connection with the fulfilling of the important office of handicapper to various New Zealand trotting clubs. The late Mr. Brinkman was undoubtedly the premier in this position, his systematic modus operandi and lengthy experience earning him the high rank. There will be several aspirants for the honour and the selections may take a wider range than generally anticipated. Seven handicappers were required to do the work for the trotting clubs which were not served by the late Mr. Brinkman, while one or two others have made adjustments in the South for racing clubs that wisely insert trotting heats on their schedule. Best Known Officials The following list shows how the trotting clubs, outside of the dozen so ably catered for by the late Mr. Brinkman, are served in the way of handicapping: Auckland, Northland, Hawke’s Bay, Hawera, Wanganui, Thames, Taranaki, Mr. Geo. Paul; Methven, South Wairarapa, Canterbury Park, Cheviot, Marlborough. Mr. C. Thomas; Otahuhu, Waikato, Te Aroha, Cambridge, Mr. C. E. Gooseman; Gore, Invercargill, Wyndham, Mr. M. Fitzgerald; Winton, Mr. H. A. Pearce; Westland, Mr. Jas. Noble; Nelson, Mr. G. S. Simpson. It is reasonable to assume that the majority of those mentioned will at least apply for some of the vacant positions, in which case their experience will stand them in good stead and perhaps give them a pull over new aspirants. On the other hand, there are sure to

be applicants who if given a chance would no doubt fill the bill satisfactorily, and with a little encouragement would turn out competent officials. The handicapping question is a serious one for those who are keenly concerned in the trotting business, and the adoption of a more uniform system of adjustment would do much to alleviate the present unsatisfactory position. The chief fly in the ointment with re- i gard to the existing style of allotting the marks is the stereotyped plan of penalising placed horses, and many clubs have endeavoured to bring in legislation to remedy the defect, but so far without avail. Advancing a Theory Leading owners in the trotting business throughout Jfche Dominion have long recognised the need for a more uniform system of handicapping, and while some unsuccessful efforts have been made to induce the powers to move in this direction, it is generally anticipated that the day is fast approaching when systematic adjusting will be enforced. The Wellington Trotting Club propagated a scheme which was submitted to the Conference in July, but it was evident from the support accorded the measiire that many clubs and delegates had not given the subject much consideration. However, while the club putting forward the proposal may not have arranged a plan to suit all requirements, there is no doubt it had something worthy of recommendation, and could be amended to be worth a trial. The scheme emanating from the management of the Empire City trotting organisation will certainly not be lost sight of and there will be similar propositions forthcoming when the Trotting Parliament a,gain meets in session. In the meantime, advocates of uniformity in handicapping will be busy evolving ideas and no doubt from the numerous brains at work some tangible and workable scheme will be evolved. Wellington Club’s Idea The Wellington Club’s remit to the Conference was based on the following lines: “That times of second and third horses be not recorded ' against them in races: (a) For pacers where the limits are slower than 2.25 for one mile, 3.2 for one mile and a-quarter, 3.39 for one mile and a-half, 3.57 for one mile and five furlongs, 4.52 for two miles, or in maiden races without limits or trial handicaps without limits; (b) for unhoppled trotters where the limits are slower than 2.30 for one mile, 3.8 for one mile and a-quarter, 3.48 for one mile and a-half, 4.7 for one mile and five furlongs, 5.5 for two miles. The winner of any race covered by this rule shall not be penalised for any subsequent event within the scope of this rule to a greater extent than eight seconds for any one win. In handicapping horses for faster classes than those covered by this rule the handicapper shall not take into

consideration the performances of horses running second or third in races covered by this rule. Winners shall not be penalised more than two seconds, and second horses more than one second, in all races with limits of or tighter than: (a) For pacers, 2.19 for one mile, 2.52 for one mile and a-quarter, 3.25 for one mile and a-half, 3.41 for one mile and five furlongs, 4.32 for two miles; (b) for unhoppled trotters, 2.22 for one mile, 2.56 for one mile and a-quarter, 3.30 for one mile and a-half, 3.47 for one mile and five furlongs, 4.36 for two miles. The handicapper shall not penalise the winner of any race within the scope of this rule, where the distance of such race was nine furlongs or less, for any subsequent event greater in distance than one mile and a-half; or the winner of a mile and a-quarter race or any lesser distance within the scope

of this rule for any subsequent event of two miles or more. The Wellington Club also went further in the question by asking for a rule to the effect that when in any race not otherwise provided for in these rules a horse improves upon its handicap by two seconds or more, the handicapper, in handicapping such horse for any subsequent event shall not add an artificial penalty to the actual times recorded by such horse. Aucklander’s View A prominent Auckland enthusiast, who has devoted a great deal of time and study to the important question of handicapping, informed “Abaydos” recently that “systematic adjusting” was sure to come into vogue sooner or later. He considered it was a subject which owners’, breeders’ and trainers’ associations should take up seriously with a view to placing concrete proposals before the next Conference. The local sportsman after going carefully and thoughtfully into the whole question, has drawn up as the basis for such a system a scale of distances and times, with penalties, as appended, and which students of the vexed question will find instructive and interesting. The author of the scheme has given a table representing what he considers horses doing a mile in a

given time should be capable of registering over extended journeys.

Winners or seconds of any race distance take their mark for other distances from the mark on file v down to the 2.12 line, that is to a horse goes back to 2.12 for winmng a mile race, then his mark to miles is 4.32, and the same applies a horse who goes back to i 32 t miles, then his mark for the other d tances are on the same line. After the 2.12 mark (specially tioned) is reached, then for winnms mile or 11 miles, his mark li miles and 11 miles is on t.he but he does not go back for 15-B®, and 2 miles, and if he wins a 15-8 in*‘ or 2 miles, then he goes back in w line for 1§ miles, 1 5-8 miles or 2 nm®* but not for the 1 mile or li mue Nominations for the position o* juster to the New Zealand M e tr P® tan Club will be received finally morrow, and the decision of the ex tive will be awaited with inter** There is sure to be a good entra.nc«i the big stake, and in adidtion tocau didates with many performances varied hue, there will be several pro ising novices {found on the list, to will be a good skirmish for the P~7. e tion, but it will not come as a surp a to find the Auckland adjuster, * starter, getting home at the flnisn-

TABLE OF DISTANCES AND TIMES 1 mile 1J mile 14 mile 15 mile 2 mile 2.24 3.1 3.39 3.58 4.55 2.23 3.0 3.38 3.57 4.54 2.22 2.59 3.37 3.56 4.52 2.21 2.58 3.35 3.54 4.50 2.20 2.57 3.34 3.53 4.48 2.19 2.55 3.32 3.50 4.46 2.18 2.54 3.31 3.49 4.44 2.17 2.52 3.29 3.47 4.42 2.16 2.51 3.28 3.46 4.41 2.15 2.50 3.26 3.44 4.38 2.14 2.49 3.24 3.43 4.36 2.13 2.48 3.22 3.41 4.34 2.12 2.46 3.21 3.39 4.32 For horses recording faster time than 2.12 to the mile a special clause is inserted, whereby a winner over the shorter courses is not penalised at the longer journeys* and vice versa, 2.11 2.45 3.20 3.37 4.30 2.10 2.43 3.18 3.35 4.28 2.9 2.42 3.17 3.34 4.27 2.8 2.41 3.15 3.32 4.26 2.7 2.40 3.14 3.31 4.25 2.6 2.39 3.13 3.29 4.24 2.5 2.38 3.12 3.28 4.33 2.4 2.37 3.10 3.27 4.22 2.3 2.36 3.9 3.26 4 21 2.35 3.7 3.24 4.30 PENALTIES 1 Mile— Down to 2.14 Winners 2 sec. Seconds 1 wme. After 2.14 Winners 1 sec. Seconds NiL 14 Mile— Down to 2.47 Winners 2 sec. Seconds 1 secAfter 2.47 Winners 1 sec. Seconds NiL 14 and 15 miles— Down to 3.33 and 3.52 Winners 4 sec. Seconds 2 sec. Down to 3.22 and 3.41 Winners 2 sec. Seconds 1 sec. After 3.22 and 3.41 Winners 1 sec. Seconds Nil. 2 Miles — to 4.39 Winners 4 sec. Seconds 2 sec. Down to 4.28 Winners 2 sec. Seconds 1 sec. After 4.28 Winners 1 sec. Seconds NiL