I do sometimes like a horse that has carried big weights who is then put up in class or into a handicap carrying a lighter weight though.
They must feel the difference between 12 stone on their back and 10 stone for example.
I should imagine that physically some are better at carrying more weight than others.
Official ratings are 95% the main consideration though.
There are many within the industry that support this view that actual weight carried is key as we regularly hear;
- got a nice racing weight
- great weight carrying performance
I have never understood the view as surely it’s the OR mark that decides the differential between horses and if a horse is high in the weights, then it’s because of its OR verses the other participants ….is it not human subjectivity coming into the equation of more weight is bad and that you want a lighter weight in a race?
If you are going up in class with a lighter weight then it’s because you are taking on higher rated horses, so the actual weight is irrelevant isn’t it?
I am also not sure about the view that certain horses are built better to carry bigger weights, as I remember little Red Rum carry some welter weights over the GN trip. Maybe though Red Rum was an anomaly and bigger horses can carry weight better v’s their OR mark.
However Racing has decided that a horse can easily carry a max of around 12 stone for Nat Hunt racing, so although it’s 10 stone or 12 stone, which will most likely be felt by the horse, then it’s the difference between their OR’ which makes the handicap and is designed to try and get horses to finish together in a race etc…..so I don’t understand how the actual weight the horse carries is actually relevant?
Going though could be a factor, as maybe softer going over a longer trip could impact their OR differential, however I also remember Suny Bay and Denmans weight carrying performances in the Hennessy, so not sure this holds water either.