Quote Originally Posted by Triple V View Post
Fellas,
When you think about it, under a Centralised Programming/Conditioned Racing system, either way...as in Trainers nominating a horse for a meeting & letting the Handicappers sort it out...or otherwise having the Handicappers writing and publishing the race conditions for Trainers to then nominate to, which is effectively pre-sorting the fields by way of conditions, the Handicapper has the final say on the composition of fields and whatever it is, be it a Pre or Post nom sorting system...the net result would effectively be the same. One's passive, the other active, that's all.
Handicappers make blatant and simple mistakes in selecting fields from the noms for one race, as I've pointed out on this forum before. How they could appropriately select fields with no programming to go is beyond me.
During EI race fields were down, people were just happy to get a run. On the same card there were R1/2s and then R2-R5s etc...a trainer of an R2 may prefer one race conditions over the other. How does the handicapper decide which R2 goes in what race?

Similarly, the R1+ divided race conditions which are currently programmed and then turned into a race/races. Out of these divided conditions lets say that come up with two races that are both R1-R3. One is $L4 <$2000 and the other is $L4 <$4000. There has been situations where a horse eligible for the <$2000 race have ended up in the <$4000 race due to number of horses entered.

These kind of things happen and irritate people even if Jesus Christ himself was the handicapper. Letting a handicapper pick fields from noms received is scary.

P.S When Arwoc Flier ran 2nd at Leeton on New Years Night it made for a very profitable night (got quinella). Unfortunately it has still been my most profitable night for the year and probably will be!