Sandbagging by Chypmunk
"First off I would like to say that I am not against sandbagging, I use different forms of sandbagging myself in Stakes Racing when I deem it may be beneficial. Neither is sandbagging against any current rules, whether it be in Rated races or Stakes races. I would also like to say that there can be some inherent differences between sandbagging in those two racing spheres, something that seems to have been glossed over in the recent debate over Rated Racing.
So what is sandbagging ?
It is a term used to cover the situation when an owner deliberately runs a horse below it's optimum in order to limit it's ability in a race. This can be achieved in a number of ways - running unfit, running without tack or with adverse tack (blinkers that have a negative effect on the horse), running on unsuitable ground or over unsuitable distances.
• The least sophisticated form of sandbagging is racing a horse with the intention of it finishing as far down the field as possible. This is generally done by employing every limiting factor possible (wrong distance/going, improperly tacked, unfit) and is used in both spheres of racing.
- In Stakes Racing this is employed in order to improve the chances of achieving the maximum possible losing margin which will then improve the weight-allowance that horse will receive in a subsequent Allowance race.
- In Rated Racing this can be employed to try to ensure the horse finishes as near last as possible to achieve a 2 point drop in it's rating.
There are two main differences in adopting this form of sandbagging between the racing spheres:
- in Rated Racing it can be employed time and time again following each win/place to quickly drop the horse down to the required rating and is also perfectly possible to run more than 1 truly run race in a row whereas in Stakes Racing weight allowances employ an average of the last 5 runs as part of the equation so the effect of sandbagging is reduced as the horse accumulates more runs and also the horse will most likely see it's weight-allowance dramatically reduced after a win/place thus limiting the ability to get an immediate second bite at the cherry.
- in Stakes Racing it is possible to achieve the required weight-allowance by sandbagging a single race (most often it's first outing) whereas in Rated Racing (with the maximum downward ratings adjustment of -2) it will more than likely take a number of races to initially achieve the required rating.
• A more sophisticated form of sandbagging is employed primarily in Stakes Racing whereby a horse is run with the intention of it turning a profit in a race without winning, the ideal finishing position being 2nd.
This is often employed in Challenge races (except 3yo racing) where weight penalties are accrued for wins which may impact on the chances of that horse performing well in the Final or a Consolation race but finishing in a paying place not only earns points toward the Final but can also generate a profit for the stable on that particular race. This strategy is by no means limited to Challenge races and can also be employed in all Stakes races to prolong both the racing career and profitability of a horse.
While there is no reason this strategy cannot also be employed in Rated Racing in a limited fashion it does require more effort as the fields and weights may not be known until 10 minutes before the race (as opposed to an hour or more with Stakes Racing) and there is therefore less time to calculatie how much sandbagging may be required in order to achieve the optimum result (2nd).
Another major difference between employing this practise in the two racing spheres is that there are no penalties for finishing 2nd in Stakes Racing (apart from any possible impacts on weight-allowances for Allowance races) but either a ratings penalty will be incurred or a loss will be made (if the field is small) when placing in Rated Racing. It is perfectly possible for a horse to finish 2nd fifteen races in a row in Stakes Racing and generate a profit each time before finally winning and having to either move up to a higher class of race (or retire) whereas this is highly unlikely in Rated Racing as a penalty will most likely be incurred in each race.
There are other situations under which a horse can be regarded as having been sandbagged (e.g. racing a horse in a race alongside a stablemate that is sure to beat it whatever the allocated Random Factors can also be regarded as a form of sandbagging if the intention is to help increase the lesser horses weight-allowance in preparation for an Allowance race.) but the above are the main two strategies employed.
Sandbagging can be an emotive subject, with some in favour and some against. With this in mind I will not provide an example horse to show the first form of sandbagging but if you would like to see an example of the more sophisticated form take a look at the last few runs of Dance Theatre from Aug 12th to Sep 17th (she doesn't like blinkers). Whilst an element of luck was received in the allocation of jockeys (this is always required in this strategy) this horse was entered in each of those races with the intention of finishing 2nd if possible without winning and a profit was made on each and every one of those races. I could have simply let her win the race on Aug 12th but by adopting this strategy an extra £6.97 profit was made whilst also acrruing another five races toward the 500 Run Bonus. Had she won earlier it would not have been a disaster as she would have still turned a profit for me before I needed to re-asses her options.
You should also be made aware that sandbagging carries the risk of miscalculation or unfortunate randoms which may cause a loss to be incurred so please do not see the above as advising you to adopt a sandbagged approach - it is merely intended as an explanation for those who may have seen the term but not been aware as to what it pertained.
Hopefully all that makes sense and well done if you made it this far without nodding off,
Chyp"