Retired Mare's Chase Ratings - corrected

Any information from the Steward
Forum rules
Do not to post anything abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, or sexually-orientated.
Do not post anything negative about any player.
No advertising other games.
The management reserves the right to delete or lock threads and messages at any time.
Read the complete SIM rules and legal information.
User avatar
J.r. Lewis
Grade 3 Winner
Posts: 698
Joined: 7 years ago

Re: Retired Mare's Chase Ratings - corrected

Post by J.r. Lewis »

I'm only here 6 months so take my opinion for what it's worth but the way I see it is, anytime an update is made to accurately reflect a horse's ability it's a good thing. Sure I'd hate to have all my hens, stars and formidables downgraded after putting so much time and effort into collecting them but I'd rather know that they're really not as good as I thought they were before I keep spending money breeding them. The change could've been done incrementally but then you still wouldn't be sure how your greatest strength matched up against the others out there.

Similarly, if you've got the 100th fastest freak, would you rather know that he's maybe a stakes instead or just be disappointed in your freak? I know Pete mentioned before how Mixers were updated a few years ago and I wouldn't be surprised to see them updated again as there are a lot of freaks that can't win stakes there too.

So in the end, it's progress getting accurate information that can't simply be updated on the fly.
User avatar
Dave Trainer
Grade 1 Winner
Posts: 942
Joined: 7 years ago

Re: Retired Mare's Chase Ratings - corrected

Post by Dave Trainer »

The breeding ratings are currently flawed The mares were not downgraded. The Steward and Admin are looking into it.
User avatar
J.r. Lewis
Grade 3 Winner
Posts: 698
Joined: 7 years ago

Re: Retired Mare's Chase Ratings - corrected

Post by J.r. Lewis »

Where did you see that Dave? According to this post the horse's ability hasn't changed but their ratings may have been wrong and they've now been corrected. The only follow up post from the Steward says that they feel bad about the mix up and they're working on something we'll like.
User avatar
Glenn Larson
Listed Stakes Winner
Posts: 550
Joined: 10 years ago

Re: Retired Mare's Chase Ratings - corrected

Post by Glenn Larson »

J.r. Lewis wrote: 6 years ago I'm only here 6 months so take my opinion for what it's worth but the way I see it is, anytime an update is made to accurately reflect a horse's ability it's a good thing. The change could've been done incrementally but then you still wouldn't be sure how your greatest strength matched up against the others out there.
So in the end, it's progress getting accurate information that can't simply be updated on the fly.
At the risk of repeating myself, the issue is not that the scale has been adjusted. As I said before, I understand and support the much needed revamp of the chaser world. Your comment about not being sure how my mare compares with others is exactly my point! If you read this thread you'll see multiple owners report that the entire barn was downgraded to potential. So explain how this change helps me compare my mares against others when everything I have and my neighbor has are all rated potential !!!! My issue is not that I'm against change, what I am opposed to is dramatic, unannounced, unexplained and apparently untested changes.
Glenn Larson
Stallion Rosters

Thoroughbred Stallions

Mixer Stallions
User avatar
Dave Trainer
Grade 1 Winner
Posts: 942
Joined: 7 years ago

Re: Retired Mare's Chase Ratings - corrected

Post by Dave Trainer »

J.r. Lewis wrote: 6 years ago Where did you see that Dave? According to this post the horse's ability hasn't changed but their ratings may have been wrong and they've now been corrected. The only follow up post from the Steward says that they feel bad about the mix up and they're working on something we'll like.
There are 2 separate issues. One is racers and the other broodmares. This thread is about the mares and they now seem to all be showing potential which is being looked at.
User avatar
J.r. Lewis
Grade 3 Winner
Posts: 698
Joined: 7 years ago

Re: Retired Mare's Chase Ratings - corrected

Post by J.r. Lewis »

I didn't realize that it was all of them...i thought the elite number was just lessened to a more realistic percentage thus making a majority of the rest of them being downgraded? So there's not 1 person out there that still has a top shelf mare? Now I understand the frustration lol.
User avatar
The Steward
Hall of Fame
Posts: 16522
Joined: 18 years ago
Location: So Cal!
Contact:

Re: Retired Mare's Chase Ratings - corrected

Post by The Steward »

We're still looking into what happened and if it's not what we wanted, but if horses were changed all across the board, that just means you need to redefine what you think a top mare is now. This has happened in Mixers before too.... DR may be next!
"There's no secret to training a good horse. It's a matter of being fortunate enough to get one."
"Funny how you often regret the stuff you didn't do more than the stuff you did do" - GG
User avatar
Mr. Lord Rich
Hall of Fame
Posts: 5966
Joined: 11 years ago
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: Retired Mare's Chase Ratings - corrected

Post by Mr. Lord Rich »

Let's do it again in mixers please, but accompany it with free hypos or bs checks for a day to organize
A CAVAL DONATO NON SI GUARDA IN BOCCA
Lucas Davenport
Eclipse Champion
Posts: 1086
Joined: 15 years ago

Re: Retired Mare's Chase Ratings - corrected

Post by Lucas Davenport »

Before there were any changes, maybe 40% of my mares, invariably the better racers, came up greatest strength. So those I kept for broodmares. I was successful in breeding numerous freaks with those mares. Those freaks went on and generally became good racers, most won a stakes or two, and some are still winning more than a few stakes. So far so good. Now after two sets of changes, everything is coming up some potential. There is no way to differentiate between those mares worth keeping and those not worth keeping. Those worth breeding from those not worth breeding. Not progress. With all due respect: "If its not broke, don't fix it."
The Hub Group of Farms: where saving your boarding and shipping dollars is always a priority, especially when you don't know where the next race will take your horse.
User avatar
Rachel Sadler
Turf Router
Posts: 493
Joined: 16 years ago
Location: Perth Western Australia

Re: Retired Mare's Chase Ratings - corrected

Post by Rachel Sadler »

Lucas Davenport wrote: 6 years ago Before there were any changes, maybe 40% of my mares, invariably the better racers, came up greatest strength. So those I kept for broodmares. I was successful in breeding numerous freaks with those mares. Those freaks went on and generally became good racers, most won a stakes or two, and some are still winning more than a few stakes. So far so good. Now after two sets of changes, everything is coming up some potential. There is no way to differentiate between those mares worth keeping and those not worth keeping. Those worth breeding from those not worth breeding. Not progress. With all due respect: "If its not broke, don't fix it."
I agree about the broodmares, but somehow it did get broken when the changes to the broodmare comments occurred for the first time, because after that change every hypomate on my mares changed. Hypomates that cost real dollars and done over several game years were suddenly different and not worth the money myself and others paid. A+ and A hypomates were suddenly dropped to a B or B+ with no ryhme or reason, not much good for breeding this year and money waisted if we cant use the hypomates we already have.
"I wish people will tell me when there unhappy"

We did, and you didn't do anything to fix the reason why we are unhappy!
User avatar
Laura Ferguson
Hall of Fame
Posts: 6534
Joined: 18 years ago

Re: Retired Mare's Chase Ratings - corrected

Post by Laura Ferguson »

Before there were any changes, maybe 40% of my mares, invariably the better racers, came up greatest strength. So those I kept for broodmares. I was successful in breeding numerous freaks with those mares. Those freaks went on and generally became good racers, most won a stakes or two, and some are still winning more than a few stakes. So far so good. Now after two sets of changes, everything is coming up some potential. There is no way to differentiate between those mares worth keeping and those not worth keeping. Those worth breeding from those not worth breeding. Not progress. With all due respect: "If its not broke, don't fix it."
And this is the heart of the problem. Whatever the range was tweaked to, it now makes it impossible to tell the good from the mediocre. From the initial change, where there was a range of ratings (brilliant to some potential), now all but one of my chaser mares is now rated some potential (that one is rated strong - I'd love to know if anyone has a mare rated brilliant after this most recent change. My guess is no). I had one or two recently retired rate no potential, but I'd say 99% of them are the same rating. All of my nonchaser flat TB mares are rated no potential, when previously, a handful did have higher ratings. I'm now in a situation where I have less information to work with. It's the equivalent of changing the flat rating bloodstock agent system so that 90% of your mares are now rated good, when before, there were stars and formidables. I understand that the bloodstock rating isn't the end-all/be-all, but this change has made the bloodstock agent effectively pointless with respect to chasers.

It may be that one more tweak is needed. For example, if the current rating is: 100-90 is brilliant, 89-80 is strong and 79-50 is some potential, at this point, while I get that it means most of our mares are 79-50, it'd be more helpful to us if 100-85 was brilliant, 84-70 was strong, and 69-50 was some potential (think of it as helping us figure out which of the current morass of some potential is a sad some potential).

I'm holding off until the end of the year to breed my chaser mares in case things get tweaked again, but right now, I'm inclined to not bother with either the bloodstock agent or hypomates, roll the dice on the mares that have a good enough produce record/pedigree/race record to warrant breeding, let the rest sit idle for a year and re-evaluate next year.

Again, I really like some of the changes - the adjustment to speed figures, so they have more meaning, the ability to get a chaser fit, like the other breeds, but the adjustment to the broodmare ratings, not so much.
User avatar
The Steward
Hall of Fame
Posts: 16522
Joined: 18 years ago
Location: So Cal!
Contact:

Re: Retired Mare's Chase Ratings - corrected

Post by The Steward »

The great fix of Year 48 is about to happen!
"There's no secret to training a good horse. It's a matter of being fortunate enough to get one."
"Funny how you often regret the stuff you didn't do more than the stuff you did do" - GG
User avatar
Dave Trainer
Grade 1 Winner
Posts: 942
Joined: 7 years ago

Re: Retired Mare's Chase Ratings - corrected

Post by Dave Trainer »

Excellent :D
User avatar
Nick Gilmore
Hall of Fame
Posts: 5354
Joined: 16 years ago

Re: Retired Mare's Chase Ratings - corrected

Post by Nick Gilmore »

Thanks to Mme Steward and the team!
User avatar
Nena Olson
Hall of Fame
Posts: 5577
Joined: 17 years ago

Re: Retired Mare's Chase Ratings - corrected

Post by Nena Olson »

Thank you to Steward and Admin :) Its nice to see the comments back to what they were!
✧.* SIM Artist ੈ✩‧₊˚
Post Reply