Behind Scenes of Arrogate’s World’s Best Ranking

For the international team of handicappers and racing secretaries who assign ratings to race performances that determine the Longines World’s Best Racehorse Rankings, the key question for 2016 was, “Did California Chrome   run his usual superior race in the Breeders’ Cup Classic (G1)?”

Ultimately, the answer to that question would be yes, which paved the way for the horse who beat him that day, Arrogate, to secure the world’s top ranking for 2016.

Arrogate Named 2016 Longines World's Best Racehorse

Throughout the world ratings are a common tool used to describe a performance in a single number that considers quality of the field, weight carried, margin of victory, time, pace of the race, and fractional times among many factors.

The Longines World's Best Racehorse Rankings is horse racing's equivalent to world rankings by other major sporting organizations such as ATP Tennis Rankings or World Golf Rankings. The rankings are based on ratings earned by horses running worldwide, from North and South America, Europe, the Middle East, South Africa, Asia, Australia, and New Zealand.

The ratings are compiled under the auspices of The International Federation of Horseracing Authorities (IFHA) by racing officials and handicappers representing the five continents who compile the ranking order by agreeing on the rating for each horse.

In 2016 California Chrome had twice earned ratings of 133, in winning the $1 Million TVG Pacific Classic Stakes (G1) at Del Mar and the Awesome Again Stakes (G1) at Santa Anita.

Oddly, as it would turn out, if the experts determined California Chrome didn’t run his race in the Classic—and assigned him a lower rating—he may have finished as the world’s top-ranked horse. But ultimately they determined California Chrome had earned a third straight 133, and since Juddmonte Farms' Arrogate prevailed that day by a half-length, he would be awarded a 134.

Question and Answer with Juddmonte Farms' Teddy Grimthorpe

Del Mar executive vice president of racing Tom Robbins, who serves as the chairman for the North American Ratings Committee (NARC) and attended the final ranking meeting in December in Hong Kong, said California Chrome’s dominance of the rest of the Classic field convinced the international handicappers that he had run another 133.

“We talked about Chrome first because we'd confidently talked about his level throughout the year. So we kind of gave a history of his performances and you use those performances as a measuring stick, comparing them with other established horses where you can justify a number that everybody's comfortable with,” Robbins said. “So in the Classic, we thought if Arrogate hadn't been in the race, we would have awarded Chrome a 133. If Arrogate hadn't been in there, he would have won the race by 10 3/4 lengths.

“When he lost to Arrogate, there was some talk of lowering (California Chrome’s) number but the more we looked at it, there was even talk of raising his level. We settled comfortably on 133 and that resulted in a higher number for Arrogate. That's how we got him to 134.”

While ultimately the rating is assigned based on an individual performance, Robbins noted that horses help define themselves by repeated quality runs. The record-breaking Travers Stakes (G1) win by Arrogate gave the experts confidence that he deserved a 134 off his Classic. That number may not have been possible if not for the respect of his Travers.

After that track-record Travers effort, Arrogate was awarded a 129 rating in his debut on the list released for races through Sept. 11.

The NARC team also includes New York Racing Association senior vice president of racing operations Martin Panza, Churchill Downs and Keeneland racing secretary Ben Huffman, Gulfstream Park vice president of racing P.J. Campo, and Woodbine director of racing Steve Lym.

Robbins noted that the North American team of racing executives has learned a lot about ratings from the handicappers who represent the some 23 nations who participated in the ratings this year. Those handicappers have more experience as they typically assign such numbers to every horse, for every race.

The team that examines every horse who earned a 115 rating or higher is headed by co-chairmen Phillip Smith, the head of handicapping for the British Horseracing Authority; and Nigel Gray, head of handicapping and race planning for the Hong Kong Jockey Club.

Robbins, who has been participating in the ratings for more than 10 years, said participants also consider historical context. Arrogate’s 134 rating matched that of last year’s top-rated horse, Triple Crown winner American Pharoah  .

“They asked me if I was comfortable putting Arrogate at the same level, 134, as we had American Pharoah. I said I was, albeit a lot fewer performances,” Robbins said. “But when you get down to the analysis of the two races, I'm good with it being the same. Now the overall body of work for one horse—American Pharoah—was more extensive than the other, but I have no reluctance in the top figures matching."