The Bangalore Turf Club’s handicapper appears to operate on a celestial plane — far removed from the realm of logic, evidence, or even basic arithmetic. From the latest communication issued by BTC Secretary Kiran, one can only conclude that the handicapper believes his ratings are not just accurate but divinely inspired, infallible, and, above all, unquestionable.

Take the case of Zuri and Emphatic — two Bangalore-based horses who clashed during the Invitation Cup weekend in March at Chennai. Zuri carried 54 kgs (including a half-kilo overweight) while Emphatic carried 53 kgs. Mayne Magic, also from Bangalore, won the race, with Zuri finishing a close second — a short head ahead of Emphatic. You’d think this tight finish under level conditions would prompt a reassessment of the ratings by any reasonable handicapper. But not at BTC, where stubbornness is a virtue and self-correction is a cardinal sin.

For context, Emphatic’s rating of 66 at Bangalore was originally earned from a win at Chennai — a performance already factored into the Chennai handicapper’s revised ratings, which were accepted by the connections of both horses. In other words, the rating adjustment had already passed the test of relevance and fairness. But at BTC, instead of acknowledging that his rating might need a reality check, the handicapper dug in his heels — as if revising his own number would somehow violate his divine standing.

And the outcome? A logic-defying postscript. Emphatic’s rating was nudged to 67, while Zuri — who actually beat Emphatic in that very race — saw her rating dropped from 67 to 64. One wonders whether this was a rating exercise or a satire in motion.

The BTC Secretary’s letter then attempts to defend this mess with the dazzling claim that the handicapper “assigns ratings to visiting horses in comparison with the local horses.” How convenient — except for the small matter that both Zuri and Emphatic are local horses. But why let facts ruin a good excuse?

The letter goes further to state that the BTC handicapper “revises ratings based on latest performances and in the context of the local racing field.” If this were remotely true, then the Chennai performance — with all horses running neck-and-neck — should have triggered a rethink. But instead, the original BTC ratings were held onto as if they were enshrined in a museum.

In reality, the only thing consistent here is the refusal to admit error. Rather than say, “We got it wrong,” we are fed convoluted explanations wrapped in institutional arrogance. The BTC handicapper didn’t just ignore evidence — he dismissed it entirely, reinforcing the notion that once he stamps a number on a horse, it’s as sacred as a royal decree.

So, here we are — in a world where absurdity is policy, accountability is fiction, and ego-driven numbers are gospel. Logic? That’s for lesser mortals. At BTC, they ride on divine inspiration — even if it takes the sport for a ride.