My earlier comment was in fact "Horses make jockeys and trainers look good" and I'll stick to that. Vo Rogue, Cyril Small and Vic Rail are one example.

Regards to the comment "why would you put Payne on a horse instead of Childs" (or similar) The reason is, that Payne is a heavyweight jockey whereas Childs is able to ride at a much lighter weight. If a horse has a big weight, it often makes more sense to have the horse carry as much "live" weight as possible as opposed to "dead weight" in the form of lead.

what i meant is payne is no good and childs is/was undefeated on northerly.

payne slaughtered northerly not once(c.f orr) not twice(manion cup) but three times(bmw).

Sorry Umrum...misunderstood you!

Payne has lost it [if he ever had it]. Gone to la la land.

Cheers.

Hi All,

Haven't posted for a while but found some of the replies to this topic very interesting.

From my analysis of the past 30 months of racing (metropolitan S/M/B/A) here are a few tips I wish to share:

1. Sportsman's Zipform is a very reliable tool. Over 80% of winners are rated within four points of the top-rated horse;
2. Ranking the above horses by Average Prize Money and the first prize money on offer in the race is a good class measurement tool;
3. Place percentage is the best indicator of racing consistency;
4. On average over 80% of winners have an average place strike-rate greater than 45%;
5. This average rises for higher quality races;
6. Only consider weight fluctuations for horses weighted above 56kgs. Like Privateer said ensure a rise in weight is matched by a drop in class or at worst the same class;
7. Last start beaten margin is irrelevant;
8. Jockey's are irrelevant- except in Sydney, wherein the top 5 jockeys account for the bulk of winners.
9. Wide barriers only matter to on-pace runners;
10. On-pace runners account for greater than 70% of all winners.

I hope some of you find this of interest and can continue this excellent thread...


Regards,
Lucky




[ This Message was edited by: Luckyboy on 2003-10-08 18:06 ]

[ This Message was edited by: Luckyboy on 2003-10-08 18:08 ]

Hi Luckyboy,
Agree with everything except points 7 and 8.



Last start beaten margin is not irrelevant in my opinion, but the last three beaten margins are perhaps more relevant.
Do some stats on horses beaten by more than 3 lengths then by more than 5 lengths at their last start and you'll see what I mean.

It depends on your system or method.
If you statistically choose your runners, then jockeys don't really come into it.
But I will not have any confidence in some selections when a known duffer is aboard my horse.

Luckyboy wrote...
8. Jockey's are irrelevant- except in Sydney, wherein the top 5 jockeys account for the bulk of winners.

Hi Luckyboy,

agree with most of your post, but find the above statement illogical. "Jockeys are irrelevant" - meaning that jockeys don't matter at all.... "except in Sydney"... meaning that ooopsss, yes they do!!!

I have a simple question for you...

You are going to punt on a horse tomorrow... Formline of 423 for it's past 3 starts, all reasonable runs, it has a real show and you expect it to start at around $3 or $4... It's a swoooper, so you know it'll get back in traffic...

You have a choice of two jockeys...

Jockey 1 has had 378 rides in the last 12 months for 19 wins.. a s/r of 5%. s/r in the last 3 months is slightly better, at 6%.

Jockey 2 has had 686 rides in the last 12 months for 145 wins.. a s/r of 21%. s/r in the last 3 months is slightly worse at 18%.

Q: Which jockey would you prefer to be riding your money around the track?

Cheers,
Chris.

Hi All.
I'd like to tell about jockeys.
Long time ego when Mick Ditman was a jockey
one saturday he have 6 rides 5 top selection and 1 donkey.I back them all up for place.
and I've lost because he won 1 race on 33/1 DONKEY the rest was UNPLACED.
Now is the same Look C.B and others they winning on FAVORITES when they HAVE TO.
VALUE is the key
Good Luck.

Hi All,

Sorry I couldn’t get back to your feedback last night...

Just to a follow up on a few points. The 'beaten margin last start' is an irrelevant statistic to look at in isolation. This was my inference and supported by a recent post from Chrome Prince



I guess the real point I make by my statement is to look thoroughly at a horse’s current form. Last start failures can be overlooked if there are mitigating circumstances.

With regard to my point about jockeys, I stand by this finding. Whilst my use of the English language may have seemed illogical - the fact remains Sydney is the only racing area where there are OVER DOMINANT trainers and OVER DOMINANT stable jockeys.

I remain hopeful that with further success and increasing stable numbers trainers like Gerald Ryan and John O'Shea will bring about a more even spread of winning trainers.

And to answer your question Chris, the statistics indicate a current above average performance for Jockey 1. Does this make a difference to me? If I had to choose between two horses ridden by these respective jockeys in a Sydney race and one of the jockeys was in the Top 5 it would make a difference.

So do we open up the debate? I really enjoy socialising my viewpoints against others. It is a great learning environment.


Regards,
Lucky

I think a very interesting point about jockeys can be seen from the following table

Good Jockeys

Name      Rides  Wins  2nds  3rds

C Brown    903   137   125   121

N Callow   686   145   100    75

G Childs   515    66    59    35

C Munce    623   106    56    68



Not As Good Jockeys

Name      Rides  Wins  2nds  3rds

A Findlay  465    36    55    39

S Wynn     378    19    23    22

T Uchiyama 226    26    32    34

With the first set of jockeys, they ride more winners than 2nds and 3rds....
The second group ride more 2nds and 3rds than winners.
Munce's win vs place strike rate is extraordinary to say the least....

I don't necessarily agree that just because they're good jockeys they get the plum rides... I think quite often owners / trainers will seek out the good jockeys on the hope that they will win on their donkey, and it doesn't always happen. And a good jockey wants to fill his riding card just as much as the next jockey.

I also agree that jockeys can have their off days just like horses. Munce's short term strike rate is well off at the moment, a very ordinary 8% vs a long term of 14%.

Cheers,
Chris.

[ This Message was edited by: stebbo on 2003-10-09 10:24 ]

[ This Message was edited by: stebbo on 2003-10-09 10:26 ]