- This topic has 10 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
Mr David X Trainer has an overall 5 year strike rate over jumps of 9%. He’s had 600 runners and 54 winners. For argument’s sake, these runs/wins are shared equally between novice/maiden hurdles, handicap hurdles, handicap chases, etc.
He has a horse running in a maiden hurdle at even money.
Does his 9% strike rate bother you if you’re taking 50% about one of his runners?
I’ve noticed over the years that a high strike rate combined with small amount of runners sent to the track are profitable.
On the other hand yes a low strike rate does bother mebut what if his even money shots win 65 % of the time?
I thought about adding this kind of stat in but I’d been going forever if I did
Mr David X Trainer has an overall 5 year strike rate over jumps of 9%. He’s had 600 runners and 54 winners. For argument’s sake, these runs/wins are shared equally between novice/maiden hurdles, handicap hurdles, handicap chases, etc.
He has a horse running in a maiden hurdle at even money.
Does his 9% strike rate bother you if you’re taking 50% about one of his runners?
I don’t look at it like that, Zark. If taking “50%” horses out of those statistics the trainer is unlikely to have achieved a 9% strike rate. I believe “5 years” is far too long anyway, it’s using out of date material. Two or one year or 6 months strike rates are imo better.
Just because a trainer has a 9% strike rate doesn’t mean it is a bad strike rate for him/her. If the average quality of horse is poor then 9% could be very reasonable. Likewise 9% means little when examining whether one particular Even money shot is value or not. When it comes to trainers, thing I am after is a horse likely to run to form. Therefore a trainer’s current record is much more important than 5, 2, 1 year or 6 month record; but I do use 6 month records in conjunction with current record.
If a trainer has a 9% 6 month record and his recent three week record shows 3 wins in 15 runners (20% SR) then in all probability the trainer is in very good form at present.
Where as if Zero winners in 15 I’d be concerned unless there’s a row of placed efforts too.
Only having One winner in 15 (6.67%). Obviously 6.67% compared to 9% isn’t great, but again it all depends on the placed efforts whether I’d consider the record good enough (see below).When establishing whether a horse is likely to run to form, it is not all about how many winners the trainer’s had. If a non-top trainer has had a lot more placed than his/her usual place strike rate – then even if the win strike rate isn’t good – the trainer is still probably in good form. Although I don’t judge all placed efforts as running to form. In that recent record, a 33/1 shot finishing 4 lengths 3rd of 20 runners has probably run really well. Where as a 1/3 odds-on 4 lengths 2nd of 8 has probably not run well.
When judging trainers recent record I don’t judge every trainer the same. If a trainer’s last four runners have all won at prices of 7/1, 3/1, 10/1 and 6/1 then even if he/she had 20 zeros before the 1,1,1,1 the trainer is in good form. Sometimes with a trainer with not many runners it needs to go back a month to judge, sometimes with a top trainer only a day or two is necessary.
Value Is EverythingI would forget the variance in trainer data and start looking at the actual “universe” of horses and “surroundings”
What if that same horse was coming out of a handicap?
This clue was very relevant.
One of those things I always look for is Paul Nicholls going through a lean spell at some point early in the year.
Value Is EverythingOne of those things I always look for is Paul Nicholls going through a lean spell at some point early in the year.
He has been, Ginger, for a good few weeks now but during this time some of his horses are running well and some are winning. Therefore, the way I study a race, I cannot say “oh, this trainer is right out of form” and put a line through all his runners carte blanche. On the contrary, any given one of his horses is liable to run to form – impossible to know which will and which won’t – so I have to consider each on its merits as if it will. If a horse of his comes out closely matched with one from another yard and that yard is in good form I will oppose the Nicholl’s beast, if his horse is clear top I will have to invest upon it.
Do you have any better solution to patchy stableform?
When a trainer is going through a lean spell it’s not that every horse will lose, GM. One or two will win and some will run well in defeat, but a higher number than normal will run poorly/lose. That means the probability of losing increases. Similarly, with any trainer in exceptional form the probability of running to form/winning increases. Therefore, although I’ll occsionally bet on a horse from a yard out of form, price I am willing to take about any horse changes due to those probabilities. Exactly the same as any aspect of form (eg race distance) affects the price am willing to take.
Value Is Everything
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.