- This topic has 56 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 8 months ago by
.
- Posts
Substitute Richard Johnson for AP, Drone. The formula is 200+ wins from more rides than any other jockey, booked by the dominant agent, the majority on well fancied horses, for a wide variety of trainers just so long as said trainer has a live one. Hard working but what else does that prove. How many times did McCoy have a great Festival or ride the National winner? Rather than his massive accumulation of career winners, Tony deserves most credit for his skill and determination to get up on lesser fancied horses from impossible positions, however, these occasions form only a small fraction of the total. There must be a better way to decide Champion Jockey for that title to be commensurate with best jockey.
Think about it.
Journeyman jockey gets the ride on the best staying chaser. Winning Betfair, King George, Gold Cup and Aintree Bowl… And those were all won easily – the proverbial anyone could win on him. He’s crowned Champion Jockey despite riding just 45 winners… ahead of an AP-like who’s had 200+ winners. Nobody would begrudge the Journeyman having a top horse. But effectively a jockey crowned “Champion” only because he’s been lucky enough to get the ride on one horse. How would that reveal the true “Champion”? Number of winners may not be perfect, GM; but it is by far the best method.Value Is EverythingA “dominant agent” does not achieve the same number of rides for everyone. Top jockeys get the number of rides because they’re the top jockeys. Jockey getting more rides isn’t ideal, but is all part of being the best jockey available. If Johnson has an unfair advantage for riding more horses in the current Jockeys Championship, then Ruby Walsh would’ve had a far bigger advantage than that if the Championship only accounted for the best races. Ruby got on far more of the best horses at Cheltenham than anyone else, so rode far more winners at the Cheltenham Festival than anyone else. ie Ruby is a bloody good jockey, but the number of Cheltenham winners distorts his ability compared to others. AP may not have had as many Cheltenham winners in recent years, but was handicapped by the McMannus retainer (not riding for Mullins or Nicholls or Henderson (non JP).
You’re fixated by the Grand National, GM. LOL. The race proven over the years not to give any sort of steer to who the best jockey is. It’a a handicap with 40 runners. Take it from me – vast majority of AP’s National rides (including his winner) started at odds nowhere near representitive to their true chance of winning – purely because of his enormous public following. Therefore, not surprising AP didn’t win more than one Grand National. How many did Champion Jockeys John Francome, Peter Scudamore and Jonjo O’Neil win between them?
Value Is EverythingYes, AP more than any other jockey used his “skill and determination to get up on lesser fancied horses from impossible positions”… And yet it is these races you want to delete from the jockeys championship?
Value Is EverythingBut who decides they are the top jockeys in the first place. You admit the current system to determine CJ is not perfect, therefore, it must be a subjective decision. Once the ball is rolling winners beget more winners. Owners choosing Walsh at the big festivals is far more indicative of whom is recognised as the most skilful, who is wanted aboard in the quality races that define a season. Similarly, the GN is the most famous and popular race in the world, and the hardest to win, so the victorious rider should be rewarded by the prize money attached to it. Anyway, AP had plenty of skilful and determined rides at the Festival: Wichita Lineman, Edredon Bleu, Uxizandre (from the front)…
What would be the best method to decide the Jockeys Championship?
1). Minimum number of rides in season requirement to qualify (suggested figures on a postcard)
2). Total prize money accumulated divided by number of rides
3). Jockey with best average prize money per ride wins!
Or Total Number of Winners over Number of Rides Times Prizemoney earned, but as some jockeys ride for, in the most, more successful trainers then this should be factored in. Therefore as an example Richard Johnson in a season rides –
100 winners from 500 rides and earns £1,000,000 for Philip Hobbs who in turn has 150 winners from 800 rides and earns £1,300,000. Then Johnson will earn
100/500*1,000,000 minus 125/800*1,200,000 = 200,000 minus 187,500 = 12,500 points.
For Henry Daly he rides 10 from 75 earning £40,000. Daly has 25 from 250 earning £100,000 in total. Therefore Johnson scores
10/75*40,000 minus 25/250*100,000 = 5,333 minus 10,000 = -4,667 points.
Therefore for the 2 trainers above Johnson scores 12,500 – 4,667 = 7,833 points. You then do this for the 40-50 trainers Johnson rides for. Only winning prizemoney counts (not placed prizemoney). You then do this for each jockey who has a minimum of 20 winners and 100 rides throughout the 12 month season.
With one day to go in the season there could be so many permutations no-one would have a bloody clue who was going to be crowned champion
Nash is harder to win than the Gold Cup?
For most jockeys the GC is harder to win as only a select few are likely to have a good chance of winning the GC and quite a few an impossibility as they never ride in it. More likely to get a ride in the National.
For the jockeys who actually ride in a GC or a GN the latter is harder to win because the field size is much bigger, the race more open and it’s longer.
I was trying to keep it simple, HS. Or I would’ve suggested a points system based on Class and Grade.
The minimum rides per season to qualify should be 200.
This debate reminds me of the problem with using Batting Averages in Cricket as a measure of batting aptitude
For those that aren’t aware, a seasonal batting average is total runs accrued by the batsman divided by number of times the batsman was out e.g. 1000 runs, out 20 times = batting average of 50
In 1953 the Australian bowler Bill Johnston, on tour here with the Aussies and regarded as a poor batsman scored 102 runs in 17 innings with 16 of them not out; therefore his batting average for the season was 102, which headed the averages that season and remains among the highest ever recorded
A minimum of 200 rides should eradicate that sort of thing, Drone, like in Major League Baseball to qualify for a title based on average a player must have 3.1 plate appearances per number of games his team played (normally 162, therefore, 502.2 PAs).
Here’s a list for the proper racing winning most jockeys in the uk. Now if we judged it by prize money poor old Sir Gordon Richards would have only earn’t tuppence
Top 20 jockeys by Flat wins in UK
jockey Wins First/last wins
Sir Gordon Richards 4870 1921/1954
Pat Eddery 4633 1969/2003
Lester Piggott 4493 1948/1994
Willie Carson 3828 1962/1996
Frankie Dettori 3131 1987-
Doug Smith 3111 1932/1967
Joe Mercer 2810 1950/1985
Fred Archer 2748 1870/1886
Edward Hide 2593 1951/1993
George Fordham 2587 1851/1883
Kieren Fallon 2578 1988/2016
George Duffield 2547 1967/2004
Kevin Darley 2450 1977/2007
Richard Hughes 2428 1994/2015
Joe Fanning 2349 1990-
Eph Smith 2312 1930/1965
Richard Quinn 2234 1981/2008
Scobie Breasley 2161 1950/1968
Ryan Moore 2117 2000-
Jamie Spencer 2069 1998-Gaelic Warrior Gold Cup Winner 2026
What about:
(No of Wins)/(No of Rides)x((co)sine) x (Prizemoney/No of Days) divided (or multiplied) by (tan(opposite over adjacent)) cubed.
Nearest the bull in the event of a tie
It’s snappy and the public would get right behind it.
Or just number of winners.
Mike
You then do this for each jockey who has a minimum of 20 winners and 100 rides throughout the 12 month season.
Nice try Homer, But those with fewer winners would surely have a better chance of winning than those with 100. Smaller sample giving a bigger chance the figures are distorted.
Value Is EverythingBut who decides they are the top jockeys in the first place. You admit the current system to determine CJ is not perfect, therefore, it must be a subjective decision. Once the ball is rolling winners beget more winners. Owners choosing Walsh at the big festivals is far more indicative of whom is recognised as the most skilful, who is wanted aboard in the quality races that define a season. Similarly, the GN is the most famous and popular race in the world, and the hardest to win, so the victorious rider should be rewarded by the prize money attached to it.
Of course the number of rides a jockey gets will always be subjective, but at least it is the result of many peoples independent subjective decisions, so has at least a chance of evening out a little. Which jockey wins most prize money at the big festivals comes down to just one man’s subjective opinion. Who W P Mullins wants to be his number 1 jockey.
Giving infinitely more substance to one race (the Grand National) in a jockeys title race is way out of proportion. Main reason why a horse wins the Grand National these days is one man’s opinion (and it’s not the jockey) – the handicapper’s wrong asssesment of the horse’s ability.
Value Is Everything“Main reason why a horse wins the Grand National these days is one man’s opinion (and it’s not the jockey) – the handicapper’s wrong asssesment of the horse’s ability.”
It could be argued that the trainer who is best able to hide his horse’s true ability is the real hero.
Betlarge wrote
What about:
(No of Wins)/(No of Rides)x((co)sine) x (Prizemoney/No of Days) divided (or multiplied) by (tan(opposite over adjacent)) cubed.
That was the point I was trying to make with my calculation. You can go to the nth degree how this can be calculated. Not for a minute do I believe my calculation is correct and the one we should go with.
I’m with you on this – Total number of wins throughout the season should decide the winner as it should with the Flat season.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.