Trainer Profiles: Fry, Lacey, Newland, O’Brien, Snowden

/in /by

In this the final Trainer Profiles article for the time being, I am examining the training record of five trainers that I have yet to study in the series. I will be looking at ten years of UK racing data from 1st January 2013 to 31st December 2022, the majority of which can be sourced by members using from the Geegeez Query Tool. All profits / losses have been calculated to Industry Starting Price and Betfair SP data will be shared where meaningful, also.

As I will be looking at several different trainers, each individual piece will focus on what I perceive to be their most important areas – highlighting where possible key positives and negatives. Let’s get cracking...

Harry Fry

Harry has been training in Dorset for just over a decade having taken out his license in October 2012.

Harry Fry Yearly Breakdown

Let’s look at Fry's yearly breakdown by win strike rate first:

 

 

The trend as a rule is downward, although 2022 did see a bounce back, perhaps as a result of settling in to his new training premises. Below are the combined strike rates and BSP returns comparing the first five years with the second five years.

 

 

2023 will be quite informative in terms of whether the 2022 improvement can be replicated.

 

Harry Fry Time of Year Breakdown

Sticking with the ‘time’ theme, Fry’s record has been much better in the main months of the National Hunt Season (November to March) as the table below shows:

 

 

There is a definite edge in strike rate, return on investment, Actual/Expected and Impact Values for the November to March period.

 

Harry Fry Performance by Market Rank

A look at some market data now, and here are the Fry figures for market position:

 

 

We can see a clear drop off once we get to 5th or bigger in the betting market, part of which is the fact that this group incorporates fifth and 15th in the markets depending on field size. Meanwhile, focusing on the top four of the betting, returns have been a solid 8 pence in the £ when betting to BSP. It looks best therefore to concentrate on Fry runners that are near the head of the betting market.

 

Harry Fry Performance by Run Style

In terms of run style Fry tends to the follow the pattern of the average trainer as this chart shows:

 

 

Roughly 52% of his runners race front rank early (led/prominent); 48% for mid/back pack runners. Not surprisingly though, the win percentages play out as we have seen in every previous piece:

 

 

If we had been able to predict when a Fry horse would take the early lead we would have been quids in. If... Note also the very poor returns for hold up horses.

 

Harry Fry Individual Stats (positive/negative)

Here are some of the strongest stand-alone stats that I have found for Fry:

  1. Four courses have seen a strike rate of 25% or more (minimum 50 runs) – these are Exeter, Newton Abbot, Uttoxeter and Kempton. All four courses have made profits to BSP; Kempton and Exeter have significant profits to both SP and BSP, the former returning 98p in the £ to BSP, the latter 52p. Conversely, Chepstow has not been a happy hunting ground with just 7 wins from 65 (SR 10.8%)
  1. Horses making their debut have won 39 races from 184 (SR 21.2%) for an SP profit of £30.07 (ROI +16.3%). To BSP this increases to +£59.04 (ROI +32.1%)
  1. Horses switching to NH racing from the ‘level’ are rare from this stable. However 35 horses have come from turf or all weather flat races last time, with only three winning
  1. Last time out winners have scored an impressive 32.4% of the time (133 winners from 410) returning 5p in the £ to SP, increasing to 12p to BSP
  1. Horses returning to the track after a break of nine weeks or more have a decent record – 136 wins from 635 (SR 21.4%). A 17p return to BSP

 

Tom Lacey

Tom started training in 2012 but it was not until 2017 that he sent out more than 100 runners. In the past three years that number has been over 200 each year. He has been profitable to BSP in five of the last seven years going back to 2016.

 

Tom Lacey Performance by Course

A look at some course data first and, specifically, at the win percentages / strike rates across all tracks where Lacey has sent at least 40 runners.

 

 

Huntingdon stands out, with 13 wins from 44 for an SP profit of £32.32 (ROI +73.45%). To BSP this increases to £41.81 (ROI +95.0%). For the record, in handicap hurdles at the course, he is an impressive 7 from 21 (SR 33.3%) with winners at 9/4, 7/2, 9/2 (twice), 7/1, 9/1 and 16/1.

 

Tom Lacey Performance by Distance

Distance splits next for Lacey:

 

 

These figures suggest that his record in shorter races is slightly worse. Profits in the 2m2f to 2m6f group are decent especially as the biggest priced winner was 25/1 and not something massively outlying. The 3m+ runners would have snuck into profit if using BSP. In terms of strike rates, the 2m2f+ runners as a whole are at or around 20% which is notably better than performance at the shortest distances.

 

Tom Lacey Performance by Jockey

 Jockey wise, here is a comparison of Lacey's use of professionals versus claiming riders:

 

 

There are virtually identical strike rates and the profit/loss figures are fairly similar. Hence, there is no need to put off if a claiming jockey is on board; indeed, it is possible the market slightly undervalues that angle.

There are three main jockeys Lacey currently uses and here are their stats:

 

 

The figures for Burke, certainly in terms of returns, are very poor - and well below the other two. It is worth noting that, like Dunne, Sheppard has been profitable to BSP. Sticking with Sheppard, his record in handicaps is excellent (strike rate of just above 20%). These races would have generated a 14p in the £ return to SP, 33p to BSP. In non-handicaps, his strike rate has been just 12.4%.

 

Tom Lacey Individual Stats (positive/negative)

Some further statistical nuggets for Tom Lacey are below:

  1. Horses priced 28/1 or bigger from the yard are 0 from 120, with just 11 placed
  1. Horses from the top five in the betting have combined to break even at starting price
  1. Horses making their debut have won 22 races from 141 (SR 15.6%) for a minimal SP profit of £3.31 (ROI +2.4%). To BSP this increases to +£36.07 (ROI +25.6%)
  1. Horses running less than three weeks since their last run have provided 58 wins from 259 (SR 22.4%) for an SP profit of £79.64 (ROI +30.8%); BSP +£121.24 (ROI +46.8%)

 

Dr Richard Newland

Richard Newland was a GP before he switched to training horses in 2006/07.

 

Dr Richard Newland Yearly Breakdown

Dr Newland has had plenty of success but this graphic shows a clear recent downturn in fortunes:

 

 

As we can see, in six of the first seven years (2013 to 2019) he managed a win percentage of over 20%. However, the last three years have seen strike rates between 15.9% and 12.8%. I have looked at various profitable angles in a bid to find ones that have held up OK in the past three years, but I could find only one.

 

Dr Richard Newland Last Run

The one area where he has continued to be profitable is with runners who failed to complete the course last time out. That is, horses whose previous form figure is a letter not a number; for example horses that fell (F), were pulled up (P), etc. Splitting up and comparing 2013 to 2019 with 2020 to 2022 we get the following results:

 

 

The strike rate has dropped but Newland has produced similar profits in the last three years to the previous seven. Whether this is a type of runner that punters should continue to follow is up for debate, but clearly Newland has been quite adept at getting these horses to bounce back.

As a rule I would be wary of backing Newland runners at the moment. Hopefully 2023 will see a resurgence.

 

Fergal O’Brien

Irish-born O’Brien started training in 2011 and in 2019 he moved to his current stables near Cheltenham. In October 2021, he joined forces with Graeme McPherson and, in 2022, finished 6th in the trainer’s championship, his highest position to date. O'Brien has one of the more interesting twitter accounts, and you can follow the team here. [Incidentally, you can - and should! - follow geegeez on twitter here]

 

Fergal O’Brien Yearly Breakdown

Let me start by looking at O’Brien’s yearly breakdown by win strike rate:

 

 

From 2016 to 2022, six of the seven years have seen very similar figures (only 2018 saw a dip); hence there is a good chance the yard will hit around the 17-19% mark again in 2023.

 

Fergal O’Brien Performance by Course

Racecourse data is next on the list to examine. Here are the tracks where he sent at least 100 runners. I have ordered by win strike rate:

 

 

There is quite a range of results here, with five courses managing a blind SP profit. A further five courses are in profit to BSP (Bangor, Market Rasen, Uttoxeter, Worcester and Southwell). Kempton has the lowest strike rate, not helped by a National Hunt Flat race record of just 1 win in 25.

Perth heads the list from a strike rate perspective, and if you combine all Scottish courses together (Ayr, Kelso, Musselburgh and Perth) they have combined to produce 57 winners from 201 runners (SR 28.4%) for an SP profit of £41.51 (ROI +20.7%); to BSP this edges up to £52.16 (ROI +26.00%). Any O’Brien runner heading that far north is worth at least a second glance. His biggest priced winner in Scotland has been 10/1 so this means there have been no huge prices skewing the stats. The trainer's twitter account is fond of "Perth pints" - and we punters should be fond of Perth punts, too!

Now, let's split the course stats into hurdle and chase output. The table below compares strike rates and A/E indices. With a ‘par’ A/E index for all trainers at around 0.87, I have highlighted A/E indices of 0.95 or higher (in green) – these are essentially positive. A/E indices of 0.79 or lower (in red) are essentially negative:

 

 

Bangor, Huntingdon and Perth are the three courses that have both A/E indices above 1. Huntingdon chase results are particularly strong, as are Bangor’s. On the negative side, Stratford chase performance has been very poor from a win perspective at least (2 wins from 52).

 

Fergal O’Brien Performance by Distance

Let's look at the distance data next:

 

There seems to be a bias against the longer races of three miles or more. For the record, chase and hurdle results of 3m+ have been very similarly flatter than shorter trips.

 

Fergal O’Brien Performance by Jockey

Here are the five jockeys who had 50 or more rides in the past ten years, and rode for the stable in 2022:

 

 

Paddy Brennan stands apart, edging into an SP profit from nigh on 2000 rides. To BSP you would have secured a ten-year profit of £357.05 (ROI +17.9%). The last two seasons, though, have seen small losses to BSP, despite solid strike rates of 21.1% and 23.1% respectively. Clearly, the market is cottoning on.

 

Fergal O’Brien Individual Stats (positive/negative)

  1. Horses wearing a tongue tie only (no other headgear) have secured a strike rate of just over 20% for SP returns of 3.5p in the £. This increases to nearer 20p in the £ to BSP
  1. Horses making their debut have won 52 races from 279 (SR 18.6%) for a SP profit of £39.87 (ROI +14.3%). To BSP this increases to +£121.84 (ROI +43.7%)
  1. On front runners Paddy Brennan has won 88 races from 247 runners (SR 35.6%). Backing all such runners would have made a huge profit to both SP and BSP
  1. Front runners who were in the top three in the betting have won 34.4% of races; hold up horses from the top three in the betting have won just 19.7% of their races

 

Jamie Snowden

Jamie Snowden worked with Nicky Henderson for three years before going it alone in 2008. Despite having a relatively small, but growing, yard Jamie has had a steady stream of winners in recent years.

 

Jamie Snowden Yearly Breakdown

Win percentage by year kicks off the Snowden analysis:

 

 

Despite the 2020 blip (Covid may be part of the reason), in general we see a sound improvement after the first three seasons (2013-2015). Time to dig deeper:

 

Jamie Snowden Breakdown by Race Type

Race type is the first port of call:

 

 

Runners in Hunter Chases are extremely rare, but maybe he should have more! Joking aside, the main race types have similar strike rates (and Impact Values, to mitigate for field size differential), though hurdle races have seen quite significant losses. This similar strike rate pattern is seen in numerous areas for Snowden, who appears to be an extremely consistent trainer; so let’s look at the more niche area of run style.

 

Jamie Snowden Performance by Run Style

Snowden appears to have an appreciation of the importance of early pace with nearly 23% of his runners taking or contesting the lead, while nearly 42% of his runners track the pace. The pie chart below shows his full breakdown:

 

 

The Held Up percentage is well below the norm for most trainers, again demonstrating that Snowden understands the significance of run style.

The win percentages for each run style group are shown in the following bar chart:

 

 

These figures are even more pronounced than normal. Hold up horses have a quite appalling record. Clearly these runners must be avoided unless there is very compelling evidence to the contrary. Front runners win a shade better than one race in every four, which is very impressive.

 

Jamie Snowden Individual Stats (positive/negative)

As I mentioned earlier, Snowden has very ‘even’ looking stats – there are only a few ‘stand out’ snippets (mainly negative) and these are listed below:

  1. Class 1 races have proved difficult. Just 6 wins from 129 with steep losses of 68p in the £ to SP, 64p to BSP
  1. 3yos have won just 1 in 43 races
  1. Female runners have had a slightly higher win percentage than male runners and they would have made a small profit of 3p in the £ if betting to BSP
  1. Horses upped in class by two class levels or more (e.g. Class 5 to Class 3) have a poor record, winning just 4.3% of the time (7 wins from 162 runs)

 

Summary: Main Takeaways

Here are the key positives and negatives that this article has uncovered across the quintet of trainers analysed:

 

 

I hope you have enjoyed the articles in this trainer series. If there is anything you would like me to research and write about, please leave your suggestions in the comments. I will do my best to accommodate you.

Thanks for reading!

- Dave Renham



Try Tix for Better Tote Returns

Trainer Profiles: Anthony Honeyball

/in /by

In this penultimate article in my Trainer Profiles series, I will examine the record of Dorset handler and geegeez-sponsored yard, Anthony Honeyball. I will be sharing ten years of UK racing data from 1st January 2013 to 31st December 2022, the majority of which can be sourced by members using from the Geegeez Query Tool. All profits / losses in this piece have been calculated to Industry Starting Price. Of course, we should be able to significantly improve upon the baseline figures of SP using exchanges or Best Odds Guaranteed, and I will share Betfair SP data when appropriate.

 

Anthony Honeyball Brief Bio

Anthony was an amateur under the tutelage of Richard Barber before signing up as a conditional jockey for Paul Nicholls where he rode 45 winners. In 2006, he switched his attention to training horses which he did initially from his parents’ Quantock farm in Somerset. In 2012, Honeyball moved just a few miles up the road to Potwell Farm where he has been ever since. For more information on the horses currently in the year, check out this excellent stable tour Matt published in October.

 

Anthony Honeyball Overall Record

To begin with let's break down Honeyball's win record down by year:

 

There have been three years where he exceeded a strike rate of 20% (2017, 2019 and 2020) and, although the last two years have dipped under that mark, SP losses have still been small. Indeed the last three years have all individually been profitable if betting to BSP. Overall, six of the ten years have been profitable to BSP and in the ten years he has basically broken even to that metric.

Time to dig a bit deeper.

 

Anthony Honeyball Performance by Race Distance

Let’s look at race distance splits. Previous articles have highlighted that some trainers perform better at specific distance bands. What about Honeyball?

 

 

There seems to be a slight bias here against the shortest distances (2m1f or less) – both the strike rate and returns are worse with this cohort. Honeyball has actually made a profit to Industry SP in the longer races of three miles or more, although this is essentially down to three of his runners that won at prices of 20/1, 25/1 and 28/1. I do, however, want to examine his three mile-plus record in a little more detail.

Anthony Honeyball Performance in 3 mile+ Races

Let's split these longer races into handicap and non-handicap races first:

 

 

The vast majority of runners at this range have come in handicaps with the non-handicaps  providing significant losses despite the relatively small sample and decent strike rate. It makes sense to further split the handicap data into 3m+ handicap chases and handicap hurdles:

 

 

We now see a lower strike rate in handicap chases, but both have similar profit profiles and A/E indices; these long distance handicaps are definitely a positive area for Honeyball.

 

Anthony Honeyball Performance in Races of 2m1f or less

As we saw earlier, these races provided the lowest strike rate from a distance band perspective. Let’s split non handicaps and handicaps as we did for the longer races earlier:

 

 

These are very unusual stats: it is extremely rare for handicap results to have a better strike rate than non-handicaps. In this case the margin is a comfortable one, too. In terms of returns there is a huge gap with handicaps providing 52p in the £ better results as compared to non-handicaps.

In fact if we look at non-handicap races as a whole (all distances) there have been losses of over 28p in the £; in all non-handicap hurdle races this goes up markedly to over 46p in the £. Handicaps are the place to concentrate on, it seems, and that is where we're going next.

 

Anthony Honeyball Performance in Handicap races

We have already seen that Honeyball has performed well in certain handicap races. Here is a price breakdown across all handicap races:

 

 

The yard maintains a very good strike rate with shorter priced runners, but thereafter it is not the normal sliding scale we expect to see with price data. Although the dataset is a little limited, which could partially be a reason for this, all price bands have had more than 100 runners. In terms of profits, the majority of profits have come from the bigger-priced runners as the graph below clearly shows:

 

 

Blind profits have been recorded in three of the price bands; the 9/1 to 14/1 group have virtually broken even; but the 3/1 to 11/2 bracket have shown surprisingly steep losses. I’m not sure what to read into this but the 3/1 to 11/2 group did have 246 qualifying runners which is a big sample. What is clear is that Honeyball is a trainer to keep an eye on in handicap races and don’t be afraid to back his bigger-priced runners if you have found a good reason to.

 

Anthony Honeyball Performance by Class

Onto class of race next. Below there is a comparison of win and each way strike rates across the classes:

 

 

There is a definite pattern and correlation in the data here: much lower strike rates in the higher class races, which is perhaps to be expected and is typical of many/most yards; meanwhile in the two lowest grades (5 and 6) Honeyball has made a profit in each. These Class 5 and 6 races have shown similar results when we split the ten-year time frame into two, as the graph shows:

 

 

It seems therefore that these lower class races are ones to look out for.

While we are discussing ‘class’ there is a difference when it comes to comparing horses that have dropped in class compared to those who have not:

 

 

Class droppers have clearly out-performed horses that are racing again in the same class as last time or horses that have been upped in class. Class droppers also would have secured solid returns of just under 7p in the £ to SP; 24p in the £ to BSP.

 

Anthony Honeyball Performance by Course

With fewer overall runners than other trainers we have looked at so far, course stats are going to be less substantial. Hence my first port of call is to look at all race course data. Courses with 50 or more runners in total are shown in the table. They are ordered by strike rate:

 

 

Fontwell has been where Honeyball has saddled the most runners of any course in the UK, and he has had the greatest success there, too, both in terms of win strike rate and also return on investment. Exeter and Taunton has also proven profitable to Industry SP. Not surprisingly perhaps the three most profitable courses have all produced A/E indices above 1.00. Concentrating  on Fontwell, here are the strongest stats I found when breaking the results down:

  1. Seven years out of ten have seen a profit to Industry SP which shows good consistency. To BSP there have been eight winning years, with the two losing two years seeing losses of just 5p and 6p in the £ respectively
  1. Honeyball has been successful in both handicaps and non-handicaps as the table below shows:

There is a slightly higher strike rate in Fontwell non-handicaps, but the returns to SP are virtually the same; A/E indices are exactly the same! To BSP, non-handicaps edge it by 31p in the £ to 27p.

  1. In Fontwell Class 5 and 6 races only, Honeyball has seen 26 of his 60 runners win (SR 43.3%) for a profit to SP of £32.96 (ROI +54.9%); to BSP this increases to +£38.58 (ROI +64.3%)
  1. He has recorded 15 wins from 32 runners (SR 46.9%) in National Hunt Flat races at the Sussex track. Returns of 53p in the £ to SP, 63p to BSP.

 

Anthony Honeyball Performance by Running Style

As regular readers will know, run style data is something I believe can be an important piece in the betting puzzle; certainly in a good proportion of races. To begin with let us see the proportion of runners that fit a specific running style. Geegeez breaks these running styles into four: Led – front runners; horse or horses that take an early lead; Prominent – horses that track the pace close behind the leader(s); Mid Division – horses that race mid pack; Held Up – horses that race at, or near the back of the field early.

Here are the splits for Honeyball:

 

These figures are relatively ‘normal’ although the front-running percentage is slightly higher than the 'all trainers' figure; commensurately, the midfield figure is slightly lower. Below is the success rate with each run style as far as win strike rate goes:

 

 

We have seen this pattern time and time again in this series of articles: horses that go to the front and lead early (L) win a far bigger proportion of their races compared to the other run styles. Prominent racers have also done well for Honeyball, hitting just over one win in every five races, but horses that raced mid-pack or at the back have relatively poor records. Looking at the potential returns for each group, it should be noted that the front-runner and prominent racer groups would have secured an SP profit; midfield runners would have lost 27p in the £, and hold up horses fared a little worse at 33p.

I want to look at favourites now and specifically their success rate in terms of run style:

 

 

We see exactly the same pattern here with early leading favourites having an excellent record. If you had backed all Honeyball favourites that ended up racing early in mid-division or at the back, it would have cost you a whopping 31p in the £ to SP.

Before moving on, let us split the front-runner data by race type. Potential returns are shown (obviously requiring your crystal ball to have been working perfectly to have identified those racing from the front before the races took place!):

 

 

These stats are highly unusual when comparing them to all trainers. Normally front runners do best in chases when comparing the three main race types; here, the yard's front runners have excelled in hurdle races. The average win percentage across all trainers for front running hurdlers is around 20%; Honeyball is close to double that. Clearly, any potential front runner from the stable in a hurdle contest is a horse to be seriously interested in.

 

Anthony Honeyball Performance by Jockey

Onto some jockey analysis now and, specifically, a look at any jockey who has ridden at least 50 times for Honeyball since 2013, with the proviso that they had at least one ride for the stable in 2022. I have ordered them by number of rides starting with the most:

 

 

David Noonan and Ben Godfrey have produced a blind profit but a 20/1 winner for Noonan and a 40/1 winner for Godfrey are the simple reasons behind this. Both Aidan Coleman and Rex Dingle have decent records when riding favourites – a 44% and 43% strike rate respectively, with both pilots making a profit to SP and BSP. They also improve upon the overall stable win percentage on front runners – Coleman stands at an impressive 37%, Dingle just under 34%.

 

Anthony Honeyball Extra Facts and figures

With the main body of the article complete, here are some extra stats or nuggets that may be of interest:

  1. Honeyball's longest losing run over the past ten years stands at 39. He has had 30 or more consecutive losers on three separate occasions;
  1. Between 15th December 2017 and 17th February 2018 he had 19 winners from 47 runners equating to a strike rate in excess of 40%; between 28th November 2019 and 6th February 2020 he had 18 winners from 45 runners (SR 40%);
  1. There are punters around who occasionally back their favourite trainer or favourite jockey and put their selections in doubles, trebles etc. Hence I thought I would look at what would have happened if you had backed all Anthony Honeyball runners in trebles on the days when he had exactly three runners. He has had exactly three runners running on the same day 100 times; the treble would have been landed just twice. However, despite just the two wins, if you had placed a £1 win treble on all 100 days you would have made a profit of £281.38 from an outlay of £100. Not such good news if you had attempted the idea with doubles on days when he had just two runners. In this case you would have lost £109.19 from your outlay of £218;
  1. Last time out winners have won nearly 21% of the time, but they have been poor value racking up losses of 32.6% to SP, 29% to BSP;
  1. Horses that failed to complete the course last time have proved profitable albeit from a relatively modest strike rate of 12.6%. To BSP this would have seen a return on investment of 40.7% (nearly 41p in the £). You would have made a profit on these runners in six of the ten years;
  1. Horses that have raced before and which are making their seasonal debut have an excellent record – 57 wins from 297 (SR 19.2%) producing profits to both SP and BSP; BSP being £87.46 (ROI 29.4%).

 

Anthony Honeyball – Main Takeaways

 

Anthony Honeyball is a trainer that should be on all of our radars as punters. His runners exhibit plenty of positives and I hope some of those have come out in this article; and that further yields can be derived from his Potwell Farm team this year and beyond.

Good luck

- DR



Try Tix for Better Tote Returns

Trainer Profiles: Gordon Elliott

/in /by

We head back to Ireland for my next trainer profile; this time I will be examining the record of Gordon Elliott. In this article I will be drilling down into just under ten years of National Hunt racing data from 1st January 2013 to 31st October 2022, the majority of which can be sourced by members using the Geegeez Query Tool. All profits / losses have been calculated to Industry Starting Price but where appropriate I will share Betfair SP data as that is a better guide these days of the likely profits/losses punters will make.

The main body of this piece will look at Elliott's record when running horses in Ireland. However, I will also examine his UK record as he sends plenty of runners across on the ferry.

Gordon Elliott Brief Bio

Elliott was not born into a racing family, but he started working for Tony Martin in his teens before riding in point to points and under rules. Towards the end of his riding career, before injury curtailed that part of his CV, he rode for Martin Pipe for a year as a conditional.

In 2006 Elliott took out his training license, operating out of Cullentra House Stables, and just a year later became the youngest trainer ever to win the Grand National, courtesy of the former Paul Nicholls inmate, Silver Birch. He has also won the Gold Cup at Cheltenham, one of his 33 winners at the Festival. He mainly focuses on National Hunt racing but he does have a few runners on the flat, and has enjoyed success at Royal Ascot (Pallasator) as well as winning the Ebor Handicap at York (Dirar). He was banned for six months in 2021 after being photographed astride a dead horse, a reckless act. We will probably have to wait another year or two to see what, if any, long term effect that has on his success.

 

Gordon Elliott: Irish racing Record

As stated, the main part of this analysis will focus on Elliott's domestic record.

Gordon Elliott Record by Year

We'll begin with a yearly performance breakdown:

 

It is worth pointing out that 2022 (to date) has produced the lowest win strike rate and the lowest A/E index of the near decade in focus. Has this something to do with the repercussions of his ban? Possibly, but as I mentioned above we will probably need a bit longer to formulate a clearer opinion on that. Even though he lost some high profile horses at that time, it wouldn’t take a lot to pull the strike rate back up over the last two months of 2022.

[Update, Elliott finished 2022 with a domestic strike rate of 14.84%, in line with results since 2018 - Ed.]

It's time to dig a bit deeper.

 

Gordon Elliott Performance by Race Type

A look at race types first; I have excluded hunter chases as he has had just 16 runners over the ten years.

 

 

In terms of strike rate National Hunt Flat races are comfortably the best performers; it is also the sphere that has seen the smallest losses to SP. Interestingly, though, there is little in it when we examine the A/E indices. Amazingly, one could have made a small profit in chases if backing at BSP, and a slightly bigger one using the machine in NH Flat races. Hurdle races returned a loss to BSP but only just over 7%.

Gordon Elliott Performance in National Hunt Flat Races

It makes sense to dig first into these flat contests. I would like to share market rank data first as it is quite revealing:

 

 

Elliott has an outstanding record with bumper favourites, close to a 50% strike rate. Compare this to the 39.8% success rate of ALL trainers with favourites in Irish NH Flat races, and you can see why this is such a strong stat. Using BSP he would have snuck into profit which, again, for favourite data, is impressive. A/E index at 0.99 is also high.

Less impressive are the performances of second and third favourites, who recorded modest win percentages and significant losses to SP. Painfully, even at BSP, second favourites would have lost you nearly 27p in the £ if backing them all, and over 35p in the £ at industry odds.

Here are a few extra stats for NH Flat races that hopefully readers will find useful:

  1. Male runners outperform female runners, scoring 23.1% of the time to 16.9%. Female losses have been around 6.5p in the £ worse when compared to male returns (Industry SP). However, female favourites actually have done better than their male counterparts, albeit from only 53 runners. Female favourites have returned an impressive 26.5% profit;
  1. Jockey Mr J Codd (Jamie) has secured an overall SR% of just over 30% (116 wins from 381) with losses of only 7p in the £ to SP; to BSP this flips to an 11p in the £ profit;
  1. Horses on debut have a very good record in these races. There have been 435 runners of which 96 have won (SR 22.1%). Profits to SP stand at £27.62 (ROI +6.3%); to BSP this becomes £144.17 (ROI +33.1%). Note, there have been a few big-priced winners in this cohort but nothing outlandish. For the record he has had ten winners priced between 14/1 and 25/1.

 

Gordon Elliott Performance in Chases

A quick review of chases now. Looking at Elliott's yearly stats in terms of win strike rate and win & placed (Each way) strike rate we see the following:

 

Gordon Elliott, win and each way performance in Irish chases

 

Both lines show a gradual drop off in success when compared with the early to mid-2010's. From 2018 to 2022 the average win strike rate was 12.2%; the previous five year period was up at 16.8%. Likewise, the each-way five year splits see the latest period on 31.6% while the earlier five year block was nearly seven percentage points higher at 38.5%, a relative differential of around 20%. Not surprisingly, returns to £1 win level stakes have been much poorer between 2018 and 2022 compared with 2013 to 2017 – 15p in the £ poorer to be precise.

The same pattern can be seen when looking at the performance of his runners in chases when they start favourite:

 

Gordon Elliott, record with chase favourites 2013 to October 2022

 

Elliott made a profit to SP in five of the six seasons between 2013 and 2018 but, since then, he has made a loss each year, with 2020 and 2021 being particularly poor. This is essentially down to the clear drop in strike rate. [Update, by the end of 2022, Elliott had crept into profit for the year with his chase favourites, returning +4.78% ROI at a 43.48% win rate]

However, before moving on there is one further stat I would like to share with you: horses priced 14/1 or bigger have provided a profit to BSP despite a strike rate of just 3.5% (26 wins from 735 runners). To £1 level stakes (BSP) profits stand at £314.17 (ROI +42.7%). I guess many punters on Betfair ignore his bigger priced runners and hence their prices are inflated somewhat, though at that strike rate you can expect to go a very long time between drinks (losing sequences of 45, 48 twice, 49, 51, 52, 67, 75 and 88) !!!

 

Gordon Elliott Performance in Hurdle Races

Our final race code stop is the smaller obstacles, and one interesting comparison is when we look at age stats:

 

 

We see a very clear preference to the younger group with correlation across strike rates, returns, A/E indices and Impact Values.

Before moving on I want to look quickly at hurdles distance data now. There is a slight dip in performance in races of 3 miles or more as the graph below highlights:

 

 

There are notably lower win and win/placed (each way) strike rates over the longer distance hurdle contests. These are races where I suggest one thinks twice about backing Elliott runners.

 

Gordon Elliott Performance by Course

Onto racecourse data now. I am going to look at all courses where Elliott has had at least 100 runners and break the data down into different subsets. I am going to look at win strike rate and A/E indices across National Hunt Flat races, hurdle races and chases. With a ‘par’ A/E index for all trainers at around 0.87, I have highlighted A/E indices of 0.95 or higher in green – these are positive. A/E indices of 0.79 or lower (in red) are negative. Missing values means that within that race code subset Elliott had fewer than 40 runners:

 

 

There is a huge variety of figures here as one might expect, more A/E indices coloured red than green showing there are several course/race type combinations where he has struggled a little or, more fairly perhaps, where he is overbet. Courses where the stats across the board are generally positive include Down Royal, Clonmel (note that NH Flat rate is 25% from 36 races, just below the threshold for display) and Navan. Courses to avoid look to be Killarney, Leopardstown and Wexford. It may also make sense to steer clear of hurdle races at Galway, Gowran Park and Tipperary. In terms of chases it looks best to avoid Gowran Park and Naas.

 

Gordon Elliott Performance by Starting Price

Industry SP performance data now. I have looked at market position in National Hunt Flat races already, but it’s time to break all Elliott's runners down by starting price:

 

 

The most positive data comes from the odds-on group followed by the Evens to 15/8 bracket. Odds-on runners are actually very close to breaking even.

In general, the betting returns in terms of SP get worse as the starting price increases. By graphing the A/E indices we can perhaps see the downward trend more clearly:

 

 

Sticking with the front end of the market, we saw earlier that NH Flat favourites were close to breaking even to Industry SP so I decided to look at the hurdle and chase favourite data, too. Chase favourites lost around 6p in the £ and hurdlers close to 11p. This improves to marginally more palatable losses of 3p and 6p to BSP.

As a general rule I would say that shorter priced runners from the Elliott yard are worth close scrutiny and in certain circumstances will offer a modicum of value. If, however, you are the other side of the price fence and prefer longshots, it should be said that despite the 32% losses to SP which 14/1+ horses have amassed, to BSP they have actually proved profitable. These runners have won on average just once in every 29 attempts so - as mentioned earlier - if you head down this longshot road, expect it to be a rocky one.

 

Gordon Elliott Performance by Running Style

To begin with let us see the proportion of his runners that fit a specific running style. Geegeez breaks these running styles into four groups: Led – front runners; horse or horses that take an early lead; Prominent – horses that track the pace close behind the leader(s); Mid Division – horses that race mid pack; Held Up – horses that race at, or near the back of the field early.

Here are the splits for Elliott:

 

 

In terms of front runners / early leaders, Elliott sends a relatively modest proportion of his horses to the front: the average front-running figure is 10% for all Irish trainers, so he stands a little below that. Prominent runners, however, have accounted for just under 40% of all runners from the stable which compares with around 30% of all Irish runners; so Elliott is comfortably above the average here.

Let us now see the win success rate of each running style:

 

 

Front runners / early leaders score close to 30% of the time, but remember he sends less than 10% of all his runners to the front early. Some, including me, would say why does he not send more horses to lead early? Prominent racers are comfortably next best in terms of win success with poor strike rates (and very poor returns) for horses positioned further back early in their races.

I want to look at favourites now and see their success rate in terms of run style:

 

 

These are very strong win percentages for front running favourites (over 55% win success) and prominent market leaders do well also, standing at just above 42%. There is a clear drop again when we look at midfield and held up horses sent off favourite. Hence a front running favourite for Elliott is a potent weapon. Here is the figures for favourites by run style, at starting price:

 

 

Essentially if you back an Elliott runner and it goes to the front early, you have far more chance of a) the horse winning and b) making a long term profit. This is especially true if the horse is favoured.

 

Gordon Elliott Performance by Jockey

Onto some jockey analysis now and a look at any jockey who has ridden at least 75 times for Elliott since 2013, with the proviso that they have had at least one ride for the stable in 2022. I have ordered them by number of rides starting with the most:

 

 

We saw earlier that Jamie Codd has a good record in National Hunt Flat races and these are the races he primarily rides in. Regular riders Jack Kennedy and Davy Russell have very similar strike rates – Russell has provided slightly better overall returns to SP, but these are flipped if we examine BSP returns. Both actually have recorded profits on 'the machine', Russell 3p in the £ and Kennedy up at 11p in the £. Kennedy has a good record on favourites scoring 42.9% of the time; all other jockeys combined have scored just under 40% of the time on stable favourites.

Of course, since this study period, Dave Russell has announced his retirement. The main beneficiary is expected to be Kennedy, though Jordan Gainford is also one to watch.

So that brings the curtain down on the Irish side of his record, let’s take a quick look at the UK data now:

 

Gordon Elliott: UK racing record

Here are Elliott's overall figures in the UK over the past nearly ten years:

 

 

As might be expected given the costs of travel and the logistical effort, he enjoys a much higher strike rate. Minimal losses to SP are a slight surprise; indeed, to BSP Elliott has returned 12p in the £ profit on his UK runners.

 

Gordon Elliott Performance by UK racecourse

Perth and Cheltenham are the courses to which Elliott has sent the vast majority of his UK runners. There are five courses where he saddled 40 or more runners (shown below):

 

 

His record at Perth is pretty much bombproof. He has had only one winner priced bigger than 10/1 in the research period (Dantes King at 20/1 in 2013). With horses priced 10/1 or shorter at the Scottish track he has produced returns of 8p in the £ to SP, double that to 16p for BSP.

At Ayr his performance is more mixed: he has made a small profit with favourites, but any horse that has not started favourite has generally run poorly. As a group those non-favourites have won just five races from 63 (SR 7.9%) losing nearly 60p in the £ to SP; 49p loss to BSP.

At Cheltenham, Elliott has a much lower strike rate compared to other courses, which is fully to be expected given both the quality and quantity of opposition, but he has still edged into profit to SP. 257 of his 347 Cheltenham runners in the study period ran at the Cheltenham Festival so let’s look his festival record.

 

Gordon Elliott Performance at Cheltenham Festival

Of his 33 Cheltenham Festival winners, 32 have been achieved in the last ten years. He has been leading trainer at the meeting in two of the last ten years, 2017 and 2018. Here is a graph of yearly performance in terms of wins:

 

 

He had no runners in 2021, when he was serving his ban (Denise Foster, who took over the licence during that time, had three winners at the 2021 Festival); and last year (2022) Elliott did seem to underperform a little, especially if we compare it with 2017 to 2020. Having said that he had six seconds, so if two or three of those had won then I probably wouldn’t have mentioned anything. The perils of tiny sample sizes!

If you had backed all Gordon Elliott runners at the Cheltenham Festival to BSP over the past ten years a profit to £1 level stakes of £161.06 would have been achieved. This equates to returns just shy of 63 pence for every £1 bet. In six of the nine years you would have made a BSP profit on his runners. For the record, the vast majority of the profits have come from Class 1 races.

What is also impressive is the breadth of races where he has been successful: Elliott has won 17 different races at the meeting ranging from the Gold Cup to the Champion Bumper to the Cross Country Chase to the Pertemps to the Supreme Novices to the Triumph Hurdle, etc.

One final stat to be aware of at the Festival is that he actually has a better record with horses wearing some sort of headgear - especially a tongue tie, both from a strike rate perspective and a returns perspective.

 

 

 

Gordon Elliott UK Performance by Race Type

A look now at race type and I have again ignored hunter chases as he has had only eight runners in such events. As we can see, Elliott has done well with his hurdlers when sending them over to the UK:

 

 

A one in four strike rate in UK hurdle races is hugely impressive as are the positive overall returns. Favourites in hurdle races have also impressed as a group, scoring nearly 50% of the time for returns of almost 9p in the £ to SP; 14p to BSP. Horses in National Hunt Flat races have a similar strike rate to that achieved in Ireland but losses have been steep. This is due to the fact that many of his runners in these events start at prohibitive odds.

 

Gordon Elliott – Extra stats and nuggets for UK Racing

Lastly on the UK data here are three extra stats to be aware of:

  1. If you ignore horses that finished first or second last time out his record reads 143 wins from 735 runners (SR 19.5%) for a SP profit of £53.03 (ROI +7.2%); BSP profit stands at £194.65 (ROI +26.5%);
  1. Horses that raced at Cheltenham last time out have won 14 races from 59 making SP returns of 32p in the £ (49p to BSP);
  1. When jockey Sean Bowen rides, the results have been impressive: 34 wins from 104 (SR 32.7%) for an SP profit of £15.87 (ROI +15.3%); BSP profit £27.54 (ROI +26.5%)

 

Summary - Gordon Elliott Key Takeaways

Irish Racing

 

 

UK Racing

 

 

So there you have it – the next year or two will be interesting due to potential repercussions of the 2021 ban, though the early signs are that most data are largely in line with pre-suspension levels. There are plenty of solid pointers, both positive and negative, with which to inform your betting in 2023.

Good luck!

- DR



Try Tix for Better Tote Returns

Trainer Profiles: Donald McCain

/in /by

We head to Cheshire to meet the next trainer in this Profiles series, and welcome Donald McCain. As with previous pieces I will be sharing nearly ten years of UK National Hunt racing data from 1st January 2013 to 31st October 2022. The vast majority of the stats I share with you can be sourced by members using from the Geegeez Query Tool. All profits / losses have been calculated to Industry Starting Price and I will quote both SP and Betfair SP returns where appropriate.

Donald McCain Brief Bio

Born in 1970, Donald McCain is the son of the legendary trainer of Red Rum, Ginger McCain. He took over from his father in June 2006 having worked as his assistant previously. He also rode in his youth and, over the years, gained experience in the racing business when working for Luca Cumani, Sir Michael Stoute and Oliver Sherwood. As a trainer he has won the Grand National (2011 with Ballabriggs) and enjoyed success at the Cheltenham Festival six times, albeit before the period of study for this piece (2006 to 2012). In fact, between 2009 and 2012 his overall win strike rate stood at 19.2% - this is worth noting when looking at the last ten years which I plan to do right now!

Donald McCain Overall Record

Let's break McCain's win record down first by year:

 

 

Overall, SP losses have equated to 21p in the £ over this 10-year period; to BSP it has been nearer 11p in the £. As we can see, from 2015 to 2020, with the exception of 2017, the win strike rate dropped quite markedly. However, there has been a very positive uptick, or so it seems, in the past two seasons. This recent improvement has been mirrored when we study the win and placed (Each Way) percentages:

 

 

So McCain’s journey as a trainer seems to have gone from early highs to modest lows and now to new highs. Any trainer can have fluctuations from year to year so it will be interesting to see whether the stable can maintain their stronger recent form in the next year or two.

Time to dig a bit deeper.

Donald McCain Performance by Race Distance

Splitting his performance by distance first:

 

There is not much to be gleaned from the race distance splits: a slightly better win percentage at shorter distances, but returns and A/E indices across the three groups are similar. If we split the distances stats comparing chases with hurdle races, we see the following win percentages:

 

 

Again, we see remarkably similar figures. This seems to suggest that McCain doesn't specialise, and is equally adept at training all types of horses.

Donald McCain Performance in Chases

I want to dig into chases races in more detail. Let me start by splitting them into handicap and non-handicap contests:

 

As can be seen in the table, there are considerably more handicap runners and, overall, they have proved far better value. To BSP, losses in handicaps are down at around 5p in the £. Below is a course breakdown of McCain's chase record in terms of strike rate at tracks where he has had at least 75 runners:

 

 

The strike rates are in a fairly narrow range, except for Aintree, where McCain has had just one winner in 76 chase races. He has made an SP profit at three courses – Catterick, Kelso and Musselburgh.

One course that is not on the list is Perth, but his chase record there is worth sharing. He has an excellent strike rate at the Scottish track of 30.4% thanks to 21 wins from 69 runners. Profits to SP stand at £27.23 (ROI +39.5%). To BSP, returns edge up to 50% (50p in the £). He picks up winners there consistently despite averaging only seven runners at the track a year. He has saddled at least two winners in eight of the last ten years and, in one of the other years (2020), he didn’t send any runners there at all.

If we combine the yard's chase record at all Scottish tracks, they have saddled 67 winners from 310 (SR 21.6%) for a profit of £39.52 (ROI +12.8%). Exchange returns increase by just over 9p in the £ to 22p.

Before moving on, here are a few extra chase nuggets worth noting:

1. Horses having their second chase start have secured 37 wins from 162 (SR 22.8%) for a small SP profit of £12.01 (ROI +7.4%); BSP profits stand at £28.58 (ROI +17.6%);

2. Chasers returning to the track within two weeks of their last run have won 37 races from 129 runners (SR 28.7%) for a profit of £48.83 (ROI +37.9%); profit to BSP is £65.24 (ROI +50.6%);

3. Horses aged 6 or 7 have been far more successful in chases than other ages. 6 and 7yos have combined to score 19.5% of the time (165 wins from 848); all other ages combined (4, 5, and 8+) have won 12.4% of the time (93 wins from 747).

Let's take a look at hurdle races now.

Donald McCain Performance in Hurdles

Let’s start once again with handicap versus non handicap splits:

 

This time we see a much better win percentage in non-handicap hurdle races but without too much of a differential in returns as far as Industry SP is concerned. However, to BSP, non-handicaps have lost just 3p in the £, compared to 13p for handicaps.

A course breakdown now and I am sticking to courses that have had 85 or more runners in hurdle races. I have chosen 85 as the ‘cap’ as I wanted to include the Scottish course Ayr (where there were 86 runners in the study period). I have ordered the courses by win strike rate percentage:

 

 

Aintree results are poor once more, as are those at Market Rasen. From a positive perspective, the Scottish courses tend to sit near the top of the table in terms of strike rate once again, although there is none of the overall profit that we saw in the chase data. Two courses have shown a profit to SP (Bangor and Newcastle) and the Bangor data is worth digging down into. Firstly, McCain's hurdle record at the Welsh course by year:

 

 

There was a dip in 2015, part of the period when the yard struggled, but the other nine years have seen strike rates above 18% which suggests he targets this course somewhat; in seven of the ten years there was a profit to SP, and in eight of the ten years a profit to BSP. These are consistent hurdle profits at Bangor rather than simply a couple of huge priced winners skewing the P&L column. Indeed, if we focus on horses priced 8/1 or shorter McCain’s hurdle performance at Bangor is extremely good:

 

 

Those are excellent numbers and, for the record, returns to BSP edge just over 40p in the £.

Bangor, McCain and hurdle races should definitely be on our radar in the future.

Donald McCain Performance in National Hunt Flat races

Here are the figures for all National Hunt Flat races (bumpers):

 

These are very modest figures from a betting perspective in spite of the decent strike rate. Losses to BSP were also steep at a painful 26p in the £. This suggests he has not had many big priced winners in this sphere and that is indeed the case. McCain runners priced 10/1 or bigger in bumpers have won just twice from 135 for a loss of £103.00 (ROI -76.3%). Ouch.

His performance at the front end of the market is not too bad, however; horses priced 3/1 or lower have won 34.9% of their races losing just 4p in the £ to SP and breaking even to BSP. Having said that, odds-on runners have won just 41% of the time losing a hefty 32.8p in the £.

Here are three more NH Flat race stats for stable that readers may find useful:

1. McCain has had just 15 NHF runners at Musselburgh but eight have won; he is 10 from 32 at Carlisle as well;

2. Jockey Brian Hughes has a 23.6% win strike rate in these races for McCain;

3. Horses that have had three or more previous career runs (that includes flat/AW races) have won just 11% of races losing over 60p in the £ to SP; 54p in the £ to BSP.

Donald McCain Performance by Starting Price

We have seen a small amount SP data already, but let us now look at all races as a whole:

 

 

The win strike rates go down uniformly as the price bands increase – it would be weird if that wasn’t the case. Industry SP losses have been the smallest with the Evens to 15/8 bracket, but there doesn’t seem a pattern to returns as a whole. However, I would definitely steer clear of his bigger priced runners (14/1 or bigger) – even to BSP you would have lost 20p in the £. This is much higher than the average loss across all 14/1 + runners which stands at around 13p.

Donald McCain Performance by Running Style

A look at run style next. To begin with let us see the proportion of runners that fit a specific run style. Geegeez breaks these run styles into four:

Led – front runners, horses that take or share an early lead; Prominent – horses that track the pace close behind the leader(s); Mid Division – horses that race mid pack; Held Up – horses that race at, or near the back of the field early.

Here are the splits for McCain:

 

 

We can see the preferred running style seems to be tracking the early pace (prominent runners); that position has accounted for nearly 40% of all runners from the stable. The early leader / front runner percentage is also high at over 27% which is good to see. Regular readers of my articles will know that horses that take the lead early win more often than any of the other run styles. Not surprisingly, this is the case for McCain as we look at the win strike rates across all run styles:

 

 

Around one in four of McCain's front runners have won, whereas just one in 14 of his hold up horses have passed the post first. Indeed, if you had backed all of his hold up horses you would have lost a whopping 43p in the £ to SP.

I want to look at favourites now in terms of their success rate by run style:

 

 

The win percentage for hold up horses that start favourite is extremely poor and would have lost you a remarkable 49p in the £. Once again front running favourites do best, and comfortably so.

Before moving on, I have looked at front running performance across different courses to see if front runners have done better at some courses than others. The graph below compares all courses where McCain has had at least 40 runners that have taken an early lead (I have rounded the %s to the nearest whole number so it fits more neatly on the graph).

 

 

There is quite a range of success here: excellent at Ayr (18 winners from 44), much less so at Aintree (two wins from 46). As we have seen, McCain's overall Aintree stats are poor so this will come as no surprise.

Donald McCain Performance by Jockey

Onto some jockey analysis now. A look at any jockey who has ridden at least 100 times for McCain since 2013, with the proviso that they have had at least one ride for the stable in 2022. I have ordered them by number of rides starting with the most:

 

 

Stable jockey Brian Hughes has by far the best strike rate. Losses of 13p in the £ were incurred to SP; with BSP, this improves to 4p in the £. Theo Gillard is in profit but a 40/1 winner makes all the difference between a profit and a loss.

As far as Hughes is concerned here are some stats worth noting:

1. Hughes has a 32% success rate on front runners;

2. On favourites he has essentially broken even; clear favourites have just nudged into profit;

3. In races of 2m1f or less he has secured a strike rate of over 24% with marginal 2% losses to SP; 11% profit to BSP;

4. Horses priced 3/1 or less (SP) have provided a BSP return on 6% (6p in the £);

5. Hughes when riding a horse who is having their first career start has a strike rate of one in three and a profit to BSP around the 35p in the £ mark.

Let's summarise the key findings from this research...

Donald McCain – Main Takeaways

It seems that Donald McCain is moving in the right direction once more. It will be interesting to see if he is able to sustain success around the 20% win mark again this season – early signs suggest he will be close.

 

I hope you have found this piece useful.

Best wishes for the remainder of the festive period, and wishing you a very Happy New Year.

- Dave Renham



Try Tix for Better Tote Returns

Trainer Profiles: Willie Mullins

/in /by

We head to Ireland for the next trainer profile and a certain Mr William Peter Mullins. In this article I will be analysing nearly 10 years of racing data from 1st January 2013 to 31st October 2022, the majority of which can be sourced by members using the Geegeez Query Tool. All profits / losses have been calculated to Industry Starting Price but where appropriate I will share Betfair SP data. As we know most punters avoid old style SP betting as it tends to impinge heavily on potential profits, favouring instead early prices, best odds guaranteed or exchange prices.

The main body of this piece will drill down into Mullins' record when running horses in Ireland. However, at the end of the article I will examine his UK dataset as he does send a fair number of runners across the sea, usually for the big festivals such as Cheltenham.

Willie Mullins Brief Bio

Mullins was born in 1956 and he began training in 1988. He served his apprenticeship as assistant to his father Paddy and also worked with Jim Bolger. He is the most successful trainer in terms of wins at the Cheltenham festival, with 88, and in the last ten seasons has saddled over 570 winners in Graded contests (484 in Ireland, 90 in the UK). He will surely go down as one of the greatest trainers of all time.

 

Willie Mullins: Irish racing

Let’s look at several different sets of data from Irish racing starting with a yearly breakdown:

Willie Mullins Record by Year

Below is a table showing Willie Mullins' record by year in Irish races, the most recent ( and incomplete) year first.

 

 

Every year his win strike rate has exceeded 20% (1 win in every 5 runs) and in eight of the ten years it has exceeded 25%. In Ireland, his overall win strike rate over the 10-year period stands at 28.15%; the each way SR at 50.18%. Breaking down into five-year batches we get the following splits:

 

 

As we can see, the performance in the last five years has dipped a little. It is still extremely good, but there is a clear drop off. I suspect the main reasons for this dip are i) on 28th September 2016 Mullins relationship with the Gigginstown House Stud ended, and ii) in recent years, Henry de Bromhead and Joseph O'Brien have emerged as serious trainers, as well of course as Gordon Elliott. The Gigginstown relationship has been rekindled, literally a couple of months ago, but it is too soon to say what affect that might have this time around.

When looking at Mullins' 10-year Irish results as a whole one would have lost roughly 11p in the £ to Industry SP. However, using BSP would have broken even, which is on the one hand surprising, but from a punter perspective rather eye-catching.

Time to dig a bit deeper.

 

Willie Mullins Performance by Race Distance

In previous articles, we have seen that some trainers do perform better at certain race distances. Let’s take a look at the stats for Mullins:

 

 

There seems to be a distance bias here with a clear drop off when horses are saddled over 3 miles or more. Win and placed (each way) percentages also correlate strongly with the win strike rates:

 

 

In general, it looks best perhaps to steer clear of the longer distance races. In terms of races of 2m1f or less here are the results in terms of race type:

 

 

There is not too much in it with chases arguably marginally best overall.

 

Willie Mullins Performance in NH Race Types

Having just looked at race types at 2m1f or less – it makes sense to look at race types in more detail. Here are the win and each way percentages across the three main race types (I have ignored hunter chases as he had just 28 runners in total in these races):

 

 

National Hunt Flat races have been best while hurdle and chase data match closely. Losses to SP across hurdle races (11.8%) and chases (13.6%) have also been similar. National Hunt Flat races have lost 6.5% which is the best of the three. Indeed, to BSP this would have snuck into profit by 2.7% or 2.7p in the £.

 

Willie Mullins Performance in National Hunt Flat races

It makes sense to dive in to these 'bumper' races in an attempt to find the most positive angles. With that in mind, here are the strongest stats I could find for these races:

  1. Last time out winners have an excellent record, winning 73 races from 175 qualifiers (SR 41.7%) for a profit to SP of £25.60 (ROI +14.6%); to BSP this increases to +£68.67 (ROI +39.2%);
  1. Grade 1 and Grade 2 contests have seen an overall profit thanks to 13 wins from 56 (SR 23.2%) for a profit to SP of £41.59 (ROI +74.3%). To BSP profits edge up to £59.45 (ROI +106.2%). It should be mentioned that Mullins often runs multiple runners in such events;
  1. There are six courses where the win strike rate has exceeded 40% (minimum 25 runs). They are Kilbeggan, Naas, Tipperary, Tramore, Clonmel and Sligo. (Clonmel and Sligo have actually exceeded 50%);
  1. Horses making their career debut have won just over 39% of the time from 419 runners, producing a small 2.7p in the £ return to SP (9.5p to BSP).

 

Willie Mullins Performance in handicaps / non handicaps

Onto handicaps versus non-handicaps next.

There is a huge difference in strike rate for Mullins when we come to compare handicap with non-handicap races. The graph below illustrates this:

 

 

Indeed, the win percentage for non-handicap runners is actually higher than the each way percentage for handicap runners. And this is not just about strike rates, but returns on investment, too. The data correlate when we examine percentage returns to SP – handicaps have lost 25p in the £, compared to just 8p in the £ for non-handicaps. For the record, losses have been much steeper in handicap chases. When we compare A/E indices we also see a big differential with non-handicaps hitting 0.95, handicaps just 0.80.

 

Willie Mullins Performance by Starting Price

Industry SP data now and here are the findings:

 

The win strike rates go down uniformly as the price bands increase – it would be extremely odd if that didn’t happen! The 2/1 to 11/4 bracket have snuck into profit amazingly; to BSP this stands at a 5p in the £ return. The best BSP profit has come from the 8/1 to 12/1 price bracket – these runners would have produced impressive returns of 24p in the £. From a negative standpoint, outsiders priced 14/1 or bigger have provided significant losses of just over 42p in the £; if using BSP this loss is cut dramatically but still stands at 12p in the £.

Despite the positivity of the 8/1 to 12/1 performance, there are no guarantees that this price bracket will continue to produce BSP profits over time. Personally I would suggest punters focus more often on the front end of the market – prices up to and including 11/4. This looks a safer option to me.

 

Willie Mullins Performance by Course

I shared a small amount of course data earlier, but I now want to dig a little deeper. First a look at his A/E indices across all courses where he has saddled at least 100 runners:

 

 

Five courses are above the magic 1.00 figure namely Tipperary, Tramore, Clonmel, Gowran Park and Wexford. The figures are more modest at Fairyhouse, Killarney, Ballinrobe and Navan, while Downpatrick’s A/E score is very poor.

Let’s look at Tipperary, Tramore, Clonmel, Gowran Park and Wexford in more detail – here is a comparison of their win SR%s amd A/E indices in hurdles, chases and NH Flat races:

 

 

All hurdle and chase A/E indices hit 1 or higher at this quintet of courses, which is impressive; three of the five NH Flat figures are also high. Only Gowran Park in NH Flat races has a poor figure.

Backing every single runner blind at all five courses would have nudged you just into profit to SP, with returns of around 11p in the £ using BSP. In general you should certainly make a note of any horses Mullins sends to one of these five courses. These runners are worth a second glance for sure.

 

Willie Mullins Performance by Running Style

To begin with let us see the proportion of his runners that fit a specific running style. Geegeez breaks these running styles into four groups:

Led – front runners; horse or horses that take an early lead; Prominent – horses that track the pace close behind the leader(s); Mid Division – horses that race mid pack; Held Up – horses that race at, or near the back of the field early.

Here are the splits for Mullins:

 

In terms of front runners / early leaders, Mullins sends a high proportion of his runners to the front – the average front running figure is about 10% for all Irish trainers, while Mullins is more than double that at 21.44%. Further, prominent runners have accounted for 40% of all runners from the stable. In Irish racing prominent runners account for around 30% of all runners, hence Mullins seems to have an appreciation that being up with or close to the pace early is important.

From here, let us see the win success rate of each running style:

 

 

We have seen this run style pattern in each article in this series so far - horses that go to the front and lead early (L) win a far bigger proportion of their races compared to the other run styles. Front runners from the Mullins stable are edging towards winning 45% of the time which is incredibly high. Prominent racers also do well, hitting close to one win in every three races; but horses that raced mid-pack or at the back have relatively poor records scoring around one in every six.

I want to look at favourites now and see their success rate in terms of run style:

 

 

There is a very strong win percentage for front running favourites (over 60% win success) and prominent favourites are also close to the 50% mark. After that, we see a clear drop when looking at midfield and held up horses that started favourite. Hence a front running or prominent racing favourite for Mullins is a potent combination.

Now, of course, we know that predicting a front runner is not an exact science, but let us imagine you had been able to see into the future as regards to Mullins’ runners – here are some angles that would have produced decent returns:

  1. Backing all of his front runners would have yielded a profit to SP of £181.30 which equates to a return of just over 13p in the £;
  1. Backing all front-running favourites would have seen similar returns of 10.5 pence in the £;
  1. Backing all female horses that took the early lead would have produced a strike rate of 48.9% for a profit of £88.03. Impressive returns of 28.7p in the £ here;
  1. Front runners in chases would have secured you returns of over 23p for every £1 bet.

These returns are all calculated to Industry SP; on average you could add another 5 to 10p in the £ if betting to BSP or taking BOG.

 

Willie Mullins Performance by Jockey

Onto some jockey analysis now and, specifically, a look at any jockey who has ridden at least 75 times for Mullins since 2013, with the proviso that they have had at least one ride for the stable in 2022. I have ordered them by number of rides starting with the most:

 

Paul Townend and (Mr P W) Patrick Mullins have excellent strike rates in excess of 30%; both have shown a small profit if backing all runners to BSP. Jody Townend has an excellent record also, and these three jockeys look the ones to concentrate most on.

 

Willie Mullins Performance by Headgear

This is an area that I have not looked at with other trainers, but the stats for Mullins are worth sharing. So no headgear versus headgear looks like this:

 

 

There is a significant drop in performance with horses that had donned any kind of headgear. Mullins uses a tongue tie or a hood far more than any other type of headgear. He rarely uses blinkers (just 47 times in 10 years). Hence I would not be too keen to see any sort of headgear on a Mullins runner I wanted to back.

And that brings the curtain down on the Irish side of his record; but let’s now take a look at Mullins' UK data:

 

Willie Mullins: UK racing

Below is Mullins' overall record in the UK over the past ten years:

 

Here we see a much lower strike rate, which is to be expected as Mullins tends to send runners to the big meetings and festivals where the racing is hugely competitive. Indeed, 71% of his UK runners have been at Cheltenham and, of these, 96% ran at the Cheltenham festival.

 

Willie Mullins Performance by Headgear

The headgear stats are worth sharing again because we see a clear difference:

 

 

As before it looks best to steer clear of horses that wear any sort of headgear.

Let's focus exclusively on Cheltenham Festival stats now.

 

Willie Mullins Performance at Cheltenham Festival

I mentioned earlier that Mullins is the leading trainer in the history of the Cheltenham Festival in terms of wins (88); 64 of those have occurred in the past ten years. He has been leading trainer at the meeting in eight of the last ten years also, only missing out in 2015 and 2016, and he has had at least four winners in each of the last ten years as the graph below shows:

 

 

His overall win strike rate in the last ten years stands at just above 12% and backing all of his runners would have secured a small 4p in the £ profit to BSP. 33 of his 87 favourites have won and they have just nudged into BSP profit also.

It is not easy to decide upon which Mullins runners to back here as he often has more than one runner in a race. Probably the one thing I’d look out for is any last time out winners of his – these have won 21% of the time, and in 7 of the 10 years they would have secured you not only a BSP profit but an Industry SP profit also.

For the record, away from the festival, Mullins has had 32 runners at Cheltenham at other times of the year, but only four have won.

 

Willie Mullins Performance at other courses

A look now at courses other than Cheltenham – Mullins' combined UK results are as follows:

 

That's a slightly better than 1 in 5 strike rate. Betting to BSP improve the -11% ROI but only to a negative return of 4p in the £.

Here is a course breakdown – courses with 15 or more runners qualify:

 

The majority of the Aintree runners were at the Grand National meeting, 14 of the 16 winners having come during the ten years of that meeting. Profits were secured at Sandown and Kempton, albeit from very small samples. I'm not sure why the Newbury figures are so bad; again, though, it is a relatively small sample.

Before I look at the main takeaways from this article, here is a selection of UK stats for Mullins (all courses):

  1. Female runners have won 23.5% of their races, male runners 12.9%;
  1. Just one winner from 113 runners has been from horses priced 33/1 or bigger (for the record nine placed);
  1. Paul Townend has a strike rate of just over 18% and has edged into a small profit of 6p in the £ to SP (15p in the £ to BSP);
  1. Front runners have won 32% of their races, hold up horses just 10%;
  1. His record in Grade 3 UK races is surprisingly poor with just 8 wins from 185 races – this equates to a strike rate of just 4.3%.

 

Main Takeaways (IRISH RACING)

  1. In terms of distance, races of 2m1f or less have been the most productive. Races of 3 miles or more have a relatively poor record in comparison;
  1. There has been similar success in hurdle races and chases; a slightly higher strike rate has occurred in National Hunt Flat races;
  1. In National Hunt Flat races last time out winners are worth close scrutiny as are any runners contesting a Grade 1 or 2 contest;
  1. Non-handicap performance is far superior to handicap performance. The record in handicap chases especially is relatively poor;
  1. Horses priced 14/1 or bigger have made significant losses even to BSP;
  1. Tipperary, Tramore, Clonmel, Gowran Park and Wexford have arguably the strongest course stats from a positive perspective;
  1. Front runners from the stable have a very good record;
  1. Jockeys Paul Townend, Patrick Mullins and Jody Townend are three to concentrate on;
  1. Horses wearing headgear have a poor record, especially when comparing them to horses that wear no headgear.

 

Main Takeaways (UK RACING)

  1. At the Cheltenham Festival, last time out winners have a strong record;
  2. As with the Irish stats, horses wearing headgear have a weak record and look worth swerving;
  3. Female runners do well across the UK courses;
  4. Front runners once again have a good record scoring roughly once in every three runs;
  5. Outsiders (33/1 or bigger) have a poor record;
  6. Paul Townend is the best jockey to follow.

-----

That concludes this trainer profile article. Willie Mullins is a serial winner and hopefully the key stats highlighted in this piece will help us to profit in the long term from his runners.

- DR



Try Tix for Better Tote Returns

Trainer Profiles: Venetia Williams, Lucinda Russell, Emma Lavelle

/in /by

For my third National Hunt trainer piece I want to drill down into three of the most successful females currently training, namely Venetia Williams, Lucinda Russell and Emma Lavelle. I will be examining nearly ten years of UK racing data from 1st January 2013 to 31st October 2022. I have used the Geegeez Query Tool to source around 90% of the stats shared in this piece. All profits / losses have been calculated to Industry Starting Price, which the Query Tool uses, but I will quote Betfair SP returns as and when appropriate.

Brief Biographies

Venetia Williams took up her license in 1995. She became only the second female to train the winner of the Grand National when Mon Mome scored at 100/1 in 2009. Venetia is still going strong and this year had two winners at the Cheltenham Festival in the Broadway Novices' Chase and the Kim Muir Handicap Chase.

Lucinda Russell trains in Scotland and has a career tally of over 800 winners and, like Williams, she has been successful in the Grand National, winning that flagship race in 2017 with One For Arthur. The Aintree Festival has been a happy hunting ground in the last two years also, with Ahoy Senor winning the Sefton Novices’ Hurdle in 2021 and the Mildmay Novices’ Chase in 2022.

Emma Lavelle trains near Marlborough in Wiltshire and has produced consistent results year in, year out. Her stable star Paisley Park has won 10 of his 23 starts including three Grade 1 successes and four at Grade 2 level. He is one of three Cheltenham Festival winners trained by Lavelle.

 

Overall Records

First off, let's compare their respective records by year in terms of strike rate:

 

 

As we can see Venetia Williams tends to come out on top from a wins to runs ration perspective each year – she has outperformed the other two in seven of the ten years. Russell tends to have the lowest yearly strike rate figure – this has occurred in eight of the ten years. As can be seen from the graph, each trainer has occasional ups and downs, and this is to be expected. The table below shows the exact yearly strike rates as well as the A/E indices for each year:

 

 

Venetia Williams has generally been on the ‘up’ in the last four seasons with very decent strike rates in 2019, 2021 and 2022 and good correlation from the A/E indices.

OK it’s time to dig a bit deeper now, starting with Lucinda Russell.

Lucinda Russell Trainer Profile

Lucinda Russell Performance in NH Race types

By race type here are the splits:

 

Chase results have clearly been the best from a win perspective; meanwhile, National Hunt Flat races have been a bit of a struggle. It is interesting to note, however, that each way performance (win & placed) has less than a 3% differential between the chase figure (30.4%) and the NH Flat figure (27.6%).

Digging deeper when looking at race type, here are the most useful angles (both positive and negative), from a potential future betting perspective:

  1. Russell has a very good record when sending chasers to Hexham. Of her 230 runners at the Borders track, 46 have won (20%) showing a profit to SP of £68.82 (ROI +29.9%). To BSP the profits increase markedly to £133.87 (ROI +57.7%). The figures are skewed somewhat by a winner whose SP was 40/1 (BSP 79.92), but having said that, Russell has produced profits to SP in seven of the ten years which is impressive
  1. Horses racing in a chase who won LTO are worth avoiding. They would have lost you a whopping 48p in the £ to SP (40p in the £ to BSP)
  1. Favourites in chases have broken even to BSP. Focusing on clear favourites only (not joint favs) would have seen a small 8p in the £ return
  1. Lucinda Russell is not generally one for big-priced winners in handicap hurdles. Horses priced 22/1 or bigger have won just once from 212 runners

 

Lucinda Russell Performance by Race Distance

Race distance breakdown next:

 

 

Looking at the strike rate, returns, A/E indices and Impact Values there is a correlation showing an improvement as the distance range increases. Indeed, backing all her runners to BSP at 3 miles or more would have seen a break even scenario.

Lucinda Russell Performance by Starting Price

Let’s examine starting price now using Industry SP prices. Firstly win strike rates:

 

 

As is usually the case, the win strike rates go down as the price bands increase. Odds on shots have fared well from a limited sample, but the Evens to 15/8 bracket have under-performed. When we look at NH trainers as a whole, the win percentage for horses priced Evens to 15/8 stands at over 38%; an absolute difference of 5% for this price bracket - 14% in relative terms - is huge. Russell also under-performs by over 3% (15% relatively) with horses priced 2/1 to 11/4, and by 2.5% (14% relatively) in the 3/1 to 9/2 price bracket. Hence her A/E indices in these three price brackets are lower than one would expect:

 

 

It can be said that there has been little value in backing Lucinda Russell runners priced between Evens and 9/2. Knowing this, when we see a Russell runner within this price range, there could be value elsewhere in that particular race.

Lucinda Russell Performance by Course

The Russell stable focus the majority of their attention on just nine courses – Ayr, Carlisle, Haydock, Hexham, Kelso, Musselburgh, Newcastle, Perth and Wetherby. 90% of their total runs have been at these courses, so we have good data sets to examine. Below is a graph comparing chase and hurdle win strike rates.

 

 

With better overall chase strike rates, I guess these stats should come as no surprise (chase fields tend to be smaller than hurdle fields, which is an important factor, but not one that fully accounts for these differentials). Only Haydock has seen Russell hurdlers win more often than chasers in percentage terms. Haydock hurdlers from the stable have made a blind profit both to SP and BSP.

We noted the excellent record at Hexham in chases earlier, and it turns out to be the only course that has proved to be profitable backing all runners in all chases. From a negative perspective, Carlisle has not been a happy hunting ground.

Lucinda Russell Performance by Running Style

A look at run style next. To begin with let us see the proportion of runners that fit a specific run style. As you'll probably be familiar with by now, geegeez.co.uk breaks run style into four categories:

Led – front runners; horse or horses that take an early lead; Prominent – horses that track the pace close behind the leader(s); Mid Division – horses that race mid pack; Held Up – horses that race at, or near the back of the field early.

In terms of run style, 18% of Russell’s runners have led early, 29% have taken up prominent positions while the remaining 53% have raced mid division or been held up near the back. Let's examine the success rate of each run style group in terms of win percentage:

 

 

Regular readers will not be surprised by this graph: early leaders / front runners have been the most successful group for Russell winning roughly one in every six, whereas hold up horses have been less successful winning around once in every 14 starts.

Looking at Lucinda's front running stats in more detail, it is interesting to note that her record improves as the distance increases:

 

 

Front runners / early leaders at distances of 3m+ have been clearly the best performers. Of course, the profits shown in the table are assuming you’d predicted every single front running horse before the race – clearly this is not possible, but it shows the potential value in the yard's front running stayers.

Lucinda Russell Performance by Jockey

Russell currently has two primary jockeys she uses – Derek Fox and Stephen Mulqueen. In 2022, Fox has ridden just over half of all her runners, Mulqueen around a quarter. Here are their overall records going back to 2013:

 

 

Fox has the better record of the two both from a strike rate and a returns perspective. Indeed, if betting to BSP the Russell / Fox combination would have yielded a profit of £130.99 (ROI +11.0%). That said, the profit has essentially been down to one 120.09 BSP winner at Aintree last year.

If we examine results for this combination nearer the front end of the market they have actually performed well. Focusing solely on horses from the top four in the betting, Fox has ridden 103 winners from 572 runners (SR 18.0%) losing around 7p in the £ to SP; to BSP that loss would have been turned into a 7p in the £ profit.

The ‘top takeaways’ for Lucinda Russell will be collated at the end of this article, along with those from the other two trainers.

Time now to examine the stats for our next eminent female tranier, Emma Lavelle.

 

Emma Lavelle Trainer Profile

Emma Lavelle Performance in NH Race types

Race type is the first port of call once more:

 

 

We can see almost identical strike rates in chases and hurdles, with ROI figures also similar. National Hunt Flat races have made a profit but a 66/1 winner has skewed the figures somewhat. Even without that bomb, she'd have almost broken even at SP.

Emma Lavelle Performance in Chases

Let's look at some of the strongest stats (both positive and negative) specifically for chase races:

  1. Younger chasers completely outperform older chasers as this table clearly shows:

 

Five- to seven-year-olds do best and backing all of them blind would have broken even to BSP. 8yos have performed reasonably, but once we get to nine or older performance is poor with just 14 successes from 242 runners (SR 5.8%);

  1. Class 1 and 2 chases have been a struggle – just 18 wins from 234 runners (SR 7.7%). Losses to SP stand at £90.92 (ROI -38.9%). Losses to BSP have been around the 30% mark;
  1. Worcester has been a happy hunting ground in chases with 12 wins from 44 (SR 27.3%). Profits to SP stand at £30.87 (ROI +70.2%); to BSP this edges up to £47.08 (ROI +107%);
  1. Horses making their chase debut have won just over 23% of the time breaking even to SP (+6p in the £ to Betfair).

 

In terms of hurdle races – the strongest stat has been when focusing on shorter distances. Hurdle races of 2m1f or less have provided 39 winners from 182 (SR 21.4%) for a small SP profit of £9.86 (ROI +5.4%). To BSP this increases to +£44.17 (ROI +24.3%).

Having ended this section looking at race distance let us next look at the distance stats across all race types.

Emma Lavelle Performance by Race Distance

Here are the splits:

 

We can see that as the distance increases the performance seems to dip a little. Chases at 2m1f or less, like the hurdle races, hit a win SR% of over 20%. It is National Hunt Flat races that bring the overall win strike rate down for shorter distances. In terms of 3m+ both chases and hurdles hit the 12% mark – chases at 12% exactly, hurdles 12.2%.

Emma Lavelle Performance by Starting Price

Market data is next on the agenda – a look at win strike rate first:

 

These are better figures overall when compared to Lucinda Russell, especially in the 2/1 to 11/4 and 3/1 to 9/2 brackets. Unsurprisingly, the A/E indices look much healthier overall too:

 

 

If you had backed all Emma Lavelle runners priced 9/2 or shorter you would have won 27% of the time losing just 3p in the £ to SP. To BSP this edges to a positive return of nearly 5p in the £. It seems therefore a good tactic to focus on the better fancied runners from the stable.

Emma Lavelle Performance by Course

We noted earlier that Worcester + chases has been a good combination. Let us look at the win strike rates in all races across courses where Lavelle has saddled at least 50 runners:

 

 

There is a big variation from track to track – the premier tracks at Newbury, Ascot and Cheltenham have three of the lowest four strike rates. Combining these courses has produced just 19 wins from 272 runners (SR 7.0%) equating to losses of 62p in the £ to SP. To BSP these losses are still steep at 57p in the £. Some of the most competitive NH racing is seen at these courses and swerving Lavelle runners at all three of these would seem to be a sensible move by and large.

There are much better results from courses such as Newton Abbot, Doncaster, Stratford and Worcester – the yard has hit 20% or better at all four of these. Indeed focusing on these courses and sticking to runners priced 9/2 or shorter we see some excellent results:

 

 

All the profits shown are to Industry SP; to BSP returns have been around 10p in the £ higher. These seem to be four courses to look out for when Lavelle sends a runner there especially if the horse is fancied.

Emma Lavelle Performance by Running Style

In terms of run style 15% of Lavelle’s runners have led early, 35% have taken up prominent positions while the remaining 50% have raced mid division or been held up near the back. Here are the success rates of each run style group in terms of win percentage:

 

 

It's the same old pattern we see time and time again – front runners / early leaders are by far the most successful winning close to one in every four, followed by prominent runners. Horses racing further back early (mid div / at the back) have won roughly just one in every ten starts.

Sticking with Lavelle front runners, these have excelled in hurdle races, winning 30% of the time; chase front runners have won just under 21% of the time. This is unusual as front runners in chases have a higher strike rate than front runners in hurdle races when considering all trainer data as a whole.

Emma Lavelle Performance by Jockey

Lavelle currently employs three main jockeys – Tom Bellamy, Adam Wedge and Ben Jones. All three have had 100+ runners for Lavelle since 2013 and their overall records are shown below:

 

 

All three have strike rates in excess of Lavelle’s overall strike rate, which stands at 14.3%. All have decent A/E indices and two of the three have made a blind profit. It should be noted though that Bellamy has ridden over 72% of Lavelle’s runners in 2022. One additional Lavelle/Bellamy stat worth noting is that when they have teamed up on favourites they have won 21 races from 46 (SR 45.7%) for a SP profit of £6.35 (ROI +13.8%). This increases to returns of 20p in the £ to BSP.

Two trainers down, one to go – it’s Venetia Williams turn next:

Venetia Williams Trainer Profile

Venetia Williams Performance in NH Race types

We will first look at Venetia's record in different race codes:

 

Williams has a reasonable record in National Hunt Flat races from a smallish sample. In terms of chases versus hurdle races there has been a much stronger performance in chases, with losses in such races of less than 10p in the £ to SP, while to BSP this is limited to just 1p in the £. Chases provided a four percent higher strike rate to boot. These races look a good starting point for further digging.

Venetia Williams Performance in chases

Firstly let us look at Venetia's chase performance by year – for this I will compare her yearly A/E indices:

 

 

As we can see, eight of the ten years have seen A/E indices over 0.90 which shows good consistency, performance dipping below that threshold only in 2015 and 2016. In six of the ten years you would have made a BSP profit backing all Williams chasers blind.

Handicap versus non handicap chases next. Generally she has far more runners in handicap chases as this table shows:

 

 

The ROI is much better in handicaps compared to non-handicaps which is useful considering the sample sizes.

Here are some more chase facts and stats worth knowing about:

  1. Chasers priced 11/4 or shorter have provided 158 winners from 424 runners (SR 37.3%) for a profit of £13.64 (ROI +3.2%) to SP; profit to BSP of £26.11 (ROI +6.2%);
  1. Perhaps it is no surprise seeing the previous stat that chasing favourites have done well. They have won 36% of the time producing returns of 5.5p in the £ to SP, 8.8p in the £ to BSP;
  1. In terms of age, younger chasers have done better. Horses aged seven and younger have won 184 races from 881 (SR 20.9%); horses aged 8 or older have won 154 from 1193 (SR 12.9%). The younger brigade have just sneaked into BSP profit across those 881 races;
  1. Female chasers have a good record with 45 wins from 221 (SR 20.4%) showing a very small profit to both SP and BSP;
  1. Horses that won last time out do well when trying to repeat that win in a chase, with 81 wins from 352 (SR 23.0%) for a break even situation to SP; to BSP these runners would have secured a profit of £55.56 (ROI +15.8%).

 

Venetia Williams Performance by Race Distance

Here is the breakdown by race distance but this time I am splitting into chase and hurdle results as they differ somewhat:

 

 

In terms of chases, Venetia Williams has her highest strike rate in the shortest distance band, and her lowest strike rate in the longest distance band. Having said that, the A/E values are all between 0.91 and 0.97. Hurdle wise, we see similar strike rates across the board, but slightly better value it seems as race distance increases. Once again, though, it shows that chases are the races that we should probably concentrate on the most.

Venetia Williams Performance by Starting Price

Market data now and win strike rates first:

 

Williams has a surprisingly low odds on strike rate, coming in at under 49%. However, the Evens to 15/8 bracket has a high figure, as does the 2/1 to 11/4 range. Indeed, backing all Venetia's runners between Evens and 11/4 would have seen you break even to SP, and earn just under 3p in the £ to BSP.

The A/E indices now:

 

Here is confirmation of what was mentioned above, with strong A/E indices for runners sent off between Evens and 11/4. Bigger priced runners (14/1 and up) are definitely worth avoiding – they would have lost you 43p in the £ to SP; 28p in the £ to BSP.

Venetia Williams Performance by Course

On to course stats now and here are the win strike rates for all courses where Williams has saddled at least 100 runners:

 

 

If we take the highest and lowest strike rates out, the percentages across the other courses are not too dissimilar. There are five courses where the A/E index has hit 0.95 or higher; these being Hereford (1.29), Ascot (1.20), Ludlow (0.97), Haydock (0.95), and Newbury (0.95).

I would say that Williams is a trainer who seems to target the race rather than the course.

Venetia Williams Performance by Running Style

In terms of run style, 22% of Venetia runners have led early, 39% have taken up prominent positions while the remaining 39% have raced mid division or been held up near the back. I would surmise that she is more aware than Russell and Lavelle of the importance of a position at, or near, the front early in a race.

The win percentages for each run style group are shown in the graph below:

 

The pattern is what we have come to expect generally, but in percentage terms her results mirror those of Emma Lavelle almost exactly. Hold up horses and mid div runners have poor records.

If we drill into her front runners in chases her strike rate hits 26.1% and if your crystal ball for predicting front runners was in tip top condition, these runners would have returned a profit of £191.59 to £1 level stakes (ROI +41.3%) – and that was to Industry SP! To BSP add another 25p in the £ to this. Hence a Venetia Williams front runner in a chase is a potential gold mine.

Venetia Williams Performance by Jockey

Williams relies mainly on Charlie Deutsch, but both Hugh Nugent and Lucy Turner are jockeys she does use from time to time. Here are their stats:

 

 

5lb claimer Lucy Turner has performed very well and shows a fair profit. However, that surplus would be obliterated if you took out her 40/1 Cheltenham festival winner, Chambard. Deutsch starting riding for Williams in 2015 but had just 11 rides that year. Since then he has ridden 100 times or more for the stable in six of the seven years; the other year he rode 85 times. Here is a year by year breakdown of his win strike rate for the stable:

 

 

Strike rates have been fairly consistent as the graph shows. However, breaking his performance down by race type gives us some interesting results:

 

 

Results in chases have been by far the best, breaking even at SP; and, while there have been a very limited number of National Hunt Flat races, comparing chases to hurdles we see a huge difference.

Main Takeaways

Let me finish by focusing on what I think are the key stats from each of the three trainers.

Lucinda Russell Positives and Negatives

 

Emma Lavelle Positives and Negatives

 

Venetia Williams Positives and Negatives

 

And that's it for this piece: three trainers for the price of one, and bundles of key takeaways.

Next time it is the turn of the Irish and a certain Mr William Mullins.

Until then...

- DR



Try Tix for Better Tote Returns

Trainer Profiles: Dan Skelton

/in /by

In this, my second National Hunt trainer piece, I am going to focus on Dan Skelton. I will be digging through nearly ten years of UK racing data from 1st January 2013 to 31st October 2022. The vast majority of the stats I share can be sourced by members using the Geegeez Query Tool. All profits / losses have been calculated to Industry Starting Price, but I will quote Betfair SP data when appropriate.

Dan Skelton Brief Bio

Dan Skelton is the son of show jumping legend Nick Skelton and started training in 2013 having previously been assistant to Paul Nicholls. It is very much a family business and younger brother Harry is the stable jockey. Skelton has saddled at least 150 wins in each of 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2021, Covid intervening in 2020.

Dan Skelton Overall Record

Below is some further detail around the yard's win record by year:

 

There's a consistent strike rate year in year out. 2020 was a little below par but with Covid hitting that year several stables had a slight dip in fortunes. Here is a graphical look at the win and placed (EW) yearly strike rates:

 

 

His overall win strike rate over the 10-year period stands at 18.8%; the each way SR at 40.2%. Breaking down into five-year batches really demonstrates Skelton's consistency:

 

 

In terms of profits / losses, overall figures stand at 23% losses to Industry SP which improves to just under 12% to BSP. This suggests that he has not had many big priced winners that can help to skew such stats. We’ll see if that is case a bit later when we delve into market factors.

At this juncture it is worth mentioning he rarely send runners across the Irish Sea, just 12 having made the journey in 10 years; and only one has won.

It's time now to dig a bit deeper with race distance first on the agenda.

 

Dan Skelton Performance by Race Distance

Last time, we saw that the Paul Nicholls stable performed better at distances of 2m6f or less – what about the Skelton stats?

 

 

His figures are remarkably even across the board in terms of strike rate, while losses are slightly greater at races of 2m1f or less. All in all there seems to be no real distance bias in play here.

 

Dan Skelton Performance in NH Race types

Onto race types now and here are the splits:

 

As a general rule, National Hunt flat races, or bumpers as they are known, seem to be an area to avoid, with a relatively modest strike rate by Skelton's standards of 15.4% and losses hitting just over 38p in the £. However, here are four additional NH flat race stats for Skelton which may surprise as three are positive:

  1. Market position seems key – favourites and second favourites have combined to win 59 races from 186 runners (SR 31.7%) for a loss of £5.76 (ROI -3.1%). BSP returns nudge into the positive returning just over a 6% profit (6p in the £);
  1. Horses third or bigger in the betting have won just 14 races from 314 (SR 5.7%) for steep losses to SP of £185.80 (ROI -59.2%). ROI to BSP is still poor standing at just under -54%;
  1. Despite his overall record in bumpers being quite modest, horses aged six or older actually have an excellent record in these races. 22 wins from 67 (SR 32.8%) for a profit of £21.95 (ROI +32.8%). BSP profits stand at +£30.47 (ROI 45.5%);
  1. This stat has some links with the previous one – bumper horses that had previously had at least three career runs have produced 15 wins from 53 (SR 28.3%) for a profit to SP of £4.00 (ROI +7.6%); to BSP this becomes a profit of £9.53 (ROI +18.0%).

This is a good example of why it is important to drill down into general stats in more detail as you may find positives (or indeed negatives) you were not expecting.

 

Dan Skelton Performance in Chases (excluding hunter chases)

Onto chases now. Overall, Dan has a strike rate of one win in every five races, which is a decent starting point. Let's  split them by handicap and non-handicap chase to see what we get:

 

 

Skelton has many more runners in handicap chases, but his non-handicap chase figures are very good indeed. To have an A/E index of 1.00 across 350 races is impressive and losses to SP have been minimal. To BSP profits stand at £24.73 which equates to returns of 7p in the £.

Sticking with non-handicap chases if we break the results down by distance we see a clear pattern:

 

The stable has enjoyed excellent results at shorter distances but, as the race distances increase, we see a notable drop off in performance. There is also a difference when we analyse class of race in non-handicap chases as the table below shows:

 

That's a huge differential in terms of strike rate, profit/loss, A/E indices and Impact Values. Top class non-handicap chases (class 1 and 2) are perhaps generally best avoided when it comes to Skelton entries: they look under-priced and over-bet.

It is also worth looking at the performance by age in these non-handicap chases as again we see a clear pattern:

 

 

 

Skelton horses aged 4 to 6 in non-handicap chases score roughly twice as often when compared to horses aged 7 or older. These younger horses have also been highly profitable, returning 37p in the £ to Industry SP and 49p in the £ to BSP.

Some final stats I want to share in terms of non-handicap chases are connected with number of previous chase runs. Horses having their first ever UK run in a chase have won 29 races from 86 (SR 33.7%) for an SP profit of £24.61 (ROI +28.6%); BSP profit stands at £37.20 (ROI +43.3%). Horses having their second ever UK run in a chase have won 26 from 69 (SR 37.7%) for an SP profit of £7.86 (ROI +11.4%); BSP profit stands at £14.75 (ROI +21.4%).

 

Dan Skelton Performance in Hurdle Races

A quick delve into hurdle races now – firstly handicap versus non-handicap results:

 

There has been a better strike rate in non-handicap hurdles as you would expect. Losses to SP are similar – to BSP non-handicap losses stand at around 17% and handicap ones at 8%. BSP figures in handicap races have been skewed a little by a few decent priced winners.

It is not easy to find profitable angles hurdles wise for Skelton. However, one snippet which has proved profitable is his record with older hurdlers. Hurdlers aged 9 or older actually have a good record: they have won 40 races from 228 runs (SR 17.5%) for an SP profit of £18.21 (ROI +8.0%); to BSP this improves to £65.62 (ROI +28.8%). If you stuck to handicap hurdles only this improves SP profits to +£35.88 (ROI +17.9%); BSP becomes +£82.96 (ROI +41.3%).

 

Dan Skelton Performance by Starting Price

Let’s examine starting price now using Industry SP prices. Firstly win strike rates:

 

The win strike rates go down uniformly as the price bands increase, which is of course what we would expect. Let's compare A/E values now:

 

 

It seems that there has been better value at the front end of the market (11/4 or shorter), which is again the general expectation. Indeed, horses priced between evens and 11/4 would have broken even if betting at BSP. Outsiders seem to have struggled: horses priced 14/1 or bigger would have produced enormous losses to SP of 61p in the £; at BSP this improved slightly but would still have lost you over 40p in every £ bet. The message is clear – avoid horses priced 14/1 or bigger. Focus on horses that are no bigger than 12/1.

 

Dan Skelton Performance by Course

I am now going to look at all courses where Skelton has had at least 100 runners and break the data down into different subsets. Firstly I am going to look at win strike rate and A/E indices across all races, hurdle races and chases (again exc. hunter chases). With a ‘par’ A/E index for all trainers at around 0.87, I have highlighted A/E indices of 0.95 or higher (in green) as a positive. A/E indices of 0.79 or lower (in red) are a negative:

 

In general we can see that the majority of individual courses correlate well across the two main race types. Skelton has poor records across the board at Cheltenham, Haydock, Newbury, Newton Abbot and Sandown. On the flip side his performances at Ascot, Market Rasen, Uttoxeter and Wetherby have been good – at all four courses you would have made a blind profit to Betfair prices.

He has contrasting stats at Doncaster, Fontwell, Kempton and Southwell – at all four courses he has solid records in chases but relatively poor performance in hurdle races.

Now a look at the same courses comparing handicap with non-handicap results using the same colour coding as before:

 

 

Interestingly, fewer than half the courses have good correlation between their handicap and non-handicap stats. This helps to illustrate why it is good to break down course stats if the sample sizes are big enough.

Here are five of the strongest positive Skelton course statistics I found:

  1. In non-handicap chases at Uttoxeter, Skelton has saddled 10 winners from 21 (SR 47.6%) for an SP profit of £16.44 (ROI + 78.3%);
  1. In non-handicap hurdles at Wetherby, sticking to horses priced 6/1 or shorter his record reads an impressive 33 wins from 65 (SR 50.8%). SP profits stand at £32.39 giving returns just shy of 50p in the £;
  1. Favourites at Leicester have won 13 of their 22 races for a profit to £1 level stakes of £6.57 (ROI +29.9%);
  1. At Fontwell horses racing in chases priced at 6/1 or shorter have secured am impressive strike rate of 44.1% thanks to 15 wins from just 34 runners. Profits to SP stand at £13.40 (ROI +39.4%);
  1. At Warwick horses racing in chases priced at 6/1 or shorter have won 29 of 67 (SR 43.3%) for a profit of £26.68 (ROI +39.8%).

 

Those are good profits to Industry SP across the board and, clearly, using BSP would have improved all of these profits by a few shekels.

 

Dan Skelton Performance by Running Style

A look at running style next. To begin with let us see the proportion of runners that fit a specific running style. Geegeez breaks these running styles into four:

Led – front runners; horse or horses that take an early lead; Prominent – horses that track the pace close behind the leader(s); Mid Division – horses that race mid pack; Held Up – horses that race at, or near the back of the field early.

Here are the splits for Skelton:

 

 

We can see the preferred running style for Skelton is clearly holding his horses up. It should be noted that hold up horses make up around 31-33%% of all National Hunt run styles but Dan's figure of 44.8% is almost 50% above that, which is quite remarkable.

Onto the win success rate of each running style now:

 

 

With just under 13% of all hold up horses winning, it begs the question why are so many runners from the yard held up? His front runners / early leaders have won one in every three races – this means a Skelton front runner has just over 2½ times more chance of winning a race than a Skelton hold up horse. Of course, some of the Skelton horses that are held up might simply not have the early pace to lay up closer to the pace, or may be working towards a handicap mark but, even so, these are powerful differences in performance.

I want to look at favourites now and compare their success rate in terms of run style:

 

 

We see exactly the same pattern here with favourites that get to the lead early having an excellent record. Prominent racers also score an impressive amount; however, horses that race mid-division or are held up early perform well below the norm. If you had backed Skelton favourites that ended up racing early in mid-division or at the back it would have cost you around 16p in the £ to SP. Front running favourites by contrast would have made a small profit, while prominent racing favs would have lost just 5p in the £.

Earlier in the article we saw that Skelton’s record in non-handicap chases (excluding hunter chases) is good. Let’s look at the percentage of runners in these chases that matched each specific run style:

 

 

 

There's quite an interesting difference here when you compare this pie with the ‘All Races’ run style data shared earlier. Far fewer horses have been held up in non-handicap chases compared with ‘All Races’, while over 30% of Skelton runners have been sent to the front early which is more than double the percentage for ‘All Races’. How curious that the stable's non-handicap chase results have been by far their best when comparing them to other race types! Could this better showing be anything to do with run style factors?!

 

Dan Skelton Performance by Jockey

Onto some jockey analysis now and, specifically, a look at any jockey who has ridden at least 50 times for Skelton since 2013, with the proviso that they have had at least one ride for the stable in 2022. I have ordered them by number of rides starting with the most:

 

 

Stable jockey Harry Skelton rides roughly 80% of all the horses from the yard. He also has by far the best record. Indeed if you combine ALL of the other jockeys who have ridden for Dan Skelton since 2013, between them they have scored 216 times from 1745 rides – this equates to win SR% of 12.1% vs Harry's 21.7%.

Backing all Harry Skelton mounts using BSP would have lost you only 2p in the £. That's highly impressive considering he has had more than 4100 rides! Strangely, though, there are no easy ways to profit from the Skelton / Skelton combo despite this excellent BSP starting point. One ‘positive’ worth mentioning is that you would have roughly broken even to BSP if sticking to horses that were 12/1 or shorter (Industry SP) or 20.0 or shorter BSP.

Harry Skelton has similar records in chases and hurdle races but he has been less successful in National Hunt Flat races as the table below shows:

 

 

Losses of over 36p in the £ in National Hunt Flat races are steep. The main reason for this is the fact that bigger priced horses have had a dreadful time in these races – something touched upon earlier when looking at all NHF races:

 

As can be seen, Harry has ridden just one winner for brother Dan in bumpers sent off 8/1 or bigger, from 114 starters.

Finally while looking at jockey Harry Skelton, he rides front runners well, scoring nearly 37% of the time on them (overall figure for the stable was 33% - see earlier graph). Indeed, he seems to ride Uttoxeter extremely well from the front winning 22 times from just 38 rides (SR 57.9%).

 

Dan Skelton: Extra stats and nuggets

With the main body of the article complete let me share some extra stats / nuggets that may be of interest:

  1. His longest losing run over the ten seasons stands at 38. He has had 38 losers in a row on two separate occasions
  2. His least successful day was on Boxing Day 2019. He sent out 17 runners and his best finishing position was 4th
  3. He has saddled back to back winners (e.g. one horse winning and then his next runner winning also) on 209 separate occasions
  4. His most successful day was on 24th April 2019 when he saddled 6 winners from 9 runners on the day
  5. I mentioned in the last article that there are punters around who occasionally back their favourite trainer or favourite jockey and put the selections in doubles, trebles etc. So what have happened if you had backed all Dan Skelton’s runners in trebles on the days when he had exactly three runners? Well, he has had exactly three runners running on the same day 301 times; the treble would have been landed five times. However, due to the fact that most prices were very short, if you had placed a £1 win treble on all 301 days you would have lost a staggering £259.33 (ROI -86.2%). Ouch!
  6. Just over 450 horses have run at least five times for Skelton– of these horses 77% of them have won at least one race

 

Dan Skelton – Main Takeaways

  1. Skelton has been very consistent year in year out with strike rates ranging between 16 and 21%
  2. In National Hunt Flat races generally look for shorter priced runners or horses aged 6 or older
  3. Skelton has a good record in non-handicap chases (excluding hunter chases), especially in Class 3 or lower or with horses aged 6 and younger. Also the shorter distance the better
  4. Horses having their first or second career chase run have positive records in non-handicap chases
  5. Hurdlers aged 9 or older have made a profit; these profits have been particularly good when sticking to handicap hurdles only
  6. Horses priced 14/1 or bigger (Industry SP) have a very poor record across all race types
  7. Uttoxeter and Wetherby are two tracks where Skelton runners generally perform well. At Uttoxeter this is especially true in non-handicap chases, at Wetherby in non-handicap hurdle races
  8. Nearly 45% of all Skelton runners take a position near the back of the field early in the race, of which less than 13% of them go onto win. Front runners fare well generally, especially in non-handicap chases
  9. Harry Skelton takes the vast majority of the rides and scores over 21% of the time. All other jockeys combined have scored just 12% of the time

 

That's plenty of Dan Skelton stats to get your teeth into, both positive and negative. Skelton sends out a good number of runners each week so hopefully this will give us plenty of potential betting opportunities in the coming weeks and months.

Good luck!

- Dave R



Try Tix for Better Tote Returns

Trainer Profiles: Paul Nicholls

/in /by

In this, and subsequent articles I am picking up the baton from Matt and Jon who have both previously written excellent pieces digging into the profiles of certain trainers, writes Dave Renham. As we are heading into the winter months it makes sense to throw the spotlight on some National Hunt trainers for this latest series. The first trainer I am going to look at is one of Britain's winter luminaries, Paul Nicholls.

I will be analysing nearly ten years of UK racing data from 1st January 2013 to 31st October 2022, the majority of which can be sourced by members using the Geegeez Query Tool. All profits / losses have been calculated to Industry Starting Price. Of course, we should be able to significantly improve upon the baseline figures of SP using the exchanges or BOG (Best Odds Guaranteed), and I will share Betfair SP data when appropriate.

Paul Nicholls Brief Biography

Born in Gloucestershire on April 17th 1962, Paul Frank Nicholls was educated at Marlwood School. He didn’t carry on into further education because, upon leaving school aged 16, he started working in a point-to-point yard. By the age of 20 he was race riding for Josh Gifford out of Findon, West Sussex, and then, in 1985, he moved to David Barons. His biggest successes as a jockey were back to back wins in the Hennessy Gold Cup (1986 & ’87) and, in his seven year career, he rode a relatively modest 133 winners. However, it is as a trainer that he has really excelled. Nicholls first took out his licence in 1991 but his training career took off in 1999 when he bagged three wins at the Cheltenham Festival, including the Gold Cup with See More Business. He was crowned Champion trainer for the first time in 2005-06 and, since then, has repeated this feat an amazing dozen further times.

Paul Nicholls Overall Performance Record

Below is Paul Nicholls' win record by calendar year:

 

Every year during the decade or so in review, his win strike rate has exceeded 20% which is impressive. Also, both his win and each way figures are consistent; both can be seen on the graph below:

 

 

Nicholls' overall win strike rate across the 10-year period stands at 23%; the each way SR at 43.2%. Breaking down into five-year groups really demonstrates his consistency:

 

Not surprisingly, though, given the Ditcheat handler's high profile, profits are hard to come by; and if you had backed all 5693 runners you would have lost roughly 12p in the £ to Industry SP. However, this improves to just under a 3p loss in the £ using BSP - not the worst way to lose a few quid with a high strike rate!

At this juncture it is worth mentioning Nicholls does send the occasional runner over to Ireland, but these are extremely rare. Indeed, just 29 runners have crossed the Irish Sea since 2013 with five winning and a further eight getting placed. Backing all his Irish runners would have seen a steep loss of 40p in the £.

It's time to dig a bit deeper.

Paul Nicholls Performance by Race Distance

When Matt dug into the Nicky Henderson numbers we saw a definite preference for shorter distances. What about his great rival Nicholls?

 

The distance distinction is not as pronounced as with the Henderson data but Team Nicholls do also seem to perform slightly worse in staying races, both from a win and returns perspective. The each way figures correlate, too, with 3 mile+ runners placing just over 36% of the time compared to the other two distance groups which stand at 46.3% (2m1f or less) and 44.8% (2m2f to 2m6f).

Paul Nicholls Performance in 3 mile+ Races

I want to dig into these 3 mile+ races in more detail as I think it is equally important to share negative angles as positive ones; avoiding poor value bets will clearly help our bottom line in the long run.

When we split these longer races into handicap and non-handicap races we get some very interesting results:

 

One might expect some difference in the win strike rates in favour of non-handicaps, due to quality biases and field size, but it is the returns that stand out. In non-handicap staying races, blanket support would have nudged into BSP profit; whereas in handicap races, losses of 31.58% (SP) are steep and, even using BSP, this only improved to a loss of 23.5% (23.5p in the £).

Here are the splits for 3m+ handicap chases and handicap hurdles:

 

Here we see similar win percentages, Impact Values and Actual vs Expected (A/E) indices; handicap chases have lost a little less money, but I would suggest these races are generally worth avoiding, unless you have a good additional reason to get involved.

 

Paul Nicholls Performance in Handicaps at 2m6f or less

Having seen some relatively poor stats for staying handicaps, let me share some more positive data.

 

As can be seen, Nicholls has recorded much higher strike rates, A/E and IV indices and, in the case of handicap hurdles, the smallest of profits even at starting price. At BSP, however, those profits would be just above the £200 mark to £1 level stakes – this equates to excellent returns of 22p in the £.

Despite this positive performance in handicap hurdle races of 2m6f or less, it is interesting to see the varying win strike rates at different courses. Below are all courses where Nicholls has had at least 40 runners:

 

 

There is quite a range here: one might expect lower strike rates at Ascot and Cheltenham due to the competitive nature of the races and, generally, races at these courses have bigger fields. Despite the low win rate, however, Nicholls has made an SP profit at Cheltenham in this context.

I want to share Nicholls' Taunton data specifically, as it is impressive: 18 wins from 71 runners, with a further 22 placed. Taunton SP profits stand at £27.47 (ROI +38.7%). BSP profits would have been increased considerably to +£47.29 (ROI +49.3%).

Paul Nicholls Performance in Non-handicap races

We have already seen that Nicholls has performed well in non-handicap races of 3 miles or further. Here are his overall non-handicap stats across different race types (all distances):

 

There are not many hunter chase runners per year (average around 13), but that cohort has made a small profit. However, the profit is hugely skewed due to two big-priced Cheltenham winners at 16/1 and 25/1.

His non-handicap chase figures (excluding hunter chases) also look very solid. Below I have broken down this record by age of horse – and it reveals a clear pattern:

 

 

There is a definite drop off in success rate in non-handicap chases as the horses hit the age of 8. Horses aged 7 or younger actually made a 3% profit to BSP; those 8 or older would have lost nearly 19% to BSP.

Sticking with these non-handicap chases (excluding hunter chases) and splitting the performance by starting price gives us the following breakdown:

 

Clearly horses priced between evens and 9/2 have offered punters good value in the past. The figures in the table above are to Industry SP; using Betfair SP one would have roughly doubled those profits. We can see very good A/E indices, too. In contrast, once starting prices get to 5/1 or bigger, there have been quite significant losses.

Paul Nicholls Performance by Starting Price

We have seen some SP data already, but let us now look at all races as a whole:

 

The win strike rates go down uniformly as the price bands increase – nothing unusual there. Industry SP losses have been smallest with the shorter priced runners, but the Betfair SP returns on investment are probably more useful to see.

 

 

Using Betfair SP sees a much more even return on investment across the price bands (ranging from a high of +1.6% to a low of -7.6%). In contrast to the Industry SP figures, it actually looks more advantageous to focus on runners priced 5/1 or bigger.

Paul Nicholls Performance by Course

I shared a small amount of course data earlier, but I want to dig a little deeper. I am going to look at all courses where Nicholls has had at least 100 runners and break the data down into different subsets. Firstly I am going to look at win strike rate and A/E indices across all races, hurdle races, and chases (again excluding hunter chases). With a ‘par’ A/E index for all trainers at around 0.87, I have highlighted A/E indices of 0.95 or higher (in green) – these are essentially positive. A/E indices of 0.79 or lower (in red) are negative:

 

 

There is a good sprinkling of positive A/E indices with not many negative ones; strong overall stats emerge for Fontwell, Newbury and Taunton.

Meanwhile, Haydock fascinates me; here, Nicholls' chase figures are exceptional, showing a 31p in the £ profit to SP, but his hurdle figures at the same course are dire, with a very low strike rate and losses in excess of a bruising 62p in the £. There are some things you just cannot explain!

Now a look at the same courses comparing handicap with non-handicap results using the same colour coding as before:

 

 

This time there is a more even split of positive and negative A/E indices. Fontwell and Newbury once again stand out, while Haydock again has hugely conflicting figures – excellent non-handicap results, dreadful handicap ones.

I have dug still deeper at different courses to share with you five positive looking PFN track stats:

  1. At Fontwell in non-handicap chases (excluding hunter chases) the stable has secured 22 wins from 36 (SR 61.1%) for a profit of £9.73 (ROI +27.0%). Using BSP would increase profits marginally to £11.64 (ROI +32.3%);
  2. At Haydock in non-handicap chases (excluding hunter chases) horses that started first or second favourite have bagged 10 wins from 16 (SR 62.5%) for a profit of £14.06 (ROI +87.9%). A slight increase again if using BSP with profits up slightly to £15.44 (ROI +96.5%);
  3. In non-handicap novice hurdles at Wincanton, Nicholls has seen 67 of his 133 runners win securing a strike rate of 50.4%. Backing all runners would have yielded an SP profit of £30.09 (ROI +22.6%); BSP profits stand at £38.38 (ROI +28.9%);
  4. At Taunton if you backed all his runners in hurdle races at 2m1f or less you would have been rewarded with 38 wins from 107 (SR 35.5%) for an SP profit of £19.51 (ROI +18.2%); BSP profits would have been double, at £38.78 (ROI +36.2%);
  5. In handicap hurdle races at Musselburgh, Nicholls has sent only 22 runners on the long trek to such events but nine have won with a further five placing. Returns of over 90p in the £ were achieved to SP; to BSP this increases to 108p in the £. When Harry Cobden has ridden, he has managed five wins and two places from just eight runs.

Paul Nicholls Performance by Horse Run Style

As regular readers of mine will know, running style data is something I believe can often be an important piece of the betting puzzle. To begin with let us see the proportion of runners that fit a specific running style. Geegeez breaks running styles into four:

Led – front runners; horse or horses that take an early lead;

Prominent – horses that track the pace close behind the leader(s);

Mid Division – horses that race mid pack;

Held Up – horses that race at, or near the back of the field early.

 

Here are the splits for Nicholls:

 

We can see the marked preference for a prominent running style, tracking the early pace. That approach has accounted for over 40% of all runners from the stable. The other three run styles are each around the 20% mark.

From here, let us review the win success rate of each running style:

 

 

This is a very familiar pattern, with horses that go to the front and lead early (L) winning a far bigger proportion of races compared to other run styles. Front runners from the Nicholls stable are edging towards winning 40% of the time. Prominent racers also do well, hitting around one win in every four races; but horses that raced mid-pack or to the rear have relatively poor records.

I want to look at favourites now to see their success rate in terms of run style:

 

 

We see exactly the same pattern here with early leading favourites having an excellent record. By contrast, if you had backed every Nicholls favourite that ended up racing early in mid-division or at the back, you would have lost a whopping 33p in the £ to SP.

We have seen already that 19.61% of runners from the stable lead when we look at all races as a whole; but this figure differs markedly depending on the race type as the table below shows:

 

 

It seems therefore that non-handicap chases are the race types where we are most likely to see a Nicholls horse front run: out of trouble. However, it should be noted that the figures are skewed somewhat as non-handicaps (both hurdle and chase) tend to have slightly smaller average field sizes when compared to handicaps. To mitigate for that, I have chosen an arbitrary field size band so that we can more easily compare ‘led’ percentages across race types. I've selected races of 6 to 8 runners only to see what happens:

 

 

So in races of 6 to 8 runners we can see that non-handicaps are still much more likely to see a Nicholls runner at the front of the pack early compared to handicaps. The gap has narrowed but it is still significant. Perhaps the most interesting finding here is that front runners in National Hunt Flat races have increased considerably in these relatively small fields. There were 81 qualifying NH Flat races and Nicholls runners led early in 30 of them. Of these, a good proportion (43.3%) went onto to win.

This is a good time to mention that statistics can be really useful and informative but, naturally, it is important to see the bigger picture as possible. Sometimes stats in isolation can be a little misleading and we need context as much as possible.

Paul Nicholls Performance by Jockey

Onto some jockey analysis now. The table below shows all jockeys to have ridden at least 50 times for Nicholls since 2013, with the proviso that they have had at least one ride for the stable in 2022. I have ordered them by number of rides starting with the most:

 

 

Stable jockey Harry Cobden has a very good record on favourites scoring nearly 46% of the time for a break even scenario to SP (profit of 4p in the £ to BSP). However, the stand out here is Bryony Frost – a strike rate of around one win in every four and a profit to boot. If betting every runner of hers at BSP the profits would have risen to £113.87 (ROI +26.8%).

She has done especially well in non-handicap chases thanks to 28 wins from 65 runners (SR 43.1%) for an SP profit of £55.11 (ROI +84.8%). At BSP these returns increase by a few pence to 92p in the £.

Here are three more Frost / Nicholls stats to be aware of:

  1. Their combined record at Ascot, Cheltenham and Kempton is impressive considering the competitive nature of the races at these tracks:

 

  1. When Frost has taken an early lead, she has won on over of 40% those runners. On hold up horses, though, she has won less than 10% of the time (SR 9.3%);
  2. Frost has an excellent record on horses she has ridden before. 68 winners from 245 rides (SR 27.8%) for a profit to SP of £87.53 (ROI +35.7%); profit to BSP of £127.01 (ROI +51.8%).

Frost is back in the saddle after a lengthy spell on the side lines so hopefully she will continue her success for Nicholls during the remainder of this season and beyond.

Paul Nicholls – Extra stats and nuggets

With the main body of the article complete let me just share with you some extra stats or nuggets that may be of interest:

  1. Nicholls' longest losing run over the ten seasons stands at 29. He has had 29 losers in a row on five separate occasions
  2. He has saddled back to back winners (e.g. one horse winning and then his next runner winning also) on 340 separate occasions
  3. There are punters around who occasionally back their favourite trainer or favourite jockey and put their selections in doubles, trebles etc. Hence I thought I would look at what would have happened if you had backed all Paul Nicholls runners in trebles on the days when he had exactly three runners. He has had exactly three runners running on the same day 212 times; the treble would have been landed seven times. However, due to the fact that most prices were quite short, if you had placed a £1 win treble on all 212 days you would have lost £96.59 (ROI -45.6%). Even worse would have occurred on days where he had exactly four runners – if you had backed all four runners in a win fourfold accumulator on each of those days, you would have landed a winning bet just once, losing a whopping £136.09 (ROI -76.9%). I am not saying punters cannot be successful with these types of bets, but the odds are generally stacked against us
  4. Just over 400 horses have run at least five times for Nicholls – of these horses 85% of them have won at least one race
  5. In handicaps the time to catch Nicholls runners is when they have had five or fewer previous runs in a handicap. This cohort has combined to win 291 of their 1624 races. Backing them at BSP would have secured a healthy profit of £243.35 (ROI +15.0%)

Paul Nicholls – Main Takeaways

Below is a summary of the key findings from my research above. It's a handy 'cut out and keep cheat sheet' for those who like such things.

  1. Every year Nicholls has secured an overall win strike rate of over 20%
  2. Distance wise, Nicholls has a relatively poor record in handicap races of 3 miles or more
  3. Handicap hurdle races at 2m 6f or less have seen impressive returns to BSP of 22p in the £
  4. In non-handicap chases (excluding hunter chases), horses aged 7 or younger have produced a small 3p in the £ profit to BSP
  5. Several course stats have been highlighted; three of the strongest being in handicap hurdles at Musselburgh, non-handicap chases at Fontwell, and non-handicap novice hurdles at Wincanton
  6. Over 40% of PFN runners take a prominent position early, of which just over 25% go onto win. His best run style performance comes with front runners / early leaders: they have won 38.5% of their races
  7. Bryony Frost has a good overall record and she has excelled in non-handicap chases
  8. Look for horses in handicaps who have previously had five or fewer handicap runs

Paul Nicholls is an incredibly successful trainer and this article has unlocked a few angles that have proved to be positive in the past. Hopefully they will continue that way for at least some time in the future, too! Also there some negatives that we need to be aware of.

I hope you have enjoyed this piece and I’ll be back next week with a drill down into the stats of another National Hunt trainer, Mr Daniel Skelton.

- DR



Try Tix for Better Tote Returns

Trainer Profiles: Nicky Henderson

/in /by

In a recent survey, you told us you were less interested in ante-post tipping articles and more interested in trainer profiles. That's music to my ears personally, and I'm delighted to oblige (though I know a few will be disappointed by the change of tack).

To kick things off, I thought we'd have a rummage through perma-champ Nicky Henderson's back catalogue in search of profitable angles. The challenge, of course, with such a high profile name is that little is lost on the market; that is subtly different however from nothing being lost on the market, so enough with the defeatism and out with the metaphorical shovel.

Jon Shenton has set a very high bar with his beautiful data visualisation - as well as killer insights - in these previous trainer profiles, and I will try to carry the baton with a degree of dexterity... or at least not drop it. Hopefully Jon will return with further contributions later in the year, but for now it's me. My intention is to create a loose template which provides for both a set of fairly generic pointers but also some 'off road' insights. The latter will usually be where the good stuff lurks.

Nicky Henderson Brief Bio

Born in 1950, Nicholas John Henderson was educated at Eton and began his training career in 1978 having previously ridden as an amateur and served his training apprenticeship with the legendary Fred Winter.

Henderson has been based at Seven Barrows in Lambourn throughout most of his training career, after starting out, I'm told, at Windows House; and has won the Champion Trainer title six times spanning 26 years between the first (1993/4) and most recent (2019/20).

During his more than forty years with a licence, Henderson has (according to wikipedia) saddled 70 Cheltenham Festival winners, second only to arch nemesis Willie Mullins on that scale, and a haul which includes multiple victories in all of the major Championship contests. He will head to Gloucestershire in March with high hopes again, spearheaded by the brilliant two-mile chaser, Shishkin.

Nicky Henderson Overall Record 2009-2021

During the period covered by our database, Henderson has been remarkably consistent and has recorded a win strike rate of greater than 20% throughout. It may be worth noting that the most recent full year, 2021, saw his lowest annual strike rate and, though it is very early days in 2022, Nicky is operating at about 18%.

 

We can see in the chart below how the each way percentage line follows the same slightly downward trajectory in recent years as the win line.

 

More materially from a betting perspective, pure profit and loss figures - and the A/E indicators - are not numbers about which to get excited. That's as far from a shock headline as anything a racing dataset could reveal given the prominence and longevity of Henderson in the training ranks. So let's dig more deeply in search of, I hope, some genuine insight...

 

Nicky Henderson Performance, by Race Distance

It is often mentioned that the one glaring omission from Nicky Henderson's lustrous palmarès is the Grand National. The reality is that he has a far less impressive record over staying distances than trips up to an extended three miles; indeed he has very few runners over longer ranges - just 3% of those saddled were set to travel beyond 3m1f.

 

The likes of Sprinter Sacre, Altior and Shishkin are demonstrations of Henderson's prowess in the speed division. Though that trio were all Champion Chasers (or -elect, in the case of Shishkin), they also each contested the Supreme Novices' over hurdles: the latter pair won while Sprinter Sacre was 'only' third. The point is that Henderson majors with fast National Hunt horses in the main.

Those columns to the right may be the most interesting for us punters revealing that, across almost 7000 runners, NJH has managed to return a small profit at Betfair odds. The sample is plenty big enough to slice and dice further, as we shall in due course.

 

Nicky Henderson Performance, by Starting Price

The market is the most consistently reliable barometer of a horse's chance. In the case of Seven Barrows runners, they've stayed incredibly close to break even at prices up to 2/1, from nearly 2100 runners. Predictably, then, a small profit could have been chiselled on 'the machine' for those with sufficient foresight; and early prices with the Best Odds Guaranteed concession would likely have yielded a quid or three more.

[Across 13 full years, that's an average SP loss of less than 3 points per year - hardly terminal for those who like to stay in the game - and compares very favourably with an overall UK NH ROI of -6.24% for horses priced 2/1 or shorter]

 

Nicky Henderson Performance, by Handicap or Non-Handicap

Henderson is dealing largely with the better class of animal and, as such, most of his runners are in non-handicap races, as the table below illustrates.

 

His strike rate in non-handicaps of better than 31% is remarkable given that the average number of runners in UK National Hunt non-handicaps since 2009 is around 8.45 (and therefore overall strike rate is less than 12%). In spite of the outstanding winner-getting ability of Nicky in non-handicaps, as an approach it is poor house material: an SP ROI of more than 12% in the hole, and worse than 3% down at exchange prices.

Handicaps are a different story. Here, we punters are asked to trade regular winners for the chance of a profit; and that is a microcosm of the game as a whole: do we want winners, or profit? A bit of both would be nice, so this near 14% hit rate allied to a better than 7% ROI at exchange prices (a chunky 10% deficit at SP - who still bets at SP?!) is another interesting facet.

Delving into that a little more deeply, the next table shows performance by number of (NH) handicap starts. So, for example, the first row - '0' - is how Henderson inmates have fared on their first National Hunt handicap outing, i.e. zero prior NH handicap starts. It paints a fascinating picture.

 

Here we have one of the pre-eminent trainers of his generation, profitable to follow blindly at SP with his handicap debutants!

There were some losing years in the sample (seven at SP, three at exchange prices), but nothing of grave concern; and recent performance offers hope that the gravy boat is not yet empty, though it may be stalling through a dining table doldrums (not sure that analogy works...).

 

More generally, following Henderson horses on their first five runs in handicap company has paid off on the exchanges.

 

The more fearless readers may like to note that backing only the subset of these horses sent off at 10/1 or greater has reaped an exchange ROI of 58.55% (376.45 points on 643 bets).

Before you contemplate pawning the proverbial granny, keep in mind that a) the strike rate has been a lowly c.8%, leading to b) a longest losing run of 40 (and further losing spins of 37, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 21 twice and on), and c) it is not always possible to know whether a horse will meet an odds threshold. Oh, and d) the odds threshold was arbitrary/convenient in any case.

Nevertheless, even with more caveats than my old mate the dyslexic tie seller, there is nourishment in the above. Not to wager religiously, but to be aware of when pondering a handicap with an unexposed Hendo at a price.

 

Nicky Henderson Performance, by National Hunt Race Code

The majority of Nicky Henderson's National Hunt runners are in hurdle races, almost exactly 60% of them to be (nearly) precise. Although it may look a bit lop-sided that's actually broadly in line with the overall ratio of hurdle runners compared with chasers and bumper starters. [That surprised me though, on reflection, it probably shouldn't have]

 

We again see a clear front-runner in betting performance terms; Hendo's hurdlers win one in four, which is about two-and-a-half times above the normal frequency and, while a negative 7% ROI at SP is no good, once more there is exchange jam on the wagering bread.

 

A Nicky Henderson Markup Combo

A number of the angles mentioned thus far are what might be called 'mark ups'. That is, they're not necessarily profitable to follow blindly, but they are a starting point to being on the right track. And they can be stacked up, like so...

We have seen that the Henderson yard seems to perform best at distances up to around three miles, and is a little under-estimated by the market with hurdlers and in handicaps, particularly those with limited (or no) previous handicap convictions to their name and/or at a price. So let's make that a 'system'.

- Nicky Henderson hurdlers at up to and including three miles on any of their first five attempts in a NH handicap

That angle, predominantly rooted in Seven Barrows logic, would have secured a miniscule 37 point profit on 1313 bets at SP; but rewards would have been considerably more substantial at early BOG prices. Exchange returns amounted to a strong 306 points (23% ROI).

If you had the stomach to only bet the longer-priced ones (10/1 and up), those figures become 40 winners from 425 runners (9.41%) for an SP return of 194 points (45.65% ROI) and an exchange tally of a whopping 381.71 points (89.81% ROI).

Now, clearly, there is a degree of retro-fit about this, as there always inevitably is with racing data analysis. But these are not best fit numbers; instead, they are based on the supersets shared earlier. [Profits were available from odds of about 15/2 and up, not just 10/1 and up; losses were made beyond 2m6f, not simply beyond three miles]

Another kicker on that angle...

Before closing, I'd like to introduce one more 'kicker' to the Nicky Henderson angle above. In my own generic research, triggered I should add from Jon Shenton's excellent earlier work, I've noted that horses which were unplaced last time are somewhat under-bet. So, when I find an angle that shows promise, it is often the case that the promise is amplified if focusing on those finishing off the podium the last day.

Adding 'unplaced last time out' to Nicky Henderson handicap hurdlers at up to and including three miles on any of their first five attempts in a NH handicap revises the bottom line thus:

122 wins from 781 runs (15.62% strike rate) and a starting price profit of 174.84 points (ROI of 22.4%). At exchange prices, that improves to 385 points and an ROI of nearly 50%.

This angle was profitable in four of the last five years at SP and all of the last five at exchange odds, and is in profit on both in 2022. And, for the purists, you can ditch the distance parameter as well as the odds range if you like; the bottom line is virtually unchanged (and is enhanced, rather inconveniently as I've only just finished the research, by 7/1 winner Scarpia this afternoon).

Nicky Henderson Profile Summary

There are lots of ways to isolate profitable approaches with even the highest profile trainers once you start looking. I hope this piece on the Master of Seven Barrows underscores that.

A great place to start looking is our Profiler tab, which Gold users will find on every racecard (and registered free users on every Race of the Day - register here if you need to).

Select the TRAINER option on there (or SIRE or JOCKEY), choose a few filters at the top (or not) and a date range, and away you go.

 

After that, you might want to graduate to Query Tool where you can really get stuck into some detail. And, once you find something you like, you can save it as a QT Angle meaning qualifiers will appear both on the racecard and in the QT Angles report which is unique and specific to you.

Enjoy!

Matt



Try Tix for Better Tote Returns

Trainer Profiles: Keith Dalgleish

/in , /by

With the 2020/21 National Hunt winter season on its final lap, focus switches to the start of the flat turf campaign, writes Jon Shenton. It’s my favourite time of the racing calendar, I love the initially unfamiliar optics of watching flat horses on turf for the first fortnight or so of April before settling down into the drumbeat of the campaign. With the original lockdown commencing in March 2020 and the subsequent hiatus of racing I’m determined to enjoy this period more than ever!

This edition is going to focus on a trainer whose predominant efforts are on the level. He was stable jockey to the ubiquitous Mark Johnston, notching nearly 300 wins before retiring from the saddle at 21 after struggling to maintain a jockey’s weight, primarily due to being a hungry six-footer. I am of course referring to Keith Dalgleish. Based in Carluke in South Lanarkshire it’s another (accidental) focus on a yard operating in northern climes.

Dalgleish is a serious proposition under all race codes; however, to keep with the season, this article will concentrate on his flat turf runners. With c.4000 runners on the level since 2011 (the usual date used as a starting point in this series) there is plenty to get stuck into. For clarity, no data from the embryonic 2021 season is included in this piece; so that’s ten years, 2011 to 2020.

Keith Dalgleish Market Overview

We start, as has become customary, with performance by Starting Price.

 

There is a definite concentration of strong performance at the sharper end of the market, as indicated by the greener bandings. Immediately, through a quick scan of the table it appears as though horses sent off at 4/1 or shorter fare marginally better than break-even across the board.

The graph above illustrates how Dalgleish entries are outperforming their peers consistently for the price bandings up to 4/1.

This isn’t at the cost of higher priced runner performance, however. The orange line almost perfectly follows the market average (blue) data through prices up to 20/1. The orange spike in the 22/1 to 40/1 category suggests an occasional propensity for a lively outsider, too. Dalgleish is a trainer who generally outperforms the market across all prices (super short prices notwithstanding, where there are limited data). However, if the money is down his is a team about which to sit up and take notice.

This is helpful to know, not only in deciding whether to back Dalgleish entrants, but also when fancying a runner from another yard that is taking on a warm Dalgleish runner.

Briefly zooming in on the 4/1 and shorter cohort, those who have read a few of my musings over the past couple of years will know that I’m partial to differentiating potential angles by last time out performance. I especially monitor and check for trainers for where a “bad” last run bears limited indication of the likely outcome of a horses chance this time. Analysing the Dalgleish shorties in this way is a case in point.

 

The strike rates are marginally stronger for those that failed to place on their last track and, more notably, SP performance is also clearly enhanced for that same cohort: this is a demonstration of how market forces can pull a price to being a value proposition where there isn’t the comfort blanket of a good run last time.

Having highlighted the most fancied runners from the yard, for the rest of the article I’m going to use 14/1 as a price cut-off, at least initially. As yard performance is more than reasonable across the larger price bands there may also be value to be attained there.

 

Keith Dalgleish by Flat Turf Race Type

Sifting through the numerous flavours of flat racing in relation to Dalgleish offers several strong pointers for potential onward utilisation. The table below displays the groupings as per horseracebase classification.

 

Before proceeding, ideally some of the groupings requires further explanation (for example non-handicap is a mix of Group, listed and conditions stakes) but given the data volumes I’m going to bypass.

There are two interesting immediate takeaways from this data. Firstly, performance in nursery handicaps is very obviously in the lower tier by comparison to the other race types for this yard. However, conversely, Maiden and Novice performance is excellent. A simple hypothesis is that the Dalgleish team must broadly focus on getting horses ready early in their careers, resulting in potentially penal marks for their initial forays into the handicapping ranks.

For those with longish memories, you may recall that my very first article for Geegeez was based on Mark Johnston. That was written in August 2018, where does the time go? Here it is for posterity and perhaps a few still useful pointers.

Despite a reticence to review my first baby steps into writing, I include it as there is a clear focus of MJ on the same type of races, namely maidens and novices (with a par record at best in nursery races, too). Circumstantial evidence perhaps, but evidence nonetheless that the former apprentice has learned from the master of Middleham.

Delving further into these races by analysing the number of previous career runs the horse has experienced paints a picture worth committing to memory.

 

Whilst debutants have a fair to middling record for Dalgleish, with roughly one-in-nine prevailing and a third placing, the record in relation to a horse’s next venture to the course (one previous career run) appears to be on the essential items list. These horses, certainly in data terms, appear to make a huge leap forward from their racecourse bows. That win rate improves by nearly three times, with comfortably over half hitting the frame.

Rummaging in the long grass, the record at Ayr of second time Dalgleish starters is 8-from-19. However, nothing materially bends the general assertion that a Dalgleish second time out animal is worth forensic examination irrespective of circumstance.

I thought it would be a fascinating exercise to evaluate these runners from the last couple of turf seasons a little more thoroughly, the rationale being an attempt to assess the improvement (or otherwise) of these runners between debut and second runs. Accordingly, this little beauty / monstrosity (!) below was constructed painstakingly one Sunday morning. It’s a good idea to locate your sunglasses before your eyes scroll downwards!

For the record, I’ve included all horses that started at 16/1 or shorter in terms of price within this section.

 

Essentially, this table shows every second time out runner (on turf) from the stable from the 2019 and 2020 campaigns. I hope it’s reasonably straightforward to follow but the basis of the info is a simple comparison between the RPR’s recorded for each horse’s first two visits to the track. They are recorded in columns RPR1 and RPR2. The victorious animals on their second run are marked in bright yellow, horses finishing in the top three are indicated by a rather more subdued hue of the same colour. Fourth, or worse are in plain old white.

The graph below shows the same data in terms of the variance between the first and second run in terms of RPR. The numbers along the bottom axis equate to the ‘No.’ column on the table above.

 

It is clear that in general there is a significant level of improvement between first and second run. Of course, this would be expected of most trainers as a horse will learn from its first day at big school but based on these results the implication is that Dalgleish is better than most.

Interpreting this further isn’t straightforward, and no doubt your views are equally as valid as mine but here are a couple of my own key takeaways.

  1. If a Dalgleish horse runs well on debut, it seldom regresses on its next run. Every horse that finished in the first three on debut attained at least as good a position on their next start.
  1. If a horse has a moderate (or poor) run on debut there is an incredibly good chance that there will be significant improvement next time. The bottom four in terms of debut RPR performance all upped their game (in terms of RPR, numbers 21-24 in the table/graph above) next time, with Tatsthewaytodoit and One Bite improving by over 30.

This is a good example of where data can be a trusty friend and support an ostensibly more daring approach to punting, giving confidence to sometimes overlook the market view. After all, it only requires one or two days in the sun to glean a profitable edge. Having backed some of these myself, I can attest that early prices are also significantly more attractive usually. I’d advise (especially if you’re a BOG recipient) that getting on early is a good idea. The danger of doing this is that you may end up backing genuine no-hoper material, but the upside more than accommodates that.

To solidify confidence in these data,  I thought it worthwhile to check the entire period back to 2011 in terms of evaluating how horses performed on their second run based on how far they were beaten on debut. The info is quite surprising, but reassuringly useful.

 

This attempt at an infographic (lol) illustrates how far the horses were beaten on their first run, with the info in the boxes demonstrating performance on their second outing. It doesn’t seem to matter one jot by how far the yard’s runners are seemingly outclassed, they come back brighter next time. As you might expect, the aforementioned punting boldness has been historically well rewarded, particularly where the horse dropped out of the back of the TV on debut; indeed, arguably the further the better based on this info, with an A/E of 1.97 from 59 runs, 16 winners and an ROI of 80%.

Keith Dalgleish in Nursery Handicaps

These races represent the two-year-old division of weight for ability, that age group’s initial foray into the cut and thrust of handicap racing. They are the natural next stop for most horses after two or three runs in maiden or novice company.

As previously noted, Dalgleish’s record in such races pales in comparison to his performance in other categories.

 

However, this doesn’t necessarily mean that searching for potential value is a lost cause: the devil, as always, is in the detail.

 

The above table denotes clearly that there is some potential in a Dalgleish first time ‘capper within this division. If a price filter of 7/1 or shorter is applied (convenient, no doubt) then the record of the yard is 11/42 with a 61% ROI. Basically, there have been no first-time handicapping nursery winners at 15/2 or greater from 25 darts. That may not be earth-shattering intel, but it is a demonstration that writing off a yard based on a macro level data set is not always the right thing to do.

 

Keith Dalgleish: General Handicapping

Soldiering on with the progression through a typical lifecycle of a racehorse into the general ranks of handicapping, the below insight demonstrates the yard’s performance by age of animal.

 

Immediately, the eye is drawn to the record of three-year olds in comparison to the rest of the age groupings. By all measures this cohort outperform their other younger or older counterparts. In fact, historically by backing all three-year-old handicap runners from the yard a tiny profit would have been attained. That’s borderline remarkable considering it encompasses 790 runners.

Evaluating three-year-old handicap performance by race class provides further insight.

 

Evidently, the numbers for basement Class 6 racing are a fair way below the more progressive grades. I have referred to this subject previously, my view being that with the lowest class racing there is generally nowhere else to go with such moderate animals. Some yards have proportionately more of these than others and, whilst some teams have learned to farm such contests efficiently, others run in them with plenty of no-hopers as there simply are no lower grade alternatives. Whilst Dalgleish has a perfectly respectable strike rate of 13% at the Class 6 level I would not be interested from an angle point of view.

Ignoring the C6’s, there are 103 wins from 537 runners in the five higher bands, returning 15% to SP with an A/E of 1.17. That’s not too shabby at all. If I were constructing a “backing blind angle”, I’d probably advise playing only when a single figure price is available. Horses between 10/1 and 14/1 inclusive are 9/132 and result in a 10% loss.

 

Keith Dalgleish by Course

I’m not going to delve too deeply into track data as there is seemingly little to get excited about. Unsurprisingly, Team Dalgleish trains a keen focus on runners in Scotland with generally competitive numbers, the vast majority of their flat runners appearing at Ayr, Hamilton or Musselburgh.

 

A similar perspective exists for Trainer / Jockey combinations, too, and I’m going to bypass analysis of that this time, especially as the recently retired from the saddle Phil Makin claimed the lion’s share of rides.

As usual, I hope you’ve gained a better understanding of a specific yard by reading this trainer profile. I’m particularly looking forward to tracking those second time outers. More generally speaking, allow me to wish you good luck and fingers crossed for a productive summer for all of us.



Try Tix for Better Tote Returns

Trainer Profiles: Nicky Richards

/in /by

Trainer Profiles: Nicky Richards

It’s time for another edition of trainer profiles and, for this one, I’ve opted to run the rule over the Cumbrian operation headed by Nicky Richards.

There are two key motivating factors in selecting Richards for a bit of the data treatment. Firstly, it’s not a yard I have especially followed, and I enjoy the educational journey that penning these articles delivers: the discovery of new insight and information is the fun element of compiling these pieces. Secondly, and far more importantly, it’s a results thing. The stable has generally strong and consistent performance over time, which is a solid foundation for deeper analysis. Let’s begin.

Here is an unedited, unfiltered view of all the yards runners from 2011 at SP in UK National Hunt racing (up to and including 5th Feb 2021)

 

That’s a very impressive set of numbers. I’d speculate that, based on these data, if you were farming the bookies’ offers of best odds guaranteed, backing all runners from the stable you’d be at worst broadly breaking even. Not a bad starter for ten.

Nicky Richards: Performance vs. the Market

As is now tradition (if three events can be counted as tradition) we will commence with a market check to obtain a general feel for the yard, which I’ve found to be a reliable starting point in the construction of a trainer profile.

The table below contains all of Richards’ runners for just over the last ten years, grouped by starting price.

 

 

As might be expected, there is a healthy look to the picture, with the probable exception of those sent off at 22/1 or longer. Three winners from 228 runners at these prices is cause enough to avoid almost at all costs. That said, one does need to be a little careful in ranges where a single winner can significantly impact the overall view. Even so, not for me in data terms, given that just one of the 81 horses priced 50/1 or bigger made the frame.

Meanwhile, at the sharper end, there is a strong impression that broad value exists in the 5/2 to 20/1 price range. This implies a slight but consistent underestimation of the stable within the market where perhaps the form claims are not overtly obvious. That’s far from an endorsement or recommendation to get involved indiscriminately, however.

Here are the data represented graphically, displayed by A/E which assists in painting a picture of where general value may exist.

 

After further rummaging, there wasn’t a lot more to get excited about within this area (that I found, anyway). Therefore, the message is a broad one, in that there is value in following Richards when paying particular attention to those priced in the 5/2 to 20/1 ranges.

Despite this, for the rest of this article I’m going to only consider runners with an SP of 14/1 or shorter, unless explicitly stated otherwise. Yes, the graph and data does show potential value up to 20/1. However, between 16s and 20s, a strike rate of 5.9% (13/222) isn’t enough to insure me against the dreaded losing runs in spite of the potential long-term profit. It’s a personal choice and you have to be geared up for feast and famine at that end of the market: I’m not especially.

Nicky Richards: Seasonal Performance

As is often the case with National Hunt yards, performance can vary throughout the year and it’s something which can be seen from Team Richards, as the table below illustrates.

 

In relative terms at least, the numbers put up during the summer jumps season are a pale shadow of the rest of the year. They’re not terrible, far from it, but it would appear that the summer season is not a major focus for the yard. The below graph shows the same data through the prism of A/E and clearly illustrates the dip.

 

Catching the yard from December to March appears to be optimal in rough terms.

Digging further, I’ve mentioned before that seasonal performance and underfoot conditions often go hand in hand. Given that the A/E numbers have a slight dip during the summer it could generally be expected that the overall performance is less positive on firmer ground, a condition more prevalent at that time of year.

 

Exactly as expected, the insight on Good and Good to Firm are strikingly below those for going on the softer side with clear variance across strike rates, P&L, A/E and even place percentages.

It’s of specific interest to try and establish whether softer ground runners in summer do comparatively well against those running on ground more typical of the warmer months, and vice versa (firmer ground performance in winter).

 

The above line graph splits the data by underfoot conditions and month. By way of explanation the dotted grey line represents the overall data for the yard in terms of A/E (same data as the graph at the start of this section). The blue line shows A/E performance for stable runners on Good to Soft, Soft and Heavy ground conditions. The sunny orange line contains A/E info for Good and Good to Firm runs.

It reveals that, generally, the yard out turns better numbers when the going is on the softer side irrespective of the time of year. It also at least hints towards an assertion that there might well be some sort of edge backing Richards runners during the summer jumps season when the going is more winter like (June still moderate). In fact, A/E performance peaks in July on the wetter going across all data sets. Granted, this only relates to 12 runs, but it does demonstrate potential value can still be attained in summer, despite the higher-level data pointing in another direction.

Of course, there is no categorical rule; none of this info should mean back or laying blindly, life is always more nuanced than that. However, by gaining an understanding of these elements a general sharpening of the punting process can be attained.

For example, to convince me to part with my cash on a Richards summer jumper on Good or Good to Firm ground I’d want the horse to tick virtually every other box available and show significant superiority over the rest of the field. In such cases, there would very likely be no juice in the price as the horse’s chance would be so obvious.

On softer ground I’d show more leniency with regards to the form in the book. Naturally, we will still be wrong a lot more often than right, but by using data to find value we can ensure our winners pay for a lot more losers!

 

Nicky Richards: Seasonal performance by race type

Another notable aspect where the seasonal performance can be seen is with National Hunt Flat races. The first port of call is to evaluate accomplishments by the different types of National Hunt discipline to ascertain how data in bumpers holds up against the other race types.

 

It’s clear, and very much like Fergal O’Brien from my last article, that Richards is a trainer to follow when no obstacles are in play. It may be enough to leave it there, however, the seasonal factor is again well demonstrated focusing on this race category alone.

 

The above table shows the rhythm of the stable regarding its bumper runners. From May to September there are two wins from 23 runs. However, performance through the winter is exemplary. If this table is representative of the future, then March will be a good time to get on board with a strike rate of very nearly a third since January 2011.

 

 

Nicky Richards: Performance by Racecourse

There is little doubt that Richards is a leading light of the northern racing circuit. A perusal of his runners by UK region confirms that beyond all reasonable doubt.

 

This yard, based in Cumbria, thirty miles from the Scottish border, has saddled just under half of its UK runners in Scotland. Most of the other stable competitors have been heavily concentrated in and around Northern England. In very general terms, the rare forays to the Southern parishes are underwhelming.

The dichotomy is stark: this is a yard that is seemingly content to harvest on the northern circuit consistently, leaving the South to others.

Analysing individual track performance, the below table demonstrates all course data for those where the stable has saddled 50 or more runners over the duration of the analysis.

 

The focus on Scotland can be clearly seen with Ayr, Kelso and Perth filling the top three berths and Musselburgh not too far behind. However, it’s hopefully obvious regarding the tracks that are front and centre in terms of punting interest. The output at Carlisle and Hexham sticks out like the proverbial sore thumb. Consequently, they’re highlighted by the unsubtle dark blue bandings (Sedgefield and Kelso have claims, too).

Whilst Carlisle has an edge over Hexham in terms of profitability, both are worth noting with percentage strike rates well in the 30s. For the record it’s a 64% ROI at SP combined across this pair of wagering diamonds.

I spent a while trying to ascertain a better edge to the track info: race types, distances, venue of last run, all sorts of other info and, in truth, there wasn’t too much to be found to enhance the edge in question. That’s heartening, I guess, because the best, most sustainable, angles are also usually the simplest.

I did check those runners with SP’s at 16/1 or greater too, just in case there was a trick being missed at these tracks. Reassuringly, the numbers for the stable at these prices are 0/37 with only four placed horses, somewhat validating my semi-arbitrary 14/1 cut off point.

With an edge that is as route-one as this it may be expected that the market would have adapted, evolved, and essentially reduced or removed any punter advantage. To evaluate this, the graph below illustrates the cumulative profit and loss picture from the 2011 start date used in this article.

 

Basically, there is no sign of abatement, in fact it could be argued that performance is going from strength to strength with the twin track performance being as strong as ever over the past three years. The law of averages (and of Sod!) suggests it’s due a reversal at some point. However, as a bare minimum a Nicky Richards-trained horse at Carlisle or Hexham requires thorough analysis given that a third of them prevail. Until the market adapts, I’m going to keep a close eye on stable runners at these courses.

Nicky Richards: Stable jockeys

The below table shows the principal riders Richards has engaged from 2011 to date [excluding Brian Harding who took the bulk of the rides until his retirement in 2017]. Craig Nichol is also riding with much less frequency for the stable, too, over recent times (but is included).

 

If the primary focus is a quest for winners, then it’s no surprise whatsoever to see Brian Hughes lead the way. The strike rate on a Hughes ride is far superior (27%) to any other pilot deployed by the yard (Sean Quinlan, who has only taken 21 rides thus far, aside). However, deriving value from a champion jockey-steered runner is easier said than done in the long term as the ROI (0.9%) and A/E (0.95) allude. At first glance, at least, the value approach is to follow the mounts of Ryan Day. In fact, there would be worse ways to indiscriminately wager than backing the Richards/Day combo based on the intel above.

To prevail, or even tread water, in this game it’s essential to swim against the tide of the market on a consistent basis (if you’ll pardon my mixed and mangled metaphors). Listening to the many protagonists within racing media it’s quite easy to pick up on common assumptions or themes and it’s always fun trying to prove or disprove the comments through, you know, actual fact-checked analysis. It’s amazing how many urban myths and factoids are hurled around which have little statistical merit. One such oft-spouted view relates to jockey upgrades or downgrades from race to race and how much this may affect the chances of a particular horse.

By way of example, we have a young, talented jockey (Day) whose impact on his rides may be underestimated by the market. And we have an extremely high profile, leading champion jockey (Hughes) with all the associated focus. This inevitably results in his mounts usually being well found in market terms.

But what about jockey switches between the two on the same horse? We can see (albeit on a micro scale) that moving from Hughes to Day is not necessarily a downgrade. Day to Hughes is not necessarily is an upgrade either. In fact, the numbers suggest the converse.

 

Horses piloted last time out by Day that have switched to Hughes have produced just three victories from 23 outings. The converse switch is four from 13. Again, these are tiny samples so let’s not go overboard; but the point is to challenge assumptions about supposed rider upgrades. There are cases such as this everywhere, every day. In this example, from a value perspective, you shouldn’t be put off a horse piloted by Ryan Day, even if the champ was on top last time.

Nicky Richards: Headgear

Analysing the Richards stable in terms of headgear performance throws up some interesting stats. The table below shows the performance of the yard’s animals by whichever accoutrements are fitted to aid performance.

 

Yard runners dating back to 2011 have outperformed market expectations where some form of body kit has been added. Based on these numbers alone it appears to be reasonably clear cut that Richards and team are exemplar in understanding when to call on some of the aids available. Including the visored runners there are a total of 49 wins from 193 runs, an A/E of 1.29 and a 33% ROI just from backing all Richards runners with headgear at SP.

I did check to establish whether there was any pattern in how many times the yard had turned to a particular piece of headgear equipment for a given horse, expecting to potentially see horses with new (to them) attachments performing better to the tried and tested ones. There wasn’t too much in it, with all horses performing well irrespective of the freshness of the headgear solution to the animal. Again, it’s one for the checklist. A Richards runner with ‘go-faster stripes’ is one to shortlist if the price is keen enough at 14s or shorter.

Yet again, I’ve exceeded my intended word count so that’s it for another edition of Trainer Profiles. Hopefully, you’re armed with a few snippets around the top trainer Nicky Richards and have discovered something new along the way. I certainly have. The stable is right in the crosshairs now, and I’ll be tracking runners closely hereafter.



Try Tix for Better Tote Returns

Trainer Profiles: Fergal O’Brien

/in , /by

This deep mid-winter lockdown is not good for much, but it is providing ample opportunity to conduct racing analysis, reading, and a general upskilling on the racing knowledge front, writes Jon Shenton. Yes, it’s wafer thin positive but, as for many others, focusing on our wonderful sport provides a diversion and purpose through the long dark nights.

With that in mind, I’ve decided to focus on the yard of Fergal O’Brien for this edition of Trainer Profiles as there is plenty of data-driven interest emanating from the stable’s runners. Based at Ravenswell Farm deep in the Cotswolds, and a few miles away from Cheltenham, the yard as of 23rd January has notched 73 winners during this National Hunt season. That’s enough to reside in 7th in the trainer table in terms of prize money, and 3rd in terms of winning races. O’Brien and team have been an outfit to keep onside for quite some time and are still on an ascendant arc.

A link to their website is here and it is well worth perusing at your leisure (it also saves me using wordcount on the intro!)

In addition to this, it would be remiss of me not to highlight the very entertaining twitter presence that the yard has, which has attracted over 36,000 followers currently. I’m sure that if you’re on the platform you probably follow them already but, if not, I’d heartily recommend checking them out @FOBracing.  An array of very funny content awaits, along with a championing of many worthy causes and a dedicated obsession with cake and cardigans.

Meanwhile, back in the betting world…

Fergal O’Brien: General Market Performance

As per my recent article on Jeremy Scott I like to get a feel for the general performance of a yard through a quick market check. The below table contains data representing O’Brien’s runners from January 2011 to present (9th Jan 2021). It relates to National Hunt runs only in the UK.

 

Immediate focus and initial conclusions show a competitive yard at all prices but there does appear to be a potential sweet spot in one or two of the more fanciful price ranges. Based on these data it would have been profitable at SP to support every one of the yard’s horses where their odds returned between 13/2 and 20/1 over the past decade or so.

To help further contextualise, the below graph demonstrates the A/E performance of the team at SP when compared to the UK National Hunt Market Average over the same period.

 

O’Brien’s numbers match the market trend in reasonably close fashion until the aforementioned 13/2 price banding. The orange (FO’B) line on the graph shows a significantly improved outcome versus the overall market through these ranges. It may also be prudent to note that at SP’s north of 20/1 the yard is 7-from-416 so historically there aren’t many that deliver from completely out of left field.

In summary, the graph and stats demonstrate an operation who can swim against the tide of conventional market consensus on a regular basis.

When presented with a picture such as this it is sensible and pragmatic to establish why the market seems to consistently understate the chances of a horse under certain conditions. In general, markets are positively receptive to recent evidence of a “good” run. As a result, a good first port of call is to check performance by whether the horse had a decent result in their prior race. There are numerous ways of doing this. However, keeping it simple and evaluating by whether the horse placed last time out is as good a starting point as any.

The table below shows these mid-range priced animals for FO’B in relation to whether their last outing resulted in a placed finish. There are 77 runs where the horse at the price ranges had no previous run, so they are excluded from the data.

 

The numbers clearly demonstrate enhanced performance for horses that had (at least by finishing position) a less impressive venture last time out. An obvious health warning is that a strike rate of 11% is not for the faint of heart. By tracking and backing such runners indiscriminately over the past decade one would have faced a longest losing run of 37 (according to horseracebase) during that period. It takes a lot of mental fortitude, and a commensurate betting bank, to keep pressing on whilst in the eye of a storm like this.

Taking it slightly further, there is always reassurance in finding reasons that a runner may improve next time. Factors such as differing underfoot conditions, headgear amendments, and even jockey changes can all be considered. Race distance is another.

 

The table above displays the performance of those unplaced last time out runners by whether they competed over the same, or a different, race distance compared to last time out. There is a clear divergence in performance: essentially, a change in distance has resulted in an improvement in a high proportion of the yard’s runners.

Again, it’s not an angle for the timid, and it is hard to advocate backing these blindly with a strike rate shy of 12%. However, the evidence at least increases the mental fortitude to partially ignore the market when an FO’B horse does not have the comfort blanket of a productive run last time out, especially if there is a credible reason that the horse may step forward today, perhaps as a result of a different trip.

Having said that the record of horses at an SP of between 16/1 and 20/1 in this sample is neutral so, ideally, I’d want a price at 14/1 or shorter to play.

 

Fergal O’Brien: By National Hunt Race Code

Maintaining a high level focus the below table illustrates the yard’s performance by the race code within National Hunt racing. For reasons broadly alluded to above I’m only considering runners with SP’s of 14/1 or shorter from this point on in this article.

 

It’s all good stuff, however, there is slightly more meritorious performance levels in the chase and NH Flat disciplines. Initially, I want to focus on the bumper component. I have referred to O’Brien’s proficiency in these races in this earlier article. However, it’s worth a quick refresher / reminder, and updated view here.

The first stop is to check performance by the number of career runs under rules that the horse has experienced. This info is contained below.

 

Again, it probably is another exhibit demonstrating how the consensus of the market underestimates a first-time out runner with zero racecourse evidence. Evidently, there is only marginal variance between the two data sets in terms of win and place rates. However, the debut runners outperform the market in terms of A/E at 1.11 and return nearly 25% profit as opposed to an 8% loss for those with a previous trip to the track.

It’s not all good news though, the below table shows the monthly distribution of the yard’s debut runners.

It seems that the boat has been missed in terms of this current National Hunt season. Autumn is clearly the peak period for O’Brien in terms of delivering new runners to the track. Any animal making their bow during this time of year is usually a serious betting proposition. It doesn’t mean that runners at other times need the cold shoulder treatment. However, that concentration in performance from September through to November is compelling. Keep this in the front of your mind later in 2021. Hopefully, we’ll be able to get to the racetrack to watch them prevail!

 

Fergal O’Brien: By Track

When evaluating O’Brien’s performance across the different racecourses around Britain there are several interesting considerations which are of the ‘sit up and take notice’ variety.

Firstly, the below table gives us the numbers for the stable runners by general geographic location of the track. Sorted by A/E. The top line is sweet viewing.

 

These Scotland data are extremely noteworthy! Nearly a third of the runners sent north of Hadrian’s barrier return home furnished with winning spoils, returning a fat SP profit of 43.5% for punters too.

Mr O’Brien and team appear to have the measure of precisely when to undertake the long trek north. There is a small caveat (as usual) in that the place data isn’t materially superior for the Scottish runners than those sent to the rest of the UK. This may indicate a statistical anomaly in this exemplar performance, especially given the ever-present warning regarding sample sizes.

For completeness, zooming in on these data below, we can view the numbers for individual Scottish courses.

 

Unmistakably, Perth is the track that has been targeted on these raids. It’s an eye-watering 387-mile expedition from Cheltenham and a six-and-a-half-hour drive (on a quiet Saturday, too, when checking my app!): with a nearly 800-mile round-trip, making the outing worthwhile is obviously a sensible proposition.

Perth has a summer only fixture list (April through to September) so tracking stable runners during this time provides a National Hunt interest while the flat season is in full swing.

Turning the focus southwards, here is a top ten of all tracks in England and Wales in terms of A/E data in relation to the stable runners (30 runs minimum).

 

One or two points are well worth raising based on this table. Firstly, despite a small sample size, the yard’s runners at Sandown are seemingly always significant and should be on any shortlist for further evaluation. It’s also of interest that O’Brien’s horses generally run very well at their local track, Cheltenham. A lower strike rate (18%) is easily explained by the generally larger field sizes and the competitive nature of racing at NH racing’s premium venue.

However, something else caught my attention here: six of the tracks that make this list have the potentially interesting trait of being right-handed in nature. If you add Perth (another right-hander to the list) that’d be seven of the yard’s top 11 performing UK tracks being righties.

As a result, I thought it would be interesting to evaluate all of Fergal’s UK runners and their relative performance by track direction with the 14/1 odds ceiling.

 

Am I alone in finding this of interest?  Probably, but I do find it fascinating!

In truth, only the yard would know if this was a “thing”. It’s more likely just a numerical curiosity but given some of the volumes involved it was well worth flagging! If nothing else, it’s a good example of the merit of stats and data in horse racing. The interpretation of the information is key and, without having a reason, it’s best to play safe. Consequently, I wouldn’t advocate building an angle around this. In fact, I’d strongly suggest you didn’t unless there is a tangible reason that the variance in performance exists (please feel free to leave a comment if you have a view!)

However, it is still worth writing it: by backing every single one of the 911 stable runners over the past ten years at SP (at 14/1 or shorter) on a right-handed course you’d have made a 14% rate of return!! I’d love to have a discussion with the yard to understand if there is any solid rationale for this, or whether it’s absolute codswallop!

 

Fergal O’Brien: By Jockey

For the final lap on Fergal, a quick assessment of the jockeys the yard typically engages to ride for them is in order.

 

These data illustrate the records of the jockeys who have most frequently represented the yard over the past two years, with the numbers showing their records at 14/1 SP or shorter dating back to the start of 2011.

Firstly, that’s an incredible percentage of rides that number one stable jockey Paddy Brennan takes for the yard. Secondly, it’s quite remarkable that by extensively backing all of Brennan’s rides for the stable from 2011 onwards you’d have a tidy profit of 11% to SP. It’s clearly a tight and fruitful combination of the utmost quality.

That said, I’m not personally a huge fan of jockey angles and can never seemingly make them pay. However, there is undoubted merit in analysing jockey performance by pace (run style) profile using the Geegeez Gold Query Tool.

 

No mega surprises here; it is generally seen that performance improves the closer to the front of the field a horse is in a race, and an O’Brien/Brennan animal is no different as the numbers clearly demonstrate. Finding a probable front running horse with this trainer / jockey combo is a desirable way to go punting.

Whilst a horse that gets to the front is optimal, the numbers are reasonably strong across the board. Even horses that are held up more or less break even (I’ve excluded 31 instances without a pace rating, where the in-running comment for the horse failed to outline its early race position). Again, this is not really angle material for me, more of a shortlisting tool.

The emerging talents of Max Kendrick and Liam Harrison are well worth keeping fixed in your sights, too, especially when they are working for Mr O’Brien. Kendrick in particular is off to flyer when riding for this stable.

That concludes this statistical jaunt around the O’Brien yard. I’ll be tracking them with a great deal of interest over the coming months and years, they are evidently an operation on the rise.

- JS



Try Tix for Better Tote Returns

Trainer Profiles: Jeremy Scott

/in /by

Hello again, it’s been a while! It goes without saying that I’m delighted to be back “on-grid” and I very much hope that this article is the first of a steady flow over the next few months, writes Jon Shenton.

Expect the usual data-driven analysis in what follows. However, this time I’m going to move ever-so-slightly away from the approach of purely seeking angles and/or system bets. Whilst these are naturally going to be a result of the research, I don’t intend for that to be the be all and end all. In this series, I’m going to delve into the profiles of specific National Hunt trainers. The primary goal is to develop a deeper understanding of the circumstances in which stables excel and/or alternatively where they generally come unstuck.

To kick things off, I’m going to run the rule over the Somerset yard of Grade 1-winning trainer Jeremy Scott. It’s a safe start as this outfit seems to be omnipresent in terms of “good data” and I already have a couple of reasonably robust, well-performing data-driven “ins” which, of course, I’ll share in due course.

Firstly, some light optional reading on the Scott operation. If you have the time it is well worth kicking back with a cuppa and having a mooch around their website. There is an abundance of good info and a blog which is updated with greater regularity than most.

Of course, in addition, the yard also has an indirect affiliation to this very site through its relationship with Geegeez-sponsored conditional jockey Rex Dingle, who rides with regularity for Team Scott. [Rex's day job is centred at the yard of Anthony Honeyball, which you’ll already know is sponsored by Geegeez too].

I’ll be using a mix of Query Tool and Horseracebase for all the data in this article and all analysis relates to 1st Jan 2011 through to 7th November 2020 inclusive.

Jeremy Scott Runners: Performance vs. the Market

Firstly, when developing a feel for a yard, I often begin by examining performance in the context of the market. This gives a solid guide to the relative importance of the weight of money behind a runner from the stable in question. It can often be the case that a line can be struck through horses once they get to more exotic price levels. As a starter for ten the below table shows Scott performance by SP range.

 

These data have a reasonably clear division between the shorter side of pricing and the more fanciful range of SP’s. Notably, backing all horses indiscriminately where the price is on the skinnier side (equal to or less than 8/1) would result in a reasonable profit. It’s a 9% ROI across 927 runners over the near decade of performance from 2011. That’s an impressive stat and smashes home the mantra that keenly priced runners from this yard are at the very least worth shortlisting. The colour formatting on the ROI column demonstrates this in a clear enough way.

To further evaluate the outfit's overall performance the below graph gives an interesting perspective by comparing the Actual vs Expected market data for Scott runners against all the market averages by SP.

 

Basically, Scott comfortably outperforms the market across virtually all price bands, reinforcing that this is a trainer to keep firmly in the metaphoric crosshairs. As expected, the results at the prices up to 8/1 generally are north of 1.00, indicating market-beating propensity at these ranges.

The blue “average” line on the graph also demonstrates that if you habitually play at fancy prices then it’s exceedingly difficult, maybe close to impossible, to consistently beat the bookies. With an A/E of below 0.40 for all runners at 50/1 or greater it indicates what an uphill battle it is to prevail against starting price. [The exchanges reflect a more realistic representation of a horses chance of victory in these deep waters].

Circling back to Scott, here is the annualised breakdown of those runners at 8/1 or shorter, underlining that, historically speaking this stable is repeatedly a serious outfit at these prices.

 

A staggeringly simple and staggeringly consistent punting perspective, notwithstanding the smallest of small blips in a couple of earlier years.

Consequently, given that Scott’s runners are just 34-from-1042 (a little over 3% strike rate) when their SP is greater than 8/1 I’m going to ignore and exclude these runners from all subsequent analysis for the remainder of this article. It doesn’t mean that there isn’t value at some of these larger prices but, for the sake of brevity, starting with the more solid data set of keenly priced horses is a pragmatic option. There is always the chance of throwing the baby out with the bathwater in some cases, however, it’s a risk I’m happy to take.

 

Jeremy Scott Runners by Race type

When evaluating trainer records in National Hunt racing it is often a hugely worthwhile exercise to perform a check on the numbers by the different disciplines within the sport. It’s surprising quite how many yards display significant variance between the obstacle types. Through separation, value can regularly be attained.

 

In the case of Scott, there is variance between the chase and hurdle form with the smaller obstacle data being clearly superior. Bumper results are worth a distinct footnote due to their relative strength, albeit that's not an area of focus here.

By zooming in on hurdle form, further differentiation can be established by checking the handicap and non-handicap status of the race:

 

Again, performance is meritorious across both formats. However, the non-handicap form appears to be particularly noteworthy, with just about a third of runners prevailing and more than half making the frame, comfortably beating market expectations, too.

Evaluating at a slightly deeper level into specific non-handicap race type:

 

“None of these” relates to Graded/Listed races and all bar one of those runs relate to the stable star, Melodic Rendezvous, who won the G1 Tolworth Hurdle in 2013. That aside, performance in maiden and novice hurdles is exemplary. In fact, we’re into angle territory with this one: I’ll be setting an alert for any Scott runner with an SP of 8/1 or shorter in maiden and novice hurdle events over the coming months and hopefully beyond.

 

Jeremy Scott Runners by Jockey

Evaluating who are the go-to pilots for Scott is the topic for exploration in this section. It transpires that there are three jockeys who have secured by far the lion's share of rides for Scott during the ten years covered here.

 

Clearly, based on this table, Rex Dingle has an outstanding record when getting legged up for Scott. Incidentally, I did check and there is not a single winner at a price of greater than 8/1 in his Scott portfolio of rides.

However, there are a couple of considerations worth discussion in the Dingle data. Firstly, he is still is riding as a conditional jockey (now at 3lb claim) and it is not beyond the realms of possibility that his claim has historically been utilised to maximum effect by this trainer. As the claim expires over time, it may be that Dingle is called upon less frequently by the Scott operation. Or perhaps the dynamics of the horses ridden may change resulting in degradation of performance. However, that said, a Scott/Dingle combo at a short to middling price is a clear indication of general intent.

As a bit of a diversion I decided to inspect in detail how these three jockeys performed based on their pace position in the race. It’s in Query Tool so seemed it rude not to!

It may be of marginal benefit to know though, I maintain, interesting, nonetheless, that there is a clear variance in performance and style between the stable jocks.

In particular, the contrast between Scholfield and Griffiths is fascinating.

 

From the table above it can be seen that Griffiths leads from the front on over 28% of occasions. His performance on these front-running rides is strong, too, with an A/E of 1.44. Scholfield, by contrast, only leads in 13% of races where he’s piloting a Scott horse. (Note, there are some “null” pace scores, when a horse's run style cannot be determined from the in-running comments, which explains why the percentages for each rider do not total 100%).

I wonder if this is purely down to jockey discretion or whether the yard matches horses preferred run styles to the rider. Either way, it may be something to note in the future. A proven front-running or prominent animal with Griffiths jocked up may be upgraded in any shortlist. Scholfield less so obviously.

Dingle, as intimated, excels in most scenarios, although it should be noted that he has only led on five horses in the sample above. Interesting that such an ascendant talent is seemingly content to take a tow into a race with greater regularity than may be anticipated.

 

Jeremy Scott Runners by Race Class

One of my treasured angles over the past few years is remarkably simple in nature and has been consistently reliable in terms of returns. It relates to following Scott horses in the lower classes of UK National Hunt racing. See if you can spot it in the table below!

 

 

Whilst the numbers are solid enough across the board, it’s abundantly clear that Scott is a shrewd operator when placing his charges amongst the lesser lights. In 2020 thus far, for instance, he has a strike rate of four-from-nine; so there is no obvious sign of this letting up just yet. I’m usually inclined to produce deeper analysis and comment but on this occasion it is best to just let the speak for themselves.

For assurance purposes, here is the annualised performance. Of course, there are no guarantees in this game but everything being equal it’s well worth tracking Scott animals lining up in these lower echelons with maximum interest.

 

Jeremy Scott Runners: Seasonal Performance / Ground conditions

Broadly speaking, trainers are creatures of habit and one factor which is always is worth due care and attention is how a yard's form typically fluctuates across the course of a season or calendar year.  However, it can pay to cross reference this seasonal view with how that stable's horses perform in specific ground conditions, particularly where National Hunt racing is concerned.

The logic for doing so is thus: given that ground conditions tend to be softer over the winter months, it could be easily argued that the primary reason a yard peaks in winter is because their horses are geared toward running in the mud, and not because their horses are highly tuned at that specific time of year.

It probably doesn’t overly matter, as horses that are mudlarks will be trained to peak with winter conditions in mind. However, I do think it’s pragmatic to check as, by focusing on winter (for example) rather than soft ground, it’s possible that other seasons' creditable soft ground performance is missed. Scott is a good case in point.

The two graphs below illustrate the performance by month. The left hand graph demonstrates the rate of return through backing all horses from the Scott yard. On the right is A/E performance relating to the same data. As you’d expect there is a strong correlation between the two.

 

This is a yard that appears to make hay when the sun starts to shine in the spring. Performance, whilst still of a respectable nature, is a notch or two lower as things progress through to late summer, autumn and into the dark winter months.

Naturally, it might then be expected that this yard would deliver stronger numbers on the slightly quicker ground which is usually more prevalent in the spring and summer months.

 

Bang in line with expectancy: Good to Soft, Good, and Good to Firm all sit proudly in profitability comparison against their slower ground counterparts. However, note the overall consistency of strike rate, both win and place.

To attempt to understand which of the ground or seasonal aspects is the primary driving force in performance it’s sensible to test the data by dividing it by month and by going. Perhaps it’s easier to explain with a graph. Below, the data show A/E of the yard's runners on good to firm, good and good to soft ground (the blue line). Soft and Heavy are represented by the broken orange bar (May through to September excluded due to small sample sizes).

The data do indicate a bias towards ground conditions being the primary factor rather than time of year. Performance of Scott horses appears to be stronger on the quicker ground across all months. It is also worth noting that the A/E’s of 1.00 or greater in deep ground conditions in March, April, September and November still exceed market expectation: likely profit still, but certainly a reduced edge.

 

Jeremy Scott Runners by Race Distance

Another element of differentiation of performance within the Scott dataset is race distance. Like many of the other topics, results are strong across the board. However, there is an advantage to consider when evaluating the yard's runners over the shorter or intermediate National Hunt trips, the table below demonstrating this:

 

A 20% strike rate for races of around three miles and beyond is not to be sniffed at. Nevertheless, it appears as though Squadra Scott has a stronger winning formula at distances towards the lower end of the spectrum. One to be filed under good to know.

 

Jeremy Scott Runners by Course

Finally, it would be remiss to omit track performance insight when considering any trainer. It’s often one of the first things to evaluate. In terms of Scott, he is an operator who seems to like keeping things close to his Somerset base.  Most of the yard's runners are concentrated across the South West and West Midlands. The data below show track results (at 8/1 or shorter) sorted in A/E order for all courses where Scott saddled 30 or more runners. His local patch of Taunton is clearly a fertile hunting ground, displaying the strongest strike rates and P&L performance, as well as A/E value.

 

 

Essentially, it’s a picture of almost metronomic consistency. Perhaps the Taunton data may merit further individual study. However, the excellent all-round performance signifies that course data is of less relevance for Scott than it is for most of his contemporaries. Whist it is always prudent to check performance by track, this insight gives reasonable assurance that achievement is predominantly course agnostic.

 

Jeremy Scott Trainer Profile: The Summary

There is a lot to consider when weighing up runners from the Jeremy Scott yard and none of the data are mutually exclusive. Based on the analysis above, the identikit Scott runner might be:

  • Keenly Priced (8/1 or shorter)
  • Maiden or novice Hurdle
  • Good to soft or quicker ground
  • Rex Dingle as jockey (or perhaps a Matt Griffiths front runner)
  • Less than 2 mile 7 furlongs in distance
  • Class 5 or 6 Race
  • And perhaps at Taunton!

Incidentally, and probably not surprisingly, this perfect cocktail has never happened yet. But when the stars align, I’ll be ready! I’m a patient man.

Until next time.

- JS



Try Tix for Better Tote Returns

Your first 30 days for just £1