• Hi Guest Just in case you were not aware I wanted to highlight that you can now get a free 7 day trial of Horseracebase here.
    We have a lot of members who are existing users of Horseracebase so help is always available if needed, as well as dedicated section of the fourm here.
    Best Wishes
    AR

What difference does the jockey make

Hi Lads, markfinn markfinn highlights important points regarding jockeys, namely trainer instructions and trainers intentions regarding who he has booked. One thing I know for certain after decades of backing is that Horses win races and jockeys lose them. The amount of bad jockeys riding is unbelievable, it seems to me that they are only in the game due to their stature, no horsemanship, talent or even racing brain. I am not talking about obvious crooked rides just downright bad rides where a jockeys lack of skills when obviously trying to win, cost the horse the race.
 
Mike Winalot said:
Hi Lads, markfinn markfinn highlights important points regarding jockeys, namely trainer instructions and trainers intentions regarding who he has booked. One thing I know for certain after decades of backing is that Horses win races and jockeys lose them. The amount of bad jockeys riding is unbelievable, it seems to me that they are only in the game due to their stature, no horsemanship, talent or even racing brain. I am not talking about obvious crooked rides just downright bad rides where a jockeys lack of skills when obviously trying to win, cost the horse the race.
Click to expand...

In England the tracks are huge.
The jockey sometimes takes the wrong course and gets stuck in the mud. Sometimes we see jockeys separating themselves from the field and gping their own way.
You can't expect them all to be geniuses.
Except Frankie. Frankie rides and things arc cosine x integral dx equals qed,
It's all part of the scenery anyway.
One time I placed a wager on two Marinopoulos horses to finish first-second. One was ridden by a champ jockey, took the rail, finished first, non-stop.
The other one had a weak girl jockey. She was following the winner, she too distanced herself from the others, no need to rush to make things difficult for her stablemate, looked like an easy 1-2. The price 8 to 1. But the girl appeared to lose the reigns in the straight, almost bolts out, the ones that followed caught up easily. The price of the winning combination was lees than 3 to 1.
I was cursing but also thought of this. If the horse was ok they would n't give it to her. In any case if the rider was a good second string jockey, it was never going to be an 8 to 1. It would be 3 to 1.
So it's all part of the landscape.
 
The racing press seems to merely show the wins, rides and strike rate for jockeys at a particular course, instead every evening I/my computer calculates ratings for each jockey for each course and race type (flat or jumps).

I’ve done a statistical comparison and the jockey ratings are almost as strong an indicator as to which horse to back as the official handicap rating, so it gives me an extra angle to consider.

These ratings mean I can immediately see which jockeys I feel are stronger performers at a particular course, rather than for example trying to decide whether one jockey achieving 15 wins out 60 rides is more relevant than another achieving 20 wins out of 100 rides.

Why do I calculate the ratings by course? The reason being that some jockeys seem to be consistently successful at some courses but not at others.

Why do I calculate long and short term ratings? A jockey may have strong long term form at a particular course but poor recent form. Also it seems to be an even stronger indicator if jockeys have both strong long and short term form.
 
pawras said:
Why do I calculate the ratings by course? The reason being that some jockeys seem to be consistently successful at some courses but not at others.

Why do I calculate long and short term ratings? A jockey may have strong long term form at a particular course but poor recent form. Also it seems to be an even stronger indicator if jockeys have both strong long and short term form.
Click to expand...

I think two good points,with the first do you include each of there mounts chance in your calculations.With the second how do you interpret and use when the short shows poor but the long good. Is the jockey losing his ability overall or is it just at this particular course and if so why.?

For myself its always first find the horse and only then start worrying about the jockey but its certainly an area i would like to learn more about.When we view stats its helpful to be able to understand why they are showing positive or negative for a situation.When we create a rating which we come to have confidence in we need to know why its working.
 
mick said:
I think two good points,with the first do you include each of there mounts chance in your calculations.With the second how do you interpret and use when the short shows poor but the long good. Is the jockey losing his ability overall or is it just at this particular course and if so why.?

For myself its always first find the horse and only then start worrying about the jockey but its certainly an area i would like to learn more about.When we view stats its helpful to be able to understand why they are showing positive or negative for a situation.When we create a rating which we come to have confidence in we need to know why its working.
Click to expand...

I don't factor in anything about the horses they've been riding. I tend to use them to aid my view of a particular runner's chances i.e. if both long and short term are high then that will add more weight to a runners chances than if only one high or both low etc.
 
The thing is with jockeys they have to make a split second decision travelling at 35mph+ on a horses back. At some stage they will get it wrong. It doesn't make them a bad jockey, just the decision they made a split second ago now looks a bad decision.

Take the draw at Beverley. The outside three stalls in 5f handicaps with 10-12 runners have an awful record. Joe Fanning rides Beverley really well but he hasn't won a race when he has been drawn in one of the outside three stalls.

Dave Allan at the end of the 2010 season had ridden 26 winners from 201 rides at Carlisle for a small LSP. If you are rating Dave Allan as a jockey to follow at Carlisle he would be right up there. At the end of the 2011 season his record was 0-21. 17 of the 21 were priced at 10/1 or less. Dave Allan didn't become a bad jockey at the track overnight but anyone rating him at Carlisle that season would have been a mile out.
 
mlmrob said:
The thing is with jockeys they have to make a split second decision travelling at 35mph+ on a horses back. At some stage they will get it wrong. It doesn't make them a bad jockey, just the decision they made a split second ago now looks a bad decision.
Click to expand...

I very much agree with this which is why i seldom offer criticism of a jockey.I think we need to judge on balance and i can see the positives in pawras pawras method in this respect.The aspect which winds me up is when there is a proven running style and they do the opposite but i guess this is riding to orders so not on them.
 
There is a Jim Crowley in the first from Don today and the RP does indeed give us the overall stats of Jim Crowley but not his stats at Doncaster.
It's possible that some jockeys ride better in some race courses because they know the geography.
The angle with jocks is the hierarchy in the stables - who is booked for what.
Then there are some demonstrably useless jockeys and you cross them out, but there can't be many of those.
 
Last edited:
I generally don't have many jockey systems/angles but they definitely have their place; some are a lot better with small field sizes or at certain distances for example-just a question of finding out what suits them best I guess. I think the whole thing is complicated by the better-known/connected and 'in-form' jockeys getting better rides which probably distorts things a bit.
 
BH01 said:
I generally don't have many jockey systems/angles but they definitely have their place; some are a lot better with small field sizes or at certain distances for example-just a question of finding out what suits them best I guess. I think the whole thing is complicated by the better-known/connected and 'in-form' jockeys getting better rides which probably distorts things a bit.
Click to expand...

No it does n't because we have only one race course and my father was an expert in jockey movements and he was making money, in the good old days when money existed.
But your "jockeys for courses" angle also looks good.
 
These are my jockey ratings for today and tomorrow at Doncaster

5dwljp.jpg
 
The ratings are based purely success/failure at the course and race type, they don't factor in anything in concerning ROI% etc.
 
Interesting, but since your units are not readily understood - in connection with the rides as well - you had better tell us in words who you fancy to do well, on the basis of the ratings, and who you don't.
I use to do the following thing some times: Note down which jockey goes well on the day and then take advantage in the last races of the meeting (back for the double or ignore).
When I see a jockey losing with a cert early on, I cross him off for the rest of the day.
The pattern often works but one who does n't follow the pattern is SDS.
 
The ratings are straight forward score out of 100 for how I view their performance in the long and short term re their success/failure for the course & race type.

I don't back purely on these ratings but if I'm viewing a couple of horses closely matched in terms of form & class etc but one has high long and short term jockey ratings it will swing my opinion in it's favour.
 
Timeform Express their Jockey Ratings for each course as Ran To Form % The Same for Last 5 years (All Courses) and This Year (All Courses)
 
On the Class Ratings Sheet we Rate Trainer and Jockey on a 10 day and 5 Day Performance against SP Expectation and Finishing Position

It can work well if there are other reasons to back the horse

Example From Today

Screen Shot 2017-09-14 at 00.31.59.png

The Pedigree Link in the Screenshot

http://www.tattersalls.com/cat/october2/2016/912.pdf

Trainer & Jockey Ratings for the race

Screen Shot 2017-09-14 at 00.31.24.png

This is how TF View Owen Burrows Form

Screen Shot 2017-09-14 at 00.36.55.png
 
How about an approach where you back a winning jockeys remaining rides?
Atenzi rode a 4 timer as did Ryan Moore and SDS the other week. Happens quite often.
 
Perhaps when they have given a horse a numb nut ride, that was backed by the connections. Like a Tennis player the Jockey has this playing on his mind a gives the next ride a bad one too. I thought Ryan gave Mirage Dancer a bad ride yesterday, but did not have another ride afterwards
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top