[AusRace] Jockeys generally
lloveday at ozemail.com.au
Tue Jan 22 12:49:38 AEDT 2019
"Raw wins and wins and placings" don't mean much in absence of prices - it's
easy to back winners; just back every runner at 1/1 or less and you'll back
around 56% of winners, and "just" lose about 5.5%.
Nor is just looking at past returns enough - factors such as those you list,
and eg, track, trainer should be considered.
Here's a simplistic look at some figures that could be used:
Considering the last 1000 rides for jockeys who have had at least 1000 rides
in the past 14 years (a somewhat different picture arises if only
considering since the advent of SOP rather than traditional SP as SOP
markets have lower market%s, especially away from Sydney/Melbourne tracks):
Best returns @ SP:
Considering only rides on horses "in the market" - gets rid of outliers like
Worst returns @SP:
Considering only rides on horses "in the market" (as I've previously said
LGHenry is in a class of her own):
The big gaps - All "in market"
SFawke 113 79
WD'Avila 103 75
MJWalker 103 76
JOliver 117 91
BMertens 88 63
JTaylor 69 100
NPunch 60 95
JeffKehoe 31 72
SLisnyy 61 102
CHall 66 107
VBolozhinsky 70 112
From: Racing <racing-bounces at ausrace.com> On Behalf Of Roman
Sent: Monday, 21 January 2019 9:34 PM
To: 'AusRace Racing Discussion List' <racing at ausrace.com>;
tonymoffat at bigpond.com
Subject: Re: [AusRace] Jockeys generally
The fascination of it all is that two raters could have the same jockey
literally poles apart depending on criterias chosen.
I have never rated jockeys nor trainers as I wonder if there is all that
much between a number of them at the top level. If the SP figures is a solid
determinant of the overall structure of horse racing does it not figure
those jockeys that ride well on well fancied horses are giving the horses
the chance of winning the market determines. Say Jockey A has 100 rides in
races in town on favs and scores 35% of the time is he not a fraction better
than Jockey B who rides 32%. So the next time the two jockeys meet on say
favs at 2/1 and 9/4 (close) but the 32% jockey rides an on pacer and the 35%
jockey rides a chronic get back type where does the ratings look now. It
would be best to rate them all on their ability with leaders, on pacers, mid
fielders and get back types and another set of figures comes up far more
accurate, imho, than just a raw wins and wins and placings.
I look forward to Len's reply.
From: Racing [mailto:racing-bounces at ausrace.com] On Behalf Of L.B.Loveday
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2019 6:12 PM
To: tonymoffat at bigpond.com <mailto:tonymoffat at bigpond.com> ;
racing at ausrace.com <mailto:racing at ausrace.com>
Subject: [AusRace] Jockeys generally
Did not get to me and I just saw it in the archives - a very different
rating method to mine; I'll evaluate and comment anon.
790*150-93-96 is the revealed racing stat for Linda Meech tomorrow - to
expand this Ms Leech has had 790 rides for 150 wins in the time frame
covered by this stat. My IV for that is 1.4, essentially she is 40% advanced
on some others in this race.
No rider gets less than 1, although the calculation is often less than
that, John Keating has .6 (scores a one in the scheme). Why? - he is on a
horse in the race and Bradbury's have happened, although I use the 1 for
statistical pureness, and to get rid of some decimals. To be factual, off a
calculation, Keating is somewhere like 80% more unlikely of producing a good
ride than Meech - he has 395*17-25-33 and is .6 against Meech at 1.4 (1.4 -
.6 is the basis of the claim for 80%).
Jason Maskiell is also on 1.4 in this race, off 347*54-46-41. The factor is
0.300552251 (the average of all jockeys riding) and my fall back value is
.31 - if a jockey can't be rated (the data is missing e.g.) then I assign
that value to it early in the calculation.
Roger Biggs wrote that he used .2595, which may be the statistical base of
all jockey placings across many rides. This has changed somewhat, there is a
jockey db. on RB Ratings. I am unaware of another method to rate and rank
jockeys against all their rides. They can only ride one horse in a race so
that the iv concocted from a large number of rides seems to be correct, and
I total all the rides for all jockeys in the race then divide that into all
the places achieved by all the jockeys, and from that sub-total I
individually determine an iv.
There is a place system for ranking jockeys when on favorites, but that is
not the jockey at all. Another time perhaps. Who likes, or wants, dividends
in the sub $2 range, most of us really.
This upcoming race has riders which have achieved 4708 rides totally under
the period of review, and of those rides those riders scored, placed, in
1415. So, 1415/4708 = .300552251 is the factor to be used. Individually
Keating has 395*17-25-33 (17+25+33/395 = .1898734) and this product is again
divided by the total score .3005522512 to give the score of .6. These
numbers seem minimal, mickey mouse almost, but are a significant part of the
overall stat picture
Trainers may have two or more runners in the race. I score them the same as
jockeys, total rides into total places (123) and develop a iv score from
Involving riders and trainers, getting a score from them combined, I
multiply their ivs and work with the product, ranking that.
Meech 1.4, trainer 1.3 (1.4 * 1.3 = 1.82)
Keating 1, trainer 1 (1 * 1 =1) actually .6 * .1. The trainer is yet to win
Maskiell 1.4, trainer 1 (1.4 * 1 = 1.4.
Dylan Dunn = 1.1
There is some upside to Linda Meech ability, trainer ability.
This is R2 Kyneton tomorrow, a maiden and I'm not betting
in it, nor do I suggest you do.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Racing