We have been looking at a few additional indicators over the last few months and I shall be reviewing progress on those. The first batch of reports will be on jockeys, trainers and stalls.But today we start with jockeys.
Several years ago I did an analysis on the effects of a jockey on the performance of a horse. I concluded that there is no mathematically measurable correlation between jockey and performance. This seems somewhat strange when the top jockeys proveably win so often. The reason for this apparent paradox is simply that the top jockeys win so often because they pick or are picked for the best rides. I am sure that the more talented jockeys extract a better result than would have been the case with a lesser jockey, its just that it is really hard to measure this from the data available.
However, all is not lost. The jockey selected can still prove a useful indicator because the trainers will want and pay for a good jockey if they believe that the horse has a good chance of winning.
I have generated 2 measures of this jockey ranking:
| Rank | Jockey | Handicap rating of average horse ridden | Average Result Achieved |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | M J KINANE | 131 | 42 |
| 2 | GARY STEVENS | 128 | 41 |
| 3 | L DETTORI | 127 | 42 |
| 4 | R HILLS | 126 | 34 |
| 5 | K FALLON | 120 | 40 |
| 6 | PAT EDDERY | 120 | 30 |
| 7 | J REID | 120 | 26 |
| 8 | J P MURTAGH | 120 | 38 |
| 9 | T QUINN | 119 | 35 |
| 10 | CRAIG WILLIAMS | 119 | 32 |
| 11 | M HILLS | 119 | 32 |
| 12 | R HUGHES | 117 | 30 |
| 13 | J FORTUNE | 117 | 30 |
| 14 | O PESLIER | 117 | 45 |
| 15 | A P MCCOY | 116 | 47 |
| 16 | R DUNWOODY | 116 | 41 |
| 17 | P J SMULLEN | 116 | 34 |
| 18 | J TIZZARD | 115 | 39 |
| 19 | M A FITZGERALD | 114 | 41 |
| 20 | K J MANNING | 114 | 32 |
Dave Taylor, October 17th 2000