How Do You Use Trainer and Jockey Win% & ITM% ?

[Running Amok]

Hey guys, just wondering how much you consider the win% and ITM% stats for the trainer and jockey when handicapping a race?

For win and ITM stats it likely doesn't much matter where you get your past performances. I've been using BRIS Ultimate PPs, which includes the Win% and ITM% for the trainer at the current meet, overall, and when it's this early in the year, last year and this year combined. The same with the jockey.

They also show the win% and ITM % for the trainer/jockey combo for the last 60 days along with several other categories for the trainer and jockey.

But my question is how much weight do you give these percentages for the trainer and jockey?

Do you rule out a horse if the trainer or jockey has a low win%?

Is a 15% win percentage significant, or do you want to see an even higher win rate?

Does the win rate at which you consider to be significant differ for the trainer vs. the jockey?

Does ITM% have much significance to you or is it the win% you mainly look at?

I know everyone has different ideas and opinions when it comes to playing the races. I'm not asking for you to reveal your secrets or methods. If the win% or ITM% mean nothing to you, that's fine.

I just thought we could have a discussion about these stats and how important you feel they are. Especially since they're not derived from debatable methodologies.

[denniswilliams]

'How Do You Use Trainer and Jockey Win% & ITM% ?'

Same way I use a pitchfork to shovel snow.

[Running Amok]

Thanks for your worthy contribution to the thread.

[capitalman]

I use Formulator & I put in data specific to the race. For example, if it's a 1st time starter in a maiden sprint race for Arkansas breds at Oaklawn, I put 1st time starter, sprint, Use today's track, and state bred & restricted races. The problem I have is the restricted races are lumped in with the state bred races, so I have to look at the individual winning horses to see if they are Ark breds.

With jockeys, I'll plug in use today's jockey with the trainer. This is helpful if a trainer is running an uncoupled entry. I usually prefer the horse that the jockey has a significantly better record with the trainer than the other uncoupled horse.

Overall, I would never look at raw trainer or jockey win % without regard to the conditions of the race. Trainers have specific win% that vary by what the race is about. I wouldn't bet a maiden 1st time starter by looking at the overall 1st time starter without regarding the surface, distance & even the specific track. For example: Chad Brown hits with 1st time starters in turf routes at 37% at Tampa Bay Downs, but wins only 7% of 1st time starters in turf routes at Gulfstream Park.

I feel I can do a lot more with Formulator than BRIS PPs. When I use BRIS I supplement the data with more specific data from Capital OTB's website that uses the Twin Spires system.

I specialize in maiden races & I look into breeding data. BRIS does not break down the difference in win % for sprints & routes. I can't handicap without knowing what distances the sires & dams progeny won at.

I never look at ITM % except in rare circumstances.

[wiretowire68]

You can use bris files. i.e. I will take Win percentage % Sprint or Rte % for Jck and take Tn% plus best percentage on whatever the angle Bris sees as a positive for the trainer pertaining to the records in these types of races. I will then add these percentages together and you can take their previous post position in their last race and subtract that percentage to today's post. It will either give a positive boost to the their post or nothing or it will downgrade it.
Then I will take all those percentages and divide by the number of horses in the race and will a show whose has an advantage or who may improve.

I have done this with spreadsheet handicapping in terms of a rating number, there are many out there who disagree but a jockey who has a good sprint percentage and knows how to get a horse to break properly. I only do this with dirt sprints. or 1 turn miles. You can use equibase as well if using other past performance data. It is just another statistic but it will help even up some of the performance percentages particularly if a jockey is new working with this trainer or limited number of amounts. It can coincide with a jockey switch or a trainer switch or trainer's original jockey was booked.

I have also done things like in many experimental manners as I am looking at developing my own software. One of the things you can do with these percentages is to take a look at the best early fraction of a paceline and add that into your position. Just thoughts, there will be the pundits on here that do not take it into account but the best trainer(despite his suspicious records and suspensions due to drugs) for getting his horses to break fast from the gate, always claims it is one of the most important factors in teaching a horse and to get the horse into proper position and clear. If Bob B. is wrong, well I do not know then I am wrong so to me those percentages can be used as part of anyone's handicapping arsenal. I guarantee all software developers use this in part of their developed algorithms when they code their machine learning.

[castaway01]

Originally Posted by Running Amok

Thanks for your worthy contribution to the thread.

He makes a good point though. The winning percentage alone doesn't say anything that isn't already baked into the price. The trainers and jockeys that win more get bet more. You have to decide on an individual basis if you're willing to take that price. Of course you're better off betting a 22% trainer over a 2% trainer. But everyone else handicapping the race knows that too and bets accordingly.

[classhandicapper]

But my question is how much weight do you give these percentages for the trainer and jockey?

For dirt racing overall

Jockey = 12.5%

Trainer = 9%

That's what my regression model came up with.

In some situations though, I think trainer can be practically be the most important factor.

[SBD400]

If it is one of the good jockeys and not bottom jockeys, I always give more weight to the trainer.

[Running Amok]

Originally Posted by castaway01

He makes a good point though. The winning percentage alone doesn't say anything that isn't already baked into the price. The trainers and jockeys that win more get bet more. You have to decide on an individual basis if you're willing to take that price. Of course you're better off betting a 22% trainer over a 2% trainer. But everyone else handicapping the race knows that too and bets accordingly.

OK, that makes sense but I'm not talking about price or making an odds line. Not at all.

And of course a 2% trainer is not going to attract many bets. But how about a trainer that has a 11% win rate? Is that an acceptable win% or do you want to see at least 15%?

In my OP I asked "Do you rule out a horse if the trainer or jockey has a low win%?"

Basically what I was asking is what do you consider to be a "low win%" and would you eliminate a horse as a contender that's trained by, or rode by, a person that has such a "low win%" ?

[wiretowire68]

thing..I have difficulty and would be interesting in terms of statistics, but anytime I see a jockey/trainer combo in the middle of a meet or a long meet, it is a very difficult statistic to base assumptions on. i.e. like 40% or 50%, hard to trust even a half decent trainer number or a trainer whose percentage is low because they are usually just starting out or not many horses in the barn.

I equate to supply and demand in terms of numbers, So many try to get a few starts in over the winter in Florida, the more horses they run, the more consistent the percentage. It happens at Churchill, Keeneland, GP every year, or even smaller barns coming in from the future defunct Golden Gate.

The obvious stated is why I only use it for dirt sprints or 1 turn and avoid this totally anytime a new meet starts, even worse when it comes to the cheap maiden claimers or low level claimers. Look at New York, Look at the guys who are constant with low percentages. That is why I call it supply and demand, bottom line, more horses better consistent percentages, and we all know that it takes money in order to build your stable and in these economic times, even worse. Clients are the key

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by Running Amok

Basically what I was asking is what do you consider to be a "low win%" and would you eliminate a horse as a contender that's trained by, or rode by, a person that has such a "low win%" ?

If I was trying to make a rule, I'd say 5% or under over a fairly long period is pretty much a toss unless the rider/jockey has a solid ROI, has done well with this particular horse or the entire race is fully of low win% jockeys and trainers.

Above 5% but below 10%, I'm still going to downgrade the horse.

Horses trained by low % trainers are less likely to run back to their recent good race than horses trained by high percentage trainers and even less likely to improve (and of course vice versa).

[Poindexter]

Because I chase carryovers I will play tracks I am not familiar with. I used to pretty much consider any trainer/ jockey under 5 percent a toss pretty much, but was burned too many times doing so. I know lover will toss a horse for that reason. I think it is very much race track/circuit dependent. I suggest doing the research on the tracks you play. Stats in general are very telling however and they should be taken very seriously. I remember a few months back looking at the driver stats at woodbine Mohawk harness 2023 and it was amazing how similar their win percentage and my opinion of their driving skills matched up.

[Robert Fischer]

If you have the higher percentage jockeys out of the exacta it makes for a solid score, even if it tends to pay a little 'low'.

[Robert Fischer]

Stats are fun to read...


if a guys winning 20% he may have an edge...

Stats give you a general idea, but you've watched the circuit. You kinda know which trainers have ALL runners, and those who are struggling.

You learn the jockey colony over time.

[Tom]

If you want a rule, I look at over 20% as positive, under 10% as negative, and between 10-20% as not influencial.

But then, what % are you looking at?
Overall, specific?

A jock might be 21% in turf routes but 11% in turf sprints.

And what you have a 25% trainer in today's situatiom, and the next best is 12%? Or what if you have 4 trainers out of 8 that are all 22-24%?

Nothing exists in a vacumm.