2011/2012 Jockey and Trainer betting

Whatever method we use will choose an outcome and I don't say one is always "better" than another.

This year the trainer with the most wins also earned the most stakes so it doesn't matter. The reason I prefer the stakes to wins for trainers is that it gives the edge to the greater achievement too.

As it happened, the trainer with the most wins in each racing province also had the highest earnings except in Gauteng, where Woodruff had 82 to Mdk and Miller had 73 each. Their stakes respectively was 6.8, 12.5 and 3 million. You are entitled to think that Woodruffs performance blew De Kock away and that he was about as good as Miller for the year if you like.

Another example could be the horse competition for the season. On number of wins, the outcome would be a tie between Celtic Fire and Igugu. On stakes it would be Igugu by R4 mill to R464,000. Jockeys also won most provinces with stakes and wins, again with Gauteng the exception. Delpech (Igugu probably making the difference) secured him 9.7 million (86 wins from 412 rides) and Marcus 8.4 million (111 from 417).

I think that most times whichever method gives the same winner or close to it, but the system in place wasn't just a thumbsuck and I imho it has proven to be more just over time, and it has just proven itself once again for good measure.

Trainer Charlie Laird is not the betting. Is he more than 100/1?

Tero -

Thank you. We are definitely reading of the same page.
This topic warrants more debate, but I agree with you. This topic has to be re-visited.

Actually this makes makes a good topic for a dissertation. Is there any students out there?

Tero.....I think golf also choose's its winners by most money earned.................

Tero Wrote:

---

> Jockey/stallion/trainer/breeder should be based on
> the number of winners for the season.
> sheep mentality needs to change

If you boil it down, you want give the same weight to a Qualifed Maiden Handicap and the July.

If we each bred and trained 1 horse and I win a Maiden, and 2 MR 70 Hcps while you win a Mdn, the Guineas and the Met.. we tie on your log. Brilliant, I think you should be the shepherd now.

Countrymember Wrote:

---

> Tero.....I think golf also choose's its winners by
> most money earned.................

Absolutely CM
I think they also have a points system in place as well.

Jockey/stallion/trainer/breeder should be based on the number of winners for the season.
In the horse category it should be based on the most number of goup races won.

I think I can lead the sheep to the oasis and not astray.

why not just measure everyone (owner/trainer/jockey/punter/etc) by their strike rate....its input vs output ....

Muzi might go close,with PRESENTER doing his capetown rides

What's your thoughts on the various horses up for awards should it be panel/number of races/quality of races/stakes won?

scotia Wrote:

---

> What's your thoughts on the various horses up for
> awards should it be panel/number of races/quality
> of races/stakes won?

Definitely not a panel......they are subjective.......it will be a farce if they use a panel to pick the horses in the various categories.

I remember the person that won the Victor Ludorum trophy in my school .......there was a set criteria to derive the eventual winner ........5 points for a win, 2 points for 2nd & 1 point for 3rd place finish...... the person that won the most number of points in all the athletic events he participated will be the winner...... I think currently all primary/secondary schools use this method......it is a more conclusive scientific way of obtaining a winner......imo a similiar method should be utilized based on winning a Maiden race 1 point, winning a MR 80 Handicap 5 points, winning a Group 1 race 80 points etc.

Incidentally Tero, we do use a panel