trainers performance

last night the old friend of me come for supper, he is the friend for many year and is godfather of my son so a very special man to me and my wife. he own a few shop in westonarea but is now retire and live in mossel bay the sons run the business, these guy is all so the old old owner and punter and all ways we sit and talk about the horse raceing. one thing i find very interesting is he say we measure the performance of trainer the wrong way. i listen to hem be cause for me it is simple the more money you win the better you are no? so what he say is these. you can no measure the performance of mike de kock versus the performance of let us say louis g. he say some how the "performance index" of stake verses the cost must be a factor. so let us say mike de kock have the 100 horse that cost 50 million and he earn 10 million hes performance index is 20%, if louisg have 50 horse that cost 5 million and he earn 2 million hes performance index is 40%, now first i think hes crazy but as we talk of these i begin to see hes point. i now there is dificulty to get the cost of entire stable especially from horse who no go to sale but he say for these horse just take the average sale price of the stallion. for me very many time we are right to play the number game but many many good trainer he get the better than average re turn on cheapies and their is no recognition for these. what do you guy think?

I think that is a fair assumption Harry (tu)

your friends aspect counts for maybe 10% , understanding handicapping and correct placement of horses in races another 10% ,, advising the owner on when to punt and when not to punt another 10% , good eye to buy horses another 10% ,, ability to keep horses fit and sound another 10% ,, etc etc,, but you can never doubt that MDK just by his achievements alone is the greatest SA trainer in the modern era

I don't think this thread is to distract from MDK success but just another measurement of a trainers performance.
Let's compare with a business and people tend to be turnover driver

Let's consider a big company with high profile turnover R100 million a year and it costs R100m and R10 to run it

Vs

A plant doing R10 M and it costs R9 M to run

mister a Wrote:

---

> your friends aspect counts for maybe 10% ,
> understanding handicapping and correct placement
> of horses in races another 10% ,, advising the
> owner on when to punt and when not to punt another
> 10% , good eye to buy horses another 10% ,,
> ability to keep horses fit and sound another 10%
> ,, etc etc,, but you can never doubt that MDK
> just by his achievements alone is the greatest SA
> trainer in the modern era

Sorry
I am with Flash Harry on this one.
A year ago there was a similar thread.
If you have rich owners in your stable that can afford those expensive horses, then you are bound to do well.

I have always said , "a manager is as good as his team".

No doubt that Harry is correct. What we see in the formguide is runners and results. There is no record of a Trainers "failures" or costs, losses etc. So, yes, Racing has become a numbers game nowadays. And those numbers are created by opm - other peoples money.

But Mister a also makes very good sense. Whilst it is not to easy to place a horse correctly all the time nowadays ( not if you want to run more than 3 times a year in the "right" race, given the combo of programming, handicapping and horse population), the principles he mentions are vital. And yes, many Trainers do get some of these wrong, often.

As for MDK, he has the Owners who value the big race wins far higher than any cost comparisons. The old saying went something like if you put a bar of soap on the counter and 100 000 USD next to it and then asked the Sheik to choose one, he would take the bar of soap, simply because he can use it. The dollars he has in billions, so the 100 000 wont make a difference or a dent either way. And when he wants a horse, he simply buys the horse. Full stop.

As for MDK, the fundamental principle remains that when he has a top horse, that is what the horse becomes. As a SA Trainer, I am proud of his achievements. He has pioneered us Internationally and when an opportunity has arisen, he has grabbed it and made it work.

Yes, he has advantages. When he tells an Owner that the horse isnt that good etc, it is accepted as law. When the smaller Trainer does this, invariably the ability of the smaller Trainer is questioned, rather than the ability of the horse. But Mike has created this and again, he built his reputation on results.

This topic is very interesting to me right now, because it is something which I am currently looking at. As a stable, we have to redirect our efforts, adapt to modern times and metamorphosise, as such. Either that or close the yard down. We are having some winners, but we are not as good as we believe we should be. We detest mediocrity.

Two factors have come up as priorities, in this new era.

First and foremost, it is vital to understand the current situation in Racing. In order to be competitive, the NUMBERS and FIGURES must be right. Numbers dictate that a yard needs enough horses to supply a steady stream of runners. From these will come a percentage of winners. These winners are the advert for the stable and in turn, they create the figures...

Secondly, the "figures" are all about buying power. Without buying power, the numbers decrease, which results in less runners, less adverts and then smaller buying power next year etc etc etc.

Many smaller or traditionally "normal" yards are now faced with this problem and possible extinction within the next 3 years. If some of the old school Trainers were training today, they would not have their traditional 50 horse string. They would have to have 100 plus horses.

I am absolutely convinced that we will see a substantial reduction in the number of Trainers in the next 3 years and a growth in numbers of horses per yard.

Again, referring to Harry and Mister a's points - Whilst the top 100 or so horses will be out of the reach of many, say 95% of buyers and many of the rest of the crop will be over priced as such, there will still be opportunities for those who know their jobs, to buy under the radar.

So, we are concentrating our Marketing efforts on bringing new Owners in and we are putting in a lot more time and hard work than ever before, come sales time. Sales time is hard graft time, nowadays, in order to survive. The normal, realistic Owner needs that, in order to stay in the game. This game is tougher than ever !

First and foremost, it is vital to understand the current situation in Racing. In order to be competitive, the NUMBERS and FIGURES must be right. Numbers dictate that a yard needs enough horses to supply a steady stream of runners. From these will come a percentage of winners. These winners are the advert for the stable and in turn, they create the figures...

I agree 100%, and that is why I support the MR system - which leads to more 'mediocre horses' being kept in training for longer periods - ensuring a steady stream of numbers and also keeping owners 'afloat' for longerperiods.

In terms of a 'performance index', I would extend that to 'rate' a stallion - relate the earnings of his runners against the cost of his yearlings - and 'value' become clearer

L G the point you make that the game is tougher than ever is very true , new owners and old owners will only stay with a trainer today who produces results for them ... no results horses will be moved in the blink of an eye to another trainer or another centre [ not all owners but most newbies, results is the standard trainers are judged by ] ..

Did Craig not get hounded for having a similar opinion?

hibernia Wrote:

---

> Did Craig not get hounded for having a similar
> opinion?


ps nice thread guys

Louis that is absolutely 100% ..great right up bud! I loved reading that

FH , as I have said in the past, that stat must and should be the way a trainer is evaluated. You will then see the difference between horsemen and trainers. A great example of this is a trainer like P Steyn, with R20 or R30 000 purchases he gets great consistent results. There are many out there. For me its more about the new owner not getting "PRO'ED" into parting with his money for KAK and there are many out there as well. This stat however doesnt exist !! Why ?
One should however take a realist look at a combination of : the trainer's good stats vs a trainer that can take your horse the whole way (eg to a grade 1 and win.) Now, there are not that many out there !!