The old "personal" stable is an old one and stil has many followers I think. Whilst doing research on something else, I noticed that nearly all the horses I was researching had won several races during their career, obviously some more than others, and in many cases at a similar time of year, but the pattern seems to be that a winner will win again at some time.

What to do with that I'm not sure , could be adding horses to your stable and always backing level stakes or dare I say "cover to win"

Before I get into this research big time I wonder if anyone has any stats that might relate to this idea?

I don't have stats but from what i have looked at if you start to back a city class winner from a spell say as a 3yo you could make a profit over a lifetime of racing.

The main problem i found was having to many horses in your stable so even when you had winners that made a profit your commitments to other runners left a loss at that time, if you decide to only have a few runners it could be weeks even months before the wins.

I thought about having a max run of outs from a spell maybe 5 that way you don't over commit to a horse that may be 12 races before a win.

What about ignoring the first 2 starts from a spell and following for the next 3 or 4 starts? Obviously, you may miss a winner or two but I'm sure you'll miss many more losers.

Your thoughts?

Thanks for the replies guys, food for thought but I still kinda like the idea. One problem that I've come across so far is sometimes several "stable" horses running in the same race especially in the West.

In my opinion, they are the races to avoid.
Stick to where a trainer has only one runner in the race, that's a pretty good guide in most events other than major Group races.
Wrote a piece a few years back about certain trainers who have a habit of leaving sole acceptors when they look likely to win or go close.

I wrote the following in Jan 2006, it was republished by a glossy mag in Feb 2006 without permission, so here it is

"I've done some analysis of John Hawkes, and thought I'd share some useless,
some salient, and some startling information I've gathered.

I've analysed 933 John Hawkes winners.

These were all not first up from a spell and were not first starters.

13.72% of winners carried same weight from last start.
40.19% of winners dropped in weight from last start.
46.09% of winners rose in weight from last start.

24.44% of winners ran over the same distance as last start 58.52% of winners
went up in distance from last start 17.04% of winners dropped in distance
from last start

100% of winners started within 30 days
87.78% of winners started within 21 days 47.27% of winners started within 14
days 6.64% of winners started within 7 days

27.33% of winners ran at the same track last start 72.67% of winners ran at
a different track last start

52.84% of winners ran in Sydney
21.76% of winners ran in Brisbane
21.22% of winners ran in Melbourne
4.18% of winners ran in Adelaide

85.53% of winners ran at a Metro track last start 14.47% of winners ran at a
Country track last start

28.51% of winners had one run since spell *** (second up) 24.54% of winners
had two runs since spell 19.29% of winners had three runs since spell 12.43%
of winners had four runs since spell 15.22% of winners had five or more runs
since spell

2.57% of winners were on Fast going
70.95% of winners were on Good going
17.15% of winners were on Dead going
5.68% of winners were on Slow going
3.54% of winners were on Heavy going

65% of winners were ridden by 5 regularly engaged jockeys 45% of winners
were ridden by not regularly engaged jockeys There was a large volume of
jockeys who only ever won once for John Hawkes - and never won again

And now for the most astounding stat of all, which made it all
worthwhile.....

I analysed the success of sole John Hawkes runners in a race compared with
multiple runners and here's what happened.....

78.56% of winners were sole Hawkes runners 19.51% of winners were dual
Hawkes runners 1.71% of winners were a trio of Hawkes runners 0.21% of
winners were a quad of Hawkes runners 0% of winners were a quin of Hawkes
runners 0% of winners where there were 7 Hawkes runners

So only 21.44% of winners came from multiple runners."

This data is obviously outdated, but it gives a pretty good insight into spotting signals.

__________________
RaceCensus - powerful system testing software.
Now with over 402,000 Metropolitan, Provincial and Country races!
http://www.propun.com.au/horse_raci...ng_systems.html
*RaceCensus now updated to 31/05/2024
Video overview of RaceCensus here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W821YP_b0Pg