(THREAD)

ARE BALLYDOYLE BATTALIONS RUINING THE DERBY?

Having read some interesting conversation about this, I decided to look into it a little deeper. This thread (which is long!) highlights some of what I found. Please read the explanatory notes below before reading on. (1/n)

Between 1998 – 2019, a total of 313 horses have run in the Derby. Of those, 85 have been Aidan O’Brien’s (AOB’s). That’s 27% of all the horses that have run in the race since he made his first entries at Epsom 22 years ago. (2/n)

1. Is it worth it?

For his 85 Derby runners since 1998, he’s had 7 winners. It’s impressive – record-equalling – but it makes for a strike rate of ~8%. This contrasts with the likes of Sir Michael Stoute (3 winners from 15 runners – 20%) and John Oxx (2 from 4 – 50%). (3/n)

It’s still superior to that of John Gosden, who is on 1 winner from 21 runners (4.76%). Obviously, these bare figures don’t take into account placed horses, which will accumulate plenty of extra prize money and gain some black-type form in the process. (4/n)

2. Is he propping up Derby field sizes?

The average Derby field since 1998 is 14.2 horses.

Yes, there have been years when his runners have made up a huge proportion of the field. However, whether a limit on runners would make a difference isn’t clear-cut. (5/n)

If Aidan O’Brien had run no more than two horses a year, that figure drops to 12.4. We would lose an average of two horses a year from the field.

The most he’s run in a single year is eight (2007). The fewest is one (1999, 2000, 2001, 2004). (6/n)

3. Are things getting out of hand?

Take the 10 most recent renewals only. The average field size for those Derbys is 13.3 horses. If O’Brien had run only two each year, it would be 11.3 – we’ve still only lost a couple of horses per year on average. (7/n)

However, the percentage of the field made up by his horses does seem to be increasing over time.

2019 was the year in which his runners made up more than half the field (54%) for the first time. (8/n)

Here's that same information in graph form. (9/n)

4. Is he running horses that deserve a chance?

313 horses ran in the Derby between 1998 and 2019.

Of these, 15 (5%) were maidens, having never won a race before. AOB has only ever run two maidens that I've seen, making his overall percentage 2.4%. (10/n)

Of all the 313 Derby runners, 187 (60%) had previously won black type. The rest had won maidens, conditions stakes and handicaps (if they had won at all). One horse debuted in the Derby. One more had run only over hurdles before lining up at Epsom. (11/n)

Of AOB’s 85 runners, 68% have lined up already black-type winners – higher than the overall average. And his runners have dragged that average up, as when you look at horses NOT trained by AOB, ‘only’ 57% were black-type winners. (12/n)

It’s the same with G1 winners. 35/313 Derby runners lined up at Epsom G1 winners – that’s 11% of them. Almost half of all G1 winners lining up at Epsom since 1998 have been AOB’s. 19% of his runners are prior G1 winners, compared to 8% across all other trainers combined. (13/n)

Overall, it seems that most of the horses lining up for him warrant the opportunity.

These figures obviously don’t take into account any horses with other commendable form, such as those who were placed in good races on prior runs. (14/n)

5. Are his runners just well-bred also-rans?

Of our 313 Derby runners, ten never ran again (some were retired, some sadly passed away). I’ve taken those out of all numbers going forward, so we’re looking at 303 Derby runners who went on to race at least once post-Epsom. (15/n)

For subsequent wins, I’ve only counted wins on the flat. Some went hurdling with variable degrees of success but, rightly or wrongly, I’ve discounted subsequent form over obstacles for these one-time Classic horses. (16/n)

Also bear in mind that these figures may be considered unfair to some horses, who may have been highly tried at the top level after the Derby yet never got their nose in front (as opposed to those who did win again, at lower levels). A pinch of salt is needed. (17/n)

Of the 303 horses that ran after Epsom, 39% never won another race on the flat. AOB’s horses alone don’t fare as well: 50% never won again after Epsom.

148/303 horses (49%) collected more black type after the Derby, with 23% going on to score at G1 level at least once. (18/n)

Of AOB’s horses, further black type has been less forthcoming with only 44% of runners picking up more – but of those that do, plenty win G1s: 28% of his Derby runners have gone on to win at least one G1 after Epsom. That's more than the percentage across all runners. (19/n)

Ruler of the World, Wings of Eagles and Anthony van Dyck (yet) can count no subsequent wins at the top level amongst them – but looking at the also-rans yields plenty of G1 talent. (20/n)

Take out the 11 Derby winners who went on to win G1s and you’re left with 58 also-rans who did the same.

Horses that finished outside the places but went onto win G1 races for AOB include Brian Boru, Oratorio, Septimus, Deauville, Kew Gardens and Circus Maximus. (21/n)

6. What about Galileo?

Since 2006 (the year that Galileo’s first crop were three-year-olds), there have been 196 Derby runners.

45 (23%) of them have been by Galileo. A remarkable 12 (27%) of his runners have finished in the top three. (22/n)

Of his 45 runners, only nine (20%) were/are not trained by Aidan O’Brien. (23/n)

The situation was different for his sire and predecessor, Sadler’s Wells, who from 1998 (the first year in which AOB had Derby runners) and 2012 (the year his final crop were 3-y-os) had 34 of 214 runners (16%). (24/n)

They were far more spread out amongst trainers, with AOB training only 15 of them.

Aidan O’Brien trained 44% of all the Sadler’s Wells colts that ran since he began his Derby career. In contrast, he has trained 80% of all the Galileos. (25/n)

In conclusion, Aidan O'Brien runs a LOT of horses, which lowers his overall strike rate compared to some other trainers. He does seem to be running more in the race as time goes on. (26/n)

But most of the horses he runs would appear to deserve their chance, based on what they’ve achieved before Epsom and what they go on to achieve afterwards.

Thanks for reading if you got this far. I’d be interested to hear what others’ thoughts are.

END (27/27)