Mark Johnston yard

rancid to the core set up

Channon's another one tho' they tend to lose most of the time.

That was pitiful in all fairness, wonder if the stewards will ask for an explanation from the BHA stalwart?
Not that there's owt up, it's just that when favs with clear form chances run about 2st below their last run, questions need to be asked for the integrity of the game.....

Common practice with this firm now. I think he's got so many horses that he doesn't know what he's doing. Plenty of odds on shots well beat, then you get ones bolting up who were never sighted in their previous start.

Probably wise to just swerve races where he has a runner?!

To say the horse was never travelling would be something of an understatement. Bookmakers bonanza as only two horses backed and second favourite ran an absolute shocker as well leaving the two rags to clean up.

Johnston newcomer up against short priced favourite in next.

will finish 1st or last imo

well documented Johnson runners on here, channon used to be very good and consistent but this last few years not many winners so another I swerve

There are or have been trainers over the years who competed mostly at the top level such as Henry Cecil, John Dunlop, Gosden, Godolphin, Hern, Barry Hills, Stoute and Geoff Wragg. Then there are or have been any number of trainers who have generally had the vast majority of their horses running at a lower level but the problem for Johnston is he has almost always had both and so the range of ability of his best and worse horses is a gaping Chasm.

Others like Cole, Cumani, Guy Harwood and a few more competed at the top but have fallen away but because Johnston still covers the whole range of abilities, then often his runners are over-bet and selected in poor races by punters on little more than his name alone and by association of him having had and still having a few top notch horses.

Is he any worse than say Fahey or Hannon who are probably as close to him in standing as any or is it just that he has got himself that reputation that's been picked up on and noticed but doesn't apply to Fahey or Hannon when one of theirs gets well beaten in low grade company?

Yes, he's worse.

but the likes of hannon and fahey do not have many horses that win easily then run stinkers the johnstone yard is in the top position for that why that happens now when it didn't used to causes great debate

"Probably wise to just swerve races where he has a runner?! "

That's about 75% of them.

qualified vet is all you need to know

Johnstons different class how many winners in the last 3 monthsobviously the way they are trained and looked after is far superior to most trainers,to suggest they're non triers and then bounce gack is complete lunacy!Stable didn't have a clue when Galician won hard to read when betting but there's usually plenty of decent form behind most runners,the only way you could back then would be to presume most are open to improvement,without question trainers different class!!

Johnstons different class how many winners in the last 3 monthsobviously the way they are trained and looked after is far superior to most trainers,to suggest they're non triers and then bounce gack is complete lunacy!Stable didn't have a clue when Galician won hard to read when betting but there's usually plenty of decent form behind most runners,the only way you could back then would be to presume most are open to improvement,without question trainers different class!!

Do you know that for sure knowall when you say trainers like Fahey and Hannon doesn't have winners that then run stinkers next time or are just presuming that because nobody has specifically highlighted it on the times they do? I know from personal experience with both yards that it does happen and just like certain jockeys and trainers get flagged up over something, there are other jockeys and trainers where it also applies but for some reason it goes under the radar with many and they don't get the same amount of flak.

For example mention Mark Prescott and people will give a knowingly wry smile with regards to him running horses 3 times short of a trip to get a handicap mark and then running up a sequence with a step up in distance but is he the only one out of all the trainers that ever does that or has he just become the one most associated with where that tactic is concerned?

In essence BACK Marks at a price and leave the over-bet ''shortie's'' alone.....   SIMPLES   !       

And here's another one for you, when M J uses Adrian they're buzzing !       

Do you know that for sure knowall when you say trainers like Fahey and Hannon doesn't have winners that then run stinkers next time

its my job to know that not everyone sees the same things, for me never to back a m Johnston one saves me fortunes I don't like playing Russian roulette with the horses I bet I need to know they are going to run well most of the time and 90% they do run well that does not mean all winning, I would drop down to 10% with johnstons and plenty of other trainers I avoid like the plague

Today's racing only 1 runner at Wolves today Franny Norton aboard 3yo handicap  Grey Blue  on balance of form looks to have little chance of winning,let's see how it goes.

Grey Blue 4.30 Thirsk not Wolves imo. I imagine the plan is to make all. Apart from the fav, it looks open and the fav looks a bit short. I might risk a tenner.

One factor to be taken into account is that fit horses making all can be flattered -- look at Martin Pipe over the years, swept all before him most of the season but rarely took the championship races because the fitness/tactics advantage was gone.

Mark Johnston no different to other trainers, strike rate comparable to Fahey and Hannon. I've no problem betting his, but only if the form and value's there. He's got a couple of 'tells', like most trainers, Glorious Goodwood the obvious one.
  Won't be betting Grey Blue, hasn't run for 110 days, so I'd just be guessing. It's Spotform, Daily Mirror, so may have form to win. Timeform says it's been running like it has physical problems. Price ain't great. Enough to stop me being interested.
  If it wins I won't be crying over it, though.

Timeform could be right about physical problems, given the 4-month break.

Quickest way to the workhouse backing Johnston odds on!

HALCYON DAYS??? when they use Adrian I`m sure u mean Nicholls they are firing??? what sort of statement is that. Do u just think of some rubbish to write with no prove. A.Nicholls is (0-20 with 2-y-o) (7-55 with 3-y-o) (1-14 with 4-y-o`s +) over the last 5 years. is that enough for you Or will I go on.

Sorry knowall as maybe I didn't word it as best I could've (or should that be could of on here?) but what I was asking was do you know that for sure regarding other trainers like Fahey and Hannon that they don't have horses win and then run badly next time out?

i know johnston has about 40% more of his horses beat 10l or more lto than hannon does (over thousands of selections)

i know johnston has about 40% more of his horses beat 10l or more lto than hannon does (over thousands of selections)

You'd expect that given the customary tactics favoured by each yard. A front-runner who has gone off too hard and blown up is likely to finish out with the washing.

i wasn't hinting anything by it ramruma

you are probably right with that assumption, the bulk of front runners that fade out the picture are definitely a big component.

the thing is people seem to get very defensive about the fact a lot of his horses are well beat, it doesn't mean he's a poor trainer but the facts are there.

It is certainly worth investigating.

There might be any explanation. Many years ago I used to bet according to a theory about a now-retired trainer's horsebox being either badly driven and shaking the horses about, or badly maintained and filling the back with carbon monoxide.

Just a couple of isolated examples admittedly but I'd be very surprised if there were not more seeing as they aren't machines and all that, but I remember backing Hannon's Libranno to win the Gr2 Park Stakes at Donny last season where the time before it was 9th of 9 in another Gr2 and the time after was 7th of 11 beaten 6½L in another Gr2 and the time after that was 13th of 15 beaten 11L in another Gr2, so in 4 races had form figures of 9th 1st 7th and 11th all at the same race level.

Another of Hannon's I backed was his Thunder Strike that won the Woodcote Stakes on Derby Day this year and then next time out was 4th in The Coventry. So OK you say that's fair enough as that's a step up from Listed to Gr2 level but the time after that it was 5th of 5 beaten 8¼L when back down to Listed class before then running well again when 3rd of 10 beaten 2½L in the Richmond at Goodwood when back up from Listed to Gr2 level, so that's very up and down form in a series of back to back races.

So there you have it everyone Johnson is just as good a trainer as Fahey and Hannon and the same in terms of his horses up and down performances.

You may feel you don't know where you are with his runners but it is an illusion what a load of silly billys you are.

HALCYON DAYS??? when they use Adrian I`m sure u mean Nicholls they are firing??? what sort of statement is that. Do u just think of some rubbish to write with no prove. A.Nicholls is (0-20 with 2-y-o) (7-55 with 3-y-o) (1-14 with 4-y-o`s +) over the last 5 years. is that enough for you Or will I go on.




Are you an ill educated pleb  ?

First of all I personally would say Johnston is as good a trainer as Fahey and Hannon, as his multiple classic wins and 20 odd Gr1 wins in Britain, Dubai, Germany, Ireland and Italy would suggest (and has actually been training t a higher level for longer than Fahey too) but I don't believe anyone is saying it is an illusion regarding him having up and down runners, but more a case of that appliing to all trainers and not just Johnston but with some it gets flagged up and others it doesn't.

Ima point taken and i respect your opinion,however i feel confident when i back certain trainers horses,but Mark Johnston horses i'm completely in the dark.

As you know i'm far from the only one on here with that view and his name keeps cropping up time after time,somethings not right about that yard.

Imamazed anyone can defend that crook

you are calling MJ a crook ?

I refer you to the 7.30pm result at Windsor right on cue

Just out of interest throwthetellyoutawindow, which particular trainers do you feel confident about regarding backing their horses?

I'm amazed thearchmeister that you see stating a fact that a certain thing doesn't only apply to one person as being deemed as meaning that's defending them.

ima_mazed66 when i fancy one i'm confident on the flat of Hannon,Fahey,Saeed bin Suroor,Stoute,David Barron,Gosden,Bryan Smart,Charles Hills to name a few

over jumps Paul Nicholls,Bridgewater,Henderson,Mullins,Nigel Twiston-Davies again to name a few. David Pipe for me same as MJ and Channon on the flat.

This was what I wrote in my initial post in this thread throwthetellyoutawindow and the trainer names you mention largely fall into the first category.

There are or have been trainers over the years who competed mostly at the top level such as Henry Cecil, John Dunlop, Gosden, Godolphin, Hern, Barry Hills, Stoute and Geoff Wragg. Then there are or have been any number of trainers who have generally had the vast majority of their horses running at a lower level but the problem for Johnston is he has almost always had both and so the range of ability of his best and worse horses is a gaping chasm.

It's very race you will see any of them have runners in sellers, auctions or claimers as Johnston does and some rarely have AW runners too and was my point about Johnston probably in general having the biggest range of abilities of any trainer when comparing his best and worse horses and some punter will back his runner in the sellers and so on just because of his name and from knowing he has trained classics winners before. If Cecil, Gosden, Stoute and others had a horse that proved disappoint and had to drop down to claimer or selling company then usually it would have left their yard before that and will be running in that grade for a new trainer.

At the other end of the scale the likes of Barron and Smart won't have too many if any runners in classics and at Gr1 level and so if one of their lesser lights runs badly it doesn't seem such a massive gap in range compared to their best horses because their best aren't anything exceptional anyway.

Nicholls, Henderson, Mullins and NTW wouldn't have too many run in sellers and claimers either, so maybe David Pipe is in a similar position to Johnston in that he/his Dad have always competed at a lower level too as well as at the top and maybe have had a good few smaller owners that like to have a few horses for fun and have been with the yard for a long time in the way Johnston has those smaller kind of owners also.

Ima i read your initial post and understood it ok that's fine and makes sense but my problem is i have no confidence in the Johnston operation on any level.
Thanks for your interest and efforts anyway.  gn.