Mark Johnston ruins betting on horses.

agree

I agree all the way but, today's winner wasn't exactly a hidden gem, he had the form in the book and the only one with small field scenario to help.

I agree, along with.... J.P McManus, C. Brynes, T.Martin, Denis Hogan, Dagleish, Tim Vaughan, and many many more..... Jockeys, we will be here to midnight...

I thought i was the only one, to be thinking like the OP

i'm sure he does it to throw punters off.
he messes about with his horses so much its no wonder he hardly ever wins group ones, even though he gets better backing than anyone. i dont know if he bets but he sure doesn't like punters winning on his horses.
when he gets a good horse he runs them into the ground & they hardly ever train on.
all in all hes bad for racing. of course, its just my opinion

Always Trying?  really , who is he trying to kid?
why would you have that as a yard slogan anyway
just runs them obviously down the field...almost as bad as no.1 sinner Jp Mcmanus

just runs them obviously down the field

If you paid attention, you would have noticed that the stable's preferred running style is up with the pace.

i certainly pay attention..it is very noticeable when he jumps em out in front and when its clear today is a no go..they tend to 'leave them alone'
and its just the sheer quantity of runs they have..you might have form figures that look like this
0112OOO230000000001002000000000000001(40/1)
How can any punter make any sense of that
i heard instead of 'training them at home, he runs them on the course..and of course is'always trying'
also that his stable is a bit of a factory...and i thought Braveheart was alright

never known a trainer so widely disliked for his pattern of running horses and ridiculous results

Do you think Charlie Appleby, Stoute and Gosden runners in hcps bounce back more or less often than MJ runners after they have been beaten 10l or more lto in a hcp?

Both in terms of % strike rates in this scenario and also actual vs expected winners, these 3 trainers are all more likely to return to the winner's enclosure.

enigma

If you look at his hcp runners that were beaten 2l or less (including lto winners) again running in a hcp NTO Stoute,Suroor, Fahey,Charlton,Cumani all are no better at converting with % strike rates or actual/expected winners.

The erratic nature of the runners is not something I've ever been able to demonstrate. It's a common perception but it doesn't hold up, certainly not with hcp runners.

Whether MJ gets the best out of his horses is another matter entirely I know plenty feel he should get better results from the stock he has.

8 st 9lbs or less last 14 days,l l won 8/1 isp,l ,won7/1 isp .+12 isp off 5.

200 horses runs them more than most,hard to win races so obviously the more races they run the more inconsistent they are,look at this years group ones especialy the sprints different winner every race,in years gone by top sprinters,stayers would rack up a sequence of wins doesnt happen very often these days,the so called best yard,best trainer in the world obrien,s horses are even more inconsistent than MJ,S just at a different level

Mark Johnston does something that NO other trainer can do...

He is able to get very exposed horses to improve when it is felt they have reached their ceiling.

Others can do this on occasion obviously but he is able to do it time and time again.

I find that amazing and I am by no means a fan of his - in fact, I go along with the opinion expressed by the OP

saying all that he does my nut in as well, would loved to have bet oriental fox but his last 2 runs were shocking,but his presence in the race made me wary of backing the fav

he,s going to be a bigger nightmare than usual next year,because he,s changed his MO this season he,ll have loads of 3 yr old sprinters next year notoriously hard to place in their 2nd season

He found a good race for oriental fox who clearly has struggled of it's rating this season in hcps. The odds on fav hadn't won a race for over a year, yes it had been running in group company this year but it hadn't actually won a race above yesterdays class. The 2nd fav was stuffed like OF in the cesarewitch, yesterday's race was a race that did have plenty of question marks over the rivals.

*off it's rating

1TP

The relaxing of the 3yo allowance in the 3yo+ hcps will be an interesting factor next season.

Sounds interesting SE
Remind me next season what it is
Yes Dasher btw

3yo's not getting so much weight allowance in hcps against their elders hatters.

Good thread totally agree with the comment above regarding horses exposed suddenly out of the blue flying home.  I laid his 50/1 winner last week 25s in running and lost all that I'd won that weekend and more. 

Never again will I touch a race with his horses in.  Enigma describes him brilliantly. I think he's already stated he has little respect for punters.

The point i was trying to make is that they don't transform half as much as is the perception by many and not in terms of other trainers people seem to think are more reliable.

you layed a big priced winner so you won't touch anything he is involved in now ?

Johnston's great advantage is that he is able to get his horses to race prominently or make the running if necessary. This must be something he trains into them. It's hugely advantageous in mid summer with the small fields you often get. This factor is one of the biggest indictments of his fellow trainers, who are often heard whinging that their star horse lost yet another race due to a lack of pace etc etc. Johnston is proof that the vast majority of horses can be trained to perform from the front, and that therefore the vast majority of trainers are failing to maximise the potential of many of their horses.

Howellsy go back to bed for yourself and stop talking sh ite. Johnston is proof that the vast majority of horses can have form figures of 00000510010000000001.  He is a shocking trainer and should be investigated by the BHA.  The likes of Tony Martin etc are saints compared to him.

Howellsy statement can be backed up by results in the small fields during the summer months, not sure too much of this other bluff on here can.

He says the vast majority of horses can be trained to perform from the front.  Wow ground breaking statement there.  If all horses were trained and ridden like the Johnston horses i dont think anyone would be betting on horse racing.

It is surely better to start a horse off by training it to come from off the pace. It is much easier to train it to win from the front if this fails, than vice versa. Seen many a horse ruined by trainers galloping them flat out.

A horse that is settled should be able to run from anywhere in the field. They are bred to gallop so whilst you are entitled to your opinion I'm not sure I'd give any credence to it.

I want to know primarily how this alleged erratic form of his runners is manifested in fact. If trainers like Gosden and Stoute and many others are scoring more frequently and in fact more than the market expects with horses that were well beat lto, how does this fit?

horrible individual who i despise with a passion wished he would **** off out of racing

Stridingedge, I can tell you from experience, if you start a two year old off to ping the stalls and go from the front, it is a hell of a task to get them settled enough to hold them up in the future.

I'm sure you know best

He ruins his horses and as a vet and a trainer with so many years experience he is utterly clueless.He is also erratic even though there is no tangible evidence of this put forward and his placement of runners is random and scatter gun even though he repeats the same methods year after year to get a lot of his winners.

OK I've got it.Thanks for all your input guys.

I remember when he was interviewed a few years ago when he said that in his view ALL handicap races should be banned. He said that horses should run on their own merits without having additional weight attached to them!

stride, how many in your table won 8 st 9lbs below?

nice too see that one get touched off..go white chocolate..obviously doesnt train em off

Johnston horses are not always easy to evaluate because he runs them frequently and is not scared to lose. I don't see this as a problem though, as punters its up to us to assess each horse. I trust Johnston horses to be trying much more than i do most stables.

as ive said he does my head in as well but as alot of his horses go from the front its basicaly shoite or bust,lots of the unplaced ones could probably have finished placed or further up the field if they,d forfeited a winning chance by been ridden  more conservatively,obviously working out which ones is why our heads are scrambled ,

I'd certainly think the front running style which largely prevails is responsible for horses being beaten further than they may have been. I'd think many feel plenty of his have reached their level but then they go up in trip and extra is found especially with regards the 3yo and even 4yo handicappers.

Coming back to erratic though,very unexposed runners at distance (I have classed as 0 or 1 run at trip) running in hcps after being beaten 2l or less (including won lto), these runners just don't deviate negatively from other high profile trainers or the general sample. They are not more unreliable from run to run in this scenario and anyone who thinks they are needs to state exactly what variables they are basing this on.

Similarly at the other end of the scale more exposed to very exposed runners at distance (5+ runs at trip) running in hcps that were beaten 10l or more last time do not deviate positively from other trainers and unlike the gains from those you may expect with this type of runner M Appleby,S Dixon,P Midgley, D Evans et al, Johnston's runners show big losses to BFSP, they rarely come to life with this profile.

No doubt a few more will appear to say he's a horrible man and his horses are unreadable but will they give me something to get my teeth into that is worth anything in fact.

I'm not trying to get up peoples noses but this general perception on this trainer somehow standing away from others with regards erratic runners just cannot be verified from anything I've studied.

The Flat Earth Society..just signed in i see

Is this the Flat Earth Society that can back up his point of view with fact rather than just ranting ideas that are backed up by nothing more than industry cliche's.

You need to give a lot more than that to be considered credible.

his last 8-9 below 12th oct,won, no qualifies since,

as a vet and a trainer with so many years experience he is utterly clueless

Over 200 winners per season for the last 5 seasons at a strike rate of around 16% would tell you different. How many trainers would like those figures?

I dont like his manner but then he probably wouldnt like me either. He looks and talks to the public like they're a piece of rubbish, Ive seen it with my own eyes at the races.

But can he train racehorses, absolutely. What people on here forget is that he doesnt exist for punters to make a profit out of the game. He's got his Porsche and aeroplane to worry about!!

well perhaps he should take more care of punters.
No punters..no betting...No Racing ..No Porsche..No Aeroplane

Johnston's job is not to take care of punters. He doesn't do anything detrimental to punters. It's up to you and everybody else to evaluate the chance of each horse and bet accordingly.

Yes, Johnston has got a bad attitude towards punters and punting. He virtually said some weeks ago that people should go racing to enjoy watching the horses and should not get involved with the punting side of it. What an idiot!

allways trying?
anyone know his goodwood wins to runs compaired to his season wins to runs

Last 5 Seasons - by Racecourse

OVERALL GB FLAT -- PROFIT/LOSS ----- 2YO Only -- PROFIT/LOSS
       
Ascot     25-274     9%     -63.47     5-66     8%     -45.88
Ayr     18-158     11%     -90.00     9-69     13%     -45.43
Bath     14-63     22%     -0.67     3-17     18%     -7.17
Beverley     65-282     23%     +15.27     13-79     16%     -33.81
Brighton     12-81     15%     -23.52     3-29     10%     -21.61
Carlisle     23-138     17%     -8.93     7-41     17%     +3.58
Catterick     29-142     20%     -34.96     11-63     17%     -34.61
Chelmsford (A.W)     24-145     17%     -25.71     11-51     22%     +13.79
Chepstow     7-37     19%     -3.90     0-9     —     -9.00
Chester     40-276     14%     -29.72     15-78     19%     -13.55
Doncaster     18-197     9%     -111.16     8-77     10%     -36.74
Epsom     16-141     11%     -59.25     6-30     20%     -10.75
Ffos Las     1-19     5%     -16.13     1-6     17%     -3.13
Folkestone     3-7     43%     +2.41     0-0     —     +0.00
Goodwood     46-280     16%     +116.12     16-81     20%     +7.49
Hamilton     51-224     23%     -12.37     17-65     26%     +15.11
Haydock     34-268     13%     -34.42     10-86     12%     -50.13
Kempton (A.W)     41-349     12%     -134.06     12-95     13%     -44.85
Leicester     18-141     13%     -50.22     8-58     14%     -13.34
Lingfield     3-37     8%     -20.75     1-11     9%     -4.00
Lingfield (A.W)     60-413     15%     -139.21     8-52     15%     +4.00
Musselburgh     55-268     21%     +1.15     19-77     25%     +15.96
Newbury     12-94     13%     -20.63     7-38     18%     -4.13
Newcastle     12-85     14%     -25.13     5-33     15%     -5.75
Newcastle (A.W)     5-37     14%     -9.64     3-23     13%     -12.64
Newmarket     31-252     12%     +24.21     14-90     16%     -9.27
Newmarket (July)     45-235     19%     +49.14     10-68     15%     -33.29
Nottingham     16-136     12%     -53.29     10-62     16%     -3.79
Pontefract     32-193     17%     -65.21     9-59     15%     -33.98
Redcar     14-104     13%     -29.27     3-36     8%     -26.80
Ripon     35-201     17%     +8.83     11-50     22%     -9.02
Salisbury     3-28     11%     -11.00     3-12     25%     +5.00
Sandown     9-108     8%     -71.79     5-31     16%     -13.59
Southwell (A.W)     48-200     24%     +2.35     8-34     24%     -14.11
Thirsk     9-112     8%     -62.85     4-36     11%     -21.35
Warwick     3-19     16%     -7.63     2-4     50%     +2.38
Wetherby     2-5     40%     +8.10     1-2     50%     +0.10
Windsor     8-63     13%     -23.28     3-16     19%     -2.40
Wolverhampton (A.W)     103-554     19%     -125.66     13-117     11%     -71.72
Yarmouth     15-83     18%     +51.05     4-19     21%     +59.73
York     14-258     5%     -131.40     6-102     6%     -62.90        
      PROFIT/LOSS

Ascot     25-274     9%     -63.47     5-66     8%     -45.88
Ayr     18-158     11%     -90.00     9-69     13%     -45.43
Bath     14-63     22%     -0.67     3-17     18%     -7.17
Beverley     65-282     23%     +15.27     13-79     16%     -33.81
Brighton     12-81     15%     -23.52     3-29     10%     -21.61
Carlisle     23-138     17%     -8.93     7-41     17%     +3.58
Catterick     29-142     20%     -34.96     11-63     17%     -34.61
Chelmsford (A.W)     24-145     17%     -25.71     11-51     22%     +13.79
Chepstow     7-37     19%     -3.90     0-9     —     -9.00
Chester     40-276     14%     -29.72     15-78     19%     -13.55
Doncaster     18-197     9%     -111.16     8-77     10%     -36.74
Epsom     16-141     11%     -59.25     6-30     20%     -10.75
Ffos Las     1-19     5%     -16.13     1-6     17%     -3.13
Folkestone     3-7     43%     +2.41     0-0     —     +0.00
Goodwood     46-280     16%     +116.12     16-81     20%     +7.49
Hamilton     51-224     23%     -12.37     17-65     26%     +15.11
Haydock     34-268     13%     -34.42     10-86     12%     -50.13
Kempton (A.W)     41-349     12%     -134.06     12-95     13%     -44.85
Leicester     18-141     13%     -50.22     8-58     14%     -13.34
Lingfield     3-37     8%     -20.75     1-11     9%     -4.00
Lingfield (A.W)     60-413     15%     -139.21     8-52     15%     +4.00
Musselburgh     55-268     21%     +1.15     19-77     25%     +15.96
Newbury     12-94     13%     -20.63     7-38     18%     -4.13
Newcastle     12-85     14%     -25.13     5-33     15%     -5.75
Newcastle (A.W)     5-37     14%     -9.64     3-23     13%     -12.64
Newmarket     31-252     12%     +24.21     14-90     16%     -9.27
Newmarket (July)     45-235     19%     +49.14     10-68     15%     -33.29
Nottingham     16-136     12%     -53.29     10-62     16%     -3.79
Pontefract     32-193     17%     -65.21     9-59     15%     -33.98
Redcar     14-104     13%     -29.27     3-36     8%     -26.80
Ripon     35-201     17%     +8.83     11-50     22%     -9.02
Salisbury     3-28     11%     -11.00     3-12     25%     +5.00
Sandown     9-108     8%     -71.79     5-31     16%     -13.59
Southwell (A.W)     48-200     24%     +2.35     8-34     24%     -14.11
Thirsk     9-112     8%     -62.85     4-36     11%     -21.35
Warwick     3-19     16%     -7.63     2-4     50%     +2.38
Wetherby     2-5     40%     +8.10     1-2     50%     +0.10
Windsor     8-63     13%     -23.28     3-16     19%     -2.40
Wolverhampton (A.W)     103-554     19%     -125.66     13-117     11%     -71.72
Yarmouth     15-83     18%     +51.05     4-19     21%     +59.73
York     14-258     5%     -131.40     6-102     6%     -62.90

^  It reformatted twice.  -

from Left ...

OVERALL:  Wins - Runners - Percentage - Profit/Loss ... Then - Same for 2YO ONLY

Juste Pour Nous in the first at Donny tomorrow - cumulatively beaten 136.25 lengths in last 3 outings, last of 8 the time before that - poorest runs all over 12f,now back over 10f and 3lbs lower than when 2nd over CD back in April. Fanning rides even though Johnston has two other runners in the race.

Can't back it because it's run shocking races three times in succession, but just the sort of his that bolts up inexplicably i.e. he's not asked to explain and does n't volunteer an explanation.

would you back it at 999-1?  If so we know what you are and are just haggling about the price.

not even looked at the prices on here, not my mo - merely highighting the horses profile although to be fair Fanning may be riding because it's easier for him to do the weight...

2 runners tomorrow 8st 9lbs below ,donny newbury.

Rease, I haven't looked at he Johnston horse you refer to, but your quote "just the sort of his that bolts up inexplicably" would make no sense if indeed this horse were to bolt up based on what you have stated.
A horse that can't win because it is too high in the handicap, runs over a trip which it doesn't get, thus well beaten, and thus falls down to a handicap mark that makes it competitive. Now races over it's correct trip, possibly more suited to going/track etc. This is the very basis of reading form. Nothing inexplicable at all.

To be honest he is a figure head, what does anyone actually think he does??  With circa 240 horses that amounts to spending 2 mins per horse "training" them.

He basically puts a team in place, they do all the day to day, someone else does all the entries, someone else does the schoozing with owners, he has a team of vets.  He keeps the arabs sweet, goes the the races and perhaps takes an interest in the top 10% of his horses.

His raw figures and strike rate of 16% are pretty good.  However other stables seem to have horses slowly build form with improved runs and then slowly go off form as time progresses and their rating creeps up or they get in better races.   It is the in out nature of performances that irks punters.  There seems to be lots of examples of horses finishing last, then a week later, in a similar race it was win hard held, or vice-versa.

I personally dont know if it just seems common with this stable due to the volume of runners he has or whether the stats support he has a higher proportion of these types.

To be honest he is a figure head, what does anyone actually think he does??  With circa 240 horses that amounts to spending 2 mins per horse "training" them.

He basically puts a team in place, they do all the day to day, someone else does all the entries, someone else does the schoozing with owners, he has a team of vets.  He keeps the arabs sweet, goes the the races and perhaps takes an interest in the top 10% of his horses.

His raw figures and strike rate of 16% are pretty good.  However other stables seem to have horses slowly build form with improved runs and then slowly go off form as time progresses and their rating creeps up or they get in better races.   It is the in out nature of performances that irks punters.  There seems to be lots of examples of horses finishing last, then a week later, in a similar race it was win hard held, or vice-versa.

I personally dont know if it just seems common with this stable due to the volume of runners he has or whether the stats support he has a higher proportion of these types.

Oct 22, 2016 -- 9:37AM, efisio. wrote:

Rease, I haven't looked at he Johnston horse you refer to, but your quote "just the sort of his that bolts up inexplicably" would make no sense if indeed this horse were to bolt up based on what you have stated.A horse that can't win because it is too high in the handicap, runs over a trip which it doesn't get, thus well beaten, and thus falls down to a handicap mark that makes it competitive. Now races over it's correct trip, possibly more suited to going/track etc. This is the very basis of reading form. Nothing inexplicable at all.

I see your point but the 'inexplicable' bit is that the last 3 runs have been beyond woeful - beaten too far for it to be merely down to the trip, I note first time blinkers today too, will watch with interest.

It's a horse that's looked blatantly out of sort and even out of love with galloping Rease IMO

If you take out mdns since 2008

MJ horse won lto or beaten less than 2l have shown a profit at BFSP of 2% after max comm

if you look at those from this group that have never run at the trip (distance exposure is a massive factor with this yard)  the return to BFSP is 16.8%.

So horses that ran well lto outside of mdn company (ok you might not agree with my variable parameters but had to use something) have actually proved to be far from erratic for the punter with regards their value and if you look at the mroe unexposed ones at the trip this is enhanced further.

For an erratic yard that apparently has so many that don't back up run to run this would be very strange indeed.

Similarly as stated earlier on this thread horses well beaten last time out (I classed as 10l+) do not have a bias or extra propensity from this yard to bounce back out of the blue. Of course some will but If you want to see trainers who really do this pretty well there are a few listed earlier in thread on one of my posts, I've found no evidence that supports this with Johnston's runners.

* I should have clarified the group i was looking at was aged 3yo+, I'm not a massive follower of 2yo's regards punting.

This is certainly not supposed to be a vindication of backing all of his older horses that finished within the distances I've stated, but merely to refute the idea that there is some erratic streak that is to the detriment of punters with this yard of horses either bouncing back from nowhere or not enough backing up a good run lto.

If anyone wants to use their own data and parameters to suggest otherwise I'd be interested to see it.

Now he has a heavily-backed FAV, Comedy School - in a 2yo Listed Race ...

- and it is the First horse to hit 1000.0 'in-running'

An absolute nightmare 'trainer'.

comedy school

Comedy trainer more like. Pathetic run that no punter could have predicted.

yeah the appleby horse ran poorly too but don't mention it.

a class 3 winner into a listed event at the back end of the season

people will be in tears when this one is winning a decent class 2 hcp over 8-10f as a 3yo

a 78 rated winner where many of the others can't get into the race but guess what let's go straight to the MJ horse

Any other horses in the race backed from 5/1-2/1 and bolted up the last twice?

Who backs them?

Charlie!

Dawaa

previous race 27L last of 12

Op spot on. Some on here defending the indefensible I'm afraid. As I've said before, they win when they want to win. We are but vulturous voyeurs to this ceaseless banquet.

If Dawaa was typical or the strike rate for horses btn 10l or more or 20l or more lto was significantly different from other trainers no one would be defending anything.

But as always on this forum a couple of examples come along and it's all the proof needed for some on this forum that the yard is a nightmare.

Oct 22, 2016 -- 1:35PM, stridingedge wrote:

It's a horse that's looked blatantly out of sort and even out of love with galloping Rease IMOIf you take out mdns since 2008MJ horse won lto or beaten less than 2l have shown a profit at BFSP of 2% after max comm

yes,striding good stuff -  I posted on a whim last night when I was studying the race - I've not read through the thread in full but will do so and take a look at your data points.

I do find his horses difficult to evaluate in the big field middle distance handicaps - I think because there are often multiple runners, they tend to run a lot and are not consistent (the last two points are probably related) - that may be at least partly perception but is also borne out of previous experience.

Horses in hcps like Dawaa today that were beaten 20l+ lto for this yard strike at 7.4% if anyone wants to do some actual research to see how this fits in with other trainers they would see that this notion these suddenly revive more often than they should after a defeat like this is simply not true. I can keep saying it and others can keep moaning every time a horse with poor lto from wins.If you are looking out for something and have a pre determined view you will always look for the occasions that back up your stance even when the facts over all dictate otherwise.

Since BFSP the Betfair market has predicted 53 winners for these horses btn like this lto from 650 and before today 48 had won.They aren't winning at any significant rate above other trainers and they aren't winning above the market expectation. There are many more runners that fit this category than many trainers due to the bulk of runners and I'm sure it's this fact which often gets stuck in peoples minds as though the % rates are not extraordinary in any way, there are far more runners making the occurrence seem more frequent.

My post Probably a little over stated on reflection. It was Marsham star that cost me today. Had andock rolling up with king of Naples and a few others. Not cost me massively, but it's uncanny the number of times one of his has popped up in a race, at a price, where from a form point of view the race has largely otherwise worked out to the pound.

Large number of punters essentially saying the same, but not about many other trainers. My view on it is largely observational and anecdotal and not based on stats, but it seems to happen time and again, and has been doing so for a long time.

The difficulty in assessment of this stable is the undoubted lack of consistency, which can't always be attributed to other factors.

Mark Johnston Nursery runners (NOT first 3 in betting):-


1/1/13> 20/9/16:  2-186 (1%) ...winners @ 7/1 & 15/2


21/9/16> 22/10/16:  6-25 (24%) ROIBF + 407 (..inc 50/1)