Advent of Alpha Day 16: Games Trainers & Jockeys Like to Play

This is the last of the “Games X like to play”, articles. It should tie together some ideas from previous days.

On day 13 I talked about the fact the participant mindset - particularly with animals - is under-valued. On day 14 I talked about training facilities often not being considered, despite them directly contributing to event preparedness and suitability. On day 15 I talked about how patrons can cause daft decisions because of their patronage. But the last group also have opaque interests too: trainers, managers, coaches, and in the case of racing, jockeys.

In theory, their interests and mindset are clear: they want to win. Winning is why they got into the game.

Except for many, winning isn’t key. Surviving is.

Of course the top trainers are thinking about championships - and knowing that is sometimes useful to understand when it comes to thinking about ante post bets and where they might place horses to optimise prize money, a game the Skeltons played beautifully this Summer - but many are not even starting to think about winning because they know they’re crowded out.

Some just want to keep their owners happy. Others aren’t quite sure they’ve figured a horse out yet. Some aren’t getting advice on what to do better, so aren’t getting winners, even when they should.

It’s hard work, running a stables. It’s hard work travelling every day along the UK’s motorways to ride slow horses in the hope you can feed your family.

I don’t believe the games these people play are unscrupulous or unfair. I think unscrupulous or unfair practice comes from these corners of the game, but I’m thinking more about them trying to find some easy wins by playing with the handicapper, going for lower grade races or just taking a horse to Ffos Las because the owner lives down the road so at least it’ll keep training fees coming in.

I am curious though how much of this gets priced into the market, because I’ve never, ever heard or read punditry that said “this trainer hasn’t had a winner in 75 days, so I think this horse is placed here just to give them a bit of optimism and break a losing streak”. Its rare I hear or see of an outsider being described as a speculative plot until after a lot of money has started to move the markets, but I think there are stables that are clearly gambling stables: their 16/1 chances win a fair bit more often one time in seventeen.

How many trainers do you think are running horses not for a win - because that is beyond them - but for a healthy bit of prize money and to let their owners have a free lunch on their owners’ badge? I reckon 40%+ of entries are more likely to be plotted on that basis than on hoping to win. Is that priced in? Can you spot those little-known trainers in the market and find alpha? Maybe.

And if you think trainers in horse racing are the only ones playing games, think for a moment what it’s like at a top football club where every word and action you make in public sight is reported on. Insane pressure.

Worse, imagine what it’s like to make a living as a manager or coach at a lower league club. Championship managers and those in lower leagues are made of stuff I can’t imagine ever having.

I suspect in some cases their motivation on a Monday morning for the week ahead isn’t about winning - because they know that’s too big an ask - but about surviving, and making sure the players in their care don’t quit, that the fans turn up the week after, and that the owners don’t have ideas about reality. None of which are aligned perfectly to winning, and where you might make very different decisions about training, line-ups and tactics in the game than if you were to gun for the win.

“Damage limitation” is the phrase I look out for. What does it really mean to a team, and the prices on the game. High scoring antics are likely out. Defensive games more likely, corner markets, yellow and red card markets, they will all start to look different.