BRITISH 2yo RACING


Trainer String Quality -
Data and Discussion




Article 14_001_2
7th January, 2014



1. INTRODUCTION

This is mostly an informational article which looks at the relative quality of the 2yo strings that British trainers have had in recent years. The quality of the horses being measured by expressed performance on the track using B2yoR Estimates. Other measures, for example Prize Money earned, do not have the same direct link between results and ability of the individual,

While preparing the Quality data it seemed natural to extend the study, and the scope of this article, by adding the details of how much the Sales bought 2yos cost to acquire. This then leads into some of the examples and discussion about trainers' performance in the later sections of this article. Which do well with the quality of horses they have and which do not. Also related points such as how strongly oriented a stable is towards juvenile racing. Are the below average returns for some trainers due to a failing in some area or because they use the 2yo season to set horses up for their 3yo+ careers. Interesting points such as which trainers have declining resources and who has increasing buying power can also be identified.

With the addition of the Sales Price information it also became clear that some background would need to be added about that area to have chance of interpreting the results fairly. If there was a clean, linear, relationship between price paid at the Sales and likely performance rating range then further comment would not be needed. That link, if it exists as anything much beyond a small signal at the lowest price ranges, is much muddier and definitely non-linear.

The B2yoR Estimates have been reworked for the 2007 and 2010-13 seasons so those five years are used for the study. Only horses which have run at least two times in Britain as 2yos are included. For example, some trainers have long tails of 2yo debuts runs in late season who will not run again until they are 3yos. Many of those debuts will be 'Educational Intros' in some form and wil not allow a reasonable assessment of the horse's ability to be formed.

The following section provides a full example of all of the data lines produced by the study for trainer Kevin Ryan to explain the information fully. Mr Ryan produces solid, around average or above, results from his juvenile string while being well below the top rank in purchasing power. His 26,250 Sales Price median in 2013, i.e. for his 2yos of that year, ranking him 62nd out of 232 trainers. His buying level was still comfortably above the Median across all trainers in 2013 which was close to 10,500. The usual split with trainers showing up with the bulk of the purchasing power being concentrated in the top 20% or so of them with a long 'tail' of smaller strings. A key question is how well that Top 20% do in terms of real Performance ratings given their access to more, and higher priced, horses. Conversely, which trainers in the less well funded yards consistently produce average or better racecourse ratings results.

Back to Top of Page



2. DATA TABLE EXAMPLE

The table below shows the output for all data lines for trainer Kevin Ryan. The text following the table explains the information in each column of the table. Similar tables for the Top 58 trainers, by number of runners in 2013, are listed Alphabetically in the Appendix to this article.

K. A. Ryan
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 42.6 43.0 188 31,216 25,510 136 3 4 10 25 37 44 39 17 9 0 0
1013 BUY 45.4 46.0 136 31,216 25,510 136 1 2 3 18 27 31 30 15 9 0 0
2007 ALL 45.0 45.0 59 55,833 41,242 42 2 0 2 8 10 14 9 11 3 0 0
2010 ALL 41.8 43.0 41 25,194 23,100 31 1 2 2 3 10 8 11 2 2 0 0
2011 ALL 45.4 49.0 52 24,933 25,100 36 2 0 3 6 8 8 13 10 2 0 0
2012 ALL 40.4 41.0 52 40,271 25,935 36 0 2 1 11 10 15 9 2 2 0 0
2013 ALL 42.8 42.0 43 33,850 26,250 33 0 0 4 5 9 13 6 3 3 0 0

Table 1 - All Data Lines for Kevin Ryan

The 'Year' column identifies which Year, or set of Years, the Data Line relates to. The B2yoR ratings, the Estimates or [Est]s, have been reworked to the same baseline for 2007 & 2010-13 and there are individual lines for each of those five seasons. Where years are grouped together the last two digits of the first and last year of the set are used. Therefore '1013' indicates a summary of the four years 2010 to 2013. Note that the figures in these grouped lines are not averages of the average figures for each individual year. They work on the full set of underlying data to produce the summary data.

'Type' refers to what set of 2yos are included in the summary. Remember that as a starting point only 2yos that ran at least twice in Britain as juveniles are included. The type 'All' equates to this whole group of qualifying 2yos. Other Type codes are then used to denote sub-sets of this full group. 'Buy' refers to the sub-set of qualifying 2yos that were purchased at the Sales and the Total numbers later in the Data Line will indicate the size of the sub-set. This allows a check to be made on how reliant a trainer is on Sales Puchases compared to other sources such as Owner Bred horses, leases from Studs and so forth.

The next two columns labelled 'MEAN RTG' and 'MEDN RTG' refer to averages calculated on the same underlying data. The Mean Rating ('MEAN RTG') refers to the arithmetic mean of the Best B2yoR Estimate of all of the qualifying 2yos in that Data Line. The Median Rating ('MEDN RTG) is the Median figure for the same set of best Estimates. The Mean and Median figures are usually close to each other for these Ratings and 3-4 points difference a 'big' divergence. The bounded nature of equine performance figures assisting this. Horses are not going to run to a rating of 250, for example, and imbalance the averages calculated.

To give an indication of the ranges the 2013 Median Ratings figures for trainers ranged from 68.0 down to low negative values. However, the four Medians above 53.0 were all special cases and 53.0 would be a good rule-of-thumb figure to use as the upper end of the Medians achieved for a trainer running a full string of 2yos in Britain. Aidan O'Brien, for example, had a Median Rating of 64.0 in 2013 but only ran a selection of his very best 2yos in Britain and in our higher class, or very valuable, races. The Median of all the Trainers' Median Ratings in 2013 was 31.0 points. But, that reflects the long tail of smaller strings and larger and better funded stables, such as Kevin Ryan's, should be rating in the 40 to 53 range. The figures in Table 1. show that Mr Ryan is comfortably in that target area and is also at the lower end of Sales Median values for those larger stables.

The 'TOT RTD' column gives the Total Number of Qualifying 2yos in that Data Line. The larger the number then the bigger the Sample the Averages are based on. A larger sample being preferred because it is more likely to reflect a real 'Signal' rather than just natural variation that might occur with small strings of juveniles. Chris Mason as an example only had one qualifying horse in 2013 and had a 'Median' of 57.0. Clearly, you would stake nothing on him being able to repeat that Median Rating regularly. Whereas with Mr. Ryan you would have a pretty good idea what to expect in 2014, assuming nothing fundamental has changed in the equine resources he has available to him.

As a cross-check the 'TOT RTD' figure for the '1013' line should be the same as totalling the figures for each of the four individual years 2010 to 2013. The difference between the 'TOT RTD' in the 'All' and the 'Buy' figures for the '1013 summary lines shows how many of the trainer's 2yo passed through the Sales Ring. In Mr. Ryan's case this is 136 of 188 and around 72%. Compare this to Richard Hannon at 73%, Mark Johnston at 54% and Roger Charlton at 26%. It is interesting to think about the good and bad points about being too reliant on purchased or owner bred horses in light of those variations. Any differences between the Median Ratings for the Whole 2yo Group and those bought at sales might also indicate where a stable's strengths are. Whether that be Buying or Training, or Both, or Neither. A subject lightly considered in Section 5. below.

The two columns 'Sale Mean' and 'Sale Medn' relate to averages of the Sales Price of the 2yos bought at Auction who ran duing that year or period. To make the point clear the monetary figure average relates to puchases made for yearling the previous Autumn or 2yos at the early season 'Breeze-up Sales'. The two figures are the arithmetic Mean and the Median of the qualifying purchased juveniles. Note that the figures in the column are in Pounds Sterling (GBP). Sales Prices in Euros (), US Dollars ($US) and the archaic Guineas (Gns, gn = 1.05) are converted to Sterling before the average calculations.

Note that the Mean and Median figures can show more variation between them than for the Race Performance ratings. The lowest price recorded in the study was 400 and the highest approching 800,000 which gives a scale much wider than the roughtly -10 to 90 for possible rating Estimates. Section 3.2 below considers the ranges of Sales Median figures but note that the Median across all 323 trainers in the 2010-13 period was just under 10,000 sterling.

The 'BUY TOT' column is the number of 2yos that were bought at the sales for the period the Data Line covers. Thus, in the lines coded 'Buy' this figure will be the same as the 'TOT RTD' number because all 2yos not purchased at Auctions are stripped out.

The final 11 Columns then show the Distribution of the qualifying 2yos across the set of Best Estimates Groups. The B2yoR scale allows negative Ratings and at the top end Ratings above 90 are rare (only Frankel and Dream Ahead in recent years). The positive Estimate ratings are grouped into 10 point blocks (1-10, 11-20, etc) and each qualifying 2yo is then assigned to a group by the Best Estimate it recorded as a juvenile. This section of Kevin Ryan's Data Table is repeated below to show how his horses are split up across the Best Estimate groups.


K. A. Ryan
YEAR TYPE < 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 3 4 10 25 37 44 39 17 9 0 0
1013 BUY 1 2 3 18 27 31 30 15 9 0 0
2007 ALL 2 0 2 8 10 14 9 11 3 0 0
2010 ALL 1 2 2 3 10 8 11 2 2 0 0
2011 ALL 2 0 3 6 8 8 13 10 2 0 0
2012 ALL 0 2 1 11 10 15 9 2 2 0 0
2013 ALL 0 0 4 5 9 13 6 3 3 0 0


Figure 1 - 2yos Best [Est] Rating Distribution Data for Kevin Ryan and overall Distribution 2010-13

The colouration of the columns requires a brief explanation. The Darkest Green column is for the '41-50' Best Estimate range Group. This Group has the largest number of 2yos in it within the overall distribution of all 2yos (see the Bar graph alongside the Ryan table in Figure 1). The two lighter Green columns either side are the next most numerous in terms of members followed by the Darker Grey cells either side. The Bar Chart showing the Distribution of Best Estimates for all qualifying 2yos is next to the Ryan table and clicking on the Chart will link to the full size version.

The colouration in the table is aimed at showing how the figures given for the subject trainer relate to the overall distribution for Best Estimates. Mr Ryan is a good trainer producing solid performance results with his 2yos and his figures balance out either side of his '41-50' group maximum in a typical manner for his type of record. Trainers with above or below average results will show up where their figures are not balanced around the usual maximum group. Try looking at the Richard Hannon figures in the table in Section 5.5 to get a feel for what the top 2yo handler can achieve. A trainer who buys well at the sales and then extracts close to the last possible rating point out of every 2yo in his stable.

Back to Top of Page


3. TOP 20 LISTS

The following two sub-sections show 2010-13 summary Data lines for the Top 20 Trainers with the proviso that they must have had at least 5 qualifying 2yos run for them during that period. The first sub-section shows the Top 20 for the highest Median Ratings of their 2yo strings. The second gives the Top 20 when the Data Lines are sorted by the Sales Median figures of their 2yos that were bought at public Auctions. The Tables assist further in gaining an understanding of the range and 'shape' of high results and prices and therefore to be able to interpret the individual results a trainer achieves. In both cases the sub-section contain general notes about the results and their use. A good question to ponder is how much overlap is their between the two Top 20s? Further, is there any worthwhile correlation visible between Prices paid and Ratings produced?


3.1 Trainers by 2yo String Median Rating

The table below is ordered by the Median Rating of the qualifying 2yos for the period 2010-13. Note that the lines are of the 'All' type which means it includes the whole set of 2yos that ran for the trainer, wherever they were sourced from, i.e. Sales, Owner Breds, leases, and so on.

TRAINER YEAR MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
A. P. O'Brien 1013 70.8 64.0 18 414,799 378,000 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 6 6 3 0
I. A. Wood 1013 47.0 55.0 9 22,943 22,050 8 0 1 0 1 0 2 3 2 0 0 0
S. B. Suroor 1013 52.7 53.0 127 158,487 126,000 40 0 0 1 6 12 31 40 29 7 1 0
M. A. Jarvis 1013 49.4 52.5 16 121,409 97,125 10 0 0 2 0 2 3 5 3 1 0 0
J. Noseda 1013 50.1 51.0 62 99,657 70,264 44 0 0 2 5 8 14 18 11 2 2 0
M. A. Zarooni 1013 49.0 51.0 176 176,678 141,750 59 1 0 5 12 26 39 65 20 8 0 0
B. W. Hills 1013 50.3 50.0 74 58,974 49,150 48 0 1 3 3 7 24 16 15 5 0 0
Ed Walker 1013 42.6 50.0 19 53,594 42,000 16 1 0 2 0 3 4 6 2 1 0 0
P. W. Chapple-Hyam 1013 47.7 49.5 56 37,295 27,300 33 1 1 0 4 11 12 13 12 2 0 0
H. R. A. Cecil 1013 49.0 49.0 38 101,552 61,813 12 0 0 1 2 7 12 9 5 1 0 1
R. Hannon 1013 48.3 49.0 575 53,401 41,475 422 6 9 16 43 77 155 127 108 29 5 0
D. H. Brown 1013 44.5 48.0 45 48,535 30,000 29 2 0 0 8 6 11 8 8 1 1 0
J. H. M. Gosden 1013 47.9 48.0 144 125,220 89,250 57 0 0 4 7 27 45 35 21 5 0 0
R. A. Mills 1013 44.4 48.0 23 29,871 26,000 16 1 0 0 1 4 11 3 3 0 0 0
A. M. Balding 1013 44.8 47.0 119 48,945 38,325 78 2 4 3 8 20 34 31 13 4 0 0
C. B. Hills 1013 44.2 47.0 91 66,526 45,000 55 0 2 8 7 16 30 13 11 3 1 0
L. M. Cumani 1013 43.9 46.5 56 84,857 66,675 30 1 2 2 5 6 23 11 4 2 0 0
M. Stoute 1013 46.7 46.5 88 197,050 187,075 21 0 1 2 5 20 33 12 10 5 0 0
G. A. Butler 1013 44.7 46.0 19 36,563 29,762 11 0 0 1 2 2 9 4 0 1 0 0
E. S. McMahon 1013 45.1 45.5 54 20,544 19,500 37 0 0 4 6 10 15 8 8 2 1 0

Table 2 - All 2010-13 Data for Top 20 Trainers ordered by String Median [Est] Rating

A general comment on the names in the Table are that they testify to more change than would be expected. The Top Ranks of established trainers feeling as if it is settled over long periods. But, Michael Jarvis and Henry Cecil have died and Ian Wood, in second place on a small number of runners, no longer trains. Barry (BW) Hills has retired and passed on his stable to son Charlie, who is also on the list. Trainer Richard Hannon retired on December 31st 2013, and has passed his stable onto his son, another Richard. Added to those moves both Mahmood Zarooni (8 years) and Gerard Butler (5 years) began long bans from training in 2013 for their use of doping products and injections, with the activities of both being described as 'reckless'. Interesting times.

Leaving aside special cases such as Aidan O'Brien and Ian Wood the range of Median Ratings runs from 53 down to 46 which sets a good benchmark for what range the 'Best' returns will be in. Of the others above 50.0 then Maktoum family funding is the most notable link. Suroor & Zarooni training solely for Godolphin, or it's second division Marmoon Racing which some 2yos got demoted to. Michael Jarvis' 16 juveniles included 11 from the Maktoum family or their Emirates associates.

One point to note is that the Suroor and Zarooni returns are 'fixed' to some extent. The Maktoum family breed and buy thousands of horses each year and only a selection of better types of that total will be placed under the Godolphin banner. Even then, if once in training the 2yos do not show a certain level of ability they will never run in the Godolphin colours. Either being sold on or demoted to run in other Maktoum family ownership colours for different trainers, Sheikh Mohammed's sons strings for example. Which means the Godolphin returns are also a 'Special Case' because of the selectivity.

The obvious example to compare them with is Richard Hannon who sits high in the list with a 49.0 rating. But, there is no selectivity going on with Hannon other than in choosing what to buy at the sales. Once a 2yo is in training with him it will almost certainly run for him no matter what quality. If a 2yo only capable of winning a seller or having some educational runs to be ready to win a weak nursery or claimer on the all-weather during the winter then it still gets into the Hannon record. Nothing is hidden in the back of the 'Shop'.

It is good to see younger trainers whom a positive opinion has been formed of in their short careers high up in this listing. The anecdotal feeling that develops while watching racing day after day, but never checked while on the treadmill, being backed up by some data. Ed Walker has made a good impression in his three seasons with a licence and improved his overall returns, total wins and Strike Rate as examples, each year. James Tate is just out of the Top 20 on a Median of 45.0 but with a Median at 50.0 for the 31 sales bought 2yos he has run in his two seasons training. His overall return being dragged down by the Owner Breds he has to run.

Having your record dragged down by having to run owner breds, of all shapes and sizes, brings up another point to consider. Who are the 'Top' trainers who are missing from the list? To pick a few names out, Mark Johnston returns 42.5 in 57th place. As with the low Strike Rate he maintains, for a trainer of his standing, you suspect that being a second level trainer for the Maktoums and handling a lot of their lesser home breds limits his performance if bulking up the quantities. Brian Meehan? Down in 36th on a reasonable 45.0 but his record dragged down by a very poor 2013 which seems to have coincided with his personal problems. It will be interesting to see how fares in 2014. Richard Fahey is 44th on the list at 44.5 but based on low Sales Median and the results still good.

A final item to note from the table is posing the question over how well the Sales Median figures match with the Median Ratings. Are the Sales Median figures mostly from the Top level of those figures (see Table in next sub-section)? Is there any sign of a progressive lessening of the Sales figure from Top to Bottom of this list? On the plus side you could say that some of the very highest figures are at the Top. But, as noted before both O'Brien's and the Godolphin figues are selected runners only and therefore special cases. We could also say that a good number of the trainers with the highest Sales Median returns ae not in this Table at all.

On the positive side you could also say that all twenty on the list are comfortably above the overall Median Rating figure for all trainers of around 10,000. But, that feels like comparing the 'Premier League', and the better funded end of the Championship, with the lower league and non-League stables. There ought to be a wider spread and, as the table shows, even those in the Top 20 are well mixed in terms of Rating Results to funding level. The positive correlation between Median Rating and Sales Median is rather weak and a good number of trainers are getting returns above their funding level, and a good number failing to reach a solid level despite the backing. A good question in these cases is what is the split between Sales buying performance and Training ability, or the lack thereof.


3.2 Trainers by Sale Buys Median Price

The table below is ordered by the Sales Median Price of the 2yos bought at Auction for the period 2010-13. Note that the Data Lines are of the 'Buy' type which means it includes only those purchased 2yos and none from any other source.

TRAINER YEAR MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
A. P. O'Brien 1013 64.7 64.0 6 414,799 378,000 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 1 0 0
M. Stoute 1013 48.2 49.0 21 197,050 187,075 21 0 0 1 1 1 11 3 3 1 0 0
C. Appleby 1013 46.0 47.0 10 190,121 173,402 10 0 0 0 1 2 3 3 1 0 0 0
M. A. Zarooni 1013 51.4 53.0 59 176,678 141,750 59 0 0 0 3 8 12 26 7 3 0 0
S. B. Suroor 1013 56.1 59.0 40 158,487 126,000 40 0 0 0 1 3 7 13 14 2 0 0
Roger Varian 1013 50.9 49.5 26 119,322 105,000 26 0 0 0 0 10 3 6 4 3 0 0
M. A. Jarvis 1013 50.7 53.5 10 121,409 97,125 10 0 0 1 0 2 2 2 2 1 0 0
J. H. M. Gosden 1013 46.2 48.0 57 125,220 89,250 57 0 0 3 4 11 16 13 9 1 0 0
J. Noseda 1013 53.5 52.0 44 99,657 70,264 44 0 0 1 1 4 10 16 8 2 2 0
D. R. Lanigan 1013 40.7 39.0 16 97,902 67,685 16 1 0 0 1 7 4 2 0 0 1 0
L. M. Cumani 1013 47.2 49.5 30 84,857 66,675 30 0 2 1 0 2 13 8 3 1 0 0
W. J. Haggas 1013 45.5 45.5 68 74,791 63,000 68 0 2 1 8 10 25 11 7 4 0 0
H. R. A. Cecil 1013 48.8 48.5 12 101,552 61,813 12 0 0 0 1 2 4 2 3 0 0 0
E. A. L. Dunlop 1013 43.3 43.0 59 89,343 57,750 59 0 1 0 9 18 12 12 6 1 0 0
B. W. Hills 1013 53.1 53.5 48 58,974 49,150 48 0 1 1 2 2 14 11 13 4 0 0
M. Prescott 1013 38.0 37.5 26 62,865 49,135 26 1 1 4 5 4 3 3 3 2 0 0
M. L. W. Bell 1013 38.6 40.0 55 63,376 48,765 55 2 3 1 10 14 12 9 2 2 0 0
B. J. Meehan 1013 48.0 47.5 128 61,321 47,775 128 2 0 5 7 16 42 33 13 10 0 0
A. J. Perrett 1013 39.9 43.0 27 66,133 47,250 27 0 0 4 2 7 6 8 0 0 0 0
C. B. Hills 1013 45.5 46.0 55 66,526 45,000 55 0 0 4 4 13 17 6 8 2 1 0

Table 3 - Sales Bought 2yos Data 2010-13 for Top 20 Trainers ordered by Sales Price Median

The following Section 3. considers issues surrounding the non-linearity of sales prices so that will not be covered here. A basic point to note about the table is the range of Median Ratings which make the Top 20 and there are clearly at least two separate levels there. At the Top are mostly the usual set of Coolmore (O'Brien) and Maktoum family backed trainers. The first stable on the list with no Coolmore, Maktoum or Dubai link would probably be that of the deceased Henry Cecil. Jeremy Noseda only has the ocasional runner for one of the Coolmore 'boys' and, along with Michael Stoute, has a good range of well funded patrons outside of the usual duo. As with the comment in the previous sub-section a large change is in progress with the high spending Qatari ruling family looking to join the top table and still in the process of building their trainer roster.

Whatever the changes, there is some sort of switchover around a Median of 90,000 and those below John Gosden. Those above and around the 60,000 level but below the top strata are either a small set in their own right or the Top of the main pack which starts just under 50,000 and form a complete spectrum for the other 300+ trainers which goes right down to the 1,000 level. A good question to ponder is how much better the 2yo Performance Median Ratings are, given the notably higher spending?

If you wanted to believe spending a lot of money was the answer to getting the 'best' 2yos then you could at least say that most of the Top 20 funded produce Median Ratings solidly into the 40s. Which would be a 'solid' if unremarkable return. You could easily produce another list of 20 trainers, leaving aside the O'Brien special case, who could equal or beat the Median Rating results and on lower Funding. Hannon, Fahey, Walker, P. Chapple-Hyam and so on.

You could also look at the Median Ratings achieved for Michael Bell, Mark Prescott, David Lanigan along with perhaps Ed Dunlop and Amanda Harwood/Perrett and consider whether they are getting the best out of the 2yos they have. Are they hampered by the resources they acquire from the sales or does the training need tweaking? Prescott is probably a special case and his record is covered further in sub-section 5.3 below. Lanigan appears, using the anecdotal antenna, to have mostly given up on having 2yo winners (a single win in 2013) and only runs the odd natural 2yo (Bold Lass in 2013) plus some expensive surplus stock which has already been identified as having low level ability.

A final point to check in the table is how the Best Estimates produced by these trainers' 2yos are distributed across the quality groups on the right side of the line. Remember that a solid result from a trainer like Keven Ryan, at a 25,500 Sales median, can produce 2yos distributed evenly either side central Dark Green column. An argument you will hear will be that the premium prices paid for young thoroughbreds is a 'gamble' over trying to find the one star, even a superstar, amongst a lot of ordinary, or worse, ones. Commonly referred to as a 'game' only very rich people can get involved in. How does the distributions for these trainers look? Any of them 'crushing it' in the manner of a top operater like Hannon? If they are not then what are the premium prices for? Can we all have a go at the game of spending other people's money in the name of 'expertise'? We all like a bit of responsibility with no accountability attached.

Back to Top of Page


4. SALES PRICE ISSUES

The idea for this article grew out of happenstance. B2yoR was putting some basic figures together of the Median Ratings for Trainers' 2yos as a cross-check and input to ongoing Race Profiling tests. The 'Sunday Forum' programme on Attheraces was on in the background, with it being, mercifully, McCririck free. The panel had been wittering on in the usual unfocussed manner about how effortlessly brilliant everyone was and had been gushing over the career of Richard Hannon with him days away from an official retirement from training. Plenty to gush about in the Hannon case, and with some hard evidence to back it up.

They then turned to the point that he had achieved all he had without serious funding and with 'cheap' horses until recently. Which is simply not true, although Hannon has punched well above his spending 'weight' for a long period, using some obvious ploys to enable that. This then developed, unfocussedly, to suggest how good it would be to have a single figure for each trainer along the "..cost per winner.." lines. How this would back up their waffle on the show. Alistair Down , one half of the panel, took this as a cue to proudly announce he had failed his Maths 'O' Level six times. Which presumably explains why he likes to position his output as mainly being 'Colour Pieces', written in bad prose. Just keep off the hard analysis stuff, Down.

Thinking about what a meaningful 'Cost Per Winner' type stat for a trainer might look like then got a bit out of hand. Which is why this article is too long. But, the use of Sales Median Prices compared to the Median Ratings for a 2yo String and across a reasonable time period do provide a useful background to at least attempt to rank trainers. Also to assist the thinking in what factors individual trainers are doing 'right' or 'wrong' to help or hinder their performance results.

At core the 'Cost per Winner' idea is fundamentally flawed as a simple, single, figure. It tacitly assumes, for example, that there is a simple and Linear relationship between how much you pay for a horse at the sales and how good a racehorse you can expect it to be. This then puts way too much of the 'difference' between trainers' results down to their ability to train horses. The relationship between sales prices and the type of horse you could expect to be buying is neither simple nor linear. Above a certain level the prices are a fantasy with premiums paid for unproven credentials the horses hold. Delve deeply into that premium area and you could convince yourself the outcomes in performance terms were uncorrelated to price paid. The following text considers a few difficulties with the simple 'Cost per Winner' ideal.

YEAR CATOLOGUED OFFERRED SOLD AGGREGATE
(Gns.)
AVERAGE
(Gns.)
MEDIAN
(Gns.)
2013 965 878 765 35,359,000 42,529 37,000
2012 1,043 937 788 31,039,000 39,390 32,000
2011 833 750 635 25,284,500 39,818 30,000
2010 1,031 929 685 22,241,900 32,470 25,000
2009 820 733 606 20,565,500 33,936 25,000
2008 847 719 509 19,672,700 38,650 29,000
2007 633 569 473 23,907,500 50,544 35,000
2006 619 553 463 20,308,000 43,862 34,000
2005 869 771 636 16,988,400 26,711 18,000
2004 1,302 1,179 850 12,993,100 15,286 10,000

Table 4 - Yearling Sales Results for Tattersalls October Book 2 Sales

The table above shows the sales details for the Tattersalls October Book 2 auction (TO2) from 2004 to 2013. Tattersalls are the largest sale house in Europe and their set of October Sales (Books 1-3) offer the largest number of yearlings. The Book 1 is seen as the Premier Sale and will usually produce the highest yearling sale prices paid in Europe each year. It is worth reiterating that Tattersalls will apply a selection procedure to accept yearlings into their sales, often including physical inspection. The TO2 sale is then the big 'middle-ground' sale with a wide range of types and pedigrees. The highest prices paid will approach those at the top of the TO1 sale but will range down to real cheap buys, or retainees.

It is an interesting table in it's own right to see how the figures have moved over the period. Despite the financial climate and 'Global Meltdowns' and the like, this is a business where less horses were sold in 2013 for around 34 Million in sterling than in 2004 for an aggregate (the total of all horses sold) of near 12.5 Million. Which seems to indicate that owning racehores is not a 'business' for an awful lot of people. There is no economic reason why a similar set of horses should be worth so much more in 2013. Where has the extra value of those horses come from? Like owning Football Clubs in Britain, sound financial models and Business plans are in short supply. The balloon stays in the air as long as wealthy people are willing to burn money underneath it for no hope of a worthwhile monetary return.

For the purposes of this article the last column is most interesting which shows the Sales Median for the TO2 sales. It was nearly 50% higher in 2013 than it had been in 2010 and clearly that makes it difficult to start comparing years directly. There needs to be a Baseline to try to account for the variability in the Strength of the Sales Markets. Remember that the TO2 sales are the biggest source of 2yos available to most trainers in one package. In 2013 a total of 401 of the 2yos to race in Britain had been sold at the TO2 sales in 2012. This equated to around 15% of the total and they ran for 103 different trainers.

255 of the 2013 British raced juveniles were sold at the Doncaster Auctions' main sale (the Premier Yearlings) as a comparison and the Doncaster sales are specifically targeted at 2yo pedigrees and type. There were 396 yearlings sold at that sale in 2012 for a Median of 20,000. Which raises another complicating factor of how you compare 2yos bought at different sales. The more fashionable sales and those marketed as being 'Premier' in some manner will attract a wider set of buyers and the 'strength' of the Market different from sale to sale. Added to that you have the issue of how to compare foreign buys with the regular set of US purchases added to in recent years by an increasing number of French sale purchases. With French bred horses qualifying for a premium, on top of the higher prize money, in French races which makes it worth British traners' while to make trip over to France with the French sale purchases. They will be able to win more money for placing in a claimer than they would for winning a British maiden race.

Figure 2 - Sales Price plotted against Best 2yo Rating for 2010 to 2013 period.

While the variability between different sales and for the same sale across different years are troublesome there is one much more important factor. That is that there in no simple relationship between sales price and expected performance on the track. Figure 2 above shows the results of plotting the Sales Price against the Best Rating at 2yo for over 5,000 juveniles from the 2010-13 seasons. If, for example, there were a simple Linear relation between the two factors then the dots would make a pattern from bottom left up towards the top right and you could fit a straight line neatly to the pattern.

There isn't that neat pattern here. On visual inspection the most you might suggest is that there is a very steep bottom left to top right line from the 400 juveniles but which has curved over to reach a straight line well before the 50,000 level. If you were looking to give some definite advice based on the plot you couldn't get much beyond the following suggestions :-

The non-linearity is obvious with a little thought. If you spend 50,000 and get an OR75 rated maiden winner and handicapper you will have had a good result. If you spend 500,000 on a yearling there is no way for it to be a ten times better racehorse. The obvious question being - are the factors that push horses into these premium levels worth the prices paid? There seems a simple answer.

This shape of prices means that it is hard to compare a Godolphin purchase with one bought in the sub 80,000 region. Godolphin, and the others at that level, are taking a gamble on one of these high priced buys being an exceptional runner and go on to be a sire and pay for the numerous 'flops'. That is assuming they care about it in commercial terms at all. Coolmore compete at these levels but really do understand the gamble they are taking. It was how John Magnier, Robert Sangster and Vincent O'Brien (unrelated to Aidan) built the business in the first place. Purchasing high priced yearlings at US sales to be trained in Ireland and race in Europe, when that was a novelty. Then getting enough good ones to be profitable sires, from Nijinsky forwards, to pay for the expensively acquired flops.

A closing point would be to think about where Richard Hannon junior is going in 2014 now he is in charge of the stable. If you look at Figure 2 the yard's success has been built on being able to find more of the dots bubbling along the top of the patch in the 10,000 to 80,000 range at the sales than others do. Now they can buy more at the 100,000 range and above, will that make any difference to the record? There are a lot less dots out there and they are not any higher than in the range they have already been purchasing in.

Back to Top of Page


5. TRAINER TYPES

The Figure below is a simple representation of the four Trainer Types that are used. By plotting increasing Sales Median against increasing Performance Median Rating we can split Trainers' record into four basic types. The following four sub-sections suggests real examples of those types. It is then possible to ponder on what that tells us about a trainer's overall ability. A nerdy item of interest would be to note that at the centre point of the diagram where the lines cross there is a point where a trainer is 'Average' at both measures. Averagely well funded and achieving average results. The closest fit to that point is Anne Duffield.

Figure 3 - Training Ability versus Sales Median and Trainer Types

The naming of the sub-sections 5.3, 5.4 & 5.5 represent a deliberate usage of the 'British Racing Defence'. The core of this approach is the 'Negating a Positive' gambit in an attempt to disguise a possible, even if only mild, questioning of a trainer (or jockey or horse, etc) over their ability and results. Regular followers of British Racing will recognise that all interviews, articles, and so forth appear to need to be based on the inquisatory level of "How do you manage to be so effortlessly brilliant, all of the time?". Which leads to the peculiar position where everybody involved seems to be marvellous & 'above average', which is quite remarkable.

[It also leads to a variety of nonsense being accepted as worthwhile comment. "That wasn't the greatest maiden ever run..", for example, which would cover 99.9 recurring percent of races run. Well done for that incisive insight, Mr Einstein. Or the tortuously twisted "not over-big", which if parsed and unpacked seems to mean 'Big'. But is used to refer to horses on the smaller side of medium or below. Just tell us how tall it is in Hands, or in metres preferably, and stop this obfuscation. But that never seems to occur to anyone.]


5.1 High And Good

If the previous sections have done a good job of describing the Data Tables and how to interpret the information in them then the examples in these sub-sections should speak for themselves. But worth picking out a few trainers to reiterate the points. First two trainers who fit into the top right hand, light green, cell of the figure.

J. H. M. Gosden
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 47.9 48.0 144 125,220 89,250 57 0 0 4 7 27 45 35 21 5 0 0
1013 BUY 46.2 48.0 57 125,220 89,250 57 0 0 3 4 11 16 13 9 1 0 0


J. Noseda
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 50.1 51.0 62 99,657 70,264 44 0 0 2 5 8 14 18 11 2 2 0
1013 BUY 53.5 52.0 44 99,657 70,264 44 0 0 1 1 4 10 16 8 2 2 0

Tables 5 & 6 - John Gosden & Jeremy Noseda, High Sales Median but High Performance with it

Two trainers who are in the top bracket for resources but turn out above average results from that backing. Looking at the anecdotal summary B2yoR carries around about all trainers as a 'Rough Guide' this matches well. Both are trainers who you would be happy to back one of their 2yos and expect it to run to form and find normal improvement. Noseda can seem to be too much of a perfectionist, or worrier, at times and some 2yos can present as overdone but overall a reliable handler. One point to note would be whether the small number of runners in 2013 for Noseda was due to a drop in funding and owners or because of some health issue with the juveniles.

Looking at the Best Estimate distributions both seem to be doing a solid job in sourcing higher class horses and getting them to rate highly through the training regime. Gosden has a record of 17 wins from 94 runs in Class 1 races at an 18% Strike Rate and seems to judge ability well. The Market usually knows they are good as well though and a solid loss backing them all despite the win percentage. The majority of the 13 individual Class 1 winners have been Owner Breds.

Noseda has a 14-91 record in Class 1 events since 2005 and, despite a higher SP set overall, still a solid loss on them.


5.2 Low And Good

In many ways this is the most interesting sector because it involves searching through the long tail of small stables to find trainers who regularly produce at least average results from low funding level. Unlike Noseda and Gosden in the previous sub-section you have a good chance of finding value Prices in the Betting Market for 2yos trained by the good trainers in this bracket. The Market, and the various agents that form it, will tend to be using a similar Bluffers' Guide sheet to assess trainers and the likes of Noseda and Gosden will often be overbet just on reputation. The overvaluing assisted by the number of noughts on the end of their sales' bought 2yos along with the pedigrees and owners' names.

Conversely, many smaller stables will be undervalued, to a large extent on nothing more than Market formers knowing little about them and not putting any time into finding anything out. The 'British Racing Defence' summary of them will be the word 'unfashionable'. The further North you train from assists your unfashionability and being female does as well. If you have read this document fully and had a look through the data tables you will know more about many trainers than the average Market person.

P. J. McBride
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 39.6 40.0 16 6,701 3,150 11 0 0 0 4 4 6 2 0 0 0 0
1013 BUY 41.9 45.0 11 6,701 3,150 11 0 0 0 2 1 6 2 0 0 0 0


L. Stubbs
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 41.4 41.0 17 7,845 8,000 13 0 0 1 3 4 6 2 1 0 0 0
1013 BUY 43.9 48.0 13 7,845 8,000 13 0 0 1 1 2 6 2 1 0 0 0

Tables 7 & 8 - P. McBride & Linda Stubbs, Low Sales Median but Good Median [Est] Ratings

Mr McBride's returns were a surprise to B2yoR and he seems to be doing a very good job but that fact had escaped notice. Two responses to seeing his data. The first to wonder why if his initials are "P. J." why does everyone call him 'Charlie', don't they? The second was to go and look at his detailed information on the website to see what is going on.

Conversely, long-time readers of the website will know that B2yoR holds the Stubbs' family set-up in well above average regard. Their MO being to buy a small set of yearlings each year and give them full 2yo seasons. The target being to get 1 or 2 rated highly enough (say OR90+), to be sold on at a profit to race in Hong Kong and help to keep the whole show going. You would expect that the pressure of having to make this plan work instills the sort of introspection required to judge personal performance correctly and improve where needed. Unlike some people with high priced youngstock being delivered to their stable yard doors each year.

Two Listed level winners in recent years with horses that cost 14,500 guineasand 2,500 guineas to add to the generally very good returns. Linda's daughter Kristin took over the stable licence in 2013 having been the assistant for many years. A poor return in 2013 in the sense of a single win and the Sales Median went up to 12,600. But, the Median Rating of the sales buys was still good at 42.0 so hopefully 2013 was a minor blip rather than indicating something significant had changed.


5.3 High And Not Good

Not an area of the plot that anyone would want to be in because there is not a possible excuse available, as there might be with trainers working with cheaper horses. But, any trainer even mildly targetting 2yo racing should be able to get a Median Rating return comfortably into the 40s. If that is not being achieved then something is not quite right. To muddy the waters a bit, and help with the pretence of not wanting to suggest anyone is less than effortlessly brilliant, the fault could lie in two main places.

The first is with recruitment of horses. A trainer provided with less able athletes, whatever they cost to buy or breed, cannot be expected to turn them into average or better class runners. If a trainer is not responsible for many of the purchases in their yard, and the buys are then topped up by an assortment of owner breds of variable quality, then the results may well be poor. Even if the trainer is competent in their training work role. If they buy themselves then they clearly have to accept that failing.

The second main area is in the training, preparation and placing of the horses which must be the trainer's responsibility. Having spent a lot of years studying 2yo racing, and paying the bills backing juveniles, a ranking of trainers becomes a necessity. The preposterous "everyone's marvellous.." approach is not an option. Preparing and looking at the data of trainer's regular performance becomes natural as well to confirm, or occasionally refute, the anecdotal opinions. Looking at thousands of 2yos in Paddock Review, what types they are, how they are presented, and so on assists in giving clues as to what might underlie the below average returns.

Section 3.2 suggested a few names who are not doing well enough and three more candidates summary tables follow. The first is an interesting case and the low Median Rating may well be by design rather than some incompetence.

M. Prescott
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 36.0 37.0 76 62,865 49,135 26 3 4 11 13 13 12 8 9 2 1 0
1013 BUY 38.0 37.5 26 62,865 49,135 26 1 1 4 5 4 3 3 3 2 0 0

Table 9 - Mark Prescott, High Sales Median but Below Average Median [Est] Ratings

Mark Prescott would qualify as a good trainer so why does he get below average returns? The obvious answer is that he deliberately splits his 2yo string into two parts. Those who can compete as '2yo types' wil be in his first batch of runners and most will normally win at some point and he does well in getting multiple wins. Mr. Prescott regularly goes on about how he is 'sent' a lot of slow developing horses with 10 furlong, or further, pedigrees. He batches many of these up and gives them three quick runs over inadequate distances at 2yo, with the horses often looking totally clueless about what being a racehorse entails. The whole point is to hold down their expressed rating as juveniles. Next we turn to a couple of more puzzling trainers.

J. R. Fanshawe
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 34.6 32.0 17 56,753 44,625 10 0 1 2 5 4 2 2 1 0 0 0
1013 BUY 35.0 33.0 10 56,753 44,625 10 0 0 2 3 2 1 2 0 0 0 0


E. F. Vaughan
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 35.3 38.0 22 47,875 28,350 17 2 0 2 3 5 6 2 2 0 0 0
1013 BUY 34.6 37.0 17 47,875 28,350 17 2 0 1 2 5 4 2 1 0 0 0

Tables 10 & 11 - J. Fanshawe & E. Vaughan, High Sales Median but Below Average Median [Est] Ratings

What is going wrong with the Fanshawe performance? Go back to 2007 and he ran 17 qualifying horses with seven bought at auction for a Median of nearly 64,000. He returned a Median Rating of 47.0. Which is fine. But 2010-13 and the runners total is well down and the Strike Rates are much lower. He still has a few expensive horses but not of better quality and only 1-2 wins per year and none in the worst seasons? Clearly some problems.

Some of the same themes with Ed Vaughan. He made a reasonable impression for 3-4 seasons from his first year in 2004. Working with small strings of 2yos. But the Median Rating has always been low and had reached dismal levels in 2012 until a better 2013. But a complete blank with no 2yo win between October 2010 until the 3 individual winners in 2013. A suspect profile.


5.4 Low And Not Good

Three examples in this section plus a question over another trainer. As hinted at before these trainers working with lower priced 2yos might invoke that as a reason for the poor returns. But, it a relatively easy to find examples of trainers with similar 'opportunities' who produce good results over an extended period of study. Some of that might just be luck but the longer it goes on the less that seems to be the primary difference.

D. Shaw
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 20.2 20.0 27 19,697 15,750 19 4 4 6 7 2 3 0 1 0 0 0
1013 BUY 22.1 21.0 19 19,697 15,750 19 2 3 4 5 2 2 0 1 0 0 0

Table 12 - D. Shaw, Lower Sales Median but Not Good Median [Est] Ratings

Derek Shaw had long been a trainer to avoid with his 2yos, in B2yoR's view. In the period of 2004-11 he managed a single win from 52 separate 2yo runners (i.e. 1 win from 275 runs by 52 different horses). A sentence which seems to need little supporting evidence. No matter how limited many of those 2yos were in ability you could name tens of trainers who you would expect to produce a better result. The real clincher though has been the performance Shaw has achieved with a group of more expensive 2yos for the owner B. Johnson. These are a purchases targetted at 2yo racing yet there overall performance has been dire. Most of the horses looking clueless and under-prepared to add to the plain lack of wins and worthwhile ratings.

N. Tinkler
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 24.0 24.5 42 15,243 8,000 32 5 3 10 8 9 5 2 0 0 0 0
1013 BUY 25.4 28.5 32 15,243 8,000 32 4 2 7 5 8 4 2 0 0 0 0

Tables 13 - N. Tinkler, Lower Sales Median but Not Good Median [Est] Ratings

Nigel Tinkler is another regular in the category of a trainer whose 2yos are to be avoided. You could be told he had the second coming of Frankel in his stable running in a juvenile maiden and you would watch the race and certainly not bet on it. The working summary of his horses being that he bought small and square ones at whatever price range, got them above averagely fit for debut and got a number of long SP places. But that 'promise' was very rarely fulfilled and winners also rare. Both the buying and the training being under question. Looking at his overall record then 2011 must have been a fluke unless he really did do something different that season. If he did he should do it again.

A. J. McCabe
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 27.7 31.0 63 20,134 7,327 40 8 6 8 7 16 12 4 1 1 0 0
1013 BUY 34.8 37.5 40 20,134 7,327 40 2 3 3 4 12 11 4 0 1 0 0

Tables 14 - A. McCabe, Lower Sales Median but Not Good Median [Est] Ratings

Alan McCabe is a trainer that puzzles B2yoR somewhat, having been well enough disposed to his 2yos in his early days when he got acceptable returns in 2006-08. But it has been downhill since then and it took some expensive backing from the Wentworths to get his one reasonable year in 2011. That owner has now moved on to use other trainers, although both parties seem to insist this break was entirely amicable.

But, for a Paddock Reviewer, the McCabe horses pose a couple of issues. One of which is that he and his bloodstock agent like to buy smaller ones and even when given a lot of money to spend still get smaller, but bulky, ones. Look at his higher priced purchases as a set and some problems seem to be common. The second issue is that his horses do not seem to run as well as they look and also do not run to a consistent level. He, and his staff, are terrific at turning the horses out looking well, smart and so on. He has a lot of cheap ones that look as if they ought to be usable at a low level and certainly given how well turned out they are. But that rarely translates into performance. Adding that background to the overall returns in 2009-13 make a trainer whose 2yos are to be avoided but without a strong grasp of why the various pieces are not coming together better.

And finally, Does David Evans belong in this Quarter on the record shown in the table? Are we looking at a Brute Force approach to getting some usable 2yos or is there a bit more skill involved?

P. D. Evans
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 32.3 33.0 114 11,535 9,354 77 6 5 15 23 23 20 17 5 0 0 0
1013 BUY 37.2 36.0 77 11,535 9,354 77 1 3 7 14 20 13 14 5 0 0 0

Table 15 - David Evans, Low Sales Median, What Rating Median level?


5.5 Upwards And Not Upwards

This sub-section uses the Sales Median returns for the four years 2010-13 to identify two pairs of trainers. The first of those are trainers where the figure has gone up during that period and two trainers with rising profiles. The first is a chance to wedge the full Richard Hannon data into the article.

R. Hannon
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 48.3 49.0 575 53,401 41,475 422 6 9 16 43 77 155 127 108 29 5 0
1013 BUY 50.6 51.0 422 53,401 41,475 422 2 6 6 27 50 110 98 92 26 5 0
2007 ALL 48.0 49.5 100 42,931 36,750 79 1 2 5 4 18 22 28 12 8 0 0
2010 ALL 48.7 49.0 130 44,743 32,000 94 1 2 2 12 17 38 23 27 7 1 0
2011 ALL 50.7 51.0 147 44,995 38,000 113 2 2 2 9 16 39 29 30 16 2 0
2012 ALL 48.6 50.0 144 63,164 44,609 100 2 3 2 7 21 38 40 26 3 2 0
2013 ALL 45.4 45.5 154 60,248 46,769 115 1 2 10 15 23 40 35 25 3 0 0

Table 16 - Richard Hannon and Sales Median Increase

The increase in the 2yo string of the Hannon stable since 2008 has been remarkable, jumping from around 100 juvenile runners before that and reaching a new record with 174 individual 2yo runners in 2013. Equally remarkable has been that the stable's performance returns have increased from a high base to be terrific. Strike Rate, debut Strike Rate and Number of wins have all gone up solidly. To highlight the success of the sales buying the percentage of winning 2yos to maidens by turf season end is now consistently over 50%. Getting above 40% is a good effort.

The stable has seen an influx of new owners during the 2008-13 period including in recent years the Arab owners that Hannon had often said he lacked. He also often said he would like to see what he could do with unusually wealhy owners backing him and we have found out. Hamdan Al Maktoum, Saeed Manana and the Qatari al Thani family have joined the owners along with other wealthy backers. 2014 would have seen the Godolphin blue colours on a Hannon runner but for the unfortunate death of Piping Rock from colic in late December of his successful 2yo season.

Looking at the table above the Sales Median has gone up steadily and you would expect it to go up again in 2014 given the level of funding and the increased strength of the yearling market in 2013. But the Median Rating has not gone up to the same degree and you might suggest that somewhere around 50 is an upper limit. The number of horses in the top distribution groups has also not changed notably despite the increased number of 100,000 purchases. Again, the Hannons are good at the sales buying but the increased funding level is pushing them into the premium price levels where the number of higher class horses available in weakly correlated (if at all) with the increasing price level.

M. Botti
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 42.3 42.0 77 51,891 31,500 49 1 1 3 5 22 26 11 7 0 1 0
1013 BUY 47.2 47.0 49 51,891 31,500 49 0 0 0 3 11 17 10 7 0 1 0
2007 ALL 35.8 35.5 8 30,348 31,500 7 0 0 1 2 3 1 0 1 0 0 0
2010 ALL 44.3 46.5 12 17,641 19,450 8 0 1 0 0 3 5 0 3 0 0 0
2011 ALL 47.0 48.0 13 30,181 18,000 9 0 0 0 0 3 6 3 1 0 0 0
2012 ALL 43.3 42.0 25 52,224 42,517 17 0 0 1 2 8 7 4 2 0 1 0
2013 ALL 38.2 40.0 27 82,808 42,000 15 1 0 2 3 8 8 4 1 0 0 0

Table 17 - Marco Botti and Sales Median Increase

A simpler story with Marco Botti and one of a younger trainer who seems to have reached some sort of 'Tipping Point' in reputation. Mr Botti could have stayed in Italy and continued on with the family record of being perpetual Champion Trainer there. Instead he decided to take the risk of training in Britain where we may have low prize money levels but it does actually get paid out. After making a good impression with small strings early on there was a lull but the last two seasons have seen a real change with increased funding, new building going on to extend his yard and so on. Mind you, still needs to work on that Median Rating figue.



To complete the story a pair of trainers who are in a decline that needs halting.

M. P. Tregoning
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 40.2 41.5 36 57,226 31,500 23 1 0 2 4 10 10 7 2 0 0 0
1013 BUY 39.7 42.0 23 57,226 31,500 23 1 0 1 3 5 7 5 1 0 0 0
2007 ALL 44.4 44.5 18 117,340 99,750 9 0 0 0 3 4 5 3 3 0 0 0
2010 ALL 40.8 41.0 8 98,730 42,000 6 0 0 1 1 2 2 1 1 0 0 0
2011 ALL 50.4 47.0 7 70,100 52,500 5 0 0 0 0 1 3 2 1 0 0 0
2012 ALL 36.0 37.0 13 29,330 19,558 7 1 0 0 3 4 1 4 0 0 0 0
2013 ALL 37.4 40.5 8 33,601 16,800 5 0 0 1 0 3 4 0 0 0 0 0

Table 18 - Marcus Tregoning and Sales Median Decrease

Up until 2005 Tregoning had a well above average record with 2yos and would be on the list of solid trainers to take seriously. It has been a slow decline since then and the 2010-13 period have seen a real slump with less runners, winners and below average Strike Rates. The Sales Median tells a lot of that story and comparing the 2007 figures to those in 2012-13 make grisly reading. There is presumably still a solid trainer in there but the equine recruitment department needs major overhaul.

J. W. Hills
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 35.5 33.0 51 21,359 15,000 37 0 3 6 13 10 11 4 3 1 0 0
1013 BUY 37.1 36.0 37 21,359 15,000 37 0 2 3 9 7 10 2 3 1 0 0
2007 ALL 38.7 39.0 15 31,708 29,019 10 0 1 0 1 7 4 2 0 0 0 0
2010 ALL 35.8 32.5 10 28,678 22,503 8 0 0 3 1 2 2 0 2 0 0 0
2011 ALL 37.2 34.5 22 16,419 10,417 18 0 2 1 7 3 4 3 1 1 0 0
2012 ALL 32.5 33.0 11 33,833 32,000 7 0 0 2 3 3 3 0 0 0 0 0
2013 ALL 34.9 33.0 8 7,120 4,989 4 0 1 0 2 2 2 1 0 0 0 0

Table 19 - John Hills and Sales Median Decrease

John Hills' figures seem to tell a lot of the story just on reading. He moved stables in 2013 and had a new hook-up to be a trainer for Hamdan Al Maktoum but the performance results do not match with that upbeat summary. Looking at the Median Rating figures he achieves and they were always poor for a stable of his size and they seem to have settled into a basement level. Unlike Tregoning the 2yos from the stable were always ones to be wary of in B2yoR's betting view. You could not rely on them to run to a consistent level and Mr. Hills to extract the best from them. Perhaps he is more 3yo season oriented but with the focus on this website it is the juveniles that matter.

Back to Top of Page


6. LARGE OWNER BREEDERS

As a reference and for general interest the table below shows the results for the same period for a set of major Owner Breeders (OBs). There are no Sales Median & Mean figures in the table because the 2yos never went through the sales ring. The OBs have spent huge sums of money to get to the position where they can produce these number of 2yos to race. Buying and running their Studs, building up a broodmare band, using fashionable stallions, the list is endless. The Maktoum family have probably spent a figure in excess of 10 Billion in this activity over the years.

OWNER BREEDER YEAR MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
Hamdan Bin Mohammed 1013 50.3 55.0 35 0 0 1 3 5 6 12 4 3 1 0
Godolphin 1013 50.1 52.0 174 0 0 4 12 22 43 55 27 10 1 0
Ahmed Al Maktoum 1013 48.8 49.5 14 0 0 1 0 1 7 2 2 1 0 0
K Abdulla 1013 48.5 49.0 80 0 1 1 5 10 28 22 7 5 0 1
L Rothschild 1013 46.4 46.5 20 0 0 0 2 6 5 3 4 0 0 0
Hamdan Al Maktoum 1013 45.7 46.0 118 1 1 2 11 26 33 29 12 3 0 0
Ballymacoll Stud 1013 42.2 46.0 13 0 1 0 2 2 4 3 1 0 0 0
The Queen 1013 43.2 44.0 25 0 0 2 4 5 5 4 4 1 0 0
JC Smith 1013 43.2 43.5 26 0 0 1 5 5 8 4 2 1 0 0
Cheveley Park Stud 1013 44.5 42.0 37 0 0 1 6 7 13 4 5 0 1 0
K Rausing 1013 34.1 36.5 24 1 1 3 4 5 4 3 3 0 0 0

Table 20 - Selected Large Owner Breeder Homebreds sorted by Median [Est] Rating

The table is ordered by decreasing 2yo Median Rating and a few points to note. The striking one is that all this investment has produced results in the usual range for a well funded trainer buying at the sales. Other than the Maktoum related special cases, and Khalid Abdulla, the distribution of Best Estimates around the '41-50' dark green column is unexceptional. If they are producing better class juveniles it is at close to a typical rate and surrounded by others of a typical range of racing ability.

The 55.0 Median Rating for the 2yos nominally bred by Sheikh Mohammed's son Hamdan is also a bit puzzling. It is on the high side and presumably there is some selectivity, as with Godolphin, around which 2yos run in that name. All of those horses run for Mark Johnston and as noted above his Median Rating tends to be low and the number of Maktoum family owner breds perhaps holding his returns down. Looking at this table you would wonder how much lower they would be without the owner breds. Johnston still has a possible counter to that in that he prefers to buy slower developing horses with 10 furlong and further pedigrees.

The one wholly commerical Stud on the list - Cheveley Park - seem to be turning out results at odds with their reputation. But their position probably reflects their commercial status. They are not turning out huge numbers of yearlings and then keeping the best for themselves. They will sell off most of males they breed and then race the females to identify those they want to keep for their breeding operation. A different model to the others who are producing a high number of horses in an attempt to improve their chances of having Group 1 level runners.



The final table is for general interest. The top two lines show the performance of the 2yos bought at Auction for Godolphin and Hamdan Al Maktoum. The interest is in comparing how this sector compares to the homebreds in the previous table.

OWNER YEAR MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
Godolphin 1013 49.4 53.0 153 164,988 136,500 153 1 0 5 9 23 31 55 24 5 0 0
Hamdan Al Maktoum 1013 52.0 52.0 82 151,175 126,000 82 0 1 1 4 5 26 19 23 3 0 0
Highclere TB 1013 44.5 43.5 38 90,617 85,567 38 1 1 1 1 8 12 11 0 3 0 0
Middleham Park Rcg 1013 44.5 45.0 69 21,948 17,000 69 1 1 2 7 12 25 11 7 3 0 0

Table 21 - Maktoum Family Owner Breeders' Sales Buys compared to Major Syndicate Owners' Purchases

Added to the table, again for comparison, are the results for two of the major Syndicate owner groups in Britain. Over the last 2-3 years Middleham Park Racing had bubbled into the B2yoR conciousness, during the daily work, as a team that were doing something positively different in terms of horse recruitment, as with the Hannon & Doyle partnership. The Median Ratings and Best Estimates they have achieved over the last four season, on a lowish Sales Median, would seem to back up that anecdotal assessment.

Back to Top of Page




APPENDIX :- Data Tables for the Top 58 Trainers in 2013 by Number of Runners

C. Appleby
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 39.6 40.0 29 190,121 173,402 10 0 0 3 4 9 6 5 2 0 0 0
1013 BUY 46.0 47.0 10 190,121 173,402 10 0 0 0 1 2 3 3 1 0 0 0
2013 ALL 39.6 40.0 29 190,121 173,402 10 0 0 3 4 9 6 5 2 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


G. Baker
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 37.9 37.5 54 30,209 26,250 39 1 2 4 9 16 10 9 3 0 0 0
1013 BUY 39.0 38.0 39 30,209 26,250 39 1 1 3 6 11 6 8 3 0 0 0
2010 ALL 25.8 26.0 6 14,070 12,940 4 1 1 1 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0
2011 ALL 46.5 53.0 15 38,057 29,762 11 0 0 0 3 3 1 6 2 0 0 0
2012 ALL 37.7 39.5 18 30,885 31,500 12 0 1 2 1 6 6 2 0 0 0 0
2013 ALL 34.5 34.0 15 27,719 26,650 12 0 0 1 5 5 3 1 0 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


A. M. Balding
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 44.8 47.0 119 48,945 38,325 78 2 4 3 8 20 34 31 13 4 0 0
1013 BUY 47.3 48.0 78 48,945 38,325 78 1 2 1 2 11 27 21 10 3 0 0
2007 ALL 48.1 44.0 19 32,464 30,975 12 0 0 0 1 5 7 3 0 3 0 0
2010 ALL 48.2 48.0 21 22,512 21,000 13 0 0 0 2 4 6 5 2 2 0 0
2011 ALL 50.4 51.0 37 42,166 31,500 25 0 1 1 1 4 10 10 8 2 0 0
2012 ALL 42.5 44.0 33 55,822 34,375 22 1 0 1 3 6 12 8 2 0 0 0
2013 ALL 37.6 41.5 28 69,045 51,250 18 1 3 1 2 6 6 8 1 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


T. D. Barron
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 41.2 41.0 57 20,447 9,354 37 0 0 6 9 13 16 9 3 1 0 0
1013 BUY 44.6 48.0 37 20,447 9,354 37 0 0 2 6 6 11 9 2 1 0 0
2007 ALL 39.8 40.0 15 22,704 21,525 8 0 0 1 0 7 5 2 0 0 0 0
2010 ALL 37.1 39.5 10 15,569 8,963 8 0 0 2 2 1 3 2 0 0 0 0
2011 ALL 46.8 48.5 12 7,985 8,000 9 0 0 1 0 2 5 3 1 0 0 0
2012 ALL 38.9 38.0 19 28,996 14,252 10 0 0 2 5 5 3 2 1 1 0 0
2013 ALL 42.1 42.5 16 27,015 13,563 10 0 0 1 2 5 5 2 1 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


R. M. Beckett
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 44.1 45.0 115 35,345 26,250 72 2 0 2 13 21 39 30 7 1 0 0
1013 BUY 45.9 49.0 72 35,345 26,250 72 2 0 2 4 11 23 24 5 1 0 0
2007 ALL 46.6 45.0 29 16,737 14,175 20 0 1 0 2 3 15 4 2 2 0 0
2010 ALL 45.3 45.0 43 34,787 28,350 31 0 0 0 3 10 16 11 2 1 0 0
2011 ALL 48.0 50.0 21 35,353 23,100 12 0 0 2 1 1 8 6 3 0 0 0
2012 ALL 44.7 47.0 29 43,213 24,125 16 1 0 0 4 4 8 10 2 0 0 0
2013 ALL 37.3 39.5 22 26,983 30,450 13 1 0 0 5 6 7 3 0 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


M. L. W. Bell
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 37.4 40.0 103 63,376 48,765 55 4 4 5 18 25 24 18 3 2 0 0
1013 BUY 38.6 40.0 55 63,376 48,765 55 2 3 1 10 14 12 9 2 2 0 0
2007 ALL 43.2 48.0 30 65,807 52,810 14 0 1 1 4 4 8 10 2 0 0 0
2010 ALL 37.8 38.0 32 77,672 48,765 15 1 0 1 10 5 8 5 1 1 0 0
2011 ALL 37.3 45.5 14 47,739 34,000 9 1 3 0 0 1 4 4 1 0 0 0
2012 ALL 39.7 38.0 31 65,066 52,000 19 0 0 2 5 10 8 4 1 1 0 0
2013 ALL 34.3 39.0 26 54,557 45,009 12 2 1 2 3 9 4 5 0 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


M. Botti
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 42.3 42.0 77 51,891 31,500 49 1 1 3 5 22 26 11 7 0 1 0
1013 BUY 47.2 47.0 49 51,891 31,500 49 0 0 0 3 11 17 10 7 0 1 0
2007 ALL 35.8 35.5 8 30,348 31,500 7 0 0 1 2 3 1 0 1 0 0 0
2010 ALL 44.3 46.5 12 17,641 19,450 8 0 1 0 0 3 5 0 3 0 0 0
2011 ALL 47.0 48.0 13 30,181 18,000 9 0 0 0 0 3 6 3 1 0 0 0
2012 ALL 43.3 42.0 25 52,224 42,517 17 0 0 1 2 8 7 4 2 0 1 0
2013 ALL 38.2 40.0 27 82,808 42,000 15 1 0 2 3 8 8 4 1 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


C. E. Brittain
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 44.5 45.0 84 46,008 33,600 53 0 2 6 4 19 20 20 9 4 0 0
1013 BUY 49.4 51.0 53 46,008 33,600 53 0 1 3 2 6 13 15 9 4 0 0
2007 ALL 47.2 54.0 32 48,016 31,500 20 0 2 1 3 6 2 10 5 3 0 0
2010 ALL 46.5 47.0 31 63,838 52,500 21 0 1 0 2 6 8 9 3 2 0 0
2011 ALL 44.2 48.0 20 30,577 26,775 14 0 0 3 2 4 3 3 4 1 0 0
2012 ALL 35.2 40.0 13 35,175 29,400 6 0 1 3 0 3 3 3 0 0 0 0
2013 ALL 47.8 43.5 20 38,226 40,425 12 0 0 0 0 6 6 5 2 1 0 0


Back to Top of Page


D. H. Brown
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 44.5 48.0 45 48,535 30,000 29 2 0 0 8 6 11 8 8 1 1 0
1013 BUY 48.5 49.0 29 48,535 30,000 29 0 0 0 3 5 7 6 7 1 0 0
2010 ALL 40.6 41.0 9 16,630 14,000 5 1 0 0 1 2 1 2 1 1 0 0
2011 ALL 44.1 45.0 9 15,450 13,125 4 0 0 0 3 0 4 1 0 0 1 0
2012 ALL 49.5 48.0 15 60,388 35,000 11 0 0 0 1 3 4 3 4 0 0 0
2013 ALL 41.4 46.0 12 66,479 42,000 9 1 0 0 3 1 2 2 3 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


E. M. Burke
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 41.2 42.0 46 17,510 10,000 29 0 1 2 6 11 14 11 1 0 0 0
1013 BUY 41.3 41.0 29 17,510 10,000 29 0 1 1 4 8 6 8 1 0 0 0
2010 ALL 31.0 31.0 1 0, 0, 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
2011 ALL 42.7 47.0 11 8,480 7,228 7 0 1 0 0 3 5 2 0 0 0 0
2012 ALL 44.6 47.0 19 18,655 10,289 12 0 0 0 2 4 7 5 1 0 0 0
2013 ALL 36.3 33.0 15 22,456 10,204 10 0 0 2 4 3 2 4 0 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


H. Candy
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 43.8 42.5 44 17,146 10,000 27 0 2 1 5 12 10 8 4 2 0 0
1013 BUY 47.6 47.0 27 17,146 10,000 27 0 0 0 3 8 6 5 4 1 0 0
2007 ALL 34.1 40.0 14 35,058 21,000 9 1 2 0 3 1 4 3 0 0 0 0
2010 ALL 49.3 43.0 9 15,700 16,000 5 0 0 0 1 2 2 2 0 2 0 0
2011 ALL 40.7 43.0 12 26,364 18,900 7 0 2 0 1 2 4 2 1 0 0 0
2012 ALL 47.8 48.5 8 15,126 6,463 6 0 0 0 0 3 2 2 1 0 0 0
2013 ALL 40.9 39.0 15 12,125 9,000 9 0 0 1 3 5 2 2 2 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


H. R. A. Cecil
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 49.0 49.0 38 101,552 61,813 12 0 0 1 2 7 12 9 5 1 0 1
1013 BUY 48.8 48.5 12 101,552 61,813 12 0 0 0 1 2 4 2 3 0 0 0
2007 ALL 54.1 57.0 14 119,095 42,000 5 0 0 1 0 2 2 3 4 2 0 0
2010 ALL 50.4 53.0 11 52,850 68,250 3 0 0 0 2 2 1 4 1 0 0 1
2011 ALL 48.6 49.0 14 139,353 47,619 5 0 0 1 0 2 4 4 3 0 0 0
2012 ALL 49.0 49.0 6 63,776 63,776 1 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 1 0 0 0
2013 ALL 47.4 42.0 7 99,843 59,850 3 0 0 0 0 2 3 1 0 1 0 0


Back to Top of Page


M. R. Channon
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 43.8 45.0 248 33,253 26,250 153 2 3 12 29 45 74 48 29 5 1 0
1013 BUY 47.7 48.0 153 33,253 26,250 153 1 1 4 11 21 48 39 22 5 1 0
2007 ALL 45.0 46.5 76 50,047 36,750 53 2 3 6 6 13 13 13 15 3 1 1
2010 ALL 43.9 44.0 70 27,123 25,000 42 1 0 3 8 13 21 14 8 1 1 0
2011 ALL 46.6 46.0 61 32,230 21,000 45 0 0 3 7 8 18 15 8 2 0 0
2012 ALL 44.3 43.5 58 38,539 30,006 36 0 0 4 6 12 16 10 9 1 0 0
2013 ALL 40.3 44.0 59 37,026 25,625 30 1 3 2 8 12 19 9 4 1 0 0


Back to Top of Page


R. Charlton
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 40.8 43.0 73 43,094 25,000 19 3 0 4 9 15 21 15 4 2 0 0
1013 BUY 35.3 38.0 19 43,094 25,000 19 3 0 1 1 6 3 3 1 1 0 0
2007 ALL 45.0 45.0 25 79,867 63,000 9 0 1 1 2 4 8 5 3 1 0 0
2010 ALL 35.9 37.0 16 67,158 70,350 5 1 0 2 3 4 2 3 1 0 0 0
2011 ALL 43.0 48.0 22 35,040 23,500 10 2 0 0 2 3 7 4 3 1 0 0
2012 ALL 43.8 44.0 16 15,000 15,000 1 0 0 1 2 2 6 4 0 1 0 0
2013 ALL 39.7 41.0 19 39,200 22,050 3 0 0 1 2 6 6 4 0 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


P. F. I. Cole
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 44.2 45.0 67 54,863 37,375 40 1 0 3 10 12 18 11 9 3 0 0
1013 BUY 48.0 47.5 40 54,863 37,375 40 0 0 0 5 7 11 8 7 2 0 0
2007 ALL 48.3 46.0 25 71,394 57,750 17 0 0 1 3 4 8 3 2 3 0 1
2010 ALL 49.0 50.0 22 57,125 63,000 11 0 0 1 2 2 8 3 5 1 0 0
2011 ALL 47.9 47.0 15 64,365 43,050 10 0 0 1 1 4 2 2 4 1 0 0
2012 ALL 39.9 39.5 14 59,583 32,550 10 0 0 0 3 5 3 3 0 0 0 0
2013 ALL 38.0 43.5 16 36,294 28,350 9 1 0 1 4 1 5 3 0 1 0 0


Back to Top of Page


C. G. Cox
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 44.6 43.0 79 30,349 22,959 47 1 0 3 3 23 26 13 7 2 1 0
1013 BUY 45.6 44.0 47 30,349 22,959 47 0 0 2 3 12 16 7 4 2 1 0
2007 ALL 48.5 47.0 17 58,389 44,643 14 0 0 1 1 2 6 3 2 2 0 0
2010 ALL 45.6 47.5 20 21,312 17,007 9 0 0 1 0 6 6 5 2 0 0 0
2011 ALL 49.6 49.5 20 24,995 25,510 11 1 0 0 0 2 8 3 4 2 0 0
2012 ALL 48.8 45.5 16 40,151 16,027 12 0 0 0 1 5 4 4 1 0 1 0
2013 ALL 36.4 37.0 23 31,857 22,959 15 0 0 2 2 10 8 1 0 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


A. C. Coyle
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 35.1 35.5 18 5,695 5,750 10 0 1 0 5 7 3 2 0 0 0 0
1013 BUY 37.2 37.0 10 5,695 5,750 10 0 1 0 1 4 2 2 0 0 0 0
2011 ALL 38.0 38.0 1 8,503 8,503 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
2012 ALL 32.8 36.0 5 2,100 2,100 2 0 0 0 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0
2013 ALL 35.8 35.0 12 6,321 6,000 7 0 1 0 3 4 2 2 0 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


L. M. Cumani
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 43.9 46.5 56 84,857 66,675 30 1 2 2 5 6 23 11 4 2 0 0
1013 BUY 47.2 49.5 30 84,857 66,675 30 0 2 1 0 2 13 8 3 1 0 0
2007 ALL 47.0 48.5 14 61,021 27,300 5 0 0 0 0 4 5 4 1 0 0 0
2010 ALL 40.3 43.0 15 44,764 33,000 7 1 1 0 1 2 7 1 1 1 0 0
2011 ALL 50.5 50.0 15 73,236 73,500 8 0 0 0 2 0 6 6 0 1 0 0
2012 ALL 42.5 45.0 15 90,286 75,075 10 0 1 1 0 3 6 2 2 0 0 0
2013 ALL 41.7 45.0 11 148,722 114,796 5 0 0 1 2 1 4 2 1 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


K. W. Dalgleish
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 34.6 37.0 39 9,753 6,901 18 1 5 2 3 14 9 4 0 1 0 0
1013 BUY 33.8 34.0 18 9,753 6,901 18 0 1 1 3 8 5 0 0 0 0 0
2011 ALL 40.3 52.5 6 0, 0, 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 0
2012 ALL 32.6 33.0 12 10,179 6,750 6 0 1 1 2 5 3 0 0 0 0 0
2013 ALL 34.1 37.0 21 9,540 7,440 12 0 3 1 1 9 6 1 0 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


T. G. Dascombe
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 41.2 42.0 124 28,421 25,510 101 3 3 5 11 34 34 22 11 1 0 0
1013 BUY 43.3 44.0 101 28,421 25,510 101 1 1 4 10 23 32 19 10 1 0 0
2007 ALL 42.8 41.0 8 17,414 17,850 5 0 0 1 1 2 2 0 2 0 0 0
2010 ALL 39.5 40.0 34 23,027 19,950 29 1 1 1 4 10 9 7 1 0 0 0
2011 ALL 44.0 45.0 33 30,440 25,255 28 1 0 1 3 7 9 7 5 0 0 0
2012 ALL 40.4 42.0 30 28,941 28,912 23 0 2 2 4 5 10 3 3 1 0 0
2013 ALL 41.0 40.0 27 32,609 30,000 21 1 0 1 0 12 6 5 2 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


A. Duffield
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 32.5 34.0 85 12,121 10,250 58 5 4 7 16 25 16 8 4 0 0 0
1013 BUY 36.8 38.0 58 12,121 10,250 58 2 0 5 9 17 14 8 3 0 0 0
2007 ALL 32.5 31.0 17 28,201 21,000 10 0 2 2 4 4 3 2 0 0 0 0
2010 ALL 36.2 42.0 20 15,290 14,000 15 2 1 1 3 3 3 5 2 0 0 0
2011 ALL 32.1 34.0 23 10,907 8,700 16 1 2 1 2 12 3 1 1 0 0 0
2012 ALL 30.7 34.5 26 11,625 11,000 16 2 1 2 5 6 9 0 1 0 0 0
2013 ALL 31.3 29.0 16 10,288 10,000 11 0 0 3 6 4 1 2 0 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


E. A. L. Dunlop
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 40.6 39.0 104 89,343 57,750 59 0 2 5 17 31 24 15 8 2 0 0
1013 BUY 43.3 43.0 59 89,343 57,750 59 0 1 0 9 18 12 12 6 1 0 0
2007 ALL 43.8 44.5 28 70,285 57,750 20 1 0 0 1 9 9 5 2 1 0 0
2010 ALL 41.0 39.5 30 48,676 33,600 17 0 1 1 3 11 7 4 2 1 0 0
2011 ALL 41.5 40.0 24 68,642 49,875 12 0 1 2 2 7 4 5 2 1 0 0
2012 ALL 39.0 39.5 26 97,279 68,027 15 0 0 2 4 8 8 2 2 0 0 0
2013 ALL 40.9 36.5 24 144,057 94,500 15 0 0 0 8 5 5 4 2 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


M. W. Easterby
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 28.6 27.5 64 7,873 6,000 35 3 1 16 14 17 9 4 0 0 0 0
1013 BUY 29.9 31.0 35 7,873 6,000 35 1 0 8 8 12 3 3 0 0 0 0
2007 ALL 12.9 14.0 27 12,907 8,400 13 8 4 6 6 0 2 0 0 1 0 0
2010 ALL 28.9 31.5 16 4,119 3,518 6 1 0 5 2 4 4 0 0 0 0 0
2011 ALL 33.1 33.0 21 10,161 6,000 11 1 0 3 4 7 3 3 0 0 0 0
2012 ALL 27.0 24.0 15 5,990 5,500 10 1 0 3 6 2 2 1 0 0 0 0
2013 ALL 22.6 21.5 12 9,894 8,000 8 0 1 5 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


T. D. Easterby
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 33.6 35.0 173 10,918 8,502 118 10 7 17 38 42 25 20 13 1 0 0
1013 BUY 38.7 38.0 118 10,918 8,502 118 1 4 5 28 29 22 18 10 1 0 0
2007 ALL 32.7 36.0 37 20,267 18,279 26 0 4 4 8 8 10 2 1 0 0 0
2010 ALL 38.4 38.0 41 10,429 7,875 33 1 2 3 7 11 4 9 3 1 0 0
2011 ALL 35.8 36.0 45 10,804 7,875 35 2 2 2 12 9 7 5 6 0 0 0
2012 ALL 30.1 33.5 52 9,670 8,738 30 5 2 6 10 15 10 2 2 0 0 0
2013 ALL 30.5 30.0 35 13,794 13,803 20 2 1 6 9 7 4 4 2 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


P. D. Evans
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 32.3 33.0 114 11,535 9,354 77 6 5 15 23 23 20 17 5 0 0 0
1013 BUY 37.2 36.0 77 11,535 9,354 77 1 3 7 14 20 13 14 5 0 0 0
2007 ALL 33.1 29.0 21 10,869 9,450 17 0 2 2 9 3 2 0 2 1 0 0
2010 ALL 34.0 32.0 33 10,128 9,725 22 2 1 3 7 7 5 5 3 0 0 0
2011 ALL 31.3 35.5 42 13,855 9,991 28 3 1 5 9 8 7 8 1 0 0 0
2012 ALL 27.0 24.0 13 6,475 3,000 7 0 1 5 2 3 1 1 0 0 0 0
2013 ALL 34.4 35.5 26 11,605 7,151 20 1 2 2 5 5 7 3 1 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


R. A. Fahey
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 44.6 44.5 276 37,123 27,300 187 1 1 11 29 57 92 50 27 7 1 0
1013 BUY 47.0 46.0 187 37,123 27,300 187 0 0 4 16 36 63 38 22 7 1 0
2007 ALL 37.4 35.0 34 27,711 26,250 23 1 1 3 6 8 7 5 3 0 0 0
2010 ALL 48.4 46.5 62 38,234 25,000 41 0 0 2 6 10 17 12 11 3 1 0
2011 ALL 42.5 44.0 69 43,738 29,000 41 1 0 4 8 14 22 15 5 0 0 0
2012 ALL 44.3 45.0 71 34,868 28,350 54 0 0 2 7 12 34 11 5 0 0 0
2013 ALL 43.5 42.0 74 33,301 27,300 51 0 1 3 8 21 19 12 6 4 0 0


Back to Top of Page


J. G. Given
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 32.2 33.0 57 27,573 21,000 35 0 6 8 11 12 14 4 2 0 0 0
1013 BUY 36.4 39.0 35 27,573 21,000 35 0 2 2 6 10 10 4 1 0 0 0
2007 ALL 29.4 30.5 18 12,314 8,400 9 2 1 1 5 4 3 1 1 0 0 0
2010 ALL 27.1 25.0 21 22,551 20,503 12 0 4 4 5 1 5 2 0 0 0 0
2011 ALL 36.3 37.0 15 34,908 26,250 8 0 0 2 3 5 3 1 1 0 0 0
2012 ALL 36.5 39.0 8 44,550 52,000 5 0 1 0 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 0
2013 ALL 32.8 33.0 13 19,242 11,000 10 0 1 2 1 4 4 1 0 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


J. H. M. Gosden
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 47.9 48.0 144 125,220 89,250 57 0 0 4 7 27 45 35 21 5 0 0
1013 BUY 46.2 48.0 57 125,220 89,250 57 0 0 3 4 11 16 13 9 1 0 0
2007 ALL 56.9 57.0 29 138,102 89,625 14 0 0 0 1 3 8 6 7 3 0 0
2010 ALL 50.1 51.0 40 182,406 145,769 14 0 0 0 1 6 12 13 6 2 0 0
2011 ALL 52.1 52.0 36 91,284 66,500 12 0 0 0 1 5 10 11 7 2 0 0
2012 ALL 46.5 46.0 36 98,917 79,800 16 0 0 0 4 6 13 7 5 1 0 0
2013 ALL 41.7 43.5 32 127,052 84,000 15 0 0 4 1 10 10 4 3 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


W. J. Haggas
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 45.0 45.0 121 74,791 63,000 68 0 3 4 13 20 46 16 13 6 0 0
1013 BUY 45.5 45.5 68 74,791 63,000 68 0 2 1 8 10 25 11 7 4 0 0
2007 ALL 46.2 47.0 21 58,983 59,325 8 0 0 2 1 2 9 4 2 1 0 0
2010 ALL 41.6 42.0 29 51,708 63,000 11 0 0 3 4 6 10 3 1 2 0 0
2011 ALL 48.2 45.0 31 82,523 63,000 19 0 1 1 3 5 8 5 6 2 0 0
2012 ALL 42.9 45.0 28 79,355 42,525 16 0 2 0 3 3 14 3 3 0 0 0
2013 ALL 47.0 46.0 33 76,336 70,875 22 0 0 0 3 6 14 5 3 2 0 0


Back to Top of Page


R. Hannon
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 48.3 49.0 575 53,401 41,475 422 6 9 16 43 77 155 127 108 29 5 0
1013 BUY 50.6 51.0 422 53,401 41,475 422 2 6 6 27 50 110 98 92 26 5 0
2007 ALL 48.0 49.5 100 42,931 36,750 79 1 2 5 4 18 22 28 12 8 0 0
2010 ALL 48.7 49.0 130 44,743 32,000 94 1 2 2 12 17 38 23 27 7 1 0
2011 ALL 50.7 51.0 147 44,995 38,000 113 2 2 2 9 16 39 29 30 16 2 0
2012 ALL 48.6 50.0 144 63,164 44,609 100 2 3 2 7 21 38 40 26 3 2 0
2013 ALL 45.4 45.5 154 60,248 46,769 115 1 2 10 15 23 40 35 25 3 0 0


Back to Top of Page


R. Harris
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 30.4 31.5 52 13,531 8,503 39 1 6 7 11 9 15 2 1 0 0 0
1013 BUY 31.3 32.0 39 13,531 8,503 39 0 4 6 8 8 11 2 0 0 0 0
2007 ALL 37.7 39.5 6 11,090 10,578 6 0 0 1 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0
2010 ALL 27.7 24.0 15 5,437 4,677 13 0 2 4 3 3 1 2 0 0 0 0
2011 ALL 24.3 22.0 7 7,483 6,200 3 0 2 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
2012 ALL 36.4 40.0 12 24,701 19,000 9 0 0 0 4 2 6 0 0 0 0 0
2013 ALL 30.9 39.0 18 15,162 14,350 14 1 2 2 1 4 8 0 0 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


C. B. Hills
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 44.2 47.0 91 66,526 45,000 55 0 2 8 7 16 30 13 11 3 1 0
1013 BUY 45.5 46.0 55 66,526 45,000 55 0 0 4 4 13 17 6 8 2 1 0
2011 ALL 57.3 62.0 9 148,022 133,774 4 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 4 1 0 0
2012 ALL 43.5 47.0 38 70,046 44,159 22 0 1 4 0 9 12 8 4 0 0 0
2013 ALL 42.1 42.0 44 52,615 42,000 29 0 1 4 7 6 16 4 3 2 1 0


Back to Top of Page


Joanna Hughes
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 31.1 34.0 33 11,328 5,527 22 1 3 4 5 10 8 2 0 0 0 0
1013 BUY 36.9 37.0 22 11,328 5,527 22 0 0 1 4 8 8 1 0 0 0 0
2011 ALL 31.5 35.0 4 24,008 29,400 3 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0
2012 ALL 27.5 30.0 13 6,167 5,264 8 0 2 3 2 3 3 0 0 0 0 0
2013 ALL 34.0 34.0 16 11,624 5,527 11 1 1 0 2 7 3 2 0 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


P. W. Chapple-Hyam
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 47.7 49.5 56 37,295 27,300 33 1 1 0 4 11 12 13 12 2 0 0
1013 BUY 51.2 52.0 33 37,295 27,300 33 0 0 0 2 6 7 8 8 2 0 0
2007 ALL 53.7 56.0 27 67,203 65,100 17 1 0 0 1 4 7 2 6 4 2 0
2010 ALL 46.8 49.0 13 28,532 26,000 8 0 1 0 0 2 5 3 2 0 0 0
2011 ALL 53.2 62.0 13 35,618 36,750 7 1 0 0 1 1 1 2 5 2 0 0
2012 ALL 46.1 51.0 17 26,258 23,075 12 0 0 0 2 5 1 6 3 0 0 0
2013 ALL 45.3 46.0 13 73,009 51,250 6 0 0 0 1 3 5 2 2 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


M. Johnston
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 40.7 42.5 264 54,712 44,100 143 7 7 18 28 60 65 55 16 7 1 0
1013 BUY 41.6 45.0 143 54,712 44,100 143 7 5 4 8 31 44 32 8 4 0 0
2007 ALL 47.3 48.0 97 57,143 48,300 40 0 0 7 3 14 30 31 9 2 0 1
2010 ALL 41.3 45.0 60 62,406 55,272 37 1 1 3 8 10 20 15 2 0 0 0
2011 ALL 44.6 45.0 66 47,074 31,500 33 2 1 3 4 15 14 16 6 4 1 0
2012 ALL 39.3 41.0 57 58,496 57,750 31 3 2 2 7 14 12 13 2 2 0 0
2013 ALL 38.0 38.0 81 51,141 38,289 42 1 3 10 9 21 19 11 6 1 0 0


Back to Top of Page


S. Kirk
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 32.8 35.0 72 17,262 13,605 50 2 3 10 16 14 20 6 1 0 0 0
1013 BUY 32.9 34.0 50 17,262 13,605 50 1 2 7 11 10 14 4 1 0 0 0
2007 ALL 42.7 41.0 25 30,680 24,150 15 0 0 2 4 5 7 4 2 0 1 0
2010 ALL 33.6 32.5 26 9,988 8,078 19 0 1 6 5 4 6 3 1 0 0 0
2011 ALL 35.5 41.0 21 15,115 12,600 14 1 0 1 5 3 9 2 0 0 0 0
2012 ALL 31.0 32.0 13 35,870 21,000 9 0 1 3 2 2 4 1 0 0 0 0
2013 ALL 28.3 31.5 12 17,363 17,450 8 1 1 0 4 5 1 0 0 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


A. J. McCabe
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 27.7 31.0 63 20,134 7,327 40 8 6 8 7 16 12 4 1 1 0 0
1013 BUY 34.8 37.5 40 20,134 7,327 40 2 3 3 4 12 11 4 0 1 0 0
2007 ALL 22.5 33.5 8 12,735 10,500 7 2 0 1 1 3 0 1 0 0 0 0
2010 ALL 33.9 34.0 22 7,925 6,650 14 1 2 1 3 7 5 2 1 0 0 0
2011 ALL 29.3 37.0 17 27,547 5,000 13 3 0 2 1 5 4 1 0 1 0 0
2012 ALL 22.8 20.0 13 33,049 15,000 7 1 2 4 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 0
2013 ALL 19.0 19.0 11 17,492 11,300 6 3 2 1 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


E. S. McMahon
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 45.1 45.5 54 20,544 19,500 37 0 0 4 6 10 15 8 8 2 1 0
1013 BUY 45.5 46.0 37 20,544 19,500 37 0 0 4 3 7 10 4 6 2 1 0
2007 ALL 46.0 45.0 13 19,077 19,055 10 0 0 0 2 3 4 1 3 0 0 0
2010 ALL 50.9 46.0 9 16,608 17,450 6 0 0 0 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 0
2011 ALL 48.8 49.5 18 23,541 21,000 15 0 0 1 1 3 6 2 4 1 0 0
2012 ALL 49.7 51.5 10 22,210 26,000 5 0 0 0 1 1 2 4 2 0 0 0
2013 ALL 35.3 38.0 17 17,845 13,000 11 0 0 3 3 4 5 1 1 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


B. J. Meehan
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 44.5 45.0 195 61,321 47,775 128 3 2 8 22 36 52 46 15 11 0 0
1013 BUY 48.0 47.5 128 61,321 47,775 128 2 0 5 7 16 42 33 13 10 0 0
2007 ALL 49.8 50.0 66 88,240 68,250 48 0 0 2 10 12 9 12 15 4 1 0
2010 ALL 45.3 45.0 63 66,850 54,600 40 1 1 4 7 11 15 11 7 6 0 0
2011 ALL 44.8 46.0 59 59,234 42,517 45 2 1 1 6 9 18 13 4 5 0 0
2012 ALL 45.0 46.0 44 51,997 45,493 26 0 0 1 6 5 14 16 2 0 0 0
2013 ALL 41.4 39.0 29 68,092 42,000 17 0 0 2 3 11 5 6 2 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


B. R Millman
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 35.7 39.5 46 11,996 9,354 33 4 1 3 6 11 11 8 2 0 0 0
1013 BUY 39.4 42.0 33 11,996 9,354 33 1 1 2 5 6 9 7 2 0 0 0
2007 ALL 33.3 31.0 17 16,099 16,800 13 0 1 3 5 3 2 2 1 0 0 0
2010 ALL 36.8 40.0 10 17,295 21,279 8 1 1 0 1 2 2 2 1 0 0 0
2011 ALL 42.2 41.5 14 6,577 5,250 11 0 0 1 1 3 6 2 1 0 0 0
2012 ALL 31.0 37.5 10 14,792 13,000 6 2 0 0 1 4 0 3 0 0 0 0
2013 ALL 31.0 30.5 12 12,050 10,452 8 1 0 2 3 2 3 1 0 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


J. S. Moore
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 33.5 34.0 105 8,226 5,102 77 7 0 12 21 29 23 9 4 0 0 0
1013 BUY 36.2 36.0 77 8,226 5,102 77 3 0 6 18 19 19 8 4 0 0 0
2007 ALL 41.3 41.0 27 21,020 14,456 23 0 3 1 2 6 7 2 4 2 0 0
2010 ALL 40.4 40.5 24 12,729 8,000 19 0 0 2 2 8 8 1 3 0 0 0
2011 ALL 38.7 41.0 23 8,014 5,051 20 1 0 2 3 5 5 6 1 0 0 0
2012 ALL 27.4 29.0 25 7,599 6,973 13 2 0 4 7 10 2 0 0 0 0 0
2013 ALL 29.5 30.0 33 5,299 4,200 25 4 0 4 9 6 8 2 0 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


H. Morrison
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 36.1 35.5 56 36,817 31,500 36 1 3 9 7 12 15 5 4 0 0 0
1013 BUY 38.9 40.5 36 36,817 31,500 36 0 2 5 6 5 10 4 4 0 0 0
2007 ALL 35.3 36.0 12 49,525 35,175 6 1 0 1 3 4 1 1 0 0 1 0
2010 ALL 45.5 43.5 14 46,568 31,500 9 0 0 0 1 3 7 1 2 0 0 0
2011 ALL 35.4 36.0 18 30,258 31,500 12 0 1 6 1 3 2 3 2 0 0 0
2012 ALL 36.6 37.0 10 32,156 24,150 8 0 1 0 3 1 4 1 0 0 0 0
2013 ALL 27.3 30.5 14 40,852 31,500 7 1 1 3 2 5 2 0 0 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


W. R. Muir
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 38.0 38.0 47 30,746 26,250 31 1 1 3 7 17 9 5 3 1 0 0
1013 BUY 43.3 42.0 31 30,746 26,250 31 0 0 1 3 11 8 4 3 1 0 0
2007 ALL 44.8 46.0 16 26,572 21,000 13 0 0 0 3 1 7 5 0 0 0 0
2010 ALL 38.0 37.0 9 23,736 16,800 7 0 0 0 0 7 1 1 0 0 0 0
2011 ALL 43.4 41.0 18 27,169 26,250 13 0 0 1 3 5 3 3 3 0 0 0
2012 ALL 42.3 49.0 7 41,917 45,000 5 0 0 1 2 0 2 1 0 1 0 0
2013 ALL 28.3 32.0 13 37,367 33,600 6 1 1 1 2 5 3 0 0 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


A. P. O'Brien
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 BUY 64.7 64.0 6 414,799 378,000 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 1 0 0
1013 ALL 70.8 64.0 18 414,799 378,000 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 6 6 3 0
2007 ALL 71.0 71.0 2 520,156 520,156 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
2011 ALL 70.0 70.0 2 0, 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
2012 ALL 0.0 0.0 4 0, 0, 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2013 ALL 66.0 64.0 9 414,799 378,000 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5 1 1 0


Back to Top of Page


D. O'Meara
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 30.3 34.0 47 8,715 7,000 29 2 4 5 11 8 13 4 0 0 0 0
1013 BUY 37.2 39.0 29 8,715 7,000 29 0 0 1 9 6 10 3 0 0 0 0
2010 ALL 26.8 22.0 8 2,551 2,338 4 0 2 2 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 0
2011 ALL 25.4 27.0 9 3,668 3,401 6 1 0 0 5 1 0 2 0 0 0 0
2012 ALL 35.9 39.5 12 9,529 9,177 10 0 0 2 2 3 5 0 0 0 0 0
2013 ALL 30.6 34.5 18 13,915 12,000 9 1 2 1 3 4 6 1 0 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


M. Prescott
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 36.0 37.0 76 62,865 49,135 26 3 4 11 13 13 12 8 9 2 1 0
1013 BUY 38.0 37.5 26 62,865 49,135 26 1 1 4 5 4 3 3 3 2 0 0
2007 ALL 33.3 34.0 24 85,557 91,919 10 1 2 2 6 6 4 1 1 1 0 0
2010 ALL 45.2 38.5 20 44,365 42,000 9 0 1 1 2 7 2 2 3 1 1 0
2011 ALL 41.6 46.0 19 90,272 78,750 7 1 1 1 2 2 5 3 3 1 0 0
2012 ALL 28.9 28.0 21 56,957 31,007 4 1 1 5 5 4 2 0 3 0 0 0
2013 ALL 27.1 24.0 16 62,581 57,010 6 1 1 4 4 0 3 3 0 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


J. J. Quinn
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 33.5 34.5 56 22,260 16,000 37 3 1 4 13 17 12 4 0 2 0 0
1013 BUY 35.1 37.0 37 22,260 16,000 37 2 1 4 6 8 11 3 0 2 0 0
2007 ALL 26.5 34.5 16 14,273 11,054 8 3 1 1 2 5 2 2 0 0 0 0
2010 ALL 35.5 34.0 11 16,975 18,000 8 0 0 1 3 5 1 0 0 1 0 0
2011 ALL 34.5 33.0 13 28,208 14,354 8 1 0 1 4 2 4 0 0 1 0 0
2012 ALL 37.3 37.5 10 18,681 18,000 7 0 1 1 0 4 1 3 0 0 0 0
2013 ALL 30.3 33.0 22 23,670 13,803 14 2 0 1 6 6 6 1 0 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


K. A. Ryan
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 42.6 43.0 188 31,216 25,510 136 3 4 10 25 37 44 39 17 9 0 0
1013 BUY 45.4 46.0 136 31,216 25,510 136 1 2 3 18 27 31 30 15 9 0 0
2007 ALL 45.0 45.0 59 55,833 41,242 42 2 0 2 8 10 14 9 11 3 0 0
2010 ALL 41.8 43.0 41 25,194 23,100 31 1 2 2 3 10 8 11 2 2 0 0
2011 ALL 45.4 49.0 52 24,933 25,100 36 2 0 3 6 8 8 13 10 2 0 0
2012 ALL 40.4 41.0 52 40,271 25,935 36 0 2 1 11 10 15 9 2 2 0 0
2013 ALL 42.8 42.0 43 33,850 26,250 33 0 0 4 5 9 13 6 3 3 0 0


Back to Top of Page


D. M. Simcock
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 44.6 45.0 63 46,103 35,325 44 1 1 3 4 11 21 14 6 1 0 1
1013 BUY 47.0 45.5 44 46,103 35,325 44 0 0 3 1 8 15 9 6 1 0 1
2007 ALL 43.9 41.5 10 50,854 45,291 8 0 0 0 2 3 2 2 1 0 0 0
2010 ALL 46.8 46.0 14 36,089 34,800 12 0 0 2 0 1 7 2 1 0 0 1
2011 ALL 45.7 44.0 21 41,928 34,650 15 0 0 0 2 5 6 5 3 0 0 0
2012 ALL 46.0 45.0 17 51,405 30,450 11 0 0 1 1 4 5 4 1 1 0 0
2013 ALL 37.6 42.0 11 66,850 57,750 6 1 1 0 1 1 3 3 1 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


B. Smart
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 38.3 40.0 77 22,802 18,900 53 4 2 6 13 16 15 12 7 2 0 0
1013 BUY 40.9 43.0 53 22,802 18,900 53 2 1 6 6 9 11 9 7 2 0 0
2007 ALL 46.9 46.0 31 29,197 26,250 25 0 1 2 2 6 9 4 3 3 1 0
2010 ALL 41.3 46.0 18 17,842 16,750 12 0 1 2 4 1 2 3 4 1 0 0
2011 ALL 40.1 40.0 29 28,038 21,000 23 2 0 2 4 8 4 5 3 1 0 0
2012 ALL 36.8 39.0 15 29,678 25,000 9 0 1 1 2 4 5 2 0 0 0 0
2013 ALL 32.6 36.0 15 9,156 10,000 9 2 0 1 3 3 4 2 0 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


O. Stevens
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 45.2 45.0 17 36,755 18,500 12 0 0 1 4 2 3 3 2 2 0 0
1013 BUY 47.3 47.0 12 36,755 18,500 12 0 0 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 0 0
2013 ALL 45.2 45.0 17 36,755 18,500 12 0 0 1 4 2 3 3 2 2 0 0


Back to Top of Page


M. Stoute
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 46.7 46.5 88 197,050 187,075 21 0 1 2 5 20 33 12 10 5 0 0
1013 BUY 48.2 49.0 21 197,050 187,075 21 0 0 1 1 1 11 3 3 1 0 0
2007 ALL 55.2 54.0 33 247,114 210,000 7 0 0 0 0 4 9 9 8 2 1 0
2010 ALL 48.2 47.0 25 256,200 241,500 5 0 1 0 0 7 9 2 3 3 0 0
2011 ALL 48.5 50.0 28 217,659 195,059 9 0 0 1 3 4 8 4 6 2 0 0
2012 ALL 44.9 45.0 15 124,127 93,537 5 0 0 0 1 2 9 3 0 0 0 0
2013 ALL 43.7 42.0 20 138,739 138,739 2 0 0 1 1 7 7 3 1 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


S. B. Suroor
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 52.7 53.0 127 158,487 126,000 40 0 0 1 6 12 31 40 29 7 1 0
1013 BUY 56.1 59.0 40 158,487 126,000 40 0 0 0 1 3 7 13 14 2 0 0
2007 ALL 60.8 54.0 17 470,044 390,117 6 0 0 0 0 1 6 4 0 4 0 2
2010 ALL 57.1 56.0 31 217,697 157,500 9 0 0 0 1 1 5 12 8 3 1 0
2011 ALL 50.8 53.0 27 133,989 104,031 11 0 0 0 4 1 6 9 7 0 0 0
2012 ALL 50.0 51.0 22 139,189 107,144 6 0 0 0 0 4 7 7 4 0 0 0
2013 ALL 52.3 53.0 47 147,941 118,125 14 0 0 1 1 6 13 12 10 4 0 0


Back to Top of Page


J. J. S. Tate
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 45.4 45.0 43 40,897 38,000 31 0 0 0 3 14 9 13 4 0 0 0
1013 BUY 47.6 50.0 31 40,897 38,000 31 0 0 0 1 9 6 11 4 0 0 0
2012 ALL 46.2 45.0 17 40,265 32,550 12 0 0 0 1 5 5 4 2 0 0 0
2013 ALL 44.9 43.0 26 41,296 40,000 19 0 0 0 2 9 4 9 2 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


N. Tinkler
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 24.0 24.5 42 15,243 8,000 32 5 3 10 8 9 5 2 0 0 0 0
1013 BUY 25.4 28.5 32 15,243 8,000 32 4 2 7 5 8 4 2 0 0 0 0
2007 ALL 22.2 24.0 12 15,469 13,125 10 1 1 3 2 3 2 0 0 0 0 0
2010 ALL 27.6 28.5 8 13,024 7,350 5 1 0 2 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0
2011 ALL 30.3 33.0 9 12,576 8,252 8 1 2 0 0 3 1 2 0 0 0 0
2012 ALL 23.1 26.0 10 15,488 8,901 8 1 0 3 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0
2013 ALL 18.7 20.0 15 18,013 7,000 11 2 1 5 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


W. G. M. Turner
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 29.8 30.0 44 7,588 9,500 13 3 3 5 11 5 9 8 0 0 0 0
1013 BUY 33.3 38.0 13 7,588 9,500 13 0 2 1 3 2 3 2 0 0 0 0
2007 ALL 28.0 26.0 15 5,256 4,200 11 0 1 6 1 4 2 1 0 0 0 0
2010 ALL 30.1 42.0 8 2,083 2,100 3 1 0 0 1 1 5 0 0 0 0 0
2011 ALL 29.2 25.0 11 12,600 12,600 1 0 1 1 5 1 1 2 0 0 0 0
2012 ALL 35.9 40.5 12 9,400 10,500 5 1 1 1 0 3 3 3 0 0 0 0
2013 ALL 24.5 23.0 13 8,200 6,500 4 1 1 3 5 0 0 3 0 0 0 0


Back to Top of Page


Roger Varian
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 48.0 45.0 65 119,322 105,000 26 0 0 0 3 18 20 12 8 4 0 0
1013 BUY 50.9 49.5 26 119,322 105,000 26 0 0 0 0 10 3 6 4 3 0 0
2011 ALL 52.3 53.0 18 106,470 52,500 5 0 0 0 1 3 4 6 3 1 0 0
2012 ALL 47.5 45.0 26 117,615 103,520 10 0 0 0 1 6 11 3 4 1 0 0
2013 ALL 45.0 41.0 21 126,716 120,000 11 0 0 0 1 9 5 3 1 2 0 0


Back to Top of Page


Ed Walker
YEAR TYPE MEAN
RTG
MEDN
RTG
TOT
RTD
SALE
MEAN ()
SALE
MEDN ()
BUY
TOT
< 1 1-
10
11-
20
21-
30
31-
40
41-
50
51-
60
61-
70
71-
80
81-
90
91-
100
1013 ALL 42.6 50.0 19 53,594 42,000 16 1 0 2 0 3 4 6 2 1 0 0
1013 BUY 47.5 52.0 16 53,594 42,000 16 0 0 2 0 2 3 6 2 1 0 0
2011 ALL 45.5 48.0 4 24,970 32,510 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0
2012 ALL 59.0 56.0 3 28,000 26,250 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0
2013 ALL 37.5 42.5 12 69,860 51,375 10 1 0 2 0 2 2 3 2 0 0 0

Back to Top of Page



© British 2yo Racing. All rights reserved.