Ruby Walsh and the last fence.

D

Double J

At the Start
Joined
Nov 16, 2016
Messages
2,592
Just been reading an excellent article by Kevin Blake of ATR. It can be found here

http://www.attheraces.com/article/570435

I've seen a few comments of Ill informed punters on Twitter and Facebook alike, none of which I agree with 'deliberately falling'.
I'd genuinely like to know the opinions of yourselves. People who post on forums such as this tend to be more of a racing fan than just a casual punter who puts on the odd £10.

I never really thought anything of it till seeing the statistics. Maybe there is something in it, mentality, the way he rides, who knows. All I do know is he is a top class jockey.
 
He did a similar piece twelve months ago and I wasn't sure then how accurate the data was or where it was sourced. I see Nicholls Canyon isn't listed for last weekend though Royal Cavalier is, multiply that by who knows how many times and a different picture may have emerged
 
I think the explanation is that while Nichols Canyon came down at the last it wasn't leading at the time
 
Arguably, Royal Caviar was only leading at the last because Geraghty and Mullins had already fallen off Bleu Et Rouge and Identity Thief.
 
It is a fact that the last fence/hurdle counts for more casualties than any other. It is a fact that horses are traveling either as fast as at any point in the race, or as fast as they can muster because they're exhausted.
So it must surely follow that if Ruby Walsh actually rides more horses and because of the larger quantity of classier animals to boot; he is surely going to be involved in a far greater percentage of last obstacle battles; hence is tumbles should at leat appear numerically greater.
Would be interesting to see his exponential percentages.
 
Another suggestion I read somewhere , which might be in Blake's article , is that the quality of Ruby's riding keeps a lot of horses in contention for longer than others might and therefore that is why he has more fallers at the last .
 
Surely the only percentage that matters is the one that indicates how his mounts winning percentages compare to their predicted chance (odds).

Then it doesn't really matter how they got there because even if he does fall nn% at the final flight more regularly than the norm - and I'm firmly in the camp that even if this is the case then there are mitigating circumstances such as those above as to why - then I'm sure he picks up wins through other attributes.

Hypothetical example;

His current win rate from 100 rides is 50% and the average odds of each horse is 6/4 (expected return of 40%) then he is outperforming by 10%
Those 50 wins came despite 5 last flight falls, which equals 5% of his rides.

The fact would be that he's still outperforming and if the numbers compare favourably to other jockeys then why should he be getting stick. You're still going to get a better return for your money than another jockey.

I haven't taken the time to interrogate his win %ages when compared to others but if it is less - and the delta (or thereabouts) can be attributed to last flight falls - then clearly something may be wrong.

But these things obviously have to be viewed more holistically than "ooh Ruby fell at the last twice again on Sunday".
 
Last edited:
Blake's article takes those points into account, chaps, you should read it.

And he's as mystified as the rest of us as to why it's happening.
 
Last edited:
Tiredness is the key. In percentage terms a horse is far more likely to come down at the last than any other obstacle. My observation is that Ruby often lets a horse find their own stride at the last if he's clear. The problem can be with a tired horse their concentration not may be as high as it was earlier in a race and they sometimes don't find it. I don't think Ruby is particularly doing anything wrong, and the suggestion that Ruby is more likely to have a lead at the last than any other jockey, and also more often in bigger races, is probably why it's so noticeable.
 
I'm going to go against the general consensus and say it is an issue.

His tendency is to let the horse coast into the obstacle and let it make its own mind up. This is when the horse is at its most tired and therefore it's concentration levels are at their weakest. It struggles to judge distance, height, speed etc just like an exhausted boxer swinging punches.

I believe Ruby should be making the horses mind up rather than standing up and hoping for the best.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
TheBear said:
I'm going to go against the general consensus and say it is an issue.

His tendency is to let the horse coast into the obstacle and let it make its own mind up. This is when the horse is at its most tired and therefore it's concentration levels are at their weakest. It struggles to judge distance, height, speed etc just like an exhausted boxer swinging punches.

I believe Ruby should be making the horses mind up rather than standing up and hoping for the best.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I made this point many years back after Kauto's first King George (either here or on TRF).

At the time, I said Walsh didn't take control of KS going into the last, and basically let the horse decide for himself what to do, and that I'd have preferred him to have bossed Kauto about a bit, given his sometimes erratic jumping.

I think I also suggested that it seemed to be a bit on the lazy side. Part of his job was to be in control, make the horse do his bidding, and try to give it an education.....and he just seemed to sit there on some horses, not doing very much. It was like he was taking stylishness to the extreme, and trying to make it look too easy.

Since then, I've never really thought about it. But Blake's article does suggest that there might be an issue, given it seems to happen more often to him, than it does his peers.

Lee's technical argument is a different matter. He is looking at effect, whereas Blake is looking at cause. Two different things.
 
I think it's an interesting discussion regarding Ruby letting the horse make his own mind up and not assuming the control and assertion that the Jockey should. However, I'd like to highlight Daryl Jacob on Might Bite at Kempton on St. Stephens day. The horse guessed at the 2nd last so Jacob asserted going to the last and tried to make the horses mind up and we all saw what happened. Jacob was widely castigated. Now, some may say that's the other extreme and Jacob fired him into the last fence, but it has to be food for thought on this subject matter.
 
In his first major NH as a youngster Paul Carberry rode Mubadir in Leopardstown Dec 26 feature Novice chase.
Leading to the last with the field closing he went for a big jump and the horse fell.
Walking in with his saddle under his arm, his father Tommy beside him and Noel Meade walking behind, a dejected PAul explained how he needed a good jump to win and by going for it felt he did the right thing.
"Son " replied Tommy " when you fall it is because you did the wrong thing !"

Standing by the last fence at Killarney last July i watched Ruby come to the fence a length down and leave it a length ahead.
Nothing wrong with his bottle.
Beyond that when your luck is out, it is out; as much for Ruby as for the rest of us methinks.
 
From my experience, I'd make the following points:
1. Lumping all rides in together confuses the stats. I'd certainly draw a big line at 2013 when he stopped riding for Nicholls.
2. I'd also differentiate between novices and the more experienced horses. In general, anyone can ride the experienced horses although some jockeys and some horses have a special relationship.
3. In general, the Mullins novices start odds on and are probably 90% likely to be involved at the last obstacle.
4. Ruby's favoured approach during the race seems to be to let the horse do its own thing and trust in the excellent schooling that goes on in training. This generally works but, on the rare occasions where the horse needs a good jump at the last, if Ruby asks for it this can take the horse by surprise.
5. As we discussed last year, Ruby's unique riding style, caused in part by the various injuries that he's had, is perhaps more precarious in terms of remaining on a horse that makes a mistake.
6. If you have the chance of Ruby riding your horse you would be certifiable if you objected, not least because Ruby is a pretty good (but not infallible) judge of his best chance of winning any particular race.
 
I'm not questioning Walsh's bottle, eddie. Nor am I suggesting in any way that he is a liability.

I'm just recalling my thoughts from that time, in the context of Blake's article. As I said, it's not anything I've thought about since, which tells it's own story.

In the case of Walsh's statistics, luck undoubtedly plays its part - as does visibility, because Walsh is probably at the business-end of many more weekend/TV races, than any other jockey in the UK or Ireland, and people have short memories.
 
It is an interesting discussion and it's also a little rich to sit in my armchair criticising the best jump jockey in the business. It may be that I feel particularly stung by him after backing both Voix Du Reve and Valseur Lido last season.

It also gives me a chance to bring up something else that's been bugging me for ages. Why does his head bobble about all over the place during races when everyone else's is still?
 
Double Handful said:
I think it's an interesting discussion regarding Ruby letting the horse make his own mind up and not assuming the control and assertion that the Jockey should. However, I'd like to highlight Daryl Jacob on Might Bite at Kempton on St. Stephens day. The horse guessed at the 2nd last so Jacob asserted going to the last and tried to make the horses mind up and we all saw what happened. Jacob was widely castigated. Now, some may say that's the other extreme and Jacob fired him into the last fence, but it has to be food for thought on this subject matter.
Click to expand...

Jacob was 25 lengths clear, so had need ro gun the horse at the fence. So not sure you are comparing apples with apples.
 
tiggers1972 said:
Jacob was 25 lengths clear, so had need ro gun the horse at the fence. So not sure you are comparing apples with apples.
Click to expand...
I've clearly said above that it's the other extreme of the scale. I was merely alluding to the reality that sometimes jockeys just can't win either way. If Ruby was firing horses into the last to try and make the horses mind up as a few have suggested that he should, and still getting last fence fallers, I've no doubt there'd be comments like 'why didn't he just let the horse pop the last'.
 
Last edited:
He has a habit of letting a horse (when clear) to just make its own mind up at the last fence. Who are we to argue? But I wish he would just sit in to the horse and force it to jump.
 
TheBear said:
It is an interesting discussion and it's also a little rich to sit in my armchair criticising the best jump jockey in the business. It may be that I feel particularly stung by him after backing both Voix Du Reve and Valseur Lido last season.

It also gives me a chance to bring up something else that's been bugging me for ages. Why does his head bobble about all over the place during races when everyone else's is still?
Click to expand...

I reckon the main idea is to relax his horse by being relaxed himself but he might have had to develop his distinctive style because of neck/shoulder injuries.
 
When it comes to riding style and not making up a horses mind for them I think some are overlooking the following line from Blake's article:

"Sometimes he asks for a big jump, sometimes he lets the horse do their own thing, other times he steadies into it. When one examines the video footage of his various mishaps, all of these differing approaches feature"

Personally I think the most informative stat in that piece is this one: Ruby has only fallen or been unseated when in front on 22 occasions in the 3735 rides he has taken since the beginning of 2009.

As far as I can tell Blake doesn't do any inferential analysis so this could all be down to chance. Take any group of 10 jockeys and 1 of them is going to have more falls then any other. Since there is clearly no sound theory to back up his stats and explain why it should be Ruby, I'm inclined to think there's nothing in it. Trying to draw patterns and conclusions from something that occurs roughly once in every 170 races seems like a waste of time.
 
TheBear said:
I'm going to go against the general consensus and say it is an issue.

His tendency is to let the horse coast into the obstacle and let it make its own mind up. This is when the horse is at its most tired and therefore it's concentration levels are at their weakest. It struggles to judge distance, height, speed etc just like an exhausted boxer swinging punches.

I believe Ruby should be making the horses mind up rather than standing up and hoping for the best.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


I should just say that Might Bite's fall at Kempton is an example of why making a horse's mind up at the last could well be a mistake .
 
Back
Top