C Byrnes
Fair A/E compares wins with a margin-stripped market expectation. Favourite-heavy samples — top yards, leading riders — naturally read a few points warm, so 1.05 means "beat the margin-free market read", not "the market underrates this by 5%".
Sends out around 180 runners a season, winning with 12% of them — beating the margin-free market read across the lifetime window (Fair A/E 1.04). In Group and Graded company the record reads 16% (304 runs). The yard is in form now — 3 winners in the last fortnight, above its own baseline.
The record is strongest at Downpatrick (27.5%, n=40), clear of the yard's 12.2% baseline. In Group and Graded company the record reads well at 15.8% (n=304, Fair A/E 1.26), but new recruits from other stables on their first run struggle at 5.4% (n=186, Fair A/E 0.69). The market has consistently overbet horses returning fresh after 61+ days: 7.1% strike, Fair A/E 0.72 and −342.64 to a £1 stake over 773 runners — those runners underperform what the price implies. Right now the yard is firing: 3 winners from 16 runners in the last 14 days (18.8%, 6.6pts above the 12.2% baseline). Philip Byrnes rides 17% of the entries and matches the yard's average almost exactly (12.4%, A/E 1.00) — the market has that partnership priced right. The yard also reads well on Good to Firm going (23.2%, n=125). 62 Group and Graded wins sit in the archive record — the biggest prize the yard has landed: the Ladbrokes World Hurdle at Cheltenham (Mar 2013, £156,613). The stable star of the record: Solwhit (FR) — 14 wins from 26 runs for the yard.
Yard patterns
the angles behind the record · vs 12.2% baselineEach tile is the record in that situation vs the 12.2% baseline — descriptive splits with the sample always shown, not tips. Tiles under 30 runs render muted. Headgear figures use the true-first definition (first gear appearance in the captured career); returns are gear back on after a bare run. Claiming riders are runs where the booked rider carried a weight claim. Group / Graded covers pattern and listed races.
Notable angles
vs their own baselineRecord by conditions
same window as headerRace type
Going
Courses
Class
Market position
Distance
By season
Handicaps
Field size
Rows below n=30 are shown faded — a small sample is a fact, not a trend. Every figure carries its N.
Jumping record
completion over obstacles · same window as headerHorses trained
same window as header · most-raced firstCurrent form
significance-gatedLast 14 days
In formWhen the yard fires
strike by month, lifetimeJockey bookings
same window · biggest samples firstCareer highlights
lifetime archive, 2005→Sires in the string
progeny record · win % by ground and tripThe record
latest 50 of 3,852 · newest firstThe latest 50 of 3,852 archived runners, newest first. The full record runs from 9 January 2005 to 26 October 2026.
Drawn from the whole archive (2005 onwards), so it can include runs outside the window the header statistics cover. Non-runners are not listed. A finish shown in letters is a non-completion (F fell · UR unseated · PU pulled up · BD brought down).
Quick answers
- What is C Byrnes's strike rate?
- C Byrnes has won 410 of 3,351 runners since 2008, a strike rate of 12.2% (as at 27 October 2026). Figures are computed from our own results archive.
- Which course does C Byrnes do best at?
- Navan by strike rate: 21 wins from 110 runners (19.1%) since 2008. Read from the 15 courses with the most runners on the same basis, and only those with at least 30 — a small sample cannot top the list, and a rarely-visited course is not in the comparison.
- Who rides most for C Byrnes?
- Philip Byrnes, with 580 runners since 2008 — 17% of the total. That pairing has won 72 (12.4%).
- Is C Byrnes in form?
- In the last 14 days: 16 runners, 3 winners, a strike rate of 18.8%. That is above the baseline of 12.2% since 2008.
- What is C Byrnes's Fair A/E?
- 1.04, from 3,348 runners with a computed fair probability since 2008. Fair A/E compares actual wins with a margin-stripped market expectation, so 1.00 is par: above it the wins came at bigger prices than the margin-free market implied, below it they did not.