C Lerner
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 140 runners a season, winning with 9% of them — level with the margin-free market read across the lifetime window (Fair A/E 1.01). Horses in first-time headgear strike at 13% (152 runs, true-first definition). The yard is in form now — 2 winners in the last fortnight, above its own baseline.
The record is strongest at Lyon Parilly (33.3%, n=30), clear of the yard's 9.1% baseline. A horse in first-time headgear has been a positive signal at 13.2% (n=152, Fair A/E 1.78), but a horse having headgear put back on after a bare run has been a poor signal at 5.1% (n=59, Fair A/E 0.72). Runners with a claiming rider up are the standout value angle: 9.7% strikes only just above baseline, but Fair A/E 1.35 and +157.50 to a £1 stake over 516 runners — a record the market has persistently underpriced. Right now the yard is firing: 2 winners from 15 runners in the last 14 days (13.3%, 4.2pts above the 9.1% baseline). M Lerner rides 15% of the entries and sits below the yard's average (6.8% vs 9.1%, A/E 0.89). The yard also reads well at trips under 6f (20.3%, n=69) and off a 8-14-day break (14.5%, n=173). 22 Group and Graded wins sit in the archive record — the biggest prize the yard has landed: the Qatar Prix du Cadran at Longchamp (FR) (Oct 2015, £132,884). The stable star of the record: Simba (FR) — 8 wins from 45 runs for the yard. Seasonally, the yard fires Mar–Apr.
Yard patterns
the angles behind the record · vs 9.1% baselineEach tile is the record in that situation vs the 9.1% 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.
Horses 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 2,691 · newest firstThe latest 50 of 2,691 archived runners, newest first. The full record runs from 17 March 2005 to 28 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 Lerner's strike rate?
- C Lerner has won 234 of 2,575 runners since 2008, a strike rate of 9.1% (as at 28 October 2026). Figures are computed from our own results archive.
- Which course does C Lerner do best at?
- Lyon Parilly by strike rate: 10 wins from 30 runners (33.3%) 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 Lerner?
- M Lerner, with 384 runners since 2008 — 15% of the total. That pairing has won 26 (6.8%).
- Is C Lerner in form?
- In the last 14 days: 15 runners, 2 winners, a strike rate of 13.3%. That is above the baseline of 9.1% since 2008.
- What is C Lerner's Fair A/E?
- 1.01, from 2,463 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.