Mark Rimell
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 60 runners a season, across both codes, winning with 10% of them — beating the margin-free market read across the lifetime window (Fair A/E 1.08).
A horse in first-time headgear has been a poor signal at 4.9% (n=41, Fair A/E 1.17). The market has consistently overbet horses returning fresh after 61+ days: 5.3% strike, Fair A/E 0.80 and −92.00 to a £1 stake over 188 runners — those runners underperform what the price implies. Rob Hornby rides 8% of the entries and matches the yard's average almost exactly (11%, A/E 1.15) — the partnership beats the margin-free market read. The yard also reads well beyond 3m (22.6%, n=31) and over 6f – 7f (15.2%, n=243). One Group or Graded win sits in the archive record — the biggest prize the yard has landed: the Lanzarote Handicap Hurdle at Kempton (Jan 2005, £29,000). The stable star of the record: Thapa VC (IRE) — 14 wins from 79 runs for the yard. Seasonally, the yard fires Nov–Jan.
Yard patterns
the angles behind the record · vs 9.7% baselineEach tile is the record in that situation vs the 9.7% baseline — descriptive splits with the sample always shown, for you to weigh. 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. The same beliefs, tested across every yard and every GB and Irish race since 2005: Racing myths.
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 firstWhen 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 1,275 · newest firstThe latest 50 of 1,275 archived runners, newest first. The full record runs from 3 January 2005 to 15 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).
KTB’s figures
the forward record · since 5 Oct 2026KTB’s figures on this yard’s runners since 13 Oct 2026: fastest on KTB Speed in 1 run (won 0) · to 13 Oct 2026.
Each pick was a KTB figure’s choice before the off — the published KTB Selection, the top-rated horse on KTB Rating, the fastest on KTB Speed — settled against the result the next morning and never worked out again; “did not run” is counted apart. GB and Irish races only. A record of weeks so far: read it as a count, not a verdict.
Quick answers
- What is Mark Rimell's strike rate?
- Mark Rimell has won 105 of 1,077 runners since 2008, a strike rate of 9.7% (as at 6 November 2026). Figures are computed from our own results archive.
- Which course does Mark Rimell do best at?
- Warwick by strike rate: 5 wins from 31 runners (16.1%) 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 Mark Rimell?
- Rob Hornby, with 82 runners since 2008 — 8% of the total. That pairing has won 9 (11%).
- What is Mark Rimell's Fair A/E?
- 1.08, from 1,073 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.