This is a remarkable achievement by any measure – especially as they were spread across five countries with 16 in the UK, seven in Ireland, three in France and one apiece in Hong Kong and the USA.

However, two questions arise. One, is Group One success the best measure of who’s the best trainer and, two, does the rating of Group One races need a radical overhaul not only here in Australia – which is a bit of a hobby horse of mine – but also in the rest of the world?

I do not profess to be an expert on the grading of European races but at a cursory glance, I would suspect at least ten of O’Brien’s wins came in races which might be of suspect Group One status.

Of course, you could argue that this might well apply across the globe – especially when it comes to races for females only. Others might argue that’s what makes the breeding world go around.

The strength or otherwise of Group One races will always be a touchy subjective, especially when it comes to the ones restricted to fillies and mares and the European Pattern Committee did create several new sex-restricted Group One races  in 2004 in a bid to encourage owners to keep their good fillies in training.

The fillies Winter (Galileo) and Roly Poly (War Front) contributed seven Group One wins to the O’Brien haul. Roly Poly’s Falmouth Stakes (Gr 1, 1m) was quite weak, although the  Prix Rothschild (Gr 1, 1600m) and the Sun Chariot Stakes (Gr 1, 1m), in fairness, looked to be pretty much up to standard.

You do have to always wonder about the depth of the Irish features. For instance, O’Brien has won 16 of the last 20 editions of the Phoenix Stakes (Gr 1, 6f) and invariably dominates in terms of the number of runners. This year Sioux Nation (Scat Daddy) won the Phoenix and the form looks solid enough, but only time will tell whether they were any good this year or not.

None of this is meant to demean O’Brien in any way. He was, after all, unlucky not to have added a couple more Group One’s with Johannes Vermeer (Galileo) in Australia.

Quite the contrary. I’m inclined to reject the argument that any other competent trainer would do as well as with the same stock and numbers. I’m sure that many other trainers would do very well but not necessarily as well.

I really don’t understand the paranoia about Group One status. Imagine if Redzel, by Snitzel (Redoute’s Choice), were an entire and he’d won the no-status The Everest (1200m) on the back of some lesser stakes wins. Would the absence of a Group One have affected his value?

The part of this equation which is driven by racing clubs also makes no sense. Would any fewer have turned up at Flemington to see Winx (Street Cry) win the Turnbull Stakes (Gr 1, 2000m) if it had Group Two status which it should have. Really, can we have three middle distance open Group One’s (Underwood, Turnbull, Caulfield Stakes) in a month leading into the one race truly of that status – the Cox Plate (Gr 1, 2040m)?

There is no such thing as a ‘mug’ punter in my view when it comes to understanding what’s going on. They may be mugs by betting behaviour but not by comprehension. The punters know a good horse and a good race when they see one – irrespective of its status.

Maybe it doesn’t matter other than its capacity to distort history and the truth. Not to mention that if you’re going to do something, isn’t there always that obligation to do it as well as possible?

This is something we can attempt to solve. As to rating trainers, I’m not so sure. For starters, there’s hundred of yearlings which were effectively bought by trainers but knocked down in someone else’s name.

Do we rate Darren Weir’s 416 winners in Victoria, last season, at 16.7 per cent as significantly better than Symon Wylde’s 68 winners at a better strike rate of 17.9 per cent, or better than Chris Waller winning about the same amount of prize money with significantly fewer winners?

How do we assess the training performances of those who have success with a horse or horses who have a myriad of issues? Is Mick Kent’s $26 into $11 win with Amadeus (Amadeus Wolf) last week a better effort than Ken Keys winning the Pakenham Cup (Listed, 2500m) with a horse who was second-up – Like A Carousel (Helike)?

Similarly, given that we began by talking about Aidan O’Brien, very similar questions would be posed in the UK and Ireland.

Interestingly, O’Brien has trained only 32 winners in England this year but tops the prize money list as they’ve earned around £8,300,000. Mark Johnston has been the most prolific trainer of winners with 214 at a 15.69 per cent strike rate. William Haggas and Charlie Appleby have fewer winners but remarkably good strike rates – 26.3 per cent and 27.8 per cent respectively.

In Ireland, O’Brien has 119 winners for the year and it’s not difficult to put that in perspective – and pay him his due – given that the highly respected Jim Bolger has just on half the numbers of winners (60) from almost the same number of runners.

For the record, O’Brien’s 28 Group One wins – beating Bobby Frankel’s 25 wins in the USA in 2003 – came with 16 individual horses led by the filly Winter (Galileo) who won four. He won eight of the ten Classics in England and Ireland and was second in the other two. Some 16 of the Group One wins came from three-year-olds, while 14 of the 28 Group One winners started favourite.

No fewer than nine of O’Brien’s individual Group One winners, for this year, are by Galileo (Sadler’s Wells). Scat Daddy (Johannesburg) chimed in with three while War Front (Danzig) had two. The remaining two were by Pour Moi (Montjeu) and Deep Impact (Sunday Silence).

As to measuring the best trainer? I think it can only every come down to personal experience and who provides the best return on yearling sale purchase price; the best counsel as to when to persevere and when to let go….oh and, occasionally, when one might have a wee bet!!