you ...... really need to stay out of conversations, like ALL conversations.

My point to Revidere was that he's riding quality, exactly. But, he's not winning on these quality mounts, at least he didn't this past weekend at Keeneland and Chuck Town. He's gift wrapped mounts on the best horses, unlike a lot out there. When he doesn't win i think people should be allowed to scrutinize, b/c he get's horse quality like none other out there

-bt-

Obviously the guy can ride as evidenced by being in the HOF. But on a Thursday claimer with a horse that isn't a dead closer or hell-bent on the lead, I can think of 15-18 riders I'd rather have on my bet.

Ride as little as possible to make as much as possible.......when you can break your neck every time you ride a race it seems like the best possible situation for a rider?

Is the implication that Emollient or Game on Dude lost because of the ride?

Id rather work just on big days...who wouldnt?

maybe less...if I could :D

:)

No smith fan here, but he has paid his dues. Let the younger guys get the green horses in racing trim...

Like an old timer electrician told my husband years ago....you take all the calls. I need the rest, you need the experience.

what are you talking about? are you saying he's riding less to diminish his chances of getting injured?

I didn't implicate anything about his rides on either. I said, it must be nice, to get choice, odds on mounts in big stakes, and have that be your weekend, no other mounts.

He looses on both, and forbid anyone from noticing or making a comment? i didn't know he was untouchable at this site. Zenyatta, Smith.... who's next that people can't offer a comment on

-bt-

Your comment was so poorly written and with the odds on loss comment what would you expect?

There is no doubt statistically that riding more increases your chance of getting hurt. Why ride a 20 mdn claimer at 1/5 if you are Mike, Gary, or any "made" rider? So yes when you dont see those guys in those races its by choice with many reasons.

sorry i couldn't articulate my thoughts to you and your standards.

and, you certainly are wowing me with statistic like jockeys who ride less are less likely to get injured.

again, my point is the guy had two choice mounts this weekend, lost them both.....nobody is allowed to bring it up?

-bt-

Who would you put up on them instead? Emollient just didn't have it - that other pace horse kept on and won. I'm not sure the ride on her cost her the win. She just got beat. With Game On Dude - that horse just doesn't tend to win unless he's uncontested for the lead. Now the speed that went with him killed themselves and set it up for someone to come pick up the pieces. I'm not a smith fan myself but I think these were fair losses. Horses are overhyped and get bet accordingly.

jockeys are incredibly overrated.

There is a reason why Mike Smith gets all the choice mounts. He wins big on big days. When he starts consistently losing, the better mounts will be lost for him as well.

Unlike other professional athletes, jockeys dont have contracts and they do not automatically get the best mounts because of a multi-year contracts they signed with a trainer or owner. IF you can prove you can win the big races consistently, the calls will come your way. Plain and simple.

:tro:

well...

but do you really think that both lost because of the ride? that it was smiths fault they lost? what jockey would have won with them, and how do you know that?
horses aren't robots. somedays are better than others.