I don't think he really tried to go to the lead. There was no pace and he ended up on the lead. That was fine because I believe the horse has gone wire to wire before. Anyway, when someone challenged him for the lead going into the clubhouse turn, he took back and let the other horse have the lead. That was the smart thing to do. It's not as if they were at the 3/8 pole. If someone comes outside of you at the 3/8 pole, they pretty much force your hand. Even if you wanted to wait a little longer before asking your horse, your hand is forced if someone is starting to pass you. It's a totally different story going into the clubhouse turn. It's not too late to take back at that point. If someone else wants the lead, I would let them have it every time. The last thing you want is to go head and head the entire race. You have very little chance if you do that.

Anyway, Relaxed Gesture had no real excuses for the most part. He got into a little traffic trouble on the far turn. That was the only excuse he had. He was not the best horse that day and there was no way he was going to win the race. You guys should stop blaming Desormeaux and admit you bet the wrong horse. I have no problem criticizing a jockey if he makes a mistake and costs his horse the race but that was not the case with Relaxed Gesture.

It's ironic that as well as Victor Espinoza rode yesterday, he actually cost his horse the race in the finale yesterday. I had no action on the race but I did watch it. Victor moved much too soon and opened up at the 3/16 pole only to get run down and lose by less than a length. Now that was a bad ride.

His last beyer was like a 99 but again that was march of 05. Long layoff and those works are nothing to write home about. If he does win, it would be a case of pure larceny by the trainer. Stranger things have happened I guess but this horse will just have to beat me.

Rupert i saw it the same way. I honestly dont know what kent could do differently besides winging it out front which would have brought certain doom. At least with what he was doing he was keeping his horse more to a style he was accustomed to. You are right...RG was just not the best horse on that day. Easier to blame the jockey.

Rupert-

Gomez does not move horses up like you think. No Jockey ever does by his or herself. Trainers move up horses and jockeys can lose races with bad decisons, but are NOT the be all end all when choosing who to bet on. Period. Garrett did ride for Pletcher (Circular Quay), Clement, Bin Surror & Godolphin. So he was not getting bad horses and moving them up. He rode many good horses well.

Betting on the Jockey angle in the end is a losing proposition.

NC Tony

Ladbroke It's obvious you don't know SH

It. and you're biased.

NC Tony

In general, I agree with you. At the big tracks, most of the jockeys are decent. If you put any of the top 12 jockeys at Del Mar or Saratoga on the best horse, they are going to win 90% of the time. there isn't any jockey that I won't bet on. In general, I don't really cares who is riding. I just try to bet on the best horse.

In the last 25 years, I've only seen 3 jockeys that actually seem to move some horses way up. Those 3 jocks are Gomez, P Val, and Stevens.

P Val is not as smart as Gomez or Stevens, but horses really seem to run for him. If you have a sprinter that usually goes head and head on the lead with the same horses every race, if you put P Val on the horse, he will probably be able to get clear of the other horses. It's the strangest thing I've ever seen. He can actually get more early speed out of a horse than anyone.

I'm not one to normally talk about jockeys. The only jockey I used to ever talk about was stevens because when he was in his prime, he was by so far the best is was ridiculous. It was like watching Tiger or Michael Jordan or anyone who is dominant in their sport. Gomez is the best jockey I've seen since Stevens. He's almost always in the right spot and he gets more out of a horse than anyone. I normally don't talk about jocks, but this guy is simply in another league. It's so extreme that it's hard not to notice. Its not just a matter of him getting good mounts. Look at his ROI. H's winning on horses at big prices and he does it consistently. Its not a coincidence. He did it last year too. He was winning huge race after huge races on 25-1 shots. He did it on Purge, Taste of Paradise, etc. It's not just a coincidence that these horses move way up for him. It happens over and over and over again. The smart trainers see it. Pletcher and Baffert both know it.

I think if you bet on him blindly in every race at Saratoga, you would have actually made money. That's pretty amazing.

Anyone who could get Purge to do that is an angel in my eyes.

That horse was just listless up until Gomez got after that ass and brought him on home. I could actually hear the stallion fee going up when I saw Gomez getting after him through the lane.

The guy just has a gift. He does such a great job and getting horses to relax and to settle into the place that will maximize their effort. Every horse has an ideal pace that they want to run at. It's an extreme example, but you wouldn't want to drop back to dead last by 12 lengths with Henny Hughes. If you did, he wouldn't run as well. By the same token, you woudn't want to gun Circular Quay. He wouldn't run as well if you did. Those are extreme examples. No jockey is going to drop back to dead-last with Henny Hughes and no jockey is going to gun Circular Quay. It's going to be more subtle than that. With Circular Quay, Gomez dropped about 14 lengths back. Any jock would have taken the horse back, but some jocks may have only been 9-10 lengths back. In this case, it wouldn't have mattered. The horse would have still won. He wouldn't have won as easily. He would have probably won by 2-3 lengths instead of 4 1/4 lengths. But if the field was a little tougher, being in the perfect spot could make the difference of winning instead of losing. There will be a lot of races where the top few horses are pretty equally matched and being in the perfect position can make the difference between winning and losing.

And Appealing Zophie cost me an $80K pick 6...

But Saratoga this year was better than ever. Anybody that can say there's a better place to race with a straight face better pass the joint. Driving back to the city on Monday was downright depressing- Belmont fall is a great meet but nothing compared to the mystique, energy, and quality of the Spa. I'm a firm believer they should expand the meet to the Wednesday after July 4th until Labor Day (so approximately 9 weeks.) How amazing would that be??

I love the place enough that I'd move there, and put up with upstate (where I grew up and vowed I'd never come back) for 46 weeks a year, just to take in the whole 6 weeks instead of just the weekends...

Not amazing at all. You have any idea how terrible those cards would become?

I have mixed feelings on extending the meet. But I will say this. The majority of people that attend the races at Saratoga could give a rat's ass about the quality of the cards. Most people are just there to hang out and I doubt it would hurt NYRA or the sport if they moved those 3 weeks of racing to Saratoga instead of keeping them at Belmont.

Adding Labor Day weekend was the best thing that ever happened to Saratoga racing.

As if they could be any worse than the last two weeks at Belmont? Are you kidding me?
The last two weeks at Belmont aren't any good at all
The next change at the Spa should be 8 weeks, 5 racing days a week.

Yes I agree Oracle. 6 days is too much. Add a couple extra weeks and chop off Monday racing, although if it wasnt for one particular monday this meet, I would have had the worst meet ever. Instead I finished around even.

Hall of Fame day is always Monday.

i heard them talking about extending the meet on the radio when i was up there this summer. it will never happen. i do not think it should either. the meet will just be watered down. trainers and their workers also have lives outside of racing and most live somewhere other than saratoga. most would not like to see the meet extended.

The cards at the end of the Belmont meet were awful this year. They CAN'T be worse than that.

I'd take 90% of Saratoga over anywhere in the world, and from NYRA's perspective the handle increase would be very much in their favor.

My proposal:
Run the Friday after July 4th until Labor Day, 5 days a week except Travers Monday, Hall of Fame Monday, and Labor Day.
That would be 46 racing days (vs. the typical 36.)

Who cares about Hall of Fame day? Break tradition and put it on a Wed. Who would really care? The race itself is no great shakes, thats for sure.

I like the Labor Day thing, that could be the only Monday. Start on a Thursday after July 4th, run 5 days a week Wed-Sun, with the exception of Labor Day being the one Monday and missing the first Wednesday of the meet, starting on that Thursday instead.

18K people attended the races the Hall of Fame Day. Big whoop. It can be changed to a different day of the week to fit into my proposed 5 day a week schedule.

Personally I had a delightful time and the yearling sales are at that time as well.

The real reson is NYRA does not want to do it. As you all probably know Belmont and Saratoga share the same equipment and "guts" The move to each meet is a royal pain in the arse. NYRA doesn't want to do it just for one day and distrupt the Belmont Meet.. All that other nonsense about hotel rooms cold weather etc. is all BS Hopefully that will change to have it there just for one time.