Derby Trail Forums - Do jockeys matter?

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)

- The Paddock (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)

- - Do jockeys matter? (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40738)

Do jockeys matter?

This doesn't have anything much to do with anything but I was looking at this...

http://www.skysports.com/racing/race...415678,00.html

... and it got me to wondering.

What do you all think?

When you're capping how much is the jockey taken into consideration?

Obviously we all have our likes and dislikes, our memories that we can't let go of. (One of mine is Kent on Paddy. Buh bye 2nd place finish).

Whether or not they're just? They become our own truths.

I know one person here who is a very good capper who swears he doesn't take the jockey into consideration.

There are people who will not play a horse if a particular rider has the mount.

What about you?

Is the jockey not important at all or the single most underrated part of the big picture or does it depend on x,y and z?

What if said jockey is in a slump?

Borel at Churchill is one thing but at Belmont it's a different story (one could argue).

Taking all these different scenerios into consideration what is your very vague answer?

Important? Somewhat? Not at all?

Feel free to share your insul... I mean thoughts and give examples, both good and bad, if you wish. (Or tell about the best or worst ride evah if you so desire). :eek: :D

I always bet the grey jockey :p:{>:

Soooo that's one vote for yes they do matter? :D

We have not seen a jockey who could ride a closer like Eddie Delahoussaye for a longtime.

I think that when you are betting tris and supers, you should take into account the jockeys ability to finish ITM....some jocks are quitters.

They matter on the big racing days.

Quote:

Originally Posted by my miss storm cat (Post 747443)

This doesn't have anything much to do with anything but I was looking at this...

http://www.skysports.com/racing/race...415678,00.html

... and it got me to wondering.

What do you all think? Yes, they matter.

When you're capping how much is the jockey taken into consideration? It depends on the circuit and the type of race. The smaller the circuit, the more I take who's riding into consideration.

Obviously we all have our likes and dislikes, our memories that we can't let go of. (One of mine is Kent on Paddy. Buh bye 2nd place finish).

Whether or not they're just? They become our own truths.

I know one person here who is a very good capper who swears he doesn't take the jockey into consideration.

There are people who will not play a horse if a particular rider has the mount.

What about you? At some of the smaller circuits, there are jockeys that couldn't win a two (or three) turn race if they were on Secretariat, so yes, some jockeys are autotosses.

Is the jockey not important at all or the single most underrated part of the big picture or does it depend on x,y and z? Somewhere in the bottom third of the things I am looking at.

What if said jockey is in a slump? Define slump. Yes, I have considered how a jockey is riding on whether to include a horse or not, but that is near the bottom of the factors I look at.

Borel at Churchill is one thing but at Belmont it's a different story (one could argue).

Taking all these different scenerios into consideration what is your very vague answer?

Important? Somewhat? Not at all? It depends. Vague enough?

Feel free to share your insul... I mean thoughts and give examples, both good and bad, if you wish. (Or tell about the best or worst ride evah if you so desire). :eek: :D

The first one to come to mind for me (because I'm still dumbfounded) is Ademar Santos's (45 0 4 3 for the meet) ride on Lewisham in Tampa's 3rd on Saturday.

http://www.equibase.com/static/chart...012911USA3.pdf

http://tampabaydowns.com/DailyReplays.aspx

A perfect example of a low percentage jock on the best horse moving way too soon.

The thing that irked me is that we were discussing before the race why this jock was on this horse with Rosemary Homeister, Leandro Goncalves and others with much better skills, were left in the jocks room. As you can see from the chart (the replay is better) my worst fears came to fruition.

It's a secondary factor, but yes, they matter.

When you're capping how much is the jockey taken into consideration?

I definitely give it some conisderation.

Is the jockey not important at all or the single most underrated part of the big picture or does it depend on x,y and z?

For me it all depends on the scenario. But bottom line for me is, if I really like a horse who I think can win (especially at a price) I'll include him no matter who is riding. I think JMS said it to me once, you will miss some prices by automatically tossing lesser jockeys. That being said, for me sometimes it's very tough using somebody that is 1/43 in a meet and if it comes down to having to narrow down a ticket by a horse, that one will usually be the one.

What if said jockey is in a slump?

For me it all depends on who it is. If it's a guy I'm really not fond of to start with (Espinoza), I might be more inclined to toss. If it's a guy who I like and believe in (Lezcano in Saratoga), I'm probably using. But like I said it mostly depends on the horse.

Taking all these different scenerios into consideration what is your very vague answer?

Important? Somewhat? Not at all?
Sometimes. :o

Jockey switches often tip a trainer's hand. A switch to a hot/top rider may just signal that the trainer is sending out his horse expecting to win.

Hard to ignore them at times even on the bigger tracks. Anathema(a Stevism!) not to use Rosario at the past Hollywood meet. Bite you in the butt everytime. He could have ridden a blind, 3 legged mule to victory.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thunder Gulch (Post 747519)

Jockey switches often tip a trainer's hand. A switch to a hot/top rider may just signal that the trainer is sending out his horse expecting to win.

Yeah but it could also be a front in a claiming race. Switching to a top rider might indicate that a horse is sound, when that just might not be the case.

If Pletcher enters two, I always take a look at the horse that J.V. isn't riding. Not that J.V. is a bad rider, but frequently the other horse is over-looked.

Lezcano in Saratoga? lol did you watch a single race last summer?

To the point of original post, it's funny how most will say they don't, but then contradict that statement by cursing out a guy after a race.

It's all about decision making and strength, some guys make better decisions then others and some have more strength. When it comes down to it, if they didn't matter we would be able to race horses with no one on their back, wouldn't we?

How much a ride matters is a question that will always be debated.

Quote:

Originally Posted by iamthelurker (Post 747650)

Lezcano in Saratoga? lol did you watch a single race last summer?

If you actually read the post what he said would make sense. You might not agree but you misunderstood what he was saying. lol

didnt see the slump part, but yeah i do disagree that was no slump.

i figure that the popular guys like gomez, dominguez, leparoux etc,,, have a certain lifestyle. they need to win a certain number of races to maintain that lifestyle.

lets pick any thursday afternoon at aqueduct:

so lets say ramon is in race 6 at the big A and he has not come in the money in the first 5 races. he has been the favorite in at least 3 of them but for some reason his mounts dont finish on the board.

now in race 6 he is on a 5-1 morning line horse and is the third choice. at post time he goes down to 4-1. the bettors are leary now of betting him knowing that he has burned a lot of money, but ramon wants to make it home in one piece.

so i would put more interest in the jockey and not the horse and wager to w/p/s.

there are reasons why guys like him are 60% in the money.

PS: i really miss listening to steves radio show at 4 pm est. never get a chance to listen now. sucks.