Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jfeld
My commentary on the riders you have so eloquently spoken about has absolutely nothing do do with gambling on them. It is solely regarding their riding ability, and their attitudes.
If you choose to endorse the cause of the little gnomes then that is your perrogative, however it is quite ignorant of you to assume that my statement that the named riders are incapable of performing their jobs and my assertion that as independant contractors they have no business extorting anything from the industry from which they as a group are already grossly overpaid is in any way related to gambling on them then you are as foolish as your avatar suggests you are.
|
ok, i'll nibble on the bait.
1. You're wrong about their abilities. Their abilities are relative to the competition. Take any of those riders and put them on a lesser circuit, they rise to the top. Fact. Smith, Martin, Lopez, etc... You tell me different.
4. You say jockeys as a group are overpaid. Really? The median earnings for a jockey in 2004 were:
a. $500,000
b. $150,000
c. $15,000
hint, it's not a or b.
5. You refer to jockeys as gnomes. I assume you know what a gnome is. It's distasteful.
6. You refer to the jockeys' efforts at bargaining for coverage as extortion. Whether I support increased coverage for jockeys is less relevant than you referring to those efforts as extortion. How is it extortion?
7. Stop blaming jockeys, ok, stop blaming Mike Smith for losses. If you know anything you certainly know that you've won as many races as result of a bad ride as you've lost. It evens out.
Good luck.