Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dalakhani
Im well aware of kent's problems with riding out to the wire and how far that goes back which is way back into the early 90's. Im also aware of ramifications of the super and triple bets. Again, this has nothing to do with my original point.
Kent or any other jockey's impact on the game/sport/industry of horse racing is extremely tiny. He is not a symbol of anything in my opinion. He is a jockey that is extremely skilled and puts in rides that are at times brilliant and at other times baffling.
|
I read the following in a editoral in the Bloodhorse a couple of years ago. I then checked it out and found that it is indeed true. McCarron has a class at his jockey school in Kentucky. He focus's on the impact of a jockey's ride on not only the outcome of a given race but the money lost by owners and breeders. His example? A race about 2 years ago at Toga when Kent was on Capote's Crown. He didn't ride the horse out in a Grade 1, missed third by a photo. The photo was of him standing up on the horse. He had given up on the horse at the top of the stretch. The horse took him to forth. Your point is what I am concerned about. I think the jock's may excuse away their rides by saying the same thing. Come on, after seeing the Haskell, you mean it never crossed your mind about what could have happened in the Belmont if he didn't give up on the horse? NOT THAT HE WOULD HAVE CAUGHT DA TARA, but didn't you wonder a bit how he may have done?