Overrated Jockeys

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Overrated riders? I think that's redundant.

It's the same answer as the corny joke my father used to ask me every time we drove by a cemetary when I was a kid. " How many people are dead in that cemetary? "


All of them.

I agree...on most occasions the horses dictate the outcome of the race, not the riders...There are a few races out there were riders visually make a difference but it is a minor percentage IMO...If one horse is typically three lengths faster than another horse and they race together and the faster horse has Tammy Fox on him and the slower horse has Angel Cordero - I'll still bet on the faster horse everytime...

Jockeys have a tough job, don't get me wrong....they have to be in immacualte physicval condition and they lay their bodies on the line everytime they exit the paddock on to the race track, but our sport's real superstars are the horses and not the jockeys....

Now, I do think a rider can ruin the outcome of a race, obviously, and it happens WAY more than they actually positively assist the outcome of the race...This is just reality and not me on a jockey-hating tirade...I actually respect jockeys a lot, but I am alos an owner and I see who pays for everything in this sport and who makes the money in this sport, which is no secret....

It's funny because I actually disagree with the original poster a little bit...I believe that Rafael Bejarano is the most talented and best rider in the game...Leparoux is a very solid up-and-comer but I like Rafael's athleticism more, and he is not scared to try on cheap horses, which many prima donas out there won't do....I believe Ramon Dominguez is the most UNDERrated rider in the country if that helps your original question, but they all probably get too much credit for their actions when one of their horses win IMO - but that is how the racing world is set up...the media can't interview the horse so the next logical figure they can latch onto as a 'star' is the jockey because they are interviewable (well some of them are)..LOL

[Scav]

off topic here but Mig doesn't lose on Allen Jerken's runners, think he is a little less then 50% on his mounts, was 4 for 10 and now 5 for 11 today....

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Scav

off topic here but Mig doesn't lose on Allen Jerken's runners, think he is a little less then 50% on his mounts, was 4 for 10 and now 5 for 11 today....

I would say it is a mutual admiration society.

[blackthroatedwind]

Basically, bettors use jockeys in a transparant attempt to veil their handicapping inadequacies. They blame them for losses when in fact it was more than likely a mediocre handicapping job ( hey, even good horseplayers don't handicap all the races well ). The truth is it is rare that you are absolutely cost money by a poor ride. And, more importantly, nobody ever seems to notice those few times when you cash simply because another rider buried his mount. I guarantee this happens MUCH more than you are cost a win by a poor ride. It's simply numbers.

But, also, people spend way too much time worrying about riders when attempting to handicap. It is a distraction and a complete waste of time and energy. Handicap the horses and hope for the best.

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Basically, bettors use jockeys in a transparant attempt to veil their handicapping inadequacies. They blame them for losses when in fact it was more than likely a mediocre handicapping job ( hey, even good horseplayers don't handicap all the races well ). The truth is it is rare that you are absolutely cost money by a poor ride. And, more importantly, nobody ever seems to notice those few times when you cash simply because another rider buried his mount. I guarantee this happens MUCH more than you are cost a win by a poor ride. It's simply numbers.

But, also, people spend way too much time worrying about riders when attempting to handicap. It is a distraction and a complete waste of time and energy. Handicap the horses and hope for the best.

Yeah you're right, but when you are cost a win, it sucks.

[Scav]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

And, more importantly, nobody ever seems to notice those few times when you cash simply because another rider buried his mount.

Another thing that is well said.....My Laviollete theory is specifically to this, he buries ALL his mounts....

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

truth is it is rare that you are absolutely cost money by a poor ride.

I don't know about that...I can say that I've seen several rides that I firmly believe cost a horse a win or better placing, and NO - most of the time I don't have money on the horse (LOL)....you see riders hurt horses FAR more than you see them help horses...

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Cunningham Racing

I don't know about that...I can say that I've seen several rides that I firmly believe cost a horse a win or better placing, and NO - most of the time I don't have money on the horse (LOL)....you see riders hurt horses FAR more than you see them help horses...

I agree they hurt horses far more than they help them. This is true even for the best riders. They have to. It's very hard to really make that much of a difference on the positive side and not that hard to screw it up. Sure, we all lose bets we should have won, Mike Luzzi CLEARLY cost me a score in the finale Friday when I needed the favorite for a good Pick-4 hit when he buried him unnecessarily on the rail behind a bad speed going down the backstretch and ended up getting shuffled back to last before rallying to lose by just over a length, but what I guess I should have said is that riders cost the average horseplayer only a fraction of the beats they blame on them. And, as I did say, you will be the positive beneficiary of other bad rides much more often. That's just a numbers game.

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I agree they hurt horses far more than they help them. This is true even for the best riders. They have to. It's very hard to really make that much of a difference on the positive side and not that hard to screw it up. Sure, we all lose bets we should have won, Mike Luzzi CLEARLY cost me a score in the finale Friday when I needed the favorite for a good Pick-4 hit when he buried him unnecessarily on the rail behind a bad speed going down the backstretch and ended up getting shuffled back to last before rallying to lose by just over a length, but what I guess I should have said is that riders cost the average horseplayer only a fraction of the beats they blame on them. And, as I did say, you will be the positive beneficiary of other bad rides much more often. That's just a numbers game.

Yeah, this is true....you'll lose some wagers on jocks poor rides when you probably had the best horse, yet every bettor out there has probably also benefitted by a bad ride on a horse in a race that they won....you're right...it is law of numbers, and riders CANNOT move horses up but can hurt their chances...this is one thing that jocks are at a disadvantage about due to the nature of the game, but surprisingly a lot of people don't understand this reality...

[blackthroatedwind]

If you ask riders, while they obviously would love to be on the favorite every race, they will tell you it is easier to ride big priced horses, in that there are usually no big expectations. On a big favorite their job is absolutely not to screw it up. On a price, they can take a chance and hope to get lucky.

[Habersham000]

Kent Desormeaux.....I won't bet horses anymore with him abord...just watch the replay from sundays 6th race at Belmont...had the best horse and loses because he sits wayyyy to far off the pace on a sprint and no horse can catch the winner even though he has much the best horse in the race....also his rides on Sweetnorthersaint in the triple crown were both terrible

Originally Posted by Cunningham Racing

I agree...on most occasions the horses dictate the outcome of the race, not the riders...There are a few races out there were riders visually make a difference but it is a minor percentage IMO...If one horse is typically three lengths faster than another horse and they race together and the faster horse has Tammy Fox on him and the slower horse has Angel Cordero - I'll still bet on the faster horse everytime...I think Ramon Dominguez is the most underrated rider in the country if that gives you a better answer to your original question.

Jockeys have a tough job, don't get me wrong....they have to be in immacualte physicval condition and they lay their bodies on the line everytime they exit the paddock on to the race track, but our sport's real superstars are the horses and not the jockeys....

Now, I do think a rider can ruin the outcome of a race, obviously, and it happens WAY more than they actually positively assist the outcome of the race...This is just reality and not me on a jockey-hating tirade...I actually respect jockeys a lot, but I am alos an owner and I see who pays for everything in this sport and who makes the money in this sport, which is no secret....

It's funny because I actually disagree with the original poster a little bit...I believe that Rafael Bejarano is the most talented and best rider in the game...Leparoux is a very solid up-and-comer but I like Rafael's athleticism more, and he is not scared to try on cheap horses, which many prima donas out there won't do....I believe Ramon Dominguez is the most UNDERrated rider in the country if that helps your original question, but they all probably get too much credit for their actions when one of their horses win IMO - but that is how the racing world is set up...the media can't interview the horse so the next logical figure they can latch onto as a 'star' is the jockey because they are interviewable (well some of them are)..LOL

I disagree totally, how is Dominguez underrated?

Originally Posted by Sweetness

I disagree totally, how is Dominguez underrated?

Do toi the circuit he rides on he doesn't get the buzz of the Prados, etc. but I don't think he takes a back seat to them one bit from a talent and overall riding total package-perspective...

Originally Posted by Cunningham Racing

Do toi the circuit he rides on he doesn't get the buzz of the Prados, etc. but I don't think he takes a back seat to them one bit from a talent and overall riding total package-perspective...

That's because Prado is riding against the best colony in the country every day, and Dominguez isn't. I mean Jeremy Rose is okay, and so is Mario Pino, but for the most part Delaware is real weak talent wise. Talent wise I agree, he has it, I just think sometimes he tries to look to good, instead of just getting up.

Originally Posted by Sweetness

That's because Prado is riding against the best colony in the country every day, and Dominguez isn't. I mean Jeremy Rose is okay, and so is Mario Pino, but for the most part Delaware is real weak talent wise. Talent wise I agree, he has it, I just think sometimes he tries to look to good, instead of just getting up.

Maybe, and you may know him better than me if you avidly keep up with that circuit because I will admit that I do not...Thus, I'm not judging him off of the talent - or lack there of - in the colony he rides in, but rather in the big races where he is facing the best riders in the world and you can really decipher between the best of the best from a talent perspective...of course, this is just my opinion ad I do admit I don't watch him day-in and day-out...

[SCUDSBROTHER]

"Songster is very talented and no one was going to beat him that day."




Well,I have no fear in calling a spade a spade.This statement is that of an idiot.If you think Bling couldn't have beaten this horse ,then you're an idiot.The horse simply needed a ride.He was kept in neutral,and he is not used to that.The incredible thing is all the excuses made for this guy.No matter what he does..."it couldn't have been helped"..."oh..bad luck" etc.etc.
My God,everybody who rides a horse from the 1 hole has a built in excuse from now on.He got Behaving Badly off the rail,and into the winners circle today.No reason he couldn't have done it with Bling.The amazing thing is that Bling is so versatile.He won the 2nd start this year by going right to the lead.He won his 1st race this year,and the Aqueduct race,by closing.He let Prado and Vega make all the decisions.They rode his horse.He let them do that by not staying out of trouble.He is the chalk on the rail.He has to use the horse's speed to get out of there,or take back.What he did was allow somebody else to clear and come over in front of him.He thought he could sit behind him,and get a hole to get out? Well,we all know that if he is on chalk and in New York,he will get covered up like Prado did.After you guys get done making excuses for him,you'll realize Prado would have won if rode Bling.He never would have placed his horse 2nd behind the leader.He would have laid back further,and got off that rail(either on the backstretch ,or in the stretch.)Gomez put this horse in "No Man's Land"(RIGHT BEHIND THE SPEED,AND ENTICED OTHERS TO LOCK HIM IN.)I'm sorry,but I fail to see why Gomez thought he wasn't going to get locked in.He allowed another big gray at Santa Anita to get locked in the same way.The horse never did get out.It was like the worst ride all meet,but the fact is he repeated the mistake in New York(a few months later.)

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

"Songster is very talented and no one was going to beat him that day."




Well,I have no fear in calling a spade a spade.This statement is that of an idiot.If you think Bling couldn't have beaten this horse ,then you're an idiot.The horse simply needed a ride.He was kept in neutral,and he is not used to that.The incredible thing is all the excuses made for this guy.No matter what he does..."it couldn't have been helped"..."oh..bad luck" etc.etc.
My God,everybody who rides a horse from the 1 hole has a built in excuse from now on.He got Behaving Badly off the rail,and into the winners circle today.No reason he couldn't have done it with Bling.The amazing thing is that Bling is so versatile.He won the 2nd start this year by going right to the lead.He won his 1st race this year,and the Aqueduct race,by closing.He let Prado and Vega make all the decisions.They rode his horse.He let them do that by not staying out of trouble.He is the chalk on the rail.He has to use the horse's speed to get out of there,or take back.What he did was allow somebody else to clear and come over in front of him.He thought he could sit behind him,and get a hole to get out? Well,we all know that if he is on chalk and in New York,he will get covered up like Prado did.After you guys get done making excuses for him,you'll realize Prado would have won if rode Bling.He never would have placed his horse 2nd behind the leader.He would have laid back further,and got off that rail(either on the backstretch ,or in the stretch.)Gomez put this horse in "No Man's Land"(RIGHT BEHIND THE SPEED,AND ENTICED OTHERS TO LOCK HIM IN.)I'm sorry,but I fail to see why Gomez thought he wasn't going to get locked in.He allowed another big gray at Santa Anita to get locked in the same way.The horse never did get out.It was like the worst ride all meet,but the fact is he repeated the mistake in New York(a few months later.)

I also have no problem calling a spade a spade and you sound like a child. So let me get this straight you obviously needed TMB, so your are upset because your handicapping sucked. Baffert was upset TMB drew the 1 hole, because it's a tough post, especially going 7 panels at Belmont. He also didn't allow somebody to clear, Vega's horse is a lighting fast horse out of the gate, and he was outbroke. He made his decision to sit, and had the hole opened when Gomez wanted, I don't think he was going by. Also, Prado sits on the rail all of the time, and comes through the rail, or doesn't if the hole doesn't open. It absolutely is luck. You're just sour because you lost, well that happens, you win some, you lose some. Stop crying.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Sweetness

I also have no problem calling a spade a spade and you sound like a child. So let me get this straight you obviously needed TMB, so your are upset because your handicapping sucked. Baffert was upset TMB drew the 1 hole, because it's a tough post, especially going 7 panels at Belmont. He also didn't allow somebody to clear, Vega's horse is a lighting fast horse out of the gate, and he was outbroke. He made his decision to sit, and had the hole opened when Gomez wanted, I don't think he was going by. Also, Prado sits on the rail all of the time, and comes through the rail, or doesn't if the hole doesn't open. It absolutely is luck. You're just sour because you lost, well that happens, you win some, you lose some. Stop crying.

"just curious as to what people think"



You brought it up.You got your f'n feedback.The guy blew this ride,and most people come to make excuses for "stars," and that is just they way it will always be.You,or I make a costly mistake,and we are written up etc. for it.Not this "star" jockey.He gets bailed out by every starstruck guy with a keyboard.This is not new.You went much farther.You said nobody was going to beat Songster that day.That is such total crap.TMB is a much better talent,and will kick Songster's a$$ every other time they meet.

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

"just curious as to what people think"



You brought it up.You got your f'n feedback.The guy blew this ride,and most people come to make excuses for "stars," and that is just they way it will always be.You,or I make a costly mistake,and we are written up etc. for it.Not this "star" jockey.He gets bailed out by every starstruck guy with a keyboard.This is not new.You went much farther.You said nobody was going to beat Songster that day.That is such total crap.TMB is a much better talent,and will kick Songster's a$$ every other time they meet.

It just seems to me that you are being real crucial for no good reason, other than you lost. You're not going to hit them all, nobody does. No one is bailing anyone out, and is TMB that much more of a talent than Songster. I have them 1-1 head to head, so I guess we'll see. I also didn't see baffert being too critical about the ride, he was critical of the situation, and the racing luck. Like everyone else here has said. You seem to be the only one thinking Gomez could have done more. Is it really that far fetched to think Songster would have won regardless? Baffert was obviously telling everyone something when he was telling anyone that would listen that he was unhappy with the 1 hole.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Sweetness

It just seems to me that you are being real crucial for no good reason, other than you lost. You're not going to hit them all, nobody does. No one is bailing anyone out, and is TMB that much more of a talent than Songster. I have them 1-1 head to head, so I guess we'll see. I also didn't see baffert being too critical about the ride, he was critical of the situation, and the racing luck. Like everyone else here has said. You seem to be the only one thinking Gomez could have done more. Is it really that far fetched to think Songster would have won regardless? Baffert was obviously telling everyone something when he was telling anyone that would listen that he was unhappy with the 1 hole.

Ain't brain surgery.The guy blew the ride,and people are lickin' nut (as usual.)For every bad ride that has ever been given,there is a guy out there ready to say it wasn't a bad ride.Yes, you are bailing him out.He won with Behaving Badly from the 1 hole,and should have won with Bling from the 1 hole.He was the favorite because he was the best horse(even with this career- ending 1 hole.).Yes,he would easily have beaten Songster with any ride at all.