MOST PROFITABLE betting angle

[GinaIsWild]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Point #4 is actually very valid and very important. The average "salary" for jockeys is usually quoted as somewhere around $26,000. That even includes the top jockeys and their inflated earnings. Median income is a better look at it, at which point I am sure the original point #4 is closer to the truth, but I thought I'd try to throw you a bone.

Could you utilize one of your plethora of degrees and inform us (ballpark figure is fine) how much you think it would cost a jockey to insure his or herself out of pocket? Of course I only wonder this because I know how much MY insurance is monthly and the huge number it translates to yearly -- and I sit at a desk for work which means (think i might have to spell things out here it seems.....) that I am unlikely to get trampled by a horse, tossed from my chair when it breaks down, or suffer any of the broken bones or punctured lungs or various other bodily injuries that insurance companies would see could happen to jockeys.

There is a perfectly logical and simple way for the jockey's insurance needs to be covered. You have to first accept the premise that the founding tenet of the jockey's guild is JOCKEYS HELPING JOCKEYS meaning the more successful riders helping their less fortunate bretheren. That being said the logical way to fund their insurance needs is as follows. Instead of them being paid TEN percent of the winner's share of the purse, give them NINE percent. Allow the horseman's bookeeper of each track to automatically withold one percent to be paid into an independent(seperate from the guild) administered fund to pay for their insurance policies. ONE percent of the purse money across the United States is enough to fund every jockey's insurance needs a thousand times over.

You know why they won't agree to it? Because they would rather extort the rest of the industry than be responsible for themselves. The primadonna riders at the top don't really give a damm about any other riders, they would just rather mouth off, and let the industry support them.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Jfeld

There is a perfectly logical and simple way for the jockey's insurance needs to be covered. You have to first accept the premise that the founding tenet of the jockey's guild is JOCKEYS HELPING JOCKEYS meaning the more successful riders helping their less fortunate bretheren. That being said the logical way to fund their insurance needs is as follows. Instead of them being paid TEN percent of the winner's share of the purse, give them NINE percent. Allow the horseman's bookeeper of each track to automatically withold one percent to be paid into an independent(seperate from the guild) administered fund to pay for their insurance policies. ONE percent of the purse money across the United States is enough to fund every jockey's insurance needs a thousand times over.

You know why they won't agree to it? Because they would rather extort the rest of the industry than be responsible for themselves. The primadonna riders at the top don't really give a damm about any other riders, they would just rather mouth off, and let the industry support them.

Let's see about that. Rider at a track making $15,000 a year. Basically what he's doing is risking his life several times a day so that YOU can get your rocks off gambling for the equivalent of $7/hr all year long.

With that established, you also want to now go ask him to take a 10% pay cut?

Awesome. Basically what I'm saying is that idea still sucks big time.

[blackthroatedwind]

The " jockeys risk their lives " argument holds ZERO water ( it is as foolish as people who resort to " you are only complaining becasue you lost your money ) as it avoids the real issue and is an irrelevent last resort. Nobody forces the riders to ride.....NOBODY. They chose this profession.

[post2post]

smith has been off his top form for a while ....... but is he riding horses with legit chances to finish itm....thats another topic..

jockeys have a difficult lifestyle making weight and staying healthy...it is their choice...but never the less, more could be done to help them with insurance.

[GinaIsWild]

Originally Posted by post2post

jockeys have a difficult lifestyle making weight and staying healthy...it is their choice...but never the less, more could be done to help them with insurance.

Why should anything be done FOR them, when they are totally unwilling to help themselves?

[outofthebox]

I have to agree with JFELD on this topic. As a trainer i am bombarded with workmans comp for my employees. I can accept paying those premiums, they are my employees and dedicate themselves at the barn 24/7. What i can't understand is how NYRA charges me $650 for jockeys insurance. The owners are also charged the same amount. That's not even including what the host tracks are putting up for insurance. And another thing that ticks me off about this issue is that when i run horses at Finger Lakes i have to put up another $650 for the jocks......Take a walk by the jocks parking lot at Aqueduct sometime and see what kind of vehicles these guys are driving.. Trust me, they can afford their own insurance...

[post2post]

good post....good info on the subject.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by outofthebox

Take a walk by the jocks parking lot at Aqueduct sometime and see what kind of vehicles these guys are driving.. Trust me, they can afford their own insurance...

Your description of your reasoning sounds much more logical -- it at least made me think. It doesn't seem fair for you to get gouged that way.

With that said, while I'm not trying to insinuate that I know anything about anything compared to you, what about a track like Fairmount Park or Portland Meadows? Perhaps riders riding for $46000 allowance purses can afford nice cars and their insurance premiums, but how about the guy or girl in Oregon or who rides a win in a third level allowance and pockets $200 for it? They work their asses off out there, but there's no glamour and no money at all. Are they less deserving of insurance than a rider at a major, high stakes track, even though they've made their own personal decision to be a rider?

Originally Posted by outofthebox

I have to agree with JFELD on this topic. As a trainer i am bombarded with workmans comp for my employees. I can accept paying those premiums, they are my employees and dedicate themselves at the barn 24/7. What i can't understand is how NYRA charges me $650 for jockeys insurance. The owners are also charged the same amount. That's not even including what the host tracks are putting up for insurance. And another thing that ticks me off about this issue is that when i run horses at Finger Lakes i have to put up another $650 for the jocks......Take a walk by the jocks parking lot at Aqueduct sometime and see what kind of vehicles these guys are driving.. Trust me, they can afford their own insurance...

What kind of car do you drive. I am sure these "trainers" could afford to pay a share of the insurance. Without the jock, you don't make any money. Seems like you would want to make sure the person riding your horse is properly covered.

[GinaIsWild]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Let's see about that. Rider at a track making $15,000 a year. Basically what he's doing is risking his life several times a day so that YOU can get your rocks off gambling for the equivalent of $7/hr all year long.

With that established, you also want to now go ask him to take a 10% pay cut?

Awesome. Basically what I'm saying is that idea still sucks big time.

What I'm saying is that it is the riders responsibility to pay for his/her own insurance. No one has a gun to their heads to be a jockey, and if they are only making $15,000 a year doing it, I suggest they look for another job because they obviously aren't successful doing this one.

Where is it written that everyone choosing to do something is guaranteed to make a living at it? Those that are good and lucky become successful while others not so fortunate must accept reality and find some other way to make a living.

You make the argument that just because someone chooses to ride races they should be guaranteed to make a living doing that. That is an absurd argument.

There are plenty of "risky" professions out there. No one is forced to work in any of them. If the risk outweighs the reward to you, get another job.

The inescapable fact is that is that jockey's are self-employed and as such are responsible for funding their own insurance.

Here are a few examples:

I have a friend who is a very good actor. He has been in a couple of series in minor roles. Is it up to everyone who watches television to guarantee he drives a porsche? Of course not, it's not everyone who watches TV's responsibility, nor is it the production company that developed and put out the series he is in to guarantee him anything. If he wants more than he is being paid doing that job, he gets another. When he isn't acting he works as an accountant.


A horse I own part of was given a poor ride the other day and finished fifth when with a clean trip would've been first or second. Subsequently he didn't earn enough to pay for his feed and training for December. Shouln't I be entitled to bill the jockey for my expenses relating to the ownership of this horse when he is at least complicit and at most the proximate cause as to why my expenses weren't covered last month?


The bottom line is this. No one is forcing these people to do what they do for a living. If they can't make it, they have to get another job. This includes your $ 15,000/year jockey.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Jfeld

...just because someone chooses to ride races they should be guaranteed to make a living doing that. That is an absurd argument.

Obviously, everyone understands exactly what you're saying in the rest of your post....they just don't agree with that.

And as for the quoted portion above -- that certainly is an insane argument, good thing nobody here has said anything like that. Thanks for fabricating it as an example though.

[GinaIsWild]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Obviously, everyone understands exactly what you're saying in the rest of your post....they just don't agree with that.

And as for the quoted portion above -- that certainly is an insane argument, good thing nobody here has said anything like that. Thanks for fabricating it as an example though. You're a piece of work, that's for sure.

Obviously not everyone. That is precisely the argument you have made. I'm not telling anyone to take a 10% pay cut. I'm suggesting that they pay their own insurance which you say is unattainable for such a "risky" profession. I say here is a logical, simple way for that to be accomplished.

[post2post]

i just think the jockeys should be covered by the governing racing association or possible the owner of the horse they are riding........

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by post2post

i just think the jockeys should be covered by the governing racing association or possible the owner of the horse they are riding........

I think the owners are paying enough in insuring their horses. I can understand why someone like Cash is King thought twice about insuring Afleet Alex for another year.

[post2post]

your probably right about that.......