Garret Gomez sucks

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

If he's so bad then why is he on top of the national standings for the 2nd year in a row?

Your tongue-in-cheek detector is awful.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Your tongue-in-cheek detector is awful.

If it makes you feel any better, Joey, I thought his ride on Hard Spun was questionable as well. At least his record in the Belmont is better, though. Instead of having an 8th place finish aboard Bob and John as his best Belmont ride, he now has a 4th place finish on Hard Spun.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Cajungator26

If it makes you feel any better, Joey, I thought his ride on Hard Spun was questionable as well. At least his record in the Belmont is better, though. Instead of having an 8th place finish aboard Bob and John as his best Belmont ride, he now has a 4th place finish on Hard Spun.

After listening to Gary Steven's commentary on Thursday, I was convinced that Gomez would rate the horse. Stevens was saying that HS is kind of a head-strong horse and after seeing what happened in the Preaknesss and not wanting that to happen again, that Gomez would come out of the gate with a hold on the horse. The reason being that Gomez did not know whether anyone else would be gunning or not. If someone else did gun and Gomez came out of the gate asking the horse, then it would be too late to take back because HS is quite head-strong. So I think that GG made the decision to take back from the start. Once he saw how slow they were going, he could have let the horse take the lead, but I think that Gomez was happy that the horse was rating kindly and he thought that he could go by the two horses on the lead at any time. He knew it was a long race and he knew that the horses to beat were behind him, so he decided to sit tight.

Was it a mistake in hindsight? I would probably say yes. With a horse as fast as HS, if I knew I could get an easy lead in :49 3/5 or so, I would much rather do that than be sitting behind horses going :50. On the other hand, we don't know if those other two horses would have left GG alone on the lead in :49 3/5 if GG would have gone to the lead.

I'm sure that if GG knew that the other horses would have given him an easy lead in slow fractions, he would have been happy to take it.

Anyway, it was a tricky situation due to the fact that HS is head-strong. I don't think the ride cost the horse anything. I think he would have probably run 4th either way. I think that GG is the best rider in the country and I'll give him the benefit of the doubt due to the totality of the circumstances. I can certainly see why people would question the ride.

i honestly feel bad for him that he lost being rags to riches regular rider - that's a load of crap, i think anyway.. but that's just me. i don't think that was fair on the part of pletcher, people are gonna say "well he shouldn't have committed to hard spun" but, he wasn't even told til 930 AM on the day prior to entries that the filly was in. not saying he should be thrown back on rags, but still - well, i guess that's racing. but that's just my thoughts.

[ELA]

Found the source -- none other than the NY Post . . .

Eric

http://www.nypost.com/seven/06112007...y_kerrison.htm


JONES GIVES JOCK GOMEZ 'HARD' TIME
By RAY KERRISON

June 11, 2007 -- COWBOY Larry Jones came out with both barrels blazing yesterday against the "nonsensical" ride top jockey Garrett Gomez gave his horse Hard Spun in the Belmont Stakes.
As he grazed his Triple Crown warrior outside the barn, Jones said up front, "This is probably not a good time to ask me a lot of questions about the Belmont."

Then, for the next 15 minutes he fumed, "I'm really starting to wonder whether any jockey has a clock in his head anymore. You could tell the old time jocks how fast to go and if they were off even a fifth of-a-second, they'd be upset with themselves. I really don't know whether these (modern) jocks have a clue as to how fast they're going."

What set Jones off was the incomprehensible tactical decision by Gomez to wrangle a free-running horse like Hard Spun back behind two leaders, C P West and Slew's Tizzy, who were running one of the slowest-run Belmonts in history.

You have to go all the way back to 1969 to find a Belmont run in such snail fractions as Saturday's crawl. That year, Arts and Letters won after going 6f in 1.16.1 and the mile in 1.40.1 on a fast track. Saturday, C P West led the field through six furlongs in 1.15.3 and the mile in 1.40.2 on a fast track.

Larry Jones could not believe his eyes as he saw the fractions posted on the infield board and saw his horse being strangled back in third place behind the leaders. What made him even madder was the memory that Hard Spun helped lose the Preakness for the exact opposite reason - he was burning the track with blistering fractions, flying through six furlongs in 1.09 and change.

Just about everybody, including Jones, expected Hard Spun to be the Belmont pacemaker.

"I tried to explain to Gomez to slow the pace down, but I told him that if this horse could get the 6f. in 1.13 or 1.14, we'd be home free," Jones said. "I never dreamed we would be going in nearly 1.16 and not be on the lead."

As this was going on, Jones complained, "Gomez kept reaching to get a bigger hold" on Hard Spun. He said after the start, Gomez dropped Hard Spun to the rail, then on the turn, swung him out wide, a tactic that clearly mystified Jones.

The race chart backs Jones to the hilt. It reads, "Hard Spun raced erratically while fighting his rider and tucking in, drifted out on the first turn, stalked the leaders five wide along the backstretch."

Five wide! "I don't know what we were doing," Jones said. "Before we got to the half-mile pole I told Cindy (his wife) 'We got no shot.' "

He said he would study the replay of the race later this week "to see if I can make any sense out of what happened." He added, "Right now a whole lot of things don't make sense. It was not a good race and I don't think Mr. Porter (Hard Spun's owner) was any happier."

The irony of Jones's problems is that he fired jockey Mario Pino off Hard Spun for what he deemed an unsatisfactory ride in the Preakness. Everyone thought he made a smart move replacing Pino with Gomez for the Belmont.

Complicating the situation is that Gomez last week tried to get a release from his commitment to ride Hard Spun so he could take the mount on the eventual Belmont winner Rags to Riches.

A few days before the race, I asked Jones whether he was compromised by forcing a reluctant jockey to ride his horse. "Oh, no," Jones said emphatically. "Garrett is a professional and he will give the horse his best ride."

But Jones is not the only Belmont participant bewildered by its unfolding. Nick Zito, who trains C P West, was startled to see his horse leading the parade around the track.

"We thought Hard Spun was going to be on the lead," he said yesterday. "We figured he would go the 6f in 1.12 and we'd be sitting next to him, as in the Preakness. But it didn't work out that way."

Zito did not blame his jockey Edgar Prado for putting C P West on the lead. "I thought we would have a great trip, tucking in behind Hard Spun, but when no one wanted the lead, Edgar took it."

"I didn't want the lead, but my horse came out well and he took it," Prado said. "The pace was slow but it didn't help me. Not many horses want to go a mile and a half. Those two horses (Rags to Riches and Curlin) went by me so fast I couldn't believe it."

The pace of the Belmont and the riding strategy was the buzz of the backstretch yesterday, but the stewards, apparently, found no reason to ask any questions.

^^^

then you should've kept pino on you moron.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by TenMostWanted

^^^

then you should've kept pino on you moron.

I'm not so certain that was really his call...

Seems to me that Porter was the one who requested the jock change. Gomez gave a botched up ride... not going to question why, but it certainly wasn't the first questionable ride he gave all day. Jones is right... Hard Spun didn't have a chance with that kind of riding.

Originally Posted by Cajungator26

I'm not so certain that was really his call...

Seems to me that Porter was the one who requested the jock change. Gomez gave a botched up ride... not going to question why, but it certainly wasn't the first questionable ride he gave all day. Jones is right... Hard Spun didn't have a chance with that kind of riding.

true enough.. but still, think its ridiculous that they threw pino off before he even crossed the finish line in the preakness - although i'm pretty sure i remember an article where jones mentioned that he knew hard spun accelerates when he sees daylight, even working.

either way, whoever it was who threw pino off - STUPID MOVE. hard spun probably was screwed out of a show placing, IMO.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ELA

Found the source -- none other than the NY Post . . .

Eric

http://www.nypost.com/seven/06112007...y_kerrison.htm


JONES GIVES JOCK GOMEZ 'HARD' TIME
By RAY KERRISON

June 11, 2007 -- COWBOY Larry Jones came out with both barrels blazing yesterday against the "nonsensical" ride top jockey Garrett Gomez gave his horse Hard Spun in the Belmont Stakes.
As he grazed his Triple Crown warrior outside the barn, Jones said up front, "This is probably not a good time to ask me a lot of questions about the Belmont."

Then, for the next 15 minutes he fumed, "I'm really starting to wonder whether any jockey has a clock in his head anymore. You could tell the old time jocks how fast to go and if they were off even a fifth of-a-second, they'd be upset with themselves. I really don't know whether these (modern) jocks have a clue as to how fast they're going."

What set Jones off was the incomprehensible tactical decision by Gomez to wrangle a free-running horse like Hard Spun back behind two leaders, C P West and Slew's Tizzy, who were running one of the slowest-run Belmonts in history.

You have to go all the way back to 1969 to find a Belmont run in such snail fractions as Saturday's crawl. That year, Arts and Letters won after going 6f in 1.16.1 and the mile in 1.40.1 on a fast track. Saturday, C P West led the field through six furlongs in 1.15.3 and the mile in 1.40.2 on a fast track.

Larry Jones could not believe his eyes as he saw the fractions posted on the infield board and saw his horse being strangled back in third place behind the leaders. What made him even madder was the memory that Hard Spun helped lose the Preakness for the exact opposite reason - he was burning the track with blistering fractions, flying through six furlongs in 1.09 and change.

Just about everybody, including Jones, expected Hard Spun to be the Belmont pacemaker.

"I tried to explain to Gomez to slow the pace down, but I told him that if this horse could get the 6f. in 1.13 or 1.14, we'd be home free," Jones said. "I never dreamed we would be going in nearly 1.16 and not be on the lead."

As this was going on, Jones complained, "Gomez kept reaching to get a bigger hold" on Hard Spun. He said after the start, Gomez dropped Hard Spun to the rail, then on the turn, swung him out wide, a tactic that clearly mystified Jones.

The race chart backs Jones to the hilt. It reads, "Hard Spun raced erratically while fighting his rider and tucking in, drifted out on the first turn, stalked the leaders five wide along the backstretch."

Five wide! "I don't know what we were doing," Jones said. "Before we got to the half-mile pole I told Cindy (his wife) 'We got no shot.' "

He said he would study the replay of the race later this week "to see if I can make any sense out of what happened." He added, "Right now a whole lot of things don't make sense. It was not a good race and I don't think Mr. Porter (Hard Spun's owner) was any happier."

The irony of Jones's problems is that he fired jockey Mario Pino off Hard Spun for what he deemed an unsatisfactory ride in the Preakness. Everyone thought he made a smart move replacing Pino with Gomez for the Belmont.

Complicating the situation is that Gomez last week tried to get a release from his commitment to ride Hard Spun so he could take the mount on the eventual Belmont winner Rags to Riches.

A few days before the race, I asked Jones whether he was compromised by forcing a reluctant jockey to ride his horse. "Oh, no," Jones said emphatically. "Garrett is a professional and he will give the horse his best ride."

But Jones is not the only Belmont participant bewildered by its unfolding. Nick Zito, who trains C P West, was startled to see his horse leading the parade around the track.

"We thought Hard Spun was going to be on the lead," he said yesterday. "We figured he would go the 6f in 1.12 and we'd be sitting next to him, as in the Preakness. But it didn't work out that way."

Zito did not blame his jockey Edgar Prado for putting C P West on the lead. "I thought we would have a great trip, tucking in behind Hard Spun, but when no one wanted the lead, Edgar took it."

"I didn't want the lead, but my horse came out well and he took it," Prado said. "The pace was slow but it didn't help me. Not many horses want to go a mile and a half. Those two horses (Rags to Riches and Curlin) went by me so fast I couldn't believe it."

The pace of the Belmont and the riding strategy was the buzz of the backstretch yesterday, but the stewards, apparently, found no reason to ask any questions.

I personally would never force a jockey to ride my horse. Why ride a guy who doesn't want the mount? There are plenty of good jockeys out there. If my jockey asked to be released from his commitment to ride my horse, I would release him.

[golfer]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

After listening to Gary Steven's commentary on Thursday, I was convinced that Gomez would rate the horse. Stevens was saying that HS is kind of a head-strong horse and after seeing what happened in the Preaknesss and not wanting that to happen again, that Gomez would come out of the gate with a hold on the horse. The reason being that Gomez did not know whether anyone else would be gunning or not. If someone else did gun and Gomez came out of the gate asking the horse, then it would be too late to take back because HS is quite head-strong. So I think that GG made the decision to take back from the start. Once he saw how slow they were going, he could have let the horse take the lead, but I think that Gomez was happy that the horse was rating kindly and he thought that he could go by the two horses on the lead at any time. He knew it was a long race and he knew that the horses to beat were behind him, so he decided to sit tight.

Was it a mistake in hindsight? I would probably say yes. With a horse as fast as HS, if I knew I could get an easy lead in :49 3/5 or so, I would much rather do that than be sitting behind horses going :50. On the other hand, we don't know if those other two horses would have left GG alone on the lead in :49 3/5 if GG would have gone to the lead.

I'm sure that if GG knew that the other horses would have given him an easy lead in slow fractions, he would have been happy to take it.

Anyway, it was a tricky situation due to the fact that HS is head-strong. I don't think the ride cost the horse anything. I think he would have probably run 4th either way. I think that GG is the best rider in the country and I'll give him the benefit of the doubt due to the totality of the circumstances. I can certainly see why people would question the ride.

Rupert, after having a few days to mull this over, I agree with most that the best this horse could have done was third in this race, no matter what trip he may have gotten. He was a spent horse coming in. I guess I am more upset at myself for going against my first instinct and playing him.
However, the strategy that you speak of comes from Gomez, and went directly against the instructions from Larry Jones. Add to that the fact that he swung 5 wide for absolutely no reason going into the first turn, and stayed out there the rest of the race, the ride Gomez gave this horse was abysmal, and GG was the only one who thought he was "money" at the 3/8ths pole.
My final word on the subject is, of course Garrett Gomez is a quality rider, but on Saturday, he sucked.

[ELA]

I guess after thinking about it more, Jones was more comfortable speaking his mind. He seemed to have a lot more to say about Gomez and his ride. I am not sure where the story, comments, etc. that I read come from, so I won't reprint them here without being able to quote the source. But to say the least, Jones was more outspoken about Gomez and his ride.

Eric

[cmorioles]

It is staggering to think Bob and John was actually favored in a Triple Crown race.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

It is staggering to think Bob and John was actually favored in a Triple Crown race.

Agreed. He was quite the plug.

[Left Bank]

Personally,I think trainers should not give instructions,because the race never plays out the way they think it will anyway,so why bother.Plus,most jockeys fail to listen anyway,hence this topic.I can understand them telling a jock to not go too hard on an animal,or to save something for the next race,but these guys that say"At this point in the race,I want you here,then here,then here,going no faster than 12 seconds a furlong" is just ridiculous.I think that most trainers or owners give instructions just so they CAN blame the jock when they lose.Owners should just keep their mouths shut and stay in the stands anyway.They hired a trainer,so they should let him do his job.

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

It is staggering to think Bob and John was actually favored in a Triple Crown race.

Is it really that hard to imagine? Think about that field...you had Bluegrass Cat whose form really didn't look that great and needed to validate his Derby runner-up finish after anything but an awe-inspiring spring. Sunriver could not have possibly been favored, Steppenwolfer was a plodder and so was Jazil. I didn't bet Bob and John, but I can see why he was favored- the field was awful. His Wood Memorial win was slow, but I think many chalked it up to the wet track that day.

I am a bit of a Stonerside Stable guy because of the hometown connection, but I don't agree that it was staggering to think that he was favored. Too bad Pointgiven1985 is not around anymore, he admitted to betting Bob and John in the Derby AND Belmont.

NT

[cmorioles]

I don't mean so much over that field, just that a mediocre horse like him could ever be favored in a TC race. I guess in today's game, it shouldn't be that big of a surprise.

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

I don't mean so much over that field, just that a mediocre horse like him could ever be favored in a TC race. I guess in today's game, it shouldn't be that big of a surprise.

Agreed....it wasn't much and further he's not much.

NT