Would you play away from Nakatani's Horses

[blackthroatedwind]

IMO, the entire notion of this thread is a perversion of reality. The rides that most horses get are random, and are a waste of time to even attempt to predict, not to mention distracting. You handicap the horses in a race and make your decisions on whether or not to bet, or who to bet, based on the merits of the horses......and not your convaluted ideas of what kind of ride they may get.

Now, when you are handicapping the race you should take into account the trip, which may involve the ride, the horse has gotten recently. You then make your best guess as to what kind of trip it will get in today's race and simply hope for the best. Of course sometimes you will see a horse going from a weaker rider to a better rider, and if this horse has been compromised recently by its rider, then perhaps it is reasonable to assume the horse is slightly more likely to get a better ride today. However, it is the horse that still needs to be good enough to win the race, not the rider on his back.

Bad riders are winning races left and right on the inner track at Aqueduct. Today Rajiv Maragh's utter incompetence eliminated any chance Accredit may have had in today's feature. Yesterday he rode Icabad Crane to victory in the 7th race. He did little right early in the race, saved ground smartly later in the race, benefited from CC Lopez's ineptitude when he needlessly swung He Aint Easy wide on the second turn, and got the win on much the best horse. Was his ride good? Somewhat. Was he helped by the ineptitude of others? Somewhat. But, make no mistake, it was the horse that won the race.

Jockeys lose races....they don't win them.

[GPK]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

IMO, the entire notion of this thread is a perversion of reality. The rides that most horses get are random, and are a waste of time to even attempt to predict, not to mention distracting. You handicap the horses in a race and make your decisions on whether or not to bet, or who to bet, based on the merits of the horses......and not your convaluted ideas of what kind of ride they may get.

Now, when you are handicapping the race you should take into account the trip, which may involve the ride, the horse has gotten recently. You then make your best guess as to what kind of trip it will get in today's race and simply hope for the best. Of course sometimes you will see a horse going from a weaker rider to a better rider, and if this horse has been compromised recently by its rider, then perhaps it is reasonable to assume the horse is slightly more likely to get a better ride today. However, it is the horse that still needs to be good enough to win the race, not the rider on his back.

Bad riders are winning races left and right on the inner track at Aqueduct. Today Rajiv Maragh's utter incompetence eliminated any chance Accredit may have had in today's feature. Yesterday he rode Icabad Crane to victory in the 7th race. He did little right early in the race, saved ground smartly later in the race, benefited from CC Lopez's ineptitude when he needlessly swung He Aint Easy wide on the second turn, and got the win on much the best horse. Was his ride good? Somewhat. Was he helped by the ineptitude of others? Somewhat. But, make no mistake, it was the horse that won the race.

Jockeys lose races....they don't win them.

Would you agree that there are jocks out there, that if they don't feel they have a chance to win coming down the stretch, they don't ride out their mounts to insure the best placing possible?

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by GPK

Would you agree that there are jocks out there, that if they don't feel they have a chance to win coming down the stretch, they don't ride out their mounts to insure the best placing possible?

Unpredictably.

You hope for the best. And you watch races carefully for next time.

[AeWingnut]

Originally Posted by GPK

Would you agree that there are jocks out there, that if they don't feel they have a chance to win coming down the stretch, they don't ride out their mounts to insure the best placing possible?

I never will forget Tyler Baze standing up before the wire and getting beat for show by a nose and cost me a $6k trifecta. He was on the favorite trying to wire the field. He gets passed by my 18-1 shot whips the horse, then passed by my 35-1 shot and gives up. Stands up in disgust and gets caught at the wire. Had it twice for $1 with him in it. 2nd choice that I didn't (saved money) like nips him because he quit riding. sure the horse was done but did he have to stand up before the wire?

If I see Tyler up I don't bet 'em. (then he leads the meet)

on topic of Corey Nakatani.. I usually bet the horse. I think Victor Espinoza got one of his mounts and won the race.

[alysheba4]

cn has lost it..........he rode at something like 6% at hollywood. completely overrated. head north to golden gate.

[2Hot4TV]

Originally Posted by alysheba4

cn has lost it..........he rode at something like 6% at hollywood. completely overrated. head north to golden gate.

Cory hasn't lost it, He can't get the same quality mounts right now. When he gets a live mount he's in the winners circle.

[tiggerv]

Originally Posted by AeWingnut

If I see Tyler up I don't bet 'em. (then he leads the meet)

on topic of Corey Nakatani.. I usually bet the horse. I think Victor Espinoza got one of his mounts and won the race.

When was the Tyler incident? He has been great the last 6 months and if anything I consider it a positive when he is on a mount especially at long odds. One of the reasons I covered that bomb in the 1st yesterday in the Pick 4 was because Tyler took it.

As far as CN, I don't think he has been getting many good mounts since Del Mar. Don't know what the reason is, it may just be because Gomez and Bejarano are in town and everybody gets bumped down the totem poll. I certainly wouldn't toss anything just because Corey is on. He will still bring the bombs home on the turf. As far as his current mounts, Flores and Bejarano seem to have picked up the better ones. Espinoza may have gotten some too. If a Rosario or Quinonez takes it then you can probably safely toss but the PPs probably already told you that.

[docicu3]

[quote=blackthroatedwind]IMO, the entire notion of this thread is a perversion of reality. The rides that most horses get are random, and are a waste of time to even attempt to predict, not to mention distracting. You handicap the horses in a race and make your decisions on whether or not to bet, or who to bet, based on the merits of the horses......and not your convaluted ideas of what kind of ride they may get.


In the words of a knowledgeable friend of mine......JesusTapDancing Christ!!

At no point in the thread was there ever a mention of minimizing the necessity for handicapping horse talent or race shape.....they remain crucial elements.

The discussion had to do with Jockey performance and your take on all these other elements of handicapping just completely distorts the subject matter.
Of course the most important element of handicapping a race is the blessed horse Andy........If ignoring the jockey is working for you Andy more power to you but I find it simplistic and falable to suggest that the Jockey riding the horse is an edge of no merit. If jockeys were all alike and places from mounts were nothing more than statistical random events then why are some jocks in such demand while others starve.....you call some of these things random I call them racing luck the difference is trivial but if I happen to be successful staying away from certain jocks or playing against certain false favorites successfully it doesn't make it a "perversion of reality" to be right on occasion

Use what you can and leave the rest just because it's different from you doesn't make it wrong....

[freddymo]

[quote=docicu3]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

IMO, the entire notion of this thread is a perversion of reality. The rides that most horses get are random, and are a waste of time to even attempt to predict, not to mention distracting. You handicap the horses in a race and make your decisions on whether or not to bet, or who to bet, based on the merits of the horses......and not your convaluted ideas of what kind of ride they may get.


In the words of a knowledgeable friend of mine......JesusTapDancing Christ!!

At no point in the thread was there ever a mention of minimizing the necessity for handicapping horse talent or race shape.....they remain crucial elements.

The discussion had to do with Jockey performance and your take on all these other elements of handicapping just completely distorts the subject matter.
Of course the most important element of handicapping a race is the blessed horse Andy........If ignoring the jockey is working for you Andy more power to you but I find it simplistic and falable to suggest that the Jockey riding the horse is an edge of no merit. If jockeys were all alike and places from mounts were nothing more than statistical random events then why are some jocks in such demand while others starve.....you call some of these things random I call them racing luck the difference is trivial but if I happen to be successful staying away from certain jocks or playing against certain false favorites successfully it doesn't make it a "perversion of reality" to be right on occasion

Use what you can and leave the rest just because it's different from you doesn't make it wrong....

I haven't read the rest of the thread... But I am pretty sure Serling is going to agree wih 90% of the post