Will I get 2-1?

[Strategic Mission]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I don't know, I've done pretty well betting the Belmont over the years, but I probably just lucked into betting the great jockeys ( I never even know who the hell is riding the horses I bet on ) and the horses that loved the dirt at Belmont.

Look, there are a lot of ways to look at the game, and just because I, or anyone, pays one aspect no mind doesn't make it necessarily irrelevent. I just read way too much excuse making on message boards, and superfluous excuse making at that, that I have come to feel, with good reason, that most people seem to spend way too much of their time worrying about inconsequential factors....or worse yet completely misunderstanding what has gone on. As a general rule, I believe in making decisions based on what I have seen in the past, rather than worrying about what I can't know in the future.

Well it is a good thing people use different criteria or everyone would be betting the same horse.

You have Allen Jerkens on your side, but I am amazed at how trainers work with trainers agents so much considering many think jockeys don't matter.

Personally I think the exercise riders in the morning are more valuable than jockeys.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Strategic Mission

Personally I think the exercise riders in the morning are more valuable than jockeys.

You get no argument from me on that.

Plus, I would always love to have Allen Jerkens on my side....though, frankly, he already is.

[DogsUp]

If I am down to two horses and I like them equally, I will then look at the jockey and that will be my determing factor. However, it rarely gets to that point. I don't look at jock or m/l odds unless I am at a complete loss. And if I am at a loss, then I usually sit the race out.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Strategic Mission

but I am amazed at how trainers work with trainers agents so much considering many think jockeys don't matter.

owners still think they matter