belmont carry sunday card.. 68,000

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

if this wasn't meant as tongue-in-cheek then its the dumbest post ever.

Why is that, JIM?

There's such a thing as ANTICIPATION in sports. If you allow for the possibility of something to happen, then you can be prepared for it when it does. Baseball players do this, for example, expecting certain pitches in certain counts. YET, this doesn't happen in horse racing? Of course, here's a sport in which jocks just can't seem to learn from their mistakes: witness the high number getting repeatedly PINCHED on the rail, going into the turn, because they're too stupid to either GUN and get the proper inside position, or take back just enough to be clear on the turn. That's why the SHUFFLE BACK is just about the most common trip note there is. (I can understand that the horse is unable to comprehend the power of DRAFTING but the real question is whether some of these jocks do, running up on heels the way they do.) Makes sense, then, that they WOULDN'T anticipate a horse stumbling at the break and thus not be prepared for it and get dumped on their ass. Thus, UNLESS a horse goes down on the break, a jock really needs to be able to stay on it.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

Why is that, JIM?

There's such a thing as ANTICIPATION in sports. If you allow for the possibility of something to happen, then you can be prepared for it when it does. Baseball players do this, for example, expecting certain pitches in certain counts. YET, this doesn't happen in horse racing? Of course, here's a sport in which jocks just can't seem to learn from their mistakes: witness the high number getting repeatedly PINCHED on the rail, going into the turn, because they're too stupid to either GUN and get the proper inside position, or take back just enough to be clear on the turn. That's why the SHUFFLE BACK is just about the most common trip note there is. (I can understand that the horse is unable to comprehend the power of DRAFTING but the real question is whether some of these jocks do, running up on heels the way they do.) Makes sense, then, that they WOULDN'T anticipate a horse stumbling at the break and thus not be prepared for it and get dumped on their ass. Thus, UNLESS a horse goes down on the break, a jock really needs to be able to stay on it.

how would one prepare for a stumble in such a way as to prevent them from flying off? what keeps a rider on a horse? nothing! if it stumbles or balks hard enough then you will be sent airborne whether you anticipated it or not.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

Why is that, JIM?

There's such a thing as ANTICIPATION in sports. If you allow for the possibility of something to happen, then you can be prepared for it when it does. Baseball players do this, for example, expecting certain pitches in certain counts. YET, this doesn't happen in horse racing? Of course, here's a sport in which jocks just can't seem to learn from their mistakes: witness the high number getting repeatedly PINCHED on the rail, going into the turn, because they're too stupid to either GUN and get the proper inside position, or take back just enough to be clear on the turn. That's why the SHUFFLE BACK is just about the most common trip note there is. (I can understand that the horse is unable to comprehend the power of DRAFTING but the real question is whether some of these jocks do, running up on heels the way they do.) Makes sense, then, that they WOULDN'T anticipate a horse stumbling at the break and thus not be prepared for it and get dumped on their ass. Thus, UNLESS a horse goes down on the break, a jock really needs to be able to stay on it.

The problem with your argument is this, Fat Man. A bicycle is a 60 pound inanimate object, whereas a horse is a 1200 pound animal with a mind of it's own. They don't stop and start on a dime, nor do they always make moves that are anticipatory. When a horse bucks, or stumbles, the rider usually has no time to prepare for it.

When you actually try riding a horse yourself you'll find this out and perhaps your rationalization will change.

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by philcski

The problem with your argument is this, Fat Man. A bicycle is a 60 pound inanimate object, whereas a horse is a 1200 pound animal with a mind of it's own. They don't stop and start on a dime, nor do they always make moves that are anticipatory. When a horse bucks, or stumbles, the rider usually has no time to prepare for it.

When you actually try riding a horse yourself you'll find this out and perhaps your rationalization will change.

So, who probably knows more about the 'nuances' of the game of basketball, say?

1) the star player

2) the casual player

3) the film geek, who spends 18 hours a day breaking down tape

You'd be surprised what you can get out of watching replays


Moreover, while I don't ride horses, assuming you're not galloping horses or riding in races of some sort, I do, however, ride within a peloton daily, where I'm constantly in traffic at speeds typically between 25-35 MPH. This quite nicely approximates what happens in a (large field) turf race, which very closely resembles the peloton.

My only point was that jocks need to better anticipate TROUBLE at the break. I don't think this is controversial. If you watch enough races, you see less than stellar performances by the jocks. They make the same mistakes, both technical and strategic, repeatedly. It's, then, not a major leap to assume that since they could improve in other areas, they might also be able to improve out of the gate. For example: in terms of ANTICIPATION.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

So, who probably knows more about the 'nuances' of the game of basketball, say?

1) the star player

2) the casual player

3) the film geek, who spends 18 hours a day breaking down tape

the star player of course would know much more about the nuances than the geek or a casual player.

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

the star player of course would know much more about the nuances than the geek or a casual player.

Really? That's why there are so many successful coaches that were star players.

You make this up as you go along?

[hockey2315]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

the star player of course would know much more about the nuances than the geek or a casual player.

I disagree with this part, but I agree with the rest of what you and Phil are saying.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

So, who probably knows more about the 'nuances' of the game of basketball, say?

1) the star player

2) the casual player

3) the film geek, who spends 18 hours a day breaking down tape

You'd be surprised what you can get out of watching replays


Moreover, while I don't ride horses, assuming you're not galloping horses or riding in races of some sort, I do, however, ride within a peloton daily, where I'm constantly in traffic at speeds typically between 25-35 MPH. This quite nicely approximates what happens in a (large field) turf race, which very closely resembles the peloton.

My only point was that jocks need to better anticipate TROUBLE at the break. I don't think this is controversial. If you watch enough races, you see less than stellar performances by the jocks. They make the same mistakes, both technical and strategic, repeatedly. It's, then, not a major leap to assume that since they could improve in other areas, they might also be able to improve out of the gate. For example: in terms of ANTICIPATION.

I do gallop horses, not as well as professional jockeys of course, but i'm also 6'1" and 180 lbs vs a jockey who's almost half that size- it's VERY difficult to immediately change direction or speed. At the start, however, i think it has more to do with the horse being overeager than anything else. I don't know if the jocks have any way of not getting them to stumble (like the comically bad start to the Mother Goose)

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by philcski

I do gallop horses, not as well as professional jockeys of course, but i'm also 6'1" and 180 lbs vs a jockey who's almost half that size- it's VERY difficult to immediately change direction or speed. At the start, however, i think it has more to do with the horse being overeager than anything else. I don't know if the jocks have any way of not getting them to stumble (like the comically bad start to the Mother Goose)

I'm not making the claim that a jock can stop a horse from stumbling or ducking out (or things of that sort) ESPECIALLY when shot out of the gate. My claim all along is that jockeys need to better anticipate these things at the break. Anticipate a horse going to its knees; anticipate a horse ducking out or in. Some jocks are better than others at not going down when these things happen. This is a fact. Part of it, I'm sure, is due to their athleticism; part to their anticipation/preparation. It's beyond argument, I would think, that if you're prepared for an occurrence, ANY OCCURRENCE, you have a better chance at handling it.

My assertion that they don't anticipate as well as they should is an inference drawn from their continual repetition of errors in other facets of the trip around the track.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

Really? That's why there are so many successful coaches that were star players.

You make this up as you go along?

successful coaches were ALWAYS former players, and not geeks who just watched films. nice try changing the premise. being a star is not the essential ingredient for being a good coach, but having played the game is a must.

correct me if i'm wrong, but in your case you have probably never ridden a thoroughbred once, let alone raced them, it certainly hasn't helped you much in terms of common sense or laws of physics. a horse breaking quickly can dump the rider in numerous ways no matter how much you prepare and anticipate.

just one question, is your concern for the rider, or for the bettor? I'm pretty sure the whole reason you brought this up was because of the wagering side. I just want to point out that if a rider acted more defensively in order to not get dumped, and fully anticipated getting dumped each time, that it would be a detriment to his chances of winning the race. the jockeys that are best for the bettors are the ones that don't hesitate or anticipate being dumped but instead put fear aside and break sharply with the horse and get into position.

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

So, who probably knows more about the 'nuances' of the game of basketball, say?

1) the star player

2) the casual player

3) the film geek, who spends 18 hours a day breaking down tape

You'd be surprised what you can get out of watching replays


Moreover, while I don't ride horses, assuming you're not galloping horses or riding in races of some sort, I do, however, ride within a peloton daily, where I'm constantly in traffic at speeds typically between 25-35 MPH. This quite nicely approximates what happens in a (large field) turf race, which very closely resembles the peloton.

My only point was that jocks need to better anticipate TROUBLE at the break. I don't think this is controversial. If you watch enough races, you see less than stellar performances by the jocks. They make the same mistakes, both technical and strategic, repeatedly. It's, then, not a major leap to assume that since they could improve in other areas, they might also be able to improve out of the gate. For example: in terms of ANTICIPATION.

Do you stop for red lights?

[Bobby Fischer]

poor analogy, excellent concept

very frustrating to see lack of Anticipation.

Particularly in recurring situations and/or critical aspects to the start of the race or turn.