Zito's thoughts on whips

Dunbar · #1 06-08-2008, 04:21 PM

When Nick Zito was doing the pre-Belmont show on ESPN, he was asked whether jockeys should carry whips. Zito said he didn't think it was necessary and that he personally would prefer it if they did away with the whips.

--Dunbar

GenuineRisk · #2 06-08-2008, 04:30 PM

What do they do then in situations like a horse veering, etc., where the whip is used not to ask for speed but to get them away from an unsafe situation?

KirisClown · #3 06-08-2008, 04:42 PM

I wonder if Birdstone would have won the Belmont without the whip....

Rupert Pupkin · #4 06-08-2008, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

What do they do then in situations like a horse veering, etc., where the whip is used not to ask for speed but to get them away from an unsafe situation?

They don't use whips in the 2 furlong two-year old races in California. I'm not sure about other states. If any horses needed whips to stay straight, it would be two year olds because they are often times green. If they don't need the whip to keep them straight in those races, they certainly don't need them in other races.

You guys would be very surprised how many people in the industry would have no problem if they took away the whips. Jerry Bailey said that they don't need them. Zito doesn't like them. I asked one of my trainers about it. He said that he would be happy if they got rid of the whips.

I would be thrilled if they got rid of them. I think that whips are unnecessary and I think that jockeys over-use the whips. They often times use the whip even when they don't need to.

I don't know if you guys saw Big Booster's race the other day. He went from last to first and was cruising home to an easy victory. For some reason, Bejarano decided to hit the horse any way inside the 1/16th pole. There was absolutley no reason for it. The race was over. Anyway, it stung the horse and made him very angry and he propped. It was lucky that it didn't cause an accident.

arulus · #5 06-08-2008, 05:44 PM

Also, didn't the jockey of Zaftig drop his whip accidently halfway through the stretch, right before she powered away to win?

GenuineRisk · #6 06-08-2008, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

They don't use whips in the 2 furlong two-year old races in California. I'm not sure about other states. If any horses needed whips to stay straight, it would be two year olds because they are often times green. If they don't need the whip to keep them straight in those races, they certainly don't need them in other races.

You guys would be very surprised how many people in the industry would have no problem if they took away the whips. Jerry Bailey said that they don't need them. Zito doesn't like them. I asked one of my trainers about it. He said that he would be happy if they got rid of the whips.

I would be thrilled if they got rid of them. I think that whips are unnecessary and I think that jockeys over-use the whips. They often times use the whip even when they don't need to.

I don't know if you guys saw Big Booster's race the other day. He went from last to first and was cruising home to an easy victory. For some reason, Bejarano decided to hit the horse any way inside the 1/16th pole. There was absolutley no reason for it. The race was over. Anyway, it stung the horse and made him very angry and he propped. It was lucky that it didn't cause an accident.

I agree with you completely about overuse, but I still think they are an often necessary piece of equipment- many disciplines I can think of use them and I know I've had some situations on trails when I should have brought one and didn't. Admittedly, I'm not a race rider, all of whom I'm sure ride far better than I do (and also ride far better horses), so I'd be interested to hear from anyone who has been on racehorses?

But yes, I agree completely, way overused and used when not necessary. And if there really is absolutely no possible circumstance in which jockey safety would be compromised by not having a whip, then yes, I'd be for seeing them gone from racing, too. I just find that hard to believe.

hockey2315 · #7 06-08-2008, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arulus

Also, didn't the jockey of Zaftig drop his whip accidently halfway through the stretch, right before she powered away to win?

No. She was already blowing by Indian Blessing when he dropped it. And that's not a valid anti-whip argument.

jcs11204 · #8 06-08-2008, 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockey2315

No. She was already blowing by Indian Blessing when he dropped it. And that's not a valid anti-whip argument.

no whip's... zito also said using just the hands requires more skill, and thats how it should be

hockey2315 · #9 06-08-2008, 07:36 PM

I respectfully disagree with Mr. Zito.

jcs11204 · #10 06-08-2008, 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockey2315

I respectfully disagree with Mr. Zito.

why ? how could it hurt to have no whips ?

hockey2315 · #11 06-08-2008, 07:44 PM

First of all - I don't get the whole "requires more skill" thing - since most jockeys aren't that skilled I don't really want to be betting on them without a whip. For horses that drift, don't switch leads, etc. the whip is necessary.

jcs11204 · #12 06-08-2008, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockey2315

First of all - I don't get the whole "requires more skill" thing - since most jockeys aren't that skilled I don't really want to be betting on them without a whip. For horses that drift, don't switch leads, etc. the whip is necessary.

chirp to them.

hockey2315 · #13 06-08-2008, 07:46 PM

nope.

jcs11204 · #14 06-08-2008, 07:47 PM

i dont know ? ? ?
i dont get it, i dont see how in anyway it could hurt the sport, and it has to be good for the horses.

hockey2315 · #15 06-08-2008, 07:49 PM

they've had no problems with it for over a hundred years - why change now? i still can't believe randy moss brought this whole non-issue up. there are so many bigger problems in the game now and this is what we should focus on?

2Hot4TV · #16 06-08-2008, 07:49 PM

It doesnt matter' but I vote for no whip. As far for not changing leads,,,,,,,,,,,,so what.

hockey2315 · #17 06-08-2008, 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2Hot4TV

It doesnt matter' but I vote for no whip. As far for not changing leads,,,,,,,,,,,,so what.

do you bet?

jcs11204 · #18 06-08-2008, 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockey2315

they've had no problems with it for over a hundred years - why change now? i still can't believe randy moss brought this whole non-issue up. there are so many bigger problems in the game now and this is what we should focus on?

what are some of the bigger problems ?

the_fat_man · #19 06-08-2008, 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockey2315

First of all - I don't get the whole "requires more skill" thing - since most jockeys aren't that skilled I don't really want to be betting on them without a whip. For horses that drift, don't switch leads, etc. the whip is necessary.

One needn't watch many races before realizing that whips are more the cause rather than the remedy for these things. More horses duck in and out because of excessive whipping than are straightened out by whipping. Poster boy for this would be Sky Dragon. More horses come off the correct lead in the stretch because of excessive whipping than are induced to change to the correct lead by the use of the whip. Take the whip away and herding becomes less frequent and more obvious (to the stewards). Have seen many cases where jocks get so involved with whipping that they miss the point: getting their horse to the wire in as straight a route as possible. Lear's Princess getting beaten up by Coa and losing two Grade 1's as a result would be a nice example of this.

Of course, if you took the whips away then jockeys would actually have to learn how to do basic things: like keeping a straight path and taking a turn correctly.

hockey2315 · #20 06-08-2008, 07:52 PM

But isn't that an issue of mis or overuse? Not necessarily the whip itself?