CONTESSA: "..wanted to throw up"

[ninetoone]

Well said DTS....and on that point, if a hole had opened up on the rail & Ramon had taken his horse too wide, we'd have a thread about why he should have taken the rail. Even if we had the information about the instructions, we'd have people whining about how those are "just a guide" or something to that effect...he should have used his judgement...blah blah blah. Come back and look at this thread in 5 years & see what Ramon has accomplished. We'll probably all be wondering why we were talking so much about a 3/5 shot in an AOC race at Aqueduct on a Thursday.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by ninetoone

Well said DTS....and on that point, if a hole had opened up on the rail & Ramon had taken his horse too wide, we'd have a thread about why he should have taken the rail. Even if we had the information about the instructions, we'd have people whining about how those are "just a guide" or something to that effect...he should have used his judgement...blah blah blah. Come back and look at this thread in 5 years & see what Ramon has accomplished. We'll probably all be wondering why we were talking so much about a 3/5 shot in an AOC race at Aqueduct on a Thursday.

What happens in the future for Ramon Dominguez has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on whether or not yesterday's ride was a poor one. It is interesting that the defenders of Mr. Dominguez continue to make these sort of comments as though there is any relevance to them whatsoever. If he were to win with 100% of his mounts the rest of his riding career yesterday's ride would still remain one of the single most puzzlingly stupid decisions in riding history. It is really only more baffling because Mr. Dominguez is a talented rider. If the worst rider in America had done what he did yesterday it still would have been wrong and somewhat baffling. But, to have a successful rider, even if he is overrated, make the choice he did will forever be mystifying.

Once again, even if the rail had opened for him it would have been a poor ride, and understanding that is important if one is to truly understand horseracing. Results are not nearly as important as how one gets there. That's what seperates winners from losers.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

What happens in the future for Ramon Dominguez has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on whether or not yesterday's ride was a poor one. It is interesting that the defenders of Mr. Dominguez continue to make these sort of comments as though there is any relevance to them whatsoever. If he were to win with 100% of his mounts the rest of his riding career yesterday's ride would still remain one of the single most puzzlingly stupid decisions in riding history. It is really only more baffling because Mr. Dominguez is a talented rider. If the worst rider in America had done what he did yesterday it still would have been wrong and somewhat baffling. But, to have a successful rider, even if he is overrated, make the choice he did will forever be mystifying.

Once again, even if the rail had opened for him it would have been a poor ride, and understanding that is important if one is to truly understand horseracing. Results are not nearly as important as how one gets there. That's what seperates winners from losers.

100% correct.

[ninetoone]

[quote=blackthroatedwind]If he were to win with 100% of his mounts the rest of his riding career yesterday's ride would still remain one of the single most puzzlingly stupid decisions in riding history. QUOTE]


You've got to be kidding me. I'm sure you've watched many more races than I have, so I hope I don't need to tell you that the type of scenario that happenned on Thursday happens every single day & every single "great" rider has done something similar or much worse. I've watched the replay several times now, and I can't believe how blown out of proportion this thread has become. He made a bad decision, no doubt. It's worse because he had instructions to do otherwise. If this was "one of the single most puzzlingly stupid decisions in riding history", he'd certainly be losing some business because of it....and believe me, that aint gonna happen.

[Rupert Pupkin]

[quote=ninetoone]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

If he were to win with 100% of his mounts the rest of his riding career yesterday's ride would still remain one of the single most puzzlingly stupid decisions in riding history. QUOTE]


You've got to be kidding me. I'm sure you've watched many more races than I have, so I hope I don't need to tell you that the type of scenario that happenned on Thursday happens every single day & every single "great" rider has done something similar or much worse. I've watched the replay several times now, and I can't believe how blown out of proportion this thread has become. He made a bad decision, no doubt. It's worse because he had instructions to do otherwise. If this was "one of the single most puzzlingly stupid decisions in riding history", he'd certainly be losing some business because of it....and believe me, that aint gonna happen.

I don't think it has been blown out of proportion at all. The ride was so moronic that it is mind-boggling. I don't see rides like that every day. It is very rare to see rides like that. Sure you see guys get into trouble every day. Sometimes there is no way to avoid trouble in full fields. But the incident yesterday was totally avoidable and the move he made had no upside.

I think he will definitely lose some business, at least in the short-run as a result of that ride.

[paisjpq]

Originally Posted by ninetoone

You've got to be kidding me. I'm sure you've watched many more races than I have, so I hope I don't need to tell you that the type of scenario that happenned on Thursday happens every single day & every single "great" rider has done something similar or much worse. I've watched the replay several times now, and I can't believe how blown out of proportion this thread has become. He made a bad decision, no doubt. It's worse because he had instructions to do otherwise. If this was "one of the single most puzzlingly stupid decisions in riding history", he'd certainly be losing some business because of it....and believe me, that aint gonna happen.

If I had that horse I wouldn't ride him again, if for no other reason than to make a point to him that he is given instructions for a reason...we all know that things happen in a race that force jocks to abandon the best laid plans but that is not the case here...and I believe the owner feels the same way.

[ninetoone]

The guy made a mistake & he said he was sorry. To say that it was one of the biggest mistakes in history is just plain ridiculous. The decision (albeit against instructions) was made in a split second & to critique it this much has taken Monday morning quarterbacking to a new level. I seriously doubt that Ramon's business will suffer as a result of this, and my guess is that Contessa probably accepted the apology & said something to the effect of "don't let it happen again"...

[Bystander]

I don't know, the mistake cost $25,000, didn't it? And isn't Contessa accountable to Darlene Bilinski and Harry Patten, having to explain why their horse missed a $30,000 check?
I bet there's a bit more said than "don't let it happen again."

[paisjpq]

Originally Posted by Bystander

I don't know, the mistake cost $25,000, didn't it? And isn't Contessa accountable to Darlene Bilinski and Harry Patten, having to explain why their horse missed a $30,000 check?
I bet there's a bit more said than "don't let it happen again."

"Please don't do it again?"

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Bystander

I don't know, the mistake cost $25,000, didn't it? And isn't Contessa accountable to Darlene Bilinski and Harry Patten, having to explain why their horse missed a $30,000 check?
I bet there's a bit more said than "don't let it happen again."

It may be much worse than just losing the money. When a horse is forced to check like that, they often times come out of the race with injuries. I owned a filly once that was bottled up on the rail turning for home. The jock checked pretty good off heels but the rail did open up and he got through and won. That was the good news. The bad news was that she wrenched her ankle pretty bad and we had to put a blister on her and turn her out for a couple of months. Two months at the farm means no racing for 6 months. Luckily the horse came back off the 6 month layoff as good as ever, but a 6 month layoff costs a lot of money in terms of expenses.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by Bystander

I don't know, the mistake cost $25,000, didn't it? And isn't Contessa accountable to Darlene Bilinski and Harry Patten, having to explain why their horse missed a $30,000 check?
I bet there's a bit more said than "don't let it happen again."

He's riding for them on Sunday - 2nd race aboard "Keep your Day Job".

The Irony is painful.

Wanna see the ride of his life? I won't be betting against him....

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by paisjpq

If I had that horse I wouldn't ride him again, if for no other reason than to make a point to him that he is given instructions for a reason...we all know that things happen in a race that force jocks to abandon the best laid plans but that is not the case here...and I believe the owner feels the same way.

If we didn't ride every jock who fails to follow instructions there wouldn't be many left to choose from.

[GPK]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

If we didn't ride every jock who fails to follow instructions there wouldn't be many left to choose from.

*note to self....lose 40-50lbs and learn to ride horses..*

[paisjpq]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

If we didn't ride every jock who fails to follow instructions there wouldn't be many left to choose from.

ahhh but the one you did have would listen

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by paisjpq

ahhh but the one you did have would listen

T3B if I can get him a little lighter

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by paisjpq

ahhh but the one you did have would listen

I hate to admit this but.....sometimes we give bad instructions.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

would still remain one of the single most puzzlingly stupid decisions in riding history.

terrible ride? yes.

but, my goodness, you just took hyperbole to an unprecedented level.

[ninetoone]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

terrible ride? yes.

but, my goodness, did you just take hyperbole to a new level.

lol....exactly

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

terrible ride? yes.

but, my goodness, you just took hyperbole to an unprecedented level.

Well, Brian, in the vast encyclopedia of rides in your memory why don't you come up with a few more baffling decisions. Be sure they were simple situations in races that absolutely cost the horses involved victory.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Well, Brian, in the vast encyclopedia of rides in your memory why don't you come up with a few more baffling decisions. Be sure they were simple situations in races that absolutely cost the horses involved victory.

There are not many more baffling rides in my memory. However, I am 23. I watch about 8 races a day. I have only been following racings since I was 16.

So my "vast" encyclopedia probably adds up to somewhere around roughly one ten thousandth of a percent of all the races in "history."

So who cares if I can name them?

One of the dumber ones I've seen? Sure, I'll give you that.

To assume it is one of the dumbest/most puzzling in history (mind you, not that you've ever seen, or in the last ten years, but you claim "history)? That seems folly, purely from a mathematical standpoint.