CONTESSA: "..wanted to throw up"

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Whoa. Whoa. Whoa. Whoa. Whoa.

First, I didn't defend anyone in this thread. I didn't "attack" you one bit. I didn't call you names. I didn't do anything but point out that you indulged in a bit of hyperbole in one post. It wasn't a criticism of anything you've said in regards to the entire ride, except that I found it mathematically unlikely that it was one of the worst rides in history.

...for starters, I'd say the stakes on closing day at Turf Paradise two or three years back when the rider misjudged the length of the race by an entire 7 furlongs...

I remember that race. I also remember Desormeaux blowing the finish line on Kotashaan in a race about 10-12 years ago in Japan. And of course, the worst instance was Shoemaker misjudging the finish line in the KY Derby while riding Gallant Man, probably costing him the win.

But the thing is, if you take all the bad decisions jockeys have made in a race over, say, the last 10 years and you make a "Top X" list, yesterday's ride probably has to be included in that list no matter how small you make X. As someone pointed out, those situations often lead to a horse incurring injury.

Frankly watching the race, I was surprised nobody clipped in there and no horses went down.

Jockeys make mistakes all the time. But not like this. For a guy who won 200+ races and $10+ million in purses last year to make that kind of move yesterday, it's utterly indefensible. It was as bad as it gets.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by SentToStud

But the thing is, if you take all the bad decisions jockeys have made in a race over, say, the last 10 years and you make a "Top X" list, yesterday's ride probably has to be included in that list no matter how small you make X..

Could not agree more. That is exactly what I've been saying.

To say in all of "history" is hyperbole....it actually embodies the very definition of the word.

I've never once defended the ride, and I've never once said it wouldn't have made a top X list in a given time period.

But "history?"

That is using hyperbole. That's all my entire point was. If that is an "attack," so be it.

[ninetoone]

Yesterday's ride wouldn't even be on the radar screen of bad rides in the last 10 years or 10 months....he thought the hole would open up and it didn't. It happens all the time, every day.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ninetoone

Yesterday's ride wouldn't even be on the radar screen of bad rides in the last 10 years or 10 months....he thought the hole would open up and it didn't. It happens all the time, every day.

I totally disagree. It wasn't just a matter of a hole not opening. It was a matter of Dominguez making a move that had no upside but had huge downside. It was an idiotic move. Even if the hole would have opened and he would have won, it would have still been a made.

I saw a jock give a similar ride once on Megahertz. I think it was Solis but I'm not positive. Anyway, I think it was a 6 horse field and the jock was coming from dead-last. He had a ton of horse. There was no way to lose if he went outside. But instead, the jock tried to split horses and ended up checking pretty good. He finally got room and won the race but it was still a terrible ride. He took a huge risk and came close to blowing the race. Nobody made a big deal about it because he won, but it was a really stupid move that had no upside.

Anyway, I don't think you're understanding what we are saying with regards to Dominguez' ride. The hole not opening is irrelevant. That's not why it was a bad ride. It was a bad ride because he made a move that had no upside.

I would have to say that Perry Outz's ride in the 8th race at River Downs in Aug of 1997 was the most puzzling ever.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by eurobounce

I would have to say that Perry Outz's ride in the 8th race at River Downs in Aug of 1997 was the most puzzling ever.

If a tree falls in the forest and nobody is there to hear it...

[ninetoone]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Anyway, I don't think you're understanding what we are saying with regards to Dominguez' ride. The hole not opening is irrelevant. That's not why it was a bad ride. It was a bad ride because he made a move that had no upside.

Sometimes that hole opens up....so sometimes there is an upside. Just not on Thursday. Look at Steve's first post w/the Q&A. Dominguez made a split second judgement call based on something he saw & based on his instincts from thousands of rides. He just happenned to be wrong. So you can't say he made a move that had no upside 100% of the time, which is my point.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ninetoone

Sometimes that hole opens up....so sometimes there is an upside. Just not on Thursday. Look at Steve's first post w/the Q&A. Dominguez made a split second judgement call based on something he saw & based on his instincts from thousands of rides. He just happenned to be wrong. So you can't say he made a move that had no upside 100% of the time, which is my point.

There was no upside because he was not going to save ground. There was no advantage to going inside.

An analogy would be if you tried to get into your house by climbing through a window when the front door was unlocked. Why would you go through the window if the front door was open? It doesn't matter whether you have a mishap climbing through the window or not. If you broke the window, the move would be stupid, but even if you didn't break the window the move would still be stupid. There is no advantage to trying to climb through the window when the front door is open.

By the same token, there is no advantage to trying to split horses when you can go to the outside. He wasn't saving any ground by going inside. They had already straightened away.

[ninetoone]

Ramon said that "when they came off the turn he was sure the rail horse was going to float wide and take the other one with him and that he would have the rail to boot home." His plan was not to split horses.

So, Ramon thought he had 2 doors to choose from...not a door and a window. In hindsight, it ended up a door and a window, you are correct. But that's why hindsight is 20/20 I guess. Good analogy though. And yes, the outside was the prudent and safer move, I agree.