Double standard?

[Tim Y]

We go on and on about the horse being not only fit, but physically sound enough to start a race with pre-race vet inspections, paddock review and post parade evaluations. After the contest, blood and/or urine samples are taken to insure a relativity clean run.

Why aren't the riders subject to the same degree of scrutiny?

Recently on a day when a ride in a big stakes race later in the program beckoned, we had a rider contest the earlier races who could NOT flex his knee. I was not aware of how bad it was until a trainer, upset over the really poor ride this fellow had given his horse was muttering that "if he couldn't ride he should have let me know. I just wasted a start with this fellow."

We watched all his races after that one and this trainer's observations were right on. This rider could not sit down in the saddle, he stood with legs extended all the way back after each ride and was so obviously incompetent on the day (losing miserable on two very short price favorites) that many in the crowd openly booed him.

Came the big race. He was on one of the short priced horses and was close but no cigar. Not surprisingly he booked off all mounts after that race.

There is enough in racing to question without this kind of blatant disregard for the people wagering on what they expect to be competent jockeys.
__________________

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Tim Y

We go on and on about the horse being not only fit, but physically sound enough to start a race with pre-race vet inspections, paddock review and post parade evaluations. After the contest, blood and/or urine samples are taken to insure a relativity clean run.

Why aren't the riders subject to the same degree of scrutiny?

Recently on a day when a ride in a big stakes race later in the program beckoned, we had a rider contest the earlier races who could NOT flex his knee. I was not aware of how bad it was until a trainer, upset over the really poor ride this fellow had given his horse was muttering that "if he couldn't ride he should have let me know. I just wasted a start with this fellow."

We watched all his races after that one and this trainer's observations were right on. This rider could not sit down in the saddle, he stood with legs extended all the way back after each ride and was so obviously incompetent on the day (losing miserable on two very short price favorites) that many in the crowd openly booed him.

Came the big race. He was on one of the short priced horses and was close but no cigar. Not surprisingly he booked off all mounts after that race.

There is enough in racing to question without this kind of blatant disregard for the people wagering on what they expect to be competent jockeys.
__________________

WOW! Talk about a "double standard"!

This is a very interesting post from a guy who also made the following statements and I quote:

"-The HORSE produces what it is capable of producing and NOT another single soul".

-"forget the horsey talk of class structure, the effect of the trainer and rider"

-"The HORSE runs the race."

-"Class is speed and speed is class. All the rest is irrelevant. The HORSE runs the race not the trainer or the condition book."

Why the "double standard?"
Why are YOU concerned with jockeys?
Are you saying jockeys matter?

[gl45]

Long time ago I ask TY if he ever considered a lobotomy, he never follow up to my suggestion. He still talk BS as usually.

[Tim Y]

Horses can get stiffed if the rider is completely incompetent like this guy was.
One of his mounts won a sprint IN SPITE OF HIS INCOMPETENCE, but when you don't even move with the horse's action it is like putting a dead weight on the animal's back.

Horses still win races all by themselves but cannot when the rider is working against them.

I just received a response from the racing secretary and there were multiple complaints from both fans and other trainers about the same rider

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Tim Y

Horses can get stiffed if the rider is completely incompetent like this guy was.
Now horses are being stiffed! Wow! Talk about the average uninformed bettor at any track in the country!
One of his mounts won a sprint IN SPITE OF HIS INCOMPETENCE, but when you don't even move with the horse's action it is like putting a dead weight on the animal's back.
But a horse won a race with this jockey. I guess the jockey was 'ok' in this race! The jockey didn't "STIFF" that one. I didn't think a jockey's competence mattered! I thought it was just the horses' ability!
Horses still win races all by themselves but cannot when the rider is working against them.
But you said this jockey DID win a race! So the jockey only "stiffed" the ones he lost with, is that the idea? You also said all the "horsey stuff", class trainers, jockey's didn't matter!
I just received a response from the racing secretary and there were multiple complaints from both fans and other trainers about the same rider. What do you care, the jockey doesn't matter, does it?

YOU have to make up your mind. "Horsey stuff" either matters or it doesn't, ALL THE TIME, not just when YOU want it to!

[Tim Y]

Originally Posted by For The Lead

YOU have to make up your mind. "Horsey stuff" either matters or it doesn't, ALL THE TIME, not just when YOU want it to!

Never matters as the logical bettor factors that in in exotics to counteract the unknowns that might or might not be there.

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Tim Y

Never matters as the logical bettor factors that in in exotics to counteract the unknowns that might or might not be there.

Nice try. And if the dog hadn't stopped to s--t, he would have caught the rabbit.

And you asked someone else today if their post was in English?

[Tim Y]

Originally Posted by For The Lead

Nice try. And if the dog hadn't stopped to s--t, he would have caught the rabbit.

And you asked someone else today if their post was in English?

Wagering is not handicapping and handicapping is not wagering. never have been

[Tim Y]

People are free to talk about any subject. I can't help if I am the only one that pushes the envelope. Have the evidence to back it up. In the myriad of approaches to understanding a race, it is incumbent to find a niche that the crowd misses. It works well in that regard.

Just like the old saying quoted at Robert Kennedy's funeral: "Some people see things as they are and ask why. I dream things that never were and ask why not?"

BOTTOM LINE: Jockey have the potential to cause more of a hindrance than a help.

If you like incestuous amplification of a single point of view, that is a pity.

[Ted Craven]

Originally Posted by Tim Y

... I can't help if I am the only one that pushes the envelope.

Tim,

So, Val3 and then SpecPA would be the cutting edge, would they, because no one else but you ever pushed the envelope further than that? (And I guess that's still the cutting edge at Sartin Alums, is it?)

Hate to break it to you, but you're not the icon you consider yourself to be. You do have a (frequently) irritating didactic style though. Though I try my best to get people to do what I tell them , I can't yet convince dozens of folks to post stuff they're working on, new research, ways of using existing Methodology tools, simple plodding success stories, because (among other reasons) they don't have as much time as you or passion for endless, withering, debate. Some people are built like that...

A question for other readers: isn't it possible to just ignore commentary from members whose style just grates on you? Or who hijack your threads or insult you? Can't you just continue on as if they hadn't interrupted? Or is it really as polar as either kick them off or cede control of the place? What about if they actually sometimes post stimulating and useful information?

Just asking...

Ted