View Full Version : Mike Smith's ride on Starry Skies, Apr 25 Race 6 SA
Stillriledup
05-08-2014, 04:06 PM
With the big discussion on Avila and Berrio, i though i'd point out this ride by Smith on Starry Skies in the 6th race on Apr 25th.
He was the betting favorite and never really "let this horse run" he had her wrapped up in Midstretch and never urged for the final 1/8th of a mile.
If this was Berrio, with same exact ride, would he be questioned for "no urging"?
Where do you stand on the long used practice of "giving a horse a race"?
VeryOldMan
05-08-2014, 04:38 PM
Just watched the replay and head-on replay multiple times. I saw horses going all over the place on the downhill SA turf course (particularly from the head-on) and Starry Skies was coming off a 1 1/2 year absence. I didn't see any horse being stiffed. What are you seeing?
Dark Horse
05-08-2014, 04:43 PM
With the big discussion on Avila and Berrio, i though i'd point out this ride by Smith on Starry Skies in the 6th race on Apr 25th.
He was the betting favorite and never really "let this horse run" he had her wrapped up in Midstretch and never urged for the final 1/8th of a mile.
If this was Berrio, with same exact ride, would he be questioned for "no urging"?
Where do you stand on the long used practice of "giving a horse a race"?
Mike Smith does that on a lot on favorites. He says that at this point in his career it's about the horse first. Sometimes you gotta wonder, though. I love the guy, but I've cursed him.
Stillriledup
05-08-2014, 04:48 PM
Just watched the replay and head-on replay multiple times. I saw horses going all over the place on the downhill SA turf course (particularly from the head-on) and Starry Skies was coming off a 1 1/2 year absence. I didn't see any horse being stiffed. What are you seeing?
So the Berrio horse was coming off a 3 or 4 year "absense" since he was a first time starter. What does it matter when the horse last raced? Does it give a jock to try "less hard" if the horse "needs" the race?
I was asking if this same horse was ridden by Berrio would people say he wasnt urging the horse in the stretch? Or, because its Mike Smith, does he get a pass?
Also, i never used the word "Stiffed" that's your word, not mine.
VeryOldMan
05-08-2014, 05:47 PM
I feel like we're talking past each other - is this thread to defend Berrio or to call out Mike Smith? I assume we're both working from this piece:
http://www.paulickreport.com/news/ray-s-paddock/california-stewards-investigate-race-ride-barn-of-churchill-maiden-winner/
Stillriledup
05-08-2014, 05:57 PM
I feel like we're talking past each other - is this thread to defend Berrio or to call out Mike Smith? I assume we're both working from this piece:
http://www.paulickreport.com/news/ray-s-paddock/california-stewards-investigate-race-ride-barn-of-churchill-maiden-winner/
Its to ask the question about a double standard and if you think there might be one when it comes to Berrio.
If Starry Skies was ridden by Berrio, would we just chalk up the "no late urge" to "great horsemanship" or would we think something was up.
VeryOldMan
05-08-2014, 06:28 PM
Let me rephrase the question and offer a multiple choice answer where you can select only ONE: are you (i) defending Berrio, (ii) criticized Smith, (iii) neither, (iv) both?
Stillriledup
05-08-2014, 06:34 PM
Let me rephrase the question and offer a multiple choice answer where you can select only ONE: are you (i) defending Berrio, (ii) criticized Smith, (iii) neither, (iv) both?
I'm probably essentially defending Berrio. I'm not criticizing Smith, as long as the judges are fine with how he rode this filly, i'm fine with it too.
Since this 'can of worms' has been opened w Berrio, i think its fair (?) to make sure all jocks are riding hard all the time all the way to the wire. If you are going to pick apart Berrio and his 'non urging" its only fair to pick apart everyone else....you know, if that's the standard the judges (who are investigating) want to adhere to.
VeryOldMan
05-08-2014, 06:42 PM
Got it.
This is the part of the Paulick article that caught my eye (my emphasis added):
Masochistic’s March 15 debut was anything but normal.
Fourth choice in the betting at 8-1 that day, Berrio sat like a statue on the horse for nearly the entire six furlongs, weaving back and forth behind horses, then diving to the rail in the stretch. The ride was so lethargic the jockey was called in the next morning for a video review with the stewards, at which he was accompanied by Jockeys’ Guild representative Darrel Haire.
“There was no discussion of the pertinent facts as a formal hearing will be set in the near future,” the stewards wrote in their daily minutes. “The Board of Stewards was concerned that Mr. Berrio prevented his horse from giving his best race. The horse was examined and tested post-race, and the CHRB investigators were directed to look into the matter.”
Three weeks later, blood and urine samples came back positive for the tranquilizer Acepromazine, a Class 3 drug under California Horse Racing Board rules. A complaint filed by the stewards said a search of Avila’s barn uncovered “medication bottles with blank veterinarian prescription labels attached or no prescription labels at all.”
Stillriledup
05-08-2014, 07:03 PM
Got it.
This is the part of the Paulick article that caught my eye (my emphasis added):
Masochistic’s March 15 debut was anything but normal.
Fourth choice in the betting at 8-1 that day, Berrio sat like a statue on the horse for nearly the entire six furlongs, weaving back and forth behind horses, then diving to the rail in the stretch. The ride was so lethargic the jockey was called in the next morning for a video review with the stewards, at which he was accompanied by Jockeys’ Guild representative Darrel Haire.
“There was no discussion of the pertinent facts as a formal hearing will be set in the near future,” the stewards wrote in their daily minutes. “The Board of Stewards was concerned that Mr. Berrio prevented his horse from giving his best race. The horse was examined and tested post-race, and the CHRB investigators were directed to look into the matter.”
Three weeks later, blood and urine samples came back positive for the tranquilizer Acepromazine, a Class 3 drug under California Horse Racing Board rules. A complaint filed by the stewards said a search of Avila’s barn uncovered “medication bottles with blank veterinarian prescription labels attached or no prescription labels at all.”
Maybe the Berrio ride has been tied into the idea that the trainer gave the horse a "slow down" drug, but essentially the comments "sit like a statue" is talking about his urging (or lack of) on this horse.
I'm wondering if you hold Berrio to a certain standard of 'urging' you have to hold everyone to that same standard. No wrapping up, you urge all the way. Now, i'm not saying to beat up a horse who is well beaten, but no reason not to pump your hands all the way, as opposed to just wrapping up.
dannyhill
05-08-2014, 07:14 PM
Prior to Smith wrapping the horse up, what was he doing with his mount?
If he never asked the horse for anything and was a motionless statue that is certainly different than if he was asking his mount for run and throwing a few crosses at her and then wrapped up on her. If he did ask for run what was the response.
Either way absolutely the game needs to eliminate the questionable looking rides, in terms of non-effort.
VeryOldMan
05-08-2014, 07:26 PM
I'm wondering if you hold Berrio to a certain standard of 'urging' you have to hold everyone to that same standard. No wrapping up, you urge all the way. Now, i'm not saying to beat up a horse who is well beaten, but no reason not to pump your hands all the way, as opposed to just wrapping up.
OK - got it.
We have previously received some very good advice about this issue from an honest-to-god current trainer on the board. Not dissing Berrio - rather, I'm suggesting the jockeys have run enough races to know when there is nothing left in tank and they need to hang on for dear life to get the horse across the finish line.
Stillriledup
05-08-2014, 07:27 PM
Prior to Smith wrapping the horse up, what was he doing with his mount?
If he never asked the horse for anything and was a motionless statue that is certainly different than if he was asking his mount for run and throwing a few crosses at her and then wrapped up on her. If he did ask for run what was the response.
Either way absolutely the game needs to eliminate the questionable looking rides, in terms of non-effort.
Smith pushed the horse along and threw a few crosses and whatnut, but he never put her into the race, he was just in the back "going around" and it didnt appear to me that his life depended on her winning or hitting the board.
Perception might not be everything, but its certainly a lot. You gotta urge all the way, whether you're Berrio, Smith or anyone else.
Stillriledup
05-08-2014, 07:39 PM
OK - got it.
We have previously received some very good advice about this issue from an honest-to-god current trainer on the board. Not dissing Berrio - rather, I'm suggesting the jockeys have run enough races to know when there is nothing left in tank and they need to hang on for dear life to get the horse across the finish line.
I'm pretty sure i've been in the middle of those discussions...and i think as bettors who are risking hard earned money, we don't really want jocks to be "Deciding" whether they're going to urge all the way or not. Just urge, you're a jock, paid to ride...they're not paid to train or own, so as a rider, i don't think i'm being unreasonable to ask them to do what they're paid to do, its also not unreasonable to ask them to urge all the way to the end. Its a Pandemic these days for jocks to just "ease up" at the wire, seems like i see this stuff way too often, there are always threads on it and plenty of examples of jocks costing mounts board spots due to being lazy.
Not asking them to punish a stopping horse who finishes way back, but if you have a shot to get 5th or better, you gotta ride hard all the way.
When these discussions come up, people defend a jock's right to stop riding because they think some bettors are asking for the jock to pound on the horse with the whip no matter where they are on the track. The discussion really surrounds horses who are in contention for an exotic board spot (down to 5th in some races).
For some bettors, a 4th place finish could be much more valuable than a win finish, a bettor can need a certain horse for 4th or 5th to cash a monster Super or Penta, so for them, there's no difference between 1st and 4th and yet many jocks ride as if there is.
VeryOldMan
05-08-2014, 09:12 PM
Not arguing - you realize that the jockeys are making their $$ from the owners, right? Trainers equal or next.
Bettors like us don't factor into the equation. Not saying that's right or wrong -it is the reality.
If I owned a horse that had no shot at winning or cashing a decent owner's check, I don't think I'd want the jockey to whip the bejesus out of my horse down the stretch. Wait for another day.
Bettors like us are the sheep to be sheared. We don't count at all in the current scheme of things. Again - not saying that is right; just that we are the LAST people considered.
Valuist
05-09-2014, 11:50 AM
SRU-
Thanks for the alert. I just watched the replay, and the stretch run is clearly a stiff job. But up until that point, Smith seemed to be trying. Old Man pointed out that the horse had been off for a year and a half. It would appear that Smith was doing what he could, and he realized the horse wasn't going to fire enough to win. Although one could wonder if he had been riding thru the stretch, he could've maybe got 3rd. But the biggest difference between this and Berrio's ride is that I don't think Smith prevented his mount from winning.
I'll be curious to see how this horse runs next out. If he's a big price, he'd probably be worth throwing into some gimmicks.
This brings to mind another question: who in their right mind bets a horse off an 18 month layoff? And worse yet, who takes a low price on a horse off a year and a half layoff? Its good to know there's plenty of bettors who will.
GMB@BP
05-09-2014, 12:56 PM
I once asked a high level rider about stiff jobs and pulling horses and his response "why would I do that, what would I have to gain compared to everything I could lose?" I think it happens with smaller riders and cheaper tracks because there could be something to gain but with guys who are pulling 1mil+ a year I dont see how getting caught up with that small change stuff would make sense.
Stillriledup
05-09-2014, 03:49 PM
Not arguing - you realize that the jockeys are making their $$ from the owners, right? Trainers equal or next.
Bettors like us don't factor into the equation. Not saying that's right or wrong -it is the reality.
If I owned a horse that had no shot at winning or cashing a decent owner's check, I don't think I'd want the jockey to whip the bejesus out of my horse down the stretch. Wait for another day.
Bettors like us are the sheep to be sheared. We don't count at all in the current scheme of things. Again - not saying that is right; just that we are the LAST people considered.
Racing boards punish "lack of effort" and they do dole out punishments for riding "infractions" so the fact that they are riding for the owners and not the bettors isnt something that the horse racing board's care about.
So, if you are a jock who stops riding and costs yourself a board spot because you were "not beating up" an owners investment, you'll get fined or suspended for that even if you say "i was riding to instructions" or i was "riding for the owner"
With that said, you're right, jocks arent riding for bettors.
Stillriledup
05-09-2014, 03:57 PM
SRU-
Thanks for the alert. I just watched the replay, and the stretch run is clearly a stiff job. But up until that point, Smith seemed to be trying. Old Man pointed out that the horse had been off for a year and a half. It would appear that Smith was doing what he could, and he realized the horse wasn't going to fire enough to win. Although one could wonder if he had been riding thru the stretch, he could've maybe got 3rd. But the biggest difference between this and Berrio's ride is that I don't think Smith prevented his mount from winning.
I'll be curious to see how this horse runs next out. If he's a big price, he'd probably be worth throwing into some gimmicks.
This brings to mind another question: who in their right mind bets a horse off an 18 month layoff? And worse yet, who takes a low price on a horse off a year and a half layoff? Its good to know there's plenty of bettors who will.
You're welcome!
I thought the same thing, AND, the horse was ridden by a guy like Smith who is going to be more "Conservative" than say a young jock trying to prove himself. It was a very silly bet by the public, they just bet the PPs and the numbers without taking into consideration the situation.
Sure, there are differences between the Smith ride and the Berrio ride, but can you really say Smith was "all in" and "hell bent to win" from the opening of the gate?
Smith didnt ride like he was the betting favorite and needed to give an aggressive ride, he rode like he was 50-1 and knew the horse "needed" the race.
Just wondering where we draw the line on this stuff.
Mad Scientist
05-09-2014, 10:03 PM
I think when you have horses that really just needs the race and the jockey rides them like it's a workout rather than a race that it's up to the bettors to be able to see what the situation is when doing their handicapping and bet accordingly. I don't blame the trainer or the jockey. If the horse needs a race than he needs a race .
How many times have you seen a route horse come back from a long layoff in a sprint and the horse gets hammered at the windows because maybe he has a class or speed figure edge even though it's obviously only a tighter for route races down the road. Figuring stuff like that out us part of what I like the most about horse racing.
Now if the jockey us "stiffing" the horse that's a whole different story, and by stiffing I mean holding a horse back from running his best race in order to either manipulate the outcome of that particular race or so that a bet a bigger odds can be cashed on the horse later down the road.
I don't think it really happens much at all where a jockey is going to try to fix a race, because the punishment for doing that is so severe. Their career would be over and they most likely would go to prison, but I do think the holding of a horse back to get better odds in a future race probably does happen occasionally.
Stillriledup
05-09-2014, 10:36 PM
I think when you have horses that really just needs the race and the jockey rides them like it's a workout rather than a race that it's up to the bettors to be able to see what the situation is when doing their handicapping and bet accordingly. I don't blame the trainer or the jockey. If the horse needs a race than he needs a race .
How many times have you seen a route horse come back from a long layoff in a sprint and the horse gets hammered at the windows because maybe he has a class or speed figure edge even though it's obviously only a tighter for route races down the road. Figuring stuff like that out us part of what I like the most about horse racing.
Now if the jockey us "stiffing" the horse that's a whole different story, and by stiffing I mean holding a horse back from running his best race in order to either manipulate the outcome of that particular race or so that a bet a bigger odds can be cashed on the horse later down the road.
I don't think it really happens much at all where a jockey is going to try to fix a race, because the punishment for doing that is so severe. Their career would be over and they most likely would go to prison, but I do think the holding of a horse back to get better odds in a future race probably does happen occasionally.
But, isnt it possible to have a horse fully cranked off workouts? Why should you use a pari mutuel race as a "qualifier" when you could just train the horse hard and have him dead fit?
Valuist
04-24-2015, 10:21 AM
I see Powerful Instinct is running tomorrow at Aqueduct. I took a look at the replay of his Feb 21 race at GP (race 1, he's number 3). There was a brief period entering the stretch where there was some mild traffic, but even after he got clear of that, it appears the rider isn't interested in winning that race, or finishing higher. Just no sense of urgency whatsoever. I'll have to rewatch the head on. Maybe there was some left handed urging I missed, but considering how lazy the rider's hands appeared to be, I doubt that's the case.
Valuist
04-24-2015, 10:33 AM
I watched the replay. It certainly wasn't a blatant stiff job, but possibly a subtle one. In the head on, he had to cross over more lanes than I realized from the pan shot. But there never was any real sense of urgency. I've never felt JRV was one to pull horses. Curious to hear other takes on the race. Maybe I'm seeing something that isn't there.
chadk66
04-24-2015, 11:47 AM
when you bet horses that have been off for a year and a half your taking a big risk. horses that were off that long are usually off due to a severe injury of some kind. no trainer or jockey in their right mind are going to take a risk of wasting all the time and money of bringing a horse back from that long of a layoff by blowing the thing up to please a bettor. just the cold reality of it. they will get the horse to show some interest early but at the first sign of fatigue/fade/disinterest they wrap em up to not blow a hole in the horse.
Valuist
04-24-2015, 12:15 PM
when you bet horses that have been off for a year and a half your taking a big risk. horses that were off that long are usually off due to a severe injury of some kind. no trainer or jockey in their right mind are going to take a risk of wasting all the time and money of bringing a horse back from that long of a layoff by blowing the thing up to please a bettor. just the cold reality of it. they will get the horse to show some interest early but at the first sign of fatigue/fade/disinterest they wrap em up to not blow a hole in the horse.
That may be true for horses off a year and a half; this horse was off 2 months, having last run December 27 before the Feb 21 race. He wasn't asked for anything at all early, and lagged quite a bit far back. The horse made progress without any urging, and saving ground on second turn helped.
GMB@BP
04-24-2015, 02:22 PM
Horse has yet to win again, looks like a 3rd place effort was her best. If there was a reason they pulled her in the race its hard to imagine what they are waiting for...maybe its like in Let It Ride.....
chadk66
04-24-2015, 04:43 PM
what most people fail to understand is sometimes trainers change things up with their horses trying to find something that makes them better. I had quite a few horses that while sprinting were pace setters or a hair off the pace. when I stretched them out they didn't finish up well. decided to take them way back early on and they closed like crazy and became great route horses. Same thing happens with sprinters. Sometimes you have to try them off the pace quite a ways and try to make them finish stronger. As a bystander you have no idea what's going on with a trainers/jockey/owners desires for a horse.
ultracapper
04-24-2015, 04:53 PM
Ba-zing. Big part of handicapping is trying to figure out connection intentions. No matter what us bettors want, not every horse in every race is hell bent to get to the wire first. Nothing wrong with that. Unless you're Brian Carney, every owner wants to work his horse into the winner's circle, some way, some time. Some of these horses take some time to figure out.
vBulletin® v3.8.9, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.