Migliore won't back down

[Indulto]

Migliore won't back down BY KEVIN MODESTI
http://www.dailynews.com/sports/ci_5285676 (http://www.dailynews.com/sports/ci_5285676)
… Determined not to quit his native circuit without a final push, Migliore resolved one morning to hit the stables and hustle business from ex-clients.

…"I'm not going to mention any names, because this one (trainer) probably will be eventually embarrassed," Migliore began the story. "I went into his barn, and I said, `Hey, I've ridden so many winners for you over the years, and I haven't been riding for you, and I feel like getting started again.' The guy's got like 40 horses in the barn. I said, `Give me one we can get started with.' "He said, `Nah, it's not going to happen.' I said, `Why? Did I do something so wrong?' He said, `You want me to be honest?' I said, `Yeah.' He said, `Why should I ride you at 41 years old with all the injuries you've had, when I could ride 25-year-olds who've never had the battle scars you have?'Any speculation as to who that trainer was?

[BIG49010]

Bruce Levine?

[Ron]

What's wrong with the Mig's agent?

[Perlnalysis]

So is the trainer insinuating that the Mig is afraid to take chances on the track any more? Or is it that he's not physically capable of muscling a horse home in the final eighth?

[boomman]

Ron asked:

What's wrong with the Mig's agent?

Ron: As far as I know, nothing! Last time I checked, he was in the very capable hands of Ron Anderson, who has put him on some "live" mounts in Southern California. IMO his move there is definitely permanent!

Boomer

[ELA]

Bruce Levine?

No chance.

Eric

[ELA]

Great article. First, let me say that I know Richard personally (as do several members of this BB). I know that the Mig was feeling a bit "stale" and that his business was stagnant here in NY. Re-energizing and rebuilding his business was slow and tough after he broke his leg. It was what it was.

I believe Richard's story in the paper. I am not saying it's not true or anything like that. However, I do want to say this. The opinion from that trainer was in the minority. To me, unless he was saying that the Mig was riding scared (and I didn't read that) -- then to me, the comment was foolish. It was the Mig's business that was down, not his courage.

I am not saying he made a mistake moving to the West Coast -- that was his decision to make. But I will say this -- Richard Migliore is an excellent jockey. 21, 41, doesn't matter. His experience is a valuable asset. I always felt that along with Jerry Bailey, Richard was one of the "smartest" jockey's on the track. I think he is tremendous strategist and a true student of the game. Sure, everyone makes mistakes, that happens. However, he is an extremely intelligent jockey on the track. He has a passion for this game that is unequaled and has no boundaries. We should all be so lucky to find something that we are as passionate about as Richard is about this game.

Now -- you ready for this? As much as I think of him as a jockey -- he's much better and greater than that as a person. I consider it an honor and privilige to know him and call him my friend.

Eric

[boomman]

Ela wrote:I believe Richard's story in the paper. I am not saying it's not true or anything like that. However, I do want to say this. The opinion from that trainer was in the minority. To me, unless he was saying that the Mig was riding scared (and I didn't read that) -- then to me, the comment was foolish. It was the Mig's business that was down, not his courage.

I am not saying he made a mistake moving to the West Coast -- that was his decision to make. But I will say this -- Richard Migliore is an excellent jockey. 21, 41, doesn't matter. His experience is a valuable asset. I always felt that along with Jerry Bailey, Richard was one of the "smartest" jockey's on the track. I think he is tremendous strategist and a true student of the game. Sure, everyone makes mistakes, that happens. However, he is an extremely intelligent jockey on the track. He has a passion for this game that is unequaled and has no boundaries. We should all be so lucky to find something that we are as passionate about as Richard is about this game.

Now -- you ready for this? As much as I think of him as a jockey -- he's much better and greater than that as a person. I consider it an honor and privilige to know him and call him my friend.

Eric

Eric: Although I have never had the pleasure of meeting Richard (but plan on doing so this summer at Del Mar if he's there), I know many people on the East Coast that know him well, and they all say the same thing as you. I think it was a smart move for him to move his tack to California, as the timing was right for not only him, but Jorge Chavez as well! BOTH of these riders are slowly but surely making their presence known there! And as for your comment that I have highlighted above concerning his race riding ability, any other "true student of the game" knows that to be true. The "Mig" is certainly an outstanding race rider and strategist!

Boomer

[ELA]

Ela wrote:I believe Richard's story in the paper. I am not saying it's not true or anything like that. However, I do want to say this. The opinion from that trainer was in the minority. To me, unless he was saying that the Mig was riding scared (and I didn't read that) -- then to me, the comment was foolish. It was the Mig's business that was down, not his courage.

I am not saying he made a mistake moving to the West Coast -- that was his decision to make. But I will say this -- Richard Migliore is an excellent jockey. 21, 41, doesn't matter. His experience is a valuable asset. I always felt that along with Jerry Bailey, Richard is one of the "smartest" jockey's on the track. I think he is tremendous strategist and a true student of the game. Sure, everyone makes mistakes, that happens. However, he is an extremely intelligent jockey on the track. He has a passion for this game that is unequaled and has no boundaries. We should all be so lucky to find something that we are as passionate about as Richard is about this game.

Now -- you ready for this? As much as I think of him as a jockey -- he's much better and greater than that as a person. I consider it an honor and privilige to know him and call him my friend.

Eric

Eric: Although I have never had the pleasure of meeting Richard (but plan on doing so this summer at Del Mar if he's there), I know many people on the East Coast that know him well, and they all say the same thing as you. I think it was a smart move for him to move his tack to California, as the timing was right for not only him, but Jorge Chavez as well! BOTH of these riders are slowly but surely making their presence known there! And as for your comment that I have highlighted above concerning his race riding ability, any other "true student of the game" knows that to be true. The "Mig" is certainly an outstanding race rider and strategist!

Boomer


Thank you. I should have said "is" one of the smartest" as opposed to "was".

I took the liberty of changing it.

Eric

[ranchwest]

When "the Shoe" brought in Ferdinand, nobody withheld the purse money because he might have an AARP card.

As for Migliore, there's no reason a jockey of only 41 can't ride for quite a few years if he doesn't have significant permanent injuries and he takes care of himself.

[the little guy]

Richie's doing great now in California, and he's happy, and that's all that matters.

It's not really important who the trainer was, though some of us know, as it is more an example of why Richie felt he needed a change. The change has invigorated him and he's riding at the top of his game. To me that's all that matters.

[jotb]

No chance.

Eric

Hello Eric:

There are several trainers that come to mine but one trainer that is possible is Kiaran Mclaughlin. I believe Kiaran has about 40 head in NY. Here are some stats.

2002- 14 wins, 43 races
2003- 29 wins, 109 races
2004- 27 wins 155 races
2005- 18 wins 116 races
2006- 1 win 16 races

Joe

[DanG]

There is an almost “brutal” honesty on the backside.

Wake up that early with virtually no vacations and people tend to be a little more candid than say a guy who hands out towels in Boca Raton.

Sidebar: If you think this frank language is brutal, my brother worked for Willard Proctor in So Cal. Willard was an old school hard boot in every sense of the word. My brother saw Proctor threaten a jockey after not following instructions with breaking his jaw.

Quick story; soon after my brother was with him Willard went to him and said, “take Morse out of his stall and walk him”. My bro thought it was odd since it wasn’t scheduled. Next he and his son Tom go in the stall and have a peir-6 bare knuckle fight. This is how many Kentucky hard boots settle disagreements.

Want to see some “frank” language and confrontations?

Get reckless and put Earlie Fires in danger. Especially when he was young you better be ready to throw hands. See Julie Krones account of punching a male rider in the face at Monmouth and trying to drown him in the Monmouth swimming pool hours later.

If you follow racing long enough you see riders “lose their nerve”. I’m not saying this happened to the Mig (I love Richard), but I’ve seen it happen.

Julie Krone talked candidly about how she thought twice about forcing through narrow holes after her horrific spill at Saratoga. In my humble opinion we are witnessing it in various degrees with Johnny V. and Alex Solis. This is NOT said in a disparaging way at all. Its plain and simple human nature after a horrendous accident.

I rode dirt bikes for a while in Jersey and was very wild before my shoulder found a tree. Never the same rider after that and these guys and gals take 1,000 times the risk.

One more thing about the Mig. Richie was a leader and a spokesman in the NY jockey’s room and word is he was very instrumental in various cancellations (due to unsafe conditions) over the years. To you and I this might sound reasonable, but to many owners and trainers it is infuriating. Possible grudge went into the statement? Only they will ever know.

I wish the Mig all the best in So Cal and he is riding in fine form in my opinion with limited opportunities. :ThmbUp:


PS: I agree 100% with Eric…I seriously doubt it was Levine.

[Stevie Belmont]

Hushion/Migs was a good combo for years. Not speculating, just pointing that out.

[maxwell]

Chop Chop and the Mig are still great riders. SoCal is not an easy place to get your foot in the door, but these two guys should make it with flying colors. Personally, I upgrade a horse when they climb aboard.

[alysheba88]

The Mig is the one who should be embarassed by the story. He comes across as a jerk

[Indulto]

The Mig is the one who should be embarassed by the story. He comes across as a jerkA8,
I hope you at least read the entire article before reaching that conclusion.

My reaction was that it was a very life-affirming story and I'd bet the author thought so too.

[boomman]

Indulto: I agree! I think the Mig just came across as asking for a 2nd chance, and when the writing was on the wall that he wasn't likely to get it with some outfits in New York, "he went west young man"!

Boomer

[alysheba88]

You dont think going to a trainer and demanding he "give me one to get started" is acting like a jerk?

[Indulto]

You dont think going to a trainer and demanding he "give me one to get started" is acting like a jerk?In that rendition of events, the statement came across to me more as a request than a demand, but I guess one had to be there. Were you? ;)

[ELA]

You dont think going to a trainer and demanding he "give me one to get started" is acting like a jerk?

Richie is one of the best jocks at hustling business. He often does a better job than his agent, LOL. He is extremely personable, extremely well liked, and well respected on NYRA backstretches. He's been there for over a quarter of a century. Many of the horsemen we see excelling at their craft today, came up with Richie. It wasn't a demand, and didn't come across as one to most people who read it. Also, Richie was saying it to someone who he had a relationship with in a context that takes place every morning on the backstretch.

Anyone who knows Richie would not think he came off like a jerk because the way he said it and how he was being.

Eric

[douglasw32]

as of feb 25th 5th best leading jock at SA

[alysheba88]

I have read the article again and still think he comes across as a jerk. He could be Mother Theresa for all I know, but he doesnt come across well. Furthermore he appears to be distorting completely what the "NY Trainer said".

According to the article he asked the trainer point blank why he wouldnt give him horses and he was told point blank why. The trainer did not say "because you are done". Later in the article Mig says he already proved the trainer wrong because he is not "done". But he never said the trainer said that!

The trainer, again can only go by what I am reading here, told him why he was riding someone else

[alysheba88]

Also- if this unnamed trainer was training nothing but a handful of bums now Hopeless 20-1 shots every race why Mig was the #1 rider would the Mig turn down quality mounts to run the hopeless bums? The backstretch is cutthroat.

You think anyone gave Julie Krone anything after all her injuries? She had to prove herself everytime she came back.

[jotb]

Furthermore he appears to be distorting completely what the "NY Trainer said".

According to the article he asked the trainer point blank why he wouldnt give him horses and he was told point blank why. The trainer did not say "because you are done". Later in the article Mig says he already proved the trainer wrong because he is not "done". But he never said the trainer said that!

The trainer, again can only go by what I am reading here, told him why he was riding someone else

Hello Alysheba:

That's exactly what the trainer meant without coming out and saying those exact words. The trainer use his age and injuries as an excuse. In other words, the mig does not have the heart anymore. When the heart is not there for a jock that jock is done. Migliore is not a jerk. He went to the trainer and that's what a jock should do. He didn't send his agent. Trainers rather see the rider than an agent and I give alot of credit to Migliore just because he confronted the trainer humbly. The problem with many trainers is a thing we call "out of sight out of mind" or "what have you done for me lately". Many trainers forget the past. The trainer supposely has 40 head and with that many horses he could have gave the Mig. a shot to jump start him. Mig never said anything about riding the barn. The Mig is a class act and will be remembered by many for his heart and riding ability.

Joe

[alysheba88]

Hello Alysheba:

That's exactly what the trainer meant without coming out and saying those exact words. The trainer use his age and injuries as an excuse. In other words, the mig does not have the heart anymore. When the heart is not there for a jock that jock is done. Migliore is not a jerk. He went to the trainer and that's what a jock should do. He didn't send his agent. Trainers rather see the rider than an agent and I give alot of credit to Migliore just because he confronted the trainer humbly. The problem with many trainers is a thing we call "out of sight out of mind" or "what have you done for me lately". Many trainers forget the past. The trainer supposely has 40 head and with that many horses he could have gave the Mig. a shot to jump start him. Mig never said anything about riding the barn. The Mig is a class act and will be remembered by many for his heart and riding ability.

Joe


To me you dont ask for a blunt answer and get mad when you get one.

I dont like how most trainers treate their jockeys. Especially the high profile ones. If anything my sympathies will be with the jockeys.

That being said the guy told Mig he had younger better riders to choose from. Which could very well be the truth. If the trainer thinks his best chance to win is those younger riders then what is he supposed to say?

[Show Me the Wire]

I do not know Migliore personally so this is an unbiased opinion about his current riding style. You will be happy if you like your horse to be the widest one in the stretch, unless Solis is in the race, or the widest in a 3 horse early speed duel.

His best rides come when he gets loose on the lead and can steal the race.

BTW the So. Cal jock colony is not very good at the moment. Migliore is riding on a daily basis against the likes of the Bazes (M.C. & T.C.), Cohen, Olguin, Antongrgi III, Bisano, Gryder, Figuero, Court, Garcia M. Realistically he should be in fifth place behind the real top Jocks led by G. Gomez. After Gomez and Espinoza there is a extremely large drop off.

[aaron]

I miss the Mig on the inner track this year. Instead, I have to endure Mike Smith and Shaun Bridghmohan who haven't a clue on how to ride the inner.The trainer who didn't want to use the Mig is probably using these two.

[jotb]

To me you dont ask for a blunt answer and get mad when you get one.

I dont like how most trainers treate their jockeys. Especially the high profile ones. If anything my sympathies will be with the jockeys.

That being said the guy told Mig he had younger better riders to choose from. Which could very well be the truth. If the trainer thinks his best chance to win is those younger riders then what is he supposed to say?

"Younger better riders to choose from" just means more heart. Mig didn't win all those races and ride all those years because he was lucky. He had the natural talent it takes to be a great jockey. When he was in his prime he could outride just about everyone ding donging down to the wire. His better days, he picked up more horses in the late stages of a race to win because he was a strong rider. In my opinion, this trainer could have thrown a bone or two to him. I'm sure that the owners of this trainer wouldn't mine having the Mig as their pilot on their horses.

[jotb]

I miss the Mig on the inner track this year. Instead, I have to endure Mike Smith and Shaun Bridghmohan who haven't a clue on how to ride the inner.The trainer who didn't want to use the Mig is probably using these two.


Hello Aaron:

What makes you think these riders don't have a clue when it comes to riding on the inner? I guess you must think they should have their horses on the front-end or ride the inside taking advantage of the bias. Not every horse in a race can be on the front-end and not every horse in a race can be down on the inside. Keep in mind that in order to do this the rider must have the horse. Not all racehorses are speed oriented and not all racehorses like the inside. Another thing to keep in mind is that jockeys are instructed by trainers prior to the race on how to ride that horse. I think the racing public expects too much from jockeys. The jockey is a pilot and nothing more. The jocks job is to guide that horse staying out of troubled trips. The jockey should have a keen sense of pace and to use the horses energy wisely within that race. The most important thing is to have the horse. No jockey is going to move a horse up 20 lengths and that's it in a nutshell.

Joe

[alysheba88]

Hello Aaron:

What makes you think these riders don't have a clue when it comes to riding on the inner? I guess you must think they should have their horses on the front-end or ride the inside taking advantage of the bias. Not every horse in a race can be on the front-end and not every horse in a race can be down on the inside. Keep in mind that in order to do this the rider must have the horse. Not all racehorses are speed oriented and not all racehorses like the inside. Another thing to keep in mind is that jockeys are instructed by trainers prior to the race on how to ride that horse. I think the racing public expects too much from jockeys. The jockey is a pilot and nothing more. The jocks job is to guide that horse staying out of troubled trips. The jockey should have a keen sense of pace and to use the horses energy wisely within that race. The most important thing is to have the horse. No jockey is going to move a horse up 20 lengths and that's it in a nutshell.

Joe

Except when it comes to Mig right?

[aaron]

Joe-
If you think Smith and Bridghmohan have a clue,you haven't been paying attention. At the beginning of the meet, they both got live horses.As it became obvious that their riding skills have eroded, they have both received less live mounts.
Mike Smith has not been the same rider since he was injured at Saratoga.The "old" Mike Smith would have ridden rings around the current inner track jockeys.
As for Bridghmohan, he has always been an inept jockey,who once in a while gives a good ride. I have been betting against him,for the most part since he returned. I can't tell you how many times he gave up perfect trips to go wide on the inner.

[jotb]

Joe-
If you think Smith and Bridghmohan have a clue,you haven't been paying attention. At the beginning of the meet, they both got live horses.As it became obvious that their riding skills have eroded, they have both received less live mounts.
Mike Smith has not been the same rider since he was injured at Saratoga.The "old" Mike Smith would have ridden rings around the current inner track jockeys.
As for Bridghmohan, he has always been an inept jockey,who once in a while gives a good ride. I have been betting against him,for the most part since he returned. I can't tell you how many times he gave up perfect trips to go wide on the inner.

Hello Aaron:

I think you are wrong about Mike Smith. Since the inner dirt meet has been open Mike has ridden in 120 races with 11 wins, 12 seconds and 16 thirds. The inner has been opened for 3 months and each month he has ridden 40 races. He won 2 races in Dec. 6 races in Jan. and 3 races in Feb. His in the money percentage was 28% in Dec, 40% in Jan and 30% for Feb. He rode 86 different horses and 50 of them either have not run back or did run back with Mike Smith aboard. Mike Smith was taken off 36 horses and 27 came back to do nothing. There were 9 horses that come back to win with another rider in their next start or the start after. 7 of the 9 horses that came back to win were dropping in class and a couple won at a different racetrack (Pha and Tampa). It's obvious Mike's business is not where it should be but it certainly has nothing to do with him riding on the inner. If you need the 86 different horses that he has ridden this meet to check and see if I did my homework please feel free to contact me so that I may forward this info to you.

Joe

[jotb]

Joe-
If you think Smith and Bridghmohan have a clue,you haven't been paying attention. At the beginning of the meet, they both got live horses.As it became obvious that their riding skills have eroded, they have both received less live mounts.
Mike Smith has not been the same rider since he was injured at Saratoga.The "old" Mike Smith would have ridden rings around the current inner track jockeys.
As for Bridghmohan, he has always been an inept jockey,who once in a while gives a good ride. I have been betting against him,for the most part since he returned. I can't tell you how many times he gave up perfect trips to go wide on the inner.

Hello Aaron:

As far as Shaun goes on the inner dirt this year, he has ridden in 213 races with 21 wins, 28 seconds, and 27 thirds. His business has not tailed off in the last 3 months because in Dec. he rode 71 races with 6 wins, 6 seconds, and 7 thirds. The month of Jan. he rode in 70 races with 5 wins, 10 seconds, and 8 thirds. His best month has been Feb. He rode in 72 races with 10 wins, 12 seconds, and 12 thirds. In Dec. his win strike was 8% and 27% in the money and in Feb. his win strike was 14% and 47% in the money. It looks like Shaun had more live horses in the month of Feb. vs the month of Dec.

Joe

[aaron]

Joe,
I am impressed with your work.I'd love to see your printout.
In my opinion,a jockey who doesn't get live mounts,but rides the inner well is Pablo Fragosa. A couple of years ago, I thought he might improve enough to be a top journeyman jockey,but that hasn't happened.

[aaron]

In my opinion, Shaun has been on many live mounts and I feel his it rate should be better.Statistics can only tell you part of the story,you have to watch the races on a daily basis and make judgements on what you see.
Also,to get back on topic, I don't remember Migliore ever being a 10% rider during the winter.

[Indulto]

Hello Aaron:

I think you are wrong about Mike Smith. Since the inner dirt meet has been open Mike has ridden in 120 races with 11 wins, 12 seconds and 16 thirds. The inner has been opened for 3 months and each month he has ridden 40 races. He won 2 races in Dec. 6 races in Jan. and 3 races in Feb. His in the money percentage was 28% in Dec, 40% in Jan and 30% for Feb. He rode 86 different horses and 50 of them either have not run back or did run back with Mike Smith aboard. Mike Smith was taken off 36 horses and 27 came back to do nothing. There were 9 horses that come back to win with another rider in their next start or the start after. 7 of the 9 horses that came back to win were dropping in class and a couple won at a different racetrack (Pha and Tampa). It's obvious Mike's business is not where it should be but it certainly has nothing to do with him riding on the inner. If you need the 86 different horses that he has ridden this meet to check and see if I did my homework please feel free to contact me so that I may forward this info to you.

Joejotb,
It is refreshing to see your analysis, not only because I believe Smith has been getting a bad rap, but because IMO this is the point from which speculation regarding a jockey's overall effectiveness should begin.

Perhaps Trackus will make such analyis more common and comprehensive. Do you think it would be productive to look at a jockey's periodic history of where and how frequently he took which paths relative to post position, number of turns, and race distance for comparison with similar data views for top riders as well as the statistical norm?

[the little guy]

I agree with Aaron. Smith has absolutely no idea what is going on out there and is simply riding as safely as he can. While the inner has been strongly biased towards the rail for the majority of the meet, Smith has made absolutely zero effort to save ground, often staying wide on both turns with nobody inside of him, and rarely making an attempt to establish any kind of early position. Why he doesn't retire is beyond me.

I also believe Bridgemohan, as Aaron also said, has no concept of the bias. Aaron is 100% correct that he has often given up inside position to move outside. He won a race last week doing this when he actually had the lead on the backstretch and drifted wide allowing another horse inside of him. He managed to outgame that horse by a head in a race most riders ( save Mike Smith ) would have won by open lengths. He won but it was a poor ride. The reason things have picked up some for him lately is that Dominguez, and then Arroyo, got hurt. It is not because of his riding.

In an extreme bias such as has existed at Aqueduct the riders can be much more important than normal, as their understanding of it can and will affect races, and these two have stood out for their lack of comprehension. The numbers are interesting but one has to watch how they ride to see how on the ball they are. These two simply aren't for whatever reasons.

Some, however, are " on the ball ", and they seem to be controlling the races.

[ELA]

Hello Aaron:

I think you are wrong about Mike Smith. Since the inner dirt meet has been open Mike has ridden in 120 races with 11 wins, 12 seconds and 16 thirds. The inner has been opened for 3 months and each month he has ridden 40 races. He won 2 races in Dec. 6 races in Jan. and 3 races in Feb. His in the money percentage was 28% in Dec, 40% in Jan and 30% for Feb. He rode 86 different horses and 50 of them either have not run back or did run back with Mike Smith aboard. Mike Smith was taken off 36 horses and 27 came back to do nothing. There were 9 horses that come back to win with another rider in their next start or the start after. 7 of the 9 horses that came back to win were dropping in class and a couple won at a different racetrack (Pha and Tampa). It's obvious Mike's business is not where it should be but it certainly has nothing to do with him riding on the inner. If you need the 86 different horses that he has ridden this meet to check and see if I did my homework please feel free to contact me so that I may forward this info to you.

Joe

Great stats Joe. BTW, just as another exercise, I recently had someone tell me about the # and/or % of horses Mike has ridden that were 5-1 or less, and then 10-1 or less.

Eric

[alysheba88]

In my opinion, Shaun has been on many live mounts and I feel his it rate should be better.Statistics can only tell you part of the story,you have to watch the races on a daily basis and make judgements on what you see.
Also,to get back on topic, I don't remember Migliore ever being a 10% rider during the winter.

Be careful about anedoctal conclusions..

Also, what does Mig have to do with Smith? Did the trainer say he was riding Smith over Mig?

Since you brought it up what do you think Mig's win percentage would be with Smith's exact mounts?

[alysheba88]

And if we are going to start comparing Mig to Smith lets be fair and look at TC and BC performances

[aaron]

Alysheba,
I believe Migliore would be at least 5% to 10% better than Smith with the exact same mounts on the inner.
In comparing Smith to Mig,I am comparing them in '07, not over their careers.
Mike Smith was once an elite rider.This is no longer the case. If he was still an top rider,he would not be riding the inner track meet. At this point in their careers, I think Migliore is the much superior rider.

[the little guy]

And if we are going to start comparing Mig to Smith lets be fair and look at TC and BC performances


What is being discussed is how Mike Smith is riding NOW...and that is poorly.

Here are some relative numbers for 2007 at Aqueduct....


Alan Garcia....... 245 mounts / 42 wins

Norberto Arroyo......177 / 31

Mike Luzzi.........279 / 38

CC Lopez..........298 / 54

Eibar Coa..........371 / 73

Ramon Dominguez.......274 / 67

then....

Bridgemohan......213 / 19

Mike Smith........114 / 9

and as a real comparison

P Morales......93 / 11

Fragoso.......133 / 16


OUCH!

[alysheba88]

Alysheba,
I believe Migliore would be at least 5% to 10% better than Smith with the exact same mounts on the inner.
In comparing Smith to Mig,I am comparing them in '07, not over their careers.
Mike Smith was once an elite rider.This is no longer the case. If he was still an top rider,he would not be riding the inner track meet. At this point in their careers, I think Migliore is the much superior rider.

I am shocked you think a rider makes that much difference

[alysheba88]

What is being discussed is how Mike Smith is riding NOW...and that is poorly.

Here are some relative numbers for 2007 at Aqueduct....


Alan Garcia....... 245 mounts / 42 wins

Norberto Arroyo......177 / 31

Mike Luzzi.........279 / 38

CC Lopez..........298 / 54

Eibar Coa..........371 / 73

Ramon Dominguez.......274 / 67

then....

Bridgemohan......213 / 19

Mike Smith........114 / 9

and as a real comparison

P Morales......93 / 11

Fragoso.......133 / 16


OUCH!


Actually what i thought was being discussed was Mig not getting mounts from a trainer ;)

[the little guy]

I am shocked you think a rider makes that much difference

I am with you that riders don't make that much difference however with the current bias at Aqueduct they play a bigger role and a rider like Mike Smith who shows no understanding of the bias simply cannot win.

If Mig was to win " 5% to 10 % " more often with Smith's mounts his paltry win total might go from 9 to 10. Well, all one would have to do is watch the replay of last Friday's 4th at Aqueduct ( February 23 ) where Mike Smith " rode " Make It Come True. No competent rider would have lost on that horse.

[the little guy]

Actually what i thought was being discussed was Mig not getting mounts from a trainer ;)

It's pretty shocking the topic is still on horse racing....let alone jockeys!

[alysheba88]

I am with you that riders don't make that much difference however with the current bias at Aqueduct they play a bigger role and a rider like Mike Smith who shows no understanding of the bias simply cannot win.

If Mig was to win " 5% to 10 % " more often with Smith's mounts his paltry win total might go from 9 to 10. Well, all one would have to do is watch the replay of last Friday's 4th at Aqueduct ( February 23 ) where Mike Smith " rode " Make It Come True. No competent rider would have lost on that horse.

Okay now I understand. I thought you meant it would go from 10% to 20%

[alysheba88]

It's pretty shocking the topic is still on horse racing....let alone jockeys!

:ThmbUp:

[the little guy]

Okay now I understand. I thought you meant it would go from 10% to 20%


Maybe that is what he meant and I misinterpreted it.

Mike Smith is getting lousy mounts but that is more because of his poor riding. The comparison between him and Morales is pretty scary.

[jotb]

I agree with Aaron. Smith has absolutely no idea what is going on out there and is simply riding as safely as he can. While the inner has been strongly biased towards the rail for the majority of the meet, Smith has made absolutely zero effort to save ground, often staying wide on both turns with nobody inside of him, and rarely making an attempt to establish any kind of early position. Why he doesn't retire is beyond me.

I also believe Bridgemohan, as Aaron also said, has no concept of the bias. Aaron is 100% correct that he has often given up inside position to move outside. He won a race last week doing this when he actually had the lead on the backstretch and drifted wide allowing another horse inside of him. He managed to outgame that horse by a head in a race most riders ( save Mike Smith ) would have won by open lengths. He won but it was a poor ride. The reason things have picked up some for him lately is that Dominguez, and then Arroyo, got hurt. It is not because of his riding.

In an extreme bias such as has existed at Aqueduct the riders can be much more important than normal, as their understanding of it can and will affect races, and these two have stood out for their lack of comprehension. The numbers are interesting but one has to watch how they ride to see how on the ball they are. These two simply aren't for whatever reasons.

Some, however, are " on the ball ", and they seem to be controlling the races.


Hello Little Guy:

Once again the rider always gets the blame. What role does the horse play in this? How many horses dislike being down on the inside? Take a look at Mike's horses the last 3 months. How many of these horses were plodders? How many of these horses had outside posts? How many were first time starters? Take a look at the horses that were previously ridden by another rider and look at the race comments to see where that horse was postitioned in the race. When you break it all down, I'm sure you will see a different picture and not assume that Smith is taken the overland route intentionally.

The comment you made about Shaun in the race that he won, "you say that he gave up the inside when on the lead drifting out", but did you ever think maybe the horse was getting out on the turn? What lead was the horse on when he drifted off the inside? I'm Curious to know what horse was this last week. I would like to take a look at that race if you remember who the horse was.

Thanks
Joe

[the little guy]

I think about all this stuff....way too much in fact.

Believe me, I am with you guys that think riders get too much blame ( and credit ). However, I have also watched the races in NY this winter very closely and there is no question that these riders have not just ridden poorly but also similarly in race after race. One isolated incident could certainly be what you are suggesting but these riders have done these things over and over again.

[the little guy]

Sorry, the race you were wondering about was the 6th on Monday February 19th.

[jotb]

In my opinion, Shaun has been on many live mounts and I feel his it rate should be better.Statistics can only tell you part of the story,you have to watch the races on a daily basis and make judgements on what you see.
Also,to get back on topic, I don't remember Migliore ever being a 10% rider during the winter.

Hello Aaron:

Shaun has been on "live" horses and you think his percentage should be higher. Well take a look at these stats on the inner this year for Shaun. He rode 7 horses less than even money and win 5 of those 7 with 1 second. That is 71% on the win end and 86% in the money. He rode 17 races between even money and 2-1 and win 5 with 4 seconds and 2 thirds. That is 29% win and 65% in the money. He rode 61 races 2-1 to 5-1 with 8 wins, 13 seconds, and 10 thirds. That is 13% win and 51% in the money. From 6-1 to 10-1 he rode 58 with 1 win, 7 seconds and 13 thirds for 2% win and 36% in the money. From 10-1 to 15-1 he rode 20 with 0 wins, 1 second and 1 third for 0% win and 10% in the money. Greater than 15-1 he rode 50 with 2 wins, 2 seconds and 1 third for 4% win and 10% in the money. Now you do the math. 60% of his mounts were 6-1 and greater. 40% were less than even money up to 5-1. We can say 40% of the time Shaun is live and he wins 21% of the time and hits the board 56% of the time. After looking at these stats I would think Shaun is doing a fine job.

Joe

[the_fat_man]

I also believe Bridgemohan, as Aaron also said, has no concept of the bias. Aaron is 100% correct that he has often given up inside position to move outside. He won a race last week doing this when he actually had the lead on the backstretch and drifted wide allowing another horse inside of him. He managed to outgame that horse by a head in a race most riders ( save Mike Smith ) would have won by open lengths. He won but it was a poor ride.

Good analysis.


Bridgemohan does give up the inside to Luzzi by blowing the turn (when they enter the BS) but it's interesting that (for the most part) only Luzzi wanted the rail on the BS and Bridgemohan won the race by keeping Luzzi pinned on the rail during the stretch run, when Luzzi was desperately trying to move off it (as his horse was also trying to drift). As it was, Bridgemohan was in the 2 path for the most part.

As for Smith's ride: he was needlessly wide throughout. Ironically, he angled in during the stretch run and basically stopped, while the top two finishers made it a point to move to the outer part of the track.

[the little guy]

Hello Aaron:

Shaun has been on "live" horses and you think his percentage should be higher. Well take a look at these stats on the inner this year for Shaun. He rode 7 horses less than even money and win 5 of those 7 with 1 second. That is 71% on the win end and 86% in the money. He rode 17 races between even money and 2-1 and win 5 with 4 seconds and 2 thirds. That is 29% win and 65% in the money. He rode 61 races 2-1 to 5-1 with 8 wins, 13 seconds, and 10 thirds. That is 13% win and 51% in the money. From 6-1 to 10-1 he rode 58 with 1 win, 7 seconds and 13 thirds for 2% win and 36% in the money. From 10-1 to 15-1 he rode 20 with 0 wins, 1 second and 1 third for 0% win and 10% in the money. Greater than 15-1 he rode 50 with 2 wins, 2 seconds and 1 third for 4% win and 10% in the money. Now you do the math. 60% of his mounts were 6-1 and greater. 40% were less than even money up to 5-1. We can say 40% of the time Shaun is live and he wins 21% of the time and hits the board 56% of the time. After looking at these stats I would think Shaun is doing a fine job.

Joe


He won with 29% of horses that were roughly 36% to win ( the average of even money to 2-1 less takeout ) and 13% of horses 19% to win ( the average of 2-1 to 5-1 less takeout ) and 2% of those horses roughly 10% to win ( 6-1 to 10-1 average less takout ) and 3% of his higher priced mounts who were about 6% to win and you think he is doing a " fine job "?

Your numbers actually bear out that he is dramatically underperforming.

[jma]

Hello Aaron:

I think you are wrong about Mike Smith. Since the inner dirt meet has been open Mike has ridden in 120 races with 11 wins, 12 seconds and 16 thirds. The inner has been opened for 3 months and each month he has ridden 40 races. He won 2 races in Dec. 6 races in Jan. and 3 races in Feb. His in the money percentage was 28% in Dec, 40% in Jan and 30% for Feb. He rode 86 different horses and 50 of them either have not run back or did run back with Mike Smith aboard. Mike Smith was taken off 36 horses and 27 came back to do nothing. There were 9 horses that come back to win with another rider in their next start or the start after. 7 of the 9 horses that came back to win were dropping in class and a couple won at a different racetrack (Pha and Tampa). It's obvious Mike's business is not where it should be but it certainly has nothing to do with him riding on the inner. If you need the 86 different horses that he has ridden this meet to check and see if I did my homework please feel free to contact me so that I may forward this info to you.

Joe

I don't see how these numbers support the "you were wrong about Mike Smith" argument. You said that 36 times his horses came back with a different rider in their next start, they won 9 times. Even not counting the Philly and Tampa shippers (which Smith obviously wouldn't ride in their next starts), it's 7/34, 20.6% winners. Smith is 11/120, which is 9.2% winners. That shows that he's much worse on the same horses than other riders. Numbers aside, as Aaron and TLG have pointed out, he's always in the wrong spot. I liked him in his prime, but he's just not good at all right now.

[ELA]

I don't see how these numbers support the "you were wrong about Mike Smith" argument. You said that 36 times his horses came back with a different rider in their next start, they won 9 times. Even not counting the Philly and Tampa shippers (which Smith obviously wouldn't ride in their next starts), it's 7/34, 20.6% winners. Smith is 11/120, which is 9.2% winners. That shows that he's much worse on the same horses than other riders. Numbers aside, as Aaron and TLG have pointed out, he's always in the wrong spot. I liked him in his prime, but he's just not good at all right now.

I think an important question here would be -- how many of those 34 horses came back on a drop? I am not going to get into the "Mike Smith" debate. Is he the rider he used to be? Of course not. That's not really the debate here.

However, it becomes much easier to blame the jock when statistics make your opinion -- albeit a great opinion -- appear even more like fact; especially when the gap between statistics and the facts drawn from them is very narrow.

Eric

[jotb]

He won with 29% of horses that were roughly 36% to win ( the average of even money to 2-1 less takeout ) and 13% of horses 19% to win ( the average of 2-1 to 5-1 less takeout ) and 2% of those horses roughly 10% to win ( 6-1 to 10-1 average less takout ) and 3% of his higher priced mounts who were about 6% to win and you think he is doing a " fine job "?

Your numbers actually bear out that he is dramatically underperforming.

Hello Little Guy:

You are looking at this from the gambling side right? Let's look at this another way. If I take Julien Leparoux who is currently the 10th leading rider in North America at the moment and we all know by now that Julien is becoming a familiar name by many in the industry and look at his stats since 12-01-2006 which is the same day the inner dirt opened at Aqueduct we can see how many live horses he has ridden compared to Shaun.

Julien rode 23 horses less than even money and won 10 races with 7 seconds and 3 thirds for 43% win and 87% in the money. He rode 74 horses 1-1 to 2-1 with 22 wins, 14 seconds and 10 thirds for 30% win and 62% in the money. He rode 124 horses from 2-1 to 5-1 with 18 wins, 24 seconds and 16 thirds for 15% win and 47% in the money. From 6-1 to 10-1 he rode 40 horses and won with 7 with 9 seconds and 6 thirds for 18% win and 55% in the money. He rode 6 horses from 10-1-15-1 with 0 wins, 0 seconds, and 1 third for 0% win and 17% in the money. He rode 10 horses greater than 15-1 and didn't hit the board with any. At odds from less than even money to 5-1 ("live horses") he rode 221 races which is almost 80% of his horses from Dec.1st 2006 and won 50 races which is almost 23% for win and he hit the board 124 times which is 56% in the money. Julien has won many more races than Shaun but Julien has rode more live horses than Shaun. The win and in the money percentage for live horses is about the same for each rider.

Joe

[jotb]

I don't see how these numbers support the "you were wrong about Mike Smith" argument. You said that 36 times his horses came back with a different rider in their next start, they won 9 times. Even not counting the Philly and Tampa shippers (which Smith obviously wouldn't ride in their next starts), it's 7/34, 20.6% winners. Smith is 11/120, which is 9.2% winners. That shows that he's much worse on the same horses than other riders. Numbers aside, as Aaron and TLG have pointed out, he's always in the wrong spot. I liked him in his prime, but he's just not good at all right now.

Hello JMA:

Nine horses came back to win but 7 of them were dropping in class. Keep in mind it works both ways. There were horses that Mike Smith picked up and won with as well. As you already know, not any rider fits every horse.

Joe

[aaron]

Joe and Alysheba
I don't think jockey's in most cases make that big a difference. In the case when a track is biased they do make a difference,because the racing almost becomes like betting the trotters on a 1/2 mile track. Your statistics on Smith bear out is ineffiency.Why would a trainer not ride him back when dropping in class,if he thinks Smith did a good job.
Also, I think your little obscessed with statistics.While statistics can be a tool in many instances they don't mean much.
For example in a race,I know a horse who is 0-13 and is trained by a low precentage trainer and today he is 6-1 against a field,I know he can beat-what should I do pass because the connections have bad statistics ?

[the little guy]

Hello Little Guy:

You are looking at this from the gambling side right?


I am not looking at it from a gambling view point at all. I am simply pointing out that mathematically he underperformed dramatically in results based on the percentage his horses should win based on their odds. Over time the odds are extremely close to correct and with the data you gave Bridgemohan is vastly underperforming. It is as simple as that.

[jotb]

Joe and Alysheba
I don't think jockey's in most cases make that big a difference. In the case when a track is biased they do make a difference,because the racing almost becomes like betting the trotters on a 1/2 mile track. Your statistics on Smith bear out is ineffiency.Why would a trainer not ride him back when dropping in class,if he thinks Smith did a good job.
Also, I think your little obscessed with statistics.While statistics can be a tool in many instances they don't mean much.
For example in a race,I know a horse who is 0-13 and is trained by a low precentage trainer and today he is 6-1 against a field,I know he can beat-what should I do pass because the connections have bad statistics ?

Hello Aaron:

Did you ever think Mike Smith might have had a double call and chose not to ride the horse back. This thing about a biased track. Do you think these jocks don't know where the best part of the track is to ride or do you think only the racing public is aware of a bias? Let's just say that the inner favors the inside and early speed types. Do you think every rider should gun for the lead and stay on the inside? You don't change a horses running style because there is a bias. You don't put a horse on the fence in behind other horses if the horse dislikes dirt. I keep hearing about that Mike and Shaun can't rider the inner. Do you know how ridiculious you sound? Tell me a jock has not acclimated to the bullring coming from a one mile track and I'll give you my ear but to say these 2 jocks can't ride the inner is just insane thinking. Another thing you should think about and that is jockeys follow a trainers instructions especially when the jockey has never been on the horse before. Anyway, I see that your mind is made up about these 2 riders and that's fine with me. I was only trying to open your mind up to see things in a different light. This was just a waste of my time. Sorry.

Joe

[alysheba88]

I am not looking at it from a gambling view point at all. I am simply pointing out that mathematically he underperformed dramatically in results based on the percentage his horses should win based on their odds. Over time the odds are extremely close to correct and with the data you gave Bridgemohan is vastly underperforming. It is as simple as that.

Putting aside the small sample size there are so many errors and simplifications with the math you are using that its basically useless and irrelevant. Using "averages between even money and 2-1". Cmon now.

[jma]

Hello JMA:

Nine horses came back to win but 7 of them were dropping in class. Keep in mind it works both ways. There were horses that Mike Smith picked up and won with as well. As you already know, not any rider fits every horse.

Joe

True, and these are small sample sizes. I just don't think he's riding well right now, either based on visuals or based on the winning percentages.

[aaron]

Joe,
To me this a gambling game and I wish you luck betting these 2 jockeys.The way the inner track has played this meet,I feel the jockeys should at least try to stay inside.As for trainers instructions,I agree the jockeys could be riding to instructions.I wonder, do you think most of the trainers are telling these jockeys to avoid the rail and stay out of trouble,go wide ?
What I find interesting is that the horsemen,at least not publically have not complained about the bias.

[alysheba88]

aaron, this will come across as pompous but the last people to recognize biases are trainers and the next to last are jockeys. Bettors are much more aware of these things.

As far as instructions many of the old school trainers in particular are clueless about the importance of speed. They still live in the old days of stamina. Where natural speed horses get strangled and "rated". How often do we read, especially for the TC races how "I dont want him to be on the lead but just off it". And look at how they butcher the post selections for the Derby and Preakness?

The CC Lopez's who will gun your speed horse every time are few and far between.

[aaron]

Alysheba-
I agree with everything you stated. I have seen this to be evident in many cases. An incident that comes to mind was when Diane Nelson was riding a speed horse on a big speed favoring day.A friend of mine comes up from the paddock and says the trainer instructed her to take back. She takes back,when she could have had an easy lead on gets wired by the horse she let go.So, I understand its not always the jockey's fault.

[jotb]

Joe,
To me this a gambling game and I wish you luck betting these 2 jockeys.The way the inner track has played this meet,I feel the jockeys should at least try to stay inside.As for trainers instructions,I agree the jockeys could be riding to instructions.I wonder, do you think most of the trainers are telling these jockeys to avoid the rail and stay out of trouble,go wide ?
What I find interesting is that the horsemen,at least not publically have not complained about the bias.

Hello Aaron:

"You feel the jocks should at least try to stay inside" and when I read that, I came to the conclusion that you and many others on this board think that racehorses are just machines rather than a living animal. On this thread I made many comments about the racehorse and why certain things don't shape up in a race the way you see fit and I noticed those reasons went over everybodys head. I wish you luck betting if this is the way you think.

Joe

[aaron]

Hi Joe,
Just how do you think the jockey's should ride the inner track ?

[Milleruszk]

The CC Lopez's who will gun your speed horse every time are few and far between.

Lopez does not need a speed horse to gun him out of the gate . Watch the replay of the 8th race on Sunday at the Big A. He gunned Olivine out of the gate and never looked back. Previously in any of her races, Olivine had never had the lead at the 1/2 mi never mind at the 1st call. Granted Lopez was helped in getting the lead by the fact that the two speed horses on his outside stumbled leaving the gate. However, he took advantage of his position and understood how the track was playing. A good ride from CC.

[the little guy]

Putting aside the small sample size there are so many errors and simplifications with the math you are using that its basically useless and irrelevant. Using "averages between even money and 2-1". Cmon now.


I don't understand....the examples were good if they proved the other side of our argument but now that they have proven our side they are too small a sample size? Which is it?

[the little guy]

aaron, this will come across as pompous but the last people to recognize biases are trainers and the next to last are jockeys. Bettors are much more aware of these things.


While the last thing I want to do is give the riders too much credit I will say that anyone who is paying careful attention knows that some riders are ACUTELY aware of the bias and the races are being run in a manner that indicates that in more ways than one.

[the_fat_man]

Lopez does not need a speed horse to gun him out of the gate . Watch the replay of the 8th race on Sunday at the Big A. He gunned Olivine out of the gate and never looked back. Previously in any of her races, Olivine had never had the lead at the 1/2 mi never mind at the 1st call. Granted Lopez was helped in getting the lead by the fact that the two speed horses on his outside stumbled leaving the gate. However, he took advantage of his position and understood how the track was playing. A good ride from CC.

Apparently, Lopez doesn't need to PUMP in order to GUN either.

He must be (covertly) GUNNING while his arms aren't pumping.

sucks when that happens

[ELA]

While the last thing I want to do is give the riders too much credit I will say that anyone who is paying careful attention knows that some riders are ACUTELY aware of the bias and the races are being run in a manner that indicates that in more ways than one.

Excellent point.

Eric

[alysheba88]

I don't understand....the examples were good if they proved the other side of our argument but now that they have proven our side they are too small a sample size? Which is it?

I dont have a side. And the small sample size is only part of it. It is generalized "lazy" math. Making proclamations based on that is wrong to me.

If you are going to be serious here you would need to know exactly what odds he went off on each mount. Not "averages". Knowing exactly what the probable odds of winning were for him and so forth. You could run studies saying horses with x odds are expected to win x percent at Aqueduct but even that wouldnt answer it completely. Would be a far more serious undertaking (and probably fruitless in the end anyway) then you are saying here.

[alysheba88]

He won with 29% of horses that were roughly 36% to win ( the average of even money to 2-1 less takeout ) and 13% of horses 19% to win ( the average of 2-1 to 5-1 less takeout ) and 2% of those horses roughly 10% to win ( 6-1 to 10-1 average less takout ) and 3% of his higher priced mounts who were about 6% to win and you think he is doing a " fine job "?

Your numbers actually bear out that he is dramatically underperforming.

Here is what I am referring to. Dont you see there is a MASSIVE difference between even money and 2-1? That "averaging" especially on a small sample size doesnt cut it? There is more I could get into, but I am tired

[the little guy]

Here is what I am referring to. Dont you see there is a MASSIVE difference between even money and 2-1? That "averaging" especially on a small sample size doesnt cut it? There is more I could get into, but I am tired

I would guess my average is at least close to the percentage chance of his mounts winning. This whole discussion, and I would guess you would agree, is getting a bit silly. There are two sides to every discussion, and all are entitled to their opinions, but I have to admit I am a bit surprised that people think based on both results and the on-track performances that either Mike Smith or Sean Bridgemohan are riding anywhere close to well. I happen to believe that candidly both riders would not be overly enthusiastic about the performances they have given this winter. I would guess ELA, who might really know, would tend to agree with this.

[Indulto]

Hello Aaron:

"You feel the jocks should at least try to stay inside" and when I read that, I came to the conclusion that you and many others on this board think that racehorses are just machines rather than a living animal. On this thread I made many comments about the racehorse and why certain things don't shape up in a race the way you see fit and I noticed those reasons went over everybodys head. I wish you luck betting if this is the way you think.

Joejotb,
Your insightful posts in this thread encouraged me to read your older posts including several describing your experiences as a jockey's agent. Are you still engaged in that activity?

Also, is the source of the statistics you've been sharing your own private database or one that other posters here might be able to gain access to?

Finally, it would seem to me that jockeys should be the first to gain awareness of any track biases that exist for competitive reasons alone. In your opinion, is tlg correct that such is not the case? It makes sense to me that a horse's physical attributes have to be compatible for the jockey to take advantage of any bias he is aware of.

ELA,
In your post in the thread on Jockey agents where you responded to jotb, you referred to a "box" used by some agents. Would you please explain what you were referring to?

Thanks guys,
Indulto

[alysheba88]

I would guess my average is at least close to the percentage chance of his mounts winning. This whole discussion, and I would guess you would agree, is getting a bit silly. There are two sides to every discussion, and all are entitled to their opinions, but I have to admit I am a bit surprised that people think based on both results and the on-track performances that either Mike Smith or Sean Bridgemohan are riding anywhere close to well. I happen to believe that candidly both riders would not be overly enthusiastic about the performances they have given this winter. I would guess ELA, who might really know, would tend to agree with this.

I have offered no opinion on whether they are riding well or not. All I was saying was using those "stats" to prove something wasnt an approach I would go take. I am surprised racing doesnt have a Bill James out there who can measure jockey and trainer impact more appropriately than the way it currently is. We are still in the "batting average" days.

[ELA]

Yes, I would agree with Andy on what he said.

Be that as it may, we all know the old cliche -- statistics don't lie . . . statiticians do! Without starting an entire new arguement, there is a great deal to be said for statistics, the #'s or data that goes into them, and what they mean. We all know statistics can be distorted or manipulated for that matter.

Example -- it would be hard to find, overall, a trainer who consistantly shoots 30% consistantly, and call him a bad trainer. Sure, you could say that he is only a 2% trainer on grass, and all that, but generically speaking, a "30% trainer" is a trainer who produces. I look for high % trainers to give horses to. Of course, there are other variables I take into consideration as well. On the other hand, there are low % trainers who are in fact good trainers -- not all of them, but a few. You see those distortions more on the low side than the high.

Anyway, Mike Smith is a good case in point. There is no question that he is not producing results like he used to. We can confuse cause and effect all we want. Is Mike Smith riding scared? Did he forget how to ride? Let's just agree that you don't win 4000 races and make the Hall of Fame by accident. So, the stats reveal certain things about Mike Smith -- but do they tell the entire story? Personally, I don't think so. Now, I am not argueing and saying the stats are wrong. However, I do think that many of the horses he didn't get to ride back did drop in class. That doesn't make his stats look good if you don't take that fact into consideration. Also, I do think that only a small % of his mounts were less than 5 or 6 to 1 -- and we know there's both a reason for him getting those mounts, and why those horses are more than 5 or 6 to 1. Stats aside, I don't think he is riding well, but I also don't think he is getting a chance. It's hard to improve your business, rider better, improve your #'s, etc. when you don't have/get the stock to ride.

Regardless, Mike Smith is not an incompetent rider. He may not be riding well, confidently, and may not be in a good place in his head. I don't want to get into any personal stuff about jocks. However, from being around a great # of jockeys, knowing them, working with them, etc., I think there is another aspect that most people don't understand. It's multi-faceted, but, when some of these guys are constantly having to make weight, doing what they do, not eating, dieting, etc., sometimes, a jock tends to be more prone to the everyday things around their job -- the highs and lows, the confidences and insecurities, and so on. I mean, let's face it -- this is a high risk profession.

Anyway, great thread.

Eric

[ELA]

About the box -- there is a service out there that compiles data -- race results, speed rating #'s, performance lines, class, etc. They format the data and put it out on a hand-held device (H-P) that jock agents use. Somebody calls you and wants to give you a call, you can pull up that horse on "the box" and check out what he did in his last start, the class, where he finished, etc. and I think it gives some sort of #, rating, or something like that.

I've seen them, looked at them but never really spent any time looking at how they work.

Eric

[aaron]

Hi Joe,
Would you please explain what comments went over everybody's head. I think we all realize that horses aren't machines,but as I have stated before there are some horses who have no chance on the inner because of the bias. If you could explain why the horsemen and trainers are not complaining about this perhaps what you are saying would make more sense to me. If you were a trainer and you thought your horse was in shape to win and he draws a 10 post,which on this track just about eliminates him,wouldn't you say something ?

[jotb]

Hi Joe,
Would you please explain what comments went over everybody's head. I think we all realize that horses aren't machines,but as I have stated before there are some horses who have no chance on the inner because of the bias. If you could explain why the horsemen and trainers are not complaining about this perhaps what you are saying would make more sense to me. If you were a trainer and you thought your horse was in shape to win and he draws a 10 post,which on this track just about eliminates him,wouldn't you say something ?

Hello Aaron:

The bottom line is, you can't expect every racehorse to be on the front-end along the rail. It just does not work that way. This thing about bias is really overrated. I've witnessed many times when the handicapper shouts out "speed is going to be good today" just because the 1st race went wire to wire. I would think it takes almost half the card for me to see a speed bias is evident. I would think speed woud be carrying if the horses that are winning wire to wire have usually tired or stopped in their previous races.

The trainers for the most part are aware of a bias if it's there and of course will inform the jockey of this and expect the jockey to try and take advantage if possible. Now if you have a horse that generally comes from out of it, 99.9% that horse will be running against the grain and there is not much the trainer and jockey can do. Hopefully they can land a share at best. Trainers are not happy when the track is biased and it does not benefit their horse. Believe it or not, there are trainers that do complain about this. I think last year in NY, John Morrison didn't want to enter in a stake race because he felt the track would not favor his horse. As far as, the jockeys go, I know for a fact that my riders and many other jockeys know what part of the track to be on and will take advantage of the bias if they can but in reality it really comes down to the racehorse.

Joe

[jotb]

jotb,
Your insightful posts in this thread encouraged me to read your older posts including several describing your experiences as a jockey's agent. Are you still engaged in that activity?

Also, is the source of the statistics you've been sharing your own private database or one that other posters here might be able to gain access to?

Finally, it would seem to me that jockeys should be the first to gain awareness of any track biases that exist for competitive reasons alone. In your opinion, is tlg correct that such is not the case? It makes sense to me that a horse's physical attributes have to be compatible for the jockey to take advantage of any bias he is aware of.

ELA,
In your post in the thread on Jockey agents where you responded to jotb, you referred to a "box" used by some agents. Would you please explain what you were referring to?

Thanks guys,
Indulto

Hello Indulto:

Yes, I'm still hustling book and probably will be involved in the industry the rest of my life. I keep records of every racetrack in the country including pp's for every horse. It's my job as an agent to find races for my clients and put them in the right spot. I'm not the type of agent that sits and waits for the phone to ring. People think an agent's job is simple and all it takes is a phone, condition book and a ball point pen but if your desire is to be a good agent then there is plenty of homework to do. You work just about every day scouring the condition books to find races for your horses that your rider has been riding and you constantly strive to pick up new horses along the way. There are a tremendous amount of race conditions in the book so you want to have a horse for each condition if possible. An agent is always looking ahead because you sometimes have 3 or 4 horses for a race condition and you always want to be on the best of those 3 or 4 but sometimes an agent can't because of the connections. You want to keep your clients happy at all times and when you can't ride one of their horses then you better let them know ahead of time. It's just good business to do it that way. You don't want to make a habit of spinning trainers. I have about 300 horses that my jockeys ride so there is alot of work to keep up with. You constantly communicate via phone and the barns each day and then watch all the races each day looking to pick up future prospects. An agent needs to be sharp. You should know where that trainer is heading with their horse and should be able to know all that trainers horses and what they have done in the past. There is so much to do daily that your spouse is not a happy camper most of the time. It's hard to find the time if you really want to succeed at this. I always thought handicapping was tough because of the time involved but an agents life is tougher.

Best regards,
Joe

[DanG]

While not always on the original subject this is a very good thread. :ThmbUp:

Thanks for sharing the agent’s perspective Joe and Eric it’s always good to read your thoughts.

[Indulto]

... I keep records of every racetrack in the country including pp's for every horse. It's my job as an agent to find races for my clients and put them in the right spot.

... You work just about every day scouring the condition books to find races for your horses that your rider has been riding and you constantly strive to pick up new horses along the way. There are a tremendous amount of race conditions in the book so you want to have a horse for each condition if possible. An agent is always looking ahead because you sometimes have 3 or 4 horses for a race condition and you always want to be on the best of those 3 or 4 but sometimes an agent can't because of the connections.

... I have about 300 horses that my jockeys ride so there is alot of work to keep up with. You constantly communicate via phone and the barns each day and then watch all the races each day looking to pick up future prospects. An agent needs to be sharp. You should know where that trainer is heading with their horse and should be able to know all that trainers horses and what they have done in the past.jotb,
I appreciate the response.

It certainly looks as if the information requirements for placing horses -- and jockeys on those horses -- could be as complex as for handicapping. I can see that your edge must come from advising connections likely to use your jockeys when and where to ship and/or run.

What I don't understand, though, is why it's necessary for agents (or trainers) to do the grunt work of determining eligibility for horses. Don't racing Secretaries have access to nationwide databases to do that automatically? Don't they normally contact all trainers with eligible horses in an effort to maximize field size?

I've heard that some operations maintain websites listing all horses on the grounds eligible for each race well in advance? I wonder if they have the capability to retrieve the eligibility status for any horse for any race at any track for a specified period.

Can you elaborate on the "box" to which ELA referred and clarified to some extent?

Thanks again to both of you. You each bring a perspective here that is tremendously helpful for non-professional players like me to understand what we can't see happening on the backstretch.

[aaron]

Hi Joe,
Thank you for your answer. I don't expect every horse to race on the front end,but I don't expect jockeys to give up position on the rail if they don't have to.You may not agree,but I think there has been a strong rail bias almost every day since Feb.8th. Feb 15-17 might not have been as severe as the other days.
I am not saying that each of those days,necessarily had a speed bias,but in any case I felt the inside was the place to be.

[jotb]

jotb,
I appreciate the response.

What I don't understand, though, is why it's necessary for agents (or trainers) to do the grunt work of determining eligibility for horses. Don't racing Secretaries have access to nationwide databases to do that automatically? Don't they normally contact all trainers with eligible horses in an effort to maximize field size?

I've heard that some operations maintain websites listing all horses on the grounds eligible for each race well in advance? I wonder if they have the capability to retrieve the eligibility status for any horse for any race at any track for a specified period.

Can you elaborate on the "box" to which ELA referred and clarified to some extent?

Thanks again to both of you. You each bring a perspective here that is tremendously helpful for non-professional players like me to understand what we can't see happening on the backstretch.

Hello Indulto:

The racing office has the access to retrieve that information but they don't call trainers unless they are having difficulty filling races. It's the trainers or agent responsiblity to enter horses and get the races filled each day and then they draw for post positions. Once they draw the races the information is sent to Equibase and the overnight is printed.

I believe the "box" you are referring to is used by many agents. It's a small handheld computer and it has the capabilty to retieve horse pp's. I believe it shows the last 5 races that the horse has run in. All you have to do is search for the horse by name and up pops the horses pp's. I think you can also search by trainer name as well to see all the horses the trainer has. Speed numbers are also there for each horse but I'm not sure whose numbers they are. They look like the Ragozin numbers but I could wrong. I have my own database so I really don't pay the "black box" any mind.

Best regards,
Joe

[jotb]

Hi Joe,
Thank you for your answer. I don't expect every horse to race on the front end,but I don't expect jockeys to give up position on the rail if they don't have to.You may not agree,but I think there has been a strong rail bias almost every day since Feb.8th. Feb 15-17 might not have been as severe as the other days.
I am not saying that each of those days,necessarily had a speed bias,but in any case I felt the inside was the place to be.


Hello Aaron:

Like I said before, there are many horses that don't like being down on the inside if they are behind another horse catching dirt. Sometimes a rider may be positioned on the fence but the horse might be getting out and the rider all of the sudden will be in the 2 or 3 path. Jockeys are not intentionally coming off the inside unless there is a reason behind it. There are alot of horses that shy away from the fence as well. The only suggestion I can give to you if you believe that there has been a strong rail bias is to follow up on the horses that were running against the grain and stay away from horses that were aided by the bias. You would be surprised how many golden nuggets you can find out of these races.

Good luck,
Joe

[aaron]

Thanks Joe,
I've hit quite a few of those,but I'd sure like to see an honest track for a few days.

[ELA]

While not always on the original subject this is a very good thread. :ThmbUp:

Thanks for sharing the agent’s perspective Joe and Eric it’s always good to read your thoughts.

jotb,
Can you elaborate on the "box" to which ELA referred and clarified to some extent?

Thanks again to both of you. You each bring a perspective here that is tremendously helpful for non-professional players like me to understand what we can't see happening on the backstretch.

Hello Indulto:
I believe the "box" you are referring to is used by many agents. It's a small handheld computer and it has the capabilty to retieve horse pp's. I believe it shows the last 5 races that the horse has run in. All you have to do is search for the horse by name and up pops the horses pp's. I think you can also search by trainer name as well to see all the horses the trainer has. Speed numbers are also there for each horse but I'm not sure whose numbers they are. They look like the Ragozin numbers but I could wrong. I have my own database so I really don't pay the "black box" any mind.

Best regards,
Joe

Thanks for the posts. Just as an FYI -- I am not an agent. As Joe said, he is an agent, and a very good one. I am a horse owner. Professionally, I work with affluent, high net worth individuals and familes, and athletes and entertainers (many jockeys) on tax and estate planning, insurance, etc. -- so I have many jockeys as clients, and as friends. My perspective was really more as an active, hands-on owner. I have always loved spending time on the backstretch, in the race office, etc. and just love the game.

I know many agents so I know about the box. Joe pretty much covered it. The ones I have seen are H-P's, exactly like the scientific or financial calculators. They are just formatted with different data. It's not a fancy hand-held computer with a color screen, internet access, etc. nor is it like a BlackBerry. The #'s and the data comes up in a non-digital, non-backlit, calculator type reading. If you are ever at the track, take a look and if any of the agents are using them.

Eric

[DanG]

Thanks for the posts. Just as an FYI -- I am not an agent.
Eric
My bad Eric…

I’ll blame running my sentences together on my Jersey Public education. ;)

BTW: I was aware you’re not an agent.

[ELA]

My bad Eric…

I’ll blame running my sentences together on my Jersey Public education. ;)

BTW: I was aware you’re not an agent.

LOL. No problem, especially for a fellow Jersey'ite, LOL.

Eric

[NY BRED]

relative to the discussions at hand, it would be quite rare to change the running style of a thoroughbred to adapt to aqu inner.

at best a sustained/ closer is not wiring a field in 6fg unless, at some point in his career, he demonstrated the ability to leave early, or the field he faces today can be beaten based upon the their ability to severly weaken if pressed early on.

Mike Smith, at least in my mind, is perceived as a class rider adept at judging
pace in stakes or high allowance route races and not as the jock you would turn to in a 6fg md clmg at aqu.

While I'm not comparing him to horses, I simply believe he can't ride speed horses in the style of C.C., Pval etc. which is a big factor at Aqu inner.

Interestingly, Aaron Gryder a fabulous gate rider now in California
couldn't find the winners circle that often during the NY fall and Summer meets, but now does quite well in Ca due to his gate skills.
As important, those skills have now impressed the trainer owner colony, and
he obtains better mounts due to this factor.

[aaron]

If anyone is interested in a jockey adjusting to the track,watch the ride Mike Luzzi gave Strummer in the 3rd race at Aqueduct on 2/28. The horse hadn't been on the lead in over a year. I realize you cannot do this with every horse,but there are instances where the jockey can get a horse to the inside and fails to do so. As,Joe stated some horses can't run inside,but there are some who can and are not taken to the inside. A good example of an inside trip not on the lead is the 2nd at Aqu. yesterday. Watch these 2 races and you'll see how the inner track should be ridden at this time.

[jotb]

If anyone is interested in a jockey adjusting to the track,watch the ride Mike Luzzi gave Strummer in the 3rd race at Aqueduct on 2/28. The horse hadn't been on the lead in over a year. I realize you cannot do this with every horse,but there are instances where the jockey can get a horse to the inside and fails to do so. As,Joe stated some horses can't run inside,but there are some who can and are not taken to the inside. A good example of an inside trip not on the lead is the 2nd at Aqu. yesterday. Watch these 2 races and you'll see how the inner track should be ridden at this time.

Hello Aaron:

Strummer figured to be up close yesterday given the fact there was not much in the way of speed other than the 5 horse. Strummer was coming out of races in the past where they went 45 and change. Luzzi broke well and went on with him. Strummer caught the right field yesterday and like you said he had wire a field some time ago. The other 2 times he wired the field he went 47 change. I like horses like that because they are versatile.

Best regards,
Joe

[westny]

Migliore just won the G-1 300k Frank Kilroe Mile at Santa Anita on a 10-1 shot in 133.88. Doesn't look like the Mig is anywhere near done.

Dutrow trains Kip Deville.

[Indulto]

Migliore just won the G-1 300k Frank Kilroe Mile at Santa Anita on a 10-1 shot in 133.88. Doesn't look like the Mig is anywhere near done.

Dutrow trains Kip Deville.Mike Smith rode Milk 'Em Mick to finish 5th in that race after riding a 23-1 winner in the 4th race which I never even looked at.

Kip Deville's last out G3 win was stronger than looked because the place horse, Awesome Gem, entered in the Santa Anita Handicap, subsequently moved up and won while Dutrow waited patiently for just the right spot.

A jock's gotta have the horse, i.e., the connections!

I actually bet Kip Deville (9-1) and his last-out competitor, Porto Santo (21-1) to win along with saver exacta boxes with Smith's horse (13-1), but I suffered a tough beat when Porto Santo narrowly missed 3rd because my prime bet in that race were TRIs that we used to call Broderick Crawford specials: 10,4 // 10,4 // ALL and 10,4 // ALL // 10,4. Another opportunity wasted. :bang:

[ELA]

Great for the Mig. Not only is he riding for NY based guys who have a presence in CA, but he's picked up some nice business from the locals as well. Having Ron Anderson is one big asset of course, but that is just one side. The jock is the other side, and the Mig is a huge asset there.

Eric

[aaron]

Aqueduct 3/7
7th race-
Will someone please tell me what S.Bridhmohan was thinking. His ride on #1 Pretty Partisan was beyond bad.He should watch films of how Chantal rode in the 6th race.