Jockeys must ride to the Finishline

[OptionalClaimer]

It's happened for years but lately jocks like Javier Castellano and Joel Rosario haven't been "finishing" their races. What I mean is once they get passed for first or second they just stop riding the horse the last 50-100 yards.
They must realize that we bet trifectas & supers with them.
Edgar Prado, Kent D are famous for just wrapping up a horse once they get passed.

Who are some of the jocks you notice don't finish every race?

[illinoisbred]

Could it be these are just "spent" horses? I don't know. For the past year I've been playing SoCal tracks and I've noticed quite a few riders that back off,even stand up before the wire. Honestly though, I can't say I recall any outside the Kent D. incident this year where finish position was compromised. I wonder in SoCal how much the new "whip rule" plays into this. A jockey can strike his mount 3 times then needs to wait for a response. Up through last week since the rule's inception,there have been approx. 70 rulings going against the jockeys. Drayden Van Dyke was found to be in violation of the rule twice in 1 race. Recently,Gary Stevens was called in before the stewards regarding his winning ride on Kobe's Back in the GR II Palos Verde. I counted 11 strikes,though the 1st 4 or 5 looked to be more "brushings" than strikes. I don't think Gary got fined. Anyways, I do wonder if the riders feel their hands are tied somewhat by the rule.

[ultracapper]

Particularly on a deep closer like Kobe's Back. I would think a jockey's basic instinct of urgency would almost make smacking away in a spot like that impulsive.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by illinoisbred

Could it be these are just "spent" horses? I don't know. For the past year I've been playing SoCal tracks and I've noticed quite a few riders that back off,even stand up before the wire. Honestly though, I can't say I recall any outside the Kent D. incident this year where finish position was compromised. I wonder in SoCal how much the new "whip rule" plays into this. A jockey can strike his mount 3 times then needs to wait for a response. Up through last week since the rule's inception,there have been approx. 70 rulings going against the jockeys. Drayden Van Dyke was found to be in violation of the rule twice in 1 race. Recently,Gary Stevens was called in before the stewards regarding his winning ride on Kobe's Back in the GR II Palos Verde. I counted 11 strikes,though the 1st 4 or 5 looked to be more "brushings" than strikes. I don't think Gary got fined. Anyways, I do wonder if the riders feel their hands are tied somewhat by the rule.

Whips have nothing to do with the epidemic of jocks forcibly slowing up their mounts before the race is over. Thoroughbreds are mostly all 'spent' at the wire, nobody is asking a jock to beat the tar out of a tiring horse, but don't start pulling the horse up before the wire either.

[Baron Star Gregg]

The jocks are paid by owners not gamblers. The difference between 3rd and 4th place shares of the purse isn't much.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by Baron Star Gregg

The jocks are paid by owners not gamblers. The difference between 3rd and 4th place shares of the purse isn't much.

There are racing rules. Not all owners want to lose out on board spots, and jocks have been punished for failure to ride out, the rules are the rules, jocks are not allowed to do what they want as long as their owner is happy

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by OptionalClaimer

It's happened for years but lately jocks like Javier Castellano and Joel Rosario haven't been "finishing" their races. What I mean is once they get passed for first or second they just stop riding the horse the last 50-100 yards.

A pretty interesting duo to point out. One, Javier, is a very thoughtful rider who frequently comes up with plans, even on cheap horses, to change their styles in productive ways. I can't really recall him giving up on his horses and losing placings. In fact, I had a discussion about this very topic with him just a few minutes after he won the Eclipse this year, where he ( without me even bringing it up ) talked about the importance of riding horses as hard as possible for minor shares of the finish.

The other guy, Joel Rosario, was injured a few weeks ago, and hasn't even been able to do anything "lately" as he hasn't ridden in going on a month.

It completely mitigates fair criticism of riders when people constantly make unfair claims about them.

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by Baron Star Gregg

The jocks are paid by owners not gamblers. The difference between 3rd and 4th place shares of the purse isn't much.

The owners wouldn't be paid without "gamblers" to fund the purse account.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Baron Star Gregg

The jocks are paid by owners not gamblers. The difference between 3rd and 4th place shares of the purse isn't much.

That may be true...but, inasmuch as the tracks insist on booking superfecta bets, the fourth-place finish remains of some concern. If the tracks regard the difference between a third and fourth-place finish to be insignificant, then cancel the superfecta...and we'd have no arguments.

[cj]

Originally Posted by the little guy

The owners wouldn't be paid without "gamblers" to fund the purse account.

This used to be true. Now it is just partly true, sadly.

[cj]

Originally Posted by the little guy

A pretty interesting duo to point out. One, Javier, is a very thoughtful rider who frequently comes up with plans, even on cheap horses, to change their styles in productive ways. I can't really recall him giving up on his horses and losing placings. In fact, I had a discussion about this very topic with him just a few minutes after he won the Eclipse this year, where he ( without me even bringing it up ) talked about the importance of riding horses as hard as possible for minor shares of the finish.

The other guy, Joel Rosario, was injured a few weeks ago, and hasn't even been able to do anything "lately" as he hasn't ridden in going on a month.

It completely mitigates fair criticism of riders when people constantly make unfair claims about them.

It is almost like he went out of his way to cite two riders that don't do this.

[v j stauffer]

Originally Posted by Baron Star Gregg

The jocks are paid by owners not gamblers. The difference between 3rd and 4th place shares of the purse isn't much.

The difference between 3rd and 4th can make the difference of paying your bills and staying in the game.

To many owners it means the world.

[Baron Star Gregg]

Originally Posted by the little guy

The owners wouldn't be paid without "gamblers" to fund the purse account.

Paying a jock is a financial obligation incurred by the owner whether the horse earns a check or not.
For Vic: The difference between the winnings of 3rd or 4th place should not determine whether you can pay your bills or not.

[v j stauffer]

Originally Posted by Baron Star Gregg

Paying a jock is a financial obligation incurred by the owner whether the horse earns a check or not.
For Vic: The difference between the winnings of 3rd or 4th place should not determine whether you can pay your bills or not.

I agree. But it does. On every circuit large or small. This sport is not played only by Kings. We need every owner we can get. Sometimes even a few thousand will carry the day.

[therussmeister]

Originally Posted by the little guy

The owners wouldn't be paid without "gamblers" to fund the purse account.

Yes, but the gamblers they rely on are the slot players.