Where do Jocks figure in your capping??

[Vince Stone]

How much weight do you give to the jocks riding horses? Does anyone have a list of what certain jocks do well with certain types or horses RE: Paco Lopez is aggressive. The ride Irad gave Terra Promessa prompted this thread. If you had money on her you were probably cursing him for a little while. So do the jocks figure in you're capping? If so to what extent. What are some good or bad qualities of certain jocks?

[EMD4ME]

Originally Posted by Vince Stone

How much weight do you give to the jocks riding horses? Does anyone have a list of what certain jocks do well with certain types or horses RE: Paco Lopez is aggressive. The ride Irad gave Terra Promessa prompted this thread. If you had money on her you were probably cursing him for a little while. So do the jocks figure in you're capping? If so to what extent. What are some good or bad qualities of certain jocks?

Absolutely but I will never pick a horse because so and so is the rider. If that makes sense. It's important to know the tendencies of a rider as well.

I am dead serious when I say that Ramon Dominguez was the only jock that I made sure I knew why he was on a horse (meaning, anything he rode, I took a triple/quadruple look into why he would). All others, are just a dime a dozen to me. I also don't care if it's Johnny V or M Franco on a Pletcher at the SPA. Many times riders have prior commitments, so it looks like they chose 1 but they in reality didn't.

What I do look for is certain nuggets that are hard to find. For ex: 3 years ago I crushed R Violette FTS who were winning like hotcakes. Many had M Franco up.

I once saw a spill at the BIG A and happened to be near some EMTs. They radio'd their buddies to ask them if they needed help. The other side of the radio said: The rider of the 4 said : PICK ME UP! I need to win the next race or something like that. Chuckle chuckle, he's ok.

It was Manny Franco and he won the next race on a Violette FTS that I liked but pounded extra on when I heard that Paid 2/1 and was a 7 horse if I remember correctly.

[VigorsTheGrey]

Sometimes I think that jockeys get in the way of the horse's chances for victory....they might go in with a preconceived notion or trainer's instructions to rate or do such and such...sometimes horses are just horses and want to run...so just let them, like Terra Promesa the other day...just let her run, and compete. She's the type of horse that can figure it out on her own...and many times when horse ACT dominant up front, the other horses sense this and just give up without trying anyway...let the horse run next time and see where she finishes on her own...

[no breathalyzer]

Never bet serious $$$ on a sub par jockey period! I have a do not bet list as well... burned too many times betting weak ass jockeys. I hear people say doing this cost you money in the long run.. simply is not true. Someone on here states in blackjack you don't have to hit, in poker you don't have to call, and in horse racing you don't have to bet. I simply just pass the race with a bs jockey aboard as a general rule... exception being im getting 5x's what i think are fair odds'

Jockeys control this game... if you think other wise you are misinformed.

[Broad Brush]

Of all of the factors that go into looking at a race, I think who is riding
is one the least important.

I always prefer that a "low profile" jock is riding a horse I like just
because of the odds. I will take Eric Cancel at 10/1 over Irad
on the same horse at 6/1 all day long.

There are some situations that is does matter though:

1. While EDM is correct about jocks having prior commitments,
if Rudy Rod has two horses in a race--the one that Irad is NOT
on almost never wins.
2. If a big time jock takes a mount on a horse early in the card and
they don't have a mount for a few races after that, can be important.
The same is true if they don't have a mount in the last few races
but they stay to ride a maiden claimer in the last can also matter.
3. If a big time jock takes a mount on a questionable drop-down,
the horse is not on the verge of a break-down. Last year, J. R. Velazquez
(who has been limiting his mounts) rode a horse for Repole/Bruce Levine
early on the card. The horse was dropping from $50,000 to
$16,000. This horse had the look of a sore horse---he galloped.
4. I also watch when certain low profile trainers use a specific jock for a horse's 2nd race after the horse did nothing in their first start--the horse is live today.

[no breathalyzer]

Originally Posted by Broad Brush

Of all of the factors that go into looking at a race, I think who is riding
is one the least important.

I always prefer that a "low profile" jock is riding a horse I like just
because of the odds. I will take Eric Cancel at 10/1 over Irad
on the same horse at 6/1 all day long.

There are some situations that is does matter though:

1. While EDM is correct about jocks having prior commitments,
if Rudy Rod has two horses in a race--the one that Irad is NOT
on almost never wins.
2. If a big time jock takes a mount on a horse early in the card and
they don't have a mount for a few races after that, can be important.
The same is true if they don't have a mount in the last few races
but they stay to ride a maiden claimer in the last can also matter.
3. If a big time jock takes a mount on a questionable drop-down,
the horse is not on the verge of a break-down. Last year, J. R. Velazquez
(who has been limiting his mounts) rode a horse for Repole/Bruce Levine
early on the card. The horse was dropping from $50,000 to
$16,000. This horse had the look of a sore horse---he galloped.
4. I also watch when certain low profile trainers use a specific jock for a horse's 2nd race after the horse did nothing in their first start--the horse is live today.

Good point here.. a low profile jockey is a good thing.. plenty of very solid riders out there still under the radar

[HalvOnHorseracing]

1. Jockeys are more likely to make a riding mistake and cause a horse to lose than get a horse that was not a top contender to win. I'd say 90+ per cent of the time, if the jockey has a brilliant ride it was a horse that figured to be competitive. I just think I far more often say, why didn't he take that speed horse to the lead, why did he get boxed on the rail, etc. Because let's be serious. It couldn't be I made a bad pick.

2. It's still 90% horse. A great jock and a great horse are a great bet. But a great jock on a bad horse is still a bad bet.

3. A jock that has successfully ridden a horse previously is fine for me, even if it isn't a "top jock."

4. If a trainer has a pattern of using a particular jock when he wants a win, that is worth noticing.

5. Most often the best jockeys get the best horses. When top jock goes to a lesser trainer, if I think that horse is competitive, I'll give it slightly more consideration.

6. I'll pay attention to the horse a jockey chooses when he has a choice of horses, unless he's forced to pick his contract stable.

7. It is only rarely that a jockey choice will sway me on or off a horse. I've never given the jockey really high "weight" in my handicapping.

[no breathalyzer]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

1. Jockeys are more likely to make a riding mistake and cause a horse to lose than get a horse that was not a top contender to win. I'd say 90+ per cent of the time, if the jockey has a brilliant ride it was a horse that figured to be competitive. I just think I far more often say, why didn't he take that speed horse to the lead, why did he get boxed on the rail, etc. Because let's be serious. It couldn't be I made a bad pick.

2. It's still 90% horse. A great jock and a great horse are a great bet. But a great jock on a bad horse is still a bad bet.

3. A jock that has successfully ridden a horse previously is fine for me, even if it isn't a "top jock."

4. If a trainer has a pattern of using a particular jock when he wants a win, that is worth noticing.

5. Most often the best jockeys get the best horses. When top jock goes to a lesser trainer, if I think that horse is competitive, I'll give it slightly more consideration.

6. I'll pay attention to the horse a jockey chooses when he has a choice of horses, unless he's forced to pick his contract stable.

7. It is only rarely that a jockey choice will sway me on or off a horse. I've never given the jockey really high "weight" in my handicapping.

1.a bad jockey or sub par jockey on a good horse is still negative ev

2.Best jockeys get the best horses and top trainers because jockey matters!

As stated before.. knowing jockey tendencies is just as important... nothing is as valuable as a sharp rider under the public's radar

[no breathalyzer]

when Kent fell of the wagon a couple yrs back and went to ride at Arlington.. he straight up crushed it riding for lower profile barns... He ran circles around these fools here

[Run Nicholas Run]

Originally Posted by no breathalyzer

Never bet serious $$$ on a sub par jockey period! I have a do not bet list as well... burned too many times betting weak ass jockeys. I hear people say doing this cost you money in the long run.. simply is not true. Someone on here states in blackjack you don't have to hit, in poker you don't have to call, and in horse racing you don't have to bet. I simply just pass the race with a bs jockey aboard as a general rule... exception being im getting 5x's what i think are fair odds'

Jockeys control this game... if you think other wise you are misinformed.

You are so right, I always used to say to anyone who told me riders
dont mean a thing is go ahead and bet on riders like:
tyrone cater
patricia grana
yiri paterka
vince montano

and see how that works out for you.

[EasyGoer89]

Originally Posted by Run Nicholas Run

You are so right, I always used to say to anyone who told me riders
dont mean a thing is go ahead and bet on riders like:
tyrone cater
patricia grana
yiri paterka
vince montano

and see how that works out for you.

You're never betting ON 'riders' you're betting on bets.

I LOVE betting on bets that are being guided by 'bad' pilots, ill take the price and hope the horse can overcome the pilot.

[Run Nicholas Run]

Originally Posted by EasyGoer89

You're never betting ON 'riders' you're betting on bets.

I LOVE betting on bets that are being guided by 'bad' pilots, ill take the price and hope the horse can overcome the pilot.

you enjoy winning at a five percent clip then.

[Robert Fischer]

There is the overall quality of jock, there are signals of intent by owner/trainer, there are style characteristics or traits that potentially relate to pace decisions


another category of tools that you try to use if/when applicable

[Murph]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

There is the overall quality of jock, there are signals of intent by owner/trainer, there are style characteristics or traits that potentially relate to pace decisions


another category of tools that you try to use if/when applicable

I don't like to criticize jockeys but I DO rate them. I use a letter grade system that is subject to my opinions.

My list has 50 to 100 names depending on time of year and number of tracks running. A riders are from the top national rankings and most consistently have the top level mounts in graded stakes. Usually 6 to 10 A riders on the list.

B riders are the jockeys who appear alert and competitive day in and day out. They will usually be a top 10 rider on their local circuit and will have shipped and won in the past 12 months among other positive signs. Jose Ortiz jr, Ramon Hernandez and Paco Lopez are examples of B rated riders on my list.

C riders are the average riders we have filling our fields every day. They work hard and try hard but for whatever reason find themselves in difficult positions because they have been out ridden by a B jock. They to often check into a wall, find their mount pinned or boxed on the inside or they like to fan 5-6 paths wide ect.

F rated riders are the auto toss list. I don't like for this category to get too large lest I do miss a couple long ones.

D riders are a special category I call dead or deadman. These riders have proven to torch MY tickets in ways I do not understand more than twice. I try to keep this list at 1% or 2% of the total on my list. Currently I rate two riders with a deadman tag. Jack Gilligan and Irad Ortiz.

[ultracapper]

I always know who the jocks in the race are, who they're riding for, and whether there have been some moving around. Sometimes something in there might matter for one reason or another, sometimes not. Pretty vague, but I'm not making any rules concerning jockeys.

Watch a lot of races. Know which ones screw up less than others, and be aware of trainer/jockey relationships.