Home › Forums › Horse Racing › Fortune
- This topic has 27 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 3 months ago by guskennedy.
-
AuthorPosts
-
June 20, 2007 at 15:26 #2096
Who got him at 12s? I did and I suspect a few of you did!!!
June 20, 2007 at 15:31 #65625see thread you started on it lower down aidan
and yeah I have a fookin smug look on me face…. ;)
(Edited by heffo at 4:34 pm on June 20, 2007)
June 20, 2007 at 15:36 #65626nice, quite a day he’s had!
June 21, 2007 at 00:21 #65628:old:
by the white hairs of my beard<br> am I fookin blind<br> I missed him
June 21, 2007 at 10:40 #65629I like your modesty Aidan :biggrin: Yoou dont hear me or Lets Get Racing bragging about us tipping Barshiba at 16s yesterday :argue:
June 21, 2007 at 17:20 #65630When did modesty become a virtue in racing?
June 21, 2007 at 20:03 #65631I think the fact the Fortune is top of the table at Ascot this week highlights horses win races and jockeys are bit part players. He’s a run of the mill pro jockey who has been lucky to be riding more of the better horses than others.
June 22, 2007 at 00:37 #65632:old:
fortune favours the brave<br> Little Plum
June 22, 2007 at 01:14 #65633*sighs at another thread started on ego*
June 22, 2007 at 07:55 #65634Quote: from Wallace on 9:03 pm on June 21, 2007[br]I think the fact the Fortune is top of the table at Ascot this week highlights horses win races and jockeys are bit part players.  He’s a run of the mill pro jockey who has been lucky to be riding more of the better horses than others.
I can’t agree with either of the above statements, Wallace.
Most trainers will tell you that jockeyship is often the difference between victory and defeat, and they will go to great lengths to obtain the services of the best jockeys.
I know you won’t change your mind on jockeys, but you then go on to say that Fortune is a run of the mill pro. They are all run of the mill in your scheme: none have exceptional talent.
Actually, Fortune has been in my top ten jockeys for about three years. The fact that he is John Gosden’s stable jockey puts him there by right. Gosden stuck with him despite Fortune’s severe back problems two seasons ago. Says an awful lot. <br>
June 22, 2007 at 08:02 #65635"Most trainers will tell you that jockeyship is often the difference between victory and defeat, and they will go to great lengths to obtain the services of the best jockeys."
…………………whereas some trainers refer to them as "necessary evils"!;)
Colin
June 22, 2007 at 08:06 #65636I’d agree that a good ride can make the difference in some cases but in others the horses are going to win no matter whose on them like Naninna the other day. I mean I could have ridden Authorized to win the Derby (not literally but you get the picture)
June 22, 2007 at 08:34 #65637"But if it was the so called King Kieran, riding all those winners" god spare me !, I shudder at the thought. :(
June 22, 2007 at 20:07 #65638Artemis, I very much doubt trainers view of jockeyship being the difference between winning and losing. They are ignoring the key element; the horse! I also think the vast majority of trainers don’t have a clue about a horse having a chance or not.
I do think there is virtually nothing to choose between the top 20 or 30 pro jockeys. I have spent a lot of time trying to devise a method of separating the input by the jockey from the ability of the horse and don’t believe there is one. I know John Whitely has worked on this for years and produces a jockey handicap but I’m still not convinced. From my research I do believe some jockeys do particularly well at certain tracks and this is easy to understand and is worth a few pounds.
This week at Ascot Jimmy Fortune has been lucky so far and is top of the table. Nothing to do with his ability compared to the likes of Kinnane, Spencer or Dettori.<br>
June 22, 2007 at 20:48 #65639My own view is that there is a fair amount between the top jockeys (Fallon, Murtagh, Dettori, Kinane) and those at the other end of a hypothetical ‘top 30’. The key differences, IMO, between the best and the rest are strength, judgement of pace and ability to remain cool under extreme pressure.
However, do good horses make good jockey or is it more correct to state that good horses make jockeys look good. <br>
June 22, 2007 at 22:01 #65640I suspect most of us are passive-aggressive when it comes to jockeys.
It’s no wonder that all jockeys have a Kipling-esque attitude toward punters, (unlike footballers who always profess a love of the supporters of which ever club they happen to be passing through at the time).
When do you ever hear an interviewed jockey say "These punters at Ponte! They send a shiver down my spine. I want to win this for them" or "Taunton gamblers are the finest in the world. I always love riding favourites here"
I personally love them when they fill my wallet (Joe Fanning on Boscobel), and hate them when they empty it, (Joe Fanning on Rosein two back at Southwell).
Objectively, as Wallace says, I don’t consider there’s 5lb between them. Well done Fortune backers.:biggrin:
June 23, 2007 at 12:15 #65641Quote: from Wallace on 9:03 pm on June 21, 2007[br]I think the fact the Fortune is top of the table at Ascot this week highlights horses win races and jockeys are bit part players.  He’s a run of the mill pro jockey who has been lucky to be riding more of the better horses than others.
I`ve seen Fortune slagged off on this forum not very long ago. <br>Please name the jockey who could have taken <br>his rides and won this week? You cant, because no one did.<br>You cant take that away from Jimmy Fortune.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.