- This topic has 31 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 10 months ago by
.
- Posts
Don’t forget, jockeys, all jockeys, ride to orders. Very often, more often than not the order is do NOT win.
Don’t forget, jockeys, all jockeys, ride to orders. Very often, more often than not the order is do NOT win.
What a load of bllx.
Yeah some of these poor jockeys cant afford the petrol money so either they are not being paid enough not to win or they cant beat the others trying not to win.
Gaelic Warrior Gold Cup Winner 2026
I have no doubt had Moore been on Hillstar today it would have won, another weak finish from Dettori
Dettori is a far better "race rider" than most TRFers are race readers".
Of course,
if
a horse is capable of being ridden in
any
way possible – then the
best
place to be in a slowly run race is
up front
. But Frankie was on Hillstar; who’s often
initially free/takes a hold
and this trait is usually even more
pronounced in slowly run races
(as this race). Therefore, Frankie did the only thing he could do, using rivals (in front of him) to first
settle
Hillstar out the back.
Unlike
most jockeys on hold up horses in the race,
once
relaxing his mount sufficiently he made a forward move
before
the pace increased – getting a
good position
and increasing the pace on a horse that stays 12f.
It may have looked as though Frankie wasn’t as strong as De Sousa, but Cavalryman has form at
2m
. So Hillstar (a
12f
horse with some good form at
10f
) was always going to be
travelling better
1 1/2 furlongs out than Cavalryman. It wasn’t that surprising Hillstar’s earlier excertions eventually took their toll against one who (a) had the run of the race and (b) settled particularly well. Frankie still did better than the rest.
imo Frankie did well given the circumstances.
Value Is EverythingI thought Frankie gave Hillstar a brilliant ride to be honest. The ride will get largely overlooked because the horse didn’t win.
Frankie at his best was one of the best. You could say the same about most "top jockeys".
Moore is head and shoulders above the current crop. Some are on the decline and some are on the way up but not yet at his level.
To answer SteveCaution’s original question:
Yes, I’d put Moore (at his best) above Frankie (at his best). Moore is on a par with Fallon (at his best).Value Is EverythingWhy pick on Frankie? You could put any other jockey up against Moore and they wouldn’t come out on top.
Frankie has been at the top of the tree for a long time and I would still have him in the top 3 riding today. You wouldn’t expect him to be at his peak in his mid forties and he has a lot less rides these days.
Gee Whiz, read the post and you will see WHY I posted the thread. The question was which jockey was better when they were at the top of their game, not which one is better now.
Interesting that you acknowledge that he can’t be at his best in his mid-forties but still think he’s in the top three. That doesn’t say much for the lads getting plenty winners nowadays if Frankie’s still better than them in your eyes.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
Frankie at his best was one of the best. You could say the same about most "top jockeys".
Moore is head and shoulders above the current crop. Some are on the decline and some are on the way up but not yet at his level.
To answer SteveCaution’s original question:
Yes, I’d put Moore (at his best) above Frankie (at his best). Moore is on a par with Fallon (at his best).I thought Moore gave Waila a cracking ride today. She was favourite but never really travelling like she would win. He had to shovel the coal on from a long way out and kept after her really strongly. Although she didn’t win, she got a second place that didn’t look likely at one stage. A bit of a tricky looking sort, she’s not one of Stoute’s best and the jockey worked for his money today.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
Why pick on Frankie? You could put any other jockey up against Moore and they wouldn’t come out on top.
Frankie has been at the top of the tree for a long time and I would still have him in the top 3 riding today. You wouldn’t expect him to be at his peak in his mid forties and he has a lot less rides these days.
Gee Whiz, read the post and you will see WHY I posted the thread. The question was which jockey was better when they were at the top of their game, not which one is better now.
Interesting that you acknowledge that he can’t be at his best in his mid-forties but still think he’s in the top three. That doesn’t say much for the lads getting plenty winners nowadays if Frankie’s still better than them in your eyes.
Maybe you should do some reading yourself Steve, many of the posts refer to recent rides including your goodself citing Asyad in your opening post. Not all posts here reply to your initial question do they?
The question why pick on Frankie still stands, why not Kieren Fallon or Richard Hughes? He’s unlikely to be riding lots of winners as he has so few rides, if you prefer the likes of Fanning, Kirby and Hanagan fair enough.
The question why pick on Frankie still stands, why not Kieren Fallon or Richard Hughes? He’s unlikely to be riding lots of winners as he has so few rides, if you prefer the likes of Fanning, Kirby and Hanagan fair enough.
As far as I can see Yeats, we don’t have to agree with Steve’s opinion but it’s a perfectly reasonable question to ask.
"Fanning, Kirby and Hanagan"
have never been thought of as the No 1 jockey and
Hughes
is still in the top echelon. Yes, you could replace the word Dettori with
Fallon
, but that would be for another thread; this is a Dettori/Moore comparisson. Why should it be so wrong to compare jockeys current and past stature… and/or consider how much ability a jockey may have lost since his/her peak?
Value Is EverythingWhy pick on Frankie? You could put any other jockey up against Moore and they wouldn’t come out on top.
Frankie has been at the top of the tree for a long time and I would still have him in the top 3 riding today. You wouldn’t expect him to be at his peak in his mid forties and he has a lot less rides these days.
Gee Whiz, read the post and you will see WHY I posted the thread. The question was which jockey was better when they were at the top of their game, not which one is better now.
Interesting that you acknowledge that he can’t be at his best in his mid-forties but still think he’s in the top three. That doesn’t say much for the lads getting plenty winners nowadays if Frankie’s still better than them in your eyes.
Maybe you should do some reading yourself Steve, many of the posts refer to recent rides including your goodself citing Asyad in your opening post. Not all posts here reply to your initial question do they?
The question why pick on Frankie still stands, why not Kieren Fallon or Richard Hughes? He’s unlikely to be riding lots of winners as he has so few rides, if you prefer the likes of Fanning, Kirby and Hanagan fair enough.
If you read my initial post you should understand that the finish of the race where Frankie was very weak on Asyad, and was clearly out-ridden by the stronger jockey, Ryan Moore, was the inspiration for the thread. In my opinion the younger jockey is superior by some margin now.
I never said I expected that the ageing jockey could keep pace with the younger man, the question was which jockey was the better of the two when they were at the top of their game.
Of course threads wander off at a tangent but you asked why I was picking on Frankie. The answer is that I am not. A thread entitled
Frankie vs Ryan Moore
really tells its own story
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
As far as I can see Yeats, we don’t have to agree with Steve’s opinion but it’s a perfectly reasonable question to ask.
"Fanning, Kirby and Hanagan"
have never been thought of as the No 1 jockey and
Hughes
is still in the top echelon. Yes, you could replace the word Dettori with
Fallon
, but that would be for another thread; this is a Dettori/Moore comparisson. Why should it be so wrong to compare jockeys current and past stature… and/or consider how much ability a jockey may have lost since his/her peak?
Yes but most of the posts are regarding recent rides rather than Frankie at his peak. Who said Fanning, Hanagan or Kirby were no 1? That was in reply to Steve’s assertion that jockeys who are riding plenty of winners now would be disappointed to be rated below Frankie, presumably he must rate them higher.
I have a video somewhere that someone did comparing Frankie & Piggott at their peak, from memory think Frankie came out with a higher score although I could be wrong.
Must dig it out to confirm but don’t currently have a working video recorderAt his peak Frankie was better than Ryan Moore is at this stage of his career. That’s not to say that Ryan cannot close the gap – he can !
Strength wise ; although Frankie isn’t as strong in the saddle as he once was , in his heyday, he certainly was the equal of Ryan in that department , and arguably stronger.
Confidence wise, it’s Frankie’s all day long – tactically, Ryan is still nowhere near astute as Frankie of old. Moore still has a bit to go there.
With Ryan, there is still improvement to come, but when assessing their abilities, then overall, I would have to rate Frankie ( in his prime ) as the more accomplished jockey of the two.
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.