July 10, 2005 at 21:26 #2248
That solution would never have occured to ex Jockeys’ Association chief, Michael Caulfield, I suppose. (RP today P.12)
Such a weight allowance might not be practical or proper in all races but would the male jockeys mind its introduction? And would the females feel insulted ? Are they getting a fair crack of the whip at present ?
<br>BTW, I’m not sure if Lisa Jones decision to self-deprecatingly publicise her driving deficiencies was a good idea. Hardly inspires confidence.July 10, 2005 at 21:49 #66753DaylightMember
- Total Posts 369
Well the fillies get them in racing, I cannot see a problem with a woman jockey getting 3Lbs in exactly the same way Although this would cause a problem on women claimers 7lb then a further 3Lbs. I actually think it is a good idea Zilzal although women will probably find it insulting but there is a gender pyshical strenght.July 10, 2005 at 21:56 #66755
3lbs might be a little generous, DL. <br>1lb might be more proportionate !
And the ladies wouldn’t be so offended !!<br>July 11, 2005 at 10:58 #66756davidbradyMember
- Total Posts 3901
The ladies may be a little insulted if they are told that they need to lose more weight!:biggrin:
Seriously though, it may raise a few objections from the usual elements calling it patronising, but if it was to give more riding opportunities to the fairer sex in the saddle, then I’m all for it and I’m sure the lady jockeys will be too.July 11, 2005 at 15:47 #66757ZorroMember
- Total Posts 472
Um, I suggested this about five years ago. Maybe people thought I was joking.July 12, 2005 at 08:42 #66759
Jockeys have attributes. I know some formites on here have a strong opinion on various abilities of jockeys. Some of these strengths/weaknesses, ability to ride from the front etc…..are well known. I don’t see why female jockeys should get a weight allowance??? I prefer to rate jockeys on their ability, and there are some female jockeys I rate above some male ones.
(Edited by Sailing Shoes at 9:44 am on July 12, 2005)July 18, 2005 at 12:06 #66760graysonscolumnParticipant
- Total Posts 6939
Quote: from Daylight on 10:49 pm on July 10, 2005[br]Well the fillies get them in racing, I cannot see a problem with a woman jockey getting 3Lbs in exactly the same way Although this would cause a problem on women claimers 7lb then a further 3Lbs. I actually think it is a good idea Zilzal although women will probably find it insulting but there is a gender pyshical strenght.<br>
<br>Female 7lb conditional jockeys already get an extra 3lb if riding horses for their own stables; although as the list of such jockeys seems to start and end with Caroline Hurley over at Richard Ford’s yard, maybe an across the board 10lb for new / inexperienced female conditionals riding for whatever yard wouldn’t go amiss.
The patron saint of lower-grade fare. A gently critical friend of point-to-pointing. Kindness is a political act.July 18, 2005 at 12:10 #66761
Nice to see Steve Dennis put flesh on the bones of this argument in today’s RP (P 16).
It might also be considered that by giving ladies 3lbs (as Dennis advocates) Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â a handlful of quality lady jockeys would be guaranteed in the jockey pool and the necessity of raising weights overall Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â would not be so pressing.
Lady jockies should fight this battle now as the racing authorities are probably not capable of taking on anybody, be they male jockeys, C4, whoever.July 20, 2005 at 21:56 #66762
The Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â lack of interest in this suggestion by racing folk, be they trainers or TRF members, confirms the male chauvism of the males and self-imposed subjugation of the females.
The lacklustre interest in an allowance by female jockeys and even journalists such as Lydia Hislop today in the Times indicates they would prefer relative anonymity if not irrelevance in racing rather than suffer the indignity of an allowance,
An allowance would simply give the handul of the Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â female jockeys an opportunity to plan and enjoy a career of some longevity in racing.
If the status quo continues we will continue to see the occasional talented Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â female meteor ascend only to disappear into oblivion.
Sadly there are enough quality female jockeys to expand the number of Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Lady-only races Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â IMO.July 20, 2005 at 23:53 #66763GlennParticipant
- Total Posts 1981
What evidence is there that women are on average less effective in the saddle than men?
I don’t think I’ve ever seen any. In fact, all the research I have seen, including my own, has female jockeys scattered pretty much evenly through the jockey rankings.
This debate seems to have been prompted by Lisa Jones saying she’s going to the States. She’s a fair jockey, that was good for her claim last year but is now finding it tough without the allowance. This is a common enough tale. I don’t see what is has specifically to do with her being female.July 21, 2005 at 00:19 #66764empty walletMember
- Total Posts 1631
Spot on Glenn,
male jocks find it tough after losing their claims
<br>As the female rider of Rudis Pet V Behan stated,
"we’ve fought for equal rights and got them,so why give those equal rights away"
they just need the support of trainers owners like any other jockey<br>
(Edited by empty wallet at 1:34 am on July 21, 2005)September 22, 2005 at 20:50 #66765
This must really be a good suggestion ! Not only did Zorro say he suggested a female jockey allowance four or five years ago in his column, today in the Racing Post Mr Ashforth claims he suggested it three years ago ! In what looks likes an example of reverse psychology the latter is now against the idea because the females jocks themselves baulk at the idea ! Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â I doubt if the girls will continue to look a gift-horse in the mouth. An allowance is theirs to claim.
Does anybody have an opinion on the present pool of male jocks. Do we really need the most moderate jocks in their forties (who can be relied on to achieve a poor win strike-rate !) keeping out younger talent of both sexes. In fact I suspect that the readiness of the senior male jocks to strike and boycott at will betrays an insecurity in their ranks built in part around their own domination of race-rides. Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Does somebody much closer Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â to the sport than I have an insight on jockey-room race-ride politics ?<br>September 23, 2005 at 17:40 #66766
Just because sir Zorro, and David Ashforth suggested it, doens’t mean it’s a good idea. Victoria Behan’s comment regarding equal rights mentioned in EW post says it all really. What are you reasons for it Zilzal?
Glenn makes an excellent point, one I made myself earlier, that some women jockeys are better than some male jockeys – It’s all matter of opinion. If I owned a horse I wouldn’t mind having a female rider – in fact I’d choose any female rider above some male ones. I just don’t see the logic??
<br>Daylight – because of physical strength??? ok I want a 3lb allowance for my jockey because he’s a little bit dimmer than the average jock.
(Edited by Sailing Shoes at 6:43 pm on Sep. 23, 2005)September 23, 2005 at 18:51 #66767non vintageMember
- Total Posts 1268
There is a generally held theory that some female jockeys are a bit weak in a finish, and often lose races by tiny margins that they could have won.
So, as an alternative to a weight allowance, what if female jockeys were given 8 inches at the start of each race?
(Edited by non vintage at 7:52 pm on Sep. 23, 2005)September 23, 2005 at 19:04 #66768
I seriously hope that post was in jest NV. :biggrin:
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.