Home › Forums › Horse Racing › L’ami Ride
- This topic has 121 replies, 35 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 11 months ago by
Gingertipster.
- AuthorPosts
- December 12, 2008 at 18:39 #9611
Is it just me or did the jockey look around to check garde champetre was behind him then not ride or use the whip until it had gone 3L past him?
I didnt even bet in the race but that looks suspicous.
December 12, 2008 at 18:46 #196434Is it just me or did the jockey look around to check garde champetre was behind him then not ride or use the whip until it had gone 3L past him?
I didnt even bet in the race but that looks suspicous.
I backed garde, but that was my thought also prob nothing in it, but did look a bit dodgy
December 12, 2008 at 19:29 #196455well someone put £12k on Garde…….
December 12, 2008 at 19:44 #196460well someone put £12k on Garde…….

is that not a small bet for the likes of JP???
December 12, 2008 at 20:30 #196475As you are aware I am not usually one for conspiracies. But I did immediately think the same (no bet in the race). Garde Champetre would probably have won anyway but when Nina came upsides the effort from Lami’s jockey was minimal until GC had flown.
Mark
Value Is EverythingDecember 12, 2008 at 20:59 #196481Wouldn’t be the first time 2 Bolger horses were involved in a controversial finish in a Cross-Country race with the more fancied coming out the winner. The La Touche Cup at Punchestown in Apr-07 comes to mind with Nina Carberry punching the air as Spot Thedifference crosses the line with JT McNamara on board while Nina Carberry’s mount Freney’s Well (in the words of the RP) "was given a slightly odd ride … [and] … would surely have won had he been put into the race sooner"
December 12, 2008 at 21:05 #196483I thought it a bit strange at the time and in the last 100 yards, when L’Ami was (finally) being ridden out, he certainly wasn’t losing ground on the winner.
December 12, 2008 at 21:08 #196485I thought the same and whilst I’m no expert it was clearly visible the difference of effort between both jockeys at the end.
Charles Darwin to conquer the World
December 12, 2008 at 22:18 #196493I thought exactly the same, i said at the time that L’Ami must be going the better of the pair, and i thought J T McNamara must be confident as he was just waiting, and waiting and i thought L’Ami was going to hold on for the victory.
It was only once Garde Champetre had gone past his stable-mate, that McNamara actually got after the horse.
I joked at the time by saying that someone must have wanted Garde Champetre to win as L’Ami looked all over the winner, even coming down to the final fence.
Aesthetically, a rather strange ride from McNamara.
December 12, 2008 at 22:26 #196495Garde Champetre is not straight forward & can maybe idle a bit in front & perhaps JT (who would know the horse well) wanted it to get there too soon. In the event it got there & stayed there but only after Nina Carberry had given him 4 or 5 cracks on the shoulder going to the last.
I am not saying that the above is fact but it does provide another reading of the ride.
December 12, 2008 at 22:43 #196499That would be my reading of it as well, David.
JT’s astonishing ride to get Rith Dubh – a horse with more kinks than Ray Davies’ photo album – to win the National Hunt chase all those years ago suggests to me that he certainly knows what it takes to get the cuter horse to win at Cheltenham.
By the same token, therefore, he must have a pretty good idea of what strategy would usually get any such animal beaten – it’s one that just happened not to work as desired on this occasion, as Garde Champetre then consented to find a bit more fight than JT expected.
Not a dodgy ride to this pair of eyes, therefore – rather, a percentage call based on previous experience which didn’t garner the desired results this time.
gc
Jeremy Grayson. Son of immigrant. Adoptive father of two. Metadata librarian. Freelance point-to-point / horse racing writer, analyst and commentator wonk. Loves music, buses, cats, the BBC Micro, ale. Advocate of CBT, PACE and therapeutic parenting. Aspergers.
December 13, 2008 at 00:55 #196528
AnonymousInactive- Total Posts 17716
I don’t think L’Ami has ever looked overly quirky, so there would be no reason for JT to play games with Garde Champetre (if indeed there was any doubt about his resolution once hitting the front).
Watching the replay, JT looked over his left shoulder twice to see where Garde Champetre was and made absolutely no effort to match Nina Carberry’s urgings (he was a length or so closer the second time he looked). When he did consent to ask something of L’Ami there was a noticeable response, measurable by the fact that he was closer to the winner at the end of the race than he was a furlong out.
The stewards, rather predictably, saw absolutely nothing wrong with the ride, but ‘dodgy’ would be the least incriminating phrase I would use (especially when Carberry and McNamara were deep in conversation after the finish line).
December 13, 2008 at 02:05 #196537Having just got back, I’m really glad my on-course impression was shared by others here – having backed L’ami was less than delighted by the ride given. When out in front was all but yanked back into the pack about half a mile out – and that was before the other shenanigans.
As others pointed out not the first time this has happened. Freneys Well’s second to Spot at Punchestown two years ago was hilarious….
December 13, 2008 at 03:40 #196565I thought exactly the same, i said at the time that L’Ami must be going the better of the pair, and i thought J T McNamara must be confident as he was just waiting, and waiting and i thought L’Ami was going to hold on for the victory.
It was only once Garde Champetre had gone past his stable-mate, that McNamara actually got after the horse.
I joked at the time by saying that someone must have wanted Garde Champetre to win as L’Ami looked all over the winner, even coming down to the final fence.
Aesthetically, a rather strange ride from McNamara.
That was how it looked to me as well and it Enda’s interview prior to the race he wanted Garde to win. Mind you Garde is good in these kind of races and he might have won in any case, but it did look rather odd to my uneducated eyes.
December 13, 2008 at 03:52 #196571I agree with the conspiracy theorists here and I think the stewards should at least have held an enquiry and had words with JT Mac.
It’s not hard to imagine him saying to Nina as she comes alongside "go on and win" and he certainly looked to take a pull coming to the last.
I know if I’d backed him I’d want to see him putting his head down and driving the horse to the line.
It’s certainly something to bear in mind in these mickey mouse contests in future if we must bet on them!December 13, 2008 at 04:31 #196576I can’t see Garde Champetre being that much of a twicer so as for JT to think, "Oh, I’ll give him a length and then he’ll give in". Yes, GC has idled before but has still kept going. There is no way he is in the Ribh Dubh (or whatever)’s class of dodgepot, who gave up when in front. A real gent of a horse "after you sir".
Also Lami was on the rail, are you seriously suggesting the jockey would let GC go infront travelling well, then wait for the horse to idle, switch his horse round Nina and get up to win.
If there is a reasonable explanation it is surely:
Nina saw a stride at the last where as JT did not (how though because they were from what I could see on the same stride. Then JT took far longer to get himself straight after the jump, before asking his mount for everything. (Coincidentally just when there’d be a chance of losing second place).Is JT that much worse a jockey than Nina?
Mark
Value Is EverythingDecember 13, 2008 at 04:45 #196578Watching the race unfold in the latter stages, I had slightly different thoughts to earlier posts. The impression I got was that the first two jockeys were trying to manouvre the finish to enable the other McManus horse to get third place, thus resulting in a nice little Trifecta. I’m not sure did it end up 1st, 2nd and 4th place for J.P.?
- AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.