February 7, 2008 at 18:42 #6563
Solution To Dropping Hands
The solution is that there is no solution.
My name is Darren Brown.
What I mean is, whatever the punishment a jockey faces, it will always happen from time to time. Because connections dislike their horses winning by too far, believing the handicapper will put the horse up more. Other times it is the jockey just posing.
I do not like the solution of forcing everyone to ride out to the line. Otherwise horses with possible injuries might be made worse or even fatal. Or at best prevents a horse who has done its best, being eased. If they made exceptions jockeys might say, â€œI felt it take a bad stepâ€value is everythingFebruary 7, 2008 at 19:23 #141010GlennParticipant
- Total Posts 1981
Take a look at the list of jockeys that have dropped their hands when well clear and lost the race…
…then ask yourself: wouldn’t these creatures just get stuck in the stalls instead if these measures were brought in?February 7, 2008 at 20:05 #141036
I think you are too synical Glenn.
99.9% of racing is perfectly straight, with horses running the best of their ability on the day.
Jockeys are only human, they will make mistakes, as we all do.
Just thought this "solution" would lesson the punters pain.value is everythingFebruary 7, 2008 at 20:11 #141040
No it wouldnt work.February 7, 2008 at 20:13 #141042
Please Zoso, don’t just say it wouldn’t work.
Give reasons.value is everythingFebruary 7, 2008 at 20:14 #141043
Ok. It would work.February 7, 2008 at 20:16 #141044value is everythingFebruary 7, 2008 at 20:21 #141046Fist of Fury 2k8Member
- Total Posts 2930
Good idea……if you want to start World War III
Sorry Ginger but what you are asking would be impossible. If you lose you lose there is no second chances. They are pros and are paid to do the job of a pro. If they mess up they are fined or banned but as punters that’s the price you pay. Would be some fights if they brought that one in.February 7, 2008 at 20:27 #141052
The idea is the equivolent of banning a football player for missing an open goal or a penalty.February 7, 2008 at 20:32 #141054
When you back any horse you have to factor in the competence of the jockey, and as such any dropping of hands resulting in the loss of first place (or second, third or fourth for each-way punters) is something you have to take on the chin. No-one likes losing in such a manner, but it’s the risk you take if you back a horse ridden by someone who doesn’t ride out to the finish.
To suggest that stewards should have the power to, in effect, correct jockey error is ludicrous. As FOF points out all hell would break loose if you had, even if somewhat fortuitously, backed the eventual winner and were only paid out on half of your stake. And I would imagine the owner of the winner would argue with the stewards giving away half of their prize money.February 7, 2008 at 20:37 #141058MikkyMo73Member
- Total Posts 1789
I think it’s ridiculous. Why should the bookies pay out on the second as if it were a winner if it was the jockeys fault for losing the race.
Lets just say the jockey that dropped his hands was riding a well backed 8/1shot, whereas the horse that benefited from the jockey dropping his hands is an easy to back 6/1 shot.
Under the current system, the bookie has to pay out on the eventual winner, in this case the very weak in the betting 6/1 shot.
But under your system, the bookies have to pay out on half the stake (it would be half the stake not odds if it was a dead heat) of the gambled on 8/1 shot. WHY? Why shold the bookies have to pay out on a loser if it wasn’t there fault it lost .
I don’t have a solution to helping prevent jockeys from dropping their hands (perhaps a more lengthy ban if I had to say anything) because I don’t think the problem is anywhere near as bad as you’re making out.
MikeFebruary 7, 2008 at 20:41 #141062seabirdParticipant
- Total Posts 2924
Solution to jockeys dropping their hands………..chop their feckin’ hands off!!
ColinFebruary 7, 2008 at 20:46 #141064
When a "wrong winner" interferes with another who should have won, there are no fights when it is disqualified. The punter on the second who should have won, rightfully gets a second chance because the jockey on the horse finishing first past the post has made a mistake by hampering the other horse.
When there is a dead heat and the two winners are paid out at half the stakes, there are no fights.
So why should there be fights in this scenario? When the jockey has made a mistake and without that mistake would clearly have been the obvious winner.
If nothing is done and punters lose everything because a jockey drops his hands, then there could be a fight.
It is not the same as a horse coming to the last fence in a clear lead and falling. The jumps are there to be negotiated, all part of the race. It should not be part of the race that a punter has to hope the jockey does not ease up prematurely when five lengths clear.
If you were on the horse finishing first past the post, would you feel wronged sharing the winnings with punters who backed the horse five lengths clear before being prematurely eased in the last 25 yards?
Gingevalue is everythingFebruary 7, 2008 at 20:47 #141066
I think that would be an all too literal interpretation of the phrase, Colin!February 7, 2008 at 20:51 #141070
The same theory can’t be applied in this case, Gingertipster, because you can’t predict interference, whether it be accidental or intentional. And, should an in-racing incident prevent a horse from winning, it is only right that the ‘winner’ be demoted (assuming of course that the beneficiary of the stewards’ decision would have won, without question).
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.