- This topic has 88 replies, 39 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Would the owner of Red Bull Racing overlook his best driver, Sebastian Vettel, in order to allow his son " a bit of sport " by giving him the nod to drive their best formula 1 car in the British Grand Prix ? No, he most certaily wouldn’t !
Red Bull is a major international company not one bloke and his pets, so the comparison is a bit daft.
And it’s not a great one anyway as Petrov, Yamamoto & Bruno Senna (plus a couple of others) all forked out for an F1 seat this season. Going back a few years when it didn’t cost gazillions to finance an F1 team, there’s actually been a very long history of Waley-Cohen-style cash and nepotism in the sport.
Mike
The owners pay the bills and are entitled to put up who they like.
I agree with Cormack. It wouldn’t look good if the owner didn’t put his son on the horse in my opinion. It’s their horse after all. I didn’t see many complaints after he rode it to a KG and GC double last season. I’m all for the punter getting a better deal, but SWC has every right to be the jockey.
The owners pay the bills and are entitled to put up who they like.
I agree with Cormack. It wouldn’t look good if the owner didn’t put his son on the horse in my opinion. It’s their horse after all.
I think his father may have some trouble telling SWC he’s not riding. Would probably require dental treatment afterwards.
Which is handy.
Mike
Would the owner of Red Bull Racing overlook his best driver, Sebastian Vettel, in order to allow his son " a bit of sport " by giving him the nod to drive their best formula 1 car in the British Grand Prix ? No, he most certaily wouldn’t !
Red Bull is a major international company not one bloke and his pets, so the comparison is a bit daft.
And it’s not a great one anyway as Petrov, Yamamoto & Bruno Senna (plus a couple of others) all forked out for an F1 seat this season. Going back a few years when it didn’t cost gazillions to finance an F1 team, there’s actually been a very long history of Waley-Cohen-style cash and nepotism in the sport.
Mike
More analogy than comparison, although the basic premise of my argument is the same. Why use a less experienced/ less talented amateur, rather than a more experienced top professional, if you wish to get the very best out of your star performer ( be it car, racehorse, whatever ) when the goal is to win said prestigious race and the prize money which goes with it ?
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
If you believe some jockeys are better than others, as I would assume most people on a racing forum would, you would have to say that Long Run would be better for having BG on his back. SWC’s problem as far as LR is concerned is that he cannot hold half of the horse and part of that is down to his being too small. SWC is a very good amateur but he will never be within a stone of the top pros in a proper grade one chase so the horse has to make up the difference. But , that said, the Waley- Cohens are perfectly entitled to do what they want with their horse; the jockey is declared and goes off at the price he does as a result. 6/5 about a horse with an amateur on his back will not make a man rich, what price would LR be if BG were riding him? I would venture to suggest he would be half the price if not more and part of that contraction would be down to my minimal investment; but racing is not just about gambling and good luck to the sporting side of the game that the Waley- Cohen’s represent.
Mike
More analogy than comparison, although the basic premise of my argument is the same. Why use a less experienced/ less talented amateur, rather than a more experienced top professional, if you wish to get the very best out of your star performer ( be it car, racehorse, whatever ) when the goal is to win said prestigious race and the prize money which goes with it ?
Perhaps RWC’s "star performer" is not LR but his son and so your argument works in reverse!
Perhaps the goal is to have a good time amd fun riding you own horse.The owner and his son have probably contributed more to the NH scene than anyhone writing on the forum.Nice to have them lighting up the scene with fun for a change.Amazing the angry voices when a person puts up their son riding their own horse.What a shame that the corinthian spirit is mostly invisible nowadays at the NH fixtures.But then again I suppose most spirits are.
If you believe some jockeys are better than others, as I would assume most people on a racing forum would, you would have to say that Long Run would be better for having BG on his back. SWC’s problem as far as LR is concerned is that he cannot hold half of the horse and part of that is down to his being too small. SWC is a very good amateur but he will never be within a stone of the top pros in a proper grade one chase so the horse has to make up the difference. But , that said, the Waley- Cohens are perfectly entitled to do what they want with their horse; the jockey is declared and goes off at the price he does as a result. 6/5 about a horse with an amateur on his back will not make a man rich, what price would LR be if BG were riding him? I would venture to suggest he would be half the price if not more and part of that contraction would be down to my minimal investment; but racing is not just about gambling and good luck to the sporting side of the game that the Waley- Cohen’s represent.
It’s surely indisputable – Geraghty is far better than SWC.
Could be the difference between a top horse and a great horse.
Perhaps the goal is to have a good time amd fun riding you own horse.The owner and his son have probably contributed more to the NH scene than anyhone writing on the forum.Nice to have them lighting up the scene with fun for a change.Amazing the angry voices when a person puts up their son riding their own horse.What a shame that the corinthian spirit is mostly invisible nowadays at the NH fixtures.But then again I suppose most spirits are.
My question would be, does this ‘nepotistic/ elitist’ side of racing put off as many people as it encourages? As far as I am concerned the Waley Cohens are generally an asset. SWC’s performance after his mistake at Fakenham was very disappointing; a sense that the rules are working very much in his favour and on the occasions that they haven’t, i.e. being prevented from riding in the national, the lobbying in his favour has been a little too transparent have muddied the waters a little in terms of his positive contribution to the NH game. But he is a very good amateur jockey and they are not breaking any rules by having him ride LR, the horse just has to be a stone better to compensate for his weakness against the pros. The same applies to Cue Card and anytime Dickie Johnson buries a horse over fences.
Perhaps the goal is to have a good time amd fun riding you own horse.
Although I understand where everyone is coming from with the posts about SWC and family, the basic fact remains that the horse is theirs and they probably don’t give a flying fig about punters’ pockets. If they want to enjoy their sport with their own horses, then so be it. Surely they are entitled to do this?
I believe you can bet without (you name it)in Ireland at the track. Can one bet without WC’s horse? That way you have your cake and eat it.
To Plasticpaddy.Riding your own horse is hardly nepotism is it?Is driving your own car another example of nepotism?How about riding your bike?To all I answer No No No.
In how many sports would we be having this ‘arguement’? I’m proud that we still have this ‘Corinthian Spirit’ in racing. A New Year Plea. Leave the lad alone, and good luck to him next year.
To Plasticpaddy.Riding your own horse is hardly nepotism is it?Is driving your own car another example of nepotism?How about riding your bike?To all I answer No No No.
Think you will find the horse is owned by RWC but I take your point and it is really semantics. SWC in trouble again at Taunton today, wonder if he will get another amateur ban for an ‘offence’ commited in a pro race? These amateur race days must be getting a bit tight to Gold Cup Day!?! Wonder if there could be a rule change on the way? Must stop being so cynical.
Well as the Foxhunters is on Gold Cup Day if he is banned he will not be able to ride, no doubt to the relief of some.
It’s surely indisputable – Geraghty is far better than SWC.
Could be the difference between a top horse and a great horse.
And yet Mark, you were very vociferous in your criticism of the handicapper. When he thought Brampour would have done better with an established jockey on board. Instead of a 7 lb claimer unable to claim riding against Geraghty on Grandouet.
Value Is Everything
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.