Ruby's ride on Compelled

C

Cantoris

At the Start
Joined
Jan 7, 2008
Messages
2,623
Ruby's rideon Compelled last nigth came under a lot of scrutiny. For those that didn't see the race, she was favourite on her first outing over fences in a pretty weak affair over 2m. She had won previously on heavy ground so the soft conditions should have suited her. Her jumping was a little indifferent. Not bad, more clumsy. Turning for home Adrian Maguires was out in front having set a reasonably strong pace and been 15 clear at one stage. Barry Geraghty was on the second fav and closed turning in. Ruby was 10 further back and looked held under and easy ride. She touched 80s in running. Three fences in the straight and she jumped the first ok and it was clear after that the first two were stopping. She got into contention at the second last and going to the last looked like she had every chance only being a few lengths behind. Ruby switched outside Geraghty, as Maguire's fell apart in third, and then inside. An ok jump at the last and she looked like she would sweep by but Geraghty's found more and held on close home.

The general reaction of people was that it was an ill judged ride and I'm going to put out the for and against here and if anyone saw it, please comment as I'm kinda on the fence on this one.

For it being a bad ride
Well she was only beaten half a length having made up 15 lenghts in the straight. He never put her into it, even coming out of the back straight. A shocking ride by a jockey who seems to be getting it wrong more often these days but the horses are good enough to get him out of it. The video evidence speaks for itself.

Against it being a bad ride
The ground was getting softer as the night was going on. she jumped stickily throughout the race and that pushed her back through the field. It was her first outing and if he kicked on with her she may have hit the deck if she was tired and knowing that her jumping was not up to scratch. He gave her a chance and let the front two kill themselves up the straight. He would have been happy to finish third and the fact she had a chance at the last was a bonus given how she jumped. he wanted a horse for the future and punters need to realise that he rides for the owner (in this case Willie himself as owner/trainer who has an interest in the hores future) and not the punters (who have an interest only in the next race).

Would the jury like to cast their votes.
 
Cantoris said:
He would have been happy to finish third and the fact she had a chance at the last was a bonus given how she jumped. he wanted a horse for the future and punters need to realise that he rides for the owner (in this case Willie himself as owner/trainer who has an interest in the hores future) and not the punters (who have an interest only in the next race).
Click to expand...

The only thing I would add is he cannot ride according to the owner's wishes, he must ride according to the rules of racing. It just so happens that the rules and punters are very closely aligned! If they want to school her, and not go absolutely for the win, I'm sure there is plenty of space around Mullins' yard.

Would very much agree he is becoming a negative when considering whether or not to back a horse.
 
Hamm said:
The only thing I would add is he cannot ride according to the owner's wishes, he must ride according to the rules of racing. It just so happens that the rules and punters are very closely aligned! If they want to school her, and not go absolutely for the win, I'm sure there is plenty of space around Mullins' yard.
Click to expand...

Yeah I see your point but we all know that's not what actually happens. Without opening a can of worms, it's a bit like the time they banned the jock for riding the horse out when it was injured and his retort was "you would have banned me if I didn't ride him out"!! I always thought that Adrian Maguire's natural instinct to win was dented by david Nicholson's desire to have horses for the future. When Maguire started on Ferdy's horses (for the lad that owned Strong Promise) he used to fling horses at the last fence but then Nicholson taught him that it is better to take your time at the last on an inexperienced horse and get beat then fling it in the hope of winning and put it on the ground, potentially. In your eyes, that's schooling too and shouldn't be allowed. But I don't want to take away from the Ruby debate and see where you are coming from.
 
If they want to school her, and not go absolutely for the win, I'm sure there is plenty of space around Mullins' yard.
Click to expand...

There is a world of difference between a young horse popping over fences it knows at home and trying to do it at racing pace amidst all the distractions of a racecourse and other horses alongside. You can't expect trainers to replicate racecourse conditions at home and you can't expect novice chasers be ready to jump like seasoned pros. The priority for any horse making a debut over fences is for it to get round safely and to enjoy the experience.
 
'Enjoy the experience'

:confused:

If a horse is fit to run in a race, it (or, rather it's jockey) has no alternative but to ensure the best possible placing is achieved.

I am well aware you cannot replicate racing conditions at home, and I don't know where I said I expect them to be able to jump like seasoned pros? I expect them (or, again, their jockey) to ensure they are ridden to achieve the best possible placing relative to their ability in the race. I completely recognise that the majority of horses will improve for their first run, but this should not be taken into the hands of a jockey, but more down to increased familiarity with the racing and racecourse experience.

I think you've completely misintrepreted my post.
 
Cantoris said:
Yeah I see your point but we all know that's not what actually happens. Without opening a can of worms, it's a bit like the time they banned the jock for riding the horse out when it was injured and his retort was "you would have banned me if I didn't ride him out"!! I always thought that Adrian Maguire's natural instinct to win was dented by david Nicholson's desire to have horses for the future. When Maguire started on Ferdy's horses (for the lad that owned Strong Promise) he used to fling horses at the last fence but then Nicholson taught him that it is better to take your time at the last on an inexperienced horse and get beat then fling it in the hope of winning and put it on the ground, potentially. In your eyes, that's schooling too and shouldn't be allowed. But I don't want to take away from the Ruby debate and see where you are coming from.
Click to expand...

Good point, and of couse when a horse is injured that's completely different. Also, I certainly would never say recklessness (such as you mention over the last fence) should be entertained in an attempt to win (it's just as likely to cost you any place at all).

Back to your initial point about Ruby, were there not several cases last year where he was suspected of something similar?
 
Hamm said:
Back to your initial point about Ruby, were there not several cases last year where he was suspected of something similar?
Click to expand...

I watched him at Tramore last week. He rides it nearly the same way everytime. Out the back, let the others go for home coming out of the back straight. Get closer going down the hill and pick them up off the home turn when the others are faultering. Examples are Dani California, Sonnium and Norwich Boy. the latter was never really going but Sonnium came from a tailed off last and Dani Caifornia had a lot of horses in front of her coming out of the back straight. Just an observation but he's either cracked the way to ride Tramore or it's the horses are getting him out of trouble.
 
Hamm said:
'Enjoy the experience'

:confused:

If a horse is fit to run in a race, it (or, rather it's jockey) has no alternative but to ensure the best possible placing is achieved.

I am well aware you cannot replicate racing conditions at home, and I don't know where I said I expect them to be able to jump like seasoned pros? I expect them (or, again, their jockey) to ensure they are ridden to achieve the best possible placing relative to their ability in the race. I completely recognise that the majority of horses will improve for their first run, but this should not be taken into the hands of a jockey, but more down to increased familiarity with the racing and racecourse experience.

I think you've completely misintrepreted my post.
Click to expand...

Yes, I did mean that part of the objective should be for the horse to enjoy the experience. If you have spent a large sum buying it, and the stable has spent many months breaking it in and getting it ready for the track, the last thing you want is for it to be beaten up on its debut and put off racing for life.

If it can win under sympathetic handling then the jockey should make sure it does, but I wouldn't want to see Ruby Walsh or any other jockey pressurising a debutant in the same way they would if it was a seasoned horse, and I would expect the rules to be interpreted along these lines as well.
 
Grey said:
Yes, I did mean that part of the objective should be for the horse to enjoy the experience. If you have spent a large sum buying it, and the stable has spent many months breaking it in and getting it ready for the track, the last thing you want is for it to be beaten up on its debut and put off racing for life.

If it can win under sympathetic handling then the jockey should make sure it does, but I wouldn't want to see Ruby Walsh or any other jockey pressurising a debutant in the same way they would if it was a seasoned horse, and I would expect the rules to be interpreted along these lines as well.
Click to expand...

I watched the race, and my initial reaction was that the horse ducked in a bit after jumping the last, and he gave her every chance. Happy for that to be challenged, but that was my initial reaction.

What is evident, however, is that Ruby's mount's are massively overbet between May and October, and rarely present any value.
 
Grasshopper said:
What is evident, however, is that Ruby's mount's are massively overbet between May and October, and rarely present any value.
Click to expand...

Do we have any stats on how he has done from May to date on a wins to ride and profit basis?? Would be interesting to see if the numbers back that up as he generally rides the favs but he doesn't have Paul Nicholls giving him easy winners. The favs tend to be 2-3/1 rather that 4/7 shots.
 
The RP site gives jockeys stats in the UK and Ireland. When I last looked Ruby had 23% winners. 'Fraid I can't remember the numbers and don't have access from work, but the figures are there if someone else does.
 
Ruby is showing £1 Level-Stakes Loss of £26.95 from 109 rides in Ireland this season, though he is showing +£0.48 profit from 40 rides for Mullins (33% SR).

The stats only go back so far (that I can see anyway), and it seems he hasn't been beaten on too many short-priced good things - in the last fortnight at least. Perhaps I imagined it?
 
Cantoris said:
I watched him at Tramore last week. He rides it nearly the same way everytime. Out the back, let the others go for home coming out of the back straight. Get closer going down the hill and pick them up off the home turn when the others are faultering. Examples are Dani California, Sonnium and Norwich Boy. the latter was never really going but Sonnium came from a tailed off last and Dani Caifornia had a lot of horses in front of her coming out of the back straight. Just an observation but he's either cracked the way to ride Tramore or it's the horses are getting him out of trouble.
Click to expand...

Was at Tramore 3 days last week and in my view nobody rides the track better then Ruby.In my opinion his win on Lieberman in a 9 furlong maiden was a clasic.I laid him on 2 horses for his father for fairly serious money with a strong opinion that both were well exposed and unlikely to win.Both of them were beaten but in fairness he gives them every chance.
 
Cantoris, I have watched the race.

I Cannot see a problem with the ride, in fact I thought he gave it a great ride. You said in your first paragraph summary of the race that "She got into contention at the second last and going to the last looked like she had every chance only being a few lengths behind." and then go on to state "He never put her into it, even coming out of the back straight." This sounds confused especially as you make no mention that the horse was in contention at the second last in your against it being a bad ride paragraph, surely the place for the comment.

To my eyes the horse had every chance and was beaten fair and square. If the horse had come with a wet sail and just failed to get up I could see cause for complaint.

Hamms assertion that Walsh is "becoming a negative when considering whether or not to back a horse." is laughable. The ride on Compelled proves it!
 
I don't think Hamm is saying he is a bad jockey, or that he is incapable of a good ride, or indeed a brilliant one. Just that he is being overbet. I tend to agree.
 
Melendez said:
I don't think Hamm is saying he is a bad jockey, or that he is incapable of a good ride, or indeed a brilliant one. Just that he is being overbet. I tend to agree.
Click to expand...
Perhaps Hamm is suggesting that Ruby tends to ride a fair proportion of non-jiggers in the old country? Whether that's true or not, it's certainly out of his system when he arrives in blighty for the proper jumps meetings.
 
Melendez said:
I don't think Hamm is saying he is a bad jockey, or that he is incapable of a good ride, or indeed a brilliant one. Just that he is being overbet. I tend to agree.
Click to expand...

He said Walsh being on a horse was becoming a negative for him, not specific about if this is due to his mounts being overbet or if he doubts his riding ability.

Perhaps he will clear this point up.
 
bloodnok said:
Cantoris, I have watched the race.

I Cannot see a problem with the ride, in fact I thought he gave it a great ride. You said in your first paragraph summary of the race that "She got into contention at the second last and going to the last looked like she had every chance only being a few lengths behind." and then go on to state "He never put her into it, even coming out of the back straight." This sounds confused especially as you make no mention that the horse was in contention at the second last in your against it being a bad ride paragraph, surely the place for the comment.
Click to expand...

On the contrary, I wasn't confused at all. It has been mentioned a few times on this forum that posters don't provide the background, names of hoses etc when they open a new thread. So to set the scene I gavfe what most people woul surely agree was the visual evidence view of what happened in the race. At the second last she was getting into contention. It is not a judgement of a ride but she was closing and was within 5-10 lenghts. I would consider that being in contention, would you not??

I then put arguments "for" it and "against" it being a bad ride so I clearly state in the "for" section that it could be argued he never put her in contention. It is easily possible to make this point. Contention in this case was in with a serious chance of winning given the amount of ground left to cover. So while 10 lengths could be considered in contention in the intro, someone arguing it was a bad ride would consider he should have been 5 lenghts closer two fences out to have a serious chance of winning. So you can view the definition of contention differently.

Ok maybe I should have included that he was in contention (the ten lengths definition) inthe "against" category but we're only splitting hairs at this stage. I think everyone got the point. I didn't state which one I thought it was, just asked people for their opinion. I have my own view but didn't want to muddy the waters with it.
 
Not the first time a fair bit of comment has been passed on a ride Walsh has given this mare - the other being when she finished third in a conditions hurdle at Downpatrick in May (as bad a ride as I've ever seen Ruby Walsh give a horse).

Can't see much wrong with the ride he gave her at Killarney; admittedly, she looked to have an awful lot of ground to make up three out, but the ease with which she closed up to the two in front suggested Walsh had judged it fairly well. She was given every chance for me but, for whatever reason, couldn't (wouldn't?) get past Geranjo.
 
I'm with Trackside on this one. Compelled closed quickly and easily on the leader but, I thought, wouldn't go past. She also pulls like stink and needs settling. I'm inclined to think that the idea was to get to the front as late as possible with a smooth run and try and nick it. Unfortunately, the horse had other ideas.
 
Fair enough Cantoris excuse my hair splitting. Muttley sums up my view of the ride better than I managed to. I just do not think this ride was a good example to choose to examine Walsh's supposed schooling/educating of horses on the track.
 
bloodnok said:
Fair enough Cantoris excuse my hair splitting. Muttley sums up my view of the ride better than I managed to. I just do not think this ride was a good example to choose to examine Walsh's supposed schooling/educating of horses on the track.
Click to expand...

It was just one that I saw and thought it got so much comment on ATR that it was worth having the discussion.

I do find that the commets that go into ATR are driven mainly by punters that don't get racing or race riding. Maybe that's unfair and their views might just differ from mine. On the same evening they gave out stink for Joseph O'Brien's ride of Mikhael Glinka. I thought he rode the quirky horse well. Yes, Murtagh might have had a better hold on him when he jimked but O'Brien is a seven pound claimer, not a group 1 jock.....yet anyway.
 
Will ber very interesting to see whether the stewards have a word with Ruby after his ride on Charminamix in the 4.05 at Roscommon today. Held up right out the back and made virtually no effort at all to get into the race at any stage.

Given that he failed to really seriously get after the horse in the straight at all and the fact that the horse looked to be carrying it's head slightly awkwardly, I wouldn't be surprised if something had gone amiss, although I'm sure some might take a more cynical view.
 
trackside528 said:
Will ber very interesting to see whether the stewards have a word with Ruby after his ride on Charminamix in the 4.05 at Roscommon today. Held up right out the back and made virtually no effort at all to get into the race at any stage.

Given that he failed to really seriously get after the horse in the straight at all and the fact that the horse looked to be carrying it's head slightly awkwardly, I wouldn't be surprised if something had gone amiss, although I'm sure some might take a more cynical view.
Click to expand...

Not hard to be cynical after watching that. !
 
Back
Top