VvD

Yeah that's hilarious but not sure what it has to do with this discussion? You're not the smartest or most logical person are you!? Read Say No More's response - you clearly had someone in mind when you posted your accusation. Hesi's response didn't change your accusation. Just tell us who you had in mind - not that difficult.

Cat's got Barry's tongue? I suspect he might have been referring to me, but if you're going to make the accusation at least have the balls to stand behind it.

1. Gold Coast R1 - 1/92. Gold Coast R2 - 5/73. Trentham R8 - 2/9 4. Gold Coast R3 - 6/75. Gold Coast R4 - 5/7 **6. Gold Coast R5 - 3/4 7. Gold Coast R6 - 10/178. Gold Coast R7 - 12/159. Gold Coast R8 - 1/3 ** 10. Gold Coast R9 - 4/6 Cheers

Cheers for the tip Peter. Nice trials - especially liked that turn of foot at the 200m mark in the latest trial. Ranch Hand who he beat in the first trial has gone well in two races and the runner up in the latest trial ran a placing in its only start. I see the NZTAB have him on the 3rd line of betting for the Slipper. Slipper (and Blue Diamond) favourite looks special - yesterday's Werribee trial was very nice.

Me! If you haven't noticed this thread started as a discussion about the suspension and the judicial process (eg. allowing David Ellis to sit in, etc..) but then another discussion spun off from that around whether Opie's riding ability warranted the effort to avoid the suspension. I think you might have even commented on that secondary discussion. As for the original topic, I don't give a toss whether Opie gets to ride on KM day or not. They estimate that he could lose $80k (might have the figure wrong) in stakes earnings. I say just fine him that much and let him take his chances.

Using this data Opie Bosson has a better career winning strike rate, when riding either the first or second favourite, than Danielle Johnson, Lisa Allpress, Jonathan Parkes, Chris Johnson and Tina Comignaghi. Haven't checked any others but suspect you would struggle to find one with a better strike rate (other than perhaps some of the tops jumps jockeys).

Let me make it really simple for you. There are two different points being discussed here: 1. Is Opie a better jockey than anyone else? 2. Is Opie better value when it comes to his performance versus the market's assessment of his likely performance? You continue to make points regarding #2. I'm asserting that this thread was about #1. The results of any analysis that you claim to have on point #2 in no way support any argument under point #1. Mardigras appears to understand the distinction, and at one point in this debate I thought you did, but alas no. By the way

You're just twisting it now. I'm saying that if say 95% of horses are not successful then it would be reasonable to expect Te Akau to have failures. What I can't say is whether their failure rate is better or worse than average. That doesn't mean that Jamie Richards is not a good judge of a jockey's riding ability. And it will go beyond Te Akau - if you polled 100 trainers in the country I'm picking the majority would have Opie as #1 in terms of riding ability.

Syndicates I've been involved with have picked an awful lot of non-performers. I don't have any stats on Te Akau's success rate relative to other buyers at the sales so I can't answer your question accurately. I suspect it is only a very very small portion of horses bred that are successful and Te Akau probably aren't exempt from picking a bunch of non performers.

"Of course they do"? Do you mean of course they pick him because he is better than others? No I don't always think that popular opinion is right, but this is the opinion of horse racing people with years of experience of assessing horses and jockeys abilities.

Do you think that might be because the owners and/or trainers of those quality horses have the pick of jockeys and they pick Opie because he is better than the others?

At least you can see that they are two different questions.

Fully understand the concept of value. What Barry can't seem to grasp is that this debate was about the owner wanting the best jockey for their horse's chance of winning the race, not the jockey who gives them the best market price relative to ability. Two different things but it's not sinking in.

Lol. You started this thread because you're worried about people being offended by a bit of negative banter and possibly leaving the site, yet you're telling me to grow a thick skin?? All good - thick skin grown. On with the comps 😊

Easy to say when it's not your posts that have been deleted 😊