SYMPOSIUM: Horsemen, jocks at odds on new losing mount fee increase

Cannon Shell · #1 12-09-2009, 02:30 PM

This is the stupidest thing to argue about. Jockeys have gotten huge increases in winning mount fees at a lot of tracks which they always seem to forget. But the horseman are too rigid in some cases. What the hell is the difference between giving the guy $50 or $60 bucks a mount?

What I really want to know is what the least effective and biggest joke of an organization in racing (a tough thing to be considering the many useless groups), the ACRI is doing setting fee schedules? They cant effectively run their own house or enforce the rules they have without coming up with complex indexes modeled after federal COLA's? That is a joke. So if the current handle trend continues or levels off the jocks will get a raise every year while everyone else takes it on the chin? C'mon man....

freddymo · #2 12-09-2009, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

This is the stupidest thing to argue about. Jockeys have gotten huge increases in winning mount fees at a lot of tracks which they always seem to forget. But the horseman are too rigid in some cases. What the hell is the difference between giving the guy $50 or $60 bucks a mount?

What I really want to know is what the least effective and biggest joke of an organization in racing (a tough thing to be considering the many useless groups), the ACRI is doing setting fee schedules? They cant effectively run their own house or enforce the rules they have without coming up with complex indexes modeled after federal COLA's? That is a joke. So if the current handle trend continues or levels off the jocks will get a raise every year while everyone else takes it on the chin? C'mon man....

Respectfully giving your trainer 10% of the winning purse vs. 10% of your net is bit off the mark as well IMO.. You win a race 30k you pay 1800 to the jock and then you pay 1800 to trainer. Jock only earns when he cashes(commission) trainer has his day rate.. I realize that nobody gets rich on 2000-3000 a month to take care of a horse but it certainly has some salary built in..

Honu · #3 12-09-2009, 02:48 PM

In England no matter the purse structure or the race meet losing jock mount is 100 pounds . Chuck how do you figure jocks have gotten a raise on winning mount fee's ? its 10% , the same as it always has been. In Canada at Woodbine there is additional 1% taken out of the winning purse for the gallop rider of every winning horse , lol be glad you dont race there.

GBBob · #4 12-09-2009, 02:54 PM

[quote=Honu]In England no matter the purse structure or the race meet losing jock mount is 100 pounds . Chuck how do you figure jocks have gotten a raise on winning mount fee's ? its 10% , the same as it always has been. In Canada at Woodbine there is additional 1% taken out of the winning purse for the gallop rider of every winning horse , lol be glad you dont race there.[/QUOTE]

We will be next year..nice to know the pie gets sliced thinner

freddymo · #5 12-09-2009, 02:58 PM

[quote=GBBob]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Honu

In England no matter the purse structure or the race meet losing jock mount is 100 pounds . Chuck how do you figure jocks have gotten a raise on winning mount fee's ? its 10% , the same as it always has been. In Canada at Woodbine there is additional 1% taken out of the winning purse for the gallop rider of every winning horse , lol be glad you dont race there.[/QUOTE]

We will be next year..nice to know the pie gets sliced thinner

You win at WB its a nice payday.. What is the ave purse 65k?

Groom 1pt Jock trainers 20pts race day 75bucks a couple more chops and it becomes a bill instead of a check

Honu · #6 12-09-2009, 03:20 PM

[quote=freddymo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GBBob

You win at WB its a nice payday.. What is the ave purse 65k?

Groom 1pt Jock trainers 20pts race day 75bucks a couple more chops and it becomes a bill instead of a check

Groom gets 1% too from the book keeper? Wow , nice place to be a back stretch worker. Really most bigger time trainers charge 12 or 13 % anyway to cover the 1% they say they give the groom the rider and the asst.

Cannon Shell · #7 12-09-2009, 03:04 PM

[quote=GBBob]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Honu

In England no matter the purse structure or the race meet losing jock mount is 100 pounds . Chuck how do you figure jocks have gotten a raise on winning mount fee's ? its 10% , the same as it always has been. In Canada at Woodbine there is additional 1% taken out of the winning purse for the gallop rider of every winning horse , lol be glad you dont race there.[/QUOTE]

We will be next year..nice to know the pie gets sliced thinner

I knew there was a reason why Tom wanted to learn to ride and is slimming down...

Honu · #8 12-09-2009, 03:17 PM

[quote=Cannon Shell]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GBBob

I knew there was a reason why Tom wanted to learn to ride and is slimming down...

LOL , we could make 3 jocks outta him !!!!! Ill hustle their books.

Cannon Shell · #9 12-09-2009, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Honu

In England no matter the purse structure or the race meet losing jock mount is 100 pounds . Chuck how do you figure jocks have gotten a raise on winning mount fee's ? its 10% , the same as it always has been. In Canada at Woodbine there is additional 1% taken out of the winning purse for the gallop rider of every winning horse , lol be glad you dont race there.

Uh when the purses contractually negotiated by the horseman go up?

Honu · #10 12-09-2009, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Uh when the purses contractually negotiated by the horseman go up?

But the 10% stays the same , and when the purses go down the 10% stays the same. Its all relative ....I really dont think many horseman (and you may be an exception )give any thought at all to the jockey's portion when they are trying to get the purses raised.

Cannon Shell · #11 12-09-2009, 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Honu

But the 10% stays the same , and when the purses go down the 10% stays the same. Its all relative ....I really dont think many horseman (and you may be an exception )give any thought at all to the jockey's portion when they are trying to get the purses raised.

What difference does it make who was thought of? The fact is that when the purses go up the jocks get more money in the same proportion to everyone else. Why should they get more? If the purses go down they have the option to leave for greener pastures. And honestly the last 20 years in he vast majority of circuits have seen an increase in purses.

Honu · #12 12-09-2009, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

What difference does it make who was thought of? The fact is that when the purses go up the jocks get more money in the same proportion to everyone else. Why should they get more? If the purses go down they have the option to leave for greener pastures. And honestly the last 20 years in he vast majority of circuits have seen an increase in purses.

How much did you pay your gallop rider per head in say 1998? How much do you pay them now? Im sure if you were paying 10$ in 1998 and were still trying to pay that now you would be having to gallop your horses yourself.
I think the fee per mount should go up just like anything else , you dont pay a groom or hot walker what you paid them 10 years ago , not if you are being lawfull anyway. Do you still charge the same day rate as you did in 1998?

Antitrust32 · #13 12-09-2009, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Honu

In England no matter the purse structure or the race meet losing jock mount is 100 pounds . Chuck how do you figure jocks have gotten a raise on winning mount fee's ? its 10% , the same as it always has been. In Canada at Woodbine there is additional 1% taken out of the winning purse for the gallop rider of every winning horse , lol be glad you dont race there.

Honestly I think 1% of all purses should be taken out and used to fund insurance for the jockeys.

Cannon Shell · #14 12-09-2009, 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

Honestly I think 1% of all purses should be taken out and used to fund insurance for the jockeys.

Spending other peoples money on a welfare program, naively sticking up for Obama based on what he "says"...are you becoming a liberal or has Riot rubbed off on you?

Antitrust32 · #15 12-09-2009, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Spending other peoples money on a welfare program, naively sticking up for Obama based on what he "says"...are you becoming a liberal or has Riot rubbed off on you?

These guys put their life on the line every time the get on the back of a tbred. AND the track / owners / trainers are basically the "employer" of the jockey.. (I know, I know, they are self employed). I find that to be a different situation than not working and asking for free insurance.

And I gotta give credit when credit is due, cause we all know we are quick to criticize when he does something we dont like.

Cannon Shell · #16 12-09-2009, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

These guys put their life on the line every time the get on the back of a tbred. AND the track / owners / trainers are basically the "employer" of the jockey.. (I know, I know, they are self employed). I find that to be a different situation than not working and asking for free insurance.

And I gotta give credit when credit is due, cause we all know we are quick to criticize when he does something we dont like.

So what? Being in a dangerous job doesnt entitle you to welfare on the backs of others. Are they your employee when they beat you on another guys horse? The Jockeys guild screwed up their insurance, it is their problem. Let them fix it. As for the mount fees, which is what this thread was about i have already said that i support higher fees though this "model rule" seems ridiclously out of touch. The insurance issue has been properly dealt with in many jurisdictions already.

Next time hold off on praising someone till you read the actual "plan" and not the speech (I'm referring to the sm business 'help'). More on that in politics...

Honu · #17 12-09-2009, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

Honestly I think 1% of all purses should be taken out and used to fund insurance for the jockeys.

In a sense at least here in California the trainers figure their Workmans Comp into their day rate , it used to be really really high out here but thru the years the horseman have taken steps to get it lowered and has come down alot.

Antitrust32 · #18 12-09-2009, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Honu

In a sense at least here in California the trainers figure their Workmans Comp into their day rate , it used to be really really high out here but thru the years the horseman have taken steps to get it lowered and has come down alot.

are the jockeys who are riding in the afternoon part of the respective trainers workmans comp?

Honu · #19 12-09-2009, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

are the jockeys who are riding in the afternoon part of the respective trainers workmans comp?

Yes the workmans comp covers all stable employees and jockeys.

Cannon Shell · #20 12-09-2009, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freddymo

Respectfully giving your trainer 10% of the winning purse vs. 10% of your net is bit off the mark as well IMO.. You win a race 30k you pay 1800 to the jock and then you pay 1800 to trainer. Jock only earns when he cashes(commission) trainer has his day rate.. I realize that nobody gets rich on 2000-3000 a month to take care of a horse but it certainly has some salary built in..

Paying 10% of gross is better than paying higher day rates in 99% of cases. Pick your poison.