view raw text
GILPIN ON JOCKEY FEES : - i English Trainer Decries Extravagant Retainers Paid to Riders. !. . 9 t u in Thinks That Biff Fees and Presents Have a o ! Tendency to Spoil Careers of 3Iny Prom- a I Islng Youngsters In the Profession. I 1 . li f P. P. Gilpin, the English trainer, writing in h the London Weekly Dispatch, has the follow- n Ing to say about jockey fees and retainers: A jockeys life is a strenuous one, notwithstanding that many of them do their travel- s ing as luxuriously as they may. This, I jj think, is pardonable to a great extent, if one considers for a moment that they may be f riding one day at Musselburgh and the next i at Bath or at Salisbury, and the day after g at Doncaster. Hence they must travel long i distances by night and day in trains or in 1 motor cars, and the latter, though very con- j venient, take a great deal out of one. c I often hear contrasts drawn between the c I present conditions and lives of the jockeys r of the old times, who traveled on their hacks -y with their saddles strapped to their backs i from one meeting to another on the move sometimes for days and who did not ride a race once for the five times of the present day jockeys. In those days there was noth- . ing like the same amount of racing as there is at the present time when the continual j strain of riding day after day at distances often 200 miles apart must make great de- , mands upon the strength and stamina of our , jockeys. DIFFERENCE IX CONDITIONS. 1 But the difference in the conditions under which the jockeys of the past and the present carry on their avocation is no wider than ; tho earnings and rewards of the profession. Take a glance back across a century of i ,turf history and visualize the conditions. ; jProm 17S3 tolSSl Frank Buckle was a great ; favorite and one of the three inflexibly hon- ; est jockeys whom Gully declared were the only ones he had known who never deviated from the paths of strictest integrity and 1 John Gully knew because he was as intimately acquainted with the underworld of - , the turf as he was with that part of it which i Is more apparent to all. The Drpid in Post and Paddock says that there never was a more brillant quartet than l Buckle, Chifney, Robinson and Harry Edwards. Buckle, right up to the end of his long career and he rode until his sixty-fifth 1 year preserved an unshaken nerve, and it la a telling commentary on the different conditions that prevail today that all four died 1 in comparative poverty. No doubt we hear of successful modern jockeys finishing their days in straitened circumstances, but generally it is the result of extravagance and reckless living. Certainly they have every opportunity to provide for the days when 1 they cease to ride. ALL DO NOT nAVE BIG RETAINERS. The, jockeys of today earn incomes that t would In the ordinary walks of life be considered " most substantial. All do not enjoy r the big retainers that are referred to now r and again in the press ; these are reserved I for the four or five jockeys who are at the 5 top of the tree and in most request, men of f a certain weight and experience, whose services - are likely to be of great value to their r employers in the classic races. But any of the more important jockeys, . even if they never have a retainer, can earn i a great deal of money, because they ride in a large number of races which, though they are only at fees of three or five guineas, , soon mount, up to a great deal of money. . Moreover, a jockey is entitled to charge his s ordinary expenses at any meeting at which i he rides, so that if he is at all careful lie need not really spend any money himself. Large retaining fees are given to a few. . For instance, we know of a jockey who was s said to have a retainer of some 0,000 last I I j year and the year before, and who received 1 unusally large presents for riding in the e biggest races in this country and in France. !. This, of course, does not end matters, for r he would have earned a considerable sum n for riding horses for other people from whom n he had no retainer and from whom he would d .in most cases certainly receive presents, when n .he was successful ; those presents, when a a jockey rides a large number of winners, 3 would naturally total another large sum. SECOND AND THIRD RETAINERS. Besides a first retainer at a large figure, a jockey sometimes has ,a second and even n a third retainer at likely two-thirds and one- third of the amount paid him for the first jt call on his services. I must say I do not view these large retainers to jockeys with favor. With some they are undoubtedly calculated to turn their lr heads, and I am afraid they certainly do so in many cases. I do not think that they are really appreciated, and that often the e donor of the big retainer, and still more c frequently of the large present, has reason to regret his openhandedness. Often that lt excess of generosity is misconstrued. I am 11 altogether in favor of showing appreciation n for services rendered ; I thing that good serv- , ices merit due recognition, but that it is a mistake to exaggerate their value. Several trainers have made a good thing out of their apprentices and out of appren- i- . tices who have been brought into prominence by others from whom they have pur-. , chased the indentures of these apprentices. s. In fact, those to whom I allude and I can h! recall several in the last few years who have e made a regular business of it have openly ly . acknowledged that they made a great deal il more out of these apprentices than they ever 2r did by their training. I can easily conceive ,-e this to be so, knowing what large sums arc re often paid for a call upon the services of 3f . these lads. Only the other week a case came ie to my knowledge where a prominent owner 2r was anxious to obtain first call on one of Df the younger jockeys and was willing to pay Ly a substantial sum for that privilege. This notwithstanding he was unable to obtain the lads services, because an even higher fee was paid by another patron of the game. Competition, of course, always raises prices in matters of this kind, but, as I said before, I do not favor these very big retainers. With one or two exceptions they are far in excess of the value of the services rendered.
