HOT: Trainer John Ward - a member of the drug council and the national consortium, urged the KHRA to adopt the model policy to create uniformity for trainers and the betting public. \"Our industry needs to become unified and increase integrity,\" Ward said. (The model policy was adopted by KHRA and may even be in place in KY before the Derby.)
NOT: Kentucky HBPA president Susan Bunning - said she was disappointed the KHRA took action without first pursuing research on use of race-day therapeutic medications. (Just be thankful that she does not work for the FDA since her stance is that any drug should be considered OK to use until scientifically proved otherwise and that it is perfectly OK for Kentucky to have different rules than the other States.)
Hot: shug. on fire. has the best bred horses in the history of the game, and the guy can\'t win a damn allowance race. AND HE IS A GOOD TRAINER!!
Not: michael dickinson, obviously.
Michael D,
One thing I\'m well aware of is that Shug is almost stubborn about giving riders instructions to break and \"Settle\"his horses.With the majority of races at most tracks won by tactical horses,he may be living a bit in the past when he had a number of great filly\'s and mares who were closers.
Having said that, I once asked why none of his horses were \"sent\". He replied that they didn\'t have any early foot.
None of them??? Kinda hard to believe.
Susan Bunning is almost comical isnt\' she? Very astute observation on the difference in drug policies.
FDA: \"Prove its safe\"
Susan Bunning: \"Prove its performance enhancing because otherwise I favor usage when other jurisdictions do not\"
Susan, you silly twit. The burden of proof to administer drugs is on the trainers even in the permissive state of Kentucky. Don\'t worry all that pot and coke hasn\'t altered your thinking one bit.
miff,
yea, training for a breeding outfit like that is tough. keeping all of them sound, like shug seems to do, involves some sacrifices. i like the way he plays the game, i just can\'t bet on his horses anymore.
Post Edited (02-22-05 18:03)
IMO Shug, as a horseman, has forgotten things that some of the current crop of hot trainers(Lake, Dutrow, Mullins, Romans, etc)will never learn.
His mission for the Phipps\' has not been to win races in large numbers, but to win the types of races that will maintain/enhance the value of the Phipps\' bloodlines.
Although I never get excited about his Triple Crown prospects, it is important not to forget that Shug has won the BC Juvenile, BC Sprint, BC Mile(twice), BC Juvenile Fillies(twice), and BC Distaff (twice).
Speaking of the BC, I was at Monmouth last week for simulcasting-- they have lots of work to do. Lots of peeling paint, etc. And please, let 2006 be the last year the BC is held at a track with a turf course less than 1 mile in circumference.
Richiebee,
If you said Alan Jerkens,I would agree. Let\'s also not forget that Shug works exclusively with the offspring of the best broodmare\'s in the game.
His recent accomplishments, considering the above, is ordinary IMO.Granted his past records were great and he probably has greater horsemanship than todays Supertrainers.
I can tell you that many NY trainers call on the Chief when they just can\'t get one right.
Miff:
I have watched and admired H. Allen since the early 1970s, when Robyn Smith (Mrs.Fred Astaire)was riding for him.
He will never be given all the credit he is due by the racegoing public because of his indifference towards \"BIG EVENTS\"--The Triple Crown and the Breeders Cup.
Maybe I\'m as guilty of overanalyzing this question as I was the Gen Geo, but there\'s an old saying that no matter how thin you make the pancakes, they still have two sides, something which \"journalist\" Hegarty does not acknowledge in today\'s article.
One of the Ky HBPA\'s arguments is that there needs to be a distinction drawn between the kinds of horses someone like Ward trains, & the kinds of horses someone like Ward used to train, namely the ones who compete in the low level claiming & conditioned claiming races at Turfway & Ellis. Of those I know, the trainers & vets who are making the argument strike me as every bit as interested in the well being of, & a lot more knowledgeable about, the horses competing at that level than John Ward is. Although there was probably some exaggeration in his argument, let\'s hope that vet Piehowicz was completely wrong when he predicted that adoption of the new rules will result in the wholesale slaughter of arthritic horses which won\'t be able to compete without the medications.
It\'s hard to defend Susan Bunning\'s comment, at least standing alone, but you might want to keep in mind that her job is to represent all trainers, not just high end trainers like John Ward. Over the last couple of yrs, her position on the question has been based on some facts that I\'ve not seen contradicted by any of the racing \"journalists\" who are currently painting her as the idiot poster girl for an \"anything goes\" medication policy:
1. Ky has the highest no. of starters per race.
2. Ky has the lowest no. of breakdowns of horses racing.
3. Ky has the highest demand for its simulcasts.
4. Ky\'s equine industry allocates more revenue to drug research than any other state.
A lot of what is done in Ky is indefensible, but racing is the signature & arguably most important business in what is a very, very small state, one with a population about 1/25th of the LA metro area. Even when I am vehemently opposed to what they do, it is rare when both sides of the pancake have not been at looked at & considered carefully, something which does not seem to be part of the \"debate\" taking place on this Bd & in the racing press.
I don\'t what the story is with Shug these days, but not too long after his greatest successes, it was fairly common knowledge that he had a personal problem that was interfering with his ability to perform at his peak. Perhaps that problem is in the past now, but I don\'t think it was a coincidence that his success declined when his personal problem started.
Shug went through a divorce and health issues over the past 5-10 years. He has a highly capable assistant in Buzz Tenney(sp?)
One August night I had a drink with Shug in Saratoga and asked him why none of the great Phipps mares were throwing any early speed. He had no answer (how could he). Without doubt, I know that he trains his horses to settle back and then make a run. That style, in recent years, has been a recipe for disaster at most circuits.
If you carefully look at just about every runner from Shug\'s barn,you will generally note the running style I refer to.I know the guys a great horseman but I wonder if he has adjusted to the style that mostly dominates racing these days, tactical/positional speed.
Shugs nearly got one of the great female runners of all time beat when he decided to use the then 1 1/4 Beldame at Belmont as a prep for the BC Distaff. The :25 and :50 splits could not have helped much in getting her ready for a cutback against the world\'s best distaffers 3 weeks later.
PERSONAL ENSIGN won it despite her trainer. For other examples,see Wood Memorial and JCGC preps for EASY GOER. You would think that Shugs would have learned something after watching EG get into the Preakness pace much earlier which set him up perfectly for his Belmont romp.
I can go on and on, even adding SEEKING THE GOLD\'s tactics in the Travers and BC Classic, but I think we all get the point when it comes to \'ol Shugs.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
Mall -
Good thoughtful post. I had thoughts along the same lines when I read a recent NY Times piece saying that a major concern for Roger Clemens in deciding whether to pitch another season was the possibility that he wouldn\'t have access to Vioxx to deal with the inflammation that results when he pitches.
Reduced medication may be the way to go to level the playing field, but it will also ultimately raise the net cost of owning horses. It\'s hard to imagine that at least part of the the increased cost won\'t be passed along to bettors in some fashion.
On the flip side: (a) the prevalence of medication will lead to the breeding of more medication-reliant horses, making the problem harder to deal with; and (b) I think we\'re talking about a lot of medications other than anti-inflammatory agents.
I agree with the position of Classhandicapper (I think it was him) that ultimately the solution has to involve consolidation of race tracks and a smaller population of racing horses. Of course, if I were training low-level claimers at a small track, I wouldn\'t think much of that solution.
Bit, I agree with you. A horse is born to run. If he can\'t run without being loaded with medications he\'s not a real horse.
Medications along with speed breeding are why horses like Mr. Prospector can\'t get starters to average more than about 7 starts. Its why the Jockey Club Gold Cup and Breeders Cup Classic are 10 marks. Thats a fair distance for a three year old in May, but its not how horses have traditionally been measured for class, both here and abroad.
I\'m all for removing ALL medication from the game. If a horse is generally arthritic, he shouldn\'t be running anymore. Does the running on medication relieve his arthritic condition? I don\'t think so. I think it exaccerbates it. Maybe what I believe will result in more claiming fields, but it will also result in well bred horses that pass on good traits.
To my mind the lax medication rules along with the brittle speed types that take advantage of them place the game in questionable circumstances. And thats not even considering the harm to the bettor and fan.
CtC
Post Edited (02-23-05 11:22)
I agree that tactical speed types seem to have an advantage over the late run types that Shug usually trains (except maybe at Belmont at time). However, I think if you look at some of top trainers of the last decade that train for speed and get their horses to produce their best form early in their careers, they also have way more premature breakdowns and horses with physical problems. Maybe there\'s a balance in there.
>I agree with the position of Classhandicapper (I think it was him) that ultimately the solution has to involve consolidation of race tracks and a smaller population of racing horses. Of course, if I were training low-level claimers at a small track, I wouldn\'t think much of that solution.<
Exactly. The solution is going to make a lot of people very unhappy. I think over the long term though, smart economics will overcome jobs etc...
Class,
From a gambling standpoint I have little interest in who keeps them sound, improving, etc.I only care about which trainers send out winners and losers.
miff,
I agree with you.
The view might be dfferent from an owner\'s perspective.
Suppose you give 5 very talented highly priced horses to 2 different trainers.
Let\'s say one breaks down 2 before they get to the races, gets a series of minor wins out of 2 before they are shelved, and turns one into a star.
Is that better than a guy that has a much lower win percentage, but keeps all his horses sounder and active long enough to reach their potential?
Here is an editorial from \"Bloodhorse\" on the topic by Gary Biszantz, chairman of the Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders Association. I think he sums up the issues and the current situation in KY very nicely.
http://opinions.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=26825
Chris
Derby, thanks for posting the Bloodhorse article. I think I may have missed it if you hadn\'t. I posted it on the other board because I think it\'s important for all to see the struggle sanity(Bizantz et al) has with the inane blunderers(Ky) in our industry. raz
Has anyone ever studied the performances of Kentucky based horses when they ship to stricter drug rule states relative to the norm? (or vice versa)
Class,
Back 5 or 6 years ago,I looked at Kentucty shippers to Saratoga. They performed very far below their norm. I did not save the data, but I was tossing all of them very successfully.
On sunday in the first, he wheeled a horse back after a win in three days. Now there was no figure for the thursday race, but he went from 12,5 to 25k. The main horse in the race was Smokieisabandit, who had just paired tops around 0(neg). Crafty Player for Dutrow had run a 6 three times last year, as late as dec 28th. Watching the race was amazing, as crafty player showed speed that we had never seen before from him, and drew off with ease. My guess is Smoke regressed a bit, probably in the 2 area, and that Craft Player jumped from 6 to maybe 0, maybe lower???? I am a novice on the figures so maybe someone can help me out. Basically this is the type of sudden move up that has lots of people scratching their head.
I think he is in a dogfight for leading trainer in New York with Lake and Contessa.
I think he was the leading trainer in New York last year, and will probably be this year.
I think he claimed a filly for $50,000, won some stakes with her, and sold her to the McNairs for 7 figures.
Before everybody became obsessed with milkshakes and NSAIDs, the top trainers used to talk about winning as being a function of studying the condition book. Rich Dutrow\'s dad competed on a very tough Maryland claiming circuit against guys like King Leatherbury and Ron Alfano, the kid may have
learned something.
I think that Dutrow studied the condition book, studied the horse population stabled in New York, and surmised that the 25K race might not be that much tougher than the 12K race. He gambled, he won.
I will repeat what I have said in the past about Gill. The same holds true for Dutrow. Because they win races in great numbers, their runners undergo more testing than their less prolific counterparts. Where are the positives?
I greatly appreciate the opportunity TGJB gives me to express myself on this board even though I am a total stranger to him. I think, a bit like Classhandicapper, that the \"move up\" trainers are like Moby to TGJB\'s Ahab. The Thorograph product is a great tool for separating winners from wannabees, but should not be used as an evidentiary tool in any court-- including the court of public opinion.
You are modest to call yourself a novice, but you certainly realize that when a top trainer moves a horse up in company-- thats usually a good thing.
Post Edited (03-01-05 10:44)
Richiebee,
A great many NY players/racetrackers(including horsemen) believe that Dutrow may be using SOMETHING. He has not been caught cheating and therefore he has be be given his props until he is caught, if ever.
IMHO, it is difficult to believe that someone could go on a run like Dutrow has for the past 5 years. There are many horsemen on the NY Circuit with at least equal talent and stock that do not produce anything near Rick\'s results.
I\'ve been around too long to believe that Horsemanship alone is the total reason for the success of the Supertrainers.No disrespect reallly, but reading the condition book and spoting horses is no great secret to many, many horsemen in this game.
Thanks. I think I may start keeping track of stats like that.
Miff,
The kentucky to saratoga shipper is the worst bet I have seen. What was Reinstadler (sp) last year 1/20, he is doing the same down at GP this meet, he comes in with legit figure contenders and the dont run back. Even a guy like Howard sees his numbers did. Its a tougher meet, but I dont think you should see figure drops pretty much across the board.
This is from Brisnet Track Stats 2004 (Based on 03) Kentucky Shippers to Aqueduct totaled 85 with 11 winning (13%)itm% 38% which was identical to Horses that remained in NY and raced again in NY.
For Belmont:
Kentucky Shippers 166 28 winners at 17% and an itm 48%, Higher than the in NY rate of 13% and 38%.
Saratoga: Ky shippers 151 with 24 winners 16% and an itm% of 45% again better than the instate horses.
Bris Publishes Track Stats which are very intersting for handicappers.
I don\'t think this helps your cause however.
richiebee wrote:
> I will repeat what I have said in the past about Gill. The same
> holds true for Dutrow. Because they win races in great numbers,
> their runners undergo more testing than their less prolific
> counterparts. Where are the positives?
Exactly, until the proof is in you can\'t withhold acclaim. I think Gill should have been Eclipse winning owner. I also agree that \"Leading Trainer\" was a hard knocker.
Still the evidence is not only \"Fast and Far\" its \"Who and When\". What does Dutrow have in common with Frankel and Pletcher, besides being \"dominant\"?
CtC
If Kentucky and New York account for only 30% of the winners where does the other 70% come from? I mean a couple from monmouth, couple from socal, couple fro phil., but out of what 250 races or so last meet, 175 are won by non new york or kentucky horses (of course you have a handfull of firsters in the group)?
Ctc:
So I guess we\'re back to Allday. I guess a fun experiment would be to let Allday treat runners from the barns of Leo O\'Brien, Gary Sciacca, Scott Schwartz and Richard DeStasio(all of whom saddled more than 100 NYRA runners in 2004 with less than a 5% strike rate). These trainers would all of a sudden become winners?
There have been exactly 500 races run on the Inner Tube so far this winter. The top 10 trainers have won 185 of these races (37%). Trainers 11- 20 have accounted for another 75 races (15%).
Would Allday help, lets say, a Linda Rice (42 starts, 3 wins) who insists on using Oscar Gomez (96 starts, 5 wins), as if he were the leading rider at the meet?
Would Allday help, lets say, a Dom Schettino (39 starts, 1 win) who threw Galloping Grocer to the wolves in his first start off a layoff when many easier spots were available?
Would Allday be able to do anything for Mark Hennig (47 starts, 3 wins) who has insisted on riding Pablo Fragoso (266 mounts, 26 wins)? Fragoso HATES to bust horses out of the gate, which, on many days on the Inner, is the short path to the winners circle.
If there was a point to all of the above (thank God real racing returns tomorrow)its that some of these trainers give their animals about the same chance to win that Sonny Corleone had of driving away from the toll plaza. There\'s just nothing that Allday or anyone else could do for them, and it makes it that much easier for the top 10- 20 trainers to win.
Uh, Richie-- don\'t know if you remember, but there was a stretch of about 4 months last year where all Scettino\'s runners were getting blasted on the tote, and running their eyeballs out. Then he went cold-- think he just became a worse trainer overnight?
The reason that some trainers use the riders they do is because they don\'t have the stock to attract the better riders-- agents are handicappers, and want to line up with the stronger barns.
It was amazing how much better the Dutrow brothers got right after their father died, like, overnight. In fact, it happened so fast I got caught in the switches-- we bought two horses from them with good numbers that went to Elliot Walden, and then pretty much fell apart physically (and remember, these were horses that passed the vet). About a year later, in desperation, the owner sent one back to Dutrow, and it reeled off two or three wins. Heckuva trainer.
Pino is another one. The guy won at about 10% for a while, then at about 35% for about a year, then became a bad trainer for about 6 months, like 5%. Then he became a good trainer again, and last I looked was winning at about 40%. Heckuva trainer.
You guys, especially CH, are missing the point. If we were making decisions about a horse, the fact that one horse could move up, or that there is subjectivity involved in measuring performance, would be significant. But we are talking about large groups of horses, over large periods of time. Anybody who uses any figures can see that Dutrow\'s horses ran differently at Saratoga than at the following Belmont meet, that Zito\'s horses, for two years, ran out of their minds in Kentucky. And yes, I would love to have this conversation in a court of law-- I can\'t tell you what they are using or how, but there is no doubt at all that a significant number of trainers are moving horses up abruptly, a lot.
Saddle,
This might explain it better and I\'ll use Saratoga 2003 Stats as the example. Its based on the winners that shipped in versus the total horses that raced(from the shipping state that shipped in):
In State NY : Starters 1924, Winners 227 12%
Shippers in to Saratoga for 2003
Kentucky -151 Starters 24 Winners 16%
New Jersey -108 Starters 12 Winners 11%
Florida -67 Starters 10 Winners 15%
Virginia -71 Starters 9 Winners 13%
Delaware -87 Starters 9 winners 10%
S Cal -31 Starters 6 winners 19%
The rest were not meaningful with a total of 18 Winners from all other states.
So what this is saying to me is that Horses that come from KY win at the same rate as any other state. They do not seem to suffer shipping in from the liberal KY Laws as was being discussed. So Juicing seemed to be on an even playing field that year.
NC Tony
Yeah, Nicky in Kentucky has been a bit of a phenomena. Whatever he\'s figured out there has been effective.
There could be symbiotic relationships with medicines they are taking advantage of I suppose.
I just don\'t believe that anyone following this game (especially from a figure perspective) can look at a five year scenario where so many of the top trainers have changed positions, where race enhancers have been identified and where performance figures have suddenly gone to dizzying levels, where certain \"jump up\" vets are identified with \"jump up\" trainers and not realize that things are not all about dominance in their field.
what is going on here?
I liked Dick Dutrow. So I kind of like his sons, but they are getting absurd results and I dont think they dominated their dad in any manner.
I\'d like to see ROI figures for those KY shippers because the pool of horses that shipped may be way above average in ability than the general horse population. That would account for a decent win percentage but not tell you whether the horses were running back to their figures.
This Bris Book Track Stats New York 2004 (for 2003) did have Roi\'s. NY State ROI\'s $-0.65, KY ROI was $-0.54, NJ $-1.00, FL $+0.24, SoCal$+1.35.
NC Tony
Round and around we go.
On move-up trainers, see page 104 and 105 of Andy Beyer\'s \"Picking Winners\" where he talks about certain successful(super?)trainers moving up horses \"mysteriously and unpredictably by 5 or 10 lengths\" in the 1973-74 Maryland circuit.
Saddlecloth wrote:
> On sunday in the first, he wheeled a horse back after a win in three days. Now there was no figure for the thursday race, but he went from 12,5 to 25k. The main horse in the race was Smokieisabandit, who had just paired tops around 0(neg). Crafty Player for Dutrow had run a 6 three times last year, as late as dec 28th. Watching the race was amazing, as crafty player showed speed that we had never seen before from him, and drew off with ease. My guess is Smoke regressed a bit, probably in the 2 area, and that Craft Player jumped from 6 to maybe 0, maybe lower???? I am a novice on the figures so maybe someone can help me out. Basically this is the type of sudden move up that has lots of people scratching their head.
Saddlecloth,
One of the owners of that horse was HOT SHOT COMMODITIES BROKER. Maybe HOT SHOT COMMODITIES BROKER sent his
HARNESS GUYS, his potent vets from the Meadowlands in Jersey, to (as Springsteen has said) \"do a lil favor for him.\"
Note that this is my best guess opinion only. For entertainment purposes only. Because I\'m unable to supply video proof.
JohnTChance
John, this is important stuff-- WHAT SONG IS THE QUOTE FROM? I\'ve seen Bruce live 35-40 times, don\'t recognize it-- my first thought was \"Meeting Across The River\", but it ain\'t.
Jerry,
It\'s from Bruce\'s \"Atlantic City.\" One part goes something like:
\"Down here it\'s just winners and losers and don\'t get caught on the wrong side of that line...\"
\"I\'m tired of coming out on the losing end... so tonight I met this guy and I\'m gonna
DO A LITTLE FAVOR FOR HIM...\"
Again, for entertainment purposes only.
JohnTChance
Absolutely correct. I\'m going to go kill myself, see you later.
TGJB,
I play poker. I ran really hot for six months. Then I couldn\'t get myself arrested for the next 2 months. This week I\'m killing them again.
Was I good, then terrible, and now good again?
Obviously not.
The reality is that for 6 months I was feeling great and running great. Then my father got very sick. I was having bad stomach problems. I wasn\'t sleeping well and had some bad luck. This week I feel great.
My life is full of great and terrible meets betting horses.
There is a high variance in results among relatively low percentage things like winning poker hands or horse races. Aside from that normal randomness, crap happens in life that impacts results.
IMO, that goes double for training horses because there are events and trainer intentions that can dictate both positive and poor results for long stretches of time over and above the randomness of the performances of the horses.
To me it shouldn\'t matter if we all agree about 9 out of 10 of the \"suspect\" trainers and can make long lists of suspect horses, suspect meets, wildly improving figures etc...
It\'s the 1 we might disagree about that is the reason I\'ve been such a pain in the butt about this. I think there is \"at least one\" trainer who has been getting bashed regularly that isn\'t doing anything illegal. He\'s just got great stock, great help, great resources and is just that darn good. That\'s why his horses win so often and improve so much when he gets them.
I\'ll drop it.
Post Edited (03-02-05 20:32)
This from 1996 stats.
KY coming into Sar: 124 starts 23 wins=19% for a +0.45 ROI, CD had 23% winners coming into Sar.... BEL: KY shippers won at 17% for a -0.50 ROI and CD won 20%, AQU: KY won at 21% for a +0.95 ROI. Looking over the trainer stats for the 95-96 year.Trainers win % with a good amount of starters: J.Dowd 24%, R.Ellis 28%, Bobby Frankel 21%, F.Miller 27%, M. Moran 24%, W.Mott 24%, J.Parisella 23%, E.Perdue 26%, B.Perkins sr. 33% wow, E.Weymouth 26%...T.Pletcher 16% with 204 starters. T.Amoss 24%, I guess this is the hot Cole Norman it says Norman M C 12%, T.Ritchey 23%, W.Dollase 25%, D.W.Lukas 21%, B.Baffert 22%, D.Hofmans 23%, R.Mandella 22%, D.O\'neil 9% with 80 starts, M.Mitchell 24%
If KY is not hard on these trainers, then who are the hot jump up trainers in KY??? Seems like to me everyone I hear is from NY or Cail.???? or down south in LA.
Yes, but RD bought this hoss for 50K and ran him right back in 50 and got his butt kick, the horse had been running for higher tags before in his life. That is one thing I see in RD horses showing early speed that they hav\'nt showed before.
kev wrote:
> If KY is not hard on these trainers, then who are the hot jump
> up trainers in KY??? Seems like to me everyone I hear is from
> NY or Cail.???? or down south in LA.
All of them?
Couldn\'t resist.
Like I said name them??? Cause we all can name the so-called NY juicers and so/cal ones.
CH-- for the third or fourth time:
You are WAY underestimating the level of analysis I am putting into this. I used winning percentages because that\'s what the lay person understands, but we have set up a function here that lets me pull all a trainer\'s starters for any time period I want, and look at the sheets on all the horses. I do this to keep me from making the kind of mistake I made in having clients buy two horses from the Dutrows.
The move-up pattern is easiest to see with those who get lots of horses from others, or lose them to others-- Dutrow, Amoss, Norman, Mullins, Lake, Vaders, Pino, Mitchell, etc. It\'s also easy to see with another group, when all their horses with established tops get faster at the same time-- Frankel, McLaughlin, Schettino for a while last summer, etc. I do NOT make decisions about this kind of thing based on small, statistically insignificant samplings-- but when I see an unusual move-up from a new face, I keep an eye on it.
What I also do, and what several others within the industry who are trying to stop the problem do (I\'m talking organizations like TOBA), is to try and see if there are cause and effect relationships. It became clear very quickly that Allday was the vet for many of the above, as well as for Byrne when he won the 15 straight at CD and had the two 2yo champs the same year, as well as Paulson for a long time (don\'t know if he still is, but some of their trainers have done a whole lot better while training for them than before or after), as well as Stronach (he went there with Byrne, was stable manager there for a while, I don\'t know about now). One of Allday\'s more endearing traits is his inability to keep his mout shut-- he has directly told THREE different people I know that he is moving horses up, and that he developed use of EPO while working for Paulson.
So when I hear that a trainer who doesn\'t claim or lose horses also is using Allday, I also draw certain conclusions. For example, Allday is as far as I know still working for Pletcher-- and my guess is that if I went back a couple of years and started looking at sheets, I could pinpoint pretty closely when he started.
Does this mean that these guys are doing something illegal, or are even using drugs? Not necessarily. Does it mean that they have something that instantly moves horses up? Yes.
By the way, Kev-- I agree that Kentucky is not one of the worst offending states in this regard, the reason being what I said yesterday, that the drugs permitted there but not elsewhere are not performance enhancers. Having said that, Amoss and Romans come to mind as move-up trainers, and there are others who I\'m not sure about since I don\'t watch the circuit year round that closely.
TGJB wrote:
One of Allday\'s more endearing
> traits is his inability to keep his mout shut-- he has directly
> told THREE different people I know that he is moving horses up,
> and that he developed use of EPO while working for Paulson.
This is hearsay. \"He said, she said\". To be admissable in court the three individuals would have to come forward and testify what they heard Allday say.
If it\'s true, its pretty damning stuff, still the statement has to be identified with a positive in the horse and if I remember right EPO is naturally occurring and they have to look for an \"indicator\" to determine if its been administered.
If you can\'t discuss the elusive quality of proof and the difficulties of evidence in a humourous but intelligent way, you might as well shelve discussing it at all.
CtC
TGJB,
I think it would be better if we just drop the subject because we probably agree about 95% or more of everything. I think we are more or less miscommunicating or have a different view on how to go about dealing with the issue.
1. I would prefer that we identify all the move up trainers so we can use that information profitably in our handicapping.
2. I would prefer that the industry implements changes (all your ideas are great) to eliminate illegal drugs and other performance enhancers. They should probably put some limitations on a lot of the stuff that\'s legal too.
3. I would prefer that we acknowledge that not all trainers, assistants, vets, and other handlers have equal ability and resources. Therefore, connection changes can account for changes in a horse\'s speed figures/form.
4. I would prefer that we acknowledge that the sharp changes in results a barn sometimes gets in terms of win percentage and/or speed figures could be related personal problems among key personnel, injuries/recoveries, sickness in the barn/recovery, synchronized form cycles for the entire barn, pointing for specific meets, random runs of good or bad luck etc...
Obviously number #1 is the most important thing for handicappers and #2 is the most important for the industry.
#3 and #4 just helps \"some of us\" avoid the presumption of guilt (just in case the consensus is wrong) and the tendency to explain every single form change in terms of drugs/illegal activities etc...
IMHO, #3 and #4 are both at work even in the barns you and I are very suspicious of. It\'s not all or nothing.
Post Edited (03-03-05 19:42)
You folks have made my day and given me a great chuckle. I went to Texas A&M College of Veterinary Medicine with \"White Mercedes\" or as we knew him Steve \"Know it Allday\". He could not keep is mouth shut at that time either. I was a practicing Equine Veterinarian for 17 years and since change vocations. One of my new current clients in the High Technology Industry has become a big player in the TB Racing Industry........it made me wonder what happened to good ole Steve. I did a google search and came up with your comments. Steve was a little above average academically in Vet School but very driven and had a big ego. You do not have to be an A+ student to be successful at anything and being driven is a good thing. Too bad Steve funneled that effort to being a \"syringe for hire\" instead of something you did not have to constantly look over your shoulder. I am not \"warm and fuzzy\" about horses but do feel the \"good ones\" should be taken care of properly and admired so it is so hard to breed, raise and train one to be successful and not fall to injury or death. Others that are not so good have a place either in another dicipline, a pet or as dog food. I guess anytime a lot of money is involved the industry is always very vunerable to methods less than honest. We see the same types of \"things\" in the \"show\" horse industry. I always thought our practice was very leading edge in our knowledge and methods of practrice/treatment. However, I had trainers ask me about pharmaceuticals I never heard of or could even find in the literature.............nor did I care to know more.
I think I am better off that ole Steve and I can sleep at nite.
Happy Trails!
Found it...for JohnTChance...it was Texas A&M per the poster...
Re: Evidence at Trial, the Usual Suspects
Posted by: Trigger (IP Logged)
Date: March 17, 2005 05:51PM
You folks have made my day and given me a great chuckle. I went to Texas A&M College of Veterinary Medicine with \"White Mercedes\" or as we knew him Steve \"Know it Allday\". He could not keep is mouth shut at that time either. I was a practicing Equine Veterinarian for 17 years and since change vocations. One of my new current clients in the High Technology Industry has become a big player in the TB Racing Industry........it made me wonder what happened to good ole Steve. I did a google search and came up with your comments. Steve was a little above average academically in Vet School but very driven and had a big ego. You do not have to be an A+ student to be successful at anything and being driven is a good thing. Too bad Steve funneled that effort to being a \"syringe for hire\" instead of something you did not have to constantly look over your shoulder. I am not \"warm and fuzzy\" about horses but do feel the \"good ones\" should be taken care of properly and admired so it is so hard to breed, raise and train one to be successful and not fall to injury or death. Others that are not so good have a place either in another dicipline, a pet or as dog food. I guess anytime a lot of money is involved the industry is always very vunerable to methods less than honest. We see the same types of \"things\" in the \"show\" horse industry. I always thought our practice was very leading edge in our knowledge and methods of practrice/treatment. However, I had trainers ask me about pharmaceuticals I never heard of or could even find in the literature.............nor did I care to know more.
I think I am better off that ole Steve and I can sleep at nite.
Happy Trails!