Here We Go -- Skippin' the Cup

[Catalin]

1) Why wouldn\'t he show up?
See Peace Rules, Sightseek

2) Why wouldn\'t he run his #?
See Sightseek(2003), You, Alderbaran, Heat Haze, Medaglia D\'oro (2002), Denon, etc.

[Silver Charm]

You mean those Negative Threes Sightseek was running at Belmont Park on a BUM ANKLE were chemicaly enhanced???


>I wonder, were people saying this about Bob B. when he was on fire in the late 90\'s???

Go back and look at Bafferts record in the Breeders Cup. Its terrible.



Post Edited (10-14-04 08:14)

[bdhsheets]

Pairing up -6\'s should undo him, a built in excuse if there ever was one. Toss in, this being his first effort at 10 panels and he\'s ripe for an upset. But, if he runs within 3pts of his top he\'s a contendaah and likely winnah.

Perfect Drift hasn\'t been the same this year, same with Pleasantly Perfect since Dubai. Dynever has been ill and hasn\'t broken thru his 3yo top.

[jbelfior]

BDH SHEETS---


Exactly. BC CLASSIC is wide open. Perhaps another VOLPONI looms this year.

I think GZ is too keyed up early to get the 1 1/4....reminds me of MDO\'s running style which led to him being virtually unbeatable at 1 1/8, bot 0 for at 1 1/4.


Good Luck,
Joe B.

[HP]

How about JAIL for some of these guys, and yes, I am serious.  These guys worry about suspensions, if you put a few of them in jail for 30 days that may be the real wake up call.  A vet who administers illegal drugs to a horse is breaking the law and should go to jail for a lot longer than 30 days.  That\'s sick.  

I can\'t understand how this \"common knowledge\" which even extends to people knowing who some of the vets are doesn\'t ever expand into full blown criminal investigations.  I don\'t know why this kind of thing isn\'t followed up on by the cops as opposed to just the industry itself.  Wall Street describes itself as \"self policing\" through the NASD, but if you go far enough, they come for you with the handcuffs.  

Find the vets and bust them, and some of the trainers should get it after the positives too.  HP

[asfufh]

HP, That\'s what is weird about this--at this point, according to this board, there are at least 20 trainers using \"magic\". Say, each trainer has 5 assistant trainers and other employees (probably low) that would have to have knowledge of the \"magic\". Assuming my figures are in the ballpark, that would mean there are at least 100+ people involved in this \"crime network/conspiracy\" over the last several years.
It doesn\'t seem logical to me that not one \"magic\" employee has gone to the track/cops/newspapers with proof of the wrongdoing (even the mob has its stoolies).
Also, why hasn\'t one of the big money/big time non-magic (presumedly independent)owners sued the tracks for allowing free rein to \"magic\" trainers on the basis the owner is getting unfairly screwed out of purse money? .
Something doesn\'t add up. Asfufh

[SJU5]

Since we can include ALL the data we want on TG sheets and DRF, why not post the VETS NAME also...we might be better off playing the vet angle more than recent speed figs or trainer angles!

1st time vet
2 nd time vet

30-90 day layoff with this vet

Shipper with the new vet

1st time off the claim...get the idea!

[TGJB]

Until such time as they make the vet accountable (like the trainer), there could be several vets treating a horse. If they ever do-- and list it on the program-- we\'ll be all over it.

[kev]

Bobby F. by the way, yes he has what only 2 wins but he ranks 3rd on all time money earn. In BC races, alot of his horses runs 2nd-3rd-4th, thats damn good for me. These are the cream of the crop horses that he runs against on BC not a G1 at Del Mar with 5 horses. There you go.

[kev]

Need to check your stats, Bob B. is rank 8th or 9th on all time money earn. He has ran 40 horses and 19 (almost)half came in the top 4. Just like I wrote about Bobby F. these races are alot tougher than some 5 horse race at Del Mar. I\'ll thake 19 out of 40 horses running in the top 4 out of mostly 14 horse fields.

[derby1592]

Kev,

This is post from last year on this very topic. It makes a decent case against the argument that Frankel\'s horses run well in the BC but they just get beat because of tougher competition.

Chris

*****
Author: derby1592
Date:   10-30-03 18:49

As I have said on past occasions on this board, I am very concerned that drug use is prevalent even at the highest levels of racing and I know that many others, including top trainers and owners share this concern. What is encouraging is that people at the top levels of racing are finally starting to take real action. For example:

1) They announced that this year\'s BC would have new extensive, enhanced drug testing

2) Next year all graded stakes will be required to do similar extensive enhanced drug testing

3) Beginning on 11/1, NY will begin testing for EPO and suspending horses (interesting penalty) that test positive.

4) This is more talk than action right now but there is an initiative underway to try and standardize drug rules across racing jurisdictions.

Who knows what sort of impact these changes will have either short term or long term but at least they are doing something and I applaud them for that.

My biggest argument for really cracking down on this is that EVERYONE who excels today is immediately under suspicion. In some cases, the suspicion is probably justified and in others it is probably not. Until/unless racing gets cleaned up and the cheaters start getting caught and punished it will be very difficult to distinguish talent from chemistry.

Absent a \"smoking gun\" is there any good \"objective\" way to spot the bad guys? Because of all the \"noise,\" probably not; however, looking at the sheet figures earned by horses may provide some insight.

For illustration purposes, let\'s pick the most visible and most controversial trainer as an example: Bobby Frankel. He has had a phenomenal year. Nobody will argue that. Is it because his training ability and racing stock are vastly superior to all of his peers or is it for some other less laudable reason?

I don\'t claim to have a definitive answer but results from this year\'s Breeder\'s Cup certainly help fuel existing suspicions. True, it is only one day and there are other possible explanations for the poor showing by most of his runners, but the objective numbers seem to tell a compelling story.

Let\'s start by looking at the last 90 day stats. Keep in mind this is all recent data.

According to the new \"sneak preview\" TG stats - in the last 90 days, Frankel had 76 starters and 22% of those runners ran a new top and only 5 percent of them ran an \"X.\" That means that only 4 horses ran an X for Frankel during the last 90 days! Compare that to the overall average for all starters (36% ran X) or for all stakes horses (30% ran X).

Now let\'s look at the figs earned compared to the tops for all the Frankel runners in the 2003 BC:

Horse, Top, BC Fig, Category (as defined in Sneak Preview)

Sightseek, -3, 3.75, X
Peace Rules, -0.5, 12.25, X
Aldebaran, -4, 1.75, X
Midas Eyes, -2.75, 5.5, X
Heat Haze, 2.75, 4, Off
Megahertz, 4, 4.25, Pair
Tates Creek, 2, 5.75 (lame), Off - but a quarter point from an X
Medaglio D'oro, -2.25, -1.5, Pair

In summary, Bobby Frankel had as many runners X in the first 4 Breeder\'s Cup races as in his last 76 starters! You could certainly make a lot excuses for his BC starters including distance, competition, surface, pace, layoffs, weather, racing luck, etc. but you have to figure that his prior 76 runners had faced just as many such negative circumstance and potential excuses and still only 4 of them ran an X.

Even with this small sample, it is fairly obvious that there was probably some other \"intervention\" that led to the dramatic change in the numbers. The most obvious, at least to me, is the much publicized, new, rigorous testing for this year\'s BC. This may not be THE explanation and, as many have already stated, we will never really know but it is nice to think that just maybe the latest actions will \"level\" the playing field in graded stakes races and talent will shine through over chemistry (at least for a while).

Cheers.

Chris

[kev]

Why not use what you call those \"excuses\", first of all, out of all those horses I must say Peace Rules has to be toss I laugh at that one, him running on the turf. So is the 1st number you listed the last # before the BC looks that way, I don\'t have TG numbers but I do have the Rags for that day. It all depends on what you though that day and how your style of capping is. Most sheets players say horses should bounce after running a top, alot of those horses was coming into the race off a new top or a repeat top. This has to be broken down by a case by case thing. Bobby F. starters for the BC 57-2-8-7-9, this needs to be talked about before the race happens. So this year let\'s talk about his horses and see if we can come up with the horses we think of his that should run well or not run well. I don\'t use the TG or rags anymore I have my own way\'s.

[derby1592]

Kev,

I think you are missing the point. Frankel had only 4 horses \"X\" in the 76 starters immediately prior to the BC. I am sure a lot of them were also coming off tops or stepping up in class or changing surfaces, etc. and still only 4 of the 76 ran an X.

The first 4 Frankel horses that ran on BC day all ran an X. No matter how many excuses you make for each horse -  4 out of 4 as compared to 4 out of 76 is a strong indication that something suddenly changed on BC day.

Time to move on.

Good luck with this year\'s BC.

Chris

[Catalin]

JB:

Its not like we don\'t have enough other stuff going on, but it would be interesting to have George run trainer fig profiles for ONLY a trainers BC starters.  eg.

Frankel  BC Starters 75
Top
Pair
Off
X

Catalin

1. Breeder\'s Cup fields are much deeper and talented than the typical Graded stake - even Grade I stakes. By definition, some very talented horses will finish poorly and not run back to their typical figures because of race development, race demands, and the number of contenders. This goes beyond ground loss. To expect as many horses as usual to run back to their typical figures in races like these is just plain naive. Horses are not machines and everything isn\'t part of some neat formula.  

2. Frankel is one of the best trainers in the world at spotting his horses properly. When you go to the BC, you aren\'t finding the softest and best spot for your horse. That means that your stats will automatically decline because you are giving up one of your biggest edges.

3. Sample sizes of the type we are talking about are often meaningless. It should be expected that some \"great\" trainers will have have \"poor\" BC records and some \"average\" ones will have \"great\" records.

I am not making any claims one way or the other about Frankel being a juicer, but the above is a list of things that should be considered.



Post Edited (10-15-04 10:36)