Drug-busting

[msola1]

Kev,

It would be helpful to know the same stats for all trainers. These stats are not especially useful since there is nothing with which to compare them.

Mike

>My theory on this is the fact that grass racing is all about late pace which may detract from the advantage gained by \"juiced-up\" horses on dirt. <

I agree.

IMO, the evidence that turf racing is very different from dirt racing is almost overwhelming. Yet many horseplayers handicap them the same way.

Granted, if you are focusing on in form horses with fast final time speed figures you are going to stumble onto a lot of winners on turf.

However, the demands of turf racing are much different than the demands of dirt racing.  That is why we see 3yo fillies beat Grade 1 older males on turf at 12 furlongs in Europe and they would get carted away in an ambulance if they tried that on dirt in the US. A top notch fresh filly can run very fast for 3 furlongs and some of the time that\'s all they need to do on turf.

Turf races often turn into a 3F sprint between very fresh horses that weren\'t used much pre stretch. It\'s often all about position and closing kick acceleration.



Post Edited (02-26-05 14:17)

[twoshoes]

Kev,

From memory Spoken Fur\'s line looked something like this. A move forward in her last start for prior connections to a 5 or so from a previous top of 7 or 8. Frankel gave her five or six weeks and she exploded to around a 1 and change and stayed right around that level (1-2.)I don\'t recall what her Alabama number was offhand but I believe it brought her back to around a 5. I\'m sure somebody can check on this but that was what I remember. Point being, this is not an isolated incident. His private purchases tend to move forward dramatically off a freshening and then in typical Frankel fashion don\'t bounce. I\'m not accusing him of cheating but I am saying I can understand the suspicion that it\'s not all due to quality horseflesh. Maybe he has a training program that these horses respond to - like Dutrow.

Mark

A few points.

No matter what you think about the issue of drugging, it\'s obvious that not all trainers, grooms, and vets are of equal ability.

Even on the naive assumption that everyone was being honest, we should expect that when horses move from weaker connections to better connections they would often improve, sometimes sharply, and for a period of time.

One must also examine stock carefully. Once a trainer is successful, he/she will tend to attract better stock. He/she might have the ability to choose specific horses that they KNOW are not being handled properly and can be improved upon. That in itself is an important skill and a sign of excellent horsemanship.  

If a trainer is getting a barn full of well bred lightly raced horses to pick from, you should expect that he/she would develop many of them into top notch horses that would continue to improve.

That\'s why I tend to take a contrarian view on this subject. I\'m not naive enough to think that a lot of guys aren\'t cheating.

I\'m just not so quick to accuse people with spectacular training records and a reputation for improving horses as certain drug users/cheaters.

Horsemanship, training, vetting etc.... are all skills. Some people are great at it and some people stink.

I also have a problem with using only only one set of speed figures (or even just speed figures) to evaluate thoroughbred perfomance and then using those subjective views to make the case that someone is cheating.

Evaluating performace is obviously highly subjective. IMHO, many horses that some people think are running spectacular races actually are not (and vice versa). That doesn\'t mean I\'m right, but we should at least be able to agree that before we cast stones about a horse running an improved performance, it should be so clear that everyone agrees with that point of view no matter whose figures they are using or not using.



Post Edited (02-26-05 12:18)

It should be pointed out that Spoken Fur was a relatively lightly raced 3yo filly. It is not at all unusual for lightly raced 3yos to explode forward. That goes double if it just moved into a more skilled barn and the trainer had 6 weeks to work with it.

Now I am not taking the position that everyone is wrong about Frankel. I\'m just saying that if I was the judge and you all brought the Spoken Fur case to my courthouse I\'d throw everyone out of my court so I had time to make the double.

[twoshoes]

CH,

I\'m not in this for an argument. It was just one case regarding Frankel that came to mind. I agree the that a 3yo filly, especially one with a nice line like this filly had could be expected to move forward for a better trainer with good rest. This was a lot of movement (4 points from her previous top and 8 points from her first start of the year.) And she didn\'t react. Make of that what you will. I\'m not pursuing a court case and would certainly not want you to miss the double.

Mark

twoshoes,

No problem. Hey for all I know Spoken Fur was juiced. I remember that race because Frankel was moving a lot of horses up at that time and he was making my life handicapping stakes races somewhat miserable. :-)

It just seems to me that some people jump to conclusions very quickly so I find myself taking the contrarian position all the time. :-)



Post Edited (02-26-05 14:20)

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

Yeah, Dutrow has a secret training program alright. Its called the \"Junkie Program\" or \"How to hit a vein in the dark\".

[kev]

Well #3 is compare to other trainers ( it\'s on there). #4 is 9.2% for all trainer\'s. Number 1 and 2 are just basic, you should know that overall trainer\'s don\'t hit at 21% on the grass and most trainer\'s can\'t win at the high rate for claiming horses. It just shows that on grass they are still hitting good, but not as strong as on the dirt. Coming off long layoff\'s they do better than the norm. but can\'t get that high win rate, compare to other times. Your right I don\'t know what the avg. is for claiming or grass, but like I said it\'s not that high.

I\'d be willing to bet almost anything that the trainer change stats (or at least the horses form change) will be more impressive if you only look at those horses that went from a non-ST to a ST (clearly a favorable trainer change). One would suspect that going from one ST to another ST would not improve the horse.    

I\'d be willing to bet that trainer changes from a ST to a non-ST show that the horses tend to deteriorate.

The 1st time start stats could easily be influenced by stock.

I also think Jerry has the right idea when he says you can\'t just look at win percentages because some guys have better stock and spot their horses much better. You have to look for changes in the horses form.

[Saddlecloth]

I dont know about everyone else here, but I am making alot of money, everyone is still betting juice mullins horses.  I will play them all back next month.

[Saddlecloth]

can he possibly lose the 9th, he has the best figure horse again

[Michael D.]

neither of his horses figured in the 7f stakes. this is very interesting though.
the public has no fear here in the 8th, making his horse the 5/2 fav...... things are getting very interesting will all of the new testing going on.

[Michael D.]

stopped at the end as the 2/1 fav (was on two weeks rest though)...... 1/25



Post Edited (02-26-05 19:14)

[Saddlecloth]

that horse actually ran well, but still the thing about juice mullins horses is despite the pace and rest they always kicked on, they are not anymore.