KING OF THE ROXY...

[Lance]

Great post, Richie. Thanks for sharing your insight. Your points are very well taken.

Winning percentages aside, I still find it uncanny how Pletcher horses seem to re-break in the lane so often; it\'s like they suddenly find a second wind. I remember repeatedly witnessing the same thing with Frankel horses a few years back (Medaglia D\'Oro in the San Felipe comes to mind first), but his current runners don\'t seem to display this tendency nearly as much as they used to. Upon reflection, I realize that what I\'m probably seeing with the typical Pletcher horse isn\'t an animal \"re-breaking,\" but rather one who is still running evenly when others are backing up. As Mr. Irwin so eloquently stated in his 2002 editorial, \"Darbepoetin and EPO do not make a horse run faster, but allow a horse to delay going into oxygen debt and decelerate at a slower rate.\"

Re. the upcoming Derby: I know that Kentucky has -- or at least had -- a reputation for liberal medication policies, but I\'m wondering if perhaps they (and other tracks) haven\'t figured something out in regards to surveillance on the biggest race days. Is there a reason Pletcher and Frankel are 0-fer in the Derby and a combined 6 for 90 in the Breeders Cup, despite saddling an inordinate number of short-priced steeds? Are there more barn-security/surveillance measures in place for the Derby than there are for your average Saturday race card?

Just questions running through my head...

[miff]

Lance wrote:

\"Re. the upcoming Derby: I know that Kentucky has -- or at least had -- a reputation for liberal medication policies, but I\'m wondering if perhaps they (and other tracks) haven\'t figured something out in regards to surveillance on the biggest race days. Is there a reason Pletcher and Frankel are 0-fer in the Derby and a combined 6 for 90 in the Breeders Cup, despite saddling an inordinate number of short-priced steeds? Are there more barn-security/surveillance measures in place for the Derby than there are for your average Saturday race card?\"


Lance, the answer is no, but the conspiracy idiots wll tell you differently. there was something that the BC was not going to test for shakes or something and people got upset.Shakes alone are probably one of the more meaningless paranoias around the game, there\'s much better illegal stuff. Don\'t know all that much about Frankel but he seems to race them when they are ready and spaces horse real well. Does he use drugs, no one knows.

In the case of Pletcher,it has to be a illegal drug conspiracy involving many staff, assistants and vets.His stable is spread across the country and he does NOT micro manage.You would think that a disgruntled employee would blow the whistle,no? I wonder if he wins at app 25% because of the following:

He learned from one of the most accomplished trainers in history D. Wayne.

His owners spend millions each year to replenish stock and he arguably has the most diversified and talented barn, year after year.

Angel sits on most in the am(advising) and Johnny V and Garret Gomez ride in the afternoon.

He gets horse like Lawyer Ron sent to him.


As far as rebreaking, it\'s in your mind from getting beat by his horses.Blood dope and designer super pain drugs are out there and if he using them he must be a poor horseman to only win at 25%. Give that barn to Tricky, he\'ll win at 50%.

Mike

[Lance]

Mike: Thanks for the reply. Good points about TAP\'s barn. I\'ve an open mind about the whole thing -- but I also have open eyes, and the rebreaking thing isn\'t merely in my mind. I\'ve been watching horses run for far too long. When a horse is being scrubbed on at the quarter pole and looks like he\'s finished, but somehow he keeps finding more -- well, that just looks fishy to me.. Sure, some horses need to be ridden like bicycles a long way out. Great Communicator was like that. But Pletcher has an inordinate amount of runners who demonstrate this quality: they\'re done, and then they\'re not.

[marcus]

Barry , Just when my migraine was going  away ... I almost went w/ KOTR in pool#2 except i didn\'t like the 2 yo pattern ( 02X and all ) or price . i draw the line at 80-1 in futures - though it doesn\'t always happen that way however  and 50-1 to 60-1 sometimes gets the flyer ... good luck and keep running \'King if he\'s well , imo - his #\'s might just hang in there ...

[davidrex]

Miff,
Your response should be required reading for all the poor suffering b..tards that hang out on this forum.   WELL DONE

[Lance]

Miff: A while back, I asked, \"Is there a reason Pletcher and Frankel are 0-fer in the Derby and a combined 6 for 90 in the Breeders Cup, despite saddling an inordinate number of short-priced steeds? Are there more barn-security/surveillance measures in place for the Derby than there are for your average Saturday race card?\"

You stated that \"the answer is no.\" Do you still believe this? Do you still believe that my observations about Pletcher horses rebreaking is just \"in [my] mind\"?

The reason I\'m revisiting this is because of something Jerry posted today: \"buried somewhere in the coverage of the Derby was a story about 24/7 surveillance of the horses. That could have been a factor.\"

I\'m curious if his words, coupled with the dismal performances (again) of the Pletcher horses, have you wondering if the so-called \"conspiracy idiots\" might be onto something.

[richiebee]

Lance:

As one conspiracy theorist to another, I will say you are asking some good
questions. But maybe one more needs to be asked: If we suspect trainers such as
Frankel, Dutrow and Pletcher of having an advantage, and that advantage is
neutralized by more stringent testing and surveillance on big race days such as
the Derby and BC, why aren\'t more of the testing and surveillance regimens
utilized on a day-to-day basis at all tracks?

1) Because these trainers with large stables have too much influence over
Racing,and the powers that be are afraid of offending them?

2) Because there is no unity among Racing jurisdictions. If Delaware Park for
example adopted strict testing, and Pennsylvania and New Jersey did not, there
would be a mass exodus to the north, and no track wants to be in that position.

I think it is important to note that many thought that Detention Barns were
going to level the playing field, but I think if you look at the trainer
standings, especially in NY and California, you will see that the balance of
power has not shifted.

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

Lets lay down some conspiracy framework.

I know Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. I\'m certain of it, but then I took the time to read the Warren Commission Report.

Its clear that New York City was not attacked by our own government on 9-11. Its equally clear that government was negligent in allowing it to happen and criminal in misrepresenting it to America.

I can\'t think of any other consipiracies, because my mind doesn\'t work that way.

On the other hand, Todd Pletcher is using drugs to cheat and if it wasn\'t for Steve Allday and his \"titrations\" (Which I believe are a combination to increase red blood cells and reduce latic acid) Todd Pletcher would be just another trainer that might have to wait two or five years to get back in the Derby instead of proclaiming, (As he did Saturday), \"I\'ll be back with a dozen next year\". He may be back, but I believe more thorough and more accurate blood tests await him.

The real shame is that outfits like Team Valor that should know better stoop to embrace him and owners that only know their millions don\'t have a clue he is cheating.

Lance Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Miff: A while back, I asked, \"Is there a reason
> Pletcher and Frankel are 0-fer in the Derby and a
> combined 6 for 90 in the Breeders Cup, despite
> saddling an inordinate number of short-priced
> steeds? Are there more barn-security/surveillance
> measures in place for the Derby than there are for
> your average Saturday race card?\"
>
> You stated that \"the answer is no.\" Do you still
> believe this? Do you still believe that my
> observations about Pletcher horses rebreaking is
> just \"in  mind\"?
>
> The reason I\'m revisiting this is because of
> something Jerry posted today: \"buried somewhere in
> the coverage of the Derby was a story about 24/7
> surveillance of the horses. That could have been a
> factor.\"
>
> I\'m curious if his words, coupled with the dismal
> performances (again) of the Pletcher horses, have
> you wondering if the so-called \"conspiracy idiots\"
> might be onto something.

[fkach]

This is not a defense of the mentioned trainers. It\'s a statement about the analysis one should do related to these kinds of stats.

One of the things that allows Pletcher and Frankel to generate such high win percentages is that they spot their horses where they can win by shipping around the country and avoiding tough spots. That\'s a skill that gets totally neutralized for races like the Derby and BC. Those races are automatically MUCH TOUGHER spots than the races that those guys tend to avoid during the year unless they have \"the horse\" they believe will win. So it\'s virtually a 100% certainty that their win percentage will fall sharply for the Derby and BC relative to the rest of the season.  Once your win percentage falls enough, bad streaks of various types are more likely and could mean nothing.

Again, I\'m not defending them.  I\'m just pointing out a reality about the evidence.

[miff]

Lance,

The conspiracy idiots are alive and well. Pletcher only drugged Rags to Riches, thats why she won,the rest of them he could not drug, thats why they lost.

Incidentally, why don\'t you or anyone else list the names of the horses that re-broke and won,running move up type TG figs, I missed those performances.

Mike

[gowand]

Miff,
Rags to Riches laid over that field.  Pletcher was not very good Friday or Saturday.  I am willing to give the guy the benefit of the doubt but this is getting ridiculous.  He starts out every year with 70-80 of the best 2 year olds in the country and gets five to the Derby.  I feel that there are a number of knowledgable people who post here and many of them treat Pletcher as an automatic throw out in big races.  How is this possible?  When it is over none of them \"handled\" the track.
As far as \"spotting\" horses, Pletcher has won the training title at the most competetive meet in the world six out of the last seven years.  This has nothing to do with \"spotting\" horses.  He has to take his horses alkl over the country beacause he has so many stakes class horses and does not want to run his ownwers against each other, if possible.

[Lance]

\"Pletcher only drugged Rags to Riches, thats why she won,the rest of them he could not drug, thats why they lost.\"

Come on, Miff -- you know it\'s not that easy. Rags is a 2-million dollar filly with impeccable bloodlines, a monstrous stride, and the build of a colt; she\'s a phenomenal talent.

As for horses rebreaking, check out Sam P in the Lewis Stakes earlier this year; the horse looked like he was absolutely finished when Great Hunter swooped past him, and then he found another gear and was coming again at the wire.

And rather than point out move-up figs, I\'d be interested to look at move-DOWN figs. I\'m guessing that most Pletcher horses run much higher figs on Derby day and BC day. Take this year. Circular Quay, higher, Any  Given Saturday, probably higher (he did lose a ton of ground, so I can\'t say for sure). Scat Daddy, higher. Cowtown Cat, higher. And that\'s not even mentioning TAP\'s 17 Breeders Cup runners in 2006, none of whom won. I wonder if anyone has ever done a study on this.

I guess we all interpret data differently and see things differently, and that\'s one of the fun things about parimutuel wagering. Take care.

[miff]

Gowand,

RTR only laid over because she was drugged in all her previous races, you do not get it. TAP can only win when his horses are drugged,it doesn\'t matter what stock he has.

For what its worth,

I noted pre derby:History tells us that TAP runners do not come up big on the first sat in May and also:

ASG was a very tired horse after the Wood lieing in his head check after the race.

CQ ridiculous 8 week layoff was not by design and skipped the Wood due to lack of energy training up.

Sam P is not a horse

Scat Daddy was third string

Cowtown was not impossible


Out of the first five betting choices only one SC was third choice.What is it that the conspiracy guys see? I dont see it and the hundreds of thousands of people who gambled the race didn\'t see it either and certainly did not bet on it.

The idiot brigade is suggesting that the pre race test was known and the horses weren\'t drugged,BRILLIANT.Small problem the idiot brigade forgot that(Jerry noted) epo is not race day and is spoon fed overtime so when the test came TAP should have had 5 positives for all the stuff in their system pre-test day.


Mike

[miff]

Lance,Lance,Lance,

ALL of TAP\'S derby runners were royally bred and expensive or worked their eyeballs out in a training sale, come on guy. The whole barn is basically that way and the guy ONLY wins @25% over the year. What is so special about that with stock like that?? You take care too, buddy.


Mike

[Lance]

Great questions, Richie. Thanks for sharing your insight. I still love this game, but damn.

And I miss Pinnacle too. Halcyon days indeed...