big jump ups - a miracle!

[shanahan]

this one caught my eye over the weekend:

Oaklawn, Sunday race 8.

The # 3 Kinetic was running last fall on the turf at Remington.  Consistently running in the 12-14 range, the last race in December on turf she bottomed out with a \"20\"...only to come back on the dirt and run a \"6\".  As a handicapper I\'m thinking complete bounce yesterday.  Not so much.  Now 4 years old, \'ol kinetic has found his form - going long on the dirt.  And now to boot - he goes up in class and now wins two in a row...that Allen Milligan is one sharpy. This will put a boost in his 11% win % for routes.  Here\'s the recent comment lines before the sudden \"jump\":

\"couldn\'t last\"
\"weakened\"
\"faded\"

Going up in class next time the line reads  \"ridden out\".  A miracle right here in front of our eyes.  I am blessed to witness it.

[SoCalMan2]

8th race on Feb 8 at Philadelphia -- Scott Lake ran a 5 yo Mare named Vicar\'s Vixen who ran second.  

The thing that is interesting is that when you look at the sheet, it is as if the mare was one horse for the first 22 races of her career, then Lake gets his hands on her, and she becomes a completely different animal for the next 7 races under Lake (n.b. paying a fat 9-1 win mutuel first time out for Lake).

If TGJB would allow this sheet to be posted, I would ask if people agree that this is another clear suspicious move up.  Maybe we should have a specific thread just for posting the sheets of suspicious move ups.  Brandeis once said something to the effect that sunlight is the best disinfectant.  Maybe we can put some sunlight on the subject just by creating a compendium of suspicious sheets.    


If only we could see Shifty Sheik\'s sheet (FYI -- i have Shifty Sheik\'s PPs -- they are quite interesting to look at.  He was not a bad horse before OSB got his hands on him and OSB was able to elevate his performance for only one or two months (during which he ran about 5 or 6 races) before falling back to earth).  Even though everybody remembers Shifty Sheik, to me the classic OSB claim was something like an incredibly ouchy looking $17,5 claimer which he would ran back at $32,5k in 3 or 4 days and the horse would be odds on and win.  It almost seemed like he had to already have entered the horse before he even claimed him.

[ajkreider]

I think if we\'re going to be casting aspersions based on \"suspicious\" move-ups, there ought to be at least a baseline idea for what makes a move-up suspicious.

Certainly, one can\'t think that significant improvement by itself upon a trainer switch is enough - unless you think all trainers equally competent.

So, how big a jump is big enough to warrent suspicion (and why)?

[SoCalMan2]

ajkreider Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think if we\'re going to be casting aspersions
> based on \"suspicious\" move-ups, there ought to be
> at least a baseline idea for what makes a move-up
> suspicious.
>
> Certainly, one can\'t think that significant
> improvement by itself upon a trainer switch is
> enough - unless you think all trainers equally
> competent.
>
> So, how big a jump is big enough to warrent
> suspicion (and why)?

I agree with you that this exact question needs to be delved into.  My recommendation is that we get permission from the site\'s owner to post sheets that are candidates for suspicious move up classification.  Then we have a debate period, then maybe the site can be set up for some form of voting.  Winners (or losers depending on how you look at it) get their sheet enshrined in the wall of shame.  My first candidate for debate is Vicar\'s Vixen.  I would be interested in hearing pros and cons.  I may be wrong to cast aspersions on Lake\'s work with this mare and would be interested to debate it and see if i am wrong.

[miff]

So Cal,

Without knowing the horse, my first question is, Who had the horse before Lake?

An owner friend who used Lake in NY 2 years ago tells me he claims lots of tucked up, worn out looking animals and then spends some vet and nutrition money. He took 2 for this owner who made money with both before they went off.Both were tapped after the claim. He spent about $600  maintenance money on each horse before they raced.Lake does not do well in NY anymore esp in Saratoga.\"THEY\" claim that he cannot juice in NY because of superior testing but how does that reconcile whenguys in NY are accused of cheating every day.Same testing for all,no?

Incidentally, Jane Vaders was banned at Philly, why not Lake? Less positives? Does he use undetectable stuff at Philly/ Del, but not in NY?

Lots of questions, lots of speculation.Logically something is going on, but there is no science to prove it. TG, RAGS,BEYER will swear by their figs that there is cheating(i agree sometimes) but no real positives for known stuff. The Magic Bullet rules!


Mike

[SoCalMan2]

miff Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So Cal,
>
> Without knowing the horse, my first question is,
> Who had the horse before Lake?
>
> An owner friend who used Lake in NY 2 years ago
> tells me he claims lots of tucked up, worn out
> looking animals and then spends some vet and
> nutrition money. He took 2 for this owner who made
> money with both before they went off.Both were
> tapped after the claim. He spent about $600
> maintenance money on each horse before they
> raced.Lake does not do well in NY anymore esp in
> Saratoga.\"THEY\" claim that he cannot juice in NY
> because of superior testing but how does that
> reconcile whenguys in NY are accused of cheating
> every day.Same testing for all,no?
>
> Incidentally, Jane Vaders was banned at Philly,
> why not Lake? Less positives? Does he use
> undetectable stuff at Philly/ Del, but not in NY?
>
> Lots of questions, lots of speculation.Logically
> something is going on, but there is no science to
> prove it. TG, RAGS,BEYER will swear by their figs
> that there is cheating(i agree sometimes) but no
> real positives for known stuff. The Magic Bullet
> rules!
>
>
> Mike


Ben M. Feliciano Jr. had her before Lake.  According to the DRF, he was a 30% trainer at the time.  There were 65 days between her last start for Feliciano and her first start for Lake.  She was not claimed.  She was either privately sold or else the owner fired Feliciano and gave the horse to Lake.  Also, her first 21 races were in Maryland or West Virginia.  Her last start for Feliciano was at Presque Isle, Lake then proceeded to run her at Delaware for the first three races of her improvement followed by three races in Maryland (where she showed a tailing off from her Delaware form)...Sunday\'s race was her first at PHA and i am guessing she reversed the slide she was showing at LRL (but I could be wrong).  Even in her slide of form at LRL, she ran all three numbers there considerably faster than anything she got for Feliciano.

There are all sorts of explanations and she may well not be a suspicious case. It is possible that Feliciano had her as a 3 yo and early 4 yo and she just blossomed late in her 4 yo year that is not unusual.

All I am saying is that if the sheet is posted, then everybody can see it and give their arguments one way or the other.  I would be interested in seeing other sheets besides hers too.  I just think having a dedicated thread to sheets that everybody can see and debate is a helpful thing for the issue.

[HP]

Miff makes some interesting points - I would think perhaps the connection between \"juice\" guys and success on certain circuits may have something to do with where the \"juice\" vet is...or maybe it represents decisions by the VET as to where he thinks he can get away with certain things?...

Maybe the vet and trainer make certain decisions based on trying to make it \"look good\" and not juice all the trainer\'s horses across the board?  

I can imagine other scenarios.  HP

[TGJB]

Like, they are testing for certain drugs at certain tracks, but not other drugs. Or they are pre-race testing for CO2 at one but taking blood post race at another, etc.