But are you guys really so fixated on these things that it\'s impossible to look at it from another angle? That sure doesn\'t sound like a healthy approach. I would really like to have this discussion without all the the trashing and meaningless arguments because it could be really interesting.
I mean, had AD ever been asked for it all I would see your points much better, but to my eye it sure hasn\'t looked like it yet. And why then, when you have \"all the data in the world\" (i.e a sample of 45 where Pletcher has had multiple runners in most of them and most of them again without any realistic hope), are you not even open to even consider that Pletcher finally does something right when he eases a horse into the Derby. How can you take those numbers so seriously then? I mean he\'s been out training until now and just happened to win them all, Florida Derby was the first time they ever wanted something out of him but still one was under the impression that there should be more left in the tank. And he ran that race in the fastest Florida Derby time since Alydar in 1978.
It\'s silly IMO to use those numbers in a hunt for the perfect pattern, I mean did you also bet against American Pharaoh every time he raced because he had a 10 point jump second time out? (which he btw never regressed from). Why was Orb\'s 6,5 point jump so much better (after all he had given it all in many races going into the derby). I saw they were \"explaining\" that with lasix at the time in the seminar, but come on, how could you be confident in assigning causality to that? It was no reaction with 1st time lasix.. It just seems like you guys do a lot of cherry picking when \"validating\" your theories, and it\'s my humble opinion that one should always be open for looking at things in a different way.
If AD wins this year Pletcher would be the co-most winning derby trainer this millennium.
And no, I didn\'t say it should be a no-brainer to bet AD as the 2nd choice, I was responding to an estimate of 10/1, as 4th choice.
All the derbies the last 5-6 years have been won by horses winning multiple races in a row going into the derby, AD is the only one that fits that bill, isn\'t that worth something? You have a horse in AD that ran a good number last time, visually very impressive, extremely impressive on the clock in a race that has been the best predictor of Derby success, and he also possesses the most successfull running style by far in Kentucky Derby this century. Isn\'t that worth something either?
And he isn\'t up against anything else one could possibly have great confidence in.
So am I really a silly, silly man for suggesting that he could be worth a bet at a price of 10/1? That is he needs to win 1 out of 11 times to break even.
Jeez. Tough crowd!
