Hard Spun Sunday

[bordercollie]

Jeff Mullins made that quote of the century two tears ago at Hollywood Park.

  \"You have to be nuts to bet on horses.\"

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

fkach Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Based on that post, I must assume that Jimbo just
> got a job working for Pletcher. ;-)
>
> Jimbo, Don\'t you know that the only reason most
> people don\'t pick the winner of every race is
> drugs. ;-)

I\'d like to point out there is at least one other reason people don\'t pick or even bet a winner:

http://www.equibase.com/static/chart/pdf/MTH080507USA13.pdf

Please note the payouts. As with \"Lady Lira\" there is an awful lot of unsophisticated gambling money wrapped up in Plech runners, especially at circuits he can \"skate\" at.

The above doesn\'t necessarily mean that anyone betting or cashing the Haskell is unsophisticated. But being unsophisticated is kinda like Alzheimer\'s. The subject never knows he has a problem.

The truth, of course, was that the Haskell was a poor return and even a poorer wager, but we did learn some things from it. We already knew some things too (If we\'ve been paying attention.) One of those things is that Plech was just another of the Lukas progeny until he took on a particular vet. And now his horses seem to run very fast on the layoff ship and unreal fast at certain circuits. At least they do so once.

CtMC

[Michael D.]

Chuckles_the_Clown2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> fkach Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Based on that post, I must assume that Jimbo
> just
> > got a job working for Pletcher. ;-)
> >
> > Jimbo, Don\'t you know that the only reason most
> > people don\'t pick the winner of every race is
> > drugs. ;-)
>
> I\'d like to point out there is at least one other
> reason people don\'t pick or even bet a winner:
>
> http://www.equibase.com/static/chart/pdf/MTH080507
> USA13.pdf
>
> Please note the payouts. As with \"Lady Lira\" there
> is an awful lot of unsophisticated gambling money
> wrapped up in Plech runners, especially at
> circuits he can \"skate\" at.
>
> The above doesn\'t necessarily mean that anyone
> betting or cashing the Haskell is unsophisticated.
> But being unsophisticated is kinda like
> Alzheimer\'s. The subject never knows he has a
> problem.
>
> The truth, of course, was that the Haskell was a
> poor return and even a poorer wager, but we did
> learn some things from it. We already knew some
> things too (If we\'ve been paying attention.) One
> of those things is that Plech was just another of
> the Lukas progeny until he took on a particular
> vet. And now his horses seem to run very fast on
> the layoff ship and unreal fast at certain
> circuits. At least they do so once.
>
> CtMC


go to the next race on Haskell day:

http://equibase.com/static/chart/pdf/MTH080507USA14.pdf

yes, that is a Pletcher/Pletcher double with AGS, and it paid $47.80.

lol.

two buck chuck, how do you manage to make an ass out of yourself every single time you post here?

lol.

[richiebee]

Ctc said \"Plech was just another Lukas progeny until he took on a particular
vet\".

Chuck, you\'ve thrown this card on the table a couple of times,and I think this
is a theory you are stating as fact. For the benefit of all of us, could you
identify an approximate point in time when Pletcher and Allday began working
together? Could you disclose what Pletcher\'s win percentage was before and after
this point in time? Number of stakes wins before and after? Number of new tops
before and after? Does Allday treat all TAP horses, or just those at certain
tracks?

Ah the \"Lukas assistant\" legacy. The four who have had the most impact are TAP,
Kieran McLaughlin and his brother in law, Mark Hennig, and Dallas Stewart.TAP
and K Mac are future Hall of Famers, Hennig and Stewart are solid trainers.
TAP and Hennig are both sons of horse trainers; Dallas Stewart came up through
the ranks, I remember him galloping horses for a shrewd Fair Grounds trainer
named Connie Tassistro back in the early 80s. K Mac grew up in horse and
basketball crazy Lexington and by his own admission realized at his height he
had a better chance of training horses than he did of playing basketball at UK.

A story about K Mac that is too good to be true is that KM had just gone to
work for DWL, and DWL left K Mac the responsibility of getting an old horse
trailer painted. K Mac found 2 people willing to paint the trailer: one offered
to do it for $400, another offered to do it for $800. K Mac opted for the $800
paint job, and DWL was apparently very impressed with K Mac\'s willingness to
spend someone else\'s money.

As usual, I digress. Chuckles, if you back up the Pletcher/ Allday alliance
theory with some statistics, the theory carries considerable weight. Until I
see some evidence I continue to contend that TAPs greatest edge is his access to
superior horseflesh.

[spa]

Enough said....................

[bordercollie]

Todd Pletcher wins because he has the resources to do so. Better talent makes trainers and jocks look better then they actually are. Alan Garcia won two races today because he was on the best horse at the perfect time. Same goes for J.Bracetty who guided a $28 horse home Sunday,with ease.The good thing was  Garrett Gomez wasn\'t on the horse, because if he was Durkin would have said great ride GG.IMO trainers have been training the same way for the last hundred years,some were just lucky to have better horses to train, period! It\'s not any differant then a basketball coach teaching the triangle offence to a group of players,group A will learn the same fundermentals as group B, but it just so happens that group A has the best players. I have watched many of TAP\'s two year olds run poorly, does that mean they didn\'t get the juice? All it means is that The Lucas boy looses 75% of the time he enters a horse, which is pretty much the norm.

[jimbo66]

Chuckles,

You really are a moron.  The fastest horse at the weights, with the rail and a recency edge is \"unsophisticated gambling\".

If you had ever read a sheet and/or learned how to handicap using the product whose board you clutter on a daily basis, you would know what is \"unsophisticated\" and what isn\'t.  

9-5 was not a great price, never is on any horse.  However, he was the most likely winner in a field with only three horses who could win.  

This is the same moronic clown who touted curlin at 4-5 in the Belmont and posted idiotic responses about the filly\'s \"ambush\" afterwards.  The same clown who was so happy with his even money on Afleet Alex in the Belmont so as to clutter this board for days.  The same clown who has no handicapping opinions worth discussing, but will certainly pontificate about nonsense endlessly here on the board.  Oh, I forgot, you only handicap races worth 1 million dollars or more.  Bologna.  Why don\'t you repost your thread listing how you have hit 17 of the 22 KEntucky Derby winners.  That is one of my favorite posts of yours.  OR is it 18 of 23?  I wouldn\'t want to shortchange you.

I think you missed your calling.  You clearly should be a tout and/or professional horse player with your endless lists of winners.  You are wasting yourself as a coffee go-fer boy for your local congressman.

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

bordercollie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Todd Pletcher wins because he has the resources to
> do so.

Do you consider the Vet one of those resources? and if you do, how much significance do you assign to the Vet as compared to other \"employees\" or the auction price of the horse? or under whom the trainer cut his teeth?

> Better talent makes trainers and jocks look
> better then they actually are. Alan Garcia won two
> races today because he was on the best horse at
> the perfect time. Same goes for J.Bracetty who
> guided a $28 horse home Sunday,with ease.The good
> thing was  Garrett Gomez wasn\'t on the horse,
> because if he was Durkin would have said great
> ride GG.

In 1997 Patrick Byrne had 2 Juvenile Champions. One of them was Horse of the Year. They were by Phone Trick and Deerhound respectively. Neither was very fashionably bred nor very pricey. But by any standard, pre purchase, they were far from the \"best horseflesh\" out there. Both were busts at breeding and both are dead now. Albeit one in a barn fire. A barn fire? They have one other thing in common. They were both overseen by the same Vet who burst upon the scene that same year.

> IMO trainers have been training the same
> way for the last hundred years,some were just
> lucky to have better horses to train, period!

Here\'s another one that doesn\'t think horses are any faster today. He is probably unaware of Lawyer Ron\'s recent track record at the Spa. And before that Left Bank\'s track record at the Spa. And also the fact that the incredibly fast numbers being run are a relatively recent phenomena in this game. As recent for Plech as about 2001. (I\'ll try to pin down the exact date, but the folks involved aren\'t real eager to disclose information that brings them under even more suspicion.) Maybe Barry Irwin can be a resource here. He \"employs\" Plech. He can ask him. The answer will be 2001. (I take that back, after a quick glance at some back numbers, the year will be 2000)

> It\'s not any differant then a basketball coach teaching
> the triangle offence to a group of players,group A
> will learn the same fundermentals as group B, but
> it just so happens that group A has the best
> players.

I guess that means Barry Bonds, Lance Armstrong, Mark McGuire and Sammy Sosa are really just much better athletes than their contemporaries. Ok, some athletes really are better than others but you\'re not really telling this board that the same track coach that gets a recent and heavily skewed number of 100 yard dash record setters is just working with the Favorite Tricks or Countess Diana\'s of the human sprint world are you?

> I have watched many of TAP\'s two year
> olds run poorly, does that mean they didn\'t get
> the juice? All it means is that The Lucas boy
> looses 75% of the time he enters a horse, which is
> pretty much the norm.

Winning at 25% is the norm? No it really is not. Traditionally, winning at 15 or even 10 percent was the norm. But at many circuits Plech has exceeded even the exceptionally high strike rate of 25%. The drugs are not a panacea and they will not work on horses like the Green Monkey, but the horses they can help will run faster and the trainers strike rate will increase by the percentage of the horses the cheating aids.

CtMC

[lfe2211]

If any trainer used anabolic steroids (AS) on his horses over a long period of time, there would definitely be an effect on the fertility of the horse because such drugs have effects directly at the gene level. Furthermore one would expect a much lower than average SPI for that horse if he ever became a stallion. Female progeny would also be adversely affected by AS. Has anyone ever performed  a study of the performance of of non-claiming super trainer horses at stud? A bad result would not neccessarily be an indictment or proof of anything because so many other factors are relevant in success at stud, e.g. Had Mr.P stood his whole career in NY, he would likely not have become arguably the greatest stallion ever. I went through the lists of leading stallions over the last 5 years and wrote in their trainers to see if there were any patterns. I leave it to others to perform the same exercise --the results are interesting.

[miff]

Bee,

It\'s really fairly obvious. The conspiracy idiots will point to a couple of performances out of thousands for TAP(unlike the incomparable OSCAR who made cripples run giant)Getting waxed at the windows by TAP is another reason the conspiracy idiots rail.

To suggest that some figs or some vet is the way to prove the existence the magic bullet in THAT barn (TAP\'s) is naive at best.Advice, never debate a subject with someone who knows much more about it or much less, you can\'t win.

Mike

[bordercollie]

Chuck,

 Yes, I saw Lawyer Ron, break the track record. In fact I bet $1200 to win. The point I made was how I feel even though I have my reservations about the game. As a person who does this for a living, I can assure you that I understand the game and what goes on behind closed doors. Maybe you should stop playing, or change tracks were Pletcher doesn\'t run. I do not post very often on the board, but I read it every day and the other guy was correct when he said you fill it up with crap. The board needs positive feedback not the personal horror stories you go through every day.
Have a good day

[fkach]

>The fastest horse at the weights, with the rail and a recency edge is \"unsophisticated gambling\".<

If the horses that Pletcher has been wining with were totally illogical, I could at least understand the obsession.

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

I don\'t mind being the first onto a topic. Sure you take some heat for the insight, but thats the way the truth is played out with the masses.

First the truth is ridiculed, then arguments are made agaisnt it and excuses are made for it, then at last the truth is considered to be self evident to those that vehemently denied it at the inception.

If you think AGS is a faster horse than either of the two he just beat what you said would make sense. That premise would be wrong however. The two defeated horses were not probable to be at their very best in the Haskell for a number of reasons. If you think 8-5 was sufficient to \"send it in\" on the winner with some probability  the other two would run their A race and the likelihood the Trifecta would pan out just as it did more power to you. Should I post the payouts Again?

Maybe its vast chasms between differing wagering \"theories\" that is the root of the denial. I\'m not going to get into my theory, but that said I don\'t consider 8-5 a very good wager even in an \"omni fig\" situation. And obviously that scenario wasn\'t present in the Haskell. In a blue moon, I will take as low as Even money, but it takes a very special circumstance to go there. I assure you that circumstance was not present in the Haskell despite the fortutious result for those that backed the winner. The proof of that is in the returns.

Maybe this is dispositive: \"Do you think the place and show horses came close to their A race?\" If you don\'t think they did and weren\'t likely to and bet the winner for those reasons congrats. But, I\'d point out again the return in relation to the risk. That said, I don\'t think you scored that Haskell, did you fkach?  

Opinions make for horseracing. I\'ll join you at the windows next one, but I doubt seriously we will be on the same horse...

CtMC

 fkach Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >The fastest horse at the weights, with the rail
> and a recency edge is \"unsophisticated
> gambling\".<
>
> If the horses that Pletcher has been wining with
> were totally illogical, I could at least
> understand the obsession.

[jimbo66]

Clown,

No matter how much you write and pontificate, you can\'t change the facts.  Read this next sentence carefully.  Any Given Saturday was a faster horse than Hard Spun on the figures for all major figure makers.  Thorograph, Beyer and Ragozin.  No dispute.

On thorograph, at the weights, Any Given Saturday\'s best race (the Dwyer) was faster than Curlin\'s best race (the Preakness).  You can ignore the Thorograph figure if you like, but when you are on this board, filling it with rubbish, you should at least occasionally reference the product\'s figures.  

Ok, based on those two facts, plus your \"post-race\" analysis that neither Hard Spun nor Curlin was likely to run their \"A\" race, 9-5 on the fastest horse, in a 3 horse race was OK.  $24 on the exacta, with Curlin out, was better. Several on this board had \"pre-race\" thoughts about Curlin and we chased the 11 to 1 on the exacta.  I will gladly take 11 to 1 on an outcome that is comprised of the winner being a horse I make more then 50% to win, and one of the only other 2 contenders coming 2nd, especially when the contender who didn\'t come 2nd was the one I threw out. Forget the triple, 11 to 1 was a nice cold punch.

I didn\'t expect Curlin\'s \"A\" race, but not sure why your POST-RACE analysis didn\'t expect Hard Spun\'s \"A\" race.  That horse runs well fresh.  His derby was off similar rest and to many, that was his best race.

I don\'t expect you to understand this, since you don\'t actually use the thorograph figures, but it is probable that the 2nd place finisher didn\'t finish far off his best race, figure wise.  He was wide on both turns and got beat 4 lengths by a horse he spotted weight to and who had run a negative 3 four weeks ago.  We will see when the figures come up again, but he very may well have run around a \"0\" or \"1\", which is his best race, for now.  And Curlin\'s figure is also very likely to be similar to every one of his figures EXCEPT the Preakness.  The horse has run five races around the \"0\" range and one race at negative 3.  Off the layoff and tough early campaign, expecting a negative 3 was a lot to ask and a \"0\" wasn\'t going to beat the Pletcher at the weights and likely inside trip AGS was going to get.

Oh well, I will stop typing now and go talk to the wall in my house for 1/2 hour and see if I get anywhere with that........

[NoCarolinaTony]

Miff,

I can\'t agree with you more.

Well Put!!

NC Tony