Friedman says Pletchers horse running well on the whole

[Bally Ache]

If he\'s not the best horse in the country right now, tell me who is.  His last two races are excellent.  ALL of his races this year are very good.  I think Holthus won a million dollars with this horse when he wasn\'t even running that fast.  He\'s to be commended for that.  Pletcher has moved him up significantly.


We all know any horse can lose on any given day.  And, as brittle as they are today, any horse could break down.  But, if you\'re interested in handicapping rather than reading tea leaves, you toss this horse today at your own peril. There all pointing for the race on Oct. 27, so if Petcher saw the slightest negative thing about him, he wouldn\'t be entered today.

He\'ll probably be odds on  so, if you want to find value in the race, you\'ll have to hook him up.

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

Ron was a good horse, so you can\'t give Plech too much credit, but do agree he has been moved up some. How is the issue.

The interesting part of this race is that Plech lost two races yesterday and his overall Spa percentage is sinking like the Titanic. On Woodward Day the trainer with \"all the horses and all the ability\" only has a couple horses in the Woodward. Plech is definitely ducking right now, but I\'m certain Ron is well intended and will be higher than a kite.

Bally Ache Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If he\'s not the best horse in the country right
> now, tell me who is.  His last two races are
> excellent.  ALL of his races this year are very
> good.  I think Holthus won a million dollars with
> this horse when he wasn\'t even running that fast.
> He\'s to be commended for that.  Pletcher has moved
> him up significantly.
>
>
> We all know any horse can lose on any given day.
> And, as brittle as they are today, any horse could
> break down.  But, if you\'re interested in
> handicapping rather than reading tea leaves, you
> toss this horse today at your own peril. There all
> pointing for the race on Oct. 27, so if Petcher
> saw the slightest negative thing about him, he
> wouldn\'t be entered today.
>
> He\'ll probably be odds on  so, if you want to find
> value in the race, you\'ll have to hook him up.

[Bally Ache]

Chuckles, you\'re like Captain Ahab.  If we all individually submitted a list of suspect trainers I think there would be remarkable similarity between the names on the various lists.  Why single out or focus on Pletcher?  

You say the important thing is how he moved the horse up.  That\'s exactly wrong.  Somewhere on this website I think it says words to the effect that this game consists of two questions.  1. How fast can this horse run.  2.  How fast is he likely to run today.  That\'s exactly right.  All the rest is talk.

I posted earlier today in response to the post that  said someone at Ragozin said Lawyer Ron would bounce.  Was there any evidence that this was likely?  No, other than that he ran very fast last time (and the time before that for people who pay attention - even though he lost).  There are oodles of functioning horseplayers who don\'t believe there\'s any such thing as bounce.

[Barry Irwin]

Chuck Less the Clown: nowhere in the history of the Turf do we find the exploits of the name Chuckles the Clown or whatever your name is. And whereas you may have selected the winners of some Derbys, you did not WIN them.

As for me, there are plenty of references to my exploits and there are also many stances of where I took stands against cheaters.

If I thought for an instant that Todd Pletcher was a cheater I would a) never have given him a horse to trainer and b) if I found out later, I would take my horses away from him.

I put my money where my mouth is.

You have no standing in this game other than as an Internet troll.

And furthermore I hope you lost your ass in the Woodward betting against the number one racehorse in the land. Serves you right, crackpot.

[sighthound]

Code: [Select]


If anything unseemly was found in the 3 autopsies


The insurance companies wouldn\'t have paid out a dime.

[sighthound]

> Plech is struggling of late and there is some
> reason to believe his stable has been
> predominantly \"dope off\" but its incredulous to
> believe that Plech would be running Ron back in 4
> weeks after that previous effort without an edge,
> so I am concluding he will be \"maintained\" in the
> Allday method with the barn conducting itself in a
> manner to elicit another big effort.


Chuckles:  

We miss you so much on the, \"Aliens Are Alive And Living In Roswell\" site.

Please.  Come home to us.

[richiebee]

Sight:

I do not think that the entities which underwrite equine mortality policies
were on the cutting edge of performance enhancing substances and methods which
may or may not have had anything to do with the deaths of 3 Pletcher runners
following peak performances in 2002. Equine insurers then and now feel much
more at home with all too frequent instances of compound fractures, colic and
laminitis, with starting gate and paddock injuries, with animals cast in their
stalls.

I think it is fair to say that these insurers (or single insurer, if that was
the case) had never been confronted with three deaths of this nature in such a
close time sequence; indeed, insurers may not have looked at the demise of these
3 runners as being related.

In between the time that Left Bank was retired and the time he died, Thorograph
poster Jurmala Berzins, posting on September 21, 2002, said the following:
\"How about putting up (Left Bank\'s TG) seeing that he\'s retired. A good example
of EPO and who knows what else at work\". CtC isn\'t alone in Roswell.

I will say it again, knowing of course that nothing will come of it: Were blood
samples from the 3 deceased animals drawn? Were they frozen? Could these samples
be subjected to Racing\'s 2007 state of the art (probably only one step behind
the successful cheaters) \"supertesting\"? (Since these cases are closed, and
Racing could only suffer from the conduct of such tests, they will never be
undertaken.)

Interesting, Sight, that in a related post you respond to CtC\'s allegations of
blood doping by saying that NYRA has been testing for that... since 2003.

[cubfan0316]

time for pletch to have the good dr. find him a new undetectable drug.

[sighthound]

>> Equine insurers then and now feel much  more at home with all too frequent >instances of compound fractures, colic and laminitis, with starting gate and >paddock injuries, with animals cast in their  stalls.
>>I think it is fair to say that these insurers (or single insurer, if that was
>>>the case) had never been confronted with three deaths of this nature in such >>a close time sequence

With all due respect to you personally, both the above statements are nonsensical and untrue.  My assessment is based upon years of personal experience.
 
I think it admirable that those that wager on horses take an interest in the problem of drug abuse in horse racing.  It is present, it is not rare, it needs to be stopped.

Those whose only contact and knowledge of horses and the TB industry is via  wagering DO have a valid vested interest, and deserve to be heard, in my opinion.

However, serious discussion has to be based within the parameters of reality.

It is painfully and increasingly obvious that many on this list have little to no factual knowledge about what they are talking about.

Much of what is posted here is simply absurd and illogical to the extreme.

If one is going to publically accuse a trainer of giving a horse \"X\", the argument would bear weight if the accuser were smart enough to both choose an \"X\" that can give the response that the accuser says was observed, and to choose an \"X\' that isn\'t tested for.

If people want to create conspiracy theory out of the deaths of horses, I would suggest that they don\'t make themselves look completely and relentlessly foolish by obviously not being familiar with horses, what they can die of, how that can occur, how diagnosis are arrived upon, whether the diseases can occur and progress as published or not, if the published facts do or do not fit \"logic\" and reasonable explaination, what is tested for during necropsy, etc.

There are trainers out there with multiple drug positives of significant, performance-altering drugs.  I never see their names mentioned here.

I do see alot of amateur CSI, and public character assassination, via internet discussion board.

I have no respect whatsoever for the people who come to this message board, and, in front of hundreds of others, while hiding behind their anonymity, publically, repeatedly, relentlessly - over months and years - make serious and real accusations regarding the personal character and professional conduct of others.

Such statements can and do have serious ramification to the lives of your targets in the real world.

People say things on the internet that they would never state on radio, television, or in the print media, for fear of legal recourse.

Guess what guys - the internet is no longer the safe, anonymous haven you think it is.

I would not be surprised in the least if some nice lawyer contacted TBJB, got the names of some of the posters here, and hauled their moronic asses into court.

[fkach]

Hey Barry,

I\'m not sure what the various figures makers are going to say, but I think LR ran even better this time. IMO, that was a legitimately great performance. There were no world beaters behind him (as was the case in the Whitney), but he buried a decent quality speed horse like Wanderin Boy and then drew off from the rest even more impressively. I hope he\'s not peaking too soon to deliver a top effort in the BC.

[richiebee]

Certainly a well reasoned response, and it brings up many issues. I\'d like to
work from the bottom. Because this is my nature, I will assume for the sense of
argument that each statement, especially the negative ones, are directed at me
personally.

1) \"I would not be surprised in the least if some nice lawyers contacted TGJB,
got the names of some of the posters here, and hauled there moronic asses into
court\".

This statement poses many fascinating issues about the Internet as it will be
treated under traditional evidence, libel and slander law. Maybe internet libel
will eventually be addressed through a uniform code, if it hasn\'t already. And
of course there are constitutional issues underlying the entire area of the
law...

I hate to discuss the law. Let me instead make three statements of opinion:

a)As hurtful as some of these accusatory statements aimed at these trainers may
be, I really do not believe that anything which was alleged or implied on the TG
Bulletin Board has resulted in any trainer suffering a pecuniary loss:  I do
not think that any trainer has had horses taken away by an owner who heard
something negative from a TG poster on the TG Board. Nor have I seen TG Board
statements quoted or discussed in mainstream racing publications ie DRF or
BloodHorse.

b)I have not heard of any trainer saying something along the lines of \"You
know, its bad enough the railbirds give us grief during the races, now we got
the loonies chirping all day in the chat rooms\". Do you know, Sight, of a
trainer who has been affected fiscally or emotionally by this dialogue, or one
who\'s career has been impacted negatively?

c) I think TGJB is a smart enough businessman to have explored the limits of
his liability with regards to statements uttered on the TG Board (Jerry, if you
haven\'t maybe now would be a good time...).

Bottom line for me is (i) please show me a trainer or trainers who has (have)
been injured by chatting and blogging of the type heard on this board and (ii)
the law and the legal system are probably not ready to identify and process all
the \"crimes and misdemeanors\" being committed on the Internet.

2) \"People say things on the internet that they would never state on radio,
television, or in the print media for fear of legal recourse.\"

Sight, this is because most of us would never be seen or heard in the print or
electronic media due to the fact that:

3)\"It is painfully and increasingly obvious that many on this list have little
to no factual knowledge about what they are talking about\" and \"much of what is
posted here is simply absurd and illogical to the extreme\". Ignorant, absurd and
illogical will usually only get you in the media if you are holding hostages.

4)\"There are trainers out there with multiple drug positives of
significant,performance- altering drugs.I never see their names mentioned here\"


Then you have only been reading my posts selectively. I am especially quick to
mention Richard Dutrow and Scott Lake, only because whatever attention I pay is
to the NY circuit and these 2 trainers were sanctioned most frequently, a
matter of public record. Usually when I mention Richard and Scott, I am not
attacking these men personally (I have taken shots at Richard for never seeming
to acknowledge his father), but rather I am pointing out what a travesty the
rules of racing are as they pertain to medication violations. Richard, Scott
and others just do not seem to be really penalized -- they never seem to lose
owners or horses, and they continue to conduct their daily operations through e-
mail and cell phone. It is especially galling to me that Richard continuously
waives right to appeal and takes a shortened suspension. How many times do they
let you play this card?

I personally have made some tough statements about Biancone, but he apparently
has been excluded from racing in Europe and Hong Kong, and now faces the music
here in the United States.

I\'ll rip Doc Harthill a new one any chance I get, but Billy Reed already did
this a few years back in the Louisville Courier Journal.

With regards to a lengthy suspension dealt to Assmussen and a shorter one given
to Todd Pletcher last year, my only comment is that the trainer responsibility
rule, applied strictly, is not a good fit in the case of trainers such as Steve
and Todd who are trainers of record for strings of horses that they sometimes
only see once a week.

And if you were reading carefully, you may have seen that I jumped to Bill
Mott\'s defense when his methods were called into question recently on this
board.


I think, Sighthound, what really has you in this confrontational state, is my
constant mention of the 3 Pletcher animals dying within a short time frame. I
would be fascinated to read any reports, whether generated by veterinarians,
insurance companies or the New York State Racing and Wagering Board. I would be
fascinated to know if these 3 deaths were considered to be somehow related at
the time of any investigation that was conducted. I am just curious that is all.

You do not hear me saying that anyone intentionally killed those animals; I
even pointed out in a post that Left Bank was colic prone, having colicked as
a 2Y0 and having undergone surgery to remove a portion of his intestine. I was
trying to view any available facts. Being ignorant, absurd and illogical should
not preclude me from trying to understand things better.

I hate to play this card, but:

5) \"...My assessment is based upon years of personal experience... I think it
admirable that those that wager take an interest in the problem of drug abuse in
racing...those whose only contact and knowledge of horses and the TB industry
via wagering DO have a vested interest, and deserve to be heard, in my opinion\".

With all due respect, between 1978- 1987 I was licensed by State Racing Boards
in Louisiana, Kentucky, Florida, Ohio,New Jersey and Pennsylania. I worked
basically 7 days a week at tracks and training farms in these states; I worked
in various capacities which gave me a fair knowledge of horses and trainers. I
held a trainers license for 3 years, and saddled maybe 90 runners (my win
percentage was somewhere between Jamie Sanders\' and Bill Mott\'s)(to be quite
honest it was a lot closer to Jamie\'s).

My point of giving the above bio is not to call attention to a less than
distinguished career on the backside which ended 20 years ago; rather I am
trying to lay a foundation for stating my OPINION that these 3 deaths were
somehow related and thereby not coincidental or random. If someone will provide
documentation of the alleged \"patch of grass\" theory, I would certainly welcome
the opportunity to review it.

The 4 major team sports in the US are spectator sports, though none would be
naive enough to say that their popularity isn\'t at least partially driven to an
extent by people who wager on these sports; these 4 sports would survive the
absence of wagering.

Racing would not survive the absence of wagering. The vested interest that you
say horseplayers\' have in Racing is something more. While the \"insiders\" may
resent the input of horseplayers, may scoff at the ignorant tone of their voice
when it comes to horses and issues involving racing, the truth is some of the
stupidest sumbitches I have ever met tend to be the ones who are \"sending it in\"
with abandon. Their opinion and their participation are both important to
racing.

Sight, you have rope- a -doped me and I am now exhausted on the entire issue
of 3 dead in \'02. I will continue to sniff around, to see what record remains.
Since I work a 60 hour week and spend another 12 or so hours each week trying
to improve my golf game, I am resigned to coming not much closer to the truth.

One last comment. A student once walked to the wisest professor he knew bearing
a question:

\"Professor\" the student asked \"What is more harmful, ignorance or apathy?\"

To which the professor replied \"I don\'t know, and I don\'t care\".

[sighthound]

Because this is my nature, I
> will assume for the sense of
> argument that each statement, especially the
> negative ones, are directed at me
> personally.

Naw.  I did comment directly to your post as it concerns the insurance statement.  I took issue with the statement, certainly not the person making it (insert friendly, hand-shaking emoticon here).

The rest of my post I intended to be pissed-off but generalized editorializing about the nature of recent discussions at large.

Drug abuse - this topic certainly needs to be discussed, it won\'t go away. And it shouldn\'t.

But I think the majority of people on this board are more intelligent than average (or they would not gravitate to TG products), and I would hope we can embrace less, \"Hahaha, white Mercedes musta been there\", in favor of a more serious, factual and educational dialogue.  

The wagering community doesn\'t currently garner much respect from horsemen, yet it needs to invited to the table on this topic, as it has much to offer.

I\'m out on this for now, gentlemen.

[sighthound]

Richibee, you make good points, thank you for your comments.

Edit:  that sounds arrogant.  How about this:  good post.

[richiebee]

Sight:

I appreciate your commentary and understand your concerns.

When I said I was going to take some of the comments personally, that was
basically a way of saying that I was responding on my own behalf and speaking
for no one else.

Seems like there is real money to be made in listening to the radio--good job
TGAB.

[Barry Irwin]

For the purpose for which Lawyer Ron, he has fulfilled the promise he held at 3 and not only has run one defining race at 4, but confirmed that form in the Woodward.

Whether he can maintain this fine edge is debatable.

Whether he has gone from a gamble as a racehorse to a certain money maker at stud is a matter of fact.

He does have a good race over the Monmouth Park track. This is a plus. A mile and a quarter appear to be within his range.