flashpoint & dutrow

[shanahan]

no posts, I guess no one really cares anymore, or we\'re just tired of racing boards ignoring it...  How does this guy live with himself?  the recent posts on it were largely ignored - I\'m guessing \"same old, same old\"...and he laughs in the face of our sport.

[Footlick]

I agree.  Just seems nothing will ever be done about it.  It aggrevates me everytime he has a winner.  Will never bet a horse of his, just on principle.

[toppled]

What are you trying to say Dutrow did with this horse today?  The horse won his only race by 6 in racehorse time with the 2nd place horse graduating next out, was eligible to be any kind, had good works and might be the top 3yo sprinter. It\'s not like he was slow & had this huge jump up at huge odds.  If another trainer had raced Flashpoint those 1st 2 races with the same result, would this thread even exist?  Please explain what evidence there is that Dutrow has done anything wrong with Flashpoint.
For the record, I did not have Flashpoint, but after the race I could see how that race was possible, regardless of who his trainer is.  I don\'t usually go around defending trainers with Dutrow\'s history, but I feel using Flashpoint\'s win today to attack his trainer is unwarranted.

[Footlick]

Any horse in his barn is tainted by his rep now, no matter how talented they may be and no matter whether they are clean or not.  It just casts doubt.  I refuse to bet a horse that comes from his barn.  I hope the horse is legit.  But, if he is I hope they find another trainer. If suddenly there is an off race, then there is going to be a bigger outcry.  Why suddenly did this horse go into a tailspin.  If you support him then you do.  I won\'t.  And that goes for any other trainer that has as many violations as he has.  We need to go back to a no raceday meds policy.  But continuing to support and allow violators is not the way to do it.  Just my opinion, take it or leave it.  This is something I won\'t skirt around.

[marcus]

Personally, I\'ve been keeping my fingers crossed that the same old approach to dealing these guys who have excessive of medication violations in their background isn\'t going to be the currently used model .

It\'s difficult to imagine imo that any track ,jurisdiction or circuit would want any part of the worst medication rules offenders in the game - but seem reluctant to do more than presently are . ..

Although the way i see it , circuits like Penn National have got to be keeping hope alive with the recent serious upgrades to their medication policies at the track - so maybe anything is possible in 2011 .

[toppled]

I guess the question has to be: Where do you draw the line when it comes to your boycott?  Steve Asmussen has a record similar to Rick Dutrow\'s.  About the only difference is that Asmussen didn\'t get suspended for smoking dope on the track\'s grounds.  Do you eschew all races where Asmussen saddles a horse?  What about Patrick Valenzuela?  He\'s been banned for personal drug use a lot more than Dutrow.  Do you avoid all races with Rudy Rodriguez, a disciple of Dutrow, even though he\'s never had a positive drug test?
The bottom line is this game is tough enough that if you start boycotting betting trainers and jockeys on moral grounds, you\'re going to have to avoid a lot of good betting opportunities.  Worse, if you\'re betting against Dutrow\'s horses by taking horses with lesser credentials, you\'re going to take a beating at the windows.  How do you know that the trainer with a lower profile than Dutrow that you just bet fits your standards of morality?    
Now if you\'re an owner, you can hire trainers and jockeys that meet your standards, but as a bettor, it\'s not my task to start boycotting this or that trainer, because it does me no good to lose money due to how I feel about the guy personally.  
If you can still survive in this game boycotting some of the most successful trainers on moral grounds, more power to you.  Most of us can\'t.

[shanahan]

toppled Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What are you trying to say Dutrow did with this
> horse today?  The horse won his only race by 6 in
> racehorse time with the 2nd place horse graduating
> next out, was eligible to be any kind, had good
> works and might be the top 3yo sprinter. It\'s not
> like he was slow & had this huge jump up at huge
> odds.  If another trainer had raced Flashpoint
> those 1st 2 races with the same result, would this
> thread even exist?  Please explain what evidence
> there is that Dutrow has done anything wrong with
> Flashpoint.
> For the record, I did not have Flashpoint, but
> after the race I could see how that race was
> possible, regardless of who his trainer is.  I
> don\'t usually go around defending trainers with
> Dutrow\'s history, but I feel using Flashpoint\'s
> win today to attack his trainer is unwarranted.


Well, we\'ll see.  There are 87 reasons on the recored as to why bettors feel disgusted when he wins a race (while on suspension).  I just wish that GP/Florida would honor NY suspensions and not let him race till he pays a penalty...but they never really have to pay, do they?  He must be one helluva salesman to get these horses.

[Rick B.]

shanahan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He must be one helluva salesman to get these horses.

It\'s way more than salesmanship. Dutrow gets results -- if you\'ll excuse the obvious pun.

Seriously: in a game where most owners lose their ass, how hard is it to understand the attraction to a guy who actually WINS, and frequently? Are any of his owners complaining about his list of violations? (I doubt it.)
 
I\'ve never owned a horse, but I have to be honest and say that I could only put up with the 5% and 10% trainers for so long if I\'m not at least breaking even.

Who would you guys have training for you -- Gary Sciacca? Let me know how that works out for you.

[Footlick]

As far as I know Valenzuela never drugged a horse.  I am talking about what trainers do to animals, not themselves.  I don\'t place a bet on any of the trainers you have mentioned.  I don\'t make my living by betting on races and so I don\'t have to bet a horse who is trained by a questionable trainer.  I love the sport, and trainers need to do what is best for the horse.  We need the same drug rules that are in place in Europe.  But as long as trainers such as Mr Dutrow are allowed to rack up violation after violation then our sport is tarnished.  I can\'t say anything about Rodriguez because he hasn\'t had a violation.  He is not in the same category as Mr Dutrow.  The fact that he is connected to him will throw suspicion on him, like it or not.  But if there is enough to suspect something other than great training is going on, then eventually it will come out.  As far as Mr Valenzuela, he has been a repeat offender who has tried to overcome personal demons.  That is difficult, and he keeps trying, but he is an addict and an addict can always relapse.  I don\'t care about Mr Dutrow\'s or Mr Asmussen\'s personal drug habits, but I can\'t imagine that their violations are because they are addicted to give horses banned substances.

[Footlick]

87 reasons or not he gets horses because he gets enough results that owners will take the chance.

[Footlick]

should have read this first!  My point exactly

[martoon]

The difference is that most of the 10% guys have a monthly vet bill 95% less than the 20% guys.  What gets older than a 5-10% trainer is an 18% trainer that gives you a $2000-$3000 monthly vet bill even for a $5k claiming animal.  Unless your horse is higher class, those training bills are harder to make up than the winning-purse percentage.  Remember these small trainers kind of have to work with what stock they have until the bitter end.  The super trainers get rid of the really slow horses in a hurry.  That helps their record as does the big trainers authority to drop horses below their true class level.  The smaller trainers usually have carrot feeding bleeding heart breeder-owners who insist their nickel bred stock don\'t get risked in claiming races  until these owners learn their lessons the hard way.  So there\'s a lot of reasons that go into winning percentage.  But I think  the golden rule is a super trainer can\'t turn a slow horse into a superstar.  They purge the slow ones from their barn\'s everyday and these horses end up in the 5% trainers barn.   The big guys can often make them run more comfortably after tapping and injecting everything they can think of for a couple thousand dollars.  We should have a trading places week where Dutrow and the other big boys switch complete stock and vet routines with the small guys for a week. I\'m sure they wouldn\'t do much better than 5-10% total either either.

[Footlick]

Good point martoon.

[Rick B.]

martoon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What gets older than a 5-10% trainer is an 18% trainer
> that gives you a $2000-$3000 monthly vet bill even
> for a $5k claiming animal.

A $2K vet bill for a nickel nag? Seriously doubt this happens much.

I get the point you are trying to make, but if I owned horses I\'d only care about what I netted each month, not what it cost to get there. A trainer that didn\'t win for me last month means I have to go into my pocket for the vet bill, whether it\'s $200 or $2000. I wouldn\'t be happy about either number.

Thanks, but I\'ll take Dutrow or another winning trainer every day.

[martoon]

Rick.. You better believe you can get a $2000 vet bill for a nickel claimer.  Problem is you often don\'t know they a nickel until you pay that out for a lot of months too.  That\'s one of the oldest and most true axioms of this game is that \"it costs just as much to train a bad horse as it does a good horse\".  Trainers generally feed, train, and vet all their horses the same.  there really isn\'t an a ala carte menu.  And they don\'t care because you are paying the bills.  These big guys just the pre-race vet work is hundreds and hundreds of dollars.  A lot of trainers put every horse in their barn on the daily joint stuff like Legend and Adequan systematically and that is expensive.  Then they all go on the daily anti- ulcer stuff which is very expensive.  Just those two right there you\'re near or over $1000 and the vet hasn\'t even shown up yet.    Some trainers do pre-race type stuff for every breeze as well...

I\'m not trying to tell you every trainer is the same.  Of course some of the top names are better than the others and they can spot a good claim and improve it.  And they are not claiming every slow rat in a 5% trainer\'s barn.  They are not miracle workers.  They cover all their bases with very expensive medical preventative maintenance, regular joint tapping, etc..    But the big guys always win the medicine and vet wars.  And they like everyone else win 80% of their races and money with 20% of their stock.  If you own a horse that\'s not that talented, I think you are better off with an honest knowledgeable  trainer that is $50 a day and no or low vet bills.  You might get lucky and break even if you win a couple, because on most circuits you are not going to make the $50,000 or $60,000 with that horse you\'ll need to break even with the expensive guys.