By the way, I think that when an athlete is in a slump it is very significant. I would not feel very confident in an athelte who has been in a slump for a month.

But with a trainer, I'm not sure how significant a 1 for 16 slump is. A 20% trainer would only win 3 times out of 15 in the long-run. It's not really a big deal if a trainer is 1 for 16. that's only two less wins than he would normally have. He could easily win a few races the next week and be right back on track. With an athlete, there may be a good reason as to why they're in a slump. Their stroke may be a little bit off or whatever. With Albertrani, I doubt he is doing anything different than normal. It's probably just a fluke.

hes 1-18 once again Rupert.

But he's 1-18 at the biggest meet of the year with Darley horses. A great trainer like Pletcher has his horses (usually) geared up at the top of their game at Saratoga. You could argue that he's going up against tougher competition at Saratoga, but with the amount of talent at his disposal 1-18 just doesn't cut it.

Some of these trainer statistics are also skewed because the owner, not the trainer, wants his horse in a race he should not be in. You know this happens in races other than the Kentucky Derby.

There's a lot of luck involved in the short run. He has a bunch of 2nd place finishes. If just two of his horses that finished 2nd would have won, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

You guys may think it's really significant that he's 1 for 18. I really don't think it is.

Johnny V is only winnning at a 13% clip. I don't think that's a big deal. I never rely on short-term results to form conclusions.

Bobby Frankel is only about 3 for 63 in Breeder's Cup races. That's a terrible record. I have a friend who actually thinks that this could be significant with Frankel. You know there is a ton of security at the BC and all the horses are guarded for 24 hours. My friend thinks that the added security is the reason why Frankel has done so poorly. I guess no trainer is above suspicion. I persoanlly think Frankel has probably just had bad luck and that things will turn for him eventually in BC races.

I don't consider a month to be that short term. If you take a random set of 18 races for Pletcher horses I doubt he's gone 1-18 many times if ever in the last however many years. The job of a trainer is to spot their horses for the right race and train them for their best effort on that day. Since Albertrani trains fewer horses than Pletcher, he should have his horses even better prepared and better spotted for those 18 starts than Pletcher for how ever many starts he's had this meet.

O by the way- JV is winning at 16%- not 13- which is a fairly significant difference when you consider how many races the jocks are in. He's fourth at the meet in win percentage which isn't too bad when you consider all the great jocks there. Where do you get your stats?

Pletcher wins at a higher clip than Albertrani. Pletcher is winnig at a 28% clip this year. I agree that he would be less likely to go 1 for 18 than Albertrani who is a 20% winner.

A trainer who wins at a 20% clip is doing very well. That's a very good win percentage. You have to remember that if a guy is a 20% trainer, he will have some lucky streaks where he may win 7 races out of 20. But if he wins 7 out of 20 sometimes, that means that other times he will go 1 for 20. If you went 7 for 20 and then 1 for 20, you would be 8 for 40 which is 20%.

By the way, how do you explain Frankel being 3 for 63 in Breeder's Cup races. He's obviously trying his hardest in these races. Does it mean that he's not that good of a trainer? I don't think so.

[quote=Rupert Pupkin]Pletcher wins at a higher clip than Albertrani. Pletcher is winnig at a 28% clip this year. I agree that he would be less likely to go 1 for 18 than Albertrani who is a 20% winner.
QUOTE]

Pletcher's win percentage is 21.3%

With regard to JV, I was just quoting another poster. I should have checked the stats for myself. You are correct.

[quote=hockey2315]I'm talking about for the year. Drf.com has Pletcher at 218 wins from 791 starts which adds up to 28%.

oops sorry about that. . . I just totally ignored "this year" . . . that only strengthens my notion to back Pletcher over Albertrani- he's beating him in the short term and long term. . .

Here's how I see it-

Performances until now: even- maybe a slight edge to Bern

Pedigree: BGC

Trainer: BGC

Jockey: BGC

Experience: BGC

I give BGC a shot. I was very impressed with his last race. I wasn't overly impressed with any of his previous races, but he looked like he really moved to the next level in the Haskell. I still would give Bernardini the edge though.

I would have to agree with Oracle, though as mentioned, BG CAT has yet to be a tiger down the lane. As for BERNIE, it's hard to look a runner in the eye when he is running off from the others.
The Travers should be an interesting race, featuring the best two 3yos currently running(only other possible might be DISCREET CAT).
My $$ will probably be on the CAT unless the wise guys pound him down out of proportion.
Should be a great day of racing, with a very difficult pik 4.
Thje King's Bishop should be a true minefield for 'cappers.
Good luck to everyone playiong, and I am jealous of all who will be there!

What exactly does pedigree have to do with winning the Travers? Your losing me. And the jockey thing I dont really think matters much more than who the horse's parents were. Best horse will win.

I agree that Albertrani is a good bet against but I think you really have to make Bernardini an exception. I dont care how many million dollar horses this guy trains and hasnt been able to win with. I think Bernardini is very special and wins this race. Bluegrass Cat of course has a shot, but I think he'll be bet way more than you think and offer little value on Saturday.

One thing that I think most of us are forgetting is that BGC has been running the Classic distances all spring except for down at Tampa and Keeneland. In the race at tampa, he threw a shoe which is a valid excuse. At Keeneland, he didn't take to the track. It is very hard to tell how much he has improved because he got taken back to 1 1/8 miles in the Haskell. Based on his pedigree, this is probably his best distance. So I really don't know where to rank him as far as improvement goes. With that being said he is probably a huge bounce candidate since he is coming back to the mile and a quarter distance so quickly off that huge (race of his life) performance.

Not sure how the distance will matter. It didnt determine Bluegrass Cat's finish in the Derby or the Belmont. Barbaro and Jazil would have beaten him at either distance. Deputy Glitters would have won the Tampa Bay race at any distance. Bluegrass Cat would have won the Haskell at any distance.

Bernbardini would have won all his races at any distances.

Why will the distance of the Travers matter? This race will be over at the 1/8th pole if not sooner.

Really? You think Bernardini would have won the Withers if it were run at 5f? Deputy Glitters would have won the Tampa Bay Derby at 4.5f?

BCG was gaining back on Deputy Glitters in the Tampa Bay Derby. If he wouldn't have thrown the shoe, I guarantee you that he would have won the race. It was a very valid statement because BCG just ran the race of his life at 1 1/8 miles in a very good time. I really do think that this is the horse's best distance. Therefore, I am saying that it is very hard to tell how much BCG has actually improved.

Bluegrass Cat may have run the best race of any 3 year old this year in the Haskell. I dont think it was because of the distance.

Slot, I am not getting your point at all (if you have any).

My point was that it's a bit of an exaggeration to say any of those horses would have won any of those races at any distance.

Well I should have been more clear. I believe the best horse won all of those races and the difference between them being 1 1/8th miles or 1 1/4 miles played no role in determining the winner.

I think Bluegrass ran his eyeballs out in the Haskell, was very imporessed with that effort from an outside post in a field which I think was fairly strong.

Bernadini is an incredible talent so far, anyone who would question this really has no idea what they are talking about.
But the most "talented" horse doesn't always win, if they did, noone would have to work. You could just bet the most talented horse in a race all the time and live on a tropical island.
In the end, I feel that Bernadini will accomplish more than his rival Bluegrass Cat, thats because Bernadini is lightly raced and still has room for development.
To beat one like this you have to have all the circumstances go right. WIth Bernadini they are thinking BC Classic, etc. as the main goals. I don't think they have emptied him out to run a lifetime best race here. I think that the decision to run Bluegrass Cat back on short rest is an indication that this is THE RACE for him. This is the goal. BC's work the other day was described to me by someone I very much respect as "perfect" and the work of the meet.
If he runs his absolute "A" race and Bernadini doesn't run his, he can win. I think that the difference in prices dictates that you either bet BC or you pass the race and watch it. Now if they both go off at the same price(won't happen) you have to bet Bernadini. But since that won't happen, if you get what you feel is value on BC then you have to bet him. The way I see value is to single BC in the pik-4 and the Pik-3's. WIth so much hobby money and once or twice a year at the track money, people will be disproportionately singling Bern. Should he lose, even to the strong 2nd choice, the pik-4 and the pik-3's will be like Christmas time.

I personally will take Bernardini's pedigree over BC, and unless the actual trainers are getting in the starting gate and racing each other, I'll take the better horse, for what it's worth at least Albertrani has won a classic race, Pletcher is ofer a lot more attempts, that info is as relevant as their stats this meet. It's the horses who are running!!!!