hockey2315 |
07-10-2008 03:01 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by ateamstupid
I never said that Asmussen and Blasi were stupid.
I'm all ears if there's a legitimate explanation as to why Asmussen, Dutrow, Contessa, etc. are consistently much less effective on the grass.
|
I never said you said that - at all. . .
Asmussen's 17% on turf and 23% overall for the year. . . It's not like he's incapable of training a turf horse - he's probably getting a lot more dirt/speed type horses than someone like Mott or Clement and he's probably just a better dirt trainer. If you gave him a good turf horse, though, I'm sure he'd be capable of training it.
Contessa - well that's easy - first of all he's not a very good trainer - but. . . when does he have most of his success? Aqueduct Inner when there's no turf and the competition level is much lower. . . Of course he's not going to out-train Mott, Clement, etc. on turf at Belmont and Saratoga. He's a 9% turf trainer and right now he's 7% at Belmont with all starters - which is a much more telling stat than comparing his 15% for the year vs. 9% turf.
Dutrow - Whether he's juicing or not - I just think he's a very good trainer. His numbers are a little lower on turf - but he's another guy who deals with a lot of claiming types. But, he's also proven that he can train turf horses - Kip Deville. Interesting stats: At Saratoga from '05-'07: Sprints: 28% with a $2.28 ROI - Routes: 22% with a $1.38 ROI. Turf Sprints: 25% with a $2.61 ROI. My guess would be that he's not great with turf routers but I don't have that stat.
What about Frankel? He's supposed to be a "super trainer" but he wins at a slightly higher clip on turf - 19% turf but 18% overall.
I don't follow them closely but don't guys like Mullins, Lake, Catalano, and Amoss also do well on turf and move horses up on it?
The whole "juice doesn't turf" philosophy is completely obsolete at this point.
|