Kellyn Gorder - buh bye for 14 months

[Cannon Shell]

How would one acquire meth to give to a horse? How would you know its actually meth? How would you know its purity? How would you know how much to give and when to give it? Do meth labs give out handbooks on horse doping?

[Calzone Lord]

Here's what I know about Kellyn Gorder:

* He has a profitable lifetime ROI with his dirt horses.

* He has a profitable lifetime ROI with his turf horses.

His strength is without routers off of an extended freshening:

Route Races, 31-to-60 day layoff: 79-for-342 (23% wins) 25% profit per dollar bet.


Route Races, 61-to-100 day layoff: 18-for-96 (19% wins) 69% profit per dollar bet.


But, he's not bad with Routers off of a 7 day or less layoff, either:

9-for-37 with an insane $6.55 ROI


Also, his stats have fallen off this year.

Through 2014:

Dirt: 806 starts - 23% wins - $2.13 ROI
Turf: 337 starts - 15% wins - $2.35 ROI


2015 stats: 12-for-106 (11% wins) - $1.27 ROI

[Jay Frederick]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

Here's what I know about Kellyn Gorder:

* He has a profitable lifetime ROI with his dirt horses.

* He has a profitable lifetime ROI with his turf horses.

His strength is without routers off of an extended freshening:

Route Races, 31-to-60 day layoff: 79-for-342 (23% wins) 25% profit per dollar bet.


Route Races, 61-to-100 day layoff: 18-for-96 (19% wins) 69% profit per dollar bet.


But, he's not bad with Routers off of a 7 day or less layoff, either:

9-for-37 with an insane $6.55 ROI


Also, his stats have fallen off this year.

Through 2014:

Dirt: 806 starts - 23% wins - $2.13 ROI
Turf: 337 starts - 15% wins - $2.35 ROI


2015 stats: 12-for-106 (11% wins) - $1.27 ROI

Wonder why his stats have fallen off this year. Must be another one of those strange horse racing coincidences.

[pointman]

Originally Posted by Jay Frederick

Wonder why his stats have fallen off this year. Must be another one of those strange horse racing coincidences.

Contamination?

[outofthebox]

Originally Posted by Jay Frederick

Wonder why his stats have fallen off this year. Must be another one of those strange horse racing coincidences.

My stats have fell off this year. Certainly i haven't changed anything. The crop of babies i got last year haven't panned out. Some horses break their maidens and get stuck at the next level. Could be he just doesn't have the same stock this year. I know i don't.

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by outofthebox

My stats have fell off this year. Certainly i haven't changed anything. The crop of babies i got last year haven't panned out. Some horses break their maidens and get stuck at the next level. Could be he just doesn't have the same stock this year. I know i don't.

The old 'stats have fallen off' argument is always precious.

Tom Proctor, 17-20% any year, went 3 for 58 (5%) in November-December last year. Must have stopped 'using'.. Or as he said, 'didn't have a 2yo that could run and the good ones retired'.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Kasept

The old 'stats have fallen off' argument is always precious.

Careful now. The old "stats have fallen off" argument actually IS precious. Now, I will admit, 106 starters in a year is not a good enough sample to prove against a five year record, and perhaps one could find a 12 month period during that five year run that was comparable, but those numbers are surely not meaningless.

It would be interesting to compare the speed figures of the runners in that 106 start sample to their numbers from the prior year.

I understand the side you're taking, and there is much to be said for it, but being dismissive of stats, especially when they come from someone like Doug, is at best defensive on your part. Stats are actually a very strong argument for the other side of your arguement.

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Careful now. The old "stats have fallen off" argument actually IS precious. Now, I will admit, 106 starters in a year is not a good enough sample to prove against a five year record, and perhaps one could find a 12 month period during that five year run that was comparable, but those numbers are surely not meaningless.

It would be interesting to compare the speed figures of the runners in that 106 start sample to their numbers from the prior year.

I understand the side you're taking, and there is much to be said for it, but being dismissive of stats, especially when they come from someone like Doug, is at best defensive on your part. Stats are actually a very strong argument for the other side of your arguement.

No.. I know that. Doug and Jerry Brown too rightly utilize figs/stats in this area. I'm just noting that 'chaotic number theory' in terms of streaks and, as Alan points out, ebbs and flows of stock can be applied to almost all outfits.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by outofthebox

My stats have fell off this year. Certainly i haven't changed anything. The crop of babies i got last year haven't panned out. Some horses break their maidens and get stuck at the next level. Could be he just doesn't have the same stock this year. I know i don't.

Might just be from the extra weight of me betting on you. I promise to stop

[outofthebox]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Might just be from the extra weight of me betting on you. I promise to stop

Just been driving me crazy watching my horses slowing down coming to the wire. And to think it was you all along...

[my miss storm cat]

Just thought I'd mention that, as mentioned on the Australian racing thread, Luke Griffith was stood down for four years for meth.

Trainer banned as he and his horses test positive

http://www.racingpost.com/news/live.sd#

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

How would one acquire meth to give to a horse? How would you know its actually meth? How would you know its purity? How would you know how much to give and when to give it? Do meth labs give out handbooks on horse doping?

May want to check with the three guys in New Mexico that got suspended for using it - they've may possibly have compared notes - they've had 3 years to do so, anyway.

[Cannon Shell]

The reports said 22 picograms was the level.

You can rant all you want but it doesnt change the reality that this guy probably is getting labeled and punished for something he didnt do.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The reports said 22 picograms was the level.

You can rant all you want but it doesnt change the reality that this guy probably is getting labeled and punished for something he didnt do.

Here is the ruling from the KHRC -

http://khrc.ky.gov/Rulings/150050.pdf


it makes no mention of the level detected - if that's available someplace for public consumption, that'd been real helpful, and gone a long way... Thanks.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

Here is the ruling from the KHRC -

http://khrc.ky.gov/Rulings/150050.pdf


it makes no mention of the level detected - if that's available someplace for public consumption, that'd been real helpful, and gone a long way... Thanks.

http://www.paulickreport.com/news/th...th-suspension/

under comments from Bill Casner

[Cannon Shell]

The irony of the general lament that drugs are ruining racing is ironic considering that horses in 2015 are probably running with less in their systems than at anytime in the last 30 years.

When I started training in 1999 in KY you could literally give 15 shots to a horse on race day. While it wouldnt be effective that quickly you could give a massive dose of painkillers and steroids 4 hours before the race. A large percentage of horses running in major races were getting milkshakes. And yet now all we hear is how dirty the game is and how drugged up the horses are despite the last 10 years having the largest overhaul of medication rules in the sports history.
Are things perfect? Of course not. Are there guys who are getting an edge? Absolutely. Do the rules need constant updating? Sure.

But the idea that things are worse than they ever have been just isnt correct. The rules are still not ideal as they are different in a lot of cases from state to state and lab to lab. Trainers and vet still dont have a firm idea of exactly what the rules are in many cases and the industry seems to prefer an adversarial relationship with horsemen as opposed to trying to come up with rules that are good for the horses and clear and easy to follow for the humans.

The biggest difference between now and 20 years ago is the information overload that we are subjected to. 20 years ago no one following NY racing would have paid 2 seconds attention to positive tests in New Mexico. A lot of the time you didnt even know a guy was suspended until a different name appeared in the program. We all act like things are so much worse but they arent. Its just that everything is a big deal now, greed and ignorance has caused the game to be overpriced and on the track the product just is not all that compelling.

I'm not saying that we can just look the other way when situations like this occur. However we need to think a little more critically and less conspiratorial.

[ADJMK]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The reports said 22 picograms was the level.

You can rant all you want but it doesnt change the reality that this guy probably is getting labeled and punished for something he didnt do.

I agree with everything you say Chuck. unfortunately not everyone here has a real clue what goes on in the backstretch.
No trainer would use Meth as a means to win a race and not expect to get caught. Cheaters know how to find stuff that is not being tested for.

If it wasn't from contamination, a possible scenario is someone in the backstretch blew some meth up the horses nose and probably cashed a bet. Unfortunately the trainer takes the rap.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by ADJMK

I agree with everything you say Chuck. unfortunately not everyone here has a real clue what goes on in the backstretch.
No trainer would use Meth as a means to win a race and not expect to get caught. Cheaters know how to find stuff that is not being tested for.

If it wasn't from contamination, a possible scenario is someone in the backstretch blew some meth up the horses nose and probably cashed a bet. Unfortunately the trainer takes the rap.

The problem with the blow up the nose theory is that had someone done that on raceday it would have likely produced a far higher level of drug. Had it been done prior to the day of the race could it actually have any effect?

[Danzig]

simply put, we can't win on this.
trainers who get one or a hundred positives get defended. how is anyone to know who got contaminated, and who didn't? how to know when someone obviously did something, and who didn't? he had unlabled meds, and syringes-does that matter or not?
i don't think anyone is happy to see a trainer 'caught', but they are happy to know a potential cheater is possibly removed...but then bettors get told they're stupid for being happy a potential cheater is removed.
than you have people who have a rap sheet a mile long, still in the sport. nominated for the hall of fame. caught with cobra venom and let back in a year later. people with long rap sheets who get clients because some clients will do anything to win.
what's the answer to this frustrating and ongoing dilemma?

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

How would one acquire meth to give to a horse? How would you know its actually meth? How would you know its purity? How would you know how much to give and when to give it? Do meth labs give out handbooks on horse doping?

I'm not doubting you for a second, but I do have to ask if nobody gives meth to horses, why are they testing for meth?