Lukas down to 40 horses

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Yes, he breaks down way more than any of those guys percetage wise.
What does it prove about the insurance companies? The insurance companies have all the numbers. They know the exact number of horses that he has insured and the exact number that have died and had to pay the policy on.

The owners buy the insurance policies but the insurance companies will ask you who your trainer is. If it's a trainer who is not profitable for them to insure, then they probably won't insure the horse.

and you have this study, right? or a link?

as for insurance co's--they'd cover your soul after you sold it to the devil as long as you could afford the premium. low risk, low premium, high risk-high premium.
funny, you're the only poster i've ever seen on here or elsewhere make these claims. funny also that i've never seen proof of it anywhere. you'd think that publications such as bloodhorse, who doesn't seem imo to shy away from touchy subjects, would be all over a story about a high profile, hall of fame trainer who can't get insurance coverage.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I'm not sure I would agree with that. Overall it seems that Pletcher is beloved on message boards and his defenders well outnumber his detracters. Do you honestly disagree with that?

Maybe I'm wrong.

just seems to me that pletcher catches a lot of grief over not having yet won a classic, and days such as his 0-17 in the bcc this year. also see a lot of posts suggesting he isn't totally above board in his training tactics from many. he's achieved a lot of success in a relatively short time, and i feel that will continue in the years to come--and that the amount of detractors will rise with the purse money!! seems everyone enjoys a success--until that guy gets 'too' successful.
look at jerry bailey--he got a ton of grief the last few years, and everyone speculated who would take his place due to his retirement. note who's #1 in the standings, and #1 in the amount of threads started on this board (one example) bashing mr gomez's every awkward move.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

no, sir, i am no lukas fan. that's where you get it wrong. but i'm also a fan of people not just posting their opinion without any proof, and putting that opinion up as being a FACT. you don't like lukas, fine. i know posters have said they don't like his tactics, they think he's too hard on horses. THAT is OPINION-something everyone is entitled to. you cross the line in saying he breaks down a higher percentage of horses than other trainers, and that insurance co's won't cover him. if it's such a known fact, why nothing from you, his harshest critic, to back up something you are posting as proven, when you have never shown anything to prove it?!

I've given you proof. Several months ago, I even gave you the name of one of the biggest insurance companies that won't insure him. Did you call them? Of course not. You don't want to call them because if you called them then you wouldn't be able to argue with me any more. I know you too well Danzig.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I've given you proof. Several months ago, I even gave you the name of one of the biggest insurance companies that won't insure him. Did you call them? Of course not. You don't want to call them because if you called them then you wouldn't be able to argue with me any more. I know you too well Danzig.

you have given me proof? what was that?? as for giving me a name, i must have missed that one. maybe it was a same old tired thread i chose to ignore, as it never goes anywhere.
lol
oh boy, you 'know' me?! lol that's rich. lemme know when you find the #'s of breakdowns, %'s, etc....been waiting for that for some time.
i'd be happy to have that name again. a # would be great. so that way, i can go find your 'proof' for you....

She's a fighter, Pupkin. She'll never quit. Ever.

D. Wayne has trained probably a billion dollars in horse flesh. Nobody can take away his accomplishments nor can they take away his failures. However, law of averages says he's going to have more failure than success.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Pillow Pants

She's a fighter, Pupkin. She'll never quit. Ever.

D. Wayne has trained probably a billion dollars in horse flesh. Nobody can take away his accomplishments nor can they take away his failures. However, law of averages says he's going to have more failure than success.

pillow, i just want him to show where he's coming from. i don't think that's too much to ask. it's hilarious that i find myself in this position, as i've never cared much for dwl. he always seemed rather pompous to me.
like i said, you don't like the guys methods, that's one thing.
hey, if he's right, great. i won't lose sleep over it. but i'd love to see something concrete showing that lukas is indeed a bigger breaker down of horses. now, if rupe perceives that lukas breaks down more, fine. but to state it as fact, then you should back it up imo.

Originally Posted by Danzig188

pillow, i just want him to show where he's coming from. i don't think that's too much to ask. it's hilarious that i find myself in this position, as i've never cared much for dwl. he always seemed rather pompous to me.
like i said, you don't like the guys methods, that's one thing.
hey, if he's right, great. i won't lose sleep over it. but i'd love to see something concrete showing that lukas is indeed a bigger breaker down of horses. now, if rupe perceives that lukas breaks down more, fine. but to state it as fact, then you should back it up imo.

Well i'm sure he's got more breakdowns than most trainers due to the fact he's trained 1000's of horses. Percentage wise he might not be number 1 but I bet he's close.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

just seems to me that pletcher catches a lot of grief over not having yet won a classic, and days such as his 0-17 in the bcc this year. also see a lot of posts suggesting he isn't totally above board in his training tactics from many. he's achieved a lot of success in a relatively short time, and i feel that will continue in the years to come--and that the amount of detractors will rise with the purse money!! seems everyone enjoys a success--until that guy gets 'too' successful.
look at jerry bailey--he got a ton of grief the last few years, and everyone speculated who would take his place due to his retirement. note who's #1 in the standings, and #1 in the amount of threads started on this board (one example) bashing mr gomez's every awkward move.

I guess I can see your point but he seems to have more defenders than detracters.

Personally I think there is some legitimacy to knocking his TC performance in that he not only gets an enormous amount of well bred and high priced young horses but has also won an abundance of 2YO races in the past and it is somewhat baffling how poorly his horses have progressed. On the other hand, he has only been on his own for 11 seasons, and really only a strong factor for five or six, so it's hard to be TOO critical. It's hardly as though he has been anything close to a failure.

As for the BC failure, well to me he is a trainer who points for the whole year, unlike a lot of people who do seem to race with the BC too much in mind. I would rather have Pletcher's resume of success in stakes races throughout the season than one BC win. Perhaps someone COULD say he squeezes the lemon dry, so to speak, before the BC but he certainly wins a LOT of big races while doing that. He gets a lot of good horses....but he does win a lot of races. Does he underperform? Hard to say but on the surface it's hard to say he does.

My criticisms are different, and not even necessarily about his training, but more about the damage to the game of one trainer controlling too many horses. Plus, I don't like the list of horses that have flashed brilliance only to fizzle out way too quickly. He seems to train for the moment rather than the long haul. On the other hand, who am I to tell someone he is doing it wrong when every owner on Earth seems to want to give him horses.

Let's face it, it's hard to not be somewhat cynical about the game these days, and anyone achieving huge success falls under suspicion. Is it always fair? Absolutely not. However, when a trainer faces drug related suspensions it doesn't exactly bolster any claims of purity.

[ELA]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

just seems to me that pletcher catches a lot of grief over not having yet won a classic, and days such as his 0-17 in the bcc this year. also see a lot of posts suggesting he isn't totally above board in his training tactics from many. he's achieved a lot of success in a relatively short time, and i feel that will continue in the years to come--and that the amount of detractors will rise with the purse money!! seems everyone enjoys a success--until that guy gets 'too' successful.
look at jerry bailey--he got a ton of grief the last few years, and everyone speculated who would take his place due to his retirement. note who's #1 in the standings, and #1 in the amount of threads started on this board (one example) bashing mr gomez's every awkward move.

I think Pletcher does take a lot of heat for having not won a Classic. Being in the "infancy" of his career (on his own), and being young (relatively speaking) I would think this is somewhat of a temporary thing. I guess we will soon see.

However, and I am not defending him in any way, he has run second and third a few times. The depth of his barn is just incredible. It's not like he is getting homebreds from one or more premier breeding operations and that makes up his barn. Nor is there one owner who fills the stalls with 7 (and in one case, 8) digit purchases.

This year, I read in either the DRF, BH or TT, perhaps all of them, that he started out the year with some staggering number of Classic eligibles. The Derby is an enigmatic race to target, train for, peak for and ultimately win.

I think there is a lot more to the statistics and numbers than just the # of training titles.

Eric

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

pillow, i just want him to show where he's coming from. i don't think that's too much to ask. it's hilarious that i find myself in this position, as i've never cared much for dwl. he always seemed rather pompous to me.
like i said, you don't like the guys methods, that's one thing.
hey, if he's right, great. i won't lose sleep over it. but i'd love to see something concrete showing that lukas is indeed a bigger breaker down of horses. now, if rupe perceives that lukas breaks down more, fine. but to state it as fact, then you should back it up imo.

Not only is it just breakdowns, but he has an incredibly high number of horses that don't finish the race. This would include any horse that broke down in the race, was eased in the race, was pulled up in the race, or who lost by over 30 lengths. I don't remember the exact number but he had around 4x more than the average trainer in terms of percentages of horses that don't finish a race.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Pillow Pants

Well i'm sure he's got more breakdowns than most trainers due to the fact he's trained 1000's of horses. Percentage wise he might not be number 1 but I bet he's close.

The only thing that matters is percentages. You would expect a guy with 150 horses to have 5x the amount of breakdowns as a guy with 30 horses. The absolute number of breakdows is not important. It's the percentage that is important.

[ELA]

Andy, 11 seasons? I know he had a couple of horses on his own and all, but when exactly was it that he opened a public stable? 1998? 1999?

I agree with you. There is legitimacy to the TC performance, results, etc. The numbers are the numbers. I don't play the game at that level of course, but I have friends and clients who do. Perhaps I am wrong, but the people I know who play at that level care more about getting to the big dance than they do about contributing to winning a training title. Sure, grade 1's are important of course and the proof is in the big pudding. How long before his barn hits $30 million in earnings? Big numbers there.

The BC is also enigmatic IMO. I mean Bobby Frankel -- like him or not, personally, professionally, etc. -- produces and gets results. The guy is a great horseman in my opinion. He doesn't get the monster purchases, yearlings, 2 year olds, etc. that say a Pletcher gets. He has a different type of operation. But he produces. Now, a few years ago -- he was what, 0 for 30 something in the BC? And, I think his first victory was with a horse he owned -- wasn't it?

I don't know what his 0 for 30 something records means exactly, but does that take away from his accomplishments? I don't think so. I am sure some do however. I tend to look beyond the stats and #'s.

Eric

[ELA]

Yeah, now that you mention it, I vaguely remember that as well. Was he full blown on his own then and operating a public stable? If so, then you guys got it -- 11. I think I remember he had a couple for JJ or a family friend.

Funny thing how you remember oh so well a nice horse you hit huh? LOL.

Eric

[blackthroatedwind]

1996 was definitely his first year on his own. It was my last full winter at Gulfstream and it's when I spoke to him quite often.

[ELA]

Got it. Thanks.

So, 1996 was your last full winter at Gulfstream huh Andy? There is no doubt our paths crossed. We both might have been a bit preoccupied or inebriated to realize it. LOL.

Eric

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by ELA

Got it. Thanks.

So, 1996 was your last full winter at Gulfstream huh Andy? There is no doubt our paths crossed. We both might have been a bit preoccupied or inebriated to realize it. LOL.

Eric

I was serious then and almost always sober.

I watched the races on the TV in the corner on the second floor of the Clubhouse straight after getting off the escalator. Or else I was hanging around the outside seats around the walking ring on the clubhouse side.

I hung out with the usual suspects.

[ELA]

I was kidding -- to an extent. LOL.

Eric

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by ELA

I was kidding -- to an extent. LOL.

Eric

Gulfstream was serious business back then. A TON of work. They ran ten or eleven a day, six days a week, and the fields were big. You worked morning, noon and night. But, you won. It was hard....but it was good.

I feel like we should have a T-Shirt that says " I was a horseplayer before Racing sucked ".

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Pillow Pants

Well i'm sure he's got more breakdowns than most trainers due to the fact he's trained 1000's of horses. Percentage wise he might not be number 1 but I bet he's close.

yeah, he would have more in total if he had a larger stable, but it's the %'s....i also have seen threads about baffert that accuse him of having the highest % of breakdowns. some don't like his methods either.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I guess I can see your point but he seems to have more defenders than detracters.

Personally I think there is some legitimacy to knocking his TC performance in that he not only gets an enormous amount of well bred and high priced young horses but has also won an abundance of 2YO races in the past and it is somewhat baffling how poorly his horses have progressed. On the other hand, he has only been on his own for 11 seasons, and really only a strong factor for five or six, so it's hard to be TOO critical. It's hardly as though he has been anything close to a failure.

As for the BC failure, well to me he is a trainer who points for the whole year, unlike a lot of people who do seem to race with the BC too much in mind. I would rather have Pletcher's resume of success in stakes races throughout the season than one BC win. Perhaps someone COULD say he squeezes the lemon dry, so to speak, before the BC but he certainly wins a LOT of big races while doing that. He gets a lot of good horses....but he does win a lot of races. Does he underperform? Hard to say but on the surface it's hard to say he does.

My criticisms are different, and not even necessarily about his training, but more about the damage to the game of one trainer controlling too many horses. Plus, I don't like the list of horses that have flashed brilliance only to fizzle out way too quickly. He seems to train for the moment rather than the long haul. On the other hand, who am I to tell someone he is doing it wrong when every owner on Earth seems to want to give him horses.

Let's face it, it's hard to not be somewhat cynical about the game these days, and anyone achieving huge success falls under suspicion. Is it always fair? Absolutely not. However, when a trainer faces drug related suspensions it doesn't exactly bolster any claims of purity.

at this point i don't think pletcher takes too much heat, but he's still got a long career ahead of him...i don't think he will ever get as much criticism as lukas because of the differences in personality. lukas has always been viewed as ****y and smug, certainly not things i've ever seen anyone say about pletcher.
as for the drug violations--like the writer wrote the other day, what do the top three trainers have in common? they're all suspended due to drug violations. and then pletcher gets to serve his suspension at the slowest time of the year. this tiger has no teeth! the drug policies in racing need work. they need to set a workable standard, but then they need to have the right policies in place, and correct punishments that fit the bill and are tough enough that a trainer would truly hesitate before attempting to get around the system ever again. i feel they got asmussens attention. but this suspension for pletcher is probably going to be considered no more than a nuisance or minor inconvenience for him.