HP,

I hear where you are coming from.

If you leave the drug aspect of the discussion out of the equation just for the moment, there's still a lot to be said for getting high quality stock, developing it properly, and spotting it well. The latter two are clearly desireable skills in a trainer and the first one often comes from demonstrating those latter two skills because they produce lots of winners.

A handful of trainers have been demonstrating those spotting and development skills for as long as I've been around the game.

Both Pletcher and Frankel are very conservative at spotting their horses (IMO Frankel is too conservative) and seem to have a very keen ability to move them up the class ladder at approximately the right pace. If they experiment and it doesn't produce good results, they adjust quickly. That's why they have such a high win percentage overall. IMO at least "partly" why they don't win as often at the Breeder's Cup is that those races are loaded with contenders relative to the typcial stakes race - which automatically translates into a lower win percentage - and they give up their "spotting" skills just by entering. They have to take on horses they do a great job of avoiding all year long when they go to the BC. THere may be other reasons :), but IMO speed figures alone are not proof because tons of horses run sub par races in those elite Grade 1 races because of the depth of quality, race development etc...

IMO, it's OK to be suspicious about what else is going on and still bet on their horses when they going off at overlaid odds in a situation where they usually have excellent results.

I am suspicious when a trainer moves a horse up by a real lot very quickly and took him from another highly competent horseman. I am suspicious if the horse is running new tops at the age of 6 etc....

I am less suspicios when a trainer improves a horse he took from a trainer with a terrible overall record or when he takes a horse that has long showed potential to a farm for two months before turning him around.

I don't disagree with any of you guys in general. I just think there has been an occasional jump to judgement.

Every time a horse runs really well it doesn't he must have been drugged and every time he misfires it doesn't mean it must have been the new drug screening. IMO, once you start playing horses with that mindset, you're gambling is going get really screwed up and you are going to start making all sorts of excuses for your own errors in information and/or understanding.







Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/30/2005 12:19PM by classhandicapper.