toppled,

why is the 1 for 44 relevant? (not saying it isn't, but what is your theory as to why it is statistic that matters)

1. Pletcher can't train horses to get 1 1/4?
2. Pletcher can't win in Kentucky because of testing?
3. Pletcher's derby horses all were slow?

I can't connect any of those dots. Maybe you can. I have to look at each case individually (in this case each horse individually).

If a coin lands heads 10 times in a row, unless I can't assume heads is more likely unless i can explain why it keeps happening.

I read the Covello post about all of Pletcher's horses being over the top before they come to the Derby because he squeezes them so hard earlier in the campaign to get them there. Maybe, but really, could Carpe Diem have come to the derby any more softly raced and ready for a new top or a good race?

The game isn't so simple so you can say "Pletcher is 1-44 so he is a toss". You can bet however you want of course, but the game has MANY MANY dimensions to it, which is why many of us like to play it. (we like to believe we are smart enough to figure out all the dimensions).

As for the Derby bet, as the exotics payouts showed, AP was more like 8-5 than 5-2 in exactas, tris, supers, pick-3s and pick 4s. My LOSING BET was that he was an underlay in those pools and made Firing Line and Frosted my "A's" and Materiality and Upstart my "B's" on all multirace bets. I lost. Would make the same bet again. (post positions switched, Materiality and Upstarts would be "A's".

You can keep tossing Pletcher on principle, I will keep analyzing his horses individually and make decisions based on form and price. (I hate the guy, I think I was the first to post how lame it was that he continues to skip the preakness while Baffert continues to be smart enough to adjust his style to win off the two weeks rest).

Best

Rob