PDA

View Full Version : romans and lukas make letterman's top 10 list


freeneasy
06-10-2005, 08:45 PM
even if i made it up myself so
what kind of reasoning can these two morons possibly offer for their decisions to run their 3 year olds in tomarrows belmont? let us count the ways
10)we thinks were as smart as we thinks we are
9)were not as smart as we think you are
8) a.p. arrow showed us the real stuff he's made of when he went wire to wire in an open mile and a quarter 6 horse maiden field and beat nolans cat and we think he can wire this field right back and at a mile and a half.
7) nolans cat may still be a maiden but he got a good second behind a.p. arrow and since the belmont is a quarter of a mile longer, we think that because of that that will give us the advantange were looking for and that this time around we'll be able to get the better of a.p. arrow and since lukas thinks that apa is going to win the belmont then that means we should be able to win the belmont since we think that this time we're going to be the ones thats going to be able to get the better of apa. see what i mean.
6) iam d. wayne kookas
5) iam d. wayne romans
4) we really, really like our chances to run 1-2 today so we got together and conspired to bet a $100 exacta box and split the cost for $50 dollars each
3) me and dale got much better spots all picked out later on but in the meantime were going to use this race to shade their form so's we can get some bigger odds for the next time
2) its our race to lose
1) the owners made me do it

saratoga guy
06-10-2005, 10:46 PM
On the other hand, let's take a realistic look at the race and think about why those horses might be entered:

Grade 1
$1 million purse -- with the 5th place finisher getting $30K
...and in this field of eleven, eight of them are eligible for NW2.

The better question might be -- why are connections with more talented runners sitting on the sidelines?

PaceAdvantage
06-11-2005, 12:19 AM
The funny part about this latest Lukas bashing is, quite a number of folks on this board rank A.P. Arrow a lot higher than I would have thought....


Must be the breeding, and the Jerry Bailey factor....

freeneasy, let's face it, this isn't the deepest Grade 1 race you'll ever see....if I had any halfway decent 3yo, and the money, I'd enter too.....good chance at picking up a check.....

Once you get past the top 2 or 3, it's WIDE open....

freeneasy
06-11-2005, 01:29 AM
the entire field is 18 for 63
after i made the first post i put my numbers down and strictly by the numbers a.p. arrow comes out 4th behind giacomo, reverberate and alex afleet ahead of southern africa and andromeda's hero. but in the speed department alone a.p. arrow comes up between 6th and 7th. if i played a tri i wouldnt give him a second and i'd have to fight off my better judgement to give him a 3rd but in a super i think id have to give him a forth but dale romans horse, nolans cat, is the most less apt to win horse in this race.

keilan
06-11-2005, 10:10 AM
Aside from Giacoma (2 for 9) and Afleet Alex (7 for 11), the other nine horses total one graded stakes and a combined 16 victories from 54 starts.

It’s embarrassing to the sport that this is the best field that is entered for such a prestigious race. I wish Foggy was in the race cause he would kick their asses that’s how bad I think this group is. If the BELMONT were being run in my backyard today, I would get up and close the drapes.

freeneasy
06-11-2005, 11:00 AM
i put up a makeshift analogy on this race in 'selections' and if iam right then i wouldnt be suprised if this race went out in 2 minutes and some 31 seconds. bla

Tom
06-11-2005, 11:05 AM
Agree - zero interst in the Belmont. Horses in it could actually get beat at Finger Lakes next week!

Actaully, the feature at FL is far more interesting - I might just go out an watch it live. BTW....admission is always FREE - no 900% increase for a NW1 stake race. LOL! Classy move.

JustRalph
06-11-2005, 12:12 PM
If the BELMONT were being run in my backyard today, I would get up and close the drapes.

:lol: :lol:

skate
06-11-2005, 02:46 PM
since its already a given

this post reminds me of the gal that aaassumes, the more she pays the better the product will become.

:p

Buckeye
06-11-2005, 03:43 PM
"I wish Foggy was in the race cause he would kick their asses that’s how bad I think this group is."

You and me both keilan. I have singled him in race 8 :cool:

Dancer's Image
06-11-2005, 09:29 PM
"what kind of reasoning can these two morons possibly offer for their decisions to run their 3 year olds in tomarrows belmont?"

Freeneasy,
I thought for sure we'd see your apology by now. How would you like your crow served?

freeneasy
06-12-2005, 03:50 PM
the only reason nolans cat was in this race was in the hopes of picking up a 4th or a 5th. you know it, i know it and everybody else and their brother knows it. he got the show and did better then expected.
nolans cat was not put in this race with the unshakable confindence that he is the best horse in this race and will prove that out over the rest of the field when he crosses the finish line first. afleet alex on the other hand was put in this race for just that purpose.
the belmont is a race that is there for the purpose of winning and for that reason and that reason only lukas and romans had no bussiness to enter and should have never ran these two horses.
now for the purpose of possibly picking up a check or two, whatever. but in some of the most important 3 year old races that we have like the belmont i like to see horses that are ment to win, not place, show or again whatever.
but this i can tell you and that is i doubt very much that you bet 'nolans cat' like i bet 'afleet alex' and if thats eating crow then baby all i can say is is "whats for desert"

Dancer's Image
06-12-2005, 06:32 PM
Let's get one more thing straight here...

You made the stupid statement..."what kind of reasoning can these two morons possibly offer for their decisions to run their 3 year olds in tomarrows belmont?"...which was proven to be stupid by the fact that Nolan's Cat finished 3rd.
Then instead of admitting your mistake, you compound your error by making another stupid statement..."nolans cat was not put in this race with the unshakable confindence that he is the best horse in this race and will prove that out over the rest of the field when he crosses the finish line first. afleet alex on the other hand was put in this race for just that purpose.
the belmont is a race that is there for the purpose of winning and for that reason and that reason only lukas and romans had no bussiness to enter and should have never ran these two horses."...by this reasoning, no other horses should have entered the race because AA was the best horse on paper, but they don't run the race on paper, and Nolan's Cat at least, proved he belonged in the race.
I have no problem with you making any predictions you want, although I do disagree with you using Letterman's top ten gimmick, and then not being a bit funny. But part of being a mature person is to admit when you are wrong, and you were wrong. Hopefully, you'll grow up one day, and maybe even find a sense of humor!

The Hawk
06-12-2005, 06:38 PM
nolans cat was not put in this race with the unshakable confindence that he is the best horse in this race and will prove that out over the rest of the field when he crosses the finish line first. afleet alex on the other hand was put in this race for just that purpose.
the belmont is a race that is there for the purpose of winning and for that reason and that reason only lukas and romans had no bussiness to enter and should have never ran these two horses.
now for the purpose of possibly picking up a check or two, whatever. but in some of the most important 3 year old races that we have like the belmont i like to see horses that are ment to win, not place, show or again whatever.
but this i can tell you and that is i doubt very much that you bet 'nolans cat' like i bet 'afleet alex' and if thats eating crow then baby all i can say is is "whats for desert"

This is utter nonsense. If trainers entered horses in races only when they had "unshakable confidence", whatever that is, we'd have a lot more short fields than we already do. The Belmont is a race that is there for the purpose of winning? Remember Commendable? How about Sarava? I'm sure if their trainers needed "unshakable confidence" they wouldn't have even been in the race. It's a horse race, with a big purse. Just because you don't like a horse, that doesn't mean he doesn't belong in the race.

Even if longshots don't win, like Nolan's Cat, there's nothing wrong with them entering to try to get a check. Let's not make it out to be anything more than what it is: it's a business, one where a trainer can make a score for his owner just by getting third. Give the guy credit, he had the horse in a good spot. Just because it's called "THE BELMONT" doesn't mean the field is any better than a Grade 3 race, and outside of the winner that's basically what it was. And he was as good as the rest of them, at least on Saturday.

Everybody loves to bash Lukas for putting his horses in tough spots and then those same people complain about the nationwide problem of short fields. If everyone was like Frankel and ran their horses 5 times a year we'd really be screwed.

Just admit, Free, that you were wrong in your original thread, instead of offering this inane rationalization. Nothing to be ashamed of, everybody who plays this game is wrong a few times a day.

freeneasy
06-12-2005, 11:50 PM
you think, talk and play a different ball game of horseracing then i do. if nolans cat was good enough to get the show in this field then he should have been good enough and it would have been better to go after and secure a win in a more suited race of lesser stength, and value.
seeing as how outstanding they must think their horse is iam sure that romans must have 3 or 4 races for 3yo's lined up for nolans cat where he should easily be a winner picking up 120 to $180,000 two maybe three times. if this is the case then we'll see how well his horse does after this belmont 3rd. if he falters then we can raise the issue that the decision to pick up a third and run this horse in the belmont as the culprit for future loses.
if the horse is this good then the better opportunity to quite possibly earn up to three times the hundred grand he earned in his belmont 3rd could very well have been ruined because of romans decision to run in the belmont.
if you got the horse put him where he belongs, give up the belmont, get the wins and the good money.
maybe they think this maiden is all that he can be right now and can go on from this belmont and blaze thru the rest of his campaign, meet afleet alex later on, beat that one and get hoty honors.
could be they didnt have any more future plans for nolans cat after the belmont until next year whereby then i guess if this was romans last shot to pick up a hundred grand then whatever.
and i entirely dissagree that just because this race is called the belmont that it doesnt mean the field is any better then a grade three race. the belmont is and always will be a grade 1 race because for the simple reason that when you answer the question why it is that it is the only race in the nation for three year old's thats carded at a mile and a half then will you understand that this race is only for the best, and only the best should be competeing in it, not some maiden that i'd bet if they put right back in a maiden race would'nt even be able to get that.
if you dont think you have the the horse that can win today then stay the hell out instead of stinking up this great classic with some bullshit maiden that gets a 3rd.
and yeah i think if you talk to ritchy and rose that there was no doubts in their mind as to who the best horse was before, during and after the race. i'd say that you would'nt have been able to convince them otherwise. the way rose shook that horse free just told me that ritchy and rose knew that there horse could have won from anywhere.
see, part of my handicapping the belmont is from the standpoint of what this race is all about. the trainers that make this race famous. take charlie whittingham. charlie knew how tough it was to get your horse back after a race and espeacially after a tough classic and never ever would have put nolans cat in this belmont for the sake of picking up a 100 grand, ever, not for the sake of nothing.
and dancers image? that was a stupid move by dale romans. a stupid move by lukas and pretty stupid of you to insist upon my stupidity 3 times and play it all off like your some kind of father figure to be awed and admired and perhaps even looked up to for the untainted maturity you seem to think you exude. no, what you need to do is press your middle finger right up underneath the bottom tip of your thumb and let go with a flick as hard as you can at that prissy little pimple you got stuck on the end of that nose until it goes pop. now thats what i call growing up with a sense of humor!

hawk: dont get me wrong, i enjoyed your post and my attitude is not the same as with the above but i have never seen lukas make so many moves that just go way outside of simple reasoning. used to be that the man could do just about no wrong. but look no further then the 8th at belmont with 'going wild' and that in itself will tell you close to all you need to know about what he was thinking when he didnt scratch a.p. arrow. all i can tell you is i feel sorry for his horses. i mean its like the man is losing touch with reality and sometimes the air about him seems like he just couldnt be concerned about it or couldnt be bothered by it. i dont know thats just not the inner sanctem of horseracing to me. i dont hate the man or nothing but sometimes it just gets to goofy with the guy and when i see that plainly just does not make any sense at all, then yeah i guess i can go off the radar a little bit. but this is not after seeing this stuff once or twice, it just seems to keep going on and you start to think how can he just keep repeating the same mistakes over and over. when he's good he's a great one. when he's bad, man he's the worst.

PaceAdvantage
06-13-2005, 03:13 AM
Despite popular opinion, horses are NOT made out of glass, and will NOT be ruined by running in the Belmont Stakes.

The Hawk
06-13-2005, 06:45 PM
you think, talk and play a different ball game of horseracing then i do. if nolans cat was good enough to get the show in this field then he should have been good enough and it would have been better to go after and secure a win in a more suited race of lesser stength, and value..

Why? Now Ramsey has a horse who finished third in a Classic race. Doesn't matter how watered down it was. That's worth a lot more than a win in a Grade 3 race, and, besides, do you really think Ramsey is worried about money?

picking up 120 to $180,000 two maybe three times. if this is the case then we'll see how well his horse does after this belmont 3rd. if he falters then we can raise the issue that the decision to pick up a third and run this horse in the belmont as the culprit for future loses. if the horse is this good then the better opportunity to quite possibly earn up to three times the hundred grand he earned in his belmont 3rd could very well have been ruined because of romans decision to run in the belmont.
..

As PA said, why is running in the Belmont the death knell for a horse?

if you got the horse put him where he belongs, give up the belmont, get the wins and the good money.
maybe they think this maiden is all that he can be right now and can go on from this belmont and blaze thru the rest of his campaign, meet afleet alex later on, beat that one and get hoty honors.
could be they didnt have any more future plans for nolans cat after the belmont until next year whereby then i guess if this was romans last shot to pick up a hundred grand then whatever.

Obviously, he DID belong in the Belmont. He got third. And I have no idea where you get the notion that they have no future plans for him. Maybe I'm missing something.

the belmont is and always will be a grade 1 race because for the simple reason that when you answer the question why it is that it is the only race in the nation for three year old's thats carded at a mile and a half then will you understand that this race is only for the best, and only the best should be competeing in it, not some maiden that i'd bet if they put right back in a maiden race would'nt even be able to get that.

That maiden was the third-best horse in this apparently precious race, which is a good indication that it was a weak race. And your contention that he might not win a maiden race next time (I happen to agree with that) illustrates MY point: The Belmont was a weak event, outside of the winner. It was hardly a Grade 1-caliber race. Most of the time it is. This year it was not. Happens all the time, at all tracks that run graded races. Some are stronger than others.

if you dont think you have the the horse that can win today then stay the hell out instead of stinking up this great classic with some bullshit maiden that gets a 3rd.

That was hardly a great classic. And if horses like Nolan's Cat didn't run in the Belmont we'd be stuck with another 4-horse field that no one wants to bet. That's the problem with the game in the first place: too many unappealing races from a betting standpoint.

and yeah i think if you talk to ritchy and rose that there was no doubts in their mind as to who the best horse was before, during and after the race. i'd say that you would'nt have been able to convince them otherwise. the way rose shook that horse free just told me that ritchy and rose knew that there horse could have won from anywhere.

Great. It should have been a walkover then. Do you know what this game is without betting? Polo.

hawk: dont get me wrong, i enjoyed your post and my attitude is not the same as with the above but i have never seen lukas make so many moves that just go way outside of simple reasoning. used to be that the man could do just about no wrong. but look no further then the 8th at belmont with 'going wild' and that in itself will tell you close to all you need to know about what he was thinking when he didnt scratch a.p. arrow. all i can tell you is i feel sorry for his horses. i mean its like the man is losing touch with reality and sometimes the air about him seems like he just couldnt be concerned about it or couldnt be bothered by it. i dont know thats just not the inner sanctem of horseracing to me. i dont hate the man or nothing but sometimes it just gets to goofy with the guy and when i see that plainly just does not make any sense at all, then yeah i guess i can go off the radar a little bit. but this is not after seeing this stuff once or twice, it just seems to keep going on and you start to think how can he just keep repeating the same mistakes over and over. when he's good he's a great one. when he's bad, man he's the worst.

I understand your point about Lukas but who's to say where the guys should run his horses? Again, just because we don't think a particular horse has a chance doesn't mean he doesn't have a right to run in a given race. I mean, this is probably the best horse racing board on the internet. A Grade 1 site. A Classic. Does that mean that posters who we happen to think have poor opinions, or have no spelling or punctuation skills, should only post at lesser sites? Seriously, like it or not, the guy is a Hall of Fame trainer, and he's won a lot of races where lots of people felt he had no business being in the race in the first place.

Suff
06-13-2005, 09:01 PM
------------------------Page Break------------------------------

freeneasy
06-15-2005, 05:14 PM
i'll try to answer each sectioned response from top to bottom

1st quote: the pp shows that nolans cat beat the kind of horses that could not carry on the campaingns that they did and win at a mile and a half in the belmont. had nolans cat run in the 'sir barton' he would not have beaten 'pin point'. had nc run in the 'LS derby and the winstar derby' he would not have beaten 'southern africa' had nc run in the preakness, KD, SA derby san filipe, sham or the hol. fut he would have not beaten giacomo. had he run in the peter pan he would not have beaten reveberate. had he run in the sham and the peter pan he would not have beaten chekov. put them all back together and this horse will get trounced because like the others he is not the kind of horse, right now that can put together a one race campainge, go in to the 1 1/2 mile belmont, get 3rd then come out of that and keep himself to any kind of a winning way. he will face the same delima the other horses faced going into the belmont only he will get beat worse then the horses he beat that day.

2nd quote: i think its going to be a pretty tough job to get this 6 time maiden back to win some important races after the belmont

3rd quote: ap arrow just beat this horse and diddnt do squat in the belmont do you really think that romans thought for one moment that his horse had any kind of a chance to win this race. no. and if romans and ramsey thought that they couldnt beat aa in the belmont then nolans cat did not belong in the race. why waste the horrse in the belmont if they have any kind serios intentions for him during this year.

4th: first, to say the belmont is an 'apparently precious race' is wrong. this race call's for trainers only who can say that their horse is ready to win the most difficult race that is carded for 3yo's throughout the entire year. to think of it as anything less is foolishness on any trainer, owner or handicapper's part. even if you've done everything right the distance alone and at this point in the racing carreer of a 3yo is a major detriment.
if this was any other race other then the belmont do you think romans would have run nc. no way. he was just hoping to get luckey and he did.
pinpoint is a better horse, south africa is a better horse, giacomo, andromeda's hero are better horse's and probably reverberate. no one stood out like aa and if he was better then these other horses then he should have at least gotten 2nd. he didnt, he got the 3rd via 'thats the kind of thing that this kind of a race can do to a horse no matter who your horse is' nc didnt give anybody a race as i found after the race was over that nc beat the one's, that couldnt give there all to a mile and a half and still be around for the end.
quote 4: actually as far as i could see it turned out to be a very exciting race. it went way better then i anticipated. the splits were quite fair, much better faster then i expected. the race lined up with a little bit of everything. you had the pace setters, the pressers, the stalkers, closers and deep closers. and everything up to the mile unfolded pretty much as expected but only the win and place horse were able to continue a sustained bid from there. it was a great race but the betting standpoint of the race pretty much pointed to the winner.

next quote about the race being a walkover and without betting the game would be a polo match? i have no idea what means or comes back to.

last quote: well outside of my quoted opinion on lukas perhaps i can further add the possibility as to the reason he seemingly runs some horses in the worst possible spots, the worst possible situations and in the worst possible physical condition may be due to the fact he is so accustomed to having his name spread across every limelight in the bussiness that he is not willing to allow an opportunity pass by without taking a shot with with whatever he has the might be available at the time. i dont know, he's thrown some pretty nice horses to some pretty hungry wolf's when in all perspectives the times just were'nt right for those horses to be entered into anything more then a vacation or a softer spot. and sure every trainer makes wrong decisions but like i said maybe he should let some of his horses have their way instead of his.

PaceAdvantage
06-16-2005, 03:45 AM
well outside of my quoted opinion on lukas perhaps i can further add the possibility as to the reason he seemingly runs some horses in the worst possible spots, the worst possible situations and in the worst possible physical condition may be due to the fact he is so accustomed to having his name spread across every limelight in the bussiness that he is not willing to allow an opportunity pass by without taking a shot with with whatever he has the might be available at the time.

How very silly. Surely you are more intelligent than to believe this? Are you saying the multi-MILLION dollar OWNERS of these said horses are PUTTY in Lukas' hand? They have NO SAY over where their MILLION DOLLAR investments are run?

Come on dude, you can't be serious, can you? You think these owners are going to risk their multi-million dollar babies to stroke D. Wayne's ego?

And even if they DO defer to Wayne, there is a good reason. The man has delivered time and again when EVERYONE has said he couldn't / shouldn't....

Azeri retired SOUND. Ghostzapper is a broken down "champion." Ya'll can scream until you're blue in the FACE about how Wayne and Paulson mismanaged Azeri and raced her in spots that were TOO TOUGH, and TOO close TOGETHER. But Azeri retired healthy, and Ghostzapper broke his leg....you tell me why we should favor one training regimen over the other? Frankel vs. Lukas. You can tell me forever that Frankel is the better trainer, that he puts his horse first. But that still didn't prevent Ghostzapper from breaking his leg....

skate
06-16-2005, 11:49 AM
Pacead,.


So, youre telling me, Frankel aint no good, huh?

PaceAdvantage
06-17-2005, 12:52 AM
Where did I say that? My point was, that despite Frankel handling Ghostzapper with kid gloves (whether he was an injury prone horse or not is up for debate, especially if you look at his morning workout record), the horse still ends up breaking down.

It doesn't matter if you race em often and hard, or less and easy....

freeneasy
06-20-2005, 09:08 PM
How very silly. Surely you are more intelligent than to believe this? Are you saying the multi-MILLION dollar OWNERS of these said horses are PUTTY in Lukas' hand? They have NO SAY over where their MILLION DOLLAR investments are run?

Come on dude, you can't be serious, can you? You think these owners are going to risk their multi-million dollar babies to stroke D. Wayne's ego?

And even if they DO defer to Wayne, there is a good reason. The man has delivered time and again when EVERYONE has said he couldn't / shouldn't....

Azeri retired SOUND. Ghostzapper is a broken down "champion." Ya'll can scream until you're blue in the FACE about how Wayne and Paulson mismanaged Azeri and raced her in spots that were TOO TOUGH, and TOO close TOGETHER. But Azeri retired healthy, and Ghostzapper broke his leg....you tell me why we should favor one training regimen over the other? Frankel vs. Lukas. You can tell me forever that Frankel is the better trainer, that he puts his horse first. But that still didn't prevent Ghostzapper from breaking his leg....

surely when lukas or romans or frankel picks up the phone and gives you a call to tell you that he thinks it a pretty good idea to run your horse here or there your definantely going to listen to what the man has to say. he gives you his reasoning and you either agree or disagree as the discision to run or not to run always comes down to the owner. but for the most part the owners will generally place their trust in and base their decision on the trainers opinion.
and of coarse not i dont think any owner would risk their horse if they thought that a trainer was simply trying to point his name towards the limelight.
but trainers love to be stroked and lets face it, owners do to. and to some degree to some owners money is no object weather it be entries or purse minies they just want to see their horse run in the KD the preakness or the belmont. what other possible reason could romans or ramsey or lukas or paulson have for wanting to run their horse in the belmont. it made more sense not to run their horses in the belmont.
maybe ramsey and paulson ordered romans and lukas to run in the belmont limititing their sayso in the matter but i dont think so. maybe the owners called and asked their trainers if they thought it was a good idea to run their horses in the belmont and it went on from there but i dont think that either.
i dont know what their logic of thinking was but they must have known that they didnt have a fat rats chance in hell to win this thing so maybe it was all ego on everybodies part.
of coarse its got to be one of the biggest thrills to have a horse in a triplecrown race and who wouldnt want to say they had a horse that ran in the derby, preakness or belmont and a chance like this dont come around to often but these guys have all been in the bussiness a long time and they should all know the difference between a legitimate chance to win at a triple crown race and taking a chance with no chance which balences out to be a burst of sudden ego or just bad, bad advice.

Dr. Carter
06-20-2005, 09:23 PM
Lukas is not going to perform the same miracles he did in the old days because the quality of his stock is far below what it was years ago. He still has support of a few bigtime owners but Lewis splits his horses 5 ways now and the Overbrook horses that Lukas gets are the culls, Stewart and Pletcher get the prime picks. He actually spends more time on the pick 4 now than the condition book.
I still dont understand the logic of running Nolans Cat except for free publicity and a chance to get a nice paycheck for a suck up third. The stallion angle is puzzling because if you haven't won the Derby or Preakness, a Belmont placing i really not what the modern day breeder looks for in a stallion. 1 to 9 that Ramsey picked the spot, not Romans.

freeneasy
06-22-2005, 02:29 AM
between lukas and robert and beverly lewis before the decision to run 'going wild' in the riva ridge at 7f that day.

hello beverly, wayne here, listen ive been looking at the lineup for the 7f riva ridge on belmont day and i'd like to run 'going wild'

who are we running against wayne?

we'd be running against 'lost in the fog'

wayne lost in the fog has won several very good races without any loss'es and leads all candidates for sprinter of the year. 'going wild' has lost his last 4 races by a combined total of 118 lenghts. dont you think we should give him some time off now? he's done everything he could in everyone of those last 4 race's but he showed he just didnt have enough finish and fell way short in the end of all 4 of those races. how do you figure this race to set up for going wild wayne? tell me

he's won 2 races on the lead at 6 furlongs and in his last 4 races hes been able to stay around to the 3/4's before giving in and i can see it this way. lost in the fog has never really been challendged for the lead and if we can do that, continue to press him past the half, then i think we might be able to wear him down enough to beat him back at 7 furlongs.

yes wayne but dont you think we'd be trying to do all that with a tired horse? i mean to press lost in the fog for 7 furlongs is asking a lot and he might be able to do that if he'd been rested the last 2 months but he's been hopelessly beaten in his last 4 races and i just dont think he'll be able to stand up to lost in the fog for more then a half.

well i gave him two good works at a half mile in 46:1 and 46:3 and he might not be as tired as he looks on paper

thats fine wayne but cant we just give him a rest and bring him back for some better suited races? i mean he's going to have to run a lot faster then 46:1 and 46:3 to beat lost in the fog.

well the works show he's still fit and i certainly think we can win this and if he does we pick up $120,000. i say we go for it.

ok wayne, we trust your judgement. go ahead and run going wild in the riva ridge. click.

honey, what do you think?

i'am definently starting to think wayne is losing his mind. :D

now i dont know how the conversation went but i shutter and couldnt even begin to think of how lukas convinced paulson to run ap arrow in the belmont. and if ramsey made the call on nolans cat like dr. carter figures then all i can say is, boy, what an enlightened conversation that must have been :D

PaceAdvantage
06-22-2005, 03:51 AM
And how did the Lewis' become multi-millionaires in the first place? By listening to advice they DIDN'T agree with, and giving in anyway? Doubtful.

Nice fantasy though.....

Tee
06-22-2005, 04:04 AM
And how did the Lewis' become multi-millionaires in the first place?

Cuz people like to drink? :D


Sorry PA, I couldn't quite hold that one back. :)

freeneasy
06-25-2005, 04:25 PM
And how did the Lewis' become multi-millionaires in the first place? By listening to advice they DIDN'T agree with, and giving in anyway? Doubtful.

Nice fantasy though.....

you dont think the lewis' had their doubts and more then likely expressed their concerns towards running going wild against lost in the fog in the riva ridge? if they care anything at all for their animals i'll bet they did. and when he lost i'll bet they were'nt suprised not one little bit. getting beat like he did his last 4 races and then to turn right back around and throw him in with lost in the fog, i'll bet they didnt even show up that day to watch their horse run another potentially painful race.
lukas hasnt garnered to many headlines and awards in the last few years and i think he's been exhibiting to many withdrawals of not having his name in the limelight. i mean a lot of his decisions have been pointing to the possibility of exactly that. a man whose been trying to regain the past. i mean sometimes it comes around to the best of em. jack van berg, charlie whittingham ect, i mean for some reason it just starts to go, you begin to lose it and you just cant train anymore.

saratoga guy
06-25-2005, 05:07 PM
i mean for some reason it just starts to go, you begin to lose it and you just cant train anymore.

Just for the record, this guy who is "losing it" ranks #17 on the 2005 trainers' earning list.

He ended 2004 ranked #14.

I'm guessing plenty of trainers would like to be "losing it" like that!

freeneasy
06-25-2005, 06:46 PM
when he's been so used to 1's, 2's, and 3's? maybe he's trying to regain a status that will never come around again. i wonder what kind of moves he's going to make when his numbers really start falling off the charts?
maybe that's the reason his stats are declining cause making moves like trying to win the belmont with a maiden winner is only going to put your thinking/judgement that much further down the hole

saratoga guy
06-25-2005, 07:17 PM
...maybe that's the reason his stats are declining cause making moves like trying to win the belmont with a maiden winner is only going to put your thinking/judgement that much further down the hole

You mean something like... Commendable?

PaceAdvantage
06-25-2005, 08:23 PM
Lukas has been counted out before, only to rise to the top over and over again, much to the dismay of his many detractors.

freeneasy
06-27-2005, 10:38 PM
this is absolutely true. lukas said in sundays form " i was pleased with his race in new york, very much so. i think if maybe we'd had another good out in him before then, he might've had a chance to be second.
at the time lukas ran ap arrow in the belmont then he must have definently thought his maiden winner had a good chance to win, but upon further odsevence taking place after the race he decides that his horse would've done much better "had he another good out in him before then"
he should have known that before the race and entered ap arrow elsewhere. if i owned ap arrow and the man calls me and tells me he wants to run in the belmont then i think the only question that i or any owner can responsibly have is, do you think he's ready to win this. and i would suppose that any trainers reply would have to be something like, well afleet alex is going to be very tough to beat here but it would seem questionable concerning the other spots that are available. owners choice.
but why run the horse where you know he cant win. whats the fun in that.
you get a good horse, you run him where he can get some good wins, later on when your ready then go ahead and take on afleet alex.
if every trainer and every owner was in this game for the sheer enjoyment of running their horse for the sole purpose of winning the race that their in then there would be a lot more horse's running in the races they can win and the same number of horses not running in the races that they cant win, so ya cant blame yogi.

peppy1993
06-28-2005, 03:18 PM
When the track puts the money on the table -- some of it fronted by the owners -- and tells the owners and trainers they can have a percentage of it for running 3, 4, 5, then they are entitled to enter and shoot for it.

Pretty amazing that anyone would think that all horses are, or should be, out to win. It's the handicapper's job to decipher what the trainer is up to, and a trainer who is sharp enough to run a maiden in the Belmont and get a check is somebody whose owner loves him, and someone who will have no problem getting other owners.

A personal bias against a trainer can only cloud your overall judgement, and is something anyone who has one should ''get over.'' An owner/trainer once ran third in a $1 million stakes race in New York with an allowance horse, and before the race the douchebag local media criticized him for doing so. He used the money to pay back taxes and alimony to the IRS and his ex-wife. It kept him out of court and possibly jail. Outsiders cannot possibly know the finances and motivations involved with most horses.

saratoga guy
06-28-2005, 03:24 PM
When the track puts the money on the table -- some of it fronted by the owners -- and tells the owners and trainers they can have a percentage of it for running 3, 4, 5, then they are entitled to enter and shoot for it.

I agree. "Ya gotta be in it to win it."

Nolan's Cat is the perfect example. He picked up more money running third in the Belmont than he would have gotten for winning a $100K stake (not to mention a MSW)! ...And if something screwy happens he could possibly have picked up the $600K winner's share.

For the most part I don't have any problem with owner's taking a shot.