Pletcher Still 0-fer

[michiken]

I thought that Dunkirk might give Pletcher his first Derby Win but he is still batting a big ZERO.

Does this guy seem cursed or what?

Same goes for the Sheik. Money just isn't buying him a Derby Win.

[Imriledup]

Maybe the pre race security for the Derby has something to do with it?

[PaceAdvantage]

Maybe the pre race security for the Derby has something to do with it?You mean the same pre-race security that have people in other threads speculating about how Mine that Bird could have possibly won?

The same pre-race security from last year that allowed poster-boy Dutrow to win? Do you see how little sense you make?

Racing fans and handicappers have gone from burying their heads in the sand when it comes to cheating, to seeing cheating around each and every corner, whether it exists or not.

I'm not quite sure which environment was worse for the game...

[Imriledup]

You mean the same pre-race security that have people in other threads speculating about how Mine that Bird could have possibly won?

The same pre-race security from last year that allowed poster-boy Dutrow to win? Do you see how little sense you make?

Racing fans and handicappers have gone from burying their heads in the sand when it comes to cheating, to seeing cheating around each and every corner, whether it exists or not.

I'm not quite sure which environment was worse for the game...

What other reason would one of the all time great trainers have to not ever be able to win this race despite having major contenders in the race almost every year?

[PaceAdvantage]

How many times did Lukas lose the Derby before he finally won...I seem to recall he lost a bunch of them early on as well...

They had a detention barn at the Belmont when Rags won if I remember correctly. The same one that busted Mullins for bringing in a water syringe.

[kenwoodallpromos]

What other reason would one of the all time great trainers have to not ever be able to win this race despite having major contenders in the race almost every year?
There are many trainers with many stakes wins under their belt who have not won the Derby, and lately a few many have not heard of who did win.
My guess is that since the number of sires breeding has gone down by 50% in a couple of decades, even smaller trainers on smaller circuits or racing undercards could still have a diamond in the rough, and new medical and medicine are equalizing the health factors.
The winning horses also are coming from all tracks, surfaces, with all kinds of records (Barbaro started on turf). Unbridled had a number of runners this year, and Raise a Native lineage has been doing well for the past 10 or so years. And with speed more and more prominent in more lines (Mr. Prospector, E.G.) and dosages from winner's lines in all 3 TC's getting higher and higher (speed) over the last few decades, I'm not all that surprised that Quarterhorse trainers have won a few lately and placed this year. I am also not as surprised as some that this year the winner was put on the speediest path by a smart jockey. As I have said in an earlier post, I also noticed that the exacta this year was won by 2 progeny of DRONE several generations back (whoever that was).
" Breeder: Claiborne Farm
State Bred: KY
Winnings: 4 Starts: 4 - 0 - 0, $12,825

Sire of 18 crops, 593 foals, 466 starters, 52 black type winners, 364 winners, $19,372,188. Sire of 248 producing daughters, 1588 foals, 93 black type winners, including Charismatic (Horse of the Year, Champion $2,038,064) and Grindstone.
Died in 1987, age 21."

[Imriledup]

I think Pletcher's problem is he's a now guy. That means, he just dances with his horses and tries to win every race he enters. Pletcher does not 'point' for the Derby specifically, he just sends his horses into battle and doesn't worry about tomorrow. This might mean his horses are peaking in the big prep races and when they come to the Derby, they are coming off hard efforts and aren't likely to 'naturally improve' in the Derby.

[Relwob Owner]

What other reason would one of the all time great trainers have to not ever be able to win this race despite having major contenders in the race almost every year?

I think you are kind of off here.....the Derby is an incredibly hard race for a trainer to win and I think everyone goes overboard with the coverage of guys not having won yet, jjust like they do in other sports.....that being said, you seem to be saying that Pletcher hasnt won because other guys cheat(if I am off here, let me know)....I do believe that Pletcher's horse, Wait a While, blew a test in the F and M Turf at the Breeders Cup, and was DQ'd from third place money....

[lamboguy]

how come no one is honest with this situation. DUNKIRK should never have run in kentucky derby 135.

i questioned it a week before the race, GARRETT GOMEZ knew. you can bet that one!

[Relwob Owner]

how come no one is honest with this situation. DUNKIRK should never have run in kentucky derby 135.

i questioned it a week before the race, GARRETT GOMEZ knew. you can bet that one!

agreed....I also think you could have made that call when the camera focused on him right after the race.....the horse looked like he may collapse

[Mineshaft]

how come no one is honest with this situation. DUNKIRK should never have run in kentucky derby 135.

i questioned it a week before the race, GARRETT GOMEZ knew. you can bet that one!





I agree 100% With only 3 races under his belt i dont think he had enough foundation under him. I threw him out of my trifect box that included 8 horses so i didnt think enough of him either.

Gomez sure made the right call on POTN.

[lamboguy]

I agree 100% With only 3 races under his belt i dont think he had enough foundation under him. I threw him out of my trifect box that included 8 horses so i didnt think enough of him either.

Gomez sure made the right call on POTN.

i very rarely have anyone on this board that agrees with me. how come no one interviewed pletcher before the race and asked him why he was running a horse that had lost weight inbetween races?

how come they didn't ask larry jones about his semi-questionable work before the derby?

my answer is that the people asking the questions have no guts.

i post things on this board and people think i am nuts in the head!!

[Dahoss9698]

i very rarely have anyone on this board that agrees with me.

There's a good reason for that. Dunkirk stumbled out of the gate, had some traffic and just never ran a lick. It happens and about 13 others ran almost as bad. Friesan Fire grabbed a quarter during the race and was bleeding afterwards. I'm still not crazy about the horse, but if grabbing a quarter isn't a viable excuse, I don't know what is.

Also, big brown had 3 races under his belt before his win. Did he lack foundation also? Why should Dunkirk not have been in the race? Because you think so? I didn't hear one negative comment about him all last week from anyone watching works, etc.

[1st time lasix]

I don't believe Bobby Frankel has ever been in the winner's circle for the KY Derby either. I wouldn't question either one of their skills as horsemen however. Dan Marino never won the Superbowl. Greg Norman never won the Master's Lots of top NBA players have never won the ring. It happens in sports.

[Dahoss9698]

Hasn't Pletcher run second in the Derby twice? Did they forget to test those years?

[slewis]

Dunkirk had a lot going against him leading up to this race.

First off, the training surface at PM, where he was stabled in FL is virtually identical to Gulfstream where he raced, so running on a different type dirt surface is an issue.

Next, trainers rarely train horses hard on sloppy tracks, and although Todd trains horses in company, often simulating race conditions, Dunkirk probably never had clumps of mud being chucked back at him.. another issue.

Then take the track itself.. I posted previously, it was sticky...unlike a sloppy track I'd ever walked on.... again, something new to overcome....

Add the hoopla of the crowd.. the paddock, and other Derby intangibles (large field of better, more competitive horses) and you have another issue...

I, personally wasn't buying the huge speed figure posted in FL either, but that's my personal opinion....the rest of the points, I dont think anyone can dispute.

[Quagmire]

Slewis congrats on MM's race.

[lamboguy]

There's a good reason for that. Dunkirk stumbled out of the gate, had some traffic and just never ran a lick. It happens and about 13 others ran almost as bad. Friesan Fire grabbed a quarter during the race and was bleeding afterwards. I'm still not crazy about the horse, but if grabbing a quarter isn't a viable excuse, I don't know what is.

Also, big brown had 3 races under his belt before his win. Did he lack foundation also? Why should Dunkirk not have been in the race? Because you think so? I didn't hear one negative comment about him all last week from anyone watching works, etc.

exactly my point, the horse lost weight before the race. media never reported it, i knew it and posted it here. horse missed schedule work. no comments on that either. garrett gomez claimed it was a tough decision, i highly doubt he would have ever rode that horse in a kentucky derby if you paid him an extra $50,000 to get on the horse's back.

take it whichever way you want, media is afraid to confront a trainer in the high stature like pletcher.

[Fingal]

How many times did Lukas lose the Derby before he finally won...I seem to recall he lost a bunch of them early on as well...



It was already said- How come Frankel has never won the Derby ? How many years before he broke that Breeder's Cup jinx ? It's One Race on One Day. That's like saying if Charlie Whittingham or Woody Stephens had never won the Derby, they aren't among the greatest of all time.

[Dahoss9698]

exactly my point, the horse lost weight before the race. media never reported it, i knew it and posted it here. horse missed schedule work. no comments on that either. garrett gomez claimed it was a tough decision, i highly doubt he would have ever rode that horse in a kentucky derby if you paid him an extra $50,000 to get on the horse's back.

take it whichever way you want, media is afraid to confront a trainer in the high stature like pletcher.

he never missed a work. Weren't you corrected on that already? Where is your proof he lost weight? Do you have any?

[bishlap]

:rolleyes: I think I can sum up this topic w/ 2 words (1?) A-ROD

[lamboguy]

he never missed a work. Weren't you corrected on that already? Where is your proof he lost weight? Do you have any?


someone tried to correct me, he had a scheduled work and delayed it 3 days.

[Dahoss9698]

someone tried to correct me, he had a scheduled work and delayed it 3 days.

Still wrong, but now he didn't miss it, it was delayed, interesting change of events. It was delayed 1 day, like I told you the first time. Keep flinging that crap, eventually some will stick to the wall.

[lamboguy]

Still wrong, but now he didn't miss it, it was delayed, interesting change of events. It was delayed 1 day, like I told you the first time. Keep flinging that crap, eventually some will stick to the wall.

thanks for the clarification, i am sure now DUNKIRK will run alot better in the preakness, i should get in line now to bet the horse before anyone else as sharp as you figures out he just stumbled and is going to run a great race next time out.

i am sure that he will look alot better for that race also. now i will double up.

[Dahoss9698]

thanks for the clarification, i am sure now DUNKIRK will run alot better in the preakness, i should get in line now to bet the horse before anyone else as sharp as you figures out he just stumbled and is going to run a great race next time out.

i am sure that he will look alot better for that race also. now i will double up.

Huh? You said he lost weight and missed a work. He didn't miss a work and I asked for any kind of proof he lost weight. Because according to anyone that was watching works, he was looking good. So, do you have any proof he lost weight before the race? Or is it more fling and hope it sticks?

I just have a hard time believing that all of these media people were lying about the way he looked and lamboguy is setting the record straight. Especially since you've been so wrong about everything else.

[lamboguy]

Huh? You said he lost weight and missed a work. He didn't miss a work and I asked for any kind of proof he lost weight. Because according to anyone that was watching works, he was looking good. So, do you have any proof he lost weight before the race? Or is it more fling and hope it sticks?

I just have a hard time believing that all of these media people were lying about the way he looked and lamboguy is setting the record straight. Especially since you've been so wrong about everything else.

i don't think i am wrong. i have 2 different private clockers that have said the same thing.

this just out, todd plecher said DUNKIRK will not be under consideration for the preakness stakes. who knows, maybe there was a little more to it than a simple little stumble out of the gate. i suspect you won't see him for the belmont, and for that matter i rather doubt you see to much of him during the rest of his 2 yo career. of course according to a few people on this board i have been completly wrong about everything i have posted. up until this minute the results haven't verified that theory. but things often change!

[Dahoss9698]

Ahh, the old private clocker excuse. Good one. Did you really think Dunkirk would go in the Preakness? It's not a secret he didn't come out of the race well. I imagine he'll get a break and point for the Travers.

For the sake of laughter, what have you been right about in the situation?

[lamboguy]

what a surprise, another country heard form, larry jones has decided to skip the preakness stakes. his horse had a few small cuts and had a rough trip in the kentucky derby. shouldn't he be able to improve on that trip? i say larry certainly don't think so!

now keep in mind, they didn't even give their horses a chance to train after the kentucky derby. could it be that they both think the same way, mine that bird is to tough to beat?

you be the judge

[Dahoss9698]

what a surprise, another country heard form, larry jones has decided to skip the preakness stakes. his horse had a few small cuts and had a rough trip in the kentucky derby. shouldn't he be able to improve on that trip? i say larry certainly don't think so!

now keep in mind, they didn't even give their horses a chance to train after the kentucky derby. could it be that they both think the same way, mine that bird is to tough to beat?

you be the judge

he had part of his foot ripped off and grabbed a quarter. You think it's a good idea to run back in 2 weeks?

[toussaud]

pletcher's horses always, always have a tenendency to peak a race too early.

pletchers horses ar ethe ones that will win the brooklyn handicap by 15 and then throw a clunker in the breeders cup classic (any given saturday).

peole say well he has never had a legit horse. bs. Any given saturday and scat daddy were pretty damn legit going into the derby. about as legit as anything I've seen this year.

that and I don't like trainers who throw 3-4 horses in the derby. derbies are usually won by a trainer who has 1 derby horse and focuses on getting that one hrose to peak at the right time.

[lamboguy]

Huh? You said he lost weight and missed a work. He didn't miss a work and I asked for any kind of proof he lost weight. Because according to anyone that was watching works, he was looking good. So, do you have any proof he lost weight before the race? Or is it more fling and hope it sticks?

I just have a hard time believing that all of these media people were lying about the way he looked and lamboguy is setting the record straight. Especially since you've been so wrong about everything else.

from what little horse background i have , i know that you don't step on anyone's toes, because the next time you will be left out in the cold.

[Dahoss9698]

Does anyone here care about facts? When did Any Given Saturday win the Brooklyn by 15?

Did Lukas have a tough time winning the Derby while running more than one horse?

[Dahoss9698]

from what little horse background i have , i know that you don't step on anyone's toes, because the next time you will be left out in the cold.

So no proof. Thanks for being honest.

[lamboguy]

So no proof. Thanks for being honest.

if i brought someone else on this board and said the same thing that would not be any proof no matter who it was. i thought the horse looked skinny.
i thought friesen fire looked off on her leftside.

both horses horses ran poorly during their races. now as far as i can see neither one is going to be in the preakness stakes.

is that the proof, or is that just a coincidence?

9698, i am sure you are a very smart man, i wonder what your real feelings are on this matter deep down in your gut?

i took a controversial position to what i saw, you have yet to show any proof at all that i am wrong, just plane supposition. and i have nothing against you.

to tell you where i am coming from, we had a horse that ran in churchill 2 days before the derby in a stakes race that worked poorly, i didn't want the horse to run in the race, the horse is still in a veteranay hospital this minute struggling to make it.

the same private clockers that told me that my horse worked poorly said they saw the same thing as myself in the friesen fire work.

the dunkirk work was not as bad as the horse looked.

[MNslappy]

http://k43.pbase.com/o5/42/267742/1/68416045.wGDPMlLK.popcorn.gif

[toussaud]

Does anyone here care about facts? When did Any Given Saturday win the Brooklyn by 15?

Did Lukas have a tough time winning the Derby while running more than one horse?


it was an exaggeration, i'm not sitting here looking at AGS's past performances but he did draw off and win going away very impressivly in the brooklyn handicp as a prep for the classic


and I didn't say the only way it could be won, but the vast majority of the year's, trainers with more than one horse in never win.


pletcher's best year ironically, is bluegrass cat finished 2nd to barbaro and i'm pretty sure, not quite sure, but pretty sure that BGC was his only derby horse that year. correct me if I'm wrong.

[Dahoss9698]

if i brought someone else on this board and said the same thing that would not be any proof no matter who it was. i thought the horse looked skinny.
i thought friesen fire looked off on her leftside.

both horses horses ran poorly during their races. now as far as i can see neither one is going to be in the preakness stakes.

is that the proof, or is that just a coincidence?

9698, i am sure you are a very smart man, i wonder what your real feelings are on this matter deep down in your gut?

i took a controversial position to what i saw, you have yet to show any proof at all that i am wrong, just plane supposition. and i have nothing against you.

to tell you where i am coming from, we had a horse that ran in churchill 2 days before the derby in a stakes race that worked poorly, i didn't want the horse to run in the race, the horse is still in a veteranay hospital this minute struggling to make it.

the same private clockers that told me that my horse worked poorly said they saw the same thing as myself in the friesen fire work.

the dunkirk work was not as bad as the horse looked.

It's not supposition. It's called using your brain. Friesan Fire grabbed a quarter in the race. Do you expect larry Jones to run him in the Preakness 2 weeks after he grabbed a quarter in the Derby? And Dunkirk stumbled, raced in traffic and came out of the race with some minor issues. Of course they aren't going to come back in 2 weeks and run in the Preakness. Would you? Would any sane person subject a nice horse to that?

Don't they both sort of have excuses?

[Dahoss9698]

it was an exaggeration, i'm not sitting here looking at AGS's past performances but he did draw off and win going away very impressivly in the brooklyn handicp as a prep for the classic


and I didn't say the only way it could be won, but the vast majority of the year's, trainers with more than one horse in never win.


pletcher's best year ironically, is bluegrass cat finished 2nd to barbaro and i'm pretty sure, not quite sure, but pretty sure that BGC was his only derby horse that year. correct me if I'm wrong.

I'm tired of correcting you. Did you ever get around to watching Lawyer Ron's Whitney? Still think Pletcher didn't get him to rate?

[lamboguy]

do you honestly thing that a horse stumbles because he is 100% before the race? as far as i saw he stumbled on his own.

i had a $5000 claimer that ran in mountaineer last week, he stumbled too. i have no idea why he stumbled, and could not find something wrong with him. i am sure there is some type of a hole in my horse that i will find in due time.

maybe you are looking at this as the glass as being half full, i see it as being half or more empty. and you are right on a technical point, i have no hard core proof. but if you take this one to court, i might win with circumstatial evidence.

[Dahoss9698]

do you honestly thing that a horse stumbles because he is 100% before the race?

Yes. Do you honestly think horses only stumble out of the gate when they are hurt? Have you ever been in a gate? Not a lot of room in there.

[lamboguy]

Yes. Do you honestly think horses only stumble out of the gate when they are hurt? Have you ever been in a gate? Not a lot of room in there.

my horse stumbled 3 starts back in the gate, when the gate opened he was going backwards. in his last race he stumbled 20 steps out of the gate.

i claimed the horse in florida, he ran and won in a lot tougher races for a different trainer. i brought him up here and changed trainers twice, 2 guys i think are top notch in their local's and they can't figure why the horse stumbled.

in my heart, i honestly feel pletcher should not have run dunkirk in kentucky derby 135. that is what the bottom line is, you obviously think he did the right thing and got an unfortunate result. i think he had a very predictable result.

that is really all to this subject, i can't prove myself 100% right and neither can you.

i just wonder what would have happened if they had a commision that review's the race after they run it like they do in japan.

[Dahoss9698]

my horse stumbled 3 starts back in the gate, when the gate opened he was going backwards. in his last race he stumbled 20 steps out of the gate.

i claimed the horse in florida, he ran and won in a lot tougher races for a different trainer. i brought him up here and changed trainers twice, 2 guys i think are top notch in their local's and they can't figure why the horse stumbled.

in my heart, i honestly feel pletcher should not have run dunkirk in kentucky derby 135. that is what the bottom line is, you obviously think he did the right thing and got an unfortunate result. i think he had a very predictable result.

that is really all to this subject, i can't prove myself 100% right and neither can you.

i just wonder what would have happened if they had a commision that review's the race after they run it like they do in japan.

No offense, but you are comparing your 5k claimer to Dunkirk. Good luck with that one. I fail to see the correlation between a horse stumbling out of the gate and being hurt beforehand. I can see a horse getting hurt AFTER stumbling, but what is the proof that horses only stumble when they are hurt? It just seems like you are flinging more stuff against that wall, but whatever, we'll agree to disagree.

You want to ignore what happened in the race, I don't. I think both are a lot better than they showed, I think they both have reasonable excuses as to their performance and I think both trainers thought their horses were ready. I'm not a Larry Jones fan. I never understood what the fascination with the guy is. But I don't think he would run an injured horse this year after what happened last year. I really don't.

[Show Me the Wire]

if i brought someone else on this board and said the same thing that would not be any proof no matter who it was. i thought the horse looked skinny.
i thought friesen fire looked off on her leftside.

both horses horses ran poorly during their races. now as far as i can see neither one is going to be in the preakness stakes.

is that the proof, or is that just a coincidence?

9698, i am sure you are a very smart man, i wonder what your real feelings are on this matter deep down in your gut?

i took a controversial position to what i saw, you have yet to show any proof at all that i am wrong, just plane supposition. and i have nothing against you.

to tell you where i am coming from, we had a horse that ran in churchill 2 days before the derby in a stakes race that worked poorly, i didn't want the horse to run in the race, the horse is still in a veteranay hospital this minute struggling to make it.

the same private clockers that told me that my horse worked poorly said they saw the same thing as myself in the friesen fire work.

the dunkirk work was not as bad as the horse looked.

Is your posting about Pletcher, resulting from your feelings about horse safety? If it is, it is way off base.

First and foremost, like it or not racing is a business, the bottom line is to make money, on the track, in the breeding shed, in the sales ring, etc. Yes. Safety is fine, but no where did I see Pletcher's actions as jeopardizing Dunkirk.


I didn't believe Dunkirk had a good chance of winning myself, due to lacking talent. So what, trainers run their horses over their head everyday, even with out the benefit of getting a piece of a $2 mil plus person.

Great you have a nice eye for horse flesh. But, one not so stellar work does not automatically spell disaster or big trouble around the corner. Could simply mean the horse was not mentally interested in working that particular day, maybe an minor upset tummy, etc. A competent trainer knows his horses total physical behavior.

You say Dunkirk lost weight? Was it because he wasn't getting into his feed? Was he running a temp? Was he acting lethargic? You don't know do you, so why assume the worst about a barn? There is a good chance the horse was acting normally. Maybe Pletcher didn't think he hit bottom on the horse, due to the horse's day ti day behavior.

I am sorry to hear that one of horses’ ended up at the vet, after showing a poor work. Your experience is not the norm. I've seen plenty of less than stellar works from horses and they were never laid up, it was just a blip in their training.

You have your operation and I am sure you run a competent barn. However, I am sure not everyone thinks your operation is the gold standard. Remember backsiders love to gossip. Don't you ever wonder what they say about your operation, when you are not present? It is very easy to criticize, really takes no effort at all. Also, because someone does something you would not do, does not make them automatically incorrect.

The results show your assessment to throw out Dunkirk was correct.. I did the same, but my assessment was based his overall ability, not on one poor work and weight loss. I might add those two fore-mentioned factors would make the horse an even more negative prospect.

Myself I thought the Derby was pretty competitive with IWR, POTN, FF etc. My only posting about any horse was that I would include Papa Clem in the list of contenders

[Imriledup]

I don't believe Bobby Frankel has ever been in the winner's circle for the KY Derby either. I wouldn't question either one of their skills as horsemen however. Dan Marino never won the Superbowl. Greg Norman never won the Master's Lots of top NBA players have never won the ring. It happens in sports.

I think though that wins aren't the only debate here. Forgetting about wins for a second, Pletcher isn't ever even CLOSE to winning. His horses just 'dont perform'. If Todd had a few 2nd and 3rd place finishes with his horses 'coming out of their skin' on Derby day, than i'm sure we'd say he's a great Derby trainer who's just had bad luck. As it stands, his horses just flop and don't ever make a move or do anything. I think that we need to talk about him being invisible moreso than we need to talk about him just not winning. Its the WAY he's losing that's alarming.

[Dahoss9698]

I think though that wins aren't the only debate here. Forgetting about wins for a second, Pletcher isn't ever even CLOSE to winning. His horses just 'dont perform'. If Todd had a few 2nd and 3rd place finishes with his horses 'coming out of their skin' on Derby day, than i'm sure we'd say he's a great Derby trainer who's just had bad luck. As it stands, his horses just flop and don't ever make a move or do anything. I think that we need to talk about him being invisible moreso than we need to talk about him just not winning. Its the WAY he's losing that's alarming.

He has been second in the race...twice.

[lamboguy]

i saw dunkirk before his maiden win. he really looked like all the money. in all honesty, i thought before the maiden race that this is going to be the winner of kentucky derby 135. he came on the track in louisville before the race, i could not have bet on him vs. bottom claimers at beulah park that day.

i am not accusing anyone of putting out unsafe horses. dunkirk just didn't look good to me. that is all i can say. if you know different than i have to say you are alot smarter than i am.

i have no big horse operation, when i run them it usually means i could not find someone to buy them. i have sold and have been involved in champions including a prior kentucky derby winner, and believe me you can accuse me of anything you want, but when i tell you a horse don't look right i am usually right on the money.

incidentally i said the same thing about big brown before the belmont.

[Show Me the Wire]

i saw dunkirk before his maiden win. he really looked like all the money. in all honesty, i thought before the maiden race that this is going to be the winner of kentucky derby 135. he came on the track in louisville before the race, i could not have bet on him vs. bottom claimers at beulah park that day.

i am not accusing anyone of putting out unsafe horses. dunkirk just didn't look good to me. that is all i can say. if you know different than i have to say you are alot smarter than i am.

i have no big horse operation, when i run them it usually means i could not find someone to buy them. i have sold and have been involved in champions including a prior kentucky derby winner, and believe me you can accuse me of anything you want, but when i tell you a horse don't look right i am usually right on the money.

incidentally i said the same thing about big brown before the belmont.

Please don't misunderstand me. I did not say I am smarter than you or that you can't tell if a horse looks right or not. In fact , I complimented you about your knowledge.

you and I evalute horses' talent differently. A horse may have the perfect conformation, all that means he looks good. Based on my applied Knowledge, I didn't care for Dunkirk's wins in Florida (For your information I don't rely on speed figures).


I have a problem with your statement linking your personal experience with Pletcher's decision to run Dunkirk. Your expeirence is not relevant to the everyday hands-on handlers of Dunkirk.

Believe me you are not the only one on this board that can look at a horse, in person, and make an assessment of the horse's physicality. Tell me does every horse of yours or that you are involved with that has a poor work end in long-term vet care or on the vet's list? If not, then your personal experience is the exception to the rule. Accordingly, it is innapropriate to compare and contrast your special personal experience with Pletcher's decision to run Dunkirk.

It is you, whom is judging who knows better. Your previous post as I understand it says if you trained Dunkirk you would not have let Dunkirk compete becasue he lost weight while in training and he worked poorly. Additionlly, all horses of mine that work poorly end up in long-term vet care.

Did I misunderstand your prior post, if so I apologize. If I understood you correctly, my criticism of your posting stands.

[lamboguy]

Please don't misunderstand me. I did not say I am smarter than you or that you can't tell if a horse looks right or not. In fact , I complimented you about your knowledge.

you and I evalute horses' talent differently. A horse may have the perfect conformation, all that means he looks good. Based on my applied Knowledge, I didn't care for Dunkirk's wins in Florida (For your information I don't rely on speed figures).


I have a problem with your statement linking your personal experience with Pletcher's decision to run Dunkirk. Your expeirence is not relevant to the everyday hands-on handlers of Dunkirk.

Believe me you are not the only one on this board that can look at a horse, in person, and make an assessment of the horse's physicality. Tell me does every horse of yours or that you are involved with that has a poor work end in long-term vet care or on the vet's list? If not, then your personal experience is the exception to the rule. Accordingly, it is innapropriate to compare and contrast your special personal experience with Pletcher's decision to run Dunkirk.

It is you, whom is judging who knows better. Your previous post as I understand it says if you trained Dunkirk you would not have let Dunkirk compete becasue he lost weight while in training and he worked poorly. Additionlly, all horses of mine that work poorly end up in long-term vet care.

Did I misunderstand your prior post, if so I apologize. If I understood you correctly, my criticism of your posting stands.

i had seen dunkirk train in florida, he looked as good as any horse you have ever laid your eyes on. in kentucky he looked pretty awful to me. so what i am doing is comparing him 4 months prior to this. beauty is always in the eyes of the beholder, he just didn't look the same to me. that is basically where i am coming from on this one. sometimes when a trainer is with a horse on a day to day basis he doesn't see the same thing as a person that only sees him once. in january dunkirk was stunning. on saturday he just looked like a horse, and pretty lathargect at that.

[Show Me the Wire]

lamboguy:

It is indeed true as you said: "..sometimes when a trainer is with a horse on a day to day basis he doesn't see the same thing as a person that only sees him once,.."

If that is what you are saying it is a fine observation. A fine observation that should have been made without comparing and contrasting your personal experience with Pletcher's decision.

[lamboguy]

lamboguy:

It is indeed true as you said: "..sometimes when a trainer is with a horse on a day to day basis he doesn't see the same thing as a person that only sees him once,.."

If that is what you are saying it is a fine observation. A fine observation that should have been made without comparing and contrasting your personal experience with Pletcher's decision.

cheap horses and stake horses are all taken care of the same way. they eat the same food, jog and gallop, sometimes one horse goes the wrong way more than others in the morning, and some horses are ponnied. they are all wrapped the same way.

i have seen plenty of horse that were in starter handicap races that are going good at that particular time that might beat stake horses on their best day.

in florida dunkirk looked like quite a specimen, in kentucky he looked mostly skin and bones to my eyes.

todd pletcher got hundreds of people all lined up to give him their best horses and pay him over $100 a day for the privilage of it. there is no one in their right mind that is going to pay me a quarter to do the same thing.

pletcher runs a top notch program. i am told his horses are all groomed with their own personal brushes. i also heard you can eat of the floors in his tack room. no question the man does a top notch job, and i probably should not be ranting about one stupid horse that ran in the kentucky derby because i saw something that no one made public. but this is the way i see it. in my experience with horses when they don't look right, they don't run no good. and that is precisely what happened in kentucky derby 135, dunkirk ran no good.

now the other thing i realise is that i might be over the hill and completly brain dead and way off base. i have been involved in the horse business for over 30 years now, and its quite possible its time for me to hang my cleats up. i can tell you this though, my birthday was in march and i had to go for an eye examination for my drivers license and i passed the test!

[Show Me the Wire]

cheap horses and stake horses are all taken care of the same way. they eat the same food, jog and gallop, sometimes one horse goes the wrong way more than others in the morning, and some horses are ponnied. they are all wrapped the same way.

...

now the other thing i realise is that i might be over the hill and completly brain dead and way off base. i have been involved in the horse business for over 30 years now, and its quite possible its time for me to hang my cleats up. i can tell you this though, my birthday was in march and i had to go for an eye examination for my drivers license and i passed the test!


I wish what you said was true. Not all operations are equal and many cheap horses are not treated like stake horses. Their treatment really depends on the deepness of the owner's pockets, the dedication of the trainer, and the trainers's ethics.

Happy to hear abnout your longevity in the business. It really is an exciting business and there is no feeling seeing your baby, you train or own, cross the under the wire first and then getting your picture taken. That high certainly can keep you going.

I wish you many more years.

[Shemp Howard]

Pletcher should consider wearing a leather jacket, black cowboy hat and sunglasses from now on.

[ManeMediaMogul]

I thought that Dunkirk might give Pletcher his first Derby Win but he is still batting a big ZERO.

Does this guy seem cursed or what?

Same goes for the Sheik. Money just isn't buying him a Derby Win.

Pletcher wouldn't let a guy with a billygoat sit in his Belmont Park box and he has been jinxed ever since.