Bends at Aqueduct
 

Has anybody else noticed that most of the horses at Aqueduct are shod with bends? I have noted that those who are not rarely finish in the money. I was going to bet the 2nd favorite #6 in the 1st race but he was picking up 7lbs from his last race and on the shoe board he didn't have bends so I passed him. He finished in the back of the pack.
Jack

Good thing to look for, thanks for posting.

I track a lot of things but too lazy to mark those down and none of the pubs do it for me.

Does anyone have stats on this that are meaningful?

Back in the 50's and 60's, if it was raining, my Dad would always check the shoe board for "mud caulks". His theory was that if a trainer spent the money to change the shoes, he meant business. It was amazing as to how many live horses he came up with.

Today, if a trainer does not invest in equipment that will help the horse, he is probably saying to himself "why waste the $100".

The options they have today are limited compared to what they were before the ban. I think you see alot of the 1/4 inch bends , shod behind , that's the limit and in front likely the Queen's Plate . Only the flat plates are allowed .

I've read statements that Pletcher and Asmussen didn't use the toe grabs and caulks . I think that was in NY though as later , Pletcher has said during Derby , Oaks preps , that he was using the rear bends , Churchill , wet or dry track .

Pletcher used caulks on many of his stake horses, you are correct on Asmussen. They both use bends on almost all their horses, although they each won a race at Aqueduct yesterday with plain shod horses (Mordi's Miracle and Cluster of Stars). I'm just posting about NYRA tracks. In my opinion NYRA should announce all shoe changes before the start of the day, just as they announce all other changes. They confuse most bettors by announcing "shoe changes" when in fact most horses are wearing the same shoes as they wore in their previous race. For the record, Cluster of Stars was announced as wearing bends but I was told she wasn't.

I used to check for mud caulks in NY on rainy days and I did feel much more confident if the horse I was betting had them on. But NYRA changed the rules to stop the use of caulks, I believe in October of 2008. I think the reason they gave was to avoid breakdowns but many top trainers said that the caulks were not bad for horses. Personally I always felt that NYRA banned caulks because they felt that horses using caulks had an unfair advantage and wanted to protect bettors.

Allen Jerkens was one of the trainers who used mud caulks and if The Chief used them you can be sure that they were not bad for horses.

Does anyone know, are these bends 1/4 inch bends? Are all bends being used at Aqueduct the same?

They are at most 1/4 inch, sometimes less. More will get your horse scratched unless his name is Cigar.
I don't believe protecting bettors is high on the Jockey Club's agenda.

I think the reason given for banning caulks was that they were harmful to the horses. I never understood how a horse having better traction was harmful. As for protecting bettors,I don't think Jockey Club cares at all about the bettors. They don't have supers in races with entries to protect the bettor or if a field has too few entries. The Jockey Club doesn't think the bettors can figure this out. Overall,the Jockey Club puts the bettor on the low end of the spectrum.

Nor the tracks.
No need for slots money to implement this improvement TODAY.
I'm sure this info could be worked into the pre-race prattles.
Maybe Bobby Flay will speak out for us all.....:rolleyes:

One of the things I look for all the time when the track is not dry. Unfortunately when I bet from home, there is no live feed from NY tracks on NJBets. I have to go to Favorites, The Big M or else where to watch.
They do post the bends changes on the live feed, usually about 10 minutes to post. Just check the scrolling race changes at the bottom of the screen. Just wondering how many horses with excellent off-track breeding are the one who don't use them and still win?

Nice that the tracks understand their customers so well.
No excuses.

The definition of "mud caulks" has changed over the years.

Years ago, mud caulks, or mud stickers, were simply a sticker on the outside of the rear shoes.

Jar caulks were stickers midway on the sides of both front shoes.

Over time, the use of stickers on the rear shoes became less prevalent, and what was previously known as jar caulks became known as mud caulks.

The biggest complaint about these mud caulks (today's definition) is that too many trainers were using them on dry tracks. When they were known as jar caulks, it had nothing to do with mason jars. It had everything to do with the action it had when those stickers grabbed the racing surface. This "jarring" is especially pronounced on dry tracks, and most vets and blacksmiths will tell you that they add a couple of lengths, but at the cost of front end soundness.

Unfortunately, many trainers today consider their horses expendable and have no hesitation to gain an advantage at any cost.

Hence, the ban.

I thought NYRA banned the caulks. If it was the Jockey Club then it was definitely not because of betting issues.

It's got to help to know how the trainer typically operates with shoes.

I like the "cost" angle though. Few are going to spend extra money for anything unless the horse is live enough to a earn piece of the purse.

Some of the horses and their trainers who used caulks are: Mack Miller, Sea Hero, Allan Jerkins, Sky Beauty (every race), Kiaran McLaughlin, Invasor (every USA race), Bobby Frankel, Ghostzapper and Empire Maker, Barkley Tagg, Funny Cide, Woody Stephens, Danzig Connection to name a few. It is outrageous to say these trainers thought these horses were "expendable".

The listings as you say can confuse bettors but I think it's information they want . If the bettor is serious and proactive enough , they might dig deep for
clues .
Drosselmeyer is an interesting one , Mott mentioned the horse trained well with the Bar Shoe . He kept the bar on for the BC Classic . I know a few people
at the simulcasrt who wouldn't even look at the him with that listed .
But why not , Mott has tremendous class and the best of farriers and the workout data was out there .You have to dig in and sometimes the clues are there . Unfortunately not always so for the daily card .

Can you tell me which kind of "caulks" you're talking about? And can you tell me if they used them exclusively on off tracks or not?

The use of mud caulks (jar caulks) were banned for a reason.

If I'm wrong (as well as most vets and blacksmiths) about it causing breakdowns and unsoundness when abused, then tell me what the reason was.

Bill Mott had a 3-5 shot who was listed as wearing bends today but i dont remember too many Mott horses with Bends, could this have been a mistake?

Mott has been using bends more often on the inner track this year with good resuts (Pinball). He did have them on Bellamy Storm.

Mott has voiced his opinion re: any kind of traction shoes effecting forelegs and praised the ban , never mentioned not using them behind .

Thanks.

So when Bends are listed on the NYRA scroll, they mean bends on all 4 feet? Or is it just bends behind?

behind

[QUOTE=DSB]Can you tell me which kind of "caulks" you're talking about? And can you tell me if they used them exclusively on off tracks or not?

The use of mud caulks (jar caulks) were banned for a reason.

If I'm wrong (as well as most vets and blacksmiths) about it causing breakdowns and unsoundness when abused, then tell me what the reason was.[/QUOTE)

Using shoes that improve traction actually results in fewer breakdowns. My records showed this before the ban and anyone who thinks that racing has been made safer by banning traction shoes (mudcaulks) has not been paying attention.

Too bad the racing form doesn't publish the data. If memory serves, I think the Racing Times might have included mud caulks in the pp's.

[QUOTE=Ernie Dahlman]Obviously you know a lot more about this than I do.

So, tell us all what the reason for banning them was.

In my opinion,the reason mud caulks may have been banned has something to do with certain trainers who were very successful when using caulks. I've never kept records on this,but I believe certain trainers win % were affected by this change. The only official comment,I seem to remember is a statement that caulks can cause injuries to the horses. Somehow if a study was done,it seems to me there have been far more breakdowns since the ban,than before the ban.I don't believe an real answer was ever given on the ban. Other racing venues still use caulks and I haven't read anything negative about their use.I never heard any vets comment on the ban,but in racing vets are the hidden element,that we never seem to hear from.

From the Jockey Club homepage:

New York Racing Association News Release, August 14, 2008

NYRA to Limit Height of Toe Grabs on Front Horseshoes at Start of Aqueduct Fall Meeting, October 29

Following the recommendation of the Thoroughbred Safety Committee of The Jockey Club, toe grabs with a height greater than two millimeters (.07874 inches) on front horseshoes will be banned from all horses racing at Saratoga Race Course, Belmont Park, and Aqueduct Racetrack. The limitation takes effect on October 29 with the opening of the Aqueduct Fall Meeting, the New York Racing Association, Inc. (NYRA) announced today.

The committee announced its recommendation to ban all toe grabs other than two-millimeter wear plates on June 17.

Earlier this month, the American Graded Stakes Committee, administered by the Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders Association, announced that graded stakes run at racetracks which have not implemented the Jockey Club limitations on toe-grab horseshoes would lose their graded status on January 1, 2009 (or the date of the track’s first graded stakes).

Both organizations cited research noting a greater risk of catastrophic injury to horses wearing front toe grabs than horses wearing shoes without toe grabs. The NYRA ruling also eliminates bends, jar caulks, stickers, or any other traction device on front hooves.

it's their game
 

[QUOTE=DSB]The real reason was that the Jockey Club members were tired of losing stake races to horses wearing traction devices while their trainers refused to use them. If MsGaughy used traction devices they would still be allowed.

Okay, so in one breath you cite all the great trainers who used them, then in the next you tell me that they were banned because of one trainer who didn't want to use them.

Hard to believe that's the reason, but hey, you're the expert....

Shug McGaughey didnt use them to my recollection and he trained for Phipps. Not sure if that means anything at all, just an observation.

clarification
 

The Jockey Club was responsible for the ban. Claude R McGaughey (the 3rd) just trains for some of their members.

And all of these are lap dogs in on the fix?

http://www.jockeyclub.com/resources/..._tsc_final.pdf

my opinion
 

[QUOTE=DSB]And all of these are lap dogs in on the fix?

http://www.jockeyclub.com/resources/..._tsc_final.pdf[/QUOTE
The shoe changes implemented by the Jockey Club 4 1/2 years ago have had a negative effect on horse safety in NY. Traction shoes make horses safer. Words like fix and lap dogs don't belong in this conversation.

And I was hoping for a simple yes or no answer.

[QUOTE=Ernie Dahlman][QUOTE=DSB]And all of these are lap dogs in on the fix?

http://www.jockeyclub.com/resources/..._tsc_final.pdf[/QUOTE

I'm glad you prefaced your comments with "my opinion." The opinions of various trainers, jockeys, and blacksmiths probably differ.

Sorry if I hurt your feelings. However, you do realize that this is what you've been suggesting, don't you? If, as you suggest, racing rules - which have resulted in increased danger for horses - have been put in place by JC members at the behest of their trainer for personal gain, that would not only be immoral, but possibly illegal, especially if injuries to horses and riders could be attributed to it.

This was big deal a while ago.
Many trainers continued to use them - including top 10 trainers.
One trainer even pointed them out to the world at large during a post parade.

More:

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/199...ack-turn-downs

There was a lot of talk about turn downs in the POST back then...not sure if they exist in archives or not.

As the article states, turndowns were banned as a safety issue for jockeys. The story I heard was that Sea Hero was invited to race at a Canadian track. The problem was that Sea Hero wore turndowns and they were not allowed at Canadian tracks. Miller said he wasn't going unless he could use turndowns and they relented. On the flight back Jerry Bailey voiced his concerns as to the danger of getting stepped on by a horse wearing turndowns and this led to the ban.

These bans happened in 2008. The Jockey Club thought they were fixing the problem that was causing breakdowns. Slewis and I argued against the changes.I believe we were right but they won.

Some trainers used very severe td's as I'm sure you know.

Would be like getting stabbed with a small knife if you got stepped on. And the horizontal momentum would probably rip you to shreds.