Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Thoroughbred Horse Racing Discussion > General Racing Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 9 votes, 4.56 average.
Old 09-27-2008, 11:36 AM   #16
DanG
Easy Goer
 
DanG's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Tampa,Florida
Posts: 3,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj
How many serious athletes have you seen playing in sneakers on a dirt or grass surface?


Maybe 4…I’ll have to check my records and get back to you.
__________________
Dan G
=======================
“We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.”
~ George Bernard Shaw
DanG is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-27-2008, 12:17 PM   #17
CryingForTheHorses
In Front
 
CryingForTheHorses's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hollywood Florida
Posts: 2,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by slewis
It's so great listening to the know-it-alls on this web site, like you sir.

You happen to be 100% incorrect about mud-calks. Tomorrow evening I will be posting statistics that PROVE just the opposite.
You see I, unlike the Jockey Club who has a bull shit study, have a 99% accurate and verifiable 9 (NINE) year study at NYRA tracks which PROVES that fewer horses break down wearing mud calks then when plain shod.
Problem is people like you make ridiculous statements claiming you "know" or have "seen", without any data to substantiate this nonsense.
Make sure you check this post tomorrow evening.. just dont try and dispute the (truth) data.

Its great reading shit like yours pal...I may not be a knowitall..But I do train horses....These shoes will be banned all over the country very soon...Calder is also banning them...Your studies mean crap to the injured horses.
CryingForTheHorses is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-27-2008, 04:40 PM   #18
Shenanigans
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 774
Quote:
Originally Posted by slewis
Dan,

As I posted earlier.. tonight I will be posting a portion of my study dating back to 2001 which consists of EVERY dirt starter at a NYRA track (over 109,000) in which I personally observed (over 99%) and recorded in a database (I record bit, blinker type, tongue tie and shoe type info on each horse).
You, and others will see how their is NO additional risk and how mud calks are statistically safer (less breakdowns) then plain shod horses.
As far as your cadillac williams ex., why not look at the millions of turns and additional traction baseball players and football players have (which is why they ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL wear them)
Imagine a baseball player rounding third hard and heading for home, when he makes that turn and plants his right foot, without cleats (same as calks) that foot gives way... torn groin, ham string, knee.
This is the same principle I've discussed with trainers like McLaughlin, who personally asked me about them when he started training again.
When an athlete, any athlete, puts it's foot (or hoof ) down, they want ONLY vertical movement (and just a little of that) and NO HORIZONTAL movement. When you start moving horizontally (sliding), thats when the athlete (including the horse) risks injury.
I will also be explaining the REAL reason why they have implemented this change, which is strictly a political move.
Oh, by the way... a 5 yr study conducted on steeplechase races in Saratoga shows that 4.5% of starters get VANNED OFF. You dont van a horse off unless he's hurt. 4.5%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! that's 4.5% vs about 0.4% for flat racing.
Think the "Concerned and caring Jockey Club" will ban steeplechase racing and threaten to "take graded status" from any track that conducts it??
These guys are an extension of the clowns we have in Washington... making and adjusting the rules for their own personal gains.
Tonight I'll tell all!
Not trying to be a wise ass here, but in your study did you walk back to the barns of each individual horse after each race and inspect their legs? Looking at the legs from the grand stand doesn't count.
Did you seek out information from each trainer about how each horse came back to the barn after each race? A lot of horses show signs of lameness while cooling out back at the barn.
Did you, in your study, follow up on each horse to see how well they came out of each race and how soon did they run back? Time off in between races usually can be due to some type of injury.
Can you reveal to us on how you conducted this study? Did you have trainers actually participating and being cooperative in this study? Most of the information you need to conduct this study would undoubtedly have to come from the trainers mouth. Are you telling us that in this study, each and every trainer of each and every horse gave you information on how their horse came out of each and every race?
Also, how were you able to verify how each horses injury did or did not be caused by the shoes they were wearing?
Shenanigans is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-27-2008, 05:48 PM   #19
Thess
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shenanigans
Not trying to be a wise ass here, but in your study did you walk back to the barns of each individual horse after each race and inspect their legs? Looking at the legs from the grand stand doesn't count.
Did you seek out information from each trainer about how each horse came back to the barn after each race? A lot of horses show signs of lameness while cooling out back at the barn.
Did you, in your study, follow up on each horse to see how well they came out of each race and how soon did they run back? Time off in between races usually can be due to some type of injury.
Can you reveal to us on how you conducted this study? Did you have trainers actually participating and being cooperative in this study? Most of the information you need to conduct this study would undoubtedly have to come from the trainers mouth. Are you telling us that in this study, each and every trainer of each and every horse gave you information on how their horse came out of each and every race?
Also, how were you able to verify how each horses injury did or did not be caused by the shoes they were wearing?
One of the suggestions at the The Welfare and Safety of the Racehorse Summit, coordinated and underwritten by Grayson-Jockey Club Research Foundation and The Jockey Club was keeping trainer stats of horses that did not finish. The jockey club is the organization that recommended the ban on toe grabs and mud calks. This is the same criteria that they recommended using to discredit trainers.

Slewis is meerly using the same criteria that they used and found important.

http://www.grayson-jockeyclub.org/re...fareSummit.pdf
Thess is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-27-2008, 07:16 PM   #20
Shenanigans
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 774
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thess
One of the suggestions at the The Welfare and Safety of the Racehorse Summit, coordinated and underwritten by Grayson-Jockey Club Research Foundation and The Jockey Club was keeping trainer stats of horses that did not finish. The jockey club is the organization that recommended the ban on toe grabs and mud calks. This is the same criteria that they recommended using to discredit trainers.

Slewis is meerly using the same criteria that they used and found important.

http://www.grayson-jockeyclub.org/re...fareSummit.pdf
Is Slewis including the knowledge and first hand experience from the "participants" on that list? I personally know a few of the people on that list and none of them have a "political agenda". These are knowledgeable horse people in the industry that actually give a damn about what's happening. I just have a hard time believing that these people are liars and don't know what they are talking about.

Last edited by Shenanigans; 09-27-2008 at 07:19 PM.
Shenanigans is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-27-2008, 07:39 PM   #21
slewis
Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,583
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shenanigans
Not trying to be a wise ass here, but in your study did you walk back to the barns of each individual horse after each race and inspect their legs? Looking at the legs from the grand stand doesn't count.
Did you seek out information from each trainer about how each horse came back to the barn after each race? A lot of horses show signs of lameness while cooling out back at the barn.
Did you, in your study, follow up on each horse to see how well they came out of each race and how soon did they run back? Time off in between races usually can be due to some type of injury.
Can you reveal to us on how you conducted this study? Did you have trainers actually participating and being cooperative in this study? Most of the information you need to conduct this study would undoubtedly have to come from the trainers mouth. Are you telling us that in this study, each and every trainer of each and every horse gave you information on how their horse came out of each and every race?
Also, how were you able to verify how each horses injury did or did not be caused by the shoes they were wearing?
Ok Darling,

I figured you'd be one of the people who wants to challenge me on this.
But after reading your post, I believe you might have an open mind here and are curious to see, so I'll answer your questions as best I can.
1) Of course I dont walk back to the barn with every horse, but I am friendly enough with enough trainers and have gotten positive feedback regarding their (mud calks) safety, that I dont need to. Plus, I have raced my own horses with them and had NO negative issues at all. With them, I do get to go back to the barn and go to the barn the next day, when the real problems become evident. I would NEVER allow these to be used if they put our horses in danger. I love these animals too much to risk that. We raced Big Truck with them as a two yr old, and at the time Tagg thought he was one of the best horses he ever had (archive the DRF article if you dont believe me).
2) The "follow-up" study. YES, absolutely. All horses that DNF for ANY reason were run through the database to check the next time they raced.
Would you agree if a horse raced within 6 weeks of a DNF, there was probably not a serious issue, and calks nor injury was probably not the cause of the DNF. Breathing issues play a larger role in these. In 99% of the cases of DNF with mud calks, horses returned to the races AGAIN wearing mud calks. That should tell you that either calks were NOT the problem or the trainer should be in jail. (Go with the first choice)
3) Revealing the study. .. I keep this database because certain shoe changes create betting AND claiming opportunities. I consider some changes negative and some positive. It's part of a complete database I keep to stay ahead of competition. Tongue tie, certain bit and blinker changes are in the database too. Their is NO ONE that I know of at NYRA that does this.. but trust me, the NYRA executives know who I am, what I have and what I'm going to expose. As far as trainers go, well, lets put it this way... Pletcher, McLaughlin, Hennig have all consulted with me on Mud calks and bends. Someone tipped McLaughlin about me when he started training again and he asked me a slew of questions. I'm honest with everyone and have the data to prove it. KM has used them on 95% of his dirt horses ever since. I asked him years ago if he had any more problems when using calks, and his answer, like most trainers who use them was and I quote "I'm seeing LESS problems and sounder horses and will be running ALL my horses with them!"
4) Your last question is somewhat a repeat..... I told you what trainers like McLaughlin, Levine, Hushion, Pletcher and even today I had a chat with Nick Zito who I gave a copy of the report last week. They all agree, this rule is nonsense and has a hidden agenda which I will post later this evening.
But again, I think we could agree that if a horse is running every 4 weeks or so wearing mud calks and bends, we dont need to ask the trainer if there's trauma or injury, he wouldn't be able to do it.
I could list the names of top top quality horses that have raced with them, including Commentator, Sky Beauty, Invasor, Jazil, and I could go on and on.
Keep an open mind and evaluate the numbers I post later.....
slewis is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-27-2008, 08:03 PM   #22
slewis
Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,583
Quote:
Originally Posted by McSchell_Racing
Its great reading shit like yours pal...I may not be a knowitall..But I do train horses....These shoes will be banned all over the country very soon...Calder is also banning them...Your studies mean crap to the injured horses.
The reason I called you a know-it all is because it's trainers like you ( and others "involved" in this game) that shoot your mouth off when you dont have anything (data or other) to substantiate it.
I've done some research and I know your about a 6 % trainer on the Calder, Tampa Bay, and occasionally GP circuit. 6% at 2 minor league tracks would hardly qualify one to be considered an "expert" in his field.
I too, are far from an expert in this business, if there is such a thing. But I listen to the guys who are respected as THE TOP TRAINERS give their opinions and views, and I listen carefully.
Allen Jerkens, in my opinion, the greatest trainer of my day, has run 85% of his dirt runners in Mud Calks and bends. He beat the great Secretariat, and has accomplished much with far inferior stock then some of his peers.
So, Mr. Schell, I ask you ever so humbly, Do you know better then Mr Jerkens??.. or Mr. Zito... or McLaughlin??? or Levine, or Hushion, etc...
My suggestion to you???... This winter in South Fla, when these trainers are in town, maybe you should ask them what you should be doing because at 6% this yr, you ain't gettin it done, pal. That is of course if your stable and you aren't over in Tampa.
slewis is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-27-2008, 08:40 PM   #23
Shenanigans
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 774
So Slewis, why are you waiting to post the reasons behind this banning until later this evening? Why not post them now?
One other thing, are you saying that the "participants" in the Grayson Jockey Club are not telling the truth and have hidden agendas? There are many reputable people on that list with a good name in the industy too.
Shenanigans is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-27-2008, 10:17 PM   #24
slewis
Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,583
Mud calk injury data at NYRA (2001-2008)

I have compiled the following data FROM DIRT races at AQU, BEL, and SARATOGA for the years mentioned above.

I PERSONALLY look at each horse, record the data and have it input into a personal database for my use. I rarely miss a day (unless there is a sale or if we have a horse race out of town, I did take 4 days off to go to the Derby this yr).
On those days, I have a competant person provide the data to me, so the study in my opinion is probably greater than 99% accurate.

I ran through my database, all horse that raced each yr ON THE DIRT, and then ran a query which horse DNF. This of course is a crude "worse case scenario" since probably 65% of DNF horses lose their jocks, clip heels, etc.

But this can be "fine tuned" by running another query as to the NEXT time each of these horses started their very next race.
Obviously, if a horse who DNF started back in 60 days or less, it was not seriously injured.

Here are the findings:

Total Dirt starters 2001-2008 (thru AUG) 109,433

Total Plain shod.....................................83.2%
Total wearing Mud calks..........................16.8%

Total DNF .............................................1115 (1.02%)
Total plain shod ..................................967 (1.06%)
Total DNF w/ mud calks .............................148 (0.81%)

Here is a breakdown by year.. (note how as years progressed, the number of horse wearing calks increased, but not the % DNF)

2008 thru aug total dirt..........................8541
total plain shod ...................................6379 (74.7%)
total calks...........................................21 62 (25.3%)
Total DNF .............................................74 (.87%)
Tot DNF plain .......................................53 (.83%)
Tot DNF wear calks ............................21 (.97%)

Plain shod DNF that did NOT race again........21 (.40%)
Mud calks DNF that did NOT race again ........7 (.31%)

2007 Mud calk data:

Total Dirt starters...................................12,442
Total plain shod .......................................9398 (75.5%)
Total mud calks ......................................3044 (24.5%)
Total DNF ................................................13 1 (1.05%)
Total DNF plain shod ...................................108 (1.12%)
Total DNF mud calks ................................... 23 (0.76%)
Of the 108 DNF plain shod to race again ...........50 (0.62%)
Of the 23 DNF with calks to race again ..........12 (0.39%)

(as you can see in 2007, a horse wearing calks that DNF is 40% more likely to have an injury where they have not returned to racing.)

2006 data

Total dirt starters .....................................14,225
total plain shod .........................................11,209 (78.8%)
total wearing calks .......................................3016 (21.2%)
Total DNF .................................................. ..116 (1.17%)
Total DNF plain shod ........................................135 (1.2%)
Total dnf mud calks ..........................................31 (1.03%)

In 2006 of the 31 DNF wearing calks.. 13 did not return racing ... (0.41%)

I am going to skip the other years but include 2001.. the results are VERY similar.

2001 data.......

Total Dirt starters ..............................................14,5 23
Total plain shod ................................................13 ,405 (92.3%)
Total wearing calks ........................................... 1118 ( 7.7%)
Total DNF .................................................. .........196 (1.35%)
Total DNF plain shod ..............................................187 (1.4%)
Total DNF wearing calks ............................................9 (0.81%)

As you can clearly see, as years have past since 2001 mud calk use has risen dramatically, yet, stats clearly show NO increase in DNF's and when those DNF's are investigated, the numbers show even more significantly, that calks not only pose no additional danger, but could be considered SAFER statistcally then plain shod horses.

Tomorrow evening I will post the HIDDEN AGENDA behind this entire rule change and clearly show the players involved and their personal reasons for implementing these new ridiculaous rules.

In the actual study I provided numerous trainers with, (which has been forwarded to Charlie Haywood), I included names of EVERY horse that DNF'd the last 3 years and commented on each of those including providing that horses next race date (if they returned to the races) and subsequent shoe information.
slewis is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-27-2008, 10:27 PM   #25
slewis
Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,583
correction above

In the above data...

Beneath yr 2007 I quoted that a horse wearing calks has a 40% greater chance of being injured......etc.


That should read approx. 40% LESS CHANCE OF BEING INJURED when wearing calks vs being plain shod.
slewis is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-28-2008, 09:35 AM   #26
Shenanigans
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 774
Horses wearing mud calks are more than likely running in the mud. Was this study done with horses running only on muddy tracks? Did it study the horses wearing mud calks vs. the horses wearing plain shoes on a muddy track? Your study is fine, but how thorough can it be when most of the time the tracks weren't muddy so there was no reason to wear mud calks? Did you include in your study the amount of muddy tracks vs. the amount of DNF wearing mud calks on a muddy track? My point is that there are more days run on dirt vs mud, therefore your percentage for plain shod horses is going to be much greater wouldn't you say? Also, were you able to prove in your study that the injury the horse received was directly caused by the shoe they were wearing? There are a lot of injuries that are not caused by the shoes. Even though the percentage of injuries to mud calk wearing horses was smaller, were you able to verify how the injury was sustained? Personally, for your study to hold any clout, the study should have been muddy tracks only with mud calks vs. plain shoes. I don't know too many trainers that run a horse on a dry track with mud calks.

Last edited by Shenanigans; 09-28-2008 at 09:36 AM.
Shenanigans is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-28-2008, 10:35 AM   #27
slewis
Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,583
Sorry gal,


You're 100% incorrect. Most trainers who use them race on both dry and wet and sloppy tracks. They race ALL their horses in them.

If I broke the stats down by sloppy, muddy or whatever, which my database allows, the results are very similar.

You know what.. rather then caall them "mud calks", they should be renamed "horse cleats"
Let me explain to you what I tell trainers when they ask me about calks.
If you have ever run on the beach (not on the hard stuff by the water, but by the sandy fluffy part) you know that your foot sinks, (cushion) and then there's a SLIDING action as you push off.
This is EXACTLY what a horse deals with when racing on the dirt.
What you want to avoid is HORIZANTAL movement of the hoof. Ankles and knees are not designed to move that way, so if you can limit the SLIDING action horizantally, the horse is oK. Mud calks and bends do this, especially on the turns!!!!!!! They WILL give a horse better traction and more confidence (just like a baseball player rounding third and trying to score).
Horses race better and stay SOUNDER with them!
You will see more horses will get hurt, especially on tracks with tighter turns (inner track at Aqueduct) with this new rule.
slewis is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-28-2008, 11:13 AM   #28
barn32
tmrpots
 
barn32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,285
Quote:
Originally Posted by slewis
I have compiled the following data FROM DIRT races at AQU, BEL, and SARATOGA for the years mentioned above.

I PERSONALLY look at each horse,
Are you saying you're down in the paddock looking at their feet? How can you see them? Unless they walk across concrete or asphalt, they are almost impossible to see.
barn32 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-28-2008, 11:20 AM   #29
slewis
Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,583
Quote:
Originally Posted by barn32
Are you saying you're down in the paddock looking at their feet? How can you see them? Unless they walk across concrete or asphalt, they are almost impossible to see.
That is precisely what I'm saying, and people on this site who know me, know I look at EVERY horse every race.

I've become so good at this, that I can see them even at Aqueduct looking through binoculars. .....And it's not unusual for the NYRA blacksmiths who check these to announce to the public, to ask me what I saw on a horse they were unsure of.
slewis is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-28-2008, 12:03 PM   #30
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,816
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanG


Maybe 4…I’ll have to check my records and get back to you.
I'm glad you were able to find humor in how silly your post about sneakers was.
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.