Jack Van Berg

[Robert Goren]

Originally Posted by cwwash

Van Burg's problem is you cannot take a knife to a gun fight.

And a pen knife at that.

[Stillriledup]

One year later, Jack Van Berg is 0 for 61 on the year.

We've talked about this in this thread, nobody can give him ONE live horse. Not one horse. Ever.

Years and years can go by and this is the guy who trained Alysheba and Gate Dancer among others and yet not one owner can even give him a solid 20k claimer. I'm not suggesting you give him a 2 million dollar yearling, but giving him a good, hard knocking 20k horse isnt something that would be a problem for a rich owner who's in the claiming game, right?

Like the OP asked, doesnt there have to be more to the story? Can anyone explain to me why Jack can't get ONE horse that can run? Just ONE? One time?

AM i asking too much?

[nijinski]

Stillriled , Billy Turner doesn't exactly get the cream of crop either and he
most certainly is capable. He does score though with what he has .
I think the owners do tend to go with the "now" trainers and also there
are those who are contracted with the farms that get the nod as well.

Pretty much all the reasons have been covered earlier in the thread and
it seems consistent with his stock and drug free handling.

[owlet]

the sport will die unless all drugs are stopped. 24 hr. monitoring, searches of people entering the stable, all products purchased from a track store, lifetime trainer ban and ownership loss of horse are what is needed.

otherwise it will die.

[toussaud]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

One year later, Jack Van Berg is 0 for 61 on the year.

We've talked about this in this thread, nobody can give him ONE live horse. Not one horse. Ever.

Years and years can go by and this is the guy who trained Alysheba and Gate Dancer among others and yet not one owner can even give him a solid 20k claimer. I'm not suggesting you give him a 2 million dollar yearling, but giving him a good, hard knocking 20k horse isnt something that would be a problem for a rich owner who's in the claiming game, right?

Like the OP asked, doesnt there have to be more to the story? Can anyone explain to me why Jack can't get ONE horse that can run? Just ONE? One time?

AM i asking too much?

this is what i am saying

heck turner won a race yesterday (or friday) if I am not mistaken. Van Burg, as good of a trainer he is, just is autotoss, no questions asked. he's come close with one of the warren horses, but i mean.. 0 for 61?

you mean he can't take any of them to golden gate and win a race? he can't win a race at fairplex? he 0 for 61? there has to be more to this than he isn't doping his horses like everyone else.

Bruce Headley is winning races (not many but still). Mel Stute hit a win milestone at hollywood park last year.

[rwwupl]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

One year later, Jack Van Berg is 0 for 61 on the year.

We've talked about this in this thread, nobody can give him ONE live horse. Not one horse. Ever.

Years and years can go by and this is the guy who trained Alysheba and Gate Dancer among others and yet not one owner can even give him a solid 20k claimer. I'm not suggesting you give him a 2 million dollar yearling, but giving him a good, hard knocking 20k horse isnt something that would be a problem for a rich owner who's in the claiming game, right?

Like the OP asked, doesnt there have to be more to the story? Can anyone explain to me why Jack can't get ONE horse that can run? Just ONE? One time?

AM i asking too much?

Jack Van Berg has taken the worst of things because he has been a "Man up" for what he believes in...He deserves better consideration from the owners,and get some horses that can run.

rw

[Bruiser1]

As one who happened to claim a filly from Van Berg a number of years back, I can tell you the filly was sound and healthy and went on to win a few races at a higher level on the SC circuit.

Even back then, there were certain trainers you'd best not claim from.

As for Van Berg's lack of success, it all has to do with what material he's working with. I see some of the lousy PP's on his stock running at SA and I do feel sorry for him. The guy knows the game and I hope an owner with some quality stock hires him.

FWIW, there are a few successful trainers from the 80's and 90's that seem to be in the same boat.

[Maumeeriverangler]

I remember Jack Van Berg from the 70s he used to rule DRC & Hazel Park & also Aksarben, I think he might have ran at Oaklawn too, I'm glad he had a Derby winner after all the hard work he has put into racing, he's probably forgot more than a lot of trainers know.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by Maumeeriverangler

I remember Jack Van Berg from the 70s he used to rule DRC & Hazel Park & also Aksarben, I think he might have ran at Oaklawn too, I'm glad he had a Derby winner after all the hard work he has put into racing, he's probably forgot more than a lot of trainers know.

He has. He's a true horsemen. Today we have chemists and publicists training America's horses for the most part.

[Fastracehorse]

Originally Posted by andymays

http://www.ntra.com/content.aspx?typ...e=red&id=41271

Excerpt:


“We’re almost at the point where if you had a cup of coffee at Starbucks three days before the race, you could test positive for caffeine at a level that would be a violation in horse racing,” said Arthur. “I can’t get a cup of coffee even from Starbucks to keep me awake for three days. In the Olympics, the threshold level for caffeine is 12,000 nanograms (parts per billion). In the ’90s California horse racing called a positive at two nanograms.

“Most people in the car next to you driving down the road could not pass a post-race drug test. Most people sitting next to you in church could not pass a post-race drug test.”

The technology has improved to the extent that California’s Kenneth L. Maddy Equine Analytical Laboratory, which tests all of California’s samples, can find up to 800 drugs. Arthur says that the lab is adding new substances it can test for all the time.

Why do the tests call positives at levels that are so far below what could possibly influence a horse’s performance?

“We err on the side of caution,” explained Arthur. “If anything, we over-regulate horse racing for two reasons—1) to protect the integrity of the competition and 2) to protect the welfare of the horse and jockey.”

Brown said that California made great strides a couple of years ago when the state began testing for alkalizing agents (in racing commonly called milkshakes) and changed its testing for clenbuterol from a urine test to a more accurate blood test.

“That has now made racing there the most drug-free and formful,” said Brown. “I don’t mean formful in the sense of favorites winning, but you don’t have to handicap the trainers as much. You can handicap the horses. What you don’t see are the extreme form reversals when horses enter or leave certain trainers’ barns that you do in the rest of the country. You have no idea how significant that is to bettors in deciding where to bet.”

California’s landmark decision to test for milkshakes—the process of administering sodium bicarbonate (TCO2) in the hopes that the horse will run faster because his muscles don’t build up as much lactic acid—virtually eliminated the problem.

“Our last violation was in August of 2008,” said Arthur. “In the last two years in California, we’ve had only two violations out of over 50,000 samples. That’s a pretty amazing success rate.”

Clenbuterol is a medication that horsemen use to help horses breathe better. While veterinarians can legally administer clenbuterol to horses in training, it must be withdrawn 72 hours prior to racing. Only that trace amount of 25 picograms per milliliter (parts per trillion) of blood is allowed in a post-race test, an amount deemed far too small to have any effect on a horse’s racing performance.

Positives are called both for illegal substances with no legitimate use in the horse and for overages of otherwise legal therapeutic medications. By far the most positives occur in the latter instance, usually when a horse received a medication too close to race time for the drug to clear the system.

“Most drug violations are mistakes,” Arthur said, “inadvertent administrations of legitimate medications that were prescribed to the horse with no intent to influence the outcome of a race. The groom, assistant trainer, or trainer may have forgotten that the horse was entered, or the medication was accidentally given to the wrong horse.

“Drugs that one would even suspect are being administered to try to beat the system are few and far between. They are very rare.”

Contamination can also cause positive tests. Several years ago, horses in the care of several prominent trainers tested positive for scopolamine. The culprit turned out to be jimsonweed, a poisonous plant containing scopolamine, which had contaminated the baled straw bought for the horses’ stall bedding.

Human drugs of abuse are another source of violations. If a backstretch worker has a drug problem, traces of the drug can get into a horse’s system just through the employee handling the horse.

.......Andy.

Most handicappers want an edge. One of the biggest edges is to bet high % trainers. There is a real good chance your horse will fire when U have one of those 38 % guys from Mnr ( or wherever).

It's part of the game - lots of big names , lots of nobody's, very few suspensions comparatively.

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

Wesley Ward was perfect w/ 6 starters yesterday at Wdb

he only won 5 races because he had 2 enterd in 1 race - they almost dead-heated

Wdb usually doesn't tolerate high % dudes too well

fffastt

[toussaud]

yay jack van berg! 138 dollar winner at santa anita

[Ocala Mike]

Seems like they throw him a bone about once a meeting. Not sure, but I think he got shut out at Del Mar. I should have been on that one today.


Ocala Mike

[Dahoss2002]

Congrats Jack!

[Robert Goren]

Originally Posted by toussaud

yay jack van berg! 138 dollar winner at santa anita

Did all the other horses fall down?