Repole says no mo disclosure

[toussaud]

http://www.paulickreport.com/news/ra...disclosure-no/

I don't really have a dog in this fight, but, I just find it funny how they have no problem with not being honest and forthright with the wagering public, yet, want you to wager all your money on these horses. Basically they want you to guess and pray.

I don't think you can have it both ways. I could care less about the derby trail, i'm talking about the wagering public. You trot a 1/9 shot out there and he runs up the track, and you have pletcher coming out all week saying he's back to his normal self, implying that he knew he wasn't right in the first place. That peeves me off.

[Idrivetrotters]

I have a big problem with Repole's comments, basically he is saying that the betting public has no business knowing what's going on in the barn, we just have to "trust" that they will run a horse right.

Well, Pletcher has a long history of running horses short, not right, and do NOT get me started on Life At Ten!

Other countries have full disclosure on everything with the horse and race on zero race day medication and owner's and trainer's are still making a living racing horses, so why can't that happen here? What are they hiding? What HAS been hidden in the past (LAT?)

I've always thought this guy was not good for racing, and now, each time he opens his mouth, I know it.

[onefast99]

The funny part is that people actually think Repole is telling Pletcher what to say!

[Tom]

Pletcher....where have I heard that name before?

Oh, yeah, Life at Ten.....another screwing of the betting public.
This jerk has zero credibility with me.

[eastie]

Originally Posted by toussaud

http://www.paulickreport.com/news/ra...disclosure-no/

I don't really have a dog in this fight, but, I just find it funny how they have no problem with not being honest and forthright with the wagering public, yet, want you to wager all your money on these horses. Basically they want you to guess and pray.

I don't think you can have it both ways. I could care less about the derby trail, i'm talking about the wagering public. You trot a 1/9 shot out there and he runs up the track, and you have pletcher coming out all week saying he's back to his normal self, implying that he knew he wasn't right in the first place. That peeves me off.

I thought Uncle Mo was a game third....up the track ? Big Brown was "up the track" in the Belmont. Poor choice of words. And by the way, the Wood was a fluke, like Secretariat losing in the Wood. Uncle Mo wins the triple crown

[toussaud]

Originally Posted by eastie

I thought Uncle Mo was a game third....up the track ? Big Brown was "up the track" in the Belmont. Poor choice of words. And by the way, the Wood was a fluke, like Secretariat losing in the Wood. Uncle Mo wins the triple crown

Would you like to buy some worldcom stock?

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by eastie

I thought Uncle Mo was a game third....up the track ? Big Brown was "up the track" in the Belmont. Poor choice of words. And by the way, the Wood was a fluke, like Secretariat losing in the Wood. Uncle Mo wins the triple crown

When you are 1-5 and you're beaten easily while not being competitive, you were essentially 'up the track'.

if Mo was 50-1, he would have been a 'game 3rd'

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by Tom

Pletcher....where have I heard that name before?

Oh, yeah, Life at Ten.....another screwing of the betting public.
This jerk has zero credibility with me.

You heard it when he drugged his horse Wait A While in the Breeders Cup a "while" back. I think the horse was DQd from purse money and Pletcher got a hefty fine.

You also heard it when Left Bank died mysteriously after running really really fast.....faster than most horses have ever run in the history of this great sport.

[toussaud]

or how rags to riches was doing "great" despite the turlesque morning workouts, only to come back and lose against horses she would have clobbered 3 months earlier and be retired.

[Linny]

They all lie like dogs. Remember how Empire Maker was coming up the Derby "better than any horse" Frankel had ever seen but as soon as he lost it was "he was nursing a foot issue all week."

Todd is the master at not saying anything. He's like the Wizard of Oz telling us to pay no attention to that vet truck behind the curtain. Funny how there was no indication before the Wood that Mo wasn't anything but 100%.

[Dahoss9698]

By no means am I trying to defend Pletcher, but some of you guys are acting like he's the only one doing this stuff. Like he's the only one that has had horses get sick or perform well under expectations, only to find out later on that something might have been amiss.

As Linny said, they all do it. And I don't think many of us would bet if we really knew what was going on behind the scenes in some barns.

We can't have it both ways. If trainers are honest and say a horse isn't doing great and they run poorly, people will call for their heads for running a horse not doing well. If they say they are doing well and run poorly, we're mad also. I think as bettors it's up to us to decide who and what we listen to, if anything at all.

[toussaud]

Originally Posted by Dahoss9698

By no means am I trying to defend Pletcher, but some of you guys are acting like he's the only one doing this stuff. Like he's the only one that has had horses get sick or perform well under expectations, only to find out later on that something might have been amiss.

As Linny said, they all do it. And I don't think many of us would bet if we really knew what was going on behind the scenes in some barns.

We can't have it both ways. If trainers are honest and say a horse isn't doing great and they run poorly, people will call for their heads for running a horse not doing well. If they say they are doing well and run poorly, we're mad also. I think as bettors it's up to us to decide who and what we listen to, if anything at all.

while i see your point, there is a difference between running poorly and the horse having issues.

The big guerrilla in the room here is do we actually believe mo had "issues" anyway. IN that way I see your point. What if he came out and vetted fine and had no major issues and ran up the track.

But the greater good here has to be the integrity of the wager. That has to be at the end of the day, more important than if we think a trainer can train or not.

[sonnyp]

i hate to break this news, but the vast,vast majority of trainers and owners feel as though they owe bettors.....gamblers, zero....nothing.

by far the attitude is that the owners put up the money, take the risk and the trainers do the work,at the barn 5:00 am day in day out. they will and do what they feel is in their best interest and that of their horse.

mullin expressed his contempt for bettors. that was no accident, he was being honest and that comment reflects the way most of them feel.

[Dahoss9698]

Originally Posted by toussaud

while i see your point, there is a difference between running poorly and the horse having issues.

The big guerrilla in the room here is do we actually believe mo had "issues" anyway. IN that way I see your point. What if he came out and vetted fine and had no major issues and ran up the track.

But the greater good here has to be the integrity of the wager. That has to be at the end of the day, more important than if we think a trainer can train or not.

Agreed that there is a difference between running poorly and having issues, however they also could be related. The horse could be running poorly because of the issues.

I have no idea if Mo had issues. I thought it was suspect that he was only going to have 2 starts before the Derby and the decision of what the 2 starts were going to be was also interesting. That said, I still viewed him as the horse to beat in the Derby, even after his race at Gulfstream, because of what he had done as a 2 year old. After seeing his Wood, I don't think he's the same horse, for whatever reason.

I'd be for full disclosure, but how is that going to be regulated exactly (not asking you specifically, just throwing it out there)? The NFL supposedly has injury disclosure, yet the Patriots have the same guys on the injury report every week, so how well is that working?

Also, while I know trainers know most of the time when something is bothering a horse, there are times when they don't, because it's not like the horse can talk (except for Zenyatta) and tell his/her connections what is bothering them.

I'd love to be able to know when horses have had procedures done, but again, it'll need to be regulated and with no commisioner, it doesn't seem realistic at this point. Doesn't mean it can't be reality at some point, but we need to take one step at a time.

[toussaud]

Originally Posted by sonnyp

i hate to break this news, but the vast,vast majority of trainers and owners feel as though they owe bettors.....gamblers, zero....nothing.

by far the attitude is that the owners put up the money, take the risk and the trainers do the work,at the barn 5:00 am day in day out. they will and do what they feel is in their best interest and that of their horse.

mullin expressed his contempt for bettors. that was no accident, he was being honest and that comment reflects the way most of them feel.

not arguing that point at all. In fact if they felt they owed us anything this would have been done already. But just because they feel that way doesn't make it right.

The real drawback as I see it is the claiming issue. would totally revamp the claiming game so to speak.