What's the Record?

[Rupert Pupkin]

According to DRF, D Wayne is 0 for 54 in graded stakes races. That's over the last 3 years or so. That's got to be some kind of record.

I know that some of you may like DWL, but you have to take the good with the bad. He certainly has some impressive accomplishments in the past. I'm not denying that.

[cowgirlintexas]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

According to DRF, D Wayne is 0 for 54 in graded stakes races. That's over the last 3 years or so. That's got to be some kind of record.

I know that some of you may like DWL, but you have to take the good with the bad. He certainly has some impressive accomplishments in the past. I'm not denying that.

I am always leery when tossing out his horses myself.

My biggest win came with Charismatic and only played him because it was DWL trained.

[letswastemoney]

You could argue he's overdue for a win lol

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by cowgirlintexas

I am always leery when tossing out his horses myself.

My biggest win came with Charismatic and only played him because it was DWL trained.

I'm not saying you can totally toss his horses in the Belmont today. The Belmont has a history of upsets. I'm expecting some type of upset today. Mine That Bird just had two hard races. He's not a very big horse. In addition, he appears to be most effective when coming from way out of it. He's not going to get much pace today. I would be surprised if he didn't regress today.

DWL's horses probably wouldn't be my top picks in this race, but I would give them a shot. That being said, I think the angle of betting DWL's horses in these big races is not a smart move. I know he's had some big longshots that have won in the past (in the 1990s) like Thunder Gulch and Charismatic. But overall, betting him in these big races is a huge losing proposition over the last few years. The numbers speak for themselves. You can't do worse than 0 for 54.

[Rupert Pupkin]

By the way, DWL may even be worse than 0 for 54. DRF is simply showing each trainer's record over a certain period of time. There is no cut-off based on when his last win was. I think they are just showing each trainer's record from either 2007-2009 or maybe 2006-2009. So DWL may even be 0 for 70 for all I know.

[Port Conway Lane]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

By the way, DWL may even be worse than 0 for 54. DRF is simply showing each trainer's record over a certain period of time. There is no cut-off based on when his last win was. I think they are just showing each trainer's record from either 2007-2009 or maybe 2006-2009. So DWL may even be 0 for 70 for all I know.

17 for 230 5 years 27% itm
7 for 168 4 years 22% itm
2 for 110 3 years 22% itm
0 for 74 2 years 22% itm
0 for 43 1 year 26% itm

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Port Conway Lane

17 for 230 5 years 27% itm
7 for 168 4 years 22% itm
2 for 110 3 years 22% itm
0 for 74 2 years 22% itm
0 for 43 1 year 26% itm

Wow. That is quite a cold streak as of late. He is at least 0 for 74 and he may even be 0 for 90 or so.