Excellent Angle: D Wayne Off

[CSC]

I don't know what Baffert is doing but the vast majority of his horses are running blinders lately, maybe he is finally warming up to sythetics, his horses are finishing full of run.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by 3kings

In the last 8-10 years almost everyone would trade their resumes. He hasn't done much except run horses in wrong spots in the major races so he could be in the spotlight. Most of these horses probably would have been better served being developed slowly than rushed so that Lukas could still seem relevant.

Yes, that is exactly right. That is what I admire about guys like Whittingham. Whittingham knew that most of his horses would be better served being developed slowly so that they would last. But by the same token, when Whittingham had a great horse that was sound, that he knew could handle the rigors of the Derby, he would run.

That is what separates the good trainers from the bad trainers. The good trainers listen to their horses and let the horse tell them what they're ready to do. The good trainers don't simply run in the big race no matter what simply because the horse is eligible.

A good example is Todd Pletcher. He could have run Rule, Interactiff, and Aikenite in the Derby. These horses were all in the top 20 but Todd didn't run them because he knew the Derby was not a good spot for those horses. He wasn't going to run just for the sake of running. He's knows that these horses are good horses and will be very useful in other spots.

If D Wayne trained those horses, I'm sure he would have run them all.

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

One of the main reasons Lukas did so well in the 80s was because he was one of the only guys using steroids. His 2 year olds were the size of 3 year olds. That's why he did so well with 2 year olds. And before you knew it, Lukas was spending $80-$100 million a year on horses while most other big trainers were spending $5 million a year. When you're one of the only guys using steroids and you're outspending everyone by 10x, it's no surprise that he won a ton of races.

After everyone else started using steroids, Lukas' edge was gone.

I'm certainly not a Lukas fan but how exactly is this different from what Pletcher or any of the big name trainers are doing presently. They get the best stock, they have the best vets, they win the most races. Lukas was using steroids, his juicer 'students' are relying on other types of meds. Same old ****. Tell you this much: take away the meds in racing and half of these (presently very successful) idiots couldn't train a poodle. They're frauds. The difference is Lukas is transparent to just about everyone while you, and others, put his juicer students on pedestals.

I mean, you're apparently in the game. Check out what's happening with regularity out in Southern Cali. I've been playing the ponies for over 30 years. Once upon a time, you either routed your horses or sprinted them. Now, in CALI, they go from a single sprint to winning routes. Not only do they win but they outfinish horses that have been routing. Now, that's some serious training ****. Sadler, Mitchell, Baffert, Abrams, etc.; they do it all the time. When's the last time a sprinter was able to stretch and win on the turf after a single sprint? Doesn't happen in too many other venues (excepting the AQU INNER). Guess these horses aren't 'specialists' anymore and they mix up their distances with regularity. New age training. Righttttttttttttt. Same way Pletcher's horses consistently get those WIDE trips and just keep going in the lane.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

I'm certainly not a Lukas fan but how exactly is this different from what Pletcher or any of the big name trainers are doing presently. They get the best stock, they have the best vets, they win the most races. Lukas was using steroids, his juicer 'students' are relying on other types of meds. Same old ****. Tell you this much: take away the meds in racing and half of these (presently very successful) idiots couldn't train a poodle. They're frauds. The difference is Lukas is transparent to just about everyone while you, and others, put his juicer students on pedestals.

I mean, you're apparently in the game. Check out what's happening with regularity out in Southern Cali. I've been playing the ponies for over 30 years. Once upon a time, you either routed your horses or sprinted them. Now, in CALI, they go from a single sprint to winning routes. Not only do they win but they outfinish horses that have been routing. Now, that's some serious training ****. Sadler, Mitchell, Baffert, Abrams, etc.; they do it all the time. When's the last time a sprinter was able to stretch and win on the turf after a single sprint? Doesn't happen in too many other venues (excepting the AQU INNER). Guess these horses aren't 'specialists' anymore and they mix up their distances with regularity. New age training. Righttttttttttttt. Same way Pletcher's horses consistently get those WIDE trips and just keep going in the lane.

I don't think there is any doubt that many of the top trainers have the best vets and they make full use of these vets. I agree with you there. But I still think that we can still usually separate the truly good trainers from the guys that would stop winning if all drugs were banned.

Let's pretend that all vets were banned from the track and there were cameras everywhere and there was no way to use any type of drug. I think that some trainers would still do well while others would drop off a cliff.

I think that Doug O'Neil would totally disappear. I think Mike Mitchell's win percentage would drop in half. I think that Vladimir Cerin's numbers would plummet.

[the_fat_man]

How are these guys training these horses to not only handle multiple distances AND be able to mix them up at will BUT to be able to stretch them out off of a single race and have them display router stamina. This was something that some of the all time greats couldn't do, at one time. I mean, great horses would return sprinting off layoffs and then (gradually) be stretched out. I can make sense of the cutback but the stretchout is tough to handle.

I watch S Cal racing and I'm hardpressed to figure out how these guys are training these horses. Clearly, in any other sport, your routers aren't able to beat sprinters sprinting and certainly your sprinters can't be routers over a distance -- and come from off the pace to do it, no less.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

How are these guys training these horses to not only handle multiple distances AND be able to mix them up at will BUT to be able to stretch them out off of a single race and have them display router stamina. This was something that some of the all time greats couldn't do, at one time. I mean, great horses would return sprinting off layoffs and then (gradually) be stretched out. I can make sense of the cutback but the stretchout is tough to handle.

I watch S Cal racing and I'm hardpressed to figure out how these guys are training these horses. Clearly, in any other sport, your routers aren't able to beat sprinters sprinting and certainly your sprinters can't be routers over a distance -- and come from off the pace to do it, no less.

If a horse wins sprinting first-time out, it is very tough to win next time out going long but it can be done. I think that in general the guys that are the most successful at this are the ones that give the horse at least 5 weeks (and preferably 6 weeks) between the debut win and the next race. The horses usually need some time to recover from the debut win and they need some long works (or 5 furlong works with long gallop-outs) to get ready for the route race.

I don't think much has changed with regards to this over the years. I first started going to the races back in 1980. Back then, if I saw a horse that won really impressively sprinting in his debut, the horse would usually get crushed if he was brought back routing 17 days later. I think that is still the same today.

[eajinabi]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Yes, that is exactly right. That is what I admire about guys like Whittingham. Whittingham knew that most of his horses would be better served being developed slowly so that they would last. But by the same token, when Whittingham had a great horse that was sound, that he knew could handle the rigors of the Derby, he would run.

That is what separates the good trainers from the bad trainers. The good trainers listen to their horses and let the horse tell them what they're ready to do. The good trainers don't simply run in the big race no matter what simply because the horse is eligible.

A good example is Todd Pletcher. He could have run Rule, Interactiff, and Aikenite in the Derby. These horses were all in the top 20 but Todd didn't run them because he knew the Derby was not a good spot for those horses. He wasn't going to run just for the sake of running. He's knows that these horses are good horses and will be very useful in other spots.

If D Wayne trained those horses, I'm sure he would have run them all.

I agree Whitingham was a trainer with great talent. Trainers today give thier horses long layoffs and juice thier horses but it does nothing to extend thier careers. How many top horses have you seen run past 10 lifetime starts in thier career nowadays.

Lukas method of training did not involve lightly racing and long extended layoffs. He liked to run horses in races (often races they did not belong in) into form. Spain is a good example of that. So If he is 0 for 25 at CD meet does this attribute to him juicing his horses too much or not at all?

How does trainers like Steve Asmussen, Rudy Rodriguez, Mike Mitchell, Jeff Mullins etc get a pass while Lukas is singled-out like a criminal.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by eajinabi

I agree Whitingham was a trainer with great talent. Trainers today give thier horses long layoffs and juice thier horses but it does nothing to extend thier careers. How many top horses have you seen run past 10 lifetime starts in thier career nowadays.

Lukas method of training did not involve lightly racing and long extended layoffs. He liked to run horses in races (often races they did not belong in) into form. Spain is a good example of that. So If he is 0 for 25 at CD meet does this attribute to him juicing his horses too much or not at all?

How does trainers like Steve Asmussen, Rudy Rodriguez, Mike Mitchell, Jeff Mullins etc get a pass while Lukas is singled-out like a criminal.

The original point of this thread was that D Wayne is not a very good trainer. His numbers have been lousy for years. He did great back in the 1980s for a number of reasons but those days are over.

With regards to him being 0 for 25 at Churchill, it's really not that shocking. He doesn't do well any more against tough competition. He does his best at places like Oaklawn Park in the winter when he's running horses he paid $200,000 for against horses that were bought for $20,000.

I don't know what you define as "juicing". Most of the top trainers do make full use of their vets. There are tons of legal drugs that are very expensive that will help most horses. With regard to Lukas' current use of vets, I would guess that his vet bills are still extremely high. His horses have always tended to be really sore so he has always had to rely on his vets.

You asked about a few other trainers. Mike Mitchell is basically a claiming trainer. He doesn't usually get many expensive young horses. He has a reputation of being a claiming trainer that magically moves a lot of horses up overnight but he also breaks down a lot of horses. I always thought he was a real butcher dating back to the 1980s.

The reason I dislike Lukas so much is because he was always such a butcher. As I've mentioned before, at one time he was breaking down so many horses that some insurance companies wouldn't even insure his horses. That's really saying something because horse insurance is a great business. They usually won't turn anyone down.

I don't know if you ever talk to any trainers, but if you do, ask them what they think of Lukas. I've never talked to a single trainer that thinks is a good trainer. I know a ton of trainers and I don't know a single one that respects Lukas as a trainer. They all respect Frankel. They all respect Whittingham. They all respect Pletcher. But none of them respect Lukas.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Yes, that is exactly right. That is what I admire about guys like Whittingham. Whittingham knew that most of his horses would be better served being developed slowly so that they would last. But by the same token, when Whittingham had a great horse that was sound, that he knew could handle the rigors of the Derby, he would run.

That is what separates the good trainers from the bad trainers. The good trainers listen to their horses and let the horse tell them what they're ready to do. The good trainers don't simply run in the big race no matter what simply because the horse is eligible.

A good example is Todd Pletcher. He could have run Rule, Interactiff, and Aikenite in the Derby. These horses were all in the top 20 but Todd didn't run them because he knew the Derby was not a good spot for those horses. He wasn't going to run just for the sake of running. He's knows that these horses are good horses and will be very useful in other spots.

If D Wayne trained those horses, I'm sure he would have run them all.

You're right, Pletcher has never run a horse that didn't belong in the Derby.

[fpsoxfan]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

The original point of this thread was that D Wayne is not a very good trainer. His numbers have been lousy for years. He did great back in the 1980s for a number of reasons but those days are over.

With regards to him being 0 for 25 at Churchill, it's really not that shocking. He doesn't do well any more against tough competition. He does his best at places like Oaklawn Park in the winter when he's running horses he paid $200,000 for against horses that were bought for $20,000.

I don't know what you define as "juicing". Most of the top trainers do make full use of their vets. There are tons of legal drugs that are very expensive that will help most horses. With regard to Lukas' current use of vets, I would guess that his vet bills are still extremely high. His horses have always tended to be really sore so he has always had to rely on his vets.

You asked about a few other trainers. Mike Mitchell is basically a claiming trainer. He doesn't usually get many expensive young horses. He has a reputation of being a claiming trainer that magically moves a lot of horses up overnight but he also breaks down a lot of horses. I always thought he was a real butcher dating back to the 1980s.

The reason I dislike Lukas so much is because he was always such a butcher. As I've mentioned before, at one time he was breaking down so many horses that some insurance companies wouldn't even insure his horses. That's really saying something because horse insurance is a great business. They usually won't turn anyone down.

I don't know if you ever talk to any trainers, but if you do, ask them what they think of Lukas. I've never talked to a single trainer that thinks is a good trainer. I know a ton of trainers and I don't know a single one that respects Lukas as a trainer. They all respect Frankel. They all respect Whittingham. They all respect Pletcher. But none of them respect Lukas.

It certainly doesn't help that most of his major clients have now passed. I'm having a hard time with your argument about Lukas' training abilities. The man has a very respectable resume that any trainer would love to have, yet you are trying to diminish a man because of his recent lack of success. You are also doing it in a way where you are making accusations that are lacking fact. The steroid thing is really quite comical. I'm sure you have facts to back this up.

[3kings]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

You're right, Pletcher has never run a horse that didn't belong in the Derby.

In many cases the owners may have one wanted to run. He wasn't pushing the horses into the race so he could seem relevent. That is my impression of why Lukas will do anything to get his horses into the derby etc....

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by fpsoxfan

It certainly doesn't help that most of his major clients have now passed. I'm having a hard time with your argument about Lukas' training abilities. The man has a very respectable resume that any trainer would love to have, yet you are trying to diminish a man because of his recent lack of success. You are also doing it in a way where you are making accusations that are lacking fact. The steroid thing is really quite comical. I'm sure you have facts to back this up.

I don't know what to tell you. If you want to believe the guy was a really good trainer, that is fine. As I said before, I don't know a single trainer that thinks he is a good trainer. Even back in the 1980s and 1990s, everyone would cringe watching his horses train in the morning. His horses would hobble by. You've never seen a guy whose horses were so sore. That is one of the reasons why everyone thinks he is so bad. He had so many sore horses and he refused to give them a break. A ton of them used to break down.

With regard to steroids, everyone was using them the last 15 years or so until they recently banned them. But the guys who started using them before anyone else, back in the early 1980s, had a huge edge. If you don't believe that, I don't know what to tell you.

By the way, Lukas didn't lose Gene Klein because he passed away. they had a huge falling out before before Klein passed away.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by 3kings

In many cases the owners may have one wanted to run. He wasn't pushing the horses into the race so he could seem relevent. That is my impression of why Lukas will do anything to get his horses into the derby etc....

I completely agree.

[eajinabi]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I don't know what to tell you. If you want to believe the guy was a really good trainer, that is fine. As I said before, I don't know a single trainer that thinks he is a good trainer. Even back in the 1980s and 1990s, everyone would cringe watching his horses train in the morning. His horses would hobble by. You've never seen a guy whose horses were so sore. That is one of the reasons why everyone thinks he is so bad. He had so many sore horses and he refused to give them a break. A ton of them used to break down.

With regard to steroids, everyone was using them the last 15 years or so until they recently banned them. But the guys who started using them before anyone else, back in the early 1980s, had a huge edge. If you don't believe that, I don't know what to tell you.

By the way, Lukas didn't lose Gene Klein because he passed away. they had a huge falling out before before Klein passed away.

In the 80's and 90's Lukas had the creme of the crop stock as far as pedigree and money spent on horses. Its not like he made a 10k claimer into a derby winner. If that was the case I would support your accusation of Lukas using steroids.

Since you like to support Pletcher a lot, then maybe you dont realize he was Lukas assistant for years before being a big time trainer he is now. Is all of Pletchers knowledge in training from Lukas or a textbook?

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by eajinabi

In the 80's and 90's Lukas had the creme of the crop stock as far as pedigree and money spent on horses.

And that's what makes him a good trainer? He juiced his way to the top and got a bunch of great stock as a result. After his top assistants left, he hit the skids and he has no idea what the hell he's doing anymore.

[eajinabi]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

And that's what makes him a good trainer? He juiced his way to the top and got a bunch of great stock as a result. After his top assistants left, he hit the skids and he has no idea what the hell he's doing anymore.

And that's what makes him a good trainer? - It certainly doesnt stamp him as a bad one.

Was it the juice or the assistants that attributed to his success? Which one is it? Or was it both and Lukas was just a face?

His training style is old and certainly cant compete with these trainers and the chemical labs. Jack Van Berg, Ron McCanaly were great trainers in thier heyday but they would be lucky if they even hit the board in modern times.

If Lukas juiced his horse in the 80's and 90's, then what is preventing him from doing it now?? He would certainly fit in perfetly as MOST trainers do it now.

[JerseyJ]

While I am a big fan of Lukas and much of that comes from the fact that when I first got into racing through books and articles many of them extensively chronicled Lukas including the book Three Strides Before the Wire about his quest for the Derby with Chris Antley and Charismatic. While he is not the trainer he once was, he is an all-time great who ran into the problem of losing his best clientele and probably his most crushing loss, his son Jeff from his stable which clearly affected Lukas and his stable.

Losing clients like Eugene Klein, The Lewis's, Overbrook downsizing, and The Thoroughbred Corporation hurts. On the other hand some of his clients now are willing to spend and getting him better horses (Westrock and Baker and Mack).

He'll never get back to where he was but to heap praise on a cheat like Pletcher and knock Lukas is wrong. And while certain trainers may not like guy or the way he trained his horses plenty of trainers I have spoken with respect Lukas and his impact on the game.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by eajinabi

In the 80's and 90's Lukas had the creme of the crop stock as far as pedigree and money spent on horses. Its not like he made a 10k claimer into a derby winner. If that was the case I would support your accusation of Lukas using steroids.

Since you like to support Pletcher a lot, then maybe you dont realize he was Lukas assistant for years before being a big time trainer he is now. Is all of Pletchers knowledge in training from Lukas or a textbook?

Part of Lukas' success was having the most money to spend and the creme of the crop horses. I totally agree with that.

With regard to his assistants, as I have stated in other threads, D Wayne was very good at hiring very good people. But he didn't teach these people how to train. He hired assistants that could run the show themselves. He hired the best people. Lukas' son was a great trainer. Jeff was a big reason for Lukas' success. Losing Jeff and all the other great assistants was a big blow to the operation.

As I've stated in other threads, Todd doesn't train anything like Lukas. They are polar opposites. Their whole philosophies are completely different.

And as I've said before, when you hear interviews with Todd or Kiaran McLaughlin and they are asked what they learned from Lukas, they never mention anything about training. They say they learned how to run a big operation and they learned how to get owners and that type of thing. They never mention anything about training.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by JerseyJ

While I am a big fan of Lukas and much of that comes from the fact that when I first got into racing through books and articles many of them extensively chronicled Lukas including the book Three Strides Before the Wire about his quest for the Derby with Chris Antley and Charismatic. While he is not the trainer he once was, he is an all-time great who ran into the problem of losing his best clientele and probably his most crushing loss, his son Jeff from his stable which clearly affected Lukas and his stable.

Losing clients like Eugene Klein, The Lewis's, Overbrook downsizing, and The Thoroughbred Corporation hurts. On the other hand some of his clients now are willing to spend and getting him better horses (Westrock and Baker and Mack).

He'll never get back to where he was but to heap praise on a cheat like Pletcher and knock Lukas is wrong. And while certain trainers may not like guy or the way he trained his horses plenty of trainers I have spoken with respect Lukas and his impact on the game.

Lukas certainly did a lot of things right. If you were a young trainer back in the 1980s and you wanted to go to work for someone with the hopes of making it big one day, Lukas was definitely the best person to work for.

He might not have been a great trainer but he had all the other skills it takes to be successful. The guy was simply a winner. He had all the key ingredients. He was bright, charismatic, articulate, etc. He was a great salesman and he knew how to promote himself. He had great communication skills. He knew how to deal with owners and he knew how to get owners. He was really well organized and he ran a great operation. He did everything first-class.

I have to give the guy a lot of credit for getting to where he got himself. He did a great job of building that operation and he ran it like a successful CEO. I give him credit for that.