CD studying races

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

In the case of a developing horse coming off a layoff, like First Defence, would you say most horses (If you can even generalize like this) are better off having one or two 'lighter' races up to the big one, and scratching if it comes up tough, or is the horse not getting as much benefit off the easy wins?

Really depends on the horse, type of race, distance, etc. Too many variables to come to any conclusions

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Really depends on the horse, type of race, distance, etc. Too many variables to come to any conclusions

Thanks.

Sorry to pester you with more questions, but in the case that too many horses are entered in a race, how does the Secretary determine who gets in and who doesn't?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

Thanks.

Sorry to pester you with more questions, but in the case that too many horses are entered in a race, how does the Secretary determine who gets in and who doesn't?

Most tracks use a 'date' system meaning that the horse with the most recent race has the least preference.

[MisterB]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

I never asked for a number, I just asked your opinion. I think he scratches more than anyone I have ever seen. You can make excuses for it, fine. But it ultimately hurts racing by having reduced fields. You do decide to use a number when saying he makes at least 17 million a year. Shouldn't he be doing this? Does he not get great stock? When you get horses from Stronach, Juddmonte, etc you better be making money or you won't be getting those horses.

Pletcher has great stock too, but neither one has a Derby under their belt. Great Stock can go down just as fast as any other horse if poorly trained. If you think short fields are caused by Bobby Frankel, we are in trouble. Frankel doesn't even race allot in NY to make a difference in the field size. Most races in NY are for State breds now. AQU has the shortest fields in the country, and Frankel doesn't run their. Believe me, I hear this about Bobby all the time, it's normally someone who wanted to bet his horse that was scratched. What is his win percentage, that's what counts.

Originally Posted by MisterB

Pletcher has great stock too, but neither one has a Derby under their belt. Great Stock can go down just as fast as any other horse if poorly trained. If you think short fields are caused by Bobby Frankel, we are in trouble. Frankel doesn't even race allot in NY to make a difference in the field size. Most races in NY are for State breds now. AQU has the shortest fields in the country, and Frankel doesn't run their. Believe me, I hear this about Bobby all the time, it's normally someone who wanted to bet his horse that was scratched. What is his win percentage, that's what counts.

I.....














































THUD

[MisterB]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

I never said Frankel is the only reason for small fields. But, with his obnoxious scratching, he doesn't help. You are right, he doesn't race a lot in NY, but he has plenty of stalls. For what? Other than trolling for a fight, what is your point here? That Frankel doesn't scratch a lot? Well, you are wrong.

What ever dude

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I admit to some mularkey on occasion.

But to answer your question it is very easy to obtain a vet scratch and you open up a whole can of worms if you start having state vets try to overrule calls made by the private vets.

...which brings me to my point that there should be a state vet system overseeing ALL trainers.

Originally Posted by MisterB

You should have more horsemen like Bobby. He doesn't run lame horse, or ones that are sick just to run. You guys crack me up with your arm chair training licences.

Yeah, for very recent examples First Defence and Saint Anddan were really sick or lame on July 4th. Come on! He's got a ton of stalls and hardly runs his horses.

Originally Posted by MisterB

Pletcher has great stock too, but neither one has a Derby under their belt. Great Stock can go down just as fast as any other horse if poorly trained. If you think short fields are caused by Bobby Frankel, we are in trouble. Frankel doesn't even race allot in NY to make a difference in the field size. Most races in NY are for State breds now. AQU has the shortest fields in the country, and Frankel doesn't run their. Believe me, I hear this about Bobby all the time, it's normally someone who wanted to bet his horse that was scratched. What is his win percentage, that's what counts.

Try again, he ran 13 horses at the AQU fall meet last year.

But took away stalls from someone who would have run twice as much.

[JJP]

First off, I don't believe for a minute that Frankel scratches the same percentage of horses that the rest of the trainers do. Not even close. And because who he is, he gets preferential treatment.

How about Dale Romans saying on HRTV last week that he scratched a horse because he drew the rail. I hope the rail was a concrete highway that day and I hope he cost himself a win.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

I've asked before and I'll ask again. Does anyone know anyway to check on statistics of scratching? Do they even keep such a stat? I am just curious, especially after this discussion here.

DRF has them, but you'd have to go through stacks of old editions to collate the data

[philcski]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Ehhh. not that interested, but I think it would be interesting. I contend Frankel has scratched more than he has run, which is probably wrong, but I think it's closer than you think.

He has 4 entered this week, 1 Wednesday and 3 tomorrow.

He's 1 for 1 on the week scratching (Argentina as the 6/5 favorite. Nice.)

Gosh dernit it dont mater if boobie scraches er not. whut matturs is de winds ann de monay.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Ehhh. not that interested, but I think it would be interesting. I contend Frankel has scratched more than he has run, which is probably wrong, but I think it's closer than you think.

i never paid that much attention to it until I saw people talking about it on here, and yeah I'd have to agree, he seems to scratch a lot in places that you wouldn't expect a scratch. If this is all for the welfare of the horse, fine. However it seems odd that he would have that many high profile horses with issues that are discovered so late.

I know he is also pretty sensitive about weights in handicaps, and a few pounds can set him off.

[MisterB]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

I know he is also pretty sensitive about weights in handicaps, and a few pounds can set him off.

Bingo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by philcski

...which brings me to my point that there should be a state vet system overseeing ALL trainers.

This is highly unlikely for a few reasons. One is that horses are based in many places not just at the track they are running at so you would need an army of vets to cover them all. Secondly, a vet that has experience with a horse is much more likely to be able to diagnose issues or potential issues than a vet who is seeing a horse for the first time. Third and most importantly is that most state vets are either inexperienced or simply not very good. There is a reason that they are working long hours and being subjected to a ton of grief for about 20% of what top private practice racetrack vets make.

[Cannon Shell]

Frankel may scratch alot but he is a tremendous horseman who treats his horses with a great deal of care. I am not defending his insanity regarding the weights which he seems to take personally but he is not the kind of guy that would run a horse who wasn't at his best, unlike a lot of other high profile trainers out there. You can feel pretty good about betting on his horses when he actually runs them because you know they are well meant and most likely 100%.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Frankel may scratch alot but he is a tremendous horseman who treats his horses with a great deal of care. I am not defending his insanity regarding the weights which he seems to take personally but he is not the kind of guy that would run a horse who wasn't at his best, unlike a lot of other high profile trainers out there. You can feel pretty good about betting on his horses when he actually runs them because you know they are well meant and most likely 100%.

Best post of the thread.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

Best post of the thread.

Do I get a prize?

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Do I get a prize?

I'll bake you cookies and bring coffee when I come to visit Sumwon at Saratoga...any preferance?

[philcski]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

i never paid that much attention to it until I saw people talking about it on here, and yeah I'd have to agree, he seems to scratch a lot in places that you wouldn't expect a scratch. If this is all for the welfare of the horse, fine. However it seems odd that he would have that many high profile horses with issues that are discovered so late.

I know he is also pretty sensitive about weights in handicaps, and a few pounds can set him off.

Weight hardly makes a difference in racing. While it's next to impossible to quantify an exact formula, it's estimated 5 pounds = 1 length.

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Frankel may scratch alot but he is a tremendous horseman who treats his horses with a great deal of care. I am not defending his insanity regarding the weights which he seems to take personally but he is not the kind of guy that would run a horse who wasn't at his best, unlike a lot of other high profile trainers out there. You can feel pretty good about betting on his horses when he actually runs them because you know they are well meant and most likely 100%.

No question about it, he's an all time great and I've loved several of his horses, which makes the scratch thing even more maddening. Nobody would care if he was scratching out with 15-1 shots but when he's 3-1, 6/5, 4-1 on the morning line with his last three it's like what are you waiting for? A walkover??

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

This is highly unlikely for a few reasons. One is that horses are based in many places not just at the track they are running at so you would need an army of vets to cover them all. Secondly, a vet that has experience with a horse is much more likely to be able to diagnose issues or potential issues than a vet who is seeing a horse for the first time. Third and most importantly is that most state vets are either inexperienced or simply not very good. There is a reason that they are working long hours and being subjected to a ton of grief for about 20% of what top private practice racetrack vets make.

What is the current time a horse has to be in the barn by on raceday?

The level-of-pay issue is one that would sorely need to be addressed with my hypothetical state vet idea, of course. And I agree that you can diagnose better with a horse you know (even a neophyte like me can see issues in mine/Swap's), so why not have each horse assigned to a specific vet until they change location?

I don't think anyone is questioning Frankel's abilities as a trainer. The problem I have with him is when he enters a horse other trainers who fear his horse will not bother and the entries will usually result in a short field. Then the guy takes his toys and goes home when he doesn't get the weight he thinks he deserves.

It's similar to the Chicago Bulls if Michael Jordan was forced to wear a fanny pack with 3 pebbles in it and he decided that he wasn't going to play tonight. It's just ridiculous and petty bullsheist and it's another in a long list of reasons why the sport is suffering.

Frankel needs to stop being a little bitch.