Why Lukas went downhill

[kentuckyrosesinmay]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

I like Flower Alley, but I think some people had their rosy tinted glasses on in regards to his talent, but you are correct he doesn't show interest in his races (but is training fine).

The BCC made me a believer in the horse. I think that some people overrated him a bit, but I do believe that he was a talented horse that was cetainly capable of finishing in the top three in all of his races this year, which he obviously did not do. I hope he is okay. Look at what happened to LITF...

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by kentuckyrosesinmay

The BCC made me a believer in the horse. I think that some people overrated him a bit, but I do believe that he was a talented horse that was cetainly capable of finishing in the top three in all of his races this year, which he obviously did not do. I hope he is okay. Look at what happened to LITF...

Which is what I think his connections thought too and gambled they could grab the Eclipse Award in a Ghostzapperesque way (minus the crazy speed). Following the Classic there wasn't a Invasor, Lava Man or Sun King that looked really good at the moment...

[Linny]

Todd said last year, right after the BCC that FA would make a late start and point for the '06 BCC. It appears to me that they had that plan. A horse with a significant injury doesn't run BSF's in the 90's as FA did in the Whitney. He's lost some speed and not replaced it with closing kick.
As for the JCGC last year, once he was fried in a pace duel with his own rabbit (why'd Todd do that again?) Johnny just eased him up. he knew that the big race was 4 (3?) weeks away. The margin could have been 4 lengths or 40, the result was the same. He was not persevered with.

I don't know what his problem is this year but I doubt he has some terrible injury. They have gone over him with a fine toothed comb and found nothing.

[kentuckyrosesinmay]

Believe what you want to, but logic tells me that when a horse is as good as FA was last year, and falls out of form as he did this year, it means that they are being bothered by something such as an injury. I have seen it happen time and time again. I am always leary of horses making late starts back for this reason. My opinion won't change unless a valid, believable excuse is made to explain Flower Alley's poor performances. The injury doesn't have to be a terrible injury for it to be affecting his races negatively. It could even be a mild to moderate injury. When I referred to a 'significant' injury earlier, I meant one that was affecting his performances in races, which is certainly significant if you have one that is as nice as Flower Alley.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Linny

Todd said last year, right after the BCC that FA would make a late start and point for the '06 BCC. It appears to me that they had that plan. A horse with a significant injury doesn't run BSF's in the 90's as FA did in the Whitney. He's lost some speed and not replaced it with closing kick.
As for the JCGC last year, once he was fried in a pace duel with his own rabbit (why'd Todd do that again?) Johnny just eased him up. he knew that the big race was 4 (3?) weeks away. The margin could have been 4 lengths or 40, the result was the same. He was not persevered with.

I don't know what his problem is this year but I doubt he has some terrible injury. They have gone over him with a fine toothed comb and found nothing.

First of all, it it totally untrue that horses with serious problems don't run fast. Some of the sorest and most unsound horses out there run 6 furlongs in 1:08 3/5. You'd be shocked at how may horses out there run great with significant injuries. The horses won't last for very long, but you often times don't know how many races they will last for. Some of these claiming horses that have tendons are ticking time-bombs. They keep on winning but any day will be their last day. They may have 1 race left in them or they may have five or six. That's why sometimes you will see one of these horses win a few in a row at the same class level and nobody claims him. People are afraid that the horse will never be able to run again and yet the horse may win another 4 in a row.

Speaking of horses running fast with serious injuries, look at Afleet Alex. He won the Belmont with a hairline fracture.

With regard to Flower Alley, you don't know that they've gone over him with a fine-tooth comb and found nothing. I would bet serious money that they know exactly what's wrong with him. Just because they aren't saying it publicly, it doesn't mean that there is no problem or that they don't know what the problem is.

With reagrd to Flower Alley in the JCGC last year, he was done at the 3/8 pole. If he just got a little tired from the fast pace, he would have at least fought until the 1/8th or the 1/16th pole. Borrego was 6 lengths by him before they even hit the 1/8th pole. There is no way that FA could have finished within 4 lengths of Borrego. you're just guessing that he ran fine and got a little tired and that JV wrapped on him. You should watch the replay before you assume that.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Speaking of horses running fast with serious injuries, look at Afleet Alex. He won the Belmont with a hairline fracture.

No one knows when he had it, all they can do is speculate.

[Linny]

As for the JCGC, my point was that the margin of loss was a product of the early pace and JV knowing that he wasn't a contender at the 3/8 pole. He wrapped up. I don't think he could have been within 4 lenths, Borrego ate him up. The point was that the margin itself was meaningless. He proved it by running very well in the BCC.

I also find it hard to believe that if Todd knew after the Whitney that something was seriously wrong with his "HOY candidate" that he'd run back in the Woodward. You do that sort of thing with the claiming stock you refer to not the horse that you think could still get you an Eclipse. I'm sure that Melnyk is trying to sell FA for stud and any subsequent poor efforts with no announced reason cuts the price. If they know he has a particular serious issue they'd say so (to own the excuse) and not run him back. You don't wiat til the price is cut again and again by poor efforts, then announce why he ran so bad.

I know most of the lesser horses (and many of the top horses) have issues to one degree or another. They all have something that's not right. lesser stock gets patched up and sent over. Horses with residual stud value are handled with kid gloves.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by Linny

As for the JCGC, my point was that the margin of loss was a product of the early pace and JV knowing that he want a contender at the 3/8 pole. He wrapped up. I don't think he could have been within 4 lenths, Borrego ate him up. The point was that the margin itself was meaningless. He proved it by running very well in the BCC.

I also find it hard to believe that if Todd knew after the Whitney that something was seriously wrong with his "HOY candidate" that he'd run back in the Woodward. You do that sort of thing with the claiming stock you refer to not the horse that you think could still get you an Eclipse. I'm sure that Melnyk is trying to sell FA for stud and any subsequent poor efforts with no announced reason cuts the price. If they know he has a particular serious issue they'd say so (to own the excuse) and not run him back. You don't wiat til the price is cut again and again by poor efforts, then announce why he ran so bad.

I know most of the lesser horses (and many of the top horses) have issues to one degree or another. They all have something that's not right. lesser stock gets patched up and sent over. Horses with residual stud value are handled with kid gloves.

I agree, good points.

Originally Posted by LOSE=GLUE

I was just listening to this radio show on the internet and they were talking about James Macinvale, and somehow Lukas name came up because he did the same thing to Satish Sanan the owner of Padua Stables caught Lukas robbing him. Thats why he named the horse Baffert trained to win the BC Juvenile VINDICATION. Man what goes around comes around. Thats why Lukas couldn't get anymore owners he was licking the gift horse in the mouth.

I thought Vindication was named such because Lukas told Sanan that the colt would never race, so why buy him. Sanan was in love with the horse, so he bought him and sent him to Baffert. The brilliant animal went undefeated before being injured. He was then rushed to stud because his immortal sire had recently died and the young Slew was needed to carry on the line. Ironically, it was in Baffert's care and not the Coach's that he was injured.

[SniperSB23]

The BC Classic last year was a dreadfully slow race with a bunch of terrible horses outside of Saint Liam. Saint Liam got stuck with a horrible post and wanted nothing to do with ten furlongs but the field was so terrible he won anyways. On many figures Flower Alley ran just as fast in the Whitney as the BC Classic, the figures just got adjusted up since they couldn't give that low of a figure to the BC Classic. The Woodward is the first race that Flower Alley didn't run his normal race and it appears that going all out in the Whitney and getting his butt kicked may have killed off his interest in racing.

[Gander]

I'm glad to see that HOY canindate was in quotes. This horse was terribly overrated off of 2 good (but neither great) races from last year. If this horse was trained by anyone else than Pletcher, he would have been considered an average horse.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Linny

As for the JCGC, my point was that the margin of loss was a product of the early pace and JV knowing that he want a contender at the 3/8 pole. He wrapped up. I don't think he could have been within 4 lenths, Borrego ate him up. The point was that the margin itself was meaningless. He proved it by running very well in the BCC.

I also find it hard to believe that if Todd knew after the Whitney that something was seriously wrong with his "HOY candidate" that he'd run back in the Woodward. You do that sort of thing with the claiming stock you refer to not the horse that you think could still get you an Eclipse. I'm sure that Melnyk is trying to sell FA for stud and any subsequent poor efforts with no announced reason cuts the price. If they know he has a particular serious issue they'd say so (to own the excuse) and not run him back. You don't wiat til the price is cut again and again by poor efforts, then announce why he ran so bad.

I know most of the lesser horses (and many of the top horses) have issues to one degree or another. They all have something that's not right. lesser stock gets patched up and sent over. Horses with residual stud value are handled with kid gloves.

You are wrong if you think that they won't run great horses when they know someting is wrong. As I said, I think they did it last year with FA in the BC Classic and it worked. The ethical trainers won't run the horse if they think that he might break down, but if they think that they can treat the problem(the ankle or knee or whatever the problem is) by injecting it, they will usually do it. This is especially the case if the horse is being retired at the end of the year any way.

I've been in the business for over 20 years. I only work with the most ethical and conservative trainers and even with these guys, sometimes they have to make a decision whether or not to run a horse who has a slight problem. They would obviously never run a horse if they thought that he might break down.

I'll give you an example of a decision that a friend of mine had to make just in the last couple of years. He had a horse who was going to be a legitimate contender in one of the BC races. The BC was only one race away. He was going to have one prep and then run in the BC. He started to have problems with one of his ankles. They could have injected the ankle and gotten at least another race or two out of him. He would have been in no danger of breaking down or anything like that. The problem was that they were not going to retire him at the end of the year. They were planning on bringing him back the following year. If they injected the ankle and ran him 1 or 2 more times, there would be a risk that permanent damage would be done to the cartilage. If that happened, then they would be screwed for the next year. Even if they turned him out and brought him back in May of next year, he may not be the same horse any more.

I thought the decision was a no-brainer to turn him out immediately. If they turned him out immediately, he would probably come back better than ever because the injury was just begining and was not that serious yet. At this point, it didn't look like there was any permanent damage. Anyway, they ended up turning him out. I can tell you that most trainers would not have turned him out. Most would have run him. My friend would have even run him if they were going to retire him at the end of the year because they would have had nothing to lose. If his ankle got a little worse it wouldn't matter since he was being retired any way. If they thought the horse had no chance of winning they wouldn't run him because it could hurt his value for breeding. But with a lot these little injuries, you relly don't know how the horse will run until you try. The horse may seem ok in the morning when he's not all-out, but when he's all-out in a race it may be a different story. So they inject the ankle and run him and see what happens. If he runs lousy, then they probably retire him. That's probably what will happen with Flower Alley. They injected the ankle or whatver problem he had and ran him. He ran bad so now they will probably retire him.

Look at Bandini. A good friend of mine who is one of the best horseman in the business saw Bandini right before the Ky Derby when the horse was being lead over to the paddock. He said the horse had a huge ankle on him. Pletcher obviously knew the horse had a bad ankle but he took a shot and ran him any way because if he would have won he would have probably been worth about $40 million. They took a shot and it didn't work. Then they had to give the horse an 8 month vacation.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Linny, I'll give you another example of a really good horse that ran with a pretty serious problem. One of my trainers was at Del Mar on Del Mar Futurit day back in 1999. He said that when Forrest Camp walked by him in the paddock, he couldn't belive he size of one of his ankles. He couldn't believe the horse was going to run on that ankle. Anyway, he won the race by about 5 lengths but that was the end of his career. He never ran again.

I'm sure they still made out fine. Because of the victory in that race, I think the horse was worth a few million dolllars for breeding.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

This is what I was trying to get at last night Rupert. You say all of these things about the methods in which Lukas trains, yet you make no mention of Baffert's name when referring to Forest Camp. Surely Baffert, Pletcher and probably every trainer have had horses run when sore, puffy ankles, etc. Why is Lukas any different than these guys? Lukas doesn't hide the fact that he is a businessman and a trainer. He is given the job to try and get the most out of his horses, so they can be sold, become broodmares, or get syndication deals.

Like I said before, Lukas is a million times worse than any of these guys. I'm not saying he is the only trainer that has ever run a sore horse. He certainly is not. But most of these guys pick their spots when they do this. These guys may run a horse with a minor injury if it's in a major race that they've been waiting for all year. They'll do it as a one-time deal type of thing. It's not their standard practice. With Lukas, it's his standard practice.

Bob Baffert may train his horses pretty hard but he is not opposed to turning a horse out if they need it. I see Baffert horses come back off 6-12 month layoffs all the time and do well. They will have successful campaigns sometimes after coming back off layoffs. Wat does that tell you? It tells you that he turned the horse out before the problem got too serious. If you keep running the horse after they get hurt, then a 12 month layoff won't do any good because permanent damage will be done to the horse. It's possible that ahorse like that could come back and runa couiple of mediocre races and maybe even win a race. But they won't come back and run as good as they were running before they got hurt. That is why you will practically never see a Lukas horse come back and do well off a layoff.

Lukas will keep running an injured horse over and over and over again until there is no way the horse can run any more. That is why Lukas has broken down so many horses and why there are very few insurance companies that will insure his horses. You have to remember that insurance companies keep very good records when it comes to this kind of stuff. Any time that a horse breaks their leg and dies and a claim is paid, there is a record kept of this type of thing. The record shows who the trainer of the horse was. This is a huge business that is very lucrative. These companies make a fortune. If you have a trainer that breaks down so many horses that's it's not even profitable for the insurers to insure him, then you know that there is a problem.

A trainer who has 200 horses will obviously have more horses break down than a tainer with 40 horses. The insurance companies obviously know this. They keep track of the percentages. The percentages are all that matter to them. Lukas is the only trainer that I know of that many insurance companies won't insure. I actually don't know if any will insure him. The ones that I know of will not.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Well a million times is a pretty big stretch. This could go on forever, I will agree with you that Lukas has had his fair share of breakdowns, and I don't know what the percentages are, but there are many trainers that train in a similar way of Lukas.

If there is another trainer that trains like him, I'd like to know who it is.

There are guys who may train cheap claimers like that but I don't know any trainer that trains good horses like that. Some of these trainers are real butchers when it comes to cheap claimers. They feel that it's not economical to turn them out so they will just run them no matter what. If they have a $10,000 claimer that is damaged beyond repair, it is pointless from a financial point of view to turn them out because they will come back with the same problem. It's expensive to turn a horse out. So these trainers will just keep running the horse. They will drop him in class if they need to but they won't turn them out. Some of these trainers will do this with a claiming horse even if he isn't damaged beyond repair. They may figure that two in the hand is better than one in the bush and they may also gigure that's its not worth it to spend $10,000 to give the horse a 6 month vacation if the horse is only worth $20,000 to begin with. They'd rather just drop the horse down in class and hope to win the race and get him claimed.

[Swap Fliparoo]

I have heard that Lukas swindles owners by racking up day rates on horses that are just standing around in the stall, clearly injured and bandaged up, instead of telling the owners and sending them back to the farm. I think Overbrook wised up to what was going on, among others.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by merasmag

run to death and it's ok cause he was never gonna be a stud anyway? that logic makes no sense to me...i guess this means richi's (it is richi, right?) saying that dwl is no better a person than a guy who runs cheap claimers into the ground to make a quick buck-if he's not saying it, if what he has said is true, i'm sayin it

No, you misunderstood me. That's not what I was saying at all. I'm saying that the claiming game is very cruel. I think what goes on with claimers should be illegal. I think it's basically cruelty to animals. They just inject their tendons and joints over and over and over again until the horses are crippled. I don't condone it any way. It's a part of racing that makes me sick. I hardly ever even watch claiming races. I never watch cheap claiming races.

So claiming races are not something that I really pay attention to these days. I know what goes on and I want nothing to do with it. In no way do I condone it.

Yes, it's Richi.

[Assttodixie]

Originally Posted by Dixie Porter

I've tapped horses (some both knees and ankles) 10 times and they won, won ,won. It has NOTHING to do with the number of times you tap. It's who's watching, who's doing it and WHAT comes OUT in the syringe.

So some moron saw a horse with a big ankle. Means nothing.

This is hopeless. Just wanted to show you why I don't bother to explain things. You want answers, it's still $1500 an hour.

Dixie

Why are we going to put any of these MORONS on the friends and family plan? 1500?

Now tell them all how you tapped Citation.

[DiscreetCat=Monster]

Here goes some more real interesting news, like this hasn't happen 20+ times

http://chrb.ca.gov/Complaints/Complaint_06DM011.pdf

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by merasmag

They just inject their tendons and joints over and over and over again until the horses are crippled.

so dwl does not do that? he just runs them without meds? is that better or worse? btw-hi, hope u are well

I didn't say DWL doesn't do that, I said he does do it. I said he does the same thing to good horses that guys do with claimers.