He isnt the most accomplished horse in history or anything. There have been horses in recent times that have been trained in far different, and less stressful manners that have accomplished more. So what training methodology is correct? None, it may depend on the horse. Which gets me back to my initial thought which was the theory that the reason that "modern" horses are not as durable and able to stand up to incredible work loads has little to do with modern training techniques and lots to do with modern horses. You can absolutely give credit to Ritchey for accomplishing a lot with this horse but his methods of training do not produce more durable horses and AA is the prime example. I just find it hard to believe that if Pletcher or Lukas had trained this horse they wouldnt be subject to scorn for him breaking down yet Ritchey is praised for the same thing.

FreddyMo-

I know this question is purely speculative but...what do you think this particular horse would have accomplished if given to Frankel? Mott? Zito?

Do you think he still wins those classics and graded stakes? Do you think he has a longer career?

Pure spectulation but..............Frankel would have passed on the derby and won Preakness then it would be back to the bench for a solid second in the Travers and a BCClassic win.. Mott would have had him ready for the Jim Dandy and or the Secretriat at Arlington.. Mr Z would have had triple crown champ second in the Travers and a late closing third in the BCC.. All three would have him booked to 150 mares with Zito's fee being 100k Mott's 12500 and Frankel 25k book full and closed..lol

If he was the most accomplished horse in history you would have nothing to say other then congrats. Pletcher killed more horses then Hitler killed people.. D Wayne is legend unfortunately once his go south they head to Chile with no return flight. Not sure how a solid medicator like Ritchie is even mentioned inn the same Breath but he does deserve all the credit for winning a lot of money for his owners and himself.. Whatever the f he did for whatever reason it worked!!

why would frankel have passed on the derby? reason why i ask is that he ran empire maker there on a bum foot, so he obviously is not immune to derby fever.

wow
hitting the hyperbole bottle today?

I am assuming Afleet Alex wasn't a Juddemonte

so you think it was juddmonte who pushed the issue with empire maker?
but why would frankel have passed on the derby? alex came damn close to winning the thing.

I think when the owners of some of the best stock in the world have a request you have to pay attention.

true, true. but i think that frankel has earned a right of refusal as well-what point having a trainer if you feel he should have no say, or isn't worth listening to? i think he felt that empire maker was much better than the rest, bum foot notwithstanding. and he was almost right.

Trains but doesn't condition. The long slow gallops are the conditioning; the speed work is the training. Lukas depended on the natural talents of his runners (and he could pick out real athletes) to carry them over a distance.

This debate has become tiresome.
I want to hear DrugS discuss whether or not he thinks Assault just won the Derby because of his rail-skimming, Street Sense/Calvin Borrel-type trip.

:tro:

Ironically enough, it was Assault's full brother, Air Lift, who broke down in his career debut at 2 (trainer was Max Hirsch) that led to that famous editorial someone posted a month or two ago entitled "Death of a Racehorse".

Of course, being a full brother is in truth more like being a "half brother", genetically speaking that is, so technically its not that ironic.

But poetically it is...