MAKUTUS!!!!

Nice win yesterday :tro:

Hopped up junkie on four legs
;)

The majority of G-1 races are run at major tracks with substantial drug testing....Pletcher races predominately in the East.

If Pletcher sent horses to the "second/third tier tracks as Asmussen when those tracks run their occasional G-1's, Pletcher's G-1 race record would improve too. Maybe Pletcher could take lessons from Sadler in CA how to avoid drugs...or O'Neill...or the master, Asmussen ,who leads the pack in drug violations.

and people wonder why some cheat-look at the constant harping on pletcher right now. maybe he wasn't clean, and is now-if so, good for him. or maybe he was clean all along, but had better stock. or maybe he sold his soul, and then changed his mind. who knows?
but i think it's bizarre that he gets tons of grief, with what-two positives now, one for an antiboiotic, the other for a level now legal? meanwhile, the man with 13 X's more the positives is said to be the eclipse fave, and no one says a thing.

Pletcher is second in the country in 2008 in purses won.
Exactly, what does this "big drop" off include...only G-1 races ?
:zz:

2008 Stats:
Starts
1056
1st-2nd-3rd
199-143-136
Earnings (Rank)
$13,765,935 (2)
Win % (In-The-Money %)
18% (45%)

Very true. I have noticed that he is not getting as good as horses as he was though. In 2004 and 2005 almost every really good horse sold at the Keeneland sale that stayed in the us went to Pletcher. Things have turned in that respect though. In some respects the same thing happened to baffert a few years earlier. A lot of big owners got tired of being second fiddle in the barn and moved. The combination of things may finally be catching up.

Best hop is the drop

He is measured against his own standard. The drop off in purse money is dramatic

This is something that I have always thought about as well..I mean..How much does he really "train"? Maybe it's just me, but the appeal of having Pletcher as your trainer would fade quickly if you are just a number to him. Maybe he runs a very hands on barn and is consistantly in touch with ALL his owners, but that seems unrealistic

I feel the same way. He has great help but that can only go so far

With all due respect, Please dont be ignorant Riot. None of the current drug tests can compete with the chemists.

And when a drug test can pick up a substance... those substances are altered so they can be used again with out detection.

Giving the trainers the benefit of the doubt is not the right way to go here..

in theory this would be great...

but how can you get on top of the doping when new drugs can and will be created that cant be tested for?

It will be a never ending cycle.

:tro: fine work sir

STOP IT, 'Zig. This is a runaway jury, and you, like me, are now just standing in the way, impeding the rush to judgment.

I think that I am an outsider to Pletcher's organization, and I don't have access to remotely enough information to make even a half-azzed guess. The drop in G1 wins at best is a symptom. Not a diagnosis.

Pletcher's decline started at Saratoga in 2007, just three weeks after the KHRA announced that they had found the cobra venom in Biancone's barn. I don't know whether that's a coincidence or not, or whether the impending steroid bans may be having an impact on his barn's current performance.

As for Pletcher's numbers this year, it is clear that in New York he has started no where near the number of horses that he once did. It seems like his percentages are skewed based on a high percentage of winners that he had at tracks like Arlington this past summer; in New York, he's almost become a throwout. (Not yet plugged in to Formulator, I'd be interested to know what his stats in NY are with non-claiming starters, as my recollection is that, at Belmont Spring and Saratoga, a fairly high perecentage of his winners were with claimers.)

The fact is that testing is always one step behind. They cannot test for what they don't know and the chemists are always cooking something up.

Tests are not a matter of taking the sample and seeing what's in it. They test for specific chemicals and reactions indicating the presence or absence of a chemical. By definition, the testing industry is always reactive, not pro-active. Unless tyey have reason to suspect a certain compound is turning up in samples, it wont be found because they wont look for it. They only find what they look for and they only look for what they know.

The day we start using a drop in purse winnings as great evidence that a trainer "stopped doping", is ... well, today, on the internet.

That, and knowing, "No horse can make a 20-point Beyer improvement without illegal means" is all we need to know about you horse trainer guys.

:rolleyes:

I think you read that wrong. The drop in purses means there is less money to earn, regardless of the way he is doing it.