John Shirreffs
 

There was a time when John Shirreffs was easily the greatest debut trainer I have ever seen.

It was back when he had the 505 Farm horses ... not only did his first time starters win at unheard of percentages ... but an alarming percentage of them ran gigantic numbers in there debut.

505 is gone .. and Shirreffs is no longer the worlds greatest debut trainer .. in fact, he's not even a good debut trainer anymore.

The magic he has now is his ability to get a peak performance from a horse in a race he aims for.







* Giacomo - this was almost everyones Kentucky Derby horse after he ran a strong closing 2nd in the Hollywood Futurity at age 2.

He failed result wise in all 3 Derby prep races ... though he was a victim of a very bad trip in the Sham, a speed bias track in the 2nd prep, and highly unfavorable pace and race shape in his final prep.

I know a few people here who posted with me back in '05 remember how I married myself to Giacomo to win the Derby even after the SA Derby defeat when mostly all of his giant bandwagon fled.

They said I was stubborn, could never admit I'm wrong about anything, and made fun of me about Giacomo. They were right ... but he did win at 50/1. Giacomo had a terrible start coming out of the gate in the Derby .. and I threw up my hands, swore, and that was finally the point I had given up on him.. thinking everything has to go perfect for his bum ass to win.

In the Breeders Cup Classic the following year ... Giacomo was a joke going in .. very sharp people thought they were taking advantage of me with Sun King in a head to head against him. He ran outstanding.. but just wasn't quite enough horse to beat an Invasor, Bernardini, or next out Clark winner Premium Tap.

* Tiago ... came into the Santa Anita Derby having never crossed the finish line first. VERY slow speed figure horse ... very moderate worktab. Shirreffs couldn't prep him into the Ky Derby because he didn't have the graded earnings.

The gloves came off in the Santa Anita Derby and Tiago won at a huge price. I didn't give Tiago a shot in hell that day even though I expected some improvment.

Breeders Cup Classic last year ... Tiago is floundering in preps ... but he steps up and he has the best finish of any American horse in the race.

* Zenyatta and Life Is Sweet. Life Is Sweet's 3 prior Beyer's going into the Breeders Cup: 93-91-99 ... she crushes the field with a 107.

Zenyatta's 3 prior Beyers going into the BC Classic: 97-99-104 ... she fires a 112 in victory.

When you really want one big race as an owner ... Shirreffs seems to be lethal.

I've always followed him and he's also pretty leathal as a trainer from a betting value standpoint. Since 1996, he's 327 for 1,641 with a jaw dropping $2.04 ROI. I know most people aren't super serious bettors and certainly don't understand that ROI of his enough to appreciate it ... but it's really mind boggling stuff.

Its on this website somewhere, I think I was PG at the time, but I did bet Tiago in the Santa Anita Derby...
I remember liking him almost by default I thought the group was HORRIBLE. Also thought he could improve. Beyer wise he had improved every career race going in.

I don't know how anyone could have bet Tiago in the SA Derby... I agree it was a bad field ... but he never did anything to suggest he was any good beforehand.

I remember having him in his debut. He absolutely looked like a million bucks on the turn, then folded up like a cheap suit. Damn.

Man, who knew Shirreffs was such a good trainer at getting them ready for the big race...thanks for letting us know!

You didn't.

In fact, you argued that Zenyatta deserves extra credit points because she's trained by an ordinary trainer like Shirreffs while RA is trained by a wizard like Asmussen.

I'd take Shirreffs in every single aspect over Asmussen as a trainer. Even ability to move horses up coming from a different barn.

I was making a joke about Asmussen and his often forays into the issues with drugs...you knew that though.

I do think its odd that a guy like Asmussen could have the horse of the year for three years in a row, and in the back of your head you wonder how much he may have "moved" the horses up, but both had talent so its his reputation that begs that question.

Couldn't the same be said about Shirreffs with Life Is Sweet and After Market.

He moved both of them up considerably off of Bill Mott.

I'm not so sure RA and Curlin were really move-ups either.

I think both got better with the surface switch (Life is Sweet) and easier competition (After Market). Though I default to your opinion.

I never said they were, I said due to his numerous shady drug issues you never know.

After Market got drilled in his final start for Mott, a N4X optional claimer at GP. I think he needed the ultra-firm turf out west as he didn't run back to his good 3YO races after a disastrous run in the Kent at Delaware.

NT

After Market finished dead last in a field of 8 in an alw race on the turf at Gulfstream in his final start for Bill Mott.

That was Jan 31st. Six months later .. he was the best in the West.

His pp's are right on top in this link...

http://www.drf.com/eclipse/2007/pps/maleturf.pdf


As for Life Is Sweet....

With Bill Mott: 2-for-7 .... zero for four in stakes races.

With John Shirreffs: 4-for-8 ... all races were either G1 or Gr 2 stakes. 3 of the 4 losses came to Zenyatta .. the other one came when 3rd to Rail Trip in the Hollywood Gold Cup.

As for the synthetic surface ... Life Is Sweet did run once on a synthetic track for Bill Mott .. she was 4th to Little Belle in the Ashland.

I actually had him... for the reasons you stated. I trust Sherriffs in a big spot and the group was terrible, and he was 30-1. One of those "why not" moments.

so you do think he is cheating then, and this is the proof?

It's a good thing you didn't run into me that day ... I might have given you 300/1. I thought he'd improve a little .. but he was just so terrible in those 3 races.

I don't know what he's doing... but he's got an edge. As a trainer, you don't produce a profitable ROI over a 14 year span without an edge.

He's a guy that consistantly would get horses to win there debut by 10 lengths with triple digit figures when he had 505.

Now he's totally opposite - but still an awesome horse trainer.

We really are to a point though where trainers with poor stats never have a top horse. That's why I was such a rabid fan of Rachel Alexandra back when Hal Wiggins trained her. Look at his stats ... they are bad!! You damn sure know that guy is 100% clean.

I would be an RA Super Fan if she stayed with Wiggins and did the same thing she did with Asmussen. It's possible she might have ... who knows. Her final start with Wiggins was amazing.

Please, take a look at After Market's PPs for a second...After Market finished a non-threatening 6th at 28-1 in the Kilroe Handicap and then was a non-threatening 5th with a perfect trip in a conditional money allowance. Finally he got into the winners circle in a weak 5 horse rendition of the Inglewood Handicap. Then he continued to get great setup, after great setup before coming home east and losing the Kelso BC Mile...Did he really improve that much out West or did he just beat up on crap out there???

The weak competition he saw in Southern Cal helped him out big time .. but still .. Shirreffs did very well with him.

What happened to Crossing The Line?

He "slayed the dragon" as a noted racecaller who frequents this site said in the Charlie Whittingham then he ran really well in the Eddie Read and Del Mar Handicap while accumulating wins at distances ranging from 8.5 to 11 furlongs. His trip in the Kelso could have been better as he was extremely wide coming off the turn and still finished up pretty well even with the pace collapse.

It's not a redboard but I had a future on Courageous Cat this year thinking that he might have a great transcendental experience heading west like his bro After Market. That and I thought Dominguez rode him like s.hit in the Jamaica.

I was a tad excited at the top of the stretch but piped down when I saw Goldikova in high gear.

NT

Lets be honest here Nick. You were a lot more then a tad excited. You thought you had it.

That Inglewood Day was a very good day for me.

I :{>: After Market after that day.

After Market had bleeding issues that was reportedly the basis for his transfer out west.

As far as Shireffs ability as a debut trainer, where are your patented stats?

I think you might just be recalling top class sprinters Swept Overboard and Hook And Ladder (maybe a little Lethal Instrument and High Wire Act?) and somehow amplifying the actual numbers...

Well, to be fair, After Market was coming off a layoff or so in the Kilroe (not to mention he was about 40-1). I think those first couple of races were classic "prep" runs (with 4 or 5 wins under his belt in NY, he couldn't really start the season in soft spots).

For comparison, see Kotashaan's record off a long layoff in the fall of '02. He was UNP in an allowance, 4th in the San Gabriel at 20-1, before chasing Star Of Cozzene a couple of times and then going on a massive tear early in '03 that was only derailed by Luazur at Del Mar and Kent Desormeaux in Tokyo...

Shirreffs with first time starters between '98 and '99 ...

24-14-4-0 (58.3% wins) $7.63 ROI.


At Hollywood Park: 12-8-2-0 $7.90 ROI

At Santa Anita: 9-6-2-0 $9.82 ROI

I made fun of you all right, but having seen you pull rabbits out of your ass before, I wasn't too serious.

As for the rest of that, everything did go perfect for him, which is why he won.

Don't forget Shirreffs trained David Copperfield ... who won his debut by a neck over Fusaichi Pegasus. Less than 6 months later Fu Peg won the Derby as the post time favorite.

Also ... Shirreffs trained the beastly filly Manistique .. who won her debut by a pole with something like a 112 Beyer.

There were a few more who freaked in there debut as well for him.

Trivia...

Cliquot was a Shirreffs/505 first time starter from that time period who got beat a nose in his debut.

Name the eventual 7 time Graded Stakes winner who beat him.

General Challenge

Yep.

It's too bad Rock Hard Ten '85 wasn't a big fan of his.

He could change his moniker to Generally Challenged 1985

I think a really high winning percentage is much more indicative of a trainer having an edge than a high ROI. We all know who some of the trainers with an edge are. Most of them have really high win percenatges, but not necessarily high ROIs.

From what I know of Shireffs, he is the last guy in the world that I would suspect of having an edge. He is one of the most honest trainers out there. Not only that, he has always used the most conservative veterinarians. The cheating trainers use the agressive and cheating vets, not the conservative vets.

Part of the insane ROI has to come from Tiago winning at 30/1 and Giacomo winning at 50/1, he only has what about a 100 starts a year or so.

Yes, exactly right. A few big longshots can have a huge impact on ROI for a trainer that doesn't have a ton of starts.

No. The guys who I'm assuming you're thinking of may have really high win percentages, but not necessarily high ROIs right now ... but only because their reputation has been so strong that there horses get overbet.

Guys like Dutrow Jr., Mullins etc.

However, before those type of guys get the big win percentages, and develop big reputations with bettors, they all had dazzling ROI's. ALL of them.

The win percentage stat is more about trainers placing horses in the right spots. The ROI is a pretty good statistical indicatior of production versus expectations.



I've been a big fan of his almost from day 1... and he sounds like a good guy. However...he's a guy that has an overall flat bet profit with EVERY single horse he's saddled since '96. He's a guy who's had a flat bet profit with every single horse he saddled in 8 different years since '96. He's a guy that won at a 40% clip with every horse he saddled in 1999.

He was the best trainer I've ever seen with having a debuter ready when he had 505's horses. Now he's really one of the best - if not the best - out there at getting good horses to peak on the right day.

Having an edge doesn't have to mean using illegal drugs, aggressive vets, and cheating. There might be guys who are doing those three things and not getting much production from them.

He's had a flat bet profit in 8 of the last 13 years.

Even if you take away the two Tiago and Giacomo years and pretend both never happened .. that would make him profitable in 6 of 11 years. And one of the two years taken away, he still would have showed a FBP without the aid of the longshot winner.

Drugs, This is the stuff that LEGENDS are made of.

http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11676

Nice.

I have no idea what in the hell you, Phil, and Hockey saw in Tiago .. but every one of his races seemed terrible to me.

It was over 2 years now, but I remember thinking this horse should love 9 furlongs and I only have to beat these 2 Pletcher SLOBS.

whats his violation record? I dont remember seeing anything the last decade or so but...

I totally agree with you that a cheating trainer will obviously have an extremely high ROI to go along with his high win percentage initially. But as you said, once everybody catches on, they will bet his horses and he will no longer have a really high ROI. The high ROI will disappear after a few years (maybe 3-4 years at the most).

I agree with you that Shireffs is great at pointing a horse for a certain race and getting the horse to peak for that race. That type of trainer should have a higher ROI than average because when people are handicapping a race, they are looking at a horse's PPs and are not expecting a horse to improve. They are expecting the horse to possibly repeat the best race he has ever run. They are not expecting the horse to step up and run much better than he's ever run before. Trainers who are pointing for a certain race, may indeed get the horse to step up in that race and run better than they've ever run before. That would give that type of trainer a much higher ROI than your average trainer.