Quote:
|
Originally Posted by saratoga guy
And -- in regard to the ROI -- with better stock, couldn't Wolfson be more competitive in some races that he wouldn't have had the stock to compete with before.
|
Getting better stock certainly isn't something that is to going improve ROI stats.
These are the stats for Larry Jones from 1997 through 2005 ...
246-for-1,193 (20% wins) $2.32 ROI
Here are his stats the last 3+ years ('06-to-present) when the much better stock came to him ..
273-for-1,261 (21% wins) $1.86 ROI
The win percentage did rise - but the ROI dropped 46 points from a GOD LIKE $2.32 down to a rock solid $1.86
Here are the stats for Kiaran McLaughlin from when he just was strating to go out on his own in 1996 through 2003.
176-for-891 (19% wins) $2.21 ROI
From 2004 until today McLaughlin's stats look like this...
496-for-2,459 (20% wins) $1.90 ROI
The win percentage did rise - but the ROI dropped 31 points from a GOD LIKE $2.21 to a rock solid $1.90.
Better horses don't translate into higher ROI's ... but higher ROI's often do translate into evenually getting better horses because owners eventually take notice of the magic and respond to it by supplying said trainers with better stock. Just as bettors take note of the magic and bet there money on these trainers which drives there ROI downward.
And go ahead and just ignore all of the unlogical form reversals ... after all ... Bill Mott doesn't know how to shoe them. Todd Pletcher doesn't know when they're very sore.