Lukas down to 40 horses

[ELA]

So, does this mean you have the data, proof, etc.? Or is is true just because you say "people don't just make this stuff up"? On this new claim, regarding the insurance, I for one would be very interested in hearing more about this and seeing the proof as I am in the insurance business.

Let's see the numbers. I am sure there are numerous others here besides me who would like to see them.

Eric

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ELA

So, does this mean you have the data, proof, etc.? Or is is true just because you say "people don't just make this stuff up"? On this new claim, regarding the insurance, I for one would be very interested in hearing more about this and seeing the proof as I am in the insurance business.

Let's see the numbers. I am sure there are numerous others here besides me who would like to see them.

Eric

If you are that interested, then call some of the thoroughbred insurance companies. They have the data.

I don't know how many times Darrel Strawberry has been arrested for drugs. It may be 4 times, it may be 6 times, I have no idea. I don't know the exact number and I really don't care. I do know that Strawberry used to have a drug problem. I don't need to document how may times he was arrested to state that he had a problem.

Lukas breaks down so many horses that many insurance companies won't insure his horse. I don't have the numbers in front of me. I don't know what the exact numbers are. I do know that the numbers are extreme. If you really want to know the exact numbers, then call some insurance companies and find out.

Ross Staaden did an analysis of Lukas training of the late 1980s. A couple excerpts: "Does Wayne break down too many horses?
To answer this we would need to know the breed average and Wayn'e breakdown rates. This is not a simple thing to measure." (Staaden winds up "not" measuring or answering conclusively.) More excerpts: "Wayne may have a lot of breakdowns simply because he has a lot of horses. . .However, the track-watcher's consensus is that he DOES break down a lot of horses...I asked Greg Ferraro, a highly respected veterinarian who did Wayn'e work in Los Angeles: 'One of the Accusations that you hear all the time about Wayne is that he breaks heaps of horses down.' 'I think if you look at his percentage, he's probably somewhere in the middle.'
'So, he doesn't break heaps of horses down?'
'Not considering the number of horses he's got...I don't think his percentage is any worse than anybody else. No worse, certainly. I'd say he's average. Average. At least in my book."

Staaden's leaves the subject by speculating Lukas's breakdown rate might have something to do with the type of yearlings he buys-- precocious, fragile types. Wayne's yearling "type" is pictured in the book. I might agree somewhat. A few more interesting tidbits from the Book:
Steinlen's exercise program:
1/21 Santa anita Allowance: 3rd
3/12 Santa Anita Allowance: 7th
3/26 Santa Anita Allowance: W
4/10 Santa Anita Stakes W
5/1 Hollywood Stakes W
5/15 Hollywood stakes W
6/1 Walked
6/2 G
6/3 G
6/4 J
6/5 Worked 5/8
6/6 W
6/7 G
6/8/J
6/9G
6/10 G
6/11 W
6/12 G
6/13 Worked 3/4
6/14 W
6/15 J
6/16 G
6/17 J
6/18 G
6/19 Race Hollywoodd Stakes 8f Won
6/20 W
6/21 W
6/22 W
6/23 J
6/24 G
6/25 J
6/26 G
6/27 G
6/28 Worked 5/8
6/29 W
6/30 G
7/4 Hollywood Stakes 9f 2nd
8/14 Saratoga Stakes 9f 2nd
8/27 Saratoga Stakes 8f Won
Gallops are 16-18 seconds/f. Lukas works around 13 sec/f.
In Staaden's book are the exercise logs for all of Lukas's horses. Lukas trains similar to Mandella. Truth is all these trainers break everything down. Watch Mandella's DVD. In contrast: Nashua trained by S. Fitzimmons before Swaps Matchrace
8/4 3/4 mile in 1:17
8/6 7/8 mile in 1:37
8/9 3/4 mile in 1:15
8/12 7/8 mile in 1:34 4/5
8/15 easy 1/18 mile 2:20 2/5
8/28 Mile in 1:39 Rupert says times have changed and that every trainer would agree this sort of training breaks down horses. Which is it rupert. The soft training of lukas, or the hard training of Fitzimmons that breaks down horses???
8/31: Match race with Swaps 1 1/4 Mile. Won. 5 lengthy breezes in 9 days. Rupert says times ahve changed and every trainer would say this sort of training breaks down horses. Which is it rupert? Lukas soft training or Fiztsimmons hard training that breaks down horses.

Hopefully the betting public will fire on his horses so some nice overlays will occur.

Bring on Oaklawn!!!

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ratherrapid

Ross Staaden did an analysis of Lukas training of the late 1980s. A couple excerpts: "Does Wayne break down too many horses?
To answer this we would need to know the breed average and Wayn'e breakdown rates. This is not a simple thing to measure." (Staaden winds up "not" measuring or answering conclusively.) More excerpts: "Wayne may have a lot of breakdowns simply because he has a lot of horses. . .However, the track-watcher's consensus is that he DOES break down a lot of horses...I asked Greg Ferraro, a highly respected veterinarian who did Wayn'e work in Los Angeles: 'One of the Accusations that you hear all the time about Wayne is that he breaks heaps of horses down.' 'I think if you look at his percentage, he's probably somewhere in the middle.'
'So, he doesn't break heaps of horses down?'
'Not considering the number of horses he's got...I don't think his percentage is any worse than anybody else. No worse, certainly. I'd say he's average. Average. At least in my book."

Staaden's leaves the subject by speculating Lukas's breakdown rate might have something to do with the type of yearlings he buys-- precocious, fragile types. Wayne's yearling "type" is pictured in the book. I might agree somewhat. A few more interesting tidbits from the Book:
Steinlen's exercise program:
1/21 Santa anita Allowance: 3rd
3/12 Santa Anita Allowance: 7th
3/26 Santa Anita Allowance: W
4/10 Santa Anita Stakes W
5/1 Hollywood Stakes W
5/15 Hollywood stakes W
6/1 Walked
6/2 G
6/3 G
6/4 J
6/5 Worked 5/8
6/6 W
6/7 G
6/8/J
6/9G
6/10 G
6/11 W
6/12 G
6/13 Worked 3/4
6/14 W
6/15 J
6/16 G
6/17 J
6/18 G
6/19 Race Hollywoodd Stakes 8f Won
6/20 W
6/21 W
6/22 W
6/23 J
6/24 G
6/25 J
6/26 G
6/27 G
6/28 Worked 5/8
6/29 W
6/30 G
7/4 Hollywood Stakes 9f 2nd
8/14 Saratoga Stakes 9f 2nd
8/27 Saratoga Stakes 8f Won
Gallops are 16-18 seconds/f. Lukas works around 13 sec/f.
In Staaden's book are the exercise logs for all of Lukas's horses. Lukas trains similar to Mandella. Truth is all these trainers break everything down. Watch Mandella's DVD. In contrast: Nashua trained by S. Fitzimmons before Swaps Matchrace
8/4 3/4 mile in 1:17
8/6 7/8 mile in 1:37
8/9 3/4 mile in 1:15
8/12 7/8 mile in 1:34 4/5
8/15 easy 1/18 mile 2:20 2/5
8/28 Mile in 1:39 Rupert says times have changed and that every trainer would agree this sort of training breaks down horses. Which is it rupert. The soft training of lukas, or the hard training of Fitzimmons that breaks down horses???
8/31: Match race with Swaps 1 1/4 Mile. Won. 5 lengthy breezes in 9 days. Rupert says times ahve changed and every trainer would say this sort of training breaks down horses. Which is it rupert? Lukas soft training or Fiztsimmons hard training that breaks down horses.

I'm saying that nowadays horses don't hold up nearly as well as they did in the past. Nowadays, if you train them too hard or you run them too often, they won't last. That's all I'm saying and any good trainer will tell you the same thing.

And I have never heard anyone say that D Wayne is too easy on his horses. Quite to the contrary, everyone say the opposite. His own employess used to often times disobey him when he would leave town. They would take it easy on most of the really sore horses.

The biggest problem with D Wayne is that he usually won't stop on a horse even if the horse has a serious problem. That's the main problem with D Wayne. With most trainers, if they have a horse that's starting to get some swelling in an ankle, they're going to back off. Wayne won't back off. He won't turn a horse out until it's way too late.

With regard to Dr. Ferraro, what do you want him to say? Do you expect him to bite the hand that feeds him? The numbers speak for themselves. As I said before, I know that many of the biggest insurance companies will not insure horses that are trained by D Wayne. There are practically no other big-time trainers that have a problem getting insurance.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

If you are that interested, then call some of the thoroughbred insurance companies. They have the data.

I don't know how many times Darrel Strawberry has been arrested for drugs. It may be 4 times, it may be 6 times, I have no idea. I don't know the exact number and I really don't care. I do know that Strawberry used to have a drug problem. I don't need to document how may times he was arrested to state that he had a problem.

Lukas breaks down so many horses that many insurance companies won't insure his horse. I don't have the numbers in front of me. I don't know what the exact numbers are. I do know that the numbers are extreme. If you really want to know the exact numbers, then call some insurance companies and find out.

you're obviously not a lawyer. see, i was just on jury duty. it's not the prosecutors job to lay out a scenario and tell the defense to prove him wrong. he has to prove himself right, he has to PROVE a presumably innocent man is guilty. you have failed, in at least the last year, to show any proof to substantiate your claims. all well and good to post that you know something. it's not my job to prove you wrong. show us where this is coming from. just once. or please, stop putting it up, if you have nothing to show where it's coming from.....other than your own bias.

[packerbacker7964]

D. Wayne as trained alot I mean alot of other trainers thru the years. If he's so bad why oh why did these people train under him so long and not complain about it after they left his operation? I've heard a trainer or jockey complain about how Mr. Triple Crown trains'em. Lots of respect for the man. I'd turn mine over to him anyday. In with the New Blood and out with the old.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by packerbacker7964

D. Wayne as trained alot I mean alot of other trainers thru the years. If he's so bad why oh why did these people train under him so long and not complain about it after they left his operation? I've heard a trainer or jockey complain about how Mr. Triple Crown trains'em. Lots of respect for the man. I'd turn mine over to him anyday. In with the New Blood and out with the old.

Why would any of those guys bite the hand that fed them? Those guys owe a lot of their success to Lukas. We've talked about this many times on this board. These guys may not have similar training styles to Lukas, but they sure learned a heck of alot about the busines from him and made numerous contacts through him.

I remember when they were interviewing McLaughlin about what he learned working for Lukas, he simply said that Lukas teaches you how to get owners. He didn't say anything about Lukas teaching him to train.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

you're obviously not a lawyer. see, i was just on jury duty. it's not the prosecutors job to lay out a scenario and tell the defense to prove him wrong. he has to prove himself right, he has to PROVE a presumably innocent man is guilty. you have failed, in at least the last year, to show any proof to substantiate your claims. all well and good to post that you know something. it's not my job to prove you wrong. show us where this is coming from. just once. or please, stop putting it up, if you have nothing to show where it's coming from.....other than your own bias.

If this was a jury trial and I was a prosecutor, I would make sure I had the data to present to the jury. But this is not a trial and I am not a prosecutor.

If you don't want to believe what I'm saying about Lukas, then don't believe it. It's fine with me. I try to give you guys some insights into the business. I have no idea why you always give me a hard time when it comes to Lukas. You obviously are a fan of his and you don't want to hear anything negative about him.

I don't think you care about the numbers. If I had the numbers and posted them, you would question the authenticity of the numbers. In the past, when you wanted corroboration from others in the business about what I was saying, even after you got the corroboration, that still wasn't good enough for you.

When I think about it, if this was a jury trial over the past couple of years, you have been presented with more than enough information from several witnesses including Honu, LBigDog, BCMile10, PP, and numerous others. They have all confirmed what I have said. If you think we're all full of it, that is your prerogative.

Maybe times have passed him by in age and other areas (fragility and overtraining issues) heck I dont know. But I do know he used to do things very right.

He has won everything in sight.

[ELA]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

If this was a jury trial and I was a prosecutor, I would make sure I had the data to present to the jury. But this is not a trial and I am not a prosecutor.

If you don't want to believe what I'm saying about Lukas, then don't believe it. It's fine with me. I try to give you guys some insights into the business. I have no idea why you always give me a hard time when it comes to Lukas. You obviously are a fan of his and you don't want to hear anything negative about him.

I don't think you care about the numbers. If I had the numbers and posted them, you would question the authenticity of the numbers. In the past, when you wanted corroboration from others in the business about what I was saying, even after you got the corroboration, that still wasn't good enough for you.

When I think about it, if this was a jury trial over the past couple of years, you have been presented with more than enough information from several witnesses including Honu, LBigDog, BCMile10, PP, and numerous others. They have all confirmed what I have said. If you think we're all full of it, that is your prerogative.

It's not that I don't believe what you are saying . . . wait a minute, hang on . . . yes, it is that I don't believe what you are saying. LOL. Seriously, you are correct in that this is not a trial nor are you are prosecutor. However, you made some very specific claims, and in my opinion, if you want credibility -- at least with me -- very simply, prove it! Back up your claims. If not, then you should expect to get called out. You use the word "we're" referring to being full of it. In this case, I am not sure that I see anyone more than "you" but if I am wrong, I say the same thing to everyone -- prove it. Back up the claims.

As far as you providing insight, as far as I am concerned -- go right ahead. I would think many people would appreciate it. However, to me, it is not your motivation that I have a problem with -- it's your delivery. In this case, the way it landed with me was that you were doing whatever you were doing in a condescending way, with negativity, criticisms, and by making specific claims. All I said was back it up. I've been in this business my entire adult life. To me, it's got nothing to do with the # of posts one has, who knows who, how many trophies one may have, or anything like that. Opinion is opinion. Sometimes it's a qualified one, sometimes it's not. And, of course, facts are facts.

It's not about Lukas. I have no problem hearing anything negative -- if it is supported, and factual. I would have asked the same questions and asked for the same proof it this was about Pletcher as well. It is merely supposition and hypothetical that I or anyone would question the authenticity of your numbers. Reason being -- you don't have them!

Your claim about being presented with "more than enough information" -- of course you say that. You have to. Just because you and several others say the same thing -- that doesn't make it right. Same thing applies to anyone who agrees with you -- Prove it.

Now, if you want to say it's your opinion, or you think, or it appears to you, or anything along those lines -- that's great. I have no problem with that. I didn't see that here however.

Eric

PS -- your anology to Strawberry is superfluous. Documented facts, proof, evidence, and so many more thinks that you do not have.

You are truly missing the point. That's OK though.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ELA

It's not that I don't believe what you are saying . . . wait a minute, hang on . . . yes, it is that I don't believe what you are saying. LOL. Seriously, you are correct in that this is not a trial nor are you are prosecutor. However, you made some very specific claims, and in my opinion, if you want credibility -- at least with me -- very simply, prove it! Back up your claims. If not, then you should expect to get called out. You use the word "we're" referring to being full of it. In this case, I am not sure that I see anyone more than "you" but if I am wrong, I say the same thing to everyone -- prove it. Back up the claims.

As far as you providing insight, as far as I am concerned -- go right ahead. I would think many people would appreciate it. However, to me, it is not your motivation that I have a problem with -- it's your delivery. In this case, the way it landed with me was that you were doing whatever you were doing in a condescending way, with negativity, criticisms, and by making specific claims. All I said was back it up. I've been in this business my entire adult life. To me, it's got nothing to do with the # of posts one has, who knows who, how many trophies one may have, or anything like that. Opinion is opinion. Sometimes it's a qualified one, sometimes it's not. And, of course, facts are facts.

It's not about Lukas. I have no problem hearing anything negative -- if it is supported, and factual. I would have asked the same questions and asked for the same proof it this was about Pletcher as well. It is merely supposition and hypothetical that I or anyone would question the authenticity of your numbers. Reason being -- you don't have them!

Your claim about being presented with "more than enough information" -- of course you say that. You have to. Just because you and several others say the same thing -- that doesn't make it right. Same thing applies to anyone who agrees with you -- Prove it.

Now, if you want to say it's your opinion, or you think, or it appears to you, or anything along those lines -- that's great. I have no problem with that. I didn't see that here however.

Eric

PS -- your anology to Strawberry is superfluous. Documented facts, proof, evidence, and so many more thinks that you do not have.

You are truly missing the point. That's OK though.

Eric, I'm not sure what you want. I do not possess written documentation from the insurance companies with the specific numbers. I think I've made that pretty clear. I have told you what I do know. I do know that many of the big insurance companies will not insure his horses because his number of breakdowns is way out of whack. I don't know what else you want from me. If you really want the information, I'm sure you could get it. If you are friendly with anybody at any of the thoroughbred insurance companies, I'm sure you can get the information.

I'm not going to call them. They don't need to convince me. They've alreay told me. I just didn't get it in writing.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

If this was a jury trial and I was a prosecutor, I would make sure I had the data to present to the jury. But this is not a trial and I am not a prosecutor.

If you don't want to believe what I'm saying about Lukas, then don't believe it. It's fine with me. I try to give you guys some insights into the business. I have no idea why you always give me a hard time when it comes to Lukas. You obviously are a fan of his and you don't want to hear anything negative about him.

I don't think you care about the numbers. If I had the numbers and posted them, you would question the authenticity of the numbers. In the past, when you wanted corroboration from others in the business about what I was saying, even after you got the corroboration, that still wasn't good enough for you.

When I think about it, if this was a jury trial over the past couple of years, you have been presented with more than enough information from several witnesses including Honu, LBigDog, BCMile10, PP, and numerous others. They have all confirmed what I have said. If you think we're all full of it, that is your prerogative.

no, sir, i am no lukas fan. that's where you get it wrong. but i'm also a fan of people not just posting their opinion without any proof, and putting that opinion up as being a FACT. you don't like lukas, fine. i know posters have said they don't like his tactics, they think he's too hard on horses. THAT is OPINION-something everyone is entitled to. you cross the line in saying he breaks down a higher percentage of horses than other trainers, and that insurance co's won't cover him. if it's such a known fact, why nothing from you, his harshest critic, to back up something you are posting as proven, when you have never shown anything to prove it?!

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

no, sir, i am no lukas fan. that's where you get it wrong. but i'm also a fan of people not just posting their opinion without any proof, and putting that opinion up as being a FACT. you don't like lukas, fine. i know posters have said they don't like his tactics, they think he's too hard on horses. THAT is OPINION-something everyone is entitled to. you cross the line in saying he breaks down a higher percentage of horses than other trainers, and that insurance co's won't cover him. if it's such a known fact, why nothing from you, his harshest critic, to back up something you are posting as proven, when you have never shown anything to prove it?!

I've given you proof. Several months ago, I even gave you the name of one of the biggest insurance companies that won't insure him. Did you call them? Of course not. You don't want to call them because if you called them then you wouldn't be able to argue with me any more. I know you too well Danzig.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I've given you proof. Several months ago, I even gave you the name of one of the biggest insurance companies that won't insure him. Did you call them? Of course not. You don't want to call them because if you called them then you wouldn't be able to argue with me any more. I know you too well Danzig.

you have given me proof? what was that?? as for giving me a name, i must have missed that one. maybe it was a same old tired thread i chose to ignore, as it never goes anywhere.
lol
oh boy, you 'know' me?! lol that's rich. lemme know when you find the #'s of breakdowns, %'s, etc....been waiting for that for some time.
i'd be happy to have that name again. a # would be great. so that way, i can go find your 'proof' for you....

She's a fighter, Pupkin. She'll never quit. Ever.

D. Wayne has trained probably a billion dollars in horse flesh. Nobody can take away his accomplishments nor can they take away his failures. However, law of averages says he's going to have more failure than success.

[ELA]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

If you are that interested, then call some of the thoroughbred insurance companies. They have the data.

I don't know how many times Darrel Strawberry has been arrested for drugs. It may be 4 times, it may be 6 times, I have no idea. I don't know the exact number and I really don't care. I do know that Strawberry used to have a drug problem. I don't need to document how may times he was arrested to state that he had a problem.

Lukas breaks down so many horses that many insurance companies won't insure his horse. I don't have the numbers in front of me. I don't know what the exact numbers are. I do know that the numbers are extreme. If you really want to know the exact numbers, then call some insurance companies and find out.

So, I guess this means, simply put, that we are not going to see any proof, data, or any back up whatsoever to your claims, or anything factual for that matter.

I would think -- once again, simply put -- because you don't have it.

Eric

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by ELA

So, I guess this means, simply put, that we are not going to see any proof, data, or any back up whatsoever to your claims, or anything factual for that matter.

I would think -- once again, simply put -- because you don't have it.

Eric

he's put this type of post up numerous times, here and elsewhere. never, ever, one iota of FACT to back it up.
puts me in a tenuous position as a non-lukas fan, but as a fan of people not making claims without any backup-regardless of who they are besmirching.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Where were you guys a few months ago when I was having this same discussion? I could have used some back up then.

i'm telling you dahoss, rupe and i have been on opposite sides of this discussion numerous times. nowadays most times i just leave it. he knows what i want, and i know he has failed to produce....

dwl was/is reviled for being so successful. it's drifted away from him for the most part, now many gleefully attack his former pupil, todd pletcher. he's the top dog now, so it's his turn.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

dwl was/is reviled for being so successful. it's drifted away from him for the most part, now many gleefully attack his former pupil, todd pletcher. he's the top dog now, so it's his turn.

I'm not sure I would agree with that. Overall it seems that Pletcher is beloved on message boards and his defenders well outnumber his detracters. Do you honestly disagree with that?

Maybe I'm wrong.