Lukas Handicapping Angle

[Rupert Pupkin]

He's not the big guy. He can't win a race. The big guys are Pletcher and Frankel.
My analogy was perfect. Do you understand what an analogy is? I love people who always will say that an analogy is not good but they don't explain why it's not good. The anology was perfect. I explained why the analogy was a good analogy. It was a good analogy because in both cases you had individuals engaging in reckless, high-risk behavior. If you are constantly driving drunk, you are going to get in a lot of accidents. If you are constanly running horses that are hurt, you're going to have a lot of horses break down. It's that simple.
With regard to the poster who said that Lukas' percentage of breakdowns is high because he has a lot of horses, that is totally inaccurate. A trainer that has a lot of horses will have a higher total number of breakdowns, but he will not have a higher percenatge of breakdowns. If one trainer has 1,000 horses over a 20 year period and 50 of those horses break down, that means that 5% of his horses broke down. If another guy had 400 horses and he had 20 horses break down, then that would also be 5%. These guys would have an equal number of breakdowns in terms of percentages.

[Rupert Pupkin]

The notion that Lukas is only criticized because he is a big trainer is absurd. If people just wanted to criticize someone because they were on top, they would be knocking Pletcher and Frankel. Lukas is criticized for legitimate reasons. As I said before, he is the only trainer out there that will just keep running a horse even after the horse has a serious injury. He will not turn a horse out. That is why he is criticized. That is why you never see his horses come back and do well of layoffs.
If a groom or assitant trainer goes up to Todd Plethcer or Bob Baffert and tells them that a horse is starting to get a bad tendon, the horse will get some time off. If one of Lukas' assistants or grooms tells him that the horse is starting to get a tendon, Lukas ignores it. He says, "Oh that's nothing. That's not a big deal. This horse can keep running." I heard one story where an assistant trainer told Lukas that a horse had some swelling in his tendon. Lukas told the assistant that he was wrong and that it was just a cosmetic thing.

Rupert, my point exactly. If you are a great trainer you can win with million dollar yearlings or what you have to work with. I could understand if this guy went from 25% winner on the big circuits to 10% if he wasn't buying every horse he wanted. He went from 25% to 3% after he didn't have every expensive horse in the country.

He did revolutinize the sport, but not as a great trainer. He did it by selling big owners into buying every horse he wanted, and have the best trainers working for him (Pletcher) making sure they won.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Lukas still gets great horses. He used to outspend everyone by 50x. Now he just outspends them by 10x. He was at the 2 year old sales last year spending more than anyone. I was sitting right next to him at Barretts last year. He was buying the best horses at the sale for $500,000 a piece. In addition, he bought some really expensive yearlings. He bought one yearling for the Lewises for around $2 million. If a trainer has a $2 million bankroll for a yearling sale, that is a lot of money. You can get some really nice horses for $200,000 a piece. That would buy you 10 really nice yearlings. There are very few trainers that have a $2 million bankroll for a single sale. I would estimate that less than 1% of trainers have that kind of money to spend. Lukas had way more money than that. He spent $2 million on a single horse.
In addition to all the expensive horses he bought last year, he also got a lot of really nice home-breds. He got a bunch of Storm Cats.
It's absurd to say that he doesn't get good horses any more and that he doesn't spend much money any more. It is simply not true. He doesn't have nearly as much money to spend as he used to, but he still has more than 99% of the other trainers.

[Scurlogue Champ]

I honestly have never seen someone so dedicated to making sure everyone knows about something.

It is almost as if Lukas is running for governor and you are his opponent's campaign manager.

Why do you make so much of an effort running Lukas and his horsemanship into the ground? You did it on ESPN, and you are doing it again.

Is there a personal vendetta? I'm sure there are plenty of trainers out there who are idiots that you could attack, it's not like it takes any real education to get your trainers license.

What is your huge problem with Lukas? If it is so severe, why didn't you just go up and tell him what he was doing wrong when you were "sitting right next to him at the Barretts last year?"

I don't understand how, if he has been committing these egregious errors for so long, that all these expert horsemen haven't just walked over and said "Listen Wayne, you are doing this all wrong. Let us professionals who make it on day rates alone show you what is going on here."

I am serious here Richi. Is there something personal, and how has it gotten so bad that no one will tell him?

[Rupert Pupkin]

As I said in a previous post, I don't know what goes on at smaller tracks with $5,000 horses. I'm sure there is a lot of really bad stuff going on in terms of lame horses being forced to run horses breaking down. There is even bad stuff going on at Santa Anita with the cheaper horses. However, Lukas is the only trainer that I am aware that treats good horses like $5,000 claimers. When I say that he treats them like $5k claimers, I am talking about the way he refuses to turn them out and will keep running them even with serious injuries. He basically won't turn them out until they are physically incapable of running. I don't know any other trainer that does that. That is why I can't stand him. He is an absolute butcher.
To answer your question, I highly doubt that many trainers go up to Lukas or any other trainer and tell them that they don't know how to train. That doesn't happen in any field. A doctor doesn't go up to another doctor and tell him that he is a lousy doctor.
The things I tell you about Lukas are not a secret. Everyone on the backstretch will tell you the same thing I'm telling you. Ever since we have had these debates, has anyone in the busines that posts on these boards ever disputed anything that I have said about Lukas? The answer is no. People like Honu and Landson have never had a problem with anything that I have said about Lukas. Whenever they have chimed in to the discussion, they have always agreed with everyting I have said.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

With regard to the poster who said that Lukas' percentage of breakdowns is high because he has a lot of horses, that is totally inaccurate. A trainer that has a lot of horses will have a higher total number of breakdowns, but he will not have a higher percenatge of breakdowns. If one trainer has 1,000 horses over a 20 year period and 50 of those horses break down, that means that 5% of his horses broke down. If another guy had 400 horses and he had 20 horses break down, then that would also be 5%. These guys would have an equal number of breakdowns in terms of percentages.

Okay, but do you have the numbers for Lukas? What % of his horses have actually broken down? What's the average for Frankel, Baffert, Pletcher, etc? Lukas has been the focus of attention going back to before Union City. Once someone gets a bad rep, people tend to remember absolutely every bad thing that happens.

Someone mentioned in passing that Halfbridled and Sweet Catomine didn't have much success in their 3-yr-old seasons either. But no one thinks for a minute that Mandella and Canani are to blame. However, as soon as Folklore is mentioned, well, that's another data point against Lukas.

Rupert, I don't doubt your observations about the way Lukas treats his horses, but I question the conclusion. You are saying that a higher percentage of Lukas's horses break down. Do you have numbers to support that claim?

--Dunbar