34 Derby/Oaks runners from 18 trainers..

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

I think I answered it. I'm open to discuss it more.

Think again. You avoided it.

How is Baffert any different than Pletcher when Baffert gets so many horses also?

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

Think again. You avoided it.

How is Baffert any different than Pletcher when Baffert gets so many horses also?

Big picture it's no different. I do believe Baffert has run more well intended horses in triple crown races then Pletcher.

[Kasept]

If you're looking for differences between the two, Baffert doesn't have anywhere near the stock in number that Pletcher does. Over the last 4 years, Baffert has averaged 500 starts while Pletcher averages 1,000. To put that in perspective, Mott has 600/year, McPeek 500/year, McGaughey 250/year. Interestingly, Baffert over that period outperformed Pletcher, averaging $24,364 in earnings per start while Pletcher averaged $18,923.

[Sightseek]

It is wishful thinking, but hopefully the media focuses more on the tradition and history of Phipps, Stevens, Lukas etc. in the Derby than Baffert and Rodriguez.

I could watch hours of Easy Goer and Winning Colors between races.

[3kings]

Originally Posted by Kasept

If you're looking for differences between the two, Baffert doesn't have anywhere near the stock in number that Pletcher does. Over the last 4 years, Baffert has averaged 500 starts while Pletcher averages 1,000. To put that in perspective, Mott has 600/year, McPeek 500/year, McGaughey 250/year. Interestingly, Baffert over that period outperformed Pletcher, averaging $24,364 in earnings per start while Pletcher averaged $18,923.

I know they both get the high end horses but it seems to me Baffert only trains these while Pletcher has a wider range of horses. Is this factual or just my perception?

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by 3kings

I know they both get the high end horses but it seems to me Baffert only trains these while Pletcher has a wider range of horses. Is this factual or just my perception?

Baffert stock certainly leans heavily towards main track Classic-intended types by virtue of his client base and long record of success in those events. Pletcher definitely gets a wider variety of types and obviously enjoys a stronger resume with turf runners than Baffert. Both have had done outstanding work with elite sprinters.

[Alabama Stakes]

if I owned a hoss running in the Derby and my trainer wasn't throwin a saddle on him, I'd have one that would be. I'm just funny that way I guess.

[Scav]

Originally Posted by Kasept

If you're looking for differences between the two, Baffert doesn't have anywhere near the stock in number that Pletcher does. Over the last 4 years, Baffert has averaged 500 starts while Pletcher averages 1,000. To put that in perspective, Mott has 600/year, McPeek 500/year, McGaughey 250/year. Interestingly, Baffert over that period outperformed Pletcher, averaging $24,364 in earnings per start while Pletcher averaged $18,923.

24k per start is just an unbelievable number. Wow

[a_rookie]

Looking forward to an "all Pletcher" KD field

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by Scav

24k per start is just an unbelievable number. Wow

I'd love to know what that number is just at Gulfstream - gotta be north of 40K

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

I'd love to know what that number is just at Gulfstream - gotta be north of 40K

The $24k is Baffert.. not Pletcher.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by Kasept

The $24k is Baffert.. not Pletcher.

Gotcha

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by Kasept

If you're looking for differences between the two, Baffert doesn't have anywhere near the stock in number that Pletcher does. Over the last 4 years, Baffert has averaged 500 starts while Pletcher averages 1,000. To put that in perspective, Mott has 600/year, McPeek 500/year, McGaughey 250/year. Interestingly, Baffert over that period outperformed Pletcher, averaging $24,364 in earnings per start while Pletcher averaged $18,923.

It could just be my perception but it seems like they both get a ton of precocious 2 year olds, which turn into stakes caliber 3 year olds.

When Pletcher is winning every MSW at Saratoga and Belmont, then the first level allowances at Gulfstream, Baffert is doing the same at Del Mar and Santa Anita.

No arguing that Pletcher has more horses, but they are spread out over a few states whereas it seems like Baffert almost has a monopoly on a certain type of horse in California. Again, could just be perception, but often times for people perception is reality.

I don't see how either is actually "good" for the game by having so many horses, but it is also hard to argue with their success, which is the rub.

[pointman]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

It could just be my perception but it seems like they both get a ton of precocious 2 year olds, which turn into stakes caliber 3 year olds.

When Pletcher is winning every MSW at Saratoga and Belmont, then the first level allowances at Gulfstream, Baffert is doing the same at Del Mar and Santa Anita.

No arguing that Pletcher has more horses, but they are spread out over a few states whereas it seems like Baffert almost has a monopoly on a certain type of horse in California. Again, could just be perception, but often times for people perception is reality.

I don't see how either is actually "good" for the game by having so many horses, but it is also hard to argue with their success, which is the rub.

This is exactly the reasoning I was using when I asked the question. Sure seems to me that Baffert gets more then his fair share of Derby caliber horses every year, which is the subject of this thread, regardless of the total number of stock each trainer has. I don't see any appreciable difference between them when it comes down to the high concentration of quality stock in the small number of trainers.

When it comes down to it, I don't blame Pletcher, Baffert or any other trainer who takes on a high number of quality horses. I blame the owners. The owners are the people who could change this by moving some or all of their stock to trainers who are capable of training high quality stock but are not getting the opportunity.

Frankly, why owners want their high quality horses in the same barn as a trainer who has several other horses of the same level is beyond me. At some point the trainer ultimately has to make a decision on one horse that negatively affects another horse which would not happen if they are in different barns. But until owners realize this and move their stock, I don't see how this problem will be solved.

[asudevil]

Originally Posted by pointman

This is exactly the reasoning I was using when I asked the question. Sure seems to me that Baffert gets more then his fair share of Derby caliber horses every year, which is the subject of this thread, regardless of the total number of stock each trainer has. I don't see any appreciable difference between them when it comes down to the high concentration of quality stock in the small number of trainers.

When it comes down to it, I don't blame Pletcher, Baffert or any other trainer who takes on a high number of quality horses. I blame the owners. The owners are the people who could change this by moving some or all of their stock to trainers who are capable of training high quality stock but are not getting the opportunity.

Frankly, why owners want their high quality horses in the same barn as a trainer who has several other horses of the same level is beyond me. At some point the trainer ultimately has to make a decision on one horse that negatively affects another horse which would not happen if they are in different barns. But until owners realize this and move their stock, I don't see how this problem will be solved.

This is spot-on. I know for certain that this is a challenge for the Baffert team.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by asudevil

This is spot-on. I know for certain that this is a challenge for the Baffert team.

sure it is. so he ships all over-which adds up shipping costs for owners. i guess they don't care?