34 Derby/Oaks runners from 18 trainers..

[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.

[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

[hi_im_god]

i don't think i ever realized the volume these large barns have.

the name trainers have to be acting more as fleet managers for most of their stock, not actual mechanics. i guess when you hire them, you're buying their expertise on the abilities of the people they've hired to handle your horse (outside of the top tier runners, of course).

[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.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

i don't think i ever realized the volume these large barns have.

the name trainers have to be acting more as fleet managers for most of their stock, not actual mechanics. i guess when you hire them, you're buying their expertise on the abilities of the people they've hired to handle your horse (outside of the top tier runners, of course).

that's a great way to describe it. anyone hiring pletcher or baffert, or some of the others, has to realize he's a ceo of a company-not the actual trainer. all the hands' on training is handed off to assistants. they show up to throw a saddle on the horses on race days when it's called for.

[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?