Lukas Handicapping Angle - Page 2

Rupert Pupkin · #21 06-07-2006, 08:02 PM

I was the first one to say that horse in Europe should not have run. If Fallon thought the horse didn't feel right, the horse should have been scratched. I don't know all the details, but if Fallon thought the horse was lame and O'Brien insited on running the horse, then O'Brien is totally to blame.
With regards to Lukas, he obviously is going to get more criticism when one of his horses breaks down than other tainers and rightfully so. He is known for running horses that are dead-lame. He runs his horses no matter what. When one of his horses breaks down, it is usually not a fluke. I don't know much about Michael Matz, but I don't think he breaks down a lot of horses. It appears that what happened to Barbaro was a fluke thing. Why would anyone crticize Matz? That's a totally different situation from Lukas, who breaks down so many that some insurance companies will not insure his horses.
An analogy would be to compare a 50 year old man who has had 4 automobile accidents in his life to another 50 year old guy that has had 25 automobile accidents and was drunk for all of them. Danzig would say, "Why are they criticizing this guy with the 25 drunk driving accidents. That other guy has had accidents too. Why don't you criticize him?" The reason is obvious. In the case of the guy with the 4 crashes, there is nothing you can say. People have accidents even if they're really careful. With the other guy who has 25 accidents, these accidents were preventable. When you drive drunk, you greatly increase your chances of getting in an accident.
When you are a trainer, you greatly increase the chances of having your horses break down, if you keep injecting the horses and force them to run when they are hurt. That's why D Wayne's horses keep breaking down. That's why D Wayne gets so much criticism. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

Ruhlmann · #22 06-07-2006, 08:05 PM

About the only older horse I remember Lukas having was Steinlen. BC Miler Champ and Horse of the year, I think. It's not so much how many horses broke down with Lukas because he had lots of horses which raised his percentage to have more break down. His thoughts are more with the owners that "broke down". Gene Klien, WT White, and Bob Lewis were major clients with deep pockets. When those guys died, I bet a little bit of D Wayne went with him. While watching the week before the Derby by Yum this year, you sensed a different D Wayne. Still with an opinion, but not about his horse. He was undercover. The man has seen it and done it all. At 70, I think he deserves all respect and let that sleepy dog be.

Danzig · #23 06-07-2006, 08:07 PM

what is so hard to understand is where you come up with an analogy like that!
i'm not stupid richi (unlike your new moniker, sheesh). i don't belond to a dwl fan club, i was never a fan. by the same token i don't understand why others are so quick to pile on. he's the big guy, an easy target. hell, fire away. i'm sure lukas will dry his tears with $100 bills....

Rupert Pupkin · #24 06-07-2006, 08:33 PM

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 · #25 06-07-2006, 08:45 PM

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.

#26 06-08-2006, 12:39 AM

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 · #27 06-08-2006, 01:07 AM

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 · #28 06-08-2006, 01:39 AM

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 · #29 06-08-2006, 02:05 AM

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 · #30 06-08-2006, 04:29 AM

Quote:

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

Rupert Pupkin · #31 06-08-2006, 04:52 AM

As I have stated before, his percentages of breakdowns is so high that that there are insurance companies that will not insure his horses. I don't have the numbers but the insurance companies have them. In addition, he has more horses get eased and pulled up than anyone. The numbers are stagerring. I don't remember what the exact figure was but his number of horses that ease is around 3x or 4x times higher than the average trainer. The numbers confirm what everyone in the business already knows.

Buffymommy · #32 06-08-2006, 09:44 AM

The dude is 70 years old. Give the guy a break! Are you as good at 70 as you are at say 40 or 50? Dang. The dude had no where to go but down. And for those critizing how he trains horses back in his heyday, do you honestly think that the other trainers around weren't doing the same exact thing he was? Not all but more than not.

Give the guy a break. He is in his 70s and starting to slow down. The dude was on top of the world at one time. I still remember when Winning Colors won the Kentucky Derby. (LOVED THAT FILLY as well as his other top filly Lady's Secret). The man has had champions. You may not like how he got there, but he got there nonetheless. Others were probably doing the same things he was training and they didn't get there, he did.

Give the Lukas bashing a rest will ya? Do we have to discuss it every week?

miraja2 · #33 06-08-2006, 09:51 AM

I generally agree with the Lukas-bashers, but I don't think Going Wild ran in all 3 legs of the TC last year. My memory may be failing me, but I think he only ran in the Derby and the Preakness. I am almost positive that he did not run in the Belmont.

#34 06-08-2006, 10:21 AM

Lukas was never known to train older horses. His drive was to win TC races and that is all. All owners know this. Back in the 80's and 90's you gave your horse to Lukas if you wanted to win a TC race. Lukas has had some good older horses--Spain, Cat Thief to name a couple. But Lukas is old school and I don't know how you can argue his success. The thing about Lukas that is so neat is the success of his prodigy. Not only did he train several champions but he was also the mentor to some of the best trainers in the game today. To me, that is a sign of a good trainer.

Dunbar · #35 06-08-2006, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

As I have stated before, his percentages of breakdowns is so high that that there are insurance companies that will not insure his horses. I don't have the numbers but the insurance companies have them. In addition, he has more horses get eased and pulled up than anyone. The numbers are stagerring. I don't remember what the exact figure was but his number of horses that ease is around 3x or 4x times higher than the average trainer. The numbers confirm what everyone in the business already knows.

Again, this could be a combination of selective memory and the number of horses he trains. I don't know how many he is training now, but he used to have an empire. Of course he was going to have 3x to 4x the number of eases as an "average trainer". I know you are asserting that his percentage is also much higher, but, well, I'd like to see figs that support that assertion.

As far as the insurance companies, go...this sounds like 2nd or 3rd hand info. Do we know if it is the big insurance companies that won't insure him?

Again, I am not doubting your observations that Lukas will run horses that shouldn't be running. But I'd need more than anecdotal evidence before I'd condemn him for actually breaking down a higher percentage of horses than his peers.

--Dunbar

Rupert Pupkin · #36 06-08-2006, 12:11 PM

Dunbar, I'm not sure I understand your question regarding his percentage of horses that ease. The information is straight forward. Not only is it easy to see from observation, but the numbers show it to be true. How often do you see a Mandella, Pletcher, Frankel, Clement, or Ellis horse ease? It is extremely rare. You see Lukas horses easing all the time. There is no innocent explanation for it. He constantly runs horses that are so lame that they don't even finish the race. By the way, I believe that the figures included any horse that got beat by over 30 lengths.
With regard to the insurance companies, I know for sure that one of the biggest companies will not insure his horses.
I am really baffled at some of the questions that you guys come up with. You know that I love analogies so I will give you another one. We see the same guy stumble out of a bar every night. It is obvious that he is an alcholic. Not only do we see him stumble out of the bar every night but we know that he has over 10 DUI arrests. You would be asking me "How can we be sure he is an alcoholic? Are you sure that the average person doesn't have 10 DUIs? How do you know that the police don't just have it in for this guy? are you sure that people are exaggerating about this guy? I'm sure that everybody has gotten drunk before."
This is what your questions and comments sound like. I don't know what you guys ae looking for. Everything I'm telling you is true. Everyone in the business that has ever chimed into these debates has said the same thing. All the evidence supports what I'm telling you. I don't know what else there is to say. If you don't want to believe it then don't believe it.

videogirl10 · #37 06-08-2006, 12:23 PM

i have a question....if lukas's horses aren't being insured b/c of his problems, then why do owners still go to him? wouldn't they want their high priced horses insured? and if he isn't doing a good job, then why do owners send their horses to him?

1st_Saturday_in_May · #38 06-08-2006, 12:44 PM

D.W. Lukas 2006 statistics

215 starters - 15 win - 32 place - 33 show - $1,117,622

6.97% winners (lowest among top 100 trainers in nation per Equibase)
37.2% in the money (96th among top 100 trainers in nation per Equibase)

Hate to say it, but if this is the best he can do with clients like Beverly Lewis and Overbrook maybe it is time for him to hang it up. Yes, he did get Folklore a win in the BCJF, but for me two horses in the past four Triple Crowns really show me that this guy is just reaching. Both Going Wild and Ten Cents a Shine were TROUNCED in the final KD preps with no excuses yet he continued on to the Derby and when the were crushed there, he went to the Preakness. Why, who knows? I personally will not be betting this guy at all anymore...

Rootdog1 · #39 06-08-2006, 12:44 PM

I can back up the insurance statement. His DNF rates are the highest of any top/middle tier trainer, and most owners that use him pay a premium for insurance. Why he still gets horses is a great question......he still sells the dream and has enough history/reputation for those believers out there.

Rupert Pupkin · #40 06-08-2006, 12:54 PM

RootDog, If there is any way you could get those exact figures, it would be great if you could post them. As I said, I don't know the exact figure but I know that his percenatge of horses that ease was around 3x or 4x higher than average.
I'm sure that some people would like to know the exact figures.