Are these Trainers bad for the game?

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Todd and Stephanie Beattie might be low-profile names right now, but they are as skilled as any trainers in the country at the fine art of improving horses dramatically.

* Todd might be most famous for the job he did with Fabulous Strike. A horse who was soundly beaten in a Tampa MSW race last winter. In his first start for Beattie, he impressively won a Penn National MSW race. It wasn't long until he was a stakes winner at Belmont. He would run a competitive 3rd to Songster and Too Much Bling by June, on the Belmont Stakes undercard. Before years end, Fabulous Strike would run a 119 Beyer, Beattie made this gelding the fastest figure 3-year-old in a strong crop that included Discreet Cat, Bernardini, and Barbaro.

Here's a closer work at the early stages of this surely fine piece of training.



Also note the trainer stats of his I underlined. He was 40-for-100 (40% wins) on the year, at the time. Sadly, he only managed to win at a 32% clip by years end, while making over 300 starts.

* Now we get to my favorite, Stephanie Beattie! Her statistical profile defies all logic---and the more I look at it, the more I wonder if she posses magical powers...or, perhaps possibly might be the female Jesus.

She also only managed to win at a 32% clip last year, BUT, she did so at Charles Town...meaning she did so racing almost exclusively against 10 horse fields. No easy task!

As you can clearly see, the last 949 horses to run for this lady have produced a truly MIND-BOGGLING 21% profit on the betting dollar. When you consider the sample size and the profit...it's beyond remarkable..it's almost impossible.



And it's not like a few 70/1 shots made the ROI stats misleading. She shows a flat bet profit in all three ranges of odds. With short priced horses, with mid-priced horses, and with longshots.

Now, I'm no fool. I've seen these stats a while ago and was excited about the oppertunity to profit from them. However, They bet these Beattie horses off-the-board and I just can't bring myself to betting on a horse who looks to be GROSSLY overbet on form....and yet the beat goes on for them.

Not only do they sharply improve new horses...but their horses often seem to improve with each subsequent start until something physically goes wrong. It's truly incredible.

Todd is winning at a 36% clip and showing a 16% flat bet profit over the last 90 days. Steph is winning at a 38% clip and showing a 21% flat bet profit over the last 90 days...and you just can't bring yourself to betting their horses because they appear so over-bet.

And it's not like you can just single them in P3's and clean up that way, they run at tracks that don't offer attractive multi-win exotics with big enough pools sizes.

Unless you are the kind of bettor who can back a seemingly overbet horse, solely on the basis of a trainers last name, the Beatties can't help you make money from a betting standpoint.

However, Todd and Steph have been polite enough to stay out of the spotlight...and not go to a major circuit and make genuinely good horseman look like pure incompetents in comparison to them. They are also both listed as reps for the Pennsylvania HBPA. I'm sure they are related in some way, perhaps husband and wife.

However, even as we know so little about these two, as they have kept such a low-profile, I think we still have to ask and answer the following question: Are these two really good for the sport?

I personally don't think so. Don't get me wrong, for all I know, they may be great people who've never had a bad test...however, what they are doing defies all logic.