Hello bpressey
Great info via your links. I have been a big fan of Tom Ivers training methods for years (they just make sense). You present some very strong, valid, and interesting points. I too feel that Comma to the Top is definitely a contender.
Bill
Haskin's Derby Dozen
Moderators: Roguelet, hpkingjr, WaveMaster
-
Bill from WA
- Breeder's Cup Contender
- Posts: 1936
- Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 11:20 am
- Location: Mountlake Terrace, WA
Thank you Bill from WA-
Ivers was way ahead of his time with some stuff, although with the advances and technology we have now - we can easier specify what does and doesn't work in each individual.
My next project involves illustrating how physiological paramaters during exercise show us if the genetic components we are striving for are present in the equine athlete.
Here is a link to a genetic paper illustrating what I have been talking about on here: http://nicholnl.wcp.muohio.edu/dingosbr ... fGaits.pdf
Pages 458-460 are the most informative.
Ivers was way ahead of his time with some stuff, although with the advances and technology we have now - we can easier specify what does and doesn't work in each individual.
My next project involves illustrating how physiological paramaters during exercise show us if the genetic components we are striving for are present in the equine athlete.
Here is a link to a genetic paper illustrating what I have been talking about on here: http://nicholnl.wcp.muohio.edu/dingosbr ... fGaits.pdf
Pages 458-460 are the most informative.
bpressey wrote:
Lookin At Lucky went from synthetic to dirt surfaces/trained on synthetic ran on dirt surfaces his entire career. He won the Preakness, Haskell, Indiana Derby, The Rebel and was 4th in the Classic. He shipped back to HP to train on synthetic after the Preakness and won the Haskell. Shipped back to Holly and won the Indiana Derby and shipped back to Holly and ran 4th in the Classic.. I'm too lazy to identify other examples. Needless to say your above statement is erroneous.
Regarding Comma, I will stand on my statement that the colt cannot get a mile and a quarter under any trainer and any training method. This is based on my experience of watching colts on the Derby trail for the last 40 years.
No one has ever prepped exclusively on one surface and shined on the other at 3.
Lookin At Lucky went from synthetic to dirt surfaces/trained on synthetic ran on dirt surfaces his entire career. He won the Preakness, Haskell, Indiana Derby, The Rebel and was 4th in the Classic. He shipped back to HP to train on synthetic after the Preakness and won the Haskell. Shipped back to Holly and won the Indiana Derby and shipped back to Holly and ran 4th in the Classic.. I'm too lazy to identify other examples. Needless to say your above statement is erroneous.
Regarding Comma, I will stand on my statement that the colt cannot get a mile and a quarter under any trainer and any training method. This is based on my experience of watching colts on the Derby trail for the last 40 years.
"Politicians should be limited to two terms, one in office and another in jail." Anonymous
Looking at Lucky ran at Oaklawn prior to his Derby effort. Similarly, he prepped at Indiana Downs before entering the BC.
Baffert learned his lesson after a few failures and was quoted somewhere stating as such. Closest he got was Pioneer of the Nile I believe with striclty synth preps and works.
I hope I typed 'exclusively' when mentioning synth to dirt, because that is what I meant.
Baffert learned his lesson after a few failures and was quoted somewhere stating as such. Closest he got was Pioneer of the Nile I believe with striclty synth preps and works.
I hope I typed 'exclusively' when mentioning synth to dirt, because that is what I meant.
"No one has ever prepped exclusively on one surface and shined on the other at 3."
Zinn you can be lazy all you wish, because you cannot find any examples to refute this statement of mine. Once they have been on dirt in KY for the first time, my quote above is no longer relevant.
Zinn you can be lazy all you wish, because you cannot find any examples to refute this statement of mine. Once they have been on dirt in KY for the first time, my quote above is no longer relevant.
Last edited by bpressey on Wed Feb 09, 2011 10:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
Bill from WA
- Breeder's Cup Contender
- Posts: 1936
- Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 11:20 am
- Location: Mountlake Terrace, WA
I love this time of year, and enjoy the respectful exchange between thoroughbred enthusiasts. This is great fun.
Good luck to all, regardless of your methodology.
Bill
Good luck to all, regardless of your methodology.
Bill
Last edited by Bill from WA on Wed Feb 09, 2011 10:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
Hold fast to dreams, for if dreams die, life is like a broken winged bird that cannot fly.
Langston Hughes
Langston Hughes
-
bdw0617
- Darley line
- Posts: 9206
- Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 10:19 pm
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
- Contact:
Honestly, I question if he got a mile and a 16th. just because he won the race doesn't mean he relished the distance, he just relished it more than anyone else in that race. He looked like drunken master coming home in that race.zinn21 wrote:bpressey wrote:No one has ever prepped exclusively on one surface and shined on the other at 3.
Lookin At Lucky went from synthetic to dirt surfaces/trained on synthetic ran on dirt surfaces his entire career. He won the Preakness, Haskell, Indiana Derby, The Rebel and was 4th in the Classic. He shipped back to HP to train on synthetic after the Preakness and won the Haskell. Shipped back to Holly and won the Indiana Derby and shipped back to Holly and ran 4th in the Classic.. I'm too lazy to identify other examples. Needless to say your above statement is erroneous.
Regarding Comma, I will stand on my statement that the colt cannot get a mile and a quarter under any trainer and any training method. This is based on my experience of watching colts on the Derby trail for the last 40 years.
"When the solution is simple, God is answering.”
- Einstein
- Einstein
bd wrote:
That's reading a race between the lines. Excellent insight.
Honestly, I question if he got a mile and a 16th. just because he won the race doesn't mean he relished the distance, he just relished it more than anyone else in that race. He looked like drunken master coming home in that race.
That's reading a race between the lines. Excellent insight.
"Politicians should be limited to two terms, one in office and another in jail." Anonymous
He spent 20+ minutes in the paddock as 2 separate blacksmiths tried in vain to replace a lost shoe before the CashCall.
There was no such struggle at 1 and 1/16 a few months earlier when he started from the outside post, darted to the rail at the turn, opened up by 9 and cruised home by 6+ with a 95 Beyer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFLnUb4nv3s
There was no such struggle at 1 and 1/16 a few months earlier when he started from the outside post, darted to the rail at the turn, opened up by 9 and cruised home by 6+ with a 95 Beyer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFLnUb4nv3s
-
Whirlaway
- Grade III Winner
- Posts: 1146
- Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 9:27 pm
- Location: Home of the brave.
I did take a look at the video and NO doubt, he looked like he was breezing in that race - as the announcer said, "fast early, fast late." When the others came to him, he was game and shook em' off but he did look kinda small, reminded me of Chiefs Crown - anyway, like it or not, this horse can scamper! I say he makes the dirt transition, no sweat. And by the way, he is a Dual Qualifier possessing Dominant Classicity.
~
bpressey,
I've read most of the posts at your blog, haven't got to the Edge stuff yet - looks like the scientific approach to conditioning is some interesting and compelling stuff. Will it be the case that some day in the near future trainers will stop guessing at what condition there horse is in and be able to review a data set and know for sure? I believe you're on to something here and those in the industry will appreciate the scientific approach - can we stop guessing already!
I've got this inquisitive mind, so here come the questions.
You wrote, "Trainer Peter Miller assured me that Comma would race on dirt once prior to the Santa Anita Derby, and also train on the surface repeatedly in March."
Interesting information. NO doubt you must know Mr. Miller. Have you had your hardware hooked up to Comma to the Top and if so what is his V200 class? How do those numbers compare to the same type of horse running on dirt? Does your data set allow you to make projections for distance? Can you project the V200 class at 8.5 furlongs out to 10 or 12 furlongs?
~
You wrote, "I long for the day someone trains and races an Uncle Mo like Comma to the Top – because that is what I think would create a monster for the ages – like what happened 3 times in the decade of the 70’s."
Do you believe Mr. Miller would train Comma to the Top the same way were he a colt?
~
I read some quotes by Dr. Bramladge that have always stuck with me, I believe they were in the Bloodhorse under Talkin' Horses, where he said and I paraphrase, breeding for speed has caused the bones of the thoroughbred to become lighter. My question is: How can you expect to train a 21st century thoroughbred the same way as they trained the thoroughbred of the early 20th century? AS the Thoroughbred has evolved so must the conditioning. If you train an Uncle Mo like you would train and Assault or Citation, wouldn't Uncle Mo' and his types crumble under the stress of the conditioning?
~
bpressey,
I've read most of the posts at your blog, haven't got to the Edge stuff yet - looks like the scientific approach to conditioning is some interesting and compelling stuff. Will it be the case that some day in the near future trainers will stop guessing at what condition there horse is in and be able to review a data set and know for sure? I believe you're on to something here and those in the industry will appreciate the scientific approach - can we stop guessing already!
I've got this inquisitive mind, so here come the questions.
You wrote, "Trainer Peter Miller assured me that Comma would race on dirt once prior to the Santa Anita Derby, and also train on the surface repeatedly in March."
Interesting information. NO doubt you must know Mr. Miller. Have you had your hardware hooked up to Comma to the Top and if so what is his V200 class? How do those numbers compare to the same type of horse running on dirt? Does your data set allow you to make projections for distance? Can you project the V200 class at 8.5 furlongs out to 10 or 12 furlongs?
~
You wrote, "I long for the day someone trains and races an Uncle Mo like Comma to the Top – because that is what I think would create a monster for the ages – like what happened 3 times in the decade of the 70’s."
Do you believe Mr. Miller would train Comma to the Top the same way were he a colt?
~
I read some quotes by Dr. Bramladge that have always stuck with me, I believe they were in the Bloodhorse under Talkin' Horses, where he said and I paraphrase, breeding for speed has caused the bones of the thoroughbred to become lighter. My question is: How can you expect to train a 21st century thoroughbred the same way as they trained the thoroughbred of the early 20th century? AS the Thoroughbred has evolved so must the conditioning. If you train an Uncle Mo like you would train and Assault or Citation, wouldn't Uncle Mo' and his types crumble under the stress of the conditioning?
Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. - William O. Douglas
~
It is the characteristic of the most stringent censorships, that they give credibility to the opinions they attack. - Voltaire
~
It is the characteristic of the most stringent censorships, that they give credibility to the opinions they attack. - Voltaire
Whirlaway-
Nope, most trainers will never change – at least not the big names in the US. Cot Campbell said it best: “The horse is less durable today. We now have seen dramatic technological advances in veterinary medicine, but no commensurate results to show for them. The most popular trainers used to campaign no more than 30-40 horses. He would tend to work them every four days, then run them once every week or ten days for awhile and then rest them, and some would go into winter quarters. Not much cold weather racing. Used to be more sport, less business.”
Maybe only if someone else has success with lower pedigreed stock for a few years, but I just can’t envision it. But that is OK, because I feel taking my approach can be an edge for the little guy, and I’d hate to see that disappear. I liken it to Beyer figures, regardless of what we think of their veracity, the moment DRF made sure everyone had them, their ‘edge’ was seriously eroded. Besides, you cannot train like the old guys who had 30 head in front of them every morning, if now you have 200 spread out over 4 strings around the country.
I try not to appear to criticize modern conditioning practices too much, because that would make me a hypocrite. To each his own, but I feel we should emulate the exercise regimens of Allan Jerkens, Preston Burch, Max Hirsch, Ben Jones, etc. rather than those of today’s supertrainers. I feel that is what wins races and keeps horses sound longer.
I do not know Mr. Miller at all, but I did send him an email begging him to get to the dirt in training as soon as possible. He replied that he planned to do so, but he was committed to this GG start on Saturday as the most favorable (easiest) path to that Preakness $5.5 million bonus. After this weekend, it is on to dirt training, another dirt prep, and the SA Derby. If Santa Anita was still synthetic, I doubt I would ever have trumpeted Comma to the Top as much as I have.
So no V200 info on this gelding, and you are 100% correct in assuming that those numbers differ according to surface. Mainly this is noted in breezes. For instance, a horse breezing 4F on dirt in :50 shows the same heart rate recovery of a similarly able horse breezing 6F on Polytrack at Keeneland. This jibes with the work of the synthetic lobbyists who show concussion forces on synth as being 50% of that on dirt. This further reinforces the landmark Nunamaker Shin Study that found stronger bone development when training on dirt at 2, versus more forgiving wood chips.
I have not yet tried to equate these numbers with suitable distance projections, for some reason my gut tells me that won’t hold the level of predictability that I would deem comfortable. But, I look forward someday to proving myself wrong! It won’t be the first time.
As far as Comma being a gelding, I think he would still be trained the same since he was only a $20k purchase to begin with, and this trainer has been similarly aggressive with others of this type. But, if you give Uncle Mo to Mr. Miller, I bet he more than likely resembles Pletcher in his conditioning/racing practices. It’s pretty simple: most horsemen think that an Uncle Mo is so blessed that he doesn’t need to train or race much, and I feel the polar opposite: that it is this obvious genetic advantage that makes him require even more conditioning – otherwise he is at a greater than average chance of injury – precisely because of his amazing physical gifts that could possibly overwhelm his physiological systems, chief among them his bone density and tendon strength.
Addressing the ‘bred for speed’ question. The TDN Finley piece ‘Do we Need a Sturdier Racehorse?’ addressed this from many angles, suffice it to say – many geneticists are not convinced that you can change breeding practices over 80 years and elicit any such fundamental change as less sound bones. They believe, as do I, that the perceived weakness is more a result of a ‘management’ change – which I believe Cot Campbell summed up quite nicely in the above quote. Bramlage in here also speaks out in favor of the Nunamaker Shins protocol, which causes for speed 2x per week in 2 year olds - so he implicitly agrees with my point here: that nurture (conditioning) can help fix perceived problems due to nature (breeding).
Hell, in the 30’s trainers were also claiming that breeders were turning out unsound stock, it’s an easy excuse to make and absolves one of further reponsibility.
To better get my point across: I do not believe you can take an Uncle Mo and throw an Assault conditioning program on him blindly.
However, I do believe Mo’s exercise should be related to his current level of physiological ability, not because of a supposed inherent weakness. Every time that colt sees the track, every step should be monitored via onboard HR/GPS gear, and blood lactate should be drawn at recommended intervals (this is not traditional bloodwork). This data should be analyzed daily and provide some input for future conditioning decisions. This is a potential $50 million horse we are taking about!
Furthermore, I believe every tool we have to get sore horses to run should be used on him in a proactive manner: massage, stretching, hyperbaric chamber treatments, etc. Simply put, if he today breezes 4F in :50 and his HR drops to below 120bpm in 2min and 80bpm in 5 minutes, he is ready to move forward. If not, he is not. Horses condition themselves, it’s just that many of these signals are invisible to the naked eye, therefore Pletcher waits his well-defined 7 days regardless.
If Pletcher and his ilk were turning out TBs that could run the Derby in 2:01 or better, I would have no legs to stand on. Trotters in the Hambo are 12sec faster than they were in 1950, while thoroughbreds have improved 2sec in this time frame. Standardbreds, to my knowledge, condition and race quite a bit more aggressively than our Derby hopefuls. I see a correlation there, but many do not.
In summary, I am not naïve enough to think I have the solution for a 50% injury rate for the last 25 BC Juvenile winners, but I think my way would cut that to 25%. I also don’t think you can consistently condition a claimer and turn him into a stakes winner – even though Miller seems to have accomplished that thus far.
Thank you very much for the thought-provoking questions Whirlaway.
I just can't shut my trap, one last comment: 4F breezes do not make a Derby winner, miles in 1:40-1:50 do that task. When you have too much of the former, and not enough of the latter, you get more than your share of injuries.
Nope, most trainers will never change – at least not the big names in the US. Cot Campbell said it best: “The horse is less durable today. We now have seen dramatic technological advances in veterinary medicine, but no commensurate results to show for them. The most popular trainers used to campaign no more than 30-40 horses. He would tend to work them every four days, then run them once every week or ten days for awhile and then rest them, and some would go into winter quarters. Not much cold weather racing. Used to be more sport, less business.”
Maybe only if someone else has success with lower pedigreed stock for a few years, but I just can’t envision it. But that is OK, because I feel taking my approach can be an edge for the little guy, and I’d hate to see that disappear. I liken it to Beyer figures, regardless of what we think of their veracity, the moment DRF made sure everyone had them, their ‘edge’ was seriously eroded. Besides, you cannot train like the old guys who had 30 head in front of them every morning, if now you have 200 spread out over 4 strings around the country.
I try not to appear to criticize modern conditioning practices too much, because that would make me a hypocrite. To each his own, but I feel we should emulate the exercise regimens of Allan Jerkens, Preston Burch, Max Hirsch, Ben Jones, etc. rather than those of today’s supertrainers. I feel that is what wins races and keeps horses sound longer.
I do not know Mr. Miller at all, but I did send him an email begging him to get to the dirt in training as soon as possible. He replied that he planned to do so, but he was committed to this GG start on Saturday as the most favorable (easiest) path to that Preakness $5.5 million bonus. After this weekend, it is on to dirt training, another dirt prep, and the SA Derby. If Santa Anita was still synthetic, I doubt I would ever have trumpeted Comma to the Top as much as I have.
So no V200 info on this gelding, and you are 100% correct in assuming that those numbers differ according to surface. Mainly this is noted in breezes. For instance, a horse breezing 4F on dirt in :50 shows the same heart rate recovery of a similarly able horse breezing 6F on Polytrack at Keeneland. This jibes with the work of the synthetic lobbyists who show concussion forces on synth as being 50% of that on dirt. This further reinforces the landmark Nunamaker Shin Study that found stronger bone development when training on dirt at 2, versus more forgiving wood chips.
I have not yet tried to equate these numbers with suitable distance projections, for some reason my gut tells me that won’t hold the level of predictability that I would deem comfortable. But, I look forward someday to proving myself wrong! It won’t be the first time.
As far as Comma being a gelding, I think he would still be trained the same since he was only a $20k purchase to begin with, and this trainer has been similarly aggressive with others of this type. But, if you give Uncle Mo to Mr. Miller, I bet he more than likely resembles Pletcher in his conditioning/racing practices. It’s pretty simple: most horsemen think that an Uncle Mo is so blessed that he doesn’t need to train or race much, and I feel the polar opposite: that it is this obvious genetic advantage that makes him require even more conditioning – otherwise he is at a greater than average chance of injury – precisely because of his amazing physical gifts that could possibly overwhelm his physiological systems, chief among them his bone density and tendon strength.
Addressing the ‘bred for speed’ question. The TDN Finley piece ‘Do we Need a Sturdier Racehorse?’ addressed this from many angles, suffice it to say – many geneticists are not convinced that you can change breeding practices over 80 years and elicit any such fundamental change as less sound bones. They believe, as do I, that the perceived weakness is more a result of a ‘management’ change – which I believe Cot Campbell summed up quite nicely in the above quote. Bramlage in here also speaks out in favor of the Nunamaker Shins protocol, which causes for speed 2x per week in 2 year olds - so he implicitly agrees with my point here: that nurture (conditioning) can help fix perceived problems due to nature (breeding).
Hell, in the 30’s trainers were also claiming that breeders were turning out unsound stock, it’s an easy excuse to make and absolves one of further reponsibility.
To better get my point across: I do not believe you can take an Uncle Mo and throw an Assault conditioning program on him blindly.
However, I do believe Mo’s exercise should be related to his current level of physiological ability, not because of a supposed inherent weakness. Every time that colt sees the track, every step should be monitored via onboard HR/GPS gear, and blood lactate should be drawn at recommended intervals (this is not traditional bloodwork). This data should be analyzed daily and provide some input for future conditioning decisions. This is a potential $50 million horse we are taking about!
Furthermore, I believe every tool we have to get sore horses to run should be used on him in a proactive manner: massage, stretching, hyperbaric chamber treatments, etc. Simply put, if he today breezes 4F in :50 and his HR drops to below 120bpm in 2min and 80bpm in 5 minutes, he is ready to move forward. If not, he is not. Horses condition themselves, it’s just that many of these signals are invisible to the naked eye, therefore Pletcher waits his well-defined 7 days regardless.
If Pletcher and his ilk were turning out TBs that could run the Derby in 2:01 or better, I would have no legs to stand on. Trotters in the Hambo are 12sec faster than they were in 1950, while thoroughbreds have improved 2sec in this time frame. Standardbreds, to my knowledge, condition and race quite a bit more aggressively than our Derby hopefuls. I see a correlation there, but many do not.
In summary, I am not naïve enough to think I have the solution for a 50% injury rate for the last 25 BC Juvenile winners, but I think my way would cut that to 25%. I also don’t think you can consistently condition a claimer and turn him into a stakes winner – even though Miller seems to have accomplished that thus far.
Thank you very much for the thought-provoking questions Whirlaway.
I just can't shut my trap, one last comment: 4F breezes do not make a Derby winner, miles in 1:40-1:50 do that task. When you have too much of the former, and not enough of the latter, you get more than your share of injuries.
bpressey wrote:Whirlaway-
Nope, most trainers will never change – at least not the big names in the US. Cot Campbell said it best: “The horse is less durable today. We now have seen dramatic technological advances in veterinary medicine, but no commensurate results to show for them. The most popular trainers used to campaign no more than 30-40 horses. He would tend to work them every four days, then run them once every week or ten days for awhile and then rest them, and some would go into winter quarters. Not much cold weather racing. Used to be more sport, less business.”
Addressing the ‘bred for speed’ question. The TDN Finley piece ‘Do we Need a Sturdier Racehorse?’ addressed this from many angles, suffice it to say – many geneticists are not convinced that you can change breeding practices over 80 years and elicit any such fundamental change as less sound bones. They believe, as do I, that the perceived weakness is more a result of a ‘management’ change – which I believe Cot Campbell summed up quite nicely in the above quote. Bramlage in here also speaks out in favor of the Nunamaker Shins protocol, which causes for speed 2x per week in 2 year olds - so he implicitly agrees with my point here: that nurture (conditioning) can help fix perceived problems due to nature (breeding).
Hell, in the 30’s trainers were also claiming that breeders were turning out unsound stock, it’s an easy excuse to make and absolves one of further reponsibility.
I think horses today can be sound for long racing careers. Bloodlines make a difference, but I wouldn't stereotype the entire TB breed as fragile. I concur that management has a great impact - feed, excercise/turnout, stall time, training.
Since so many races are carded at 6F now, where is the incentive to put a really solid base on a horse? By solid base, I mean the sort a steeplechase horse, old-school 3-day event horse, or even an endurance horse? Why do flat race trainers not benchmark other equine disciplines where sound, older horses are more the norm? It is often said that a tired racehorse is more likely to get injured in a race. Why not have a horse fit for a 2 miles race and run them at a mile - seems more likley today to have them fit for a mile and try to get 10 furlongs out of them.
Obviously, this is sidetracking from the original topic. I have quite a few Derby hopefuls I am watching this year. I hope some are around for us to see after this year; as a fan, I like to follow a horse through a career, not just a few race campaign.
bp wrote:
What race were you watching? He won by a length and three quarters and ran the last sixteenth in 7 1/5. He was staggering.
Most horses are over trained and break down due to over stress. But I encourage you to pony up and show us all how it's done. Your regimen sounds similar to the Ivers interval training methods.
I am all for sounder well conditioned equine athletes but doubt that an Ivers type of training regimen will work. Perhaps you and your backers will get it done. We shall see.
There was no such struggle at 1 and 1/16 a few months earlier when he started from the outside post, darted to the rail at the turn, opened up by 9 and cruised home by 6+ with a 95 Beyer.
What race were you watching? He won by a length and three quarters and ran the last sixteenth in 7 1/5. He was staggering.
I just can't shut my trap, one last comment: 4F breezes do not make a Derby winner, miles in 1:40-1:50 do that task. When you have too much of the former, and not enough of the latter, you get more than your share of injuries.
Most horses are over trained and break down due to over stress. But I encourage you to pony up and show us all how it's done. Your regimen sounds similar to the Ivers interval training methods.
I am all for sounder well conditioned equine athletes but doubt that an Ivers type of training regimen will work. Perhaps you and your backers will get it done. We shall see.
"Politicians should be limited to two terms, one in office and another in jail." Anonymous
I included the link above, watch it. It's the Real Quiet Stakes a few weeks before the CashCall Futurity which you have rightfully criticized, Whirlaway found it just fine. Again, here it is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFLnUb4nv3s
If you didn't take the time to click on that youtube link in your rush to criticize me, I feel we are miles apart in many ways.
If you call 'overtrained' 4F breezes every 7 days, that is another example of how different we think.
Here is a link to a successful interval training program I consulted on that turned a $7,500 claimer into a $50,000 claimer in 5 months at Churchill Downs. In those 5 months this gelding raced 9 times and won 7 - including two separate 1.5 mile races by 29 lengths total. I have included PPs for proof:
http://horsetrainingscience.blogspot.co ... h-pps.html
Lukas had him and like many others, failed to maximize his potential.
He is the one horse that my data showed could benefit from IT, and Jay was the one trainer willing to try something new. His new trainers have set him back 3 years with conventional training.
I also personally know that in Ireland, Frank Dunne took a filly literally out of a pasture and interval trained her to win 2 graded stakes in 4 days at Ascot, and followed up later with a win in the Japan Cup.
Ivers and I are similar, yet different in that we now have the technology to accurately measure who can, and cannot, benefit from such a regimen.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFLnUb4nv3s
If you didn't take the time to click on that youtube link in your rush to criticize me, I feel we are miles apart in many ways.
If you call 'overtrained' 4F breezes every 7 days, that is another example of how different we think.
Here is a link to a successful interval training program I consulted on that turned a $7,500 claimer into a $50,000 claimer in 5 months at Churchill Downs. In those 5 months this gelding raced 9 times and won 7 - including two separate 1.5 mile races by 29 lengths total. I have included PPs for proof:
http://horsetrainingscience.blogspot.co ... h-pps.html
Lukas had him and like many others, failed to maximize his potential.
He is the one horse that my data showed could benefit from IT, and Jay was the one trainer willing to try something new. His new trainers have set him back 3 years with conventional training.
I also personally know that in Ireland, Frank Dunne took a filly literally out of a pasture and interval trained her to win 2 graded stakes in 4 days at Ascot, and followed up later with a win in the Japan Cup.
Ivers and I are similar, yet different in that we now have the technology to accurately measure who can, and cannot, benefit from such a regimen.