Big stables less dominant recently?

[Danno]

Hardly a siginificant difference at all - in fact it might be worse. Did you think for a second that the meet on 03/03 was the ID final where the winner was trained by Gary Hall from WA, the Chariots winner was trained by Cran Dalgety from NZ, the Oaks winner by Dean Braun from Vic and the Derby winner by John Justice from Vic.

Those 4 trainers would hardly have had a horse at Menangle outside that meet.

If we take those 4 winners out, you have 32 races won by 26 tainers as opposed to 34 races won by 25 trainers... Massive difference?? I dont think so...

As the saying goes, never let the facts get in the way of a good story. Whilst I was in Syd a few weeks ago, i was being told daily about all these trainers that had positive swabs to all sorts of substances, including one well know trainer to snake venom. Supposedly there were up to 50 positive swabs. Well, almost 4 weeks on and absolutely none of the rumours have as yet been confirmed as true.

Is our industry totally clean? Absolutely not, but I genuinely do not believe that cheating is as widespread as rumoured. Further, I dont believe its the big stables that are the most likely cheaters. its more likely to be in the smaller stables, where significant improvers wont be identified as easily.

PS - I have horses with many trainers. Not all in one camp. Besides McCarthy, I have horses with Andy Gath, Maree Caldow, Jayne Davies, Wayne Potter, Russell Jack, Dean Braun...

Geez forgive me Harvey,

I must be dreaming again! I take 6 or 7 minutes to look at some results randomly to re-affirm an observation........and I get a response from you about the "most likely cheaters. its more likely to be in the smaller stables, where significant improvers wont be identified as easily"

and something to the effect ", i was being told daily about all these trainers that had positive swabs to all sorts of substances, including one well know trainer to snake venom."

Harvey, my observations were not just around Menangle, or NSW for that matter, there is ( like it or not) a current trend towards a widening gap in the trainers stakes, whereas in more recent times the winners were coming from a more compressed set of trainers.



an old wise man told me once... there are 3 types of intelligence,

1) those that are intelligent.

2) those that think they are.

3) and those that are so dumb they think they are more intelligent than those around them.

[mightymo]

Dan

You made the initial comments about "big stables being less dominant". I said I disagreed. You attempted to provide evidence, but that was actually shown to not prove your statement.

Show me some facts and I will be happy to say Im wrong, but the bottom line is that in recent times the majority of trainers outed for drug offences are not big stables. McCarthy, Fitzpatrick, Turnbull etc were not the ones involved. Rather it was the smaller trainers.

[Danno]

Harvey,

I am not going to waste any more of my time,

you must be right, I must therefore be an idiot

totals 36 races won by 30 trainers


totals 34 races won by 25 trainers.

Many years ago I worked with a "white" south african bloke, he was a smart bloke except for when you disagreed with him..... and then he became a different bloke altogether he was then a "my way or the highway" fella to deal with.

Cheers,
Dan

[mightymo]

Harvey,

I am not going to waste any more of my time,

you must be right, I must therefore be an idiot

totals 36 races won by 30 trainers


totals 34 races won by 25 trainers.

Many years ago I worked with a "white" south african bloke, he was a smart bloke except for when you disagreed with him..... and then he became a different bloke altogether he was then a "my way or the highway" fella to deal with.

Cheers,
Dan

I dont know how else to spell this out. If (and i have shown that I disagree) we take your stats on face value, that still doesnt show that "BIG stables are less dominant". What I have tried to show you is that I believe its the smaller stables who may have had 2 or 3 winners, that may now have had only 1 winner.

I genuinely dont believe that there have been any"big stables that have been less dominant"

Feel free to provide any evidence...

PS - how do you define "big" stables?I can only think of a handful of trainers(at best), so it shouldnt be too hard for you to bring up the evidence

[Lenem]

Harvey,

I am not going to waste any more of my time,

you must be right, I must therefore be an idiot

totals 36 races won by 30 trainers


totals 34 races won by 25 trainers.

Many years ago I worked with a "white" south african bloke, he was a smart bloke except for when you disagreed with him..... and then he became a different bloke altogether he was then a "my way or the highway" fella to deal with.

Cheers,
Dan

I find it hard to believe that anyone could believe for one second that this "statistic" could arouse any sort of suspicion.The two periods you have chosen are not representative (in statistical terms) of anything and even if we were to ignore that major flaw in your "theory" the difference is so small as to be insignificant.