Reality Check For the McCarthy Paranoia!!!

[Old Frank]

Of course some of lukes horse are going to start coming back to the field. They will get up to high in their grades, but guess what will happen than? He's put a lot of extra cash in a lot of good owners pockets so they will duly go out and buy him another horse just as good on a low mark and he will more than likely do the same job as before. The success he's had already will ensure that he has a good turnover of stock regulary and as I've said before, he's not stupid, if they can't go thru their grades he won't hold onto them foe long, that's probably the biggest reason in my opinion why he's so fa ahead is because he is a great judge of a horse. All you whinging whining sooks out there that hate to see someone succeed don't see the behind the scenes were luke may have a horse that doesn't go an good and he simply sacks it. A lot of other stables will keep them horses because at the end of every month they get a nice cheque. Yes a lot of trainers bull shit owners and farm horses for the fees. In my opinion that's were Luke is so far ahead, he's smarter.

Great post and some absolute spot on comments, well said.

[Danno]

Edited

Steady on brenno, I'm not convinced that's within the Disney realm, remember to play nice! Do you think the "context" argument will stack up?

[zipzap]

Edited

You are the lowest form of a human, what a disgusting post by a gutless Animal. you should be barred for this post its out of order.to say im angry is a understatement you low life coward.

[racefair]

Do you know Racefair, I genuinally don't believe Luke is improving horses to the level you or others are insinuating. In a generalised view, your all insinuating he has sent these horses off the charts, yet in my view, it's simply a case of a stable in a 'purple patch'.

How come he doesn't win every race? He had no winners Tuesday just gone, so where's the improvement?

I don't know you from a bar of soap, but I assume your an industry man and if not, you've still probably heard the term on race coverage at times 'hit their mark', well maybe the majority of McCarthy's team through the first part of the stables season success may be ready 'to hit their mark' and not carry on their winning percentages in the back half of the season?

Horses transfer from trainer to trainer, always have, always will and like all situations, some acheive success and some don't, that's life. I've seen horses leave 'top trainers' and do a great job elsewhere as much as I've seen them leave top trainers and go no good. I've asked this question before, maybe the horses that have left 'top trainers' to come to Luke are only running up to the ability potential they showed elsewhere, yet because the horse transferred to him at the right time he's enjoying the benefits of the horse on the right mark and at the right time and the horse is now running to it's maximum ability. Improvement could come with Luke's better driving as in my opinion, he's got the lot covered at Menangle by a long way.

Some smart ass on here the other day tried to insinuate Luke's success using and comparing to the 'Lou Pena' scenario yet that's vastly different (and bullshit!), Luke isn't taking 1.52 and 1.53 type claimers and within 1-2 weeks having them back at the Meadowlands winning in 1.48 and change in better class company!!! That is a complete and utter farce and that simply isn't the case here with McCarthy's results.

Comments made on here also have referred to the times they are running. Gentleman as a whole, get with the program, it's 2012, not 1967 Robin Dundee 2.00 Miracle Miles. Menangle has changed the dimension of racing and our thought process has to completely about face and accept that if you have a horse now and it can't go 1.53 for a mile at Menangle, it won't do the job for you.

I am only generalising again, but the majority of racing at HP used to be 2100m so acceptable mile rates of 1.58/1.59 were considered good going. Now a 2300m event goes a lot quicker so it's only logical that a 1600m event will be quicker again. From what I see and I could be wrong, mile racing is more dominant than ever at Menangle so our base platform for assessment is vastly different.

You made dismissive comments about Luke's facilities and the contribution they would have to his success. Well Bart Cummings always said a "happy horse is a good horse" so if Luke makes the horses feel better through great facilities, both in training and for resting well it can only help I would assume? You further questioned as to don't all trainers have access to all this? Well in actual fact, no they don't.

I know a stack of trainers that train out of shit facilities, not worthy of training a dog to sit and generally complented with shit staff (stacked with weekend warriors!) and most of the time, have shit stock in the first instance that wouldn't be able to compete with quality stock that Luke receives and subsequently turns out. I would also hazard a guess that Luke cull's them at home pretty quickly or with maybe only a trial or very limited starts if he feels that won't stack up to his requirements, hence his percentages of winners / place getters should always be strong. (What's the old adage, how do you make a slow horse fast - put it on the float!)

Smaller trainers will punch around their stock all the time as they need the training fees, (I have personally heard some say these very comments) so fundamentally their pinching money from their owners, yet the horse is limited in ability or already have hit it's mark. Trainers using this methodology only play into the hands of guy's like McCarthy or a Fitzpatricks also who have horses consistently on the 'up' or 'improve'. They have a big galloping trainers mentaility to a degree and overall very happy owners as they don't abuse the owners trust by wasting their money on a slow one, they sack it and allow the owner the opportunity to source a new one. Slow horses and bullshit trainers are what driver owners away, not winning trainers such as Luke. There wouldn't be an owner in Luke's barn upset one iota I could safely assume!

I think everyone's got carried away with Luke's so-called 'improvement', yet I actually feel his success is down to numerous contributing factors (methods, feed, training facilities, quality staff working towards the common goal, quality/right horses / right mark / driving, etc, etc) all coming together for him and now consistently working well.

Hi Nathan, thanks for your detailed response. I'll do my best to respond to all replies.
1. I haven't before contributed to any forum and as such am not aware of rules and etiquette. If there are any on this forum then can someone highlight them for me and then I'll decide whether to contribute or not going forward.
2.
Post #31 you comment about being "disrespectful to all current trainers and those of the past", yet aren't you taking quite the hypocritical position yourself of disrespecting Luke by casting aspersion and innuendo on Luke's results from being anything but performance enhancing based?
If that's what you call my comments around the reasons for LM's improvements/results, then yes I am. Most trainers use drugs/treatments on their horses for a variety of reasons. I.e. to get them to perform to their ability, to help them recover, to calm them down etc. Some drugs are legal, some are illegal and some are undetectable. They have different withdrawal times etc. Others are better placed to tell you more. It's no coincidence that LM's improvement/results are similar to that you'd get using PED's. If LM is as Professional as he appears and with the money at his disposal then, why wouldn't he research and use the best drugs/treatments on the market?
3.
Secondly, "innocent until proven guilty" is the age-old adage we have all grown up and is 'apparently' still what the law of society is based upon however listening to you and going by your position (and of others on here also), Luke is guilty until proven innocent.
I think that I've covered this in [2.] . I'm not a steward or the police. It's up to them to determine if anyone's drugs/treatments are legal, legal or undetectable.
4.
You keep asking everyone for vinidication as to Luke's success, yet this is only a deflection from yourself for not having any 'fact' yourself in which to refute his success.
I'm not sure what I'm deflecting or you mean? I'm answering every point and don't get much back until now.
5.
I have put forth numerous points in different threads I believe would help contribute to that success as producing winners takes numerous factors to come together consistently.
I've seen some of them Nathan, and if you did a controlled experiment and got a trainer to try any combination of them, then you'd find that they wouldn't get any where near the improvement that you're seeing. Show me any evidence/references of these numerous factors producing the type of improvements/results that we're seeing. They don't exist.
6.
I personally am an unabashed McCarthy fan and haven't hidden the fact, however I don't think his success is anything I haven't seen before either here in NSW or in other states.
David Aiken (absolute champion bloke and one of my all-time favourite trainers) trained more city winners in his prime, the Fitzpatricks followed and yes, McCarthy appears to be on his way to beating them, however he's not there yet so we can't comment on "what if's" scenario's. The Dixon's in Brisbane appear to churn out hundreds of winners also.
Where have you seen a 45-50% strike rate, $800,000 and 300 + winners in a few months? Look at LM versus Fitzpatrick now. Why the gap? Why do you have a prime in this industry? Shouldn't you get better and better with the more experience that you have?
7.
For anything we say or write however, it all still comes back to the original point - McCarthy's winning races, running what appears to be a tip-top operation, has no positive swabs issues or driving suspensions and is not involved in any race-fixing issues, yet jealous mugs want to dismiss his success and yes, if you wish to dispel his success, this is your right, but don't claim to base it on 'fact' when you a.) have none and b.) can't provide any to dispel any issues as we all currently are aware, are none.
What do you mean by dismiss his success? No one can dismiss it and I respect him immensely for it. I've described above and previously the facts that I've based my opinions on.
8.
Do you know Racefair, I genuinally don't believe Luke is improving horses to the level you or others are insinuating. In a generalised view, your all insinuating he has sent these horses off the charts, yet in my view, it's simply a case of a stable in a 'purple patch'.
This is nonsense Nathan. Look at Lettucerockyou in the Intercity Pace recently as an example. Others have provided countless others. It will be a long time until his horses start hitting their mark when there winning by +30metres.
9.
How come he doesn't win every race? He had no winners Tuesday just gone, so where's the improvement?
The horses won't improve infinitely. This is a silly question. We discussed his strike rates and improvement rate as being more than anything in history.
10.
I don't know you from a bar of soap, but I assume your an industry man and if not, you've still probably heard the term on race coverage at times 'hit their mark', well maybe the majority of McCarthy's team through the first part of the stables season success may be ready 'to hit their mark' and not carry on their winning percentages in the back half of the season?
Horses like Grand Stride who went sub 1.53 in a 3C0 recently have a long way before they hit their mark. I'm happy to bet that LM will get stronger. I only see him getting stronger.
11.
Horses transfer from trainer to trainer, always have, always will and like all situations, some acheive success and some don't, that's life. I've seen horses leave 'top trainers' and do a great job elsewhere as much as I've seen them leave top trainers and go no good. I've asked this question before, maybe the horses that have left 'top trainers' to come to Luke are only running up to the ability potential they showed elsewhere, yet because the horse transferred to him at the right time he's enjoying the benefits of the horse on the right mark and at the right time and the horse is now running to it's maximum ability. Improvement could come with Luke's better driving as in my opinion, he's got the lot covered at Menangle by a long way.
So then LM gets them at the right time every time? There is no doubt that LM is an exceptional driver however, I'm confident that most drivers would get the same results on his trained horses. Ashley Siejka didn't lose too many when Russo's stable was in a "purple patch". Same with Jim Douglas and Ian Wilson.
12.
You made dismissive comments about Luke's facilities and the contribution they would have to his success. Well Bart Cummings always said a "happy horse is a good horse" so if Luke makes the horses feel better through great facilities, both in training and for resting well it can only help I would assume? You further questioned as to don't all trainers have access to all this? Well in actual fact, no they don't.
What facilities don't other trainers have? Please give me some examples of what facilities can make such a difference? Does Bart Cummings have a strike rate near LM? We are only talking about horses and not a highly emotional teenager.
13.
Smaller trainers will punch around their stock all the time as they need the training fees, (I have personally heard some say these very comments) so fundamentally their pinching money from their owners, yet the horse is limited in ability or already have hit it's mark. Trainers using this methodology only play into the hands of guy's like McCarthy or a Fitzpatricks also who have horses consistently on the 'up' or 'improve'. They have a big galloping trainers mentaility to a degree and overall very happy owners as they don't abuse the owners trust by wasting their money on a slow one, they sack it and allow the owner the opportunity to source a new one. Slow horses and bullshit trainers are what driver owners away, not winning trainers such as Luke. There wouldn't be an owner in Luke's barn upset one iota I could safely assume!
I agree.
14.
I think everyone's got carried away with Luke's so-called 'improvement', yet I actually feel his success is down to numerous contributing factors (methods, feed, training facilities, quality staff working towards the common goal, quality/right horses / right mark / driving, etc, etc) all coming together for him and now consistently working well.
Unfortunately Nathan these numerous contributing can't be the reasons. Tell me one thing. How can these contributing factors have such an improvement in the space of a few weeks? If the improvement wa gradual and over a few months then I can buy it. However we are seeing in consistently with any horse all of the time in a short space of time.

Finally.. mate, your one of few that has given it some thought and so thank you for that. Some have claimed some ridiculous things and won’t reply to comments around it.
I'll promise you this. If you or the stewards sat on a horse such as Lettucerockyou for 3 weeks with 24/7 security and not allowed any drugs/treatments, then you would see it hit its old mark. I'll promise you that. I've not taken notice of a horse leaving LM's stable and observed it's performance thereafter, however I'm confident that within 3 weeks they will fall in a hole. The stewards/authority must do more and not rely on a positive test from any trainer before taking action.
I don't get paid for this Nathan and am getting a little bored with it. I’d like to believe what you believe as it could be a really good story however I can’t because it doesn’t add up. Good luck to LM for being smarter and the best. Cheers,

[zipzap]

Steady on brenno, I'm not convinced that's within the Disney realm, remember to play nice! Do you think the "context" argument will stack up?

No wonder they gave him the flick from Eastdowns

[Messenger]

Steady on brenno, I'm not convinced that's within the Disney realm, remember to play nice! Do you think the "context" argument will stack up?

I am thinking Brenno had a rush of blood there and forgot to review his post. I figure Wilson instead of Watson had to be a typo - cannot be for cover after you quote a guy

[aussiebreno]

So what we've discovered is its not nice to have people say bad things about you, whether true or not?
Thankyou.
Zipzap you have good googling skills to know where I work, well done champ *thumbsup*.

And yes I went to an extreme to prove it but it got the desired reaction.

[triplev123]

Hey Breno, I can see & I can completely understand exactly where you are coming there...you've gone to an extreme/absurd level to make a point...but Trooper, there are probably better ways to make it. You'd be best to delete that one and try again.

[triplev123]

You beat me to it.

[aussiebreno]

Hey Breno, I can see & I can completely understand exactly where you are coming there...you've gone to an extreme/absurd level to make a point...but Trooper, there are probably better ways to make it. You'd be best to delete that one and try again.

Must have sensed you typing that one!