Comments on: Feeling Insecure

By: o_crunk

o_crunk — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 02:51:05 +0000

Just some more context to think about. Lake has started *more than half* of horses this year at Philadelphia Park, in a state that lost its graded status last year *because* of a lack of higher level drug testing. For the year 2010, Lake is winning at 10% among ~250 total starters.

By: Jessica

Jessica — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 17:01:52 +0000

There’s naming names, and then there’s libel.

Thanks for the additional context. Definitely makes the example a little more complex and gives the reader more to think about re: the detention barn and what its closing next week may or may not mean.

By: o_crunk

o_crunk — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 15:25:50 +0000

The trainer in question is Scott Lake. Last NYRA starter was 12/31/09 and he’s had declining NYRA starters since 2005, every year.

Should name names when you can. Though it could be an insinuation of wrong doing, stats are stats.

I don’t like the insinuation that this was a security barn ‘success’. Just put the stats out there and let the reader decide. For instance, Lake had a much higher number of 2009 Belmont starters than he did for the same meet(s) in 2008. There is no question, that considering Lake’s level of stock, it is much more competitive at Belmont in the spring than Aqueduct in winter, where the majority of Lake’s winning occurred during the last five years.

The stats don’t make it as clear cut as insinuated in the article but just the stats on their own are compelling enough for the reader to decide on his or her own.

By: Jessica

Jessica — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 11:17:56 +0000

I think because [the column can be read in such a way that] there’s an insinuation of wrongdoing. But it does almost seem worse, leaving people guessing.

By: Robin

Robin — Sat, 17 Jul 2010 20:25:45 +0000

Why doesn’t he he name the trainers? It’s just statistics, right?