I have no dog in this fight. But someone please explain to me why a guy would use a drug
a) that doesn\'t move a horse up
b) that he knows there\'s a test for
c) because he\'s had a positive for it before, after which he swore publicly they would never allow it in the barn again.
Walk me through the risk/reward on this. I have no idea whether Baffert is using something, but if he is it ain\'t this stuff. He\'s not an idiot.
You can apply the same logic to any of his other positives can’t you? The medication must have some beneficial effect or it wouldn’t be on the list of controlled substances.
Let\'s say yes. So?
You\'re talking about an incredibly small amount here. And the stuff is found at the track and used between races.
But you haven\'t addressed the question. How is there enough upside to warrant the (likely) downside, especially in a race like this? We\'re not talking about something like EPO or Clenbuterol, which have dramatic effects.
maybe its this
Page 28 of the FBI Indictment of Servis. \"There is no test for it in America, SGF-1000 may appear on a drug test as a false positive result for a different substance, Dex\"
One possibility:
Whatever he may be using (whether unethical, ethical, legal, or illegal I don\'t know) is showing a false positive for beta. Just like Servis, SGF 1000, and a possible Dex false positive which was discussed on the wiretap. . . . .That\'s why he can be so insistent he didn\'t use beta.
If you trained Gamine, would you dope her? Treating her 18 days out is well within the withdrawal time they set. He admits giving it to her and she still tested positive, which suggests her metabolism is different than other equines.
I agree with TGJB, he ain’t dumb, he is aware of the situation he is in. This should be interesting. Delaware threw out Pletchers positive for this very same thing. If you are testing at the picogram level, the place needs to be spotless , the grooms and assistants should be in hazmat suits, and so on. Figure the horse weighs a 1000 pounds, is 21 picograms , +-5 picograms , going to affect a horse.
Like I said, I am not good at math , but horse equals 28,000 grams and the level of betameth equals .000000000021 grams . Come on!
My guess is they were using it between races and there was a residual amount still in the horses system.
The question then would be why did Baffert deny ever treating the horse with it when he could have copped the residual amount plea. The answer is the DQ would stand.
Agree 100% regarding risk reward.
Makes zero sense.
Like others on this string and the related postings on this board, I also have no idea whether Baffert was using and am not smart enough to climb inside his head regarding the risk reward. I do seek to challenge some of the assertions I have read here. First, when it is written that the drug in question “ does not move a horse up†I don’t know what that means.The fact that it is not EPO does not mean it cannot help a horse run better than if it wasn’t on the drug. The drug in question is a type of steroid/ anti inflammatory - think super advil. If any of us was running in a 5k and had an ouchy ankle, I assume we can stipulate that if we took advil before the race it would assist our ability to navigate the 5k. Assuming arguendo, Medina a did receive a shot of the drug before the derby in his ankle I assume it was given for a similar reason- to help Medina deal with an ouchy ankle. It may not assist in helping the horse with its oxygen content, i.e. EPO, but it would, arguably, make it a tad easier for the horse to run 1 1/4 miles for the first time. In terms of the dose ( and this comes from one of the zillion articles written over the past 24 hours), if the drug is administered directly into a specific area, the fact that a horse has a zillion milligrams or pints of blood is irrelevant- it is primarily absorbed in the area of the injection. Finally, and this comes from the TDN- Baffert, Maker, Casse, Brown and Assmussen ran in the most graded races in 2020-2021( and we know our suspicions about some of the other names)- other than Baffert none of the others had a positive test. Baffert - in 449 graded races had 5. As a bonus, I ask the following by way of pure paranoia- what are the odds of the same trainer having a $17000 purchase with a crooked knee that he ran in New Mexico win the Derby ( see Real Quiet) and 25 years later do the same thing with a horse from a stallion with a $1000 stud fee as bought on the cheap. Which will be worse for racing- the split sample confirming the first finding or the opposite- calling the regulation of this issue and the competence of those who are in charge even more in doubt
IMO the worst for racing is having the most visible trainer’s horse “taken down†or DQ’d in the biggest race of the year. That is an unmitigated disaster that the sport can’t let happen. I could see lawsuit after lawsuit after class action suit being filed, the result would be the nut low on multiple levels. Just can’t happen.
Regarding the Steroid in question, Gamines split sample confirmed the presence of the \"medication\" and Gamine was disqualified from the Kentucky Oaks, a race she finished third in, carrying her speed a long way.
Gamine\'s Kentucky Oaks (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6obwV9UOv4)
Since then, Gamine has evolved into a sprint mare and Baffert maintains she is one of his best mares ever.
After a spate of positives Baffert vowed to run a \"tighter ship\", stating, we\'ve been running our stable like a first class stable, but we must run it like a hospital.
Hospitial cross contamination pledge (https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/244538/baffert-commits-to-changes-to-prevent-failed-drug-tests)
(Baffert and his Lawyer, maintained the positives were from exposure to stable hands taking the Race Day banned medications.) That defense did not hold up with Gamine, likely based upon a \"Strictly Liable\" for ANY positive standard.
Baffert Vows New Precautions (https://www.drf.com/news/gamine-disqualified-kentucky-oaks-placing-baffert-fined-1500)
Post \"Tighter Ship\" vow, Medina Spirit now has a positive with the same Medication Gamine was disqualified upon. However, it does not yet appear that the split sample has been tested to confirm the positive.
Performance enhancing? In the anecdotes and alchemy of medications can anyone truly say? Who would like to hear Bafferts opinion on that regardless of what he might say?
It is my understanding that the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission manages the Churchil Downs equine blood testing. They are the ones who announced Medina Spirit was in violation of the rules.
Churchil Downs Inc. (CDI) was the organization that banned entries from trainer Baffert.
Generally speaking CDI\'s actions take some consideration to appreciate. Their ban of Baffert entries is curious because it was so rapid seemingly a knee jerk response?
As an amateur sleuth, aren\'t all handicappers, assuming some CDI exec or department has in-depth knowledge of PED use and testing. I surmise that the presence of \"Dex\" in Medina Spirit\'s blood is a known (by insiders) by-product of using a PED like STR-1000. Their reaction could be as simple as damn it... enough is enough. Same basis or precedent as Hollendorfer?
One of the strangest, most contradictory things among horseplayers is the constant, never-ending complaining about move-up horses, it\'s the Wild West out there, the huge unexplained improvements in horses off the claim, horses rebreaking, trainers with horses that have endless stamina, when are they going to clean up the game, we need federal regulation....and then when someone gets busted, it\'s \"But not that guy!\" \"The dose is too small!\" \"Not that drug!\"
More importantly, How many mattresses did Mattress Mike sell that week?
Couldn\'t help myself.
Richardâ€" the move up drugs (EPO etc.) allow the horse to run faster than nature gives him the ability to do by increasing red blood cells, air flow, or muscle. Other drugs (anti-inflammatories etc.) give the horse the ability to run as fast as he naturally can, but don’t move him up.
There are good reasons not to allow some things in the second category (like pain killers) to be used in races themselvesâ€" to protect both the horses and the public (you could run a horse hot or cold and the public wouldn’t know. Think Lasix on and off without the public knowingâ€" which is pretty much the world we are now entering).
The idea of testing and withdrawal times is to guarantee the above. They figure out how far out a drug would stop being in a horse’s system (and having an effect), then add a cushion of extra days for safety.
The drugs that are involved in most of these cases (Asmussen, Baffert etc.) are in the second category. They are legal to use between races, but NOT in a race itself, and the amounts found generally (and just now) were tiny traces. Aside from not being something someone would use to cheat, there is no indication enough could still be in a horse’s system to have an effect.
The group busted about this time last year appear to fall into the first (move up) category, As is the White Mercedes crap I’ve detailed here over the years. Anyone who has been coming to this site for a while knows my position on that stuff, I’ve been fighting it longer and louder than anyone else.
There are situations where a positive for an anti-inflammatory could be suspiciousâ€" a big drop down in a claiming race with a larger amount found would be an example, especially if after the drug wears off the horse is lame. The idea would be they’re trying to get past the vet to dump the horse.
But this was the opposite. It’s the Derby, and he’s running back in two weeks. No way Baffert was knowingly doing something involving that drug. No upside and a lot of downside.
Good overview on all this by Matt Hegarty on the DRF site.
no upside to winning the derby?
Meanwhile, Trump says “Medina Spirit is a junky (sic) and emblematic of what is happening in our countryâ€, and Baffert goes on Fox to say it’s cancel culture.
Shoot me.
No upside to doing something that can’t help him win and could cause a catastrophe.
Now that is very incriminating given the history of Fox News guests.
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Meanwhile, Trump says “Medina Spirit is a junky
> (sic) and emblematic of what is happening in our
> countryâ€, and Baffert goes on Fox to say it’s
> cancel culture.
>
> Shoot me.
The New York Times said in November 2020 that Baffert-trained horses have failed at least 29 drug tests in his four-decade career. “I\'m worried about our sport,†Baffert said. “Our sport, we\'ve taken a lot of hits as a sport.
To me, this is the biggest problem. And, Baffert is not just a trainer -- he is the face of horse racing and has been for decades. Even people who don\'t give a damn about racing knows \"that white haired guy.\" He is the highest profile person in the sport. He had a positive in the biggest race in the world. Not a PED but it doesn\'t really matter to those who just watch the Derby once a year.
He will get off -- again. The stain will last. Possibly not his fault but hard to explain away 29 positives when other high profile/high volume running trainers are not getting them.
The biggest problem is the “positives†are garbage, while actual move ups are going on all the time. The industry is trying to look like they’re serious while not being willing to do serious thingsâ€" like freeze and retest samples. Like publish test results so we know the testers are actually doing their fâ€"-ing jobs.
I’m with you rezlegal
So you’d prefer that the suspected offense be glossed over because of bad optics? The public is already on to horse racing being a dirty sport and this is a big reason why. The best thing that could happen to the sport would be a massive come to Jesus moment whereby all sinners are expelled.
JB what do any of these issues mean if a: the rules are not enforced and b: the rules are not enforced equably?
JB, you’re on this thing of what a horses natural ability is vs enhancements as if pain masking meds are ok because the horse could actually run that fast if he wasn’t so damn lame.
If it’s a regulated med and it shows up in a blood test it’s a violation. Your beef is with the status of the med.
Can’t help him win. You try running on a bum knee. See how far you get.
Baseball got serious about PEDs by giving serious penalties to those who got caught using them and effectively banning them from post career awards (Hall of Fame). Looks like -- aside from some trash can bashing -- baseball is now clean. I agree a \"positive\" for a trillionth of a gram of anything is pretty ridiculous and that the focus, as you say, should be on substances and amounts of those substances that actually affect performance.
Some may argue that Baffert is a \"move up trainer\" and gets numbers in major races that make no sense to those who study patterns. I think his recent Kentucky Derby winner may fit in that category.
Richieâ€" the right rules need to be enforced the right way. Punishing someone for something that doesn’t make a difference and not punishing someone for the things that do is Lewis Carroll territory. Off with his head!
Jerryâ€" you need to read my post on this string from 11:40 AM.
You\'re saying this horse was a \'move up\' horse? Give me a break, he was among the leaders in numbers going into the race. Did he improve? Yes. But not out of the range of normalcy for a young horse.
Baffert may be an egotistical idiot, but he\'s no fool. This positive is not the reason the horse won. Give Baffert some credit and JV too. They stole the race the old fashioned way.
TGJB, the line of discussion you are taking here makes sense if Baffert says he gave the horse the drug weeks ago and there\'s only a trace amt left (going to put aside the performance enhancing question for now).
But unless I\'ve missed something, he\'s flat out saying he never gave the horse the drug at all.
That leaves only 3 possibilities:
1) He knew about an arrangement to give the horse the drug off the record at some points
2) He knew nothing about it and someone thought they would sneak it in and it would be out of system by race day
3) He knew nothing about it and someone is trying to sabotage him
None of these explanations cast Baffert in a positive light, especially for someone who has prior violation issues. He is supposed to have 100% responsibility for these horses, the buck stops with him.
With the millions of dollars that are at stake, it does seem highly illogical and downright implausible that he would be doing anything that would potentially risk those millions.
Then comes the story that one of his recent violations was because a groom pissed on the horse\'s hay, and any arguments grounded in logic and the protection that they might/should be offering these horses goes out the window.
At best, Baffert is guilty of what the NCAA would call \"failure to monitor\". At worst, something nefarious. Either one is not excusable for him. I do feel badly for the horse and connections, if they truly knew nothing about it.
I doubt I need to tell you, but logic and rationality in all things, has left the building long ago.
confused Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You\'re saying this horse was a \'move up\' horse?
> Give me a break, he was among the leaders in
> numbers going into the race. Did he improve?
> Yes. But not out of the range of normalcy for a
> young horse.
>
> Baffert may be an egotistical idiot, but he\'s no
> fool. This positive is not the reason the horse
> won. Give Baffert some credit and JV too. They
> stole the race the old fashioned way.
I do not agree. His pattern into the race was essentially a throwout. If you study patterns maybe you are a bit \"confused.\"
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The biggest problem is the “positives†are
> garbage, while actual move ups are going on all
> the time. The industry is trying to look like
> they’re serious while not being willing to do
> serious thingsâ€" like freeze and retest samples.
> Like publish test results so we know the testers
> are actually doing their fâ€"-ing jobs.
Disqualifying the most famous trainer in America from the biggest horse race in America seems pretty serious...
I think you can still probably find the seminar someplace.
Seems is exactly the right word.
We\'re not supposed to talk about winners postrace, but maybe my patterns are better than yours. Sorry, I don\'t like to go negative, but MS looked like one of the top 5 in the race to me, PRE-race.
I would debate that pattern interpretation with you.
No need to. You were wrong and I was right. I think that\'s what counts in handicapping.
Not going to post the sources again, but Ol\' Bobby is contradicting himself. He claimed in one breath that the horse was never given the medication. However there is a vet that maintains the horse was treated with the medication 18 days prior to the Derby. Which is it?
Now Bobby is arguing \"Cancel Culture\", that its wrong to disqualify his horse on something this insignificant.
So which is it, a fabrication or a de minimis transgression?
In the end Ol\' Bobby can say whatever he wishes but its not of much import because the standard is one of Strict Liablity and the amount is not much less than found in Gamines blood post Kentucky Oaks.
unless the cross sample comes back clean its seven knots and a swing.
Cancel That!
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think you can still probably find the seminar
> someplace.
\"Medina Spirit â€" cost just a little less than Baffert’s babies usually do, but as soon as he was stretched out he started pounding out good figures. In his last he raced wide and actually earned almost the same figure as the winner, who saved ground. We don’t love the four preps and he’s only a borderline fit on ability, but there are a couple of other things to consider. On the plus side, a lot of Baffert runners move forward when they leave California. But this guy has been getting wide trips in small fieldsâ€"that could be a real issue in a huge field.\"
Perhaps \"a throwout\" was a bit harsh. I didn\'t like him. TG was \"borderline\" with him and 3 others in the B Group while liking 4 other horses in the A Group. But, the seminar did like the post position draw.
My very dependable rear view mirror says he could have been used but certainly not as a key unless you were a Baffert lover.
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have no dog in this fight. But someone please
> explain to me why a guy would use a drug
>
> a) that doesn\'t move a horse up
>
> b) that he knows there\'s a test for
>
> c) because he\'s had a positive for it before,
> after which he swore publicly they would never
> allow it in the barn again.
>
> Walk me through the risk/reward on this. I have no
> idea whether Baffert is using something, but if he
> is it ain\'t this stuff. He\'s not an idiot.
Then let\'s reverse your scenario. A trainer who\'s had 3 Derby winners in 5 years gets exposed with two of them having to face doping issues, along with Gamine in the Oaks. If this drug is as innocuous as you suggest, why is it prohibited to the extent it\'s got its own test to detect it? And since its prohibited everywhere, not just in Kentucky, why would that be if it offers no assistance to performance anyway? That the same guy - who just went through months of trying to shake off the medication rap of Justify - turns up with another positive in the Derby, let\'s call it an overall pattern that any common sense suggests is \"suspicious\" (and that\'s being charitable). As to your statement about Baffert not being an idiot in this case because you suggest he\'s too smart to get caught with this...I\'ll offer a scenario to prove this in fact makes him the biggest idiot for the reason you cite.
The KHRC is going to have to disqualify Medina Spirit because the horse is in violation of their rules governing permissive use medication - full stop. That means his owners lose the purse money. They now get zero. If the KHRC doesn\'t disqualify Medina Spirit, what do you think the other owners of the runners up will do? They\'ll go straight to court, and it will be an open and shut case. The 2nd-6th place owners all stand to get much more money by getting Medina Spirit disqualified and redistributing the purse. To avoid the protracted court battle and it\'s attendant terrible publicity, the KHRC will almost be forced to disqualify to get the thing shut down now, because the last thing they want is to uphold Medina Spirit as the winner and then have a judge toss the whole thing out. They end up looking stupid, and worse, it can make the KHRC look they they are part of the corruption. Not to mention, what do you think Pimlico is facing now? They have to decide what to do - allow Baffert and all the horrible press of all his doped steeds come to Maryland? The MD Racing Commission will need guidance from the KHRC - will Kentucky suspend Baffert for his overall pattern of violations in Kentucky\'s two biggest races in 3 of the last 5 years? ALL of this fallout from a guy you say gives an innocuous prohibited substance he knows they test for that won\'t help his horse win.
Now tell us again how stupid Baffert ain\'t. If they disqualify via KHRC or a judge, he will have cost the owner a ton of money. That qualifies as an idiot in my book.
You have a lot of reading ahead of you just on this string.
KHRC statement:
https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/250053/khrc-outlines-procedures-following-failed-drug-test?utm_source=BHTW&utm_medium=social
It takes 4-8 weeks for the split sample, so hypothetically, he could win the Preakness and Belmont and get DQ\'d from the Triple Crown for a drug positive, Just when you thought the game hits rock bottom, look out below. Baffert taking us on a ride...
TreadHead Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Then comes the story that one of his recent
> violations was because a groom pissed on the
> horse\'s hay, and any arguments grounded in logic
> and the protection that they might/should be
> offering these horses goes out the window.
This is a really piss poor argument
what takes 4 weeks, and why
slow first class delivery, the test has to sit there for 4 weeks to complete, or the track is too cheap to pay the express servis(sic) fee .
I believe he was responding to Strike, not you. Agree that was not a jump up by any stretch of the phrase. The horse improved 2 points off of pairing his tops.....as a 3 year old.
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have no dog in this fight. But someone please
> explain to me why a guy would use a drug
>
> a) that doesn\'t move a horse up
>
> b) that he knows there\'s a test for
>
> c) because he\'s had a positive for it before,
> after which he swore publicly they would never
> allow it in the barn again.
>
> Walk me through the risk/reward on this. I have no
> idea whether Baffert is using something, but if he
> is it ain\'t this stuff. He\'s not an idiot.
JB, without putting all that on the scale for a moment, I wanted to highlight your seminar comment:
\"a lot of Baffert horses move forward when they leave California.\"
Is this common? Has it been true for John Sadler or Pete Miller when they bring a string to Arkansas? I\'m not asking this with an edge, just trying to add to a meager knowledge base. However, to be fair, it could be asked with an edge.
To your main contentions, above, if all the answers favor Baffert, and it still comes down to a violation, however clean his hands might have been, he will still take the fall if he\'s crossed the wrong people. It\'s no different than in law enforcement where, if they want to get you on a technicality, and they can hurt you by doing so, they will.
It’s on occasion been true with Pete and O’Neill- check out the figures from that BC at CD a few years ago.
Everybody seems to be forgetting the details of my original statement. I’m not offering any opinion about Baffert using something. I’m saying he didn’t use this drug, in the Derby. The closest analogy I could come up with is that closer on the Mets who got nailed three times for the same easily testable steroid, and eventually got banned for life. That’s how dumb this would be. Worse- Baffert has more to lose, and the steroid has a much bigger benefit.
I’ve said here for years that California is the cleanest of any major jurisdiction in the country, they actually pulled a quote of mine saying that and used it in one of their ads a few years ago. The reason is Rick Arthurâ€" he is one guy that is not messing around.
🥸🤬
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It’s on occasion been true with Pete and
> O’Neill- check out the figures from that BC at
> CD a few years ago.
>
> Everybody seems to be forgetting the details of my
> original statement. I’m not offering any opinion
> about Baffert using something. I’m saying he
> didn’t use this drug, in the Derby. The closest
> analogy I could come up with is that closer on the
> Mets who got nailed three times for the same
> easily testable steroid, and eventually got banned
> for life. That’s how dumb this would be. Worse-
> Baffert has more to lose, and the steroid has a
> much bigger benefit.
>
> I’ve said here for years that California is the
> cleanest of any major jurisdiction in the country,
> they actually pulled a quote of mine saying that
> and used it in one of their ads a few years ago.
> The reason is Rick Arthurâ€" he is one guy that is
> not messing around.
I wasn\'t offering an opinion on him using something either. But cases are not always decided on the merits. You\'re familiar with Kentucky justice. Baffert doesn\'t have the home court advantage. He\'s not a sympathetic defendant. And just because it would be stupid to do something doesn\'t mean that some stupid things aren\'t done. My point being even if your argument is grounded in logic and sound analysis, it can win a debate, but won\'t necessarily win a fight.
According to Thoropattern he had a 31% chance for a new top
I was thinking along similar lines. If what he said in that press conference is accurate (if he\'s lying there, it\'s like a whole Michael-Corleone-Senate-hearing thing--and he\'d be REALLY stupid, which we know he is not), it should be easy enough with time to get to the truth, esp. regarding the hair analysis. The whole thing seems like some kind of set up, or dare I use the \"C\" word. None of this makes any sense. I\'m not defending him, but until the second split sample gets tested, this isn\'t official anyway. And labs do make mistakes by the way--any important tests for horses or humans should be repeated and double-checked. I\'m not saying this is true, but there are enough elements who\'d like to do away with racing and will take any chance they can get to take a free shot at the stumbling giant, like the Lilliputians harassing poor Gulliver. I can\'t remember the story, did Gulliver have it coming? I don\'t think so. Anyway, on to the Preakness, for now anyway. Poor Bob won\'t be able to show his face in Baltimore. Jimmy Barnes is all he needs anyway. I\'m thinking a 1-2 finish will quell the critics.
moosepalm Wrote:
You\'re familiar with Kentucky justice.
Ouch! Damn, Rog, but good point.
moosepalm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And just because it would be stupid to
> do something doesn\'t mean that some stupid things
> aren\'t done.
This. Stupid things are done all the time. You might even call it a fundamental characteristic of the human race.
Dana666 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I was thinking along similar lines. If what he
> said in that press conference is accurate (if he\'s
> lying there, it\'s like a whole
> Michael-Corleone-Senate-hearing thing--and he\'d be
> REALLY stupid, which we know he is not), it should
> be easy enough with time to get to the truth, esp.
> regarding the hair analysis. The whole thing seems
> like some kind of set up, or dare I use the \"C\"
> word. None of this makes any sense. I\'m not
> defending him, but until the second split sample
> gets tested, this isn\'t official anyway. And labs
> do make mistakes by the way--any important tests
> for horses or humans should be repeated and
> double-checked. I\'m not saying this is true, but
> there are enough elements who\'d like to do away
> with racing and will take any chance they can get
> to take a free shot at the stumbling giant, like
> the Lilliputians harassing poor Gulliver. I can\'t
> remember the story, did Gulliver have it coming? I
> don\'t think so. Anyway, on to the Preakness, for
> now anyway. Poor Bob won\'t be able to show his
> face in Baltimore. Jimmy Barnes is all he needs
> anyway. I\'m thinking a 1-2 finish will quell the
> critics.
I love how Baffert, who has skated through more drug violations and mysterious deaths while winning more races than 10 trainers put together, is somehow being persecuted. The argument for his innocence is that he\'s too smart to do something stupid, which if it worked as an argument would clear out the prisons in the country. Oh, and the split sample coming back negative, which happens about .00001% of the time, but of course should happen here.
This is typical horse racing---we whine endlessly about illegal drugs, then flip out when someone is actually punished because, what, we like him and he does good interviews? Just baffling why this sport is dying a 40-year slow death, isn\'t it? With fans like us, who needs enemies?
\"I can\'t remember the story, did Gulliver have it coming?\"
Think of Baffert\'s groom in the stall--only Gulliver was putting out a fire, and Baffert\'s groom was starting one.
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have no dog in this fight. But someone please
> explain to me why a guy would use a drug
>
> a) that doesn\'t move a horse up
>
> b) that he knows there\'s a test for
>
> c) because he\'s had a positive for it before,
> after which he swore publicly they would never
> allow it in the barn again.
>
> Walk me through the risk/reward on this. I have no
> idea whether Baffert is using something, but if he
> is it ain\'t this stuff. He\'s not an idiot.
You\'re starting out from a false premise - roughly, that Baffert sees the world and comes to his decisions in a way more or less similar to the way that you do. My experience as a criminal defense attorney leads me to think that you should reconsider the assumptions you\'ve made above: that Baffert is intelligent, that Baffert understands risk/reward calculus the way you do, that Baffert has any degree of concern for previous positives he\'s had or statements he\'s made regarding those tests/medications, that you know everything the horse was given or what provoked this test or what effect it can have on the horse, and so on, and so forth.
(And by the way, the statements he has made publicly in the last 48 hours alone very seriously belie your assertion that Baffert is not an idiot.)
Since you invited the speculation, I\'ll take a shot: he otherwise had no chance to win the race, the horse was worth $50,000 or $500,000 before the race and about $50,000,000 after, and he has absolutely no reason to believe he\'ll ever suffer a consequence for any misdeed performed by himself or anyone urinating in the corner of a barn under his control - said another way, it is in fact you who misunderstands the risk/reward presented to him by this situation, and not Bobby!
Irony:
Cox gets the Derby win via a failed drug test?
Karma:
BB nailed for one thing he didn\'t do?
Clarity:
Test is picograms per milliliter of blood.
Infinity:
Detected amount divided by allowable level.
Justify:
No justifying this as a \"Garbage Test\" since it applies to all.