There are lots of reasons to have ongoing dialogues about finding new and thorough ways of managing the dilemma of "drugged" horses. Yes, there are trainers, vets, grooms and owners in the world who try to find ways of enhancing the performance of these fragile animals that we love to bet on (or own). Some of these "illegal" drugs (so called Type A, B, or C) have no business being in a horse while racing. Other "types" (D or E) are mere medications that any of us would take to aid in the management of itchy skin, sneezing, headache, etc. Let's face it, these animals live in dusty places, which have rodent droppings, cat hair, rooster feathers and other horses' manure under their roof 24/7. What concerns me is the quickness to judge and the guilty- before- trial- mentality of many handicappers. In light of the e-coli problems with lettuce, green onions, etc, especially originating from California, we must ask if it is it ever possible that farms selling products to the racing industry may have a role in this. For example, handlers preparing and packaging hay, feed, carrots or any other items critical in the racing/agriculture industry, may be drugs users or not clean in their handling of these items. Any innocent trainer/handler would not know this in advance. Or, can it be the outrider or valet or jockey or friend of a friend petting the horse? I know 2 people who were hospitalized for e-coli. I also know many people who have tested positive in a work environment and were found innocent afterwards after learning it came from a fellow co-worker. In one case, there were traces of cocaine on the hands of another who shared, ate/touched candy and cookies from a tray at work. So, moral of my story is please watch the negativity and jumping to conclusions that there is a "definite" connection to the trainers. Yes trainers are "in charge" but so are the CEO and Board at Taco Bell.
what race is the C.E.O. of Taco Belle entered in today?
will he bounce back from missing a few training days?
has the medication he took for his illness been discharged from his body?
MOST IMPORTANTLY;what\'s his sheet look like?
ps bobphilo,its a rag
pss robes,not that kind of rag
You wrote; 1) "what race is the C.E.O. of Taco Belle entered in today?" 2) "will he bounce back from missing a few training days?" 3) "has the medication he took for his illness been discharged from his body?" 4) "MOST IMPORTANTLY;what\'s his sheet look like?"
1) Cute! My point was to make sure there is a thorough investigation looking into all possible scenarios before jumping on the trainer. What guarantee or safeguarding is available for a Taco Bell or the lettuce growers? Or both? Obviously the consumer attacked Taco Bell immediately before there was a thorough forensic exam. And because they have $4Billion at stake, they will be sure to defend themselves.
2) Smart and athletic horses most often bounce back if there was just an acute issue and not a chronic ailment.
3) Some horses are ready to run but the condition books are not friendly. If the perfect race is written for a few days after his/her medication for some minor ailment and it's not a performance enhancing drug, why should the horse/athlete and it's owner be penalized. Are the athletes we bet on in football etc, asked to be "discharged" of any of their drugs? Prescription, herbal or over the counter?
4) Yes important question. As a horse owner for over 25 years, my horses' sheet numbers sometimes look odd but maybe it is because he/she had a stuffy nose that day or a chronic allergy to an external irritant. Would you know that as a bettor by looking at sheets?
5) not sure what the private joke is about.. (" ps bobphilo,its a rag
pss robes,not that kind of rag")
Head-- the situations we are talking here about do not involve accidental contamination. The drugs most of the suspensions you refer to are caused by are not performance enhancers. To raise a horse\'s blood CO2 level you have to put a LOT of alkalizing agents into his system, and nobody is walking around with trace amounts of EPO on their hands.
headst8ner - Somehow I could tell you were a professionally experienced horse owner even before your #4 point and I agree with All of your points of topic ( except that Taco Bell issue , the relevance and comparison is purely theory ).
I have wondered myself about timing of meds you discuss in Point #3 - and not that I really know what I\'m talking about but, if you are refering to the Class C & D type cat , your position sounds reasonable .
Perhaps some of these less significant or insignificant Meds ( in terms of juicing ) shouldn\'t even be tested for or should not punishable offense\'s . I\'m curious , as you are an Owner , about your feelings toward the upcoming Jan 9 CHRB Med Com public hearing ...
headstr8ner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There are lots of reasons to have ongoing
> dialogues about finding new and thorough ways of
> managing the dilemma of "drugged" horses. Yes,
> there are trainers, vets, grooms and owners in the
> world who try to find ways of enhancing the
> performance of these fragile animals that we love
> to bet on (or own). Some of these "illegal" drugs
> (so called Type A, B, or C) have no business being
> in a horse while racing. Other "types" (D or E)
> are mere medications that any of us would take to
> aid in the management of itchy skin, sneezing,
> headache, etc. Let's face it, these animals live
> in dusty places, which have rodent droppings, cat
> hair, rooster feathers and other horses' manure
> under their roof 24/7. What concerns me is the
> quickness to judge and the guilty- before- trial-
> mentality of many handicappers. In light of the
> e-coli problems with lettuce, green onions, etc,
> especially originating from California, we must
> ask if it is it ever possible that farms selling
> products to the racing industry may have a role in
> this. For example, handlers preparing and
> packaging hay, feed, carrots or any other items
> critical in the racing/agriculture industry, may
> be drugs users or not clean in their handling of
> these items. Any innocent trainer/handler would
> not know this in advance. Or, can it be the
> outrider or valet or jockey or friend of a friend
> petting the horse? I know 2 people who were
> hospitalized for e-coli. I also know many people
> who have tested positive in a work environment and
> were found innocent afterwards after learning it
> came from a fellow co-worker. In one case, there
> were traces of cocaine on the hands of another who
> shared, ate/touched candy and cookies from a tray
> at work. So, moral of my story is please watch the
> negativity and jumping to conclusions that there
> is a "definite" connection to the trainers. Yes
> trainers are "in charge" but so are the CEO and
> Board at Taco Bell.
re the \"in charge\", NY appeals said this:
\"The court said Pletcher\'s argument \"overlooks the purpose and policy behind the trainer responsibility rule.\'\' The court added that the rule \"deliberately\'\' places a responsibility on trainers to uphold the integrity and fairness of racing in the state. It noted that the law requires that trainers be \"held responsible for any positive test unless he can show by substantial evidence that neither he nor any employee nor agent was responsible for the administration of the drug or other restricted substance\"
and i don\'t believe the Pletcher, Asmussen, and Dutrow mepivacaine positives came from the carrots ...
a cocaine positive from cookies?
dude, i\'m not buyin that one either.
So if it was a feed contaminate, why only the single horse. What was so special about his bag of feed or bale of hay? Like the e-coli lettuce, there were multiple positives. Is this particular trainer the only one that buys feed from that particular mill or distributer? Not very likely, so your excuse of contaminated feed is lacking substance. Do trainers really separate the feed by animal? Doubt it, the bales of hay are in that corner, the feed is on the skids and the animals are fed. So contamination should occur in the whole herd of animals and not just a single horse. On top of that, there should other barns affected with the same problem. Has not happened,and if there was a serious contamination, and the fashion in which the USDA tracks things today, they should be able to find this mysterious source of contamination in the feed. They can pinpoint \"e-coli\" to the field of shipment, but can\'t find the problems in some feed? Give your head a shake if you believe that contaminated feed was purchased. All owners have one thing in mind, they all pay lip-service to running on hay, water and oats. But once the doors are closed they always ask where to buy some.
It seems to me that more attention should be paid to the over worked, under paid, illiterate stable help who have a (albeit selfish, but understandable) motive to bet their $250 weekly paycheck on a horse they know is drugged going off at odds of 3-1 so that they can live the \"high life\" for a week or two.