Floyd Landis, the 2006 Tour de France winner tested positive for Steroids and was suspended for 2 years.
Lance Armstrong 7 time consecutive Tour de France winner had preserved samples tested which come back positive and he has faced a rash of associates charging him with doping.
This year, Alexandre Vinokourov, was considered a strong candidate to win but then he took a terrible fall. With stitches in both knees he won a difficult Time Trial and then tested positive for Blood Transfusions. The blood that was detected was from a donor. Cycling says Donor Blood has been detectable since 2004. Is horse racing testing for Donor Blood? and if not, shouldn\'t it be?
Michel Audran, said to be knowledgeable in the field, states that:
Blood transfusions work by increasing an athlete\'s count of red blood cells, which carry oxygen to the muscles.
"Performance can increase between 5 and 20 percent," depending on how much is injected, unquote
http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports/20070724-1656-cyc-tourdefrance.html
I posited earlier that 4 lengths of separation at 9 furlongs may only be a 2 or 3 percent difference in performance. 8 lengths may be over 10 percent or more. Thats a big 10 percent, especially when following closely upon the heels of a remarkable effort.
There are many that believe everyone running near the front of the pack in the Tour de France are doping. I don\'t know about that, but its clear that some are and that one of their primary tools is Blood Transfusion.
The stables all monitor blood. To Transfuse all they would need to know is how to Type, perhaps how to store and how to transfer. Most legit vets would be able to handle that is my suspicion. Illegitimate ones certainly know how.
There are risks with donor transfusion. The recipient risks the illnesses the donor has had. Simple things like colds and more dangerous things too. I don\'t agree with Tgraph that this past Belmont was the 2nd fastest in history, but I find very coincidental the number of fevers that Rags to Riches is suddenly spiking and Lawyer Ron is running at a level now, that clearly defies explanation. That was not a relaxed Ron. That was old headstrong Ron, staying on much better for some reason.
I haven\'t discussed the really troubling part, because I\'m convinced most of you really don\'t understand this at all.
>I don\'t agree with Tgraph that this past Belmont was the 2nd fastest in history, but I find very coincidental the number of fevers that Rags to Riches is suddenly spiking and Lawyer Ron is running at a level now, that clearly defies explanation. That was not a relaxed Ron. That was old headstrong Ron, staying on much better for some reason. <
One of Charlie Munger\'s favorite sayings is, \"To a man with only a hammer, everything looks like a nail\".
What that means is that people with a single way of looking at things often twist, distort, and interpret facts in ways that are consistent with that way of thinking instead of examining whether they should rethink their models, theories, and ideas to better explain what\'s going on.
Charlie Munger also said:
\"But the real shocker is when the two penny nail is sticking straight up out of the two by four and the bystander equipped without any tool at all, who knows neither craft nor archetecture, insists that it must be part of the design.\"
fkach Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >I don\'t agree with Tgraph that this past Belmont
> was the 2nd fastest in history, but I find very
> coincidental the number of fevers that Rags to
> Riches is suddenly spiking and Lawyer Ron is
> running at a level now, that clearly defies
> explanation. That was not a relaxed Ron. That was
> old headstrong Ron, staying on much better for
> some reason. <
>
> One of Charlie Munger\'s favorite sayings is, \"To a
> man with only a hammer, everything looks like a
> nail\".
>
> What that means is that people with a single way
> of looking at things often twist, distort, and
> interpret facts in ways that are consistent with
> that way of thinking instead of examining whether
> they should rethink their models, theories, and
> ideas to better explain what\'s going on.
Chuckles,
Do us all a favor and start quoting Charlie Chaplin.
Chuckles_the_Clown2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Charlie Munger also said:
>
> \"But the real shocker is when the two penny nail
> is sticking straight up out of the two by four and
> the bystander equipped without any tool at all,
> who knows neither craft nor archetecture, insists
> that it must be part of the design.\"
The \"bystander\" is just using common sense, as a two penny nail (1 inch long) has no function when sticking up out of, or pounded into, a two by four.
And when the man with only a hammer sees a nail sticking out of a 2x4 on display at an art exhibit, he will not consider that that this could have been by the artist\'s design and take a hammer to it.
Bob
Did any one, or anyone known to you, win at DMR that DIDN\'T bet Student Council.
Anyone beat this meet is my question, (although that one could make a meet)? It seems impossible to me, but I could be a dinosaur and \"not get it\". It does makes sense to me that a seriously good final time with form cycle would be more effective than how us old fashioned pace handicappers view things - who grew up sending speed on front tracks that had clay and bad drainage and long for those days or the inner track.
I did notice yesterday (not hearing Alan on the radio) that the horse was sitting on a six where 5 was the top of race so that is fair, but was inside speed (which I hold to be the most logical leveraged trip on a bumper car turf course), had been 4 wide on both corners last time, and previous to that had pressed Buddy\'s Humor then faded. That makes sense to me, although I was too timid to do it. That was great handicapping I thought.
To stay on a central point here, DOES ANYONE WIN ON POLYTRACK OTHER THAN AT WO?
Without being over cynical, noboy beats any track, at any time. Impossible game to stay ahead of.
Your understanding of athletics and athletes is nil.
You are a joke.
I guess that\'s where the Clown part comes in.
Barry Irwin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Your understanding of athletics and athletes is
> nil.
>
> You are a joke.
>
> I guess that\'s where the Clown part comes in.
Didn\'t I read a similar BH opinion piece written by you? Wait, it just clicked. Pletcher\'s not only one of your trainers and Allday one of your vets but you got an agent commission, perhaps a piece or a breeding right, for the sale of Ron to Stonewall.
With respect to Chuck\'s thoughtful post, the reasonable followup questions I would suggest he pursue regarding his query (is it technically possible and how) would be to ask things like:
How many packed red cells would it take to increase the oxygen-carrying capacity of the blood within the circulatory system of an 1100-lb animal, in order to yield significant (measurable) increase in aerobic performance?
Once you decide what volume needs to be administered, how will you obtain the blood or packed cells, maintain them safely until administration, administer them (time period, location, etc) and monitor for transfusion side effects?
How would this affect the normal PCV (packed red cells) in the horse? For how long will the effect last?
How will the administration of the diuretic lasix pre-race (causing some dehydration) further affect PCV, considering also splenic contraction to increase PCV that occurs during exercise? (will the horses\' blood \"sludge to thickness\" within capillaries due to too many red cells (volume increase) within the circulation?)
If you don\'t understand how limited your thinking is on this subject, it simply has to be costing you money at the windows.
I can\'t see how anyone could function successfully as a gambler if their interpetation of virtually every important result is related to drugs on or off, blood doping on or off etc...
I\'m not naive or stupid. I am just honest enough with myself to know I don\'t know the answers to some of these questions and certainly can\'t prove anything. Most importantly, I don\'t spend my time living in or writing x-files episodes.
One of the public handicappers whose picks are published every day in the San Diego Union Tribune (Jeff Siegel) is showing a small flat-bet profit with 32% winners based on his 361 published picks. A second (Bob Ike) is down less than 1%. My recollection is that the public handicappers did even better as a group last year.
My take is that this confirms what TGJB says about the importance of being tapped into how horses are adapting to the Del Mar environment and performing in the morning. It also indicates that the Poly results are not as unpredictable as some have suggested.
That\'s too cynical for me, but it would be silly to argue.
That\'s cynical,but it would be silly to argue in public.
Damn this reminds me of high school.
Use your Street Sense, pal.
Who is in a better position to know about what is going on with Pletcher, Allday and Lawyer Ron...some crackpot in Chicago who is apartment bound, or somebody close to the stable?
Do not confuse possible conflict of interest with conflict of interest.
Barry Irwin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Use your Street Sense, pal.
>
> Who is in a better position to know about what is
> going on with Pletcher, Allday and Lawyer
> Ron...some crackpot in Chicago who is apartment
> bound, or somebody close to the stable?
Our point precisely and that is why we have asked you to find out when Allday established his relationship with Plech. You can talk the talk, but can you walk the walk?
> Do not confuse possible conflict of interest with
> conflict of interest.
I believe what Barry meant to say is don\'t confuse Appearance of Impropriety with Conflict of Interest. Barry could go a long way to diffuse the appearance of impropriety by digging a little deeper. At that point, even he may discern the conflict of interests.