Yes, read it and weep substance bettors.
The First Saturday in May is a \"Dry Saturday\" in a dry county.
Whatchagonnado when the juicers can\'t run for you?
http://sports.yahoo.com/rah/news?slug=ap-kentuckyderby-drugtesting&prov=ap&type=lgns
P.S. Monba is still a dangerous horse to leave off the ticket
Zito was crying a bit. Think its time to downgrade Anak Nakal?
Chuckles_the_Clown2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The First Saturday in May is a \"Dry Saturday\" in a
> dry county.
First, it\'s still Kentucky -- arguably the loosest state of all, medication-wise.
Second, an excerpt from the article:
\"Kentucky Horse Racing Authority executive director Lisa Underwood said trainers should be "ready for anything" when it comes to testing this year.
Well, almost anything. The Derby horses will not be tested for steroids...\"
Third, is there TCO2 testing in Kentucky? No mention in the article, but if you can still jug a horse in Ky., well...
Lastly, it was perceived by the Dutrow and Asmussen bashers that their horses would flop miserably under the \"more stringent rules and testing\" in Dubai. Didn\'t happen, so either the \"better testing\" is just BS being spewed to calm the public, or these guys are still way ahead of the chemists.
(I won\'t even bother with the other option -- that these guys and Pletcher are just better horsemen, with better stock than the rest. That just isn\'t possible, is it?)
Rick,
The quote does Not say they \"Will not be tested for Steroids.\" My read is that the trainers better be worried they may. (Whether there is a sanction is another matter.)
I absolutely discount the notion that Plech can pick a yearling out of the sales any better than my barber.
Rick B. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Chuckles_the_Clown2 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The First Saturday in May is a \"Dry Saturday\" in
> a
> > dry county.
>
> First, it\'s still Kentucky -- arguably the loosest
> state of all, medication-wise.
>
> Second, an excerpt from the article:
>
> \"Kentucky Horse Racing Authority executive
> director Lisa Underwood said trainers should be
> "ready for anything" when it comes to testing this
> year.
>
> Well, almost anything. The Derby horses will not
> be tested for steroids...\"
>
> Third, is there TCO2 testing in Kentucky? No
> mention in the article, but if you can still jug a
> horse in Ky., well...
>
> Lastly, it was perceived by the Dutrow and
> Asmussen bashers that their horses would flop
> miserably under the \"more stringent rules and
> testing\" in Dubai. Didn\'t happen, so either the
> \"better testing\" is just BS being spewed to calm
> the public, or these guys are still way ahead of
> the chemists.
>
> (I won\'t even bother with the other option -- that
> these guys and Pletcher are just better horsemen,
> with better stock than the rest. That just isn\'t
> possible, is it?)
The designer roids cannot be tested for even in Dubai and Japan unless they have a sample. I doubt that any trainer is going to give them a sample of his \"Silver Bullet\" to use.
The best roid maker or at least one of the best has stated that he intended to produce one that would allow an 80 year old man in a wheelchair to hit a 500 foot homerun.
Even if a trainer was caught; what would be the penalty, $500 and and 15 days?
Rick,
I believe you meant to say the cheats/chemists are ahead of the testers.No matter how much testing they do some guys will continue to win at a high rate, if they are using undetectable stuff.There is cheating going on but not as much as the conspiracy theorists believe. Some guys just get lucky and get a chance to get real quality stock, some of which turns out to be real fast.
Horsemanship is something that seems to coincide with quality stock and fast horses. Ever wonder how thes so called great \"horsemen\" would do if they had John Candlin\'s barn of despicable New York Bred slow rats.
It could be that Tricky is this years brilliant \"horseman\" but remember when Pat Reynolds trained BB, he was very impressive also.
Mike
... but why even go there, Spend a Chuck, when major contenders this year will
also be lead over from the barns of 2 of the other usual suspects, Steve
Asmussen and \"Babe\" Dutrow.
These guys all have high volume high visibility operations. If they are using
any performance enhancing methods, these are methods which have consistently
passed or evaded the level of scrutiny which is being applied by Racing.
If you are going to attack the credibility of a trainer, why not use FACTS or
STATISTICS (TG #s?)to support your contentions?
Here\'s a project for Clownograph: All of TAPs Derby starters, what number did they get in their last Derby prep, what was their subsequent Derby # ? Big
bounces? Wouldn\'t this be helpful, seeing as TAP could have 2 and maybe 3
runners in the Derby? (Not bad for a trainer who has been \"counted out\" by some
who should know better).
The Circus Wagon hasn\'t been running the White Mercedes off the road recently;
you weren\'t ceased and desisted, were you?
In Richality,
It\'s getting exciting isn\'t it? I can\'t hardly sit still. I can\'t hardly sleep. Are you on as big a Derby Buzz?
Remember that old anti-drugs commerial? \"This egg is your mind, this egg in the frying pan is your mind on Dope\"?
Theres a couple angles for this Derby, and angles to factor later when they test and discipline for Steroids and Bloodpacking. If some have been cheating and the threat of being discovered and/or disciplined becomes significant, they will modify their behavior. I think the Derby this year has great potential to modify behavior. They will be watched and they will be tested. It would be prudent to be careful and rely upon your horse and your horsemanship.
If the above occurs the question is which trainers benefit and which trainers are impacted negatively. In regard to the former. I think Mott moves up big time. The problem is that his horse has not looked like much. If he was any horse at all he should have walked away from them in the stretch of the Wood. That said, Mott is genuine. I think Stutts, Tagg and Matz move up.
Who moves down? Plech, Zito, Gas and Dutrow. But, you have to factor the horse too. How good are their horses? I tend to think Gas and Tricky are bringing better eggs to Louisville.
richiebee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ... but why even go there, Spend a Chuck, when
> major contenders this year will
> also be lead over from the barns of 2 of the other
> usual suspects, Steve
> Asmussen and \"Babe\" Dutrow.
>
> These guys all have high volume high visibility
> operations. If they are using
> any performance enhancing methods, these are
> methods which have consistently
> passed or evaded the level of scrutiny which is
> being applied by Racing.
>
> If you are going to attack the credibility of a
> trainer, why not use FACTS or
> STATISTICS (TG #s?)to support your contentions?
>
> Here\'s a project for Clownograph: All of TAPs
> Derby starters, what number did they get in their
> last Derby prep, what was their subsequent Derby #
> ? Big
> bounces? Wouldn\'t this be helpful, seeing as TAP
> could have 2 and maybe 3
> runners in the Derby? (Not bad for a trainer who
> has been \"counted out\" by some
> who should know better).
>
> The Circus Wagon hasn\'t been running the White
> Mercedes off the road recently;
> you weren\'t ceased and desisted, were you?
Bill Mott\'s dad was a veterinarian. Anyone who\'s brought up working with animal\'s and has a vet for a dad isn\'t totally above the possibility.
You can look at Louie Rousell III, Neil Pessin, John Kimmel who gave up a vet practice to train, there\'s a whole lotta people who work with animals that have experience, or backgrounds working with or growing with or becoming associates with those that have knowledge of animals. It doesn\'t mean any more than it means. Good horsemen, poor horsemen, we\'ve all seen them.
The constant hammering on Pletch, Asmussen, Lake, etc only means they\'re the easy targets because they\'re the most visible, and many want to link their successes to drugs.
You\'ve got the different levels in Illinois vs. Louisiana, etc. What\'s a legal level in one area exceeds the levels in another.
Doesn\'t mean they can\'t train, it just makes it equally dangerous to wager on or against their stock. Take your pick.
Ad Nauseum--
TCO2 testing is irrelevant as long as the threshold level for a positive is 37. Horses produce 29-31 on their own (on rare occasions 32). In my quest to bring this subject out into the daylight I recently got a response to my F.O.I Act request from N.Y., and so far I\'ve just looked at the test results for one month (Jan 08). There are lots of 33s and 34s, which CAN NOT happen naturally. We\'ve been a little busy with the Derby, new products, etc., so we haven\'t had time yet to match the results up by trainer, or seriously pursue the discussions with other states.
As I have mentioned before, the dialogue we have had with Kentucky has been hilarious (and continued in that vein)-- and in response to what someone said here, there is more than a question as to whether they have been testing in Kentucky. I know for a fact there have been stretches of time where they have not. And that appears to be one of the reasons they are fighting not to release the data to me.
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ad Nauseum--
>
> TCO2 testing is irrelevant as long as the
> threshold level for a positive is 37. Horses
> produce 29-31 on their own (on rare occasions 32).
> In my quest to bring this subject out into the
> daylight I recently got a response to my F.O.I Act
> request from N.Y., and so far I\'ve just looked at
> the test results for one month (Jan 08). There are
> lots of 33s and 34s, which CAN NOT happen
> naturally.
Thank you Jerry. I knew you had mentioned this many times before, but I couldn\'t remember the actual #\'s, and I was too lazy to go look for them.
My point in bringing it up was in response to Chuckles over-exuberance regarding the latest proclamation of \"new and improved\" testing for the Derby -- new and improved, how so?
They never quantify it, so I just chalk it up to more mealy-mouthed bullshit from the local PR machine -- whether it\'s the tracks, the authorities, whoever -- and I\'ll neither move and trainers up or down because of it.
I\'m pushing pretty hard in several different directions on the TCO2 and other drug issues, and when I get some time I\'m going to push harder. It will probably take a serious investigative reporter to blow this up, and one of the things I\'m doing is working on that.
Smalltimer:
Some cracks in the facade are showing. I may have to start calling
you \"Smallminded\".
We are going to say that the youngest trainer ever admitted to Racing\'s Hall of
Fame, a trainer who has probably been leading trainer at in excess of 10
different tracks (and probably more)(including Saratoga maybe 10 times)is not
above suspicion because \"His father was a vet\"? Even the Citrus Conspiracy seems
to acknowledge that Mott is beyond reproach.
To say that Neil Pessin \"gave up a veterinary career\" is a bit of a stretch.
Are you confusing Neil with his father, a controversial former state vet in the
state of Kentucky?
Rather than distributing errata, why not go back to that definitive synthetic
breeding study. With any luck, it might be finished by the time that all US
tracks have returned to dirt racing.
Your early contributions were viable, though verbose. Now it seems like you
have joined my dear friend Chuckles on the grassy knoll.
Jerry,
Keep it up. You are the only one who seems concerned or at least is willing to come out of the closet!
You are to be commended for all your work and efforts.................
TGJB Wrote:
> There are
> lots of 33s and 34s, which CAN NOT happen
> naturally.
Please see the current breadth of scientific literature regarding feedstuffs/nutrition and dietary constituent impact on altering TCO2 levels in the horse.
General rule:
Horses on pasture: generally run 26-32
Horses on commercial feed and hay: 27-33
Horses on higher protein feeds, supplements and hays 28-35
With no \"milkshaking\" involved.
TGJB Wrote:
> As I have mentioned before, the dialogue we have
> had with Kentucky has been hilarious (and
> continued in that vein)-- and in response to what
> someone said here, there is more than a question
> as to whether they have been testing in Kentucky.
> I know for a fact there have been stretches of
> time where they have not. And that appears to be
> one of the reasons they are fighting not to
> release the data to me.
I think you are exactly right in that presumption.
richiebee,
Many thanks for the accolades. I\'ve stood on the grassy knoll as well.
I\'ll try to be as concise as possible, to avoid using more characters than are allowed in this forum.
Feel free to refer to me in any cute name you prefer. My suggestion is - don\'t read my lengthy posts if you\'re offended by their wordage.
The need for your approval/disapproval fails to sway me either way.
If you\'d care to RE-READ my initial post on this topic, I wrote John Kimmel gave up the vet practice, not Neil Pessin, okie dokie? So richiebee, if you wanna criticize, either get your facts straight or get your vision checked.
In regards to Bill Mott, who was his most successful animal of all time, and exactly how sterile was that animal? Probably a genetic defect.
Regarding synthetic. It makes no diff to me what the surface(s) are yesterday, tomorrow or 15 years from now. I can play all of them and not whine about it.
(I need to wrap this up, due to my already lengthy response).
In your future responses to my ramblings, please be a lot more specific than, \"in excess of 10 different tracks,\" \"and probably more,\" \"including Saratoga, maybe 10 times,\" etc, violates my sense of proving something. I don\'t deal in \"about/probably/maybe/probably more.\"
Your ability to judge what I say, as viable or otherwise, is unnecessary given your proclivity to deal in generalities while ignoring specifics.
Peace, out...
Raise a Richie,
You\'d find that I\'m not a big believer in conspiracies:
I think Oswald acted alone;
I don\'t think Dubya blew up either the WTC\'s or the New Orleans Levees. (Whether he was Negligent, Intentionally Ignorant or Casually Indifferent are other matters entirely.)
Now, don\'t ask me about Big Oil and Price Fixing or
Corporate Welfare and the outsourcing of manufacturing for Windfall Profit.
Among trainers, I think you\'ll find there\'s not much collaboration and thus not much chance of inter trainer conspiracies. That said, some leading trainers are committing crimes almost every day and they are doing it at the expense of others. That is not a conspiracy. It is a crooked trainer, acting in concert with a crooked vet, but I\'m optimistic their heyday is behind them.
I can\'t believe Winstar welshed upon a gratuity breeding right for TGraph. DH has made that Farm. OK, now I\'m really rooting against them.
richiebee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Smalltimer:
>
> Some cracks in the facade are showing. I may have
> to start calling
> you \"Smallminded\".
>
> We are going to say that the youngest trainer ever
> admitted to Racing\'s Hall of
> Fame, a trainer who has probably been leading
> trainer at in excess of 10
> different tracks (and probably more)(including
> Saratoga maybe 10 times)is not
> above suspicion because \"His father was a vet\"?
> Even the Citrus Conspiracy seems
> to acknowledge that Mott is beyond reproach.
>
> To say that Neil Pessin \"gave up a veterinary
> career\" is a bit of a stretch.
> Are you confusing Neil with his father, a
> controversial former state vet in the
> state of Kentucky?
>
> Rather than distributing errata, why not go back
> to that definitive synthetic
> breeding study. With any luck, it might be
> finished by the time that all US
> tracks have returned to dirt racing.
>
> Your early contributions were viable, though
> verbose. Now it seems like you
> have joined my dear friend Chuckles on the grassy
> knoll.
Whoa there. I didn\'t say anybody \"welshed\". It\'s a long, annoying story.
Look, stop playing word games. YES, the alkalysing agents are in the feed, whether it\'s premixed or added by the vet/trainer (one of the things that needs to be seriously investigated). I\'ve been saying so right along. HOWEVER it gets in the system, it elevates performance-- as the study you yourself posted (which Rick Arthur sent to me independently) shows. Your position is that performance enhancers in the feed is \"natural\", and should be allowed, WITHOUT THE CONSUMER (HORSEPLAYER) KNOWING WHICH HORSES HAVE BEEN DRUGGED AND WHICH HAVE NOT?
I reported to someone who has worked closely with Rick (someone who has seen all the California readings) that the NYRA readings contained lots of 33s and 34s. He said QUOTE-- \"That can\'t happen without them being given something\". END QUOTE.
So, I haven\'t matched up the trainers with the results yet. You want to bet me as to whether there is a pattern? You want to bet me as to whether the higher readings result in better finish positions?
TGJB,
I\'m with you on this one.
There is no question, patterns will clearly indicate performance levels.
I\'m more than happy to make a friendly wager that you and I both know what those results will show.
I think you\'ve landed on a certainty.
Small:
Good post--thanks for accepting my post in the manner in which it was delivered.
I am usually open minded and accommodating, but I get a bit upset when
allegations are cast in certain directions.
I have been watching Bill Mott train horses since the early 1980s. I worked for
him briefly in 1986, and I must say that we disliked each other quite a bit. To
be honest, Bill disliked me quite a bit more than I disliked him.
As to Neil Pessin, I saw his work up close at Saratoga, 1982: gambled all day,
spent most of the night trying to avoid folks he owed money to; famously spent
an entire day at the races at the Spa in a men\'s room avoiding his landlord.
None of which made him a bad fellow.
I think Mott\'s horsemanship skills, and willingness to abide by racing\'s rules
as evidenced by his record, should spare him the indignity of a statement which
smears, though only peripherally, his reputation and indirectly, that of his
father.
I am not ignoring the Cigar allegation. I do not have the time to retrieve
Mott\'s CV in terms of champions trained, or the number of times he has been
leading trainer and at which tracks. To speak in general terms for the purpose
of saving time, can we agree that his career to this point has been rather impressive?
The sad thing is, Smalltimer, if the concern is for drug free racing, nothing
is more counterproductive than to expend energy chasing those who are likely
without guilt.
Sorry if I overreacted. And make sure you leave Forego alone.
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Look, stop playing word games. YES, the alkalysing
> agents are in the feed, whether it\'s premixed or
> added by the vet/trainer (one of the things that
> needs to be seriously investigated).
Not playing word games or trying to. Please check the literature for the results of feeds without such agents. Alfalfa hay vs timothy. Adding oats vs pasture only.
>> Your position is that
> performance enhancers in the feed is \"natural\",
No, not at all. Oats are not \"natural\" in my book.
> I reported to someone who has worked closely with
> Rick (someone who has seen all the California
> readings) that the NYRA readings contained lots of
> 33s and 34s. He said QUOTE-- \"That can\'t happen
> without them being given something\". END QUOTE.
Please talk to more than one person, and please talk to those others who have done research in this area. There are very qualified and nationally-respected clinicians (and Dr. Arthur certainly is one, too) who feel that milkshaking doesn\'t do much at all for a horse.
It seems you\'ve already decided what level of TCO2 is cheating and what is not. Why even bother to compare that to your figures?
smalltimer Wrote:
> I\'m more than happy to make a friendly wager that
> you and I both know what those results will show.
> I think you\'ve landed on a certainty.
In other words, you enjoin the methodology of making up one\'s mind before the data tells one what seems to be true, then simply using the data to prove and support one\'s opinion.
That isn\'t remotely \"science\". That\'s politics
Yeah, you\'re probably right. So bet me. It doesn\'t have to be for Jan 08. Pick a month from 06-7, I\'ll request the data, and send it to you.
The very study you posted here showed the correlation between TCO2 and performance.
sightsound,
Please forward me the name of your book title, so I can read the chapter explaining your scientific explanation making Oats not natural? I eagerly anticipate your reply. And can I get that book online....Oh, I think I just found it \"OATS, NATURAL OR NOT? ONE MAN\'S OPINION\"
richiebee,
Many thanks for the response. (I\'ll try to keep this short. lol).
I have great respect for Bill Mott. Agreed, his success speaks for itself. At no point did I infer he used illegal drugs, I simply stated he was a product of a situation which could have led him on that path. Fair enough?
I only mentioned Neil Pessin in passing, he was someone who came to mind. I could have mentioned tons of these type individuals on the La/Cal/Ill/Fla, etc etc circuit, but I was only making a quick point.
Reference Cigar, the son of Palace Music the sire of 300+ offspring including Cigar, the dam produced 11 live foals in 14 years, including 5 that were actually racehorses. Those horses out of the dam produced horses that made it to the track, and also produced offspring. The point being, neither of us could prove/disprove Cigar was/wasn\'t sterile through the use of drugs. Neither you or I could ever prove with 100% certainly that we are right. Right? Also, at no point did I ever \"allege\" anything about Mott. Couple years ago I did a study of over 300 of his animals, about 2,000 starts, so I have enough respect to play his animals in the right spots.
richiebee, I say, with all due respect, I don\'t chase trainers trying to catch the illusive cheaters. But am I congnizant of the very best trainers, performance wise in the entire industry? The answer is yes.
The need to address the possible overreaction on your part is not necessary. I reciprocated with some smart ass remarks also. That type of exchange makes for fun reading to some, but it doesn\'t add much to the room. You and I are very passionate about the sport. We both see things that are counterproductive and hurt the sport. Forego will be left alone.....per your request.
I\'ll correct the typo if you tell the story.
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Whoa there. I didn\'t say anybody \"welshed\". It\'s a
> long, annoying story.
1. The quality of those watching the barn and the Derby horses varies from person to person and is usually not impressive.
2. You can milkshake in Dubai because they don\'t test for it. Never have.
3. What on earth does this have to do with Todd Pletcher.
4. You act like a public handicapper: make a semi-bold prediction, then backtrack and cover your sorry ass.
I want to play devils advocate and ask the question, What happens as a result of the use of all these drugs in the so called superior equine animals? Answer: We have all admitted it ruins the game. We have yet to discuss the effects on breeding, when these same horses are snapped up by the Arabs for huge amounts. These trainers and their cheating ways actually, to my knowledge, bring vast amounts of middle east revenue to the table as the buyer purchases damaged goods.
I would like to see a study of these horses purchased for millions and the offspring and durability they produce.
Horses don\'t eat oats in the wild. Horses are not designed to eat oats. Being fed quarts of oats a day has big downside. That\'s something man added using the horse for increased work. Hence not \"natural\".