Dear fellow posters ... for me, the proverbial camel is tetering and feel personally that if this guy somehow shakes loose any faith that I have in this game may be irretrievably lost ... And the particpants are pulling at the heartstrings with their \" its someones life and livlihood \" syrupy crap. There are so many good people that play on the fringes of this game, within the rules, and who I ask is looking out for them? And while I am at it, let me send a personal shout out to Michael Veitch (brother of KY steward John) who does a fantastic Orprah imitation with his interviews with Dutrow almost diefying the cheater. And yet he fancies himself a journalist. How can we make them hear, \"we want the game cleaned up!\"
Niall,
Think THEY got ya buddy.Tricky\'s positives mainly minutia.The latest Tricky positive violation(90 days) for a race day banned painkiller,the horse finished dead last, but Tricky is responsible.
Seen MANY horses routinely injected for minor stuff at the track/farms by trainers/assistants wanting to save owner vet bills.Many own/have hypo needles.Tricky is responsible for the hypo needles found in his barn area. Incidentally, where are the repeated Class 1 and 2 Violations which should lead to revocation??
Tricky a target of the disingenuous Albany politicians via certain upstate Blue bloods in the game. The demise of the game came long before the likes of a nitwit like Tricky showed up.Most of the blame in NY rest with the Albany Politicians who suddenly champion the popular \"integrity cry\" like every clown in the game with a forum. The smug Clueless Clowns who\'ve been running NYRA for the past 10 years or so,also complicit in hurting the NY racing game.
By the way,imo, Tricky lacks the wherewithal to run any kind of ongoing cheating scheme. It\'s well known he\'s a nitwit and his own worst enemy(nothing to do with racing).They may revoke Tricky for being an undesirable to gain favor with the public because they really have nothing else of substance.
If Tricky\'s revoked,some will think something good just happened to the game, but you\'d just be sucked in by the Albany crowd who are desperate to do damage control to a drying up revenue stream, the players money.
Mike
Interesting point/counterpoint. One comment. Miff wrote...
\"Tricky is responsible for the hypo needles found in his barn area.\"
Maybe I\'m misinterpeting this but it seems like you are saying perhaps he is NOT responsible?
For me, the answer to this is a resounding YES. He IS responsible. I don\'t know what it adds up to...but that\'s definitely YES.
HP
Spot on Mike.
I would only add that it is not the \"race day\" medications that are the real issue, rather it is the training drugs; ractopamine et al.
More than a few top level trainers are using powerful stuff that clears the system by race day. bbb
HP,
Absolutely yes, as was Gary Sciacca when he got 90 days for a positive while he was out of the country. Thats what the trainer responsibity rule is all about.
Mike
1-- Yes, most of the times Tricky has been CAUGHT involved innocuous suibstances.
2-- He had a 42 TCO2 test in Ky. That alone should have gotten him at least a year even if it was a first offense-- it\'s way over the limit, so clearly intentional, and involves a definite performance enhancer. It\'s also probably a federal crime (affecting the outcome of a sporting event).
3-- The problem isn\'t the things he\'s been caught using.
Hi Bell,
Aware that you know this stuff but in NY that problem has somewhat dissapted. NYRA was desperate to \"get\" Rudy Rod, they had 99 spies and all kinds of out of competition testing done,got nuttin.New Jersey went after Levine in the same way a few years back,got nuttin.Cali always after Sadler,Mitchell et al, got nuttin except a Mullins bullshit thing.Chemists way ahead of testers.
With other venues doing the out of competition surprise testing, I wonder which trainers still have the chops to do the in between thing.
Mike
No knowledge or opinion on Rudy. NJ only tested Levine for one drug (EPO) in their famous investigation and did not freeze the samples. Rick Arthur in Cali has stopped everyone except possibly one guy (there was one other for a few months ending a couple of months ago).
Take a look at the \"last 90 days\" for the usual suspects in So Cal. It shows up in the figures, too.
\"Take a look at the \"last 90 days\" for the usual suspects in So Cal. It shows up in the figures, too\"
JB,
Obvious PR-ing for your pal Rick Arthur.Don\'t agree at all. Sadler and Mitchell both had enormous runs AFTER Arthur outed them re the steroid thing, 2 years ago,maybe??. Both only RECENTLY on the quiet side,but any barns can go to the cold side at any time.They are still in the very top tier of the trainers standing, meet after meet.
Mike
Mitchell has been quiet?
Sadler horses were ruining like Booby Frankel-esque circa 2002/2004, where they would re-brake inside the 3/16th as if the had wings for the past 2+ years. His current runners including winners are not exhibiting that style of running.
What I cannot understand is why racing haven\'t adopted the testing/enforcement measures that are in place in Track & Field given that both sports are clones of each other. In fact, just about all performance enhancers in racing can trace their origin to Track & Field.
Mitchell is the only one of the big ones from a few years ago still winning or getting figures like he was. O\' Neill and Mullins way down, Sadler a good trainer with good stock but not getting the big numbers he was, as a rule. The steroid thing is very old news, not what this is about.
The guys that bear watching now are Carava and Puype, not sure yet.
Jerry, Mitchell is absolutely on fire in Cal. Lost in all the back and forth about the DQ in the sprint on Monday was that the Mitchell horse that was put up was one who had been trained last year by Carla Gaines, a very skilled trainer with no indication of move-up tendencies. Last year the horse had a settled top of 7.5. Sadler claimed the horse at Del Mar and laid him off until January, and the horse moved forward a 2.25 points second off the layoff. Okay, possible given that the horse had been laid off and now was 4. Then, however, Mitchell claims the horse and moves it up another 3.25 points in the first try off the claim. He then bounces a couple of points going back to turf, runs Monday in the stakes and probably ran another new top in that race. Something isn\'t right somewhere.
Rich,
Thought JB was inferring Mitchell in the \"usual suspects\" category.He just had a former claimer put up on a DQ against some of the best Cali sprinters on Monday.
Mike
\"it\'s the shoes\"... that\'s the typical response you get from these move-up trainers....
colt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> \"it\'s the shoes\"... that\'s the typical response
> you get from these move-up trainers....
When did Mars Blackmon become a horse trainer?
I got one better, and unfortunately it is true. Mitchell gave an interview several years ago indicating that Jesus gave him some help on deciding which horses to claim. Not kidding. Hay, oats, water and Jesus, apparently.
Yeah but Gastroguard, a deworming, a better blacksmith, better nutrition, a tooth float, a better morning exercise rider, kinder care in the stable, a better fitting bit,joint tapping,hyperberic chambers and massages have nothing to do with it.It\'s ONLY illegal drugs that move up horses.
Mike
Mike: No one is saying that. Those things all matter. A horse I owned several years ago turned around simply because he finally got a good dentist. His prior dental care was horrible. But take my example, the horse that was put up in the race Monday. Almost impossible on straight horsemanship and the other stuff you mention does that horse move up six or seven points leaving the Carla Gaines barn. No way, no how. If the horse had been claimed off Librado Barocio we wouldn\'t be having this conversation.
It\'s not a black or white world. Some of these guys could be good trainers AND using something. Back in the day, Mullins actually claimed a couple of horses off Frankel, horses that Frankel himself had moved up mysteriously in that period early in the decade Jerry references. Those horses continued to perform well. If Mullins was nothing more than a juicing ignoramus, that could not have happened.
Yeah, and the only ones who know about those things are certain guys. And they forget them sometimes, which is why a guy like Mullins was a 35% trainer, then a 9% trainer.
Other guys, like Scott Lake, know about those things in the Mid-Atlantic states, but forget them when they come to NY. And this guy Guerrero at Pha, he knew them, then he forgot them, now he remembered again.
You conveniently left out that Mullins lost his top owner during the financial crisis and is at 24per cent with no stock to speak of.
Guys cheat but not nearly as much as the Kool Aid drinker thinks.
Pupye and Carava,really?
After reading so many passionate responses I am certain that my erstwhile camel will spend some time on the farm getting some R&R and maybe a visit from Bartolo Colon\'s Dr, and be ready to carry a whole bunch of Saratoga straw !! For the most part we are all educated people participating in a pastime that is rigged. After reading some of the news articles about the hearing I felt that the policy makers are BEGGING us not to play ... But play we will !! The financial markets are rigged as well and yet I play that game too ... Every now and again we need someone in our corner that will give us a fighting chance ...
As an aside, when looking to the Belmont Stakes stongly consider the Jocks involved. Specifically who likes to save ground ... It is more so a jockeys race than many others. Prado have a mount?
Mike-- I\'m trying to be polite, but you are trying my patience.
I don\'t care what clients Mullins has, or his win percentage, I only use that to have a common language for discussion with guys like you. I look at the figures these guys get compared to the ones other guys get out of the same stock.
The basic issue is really that of who the vet is, but because that info is not published we have to go with the trainers.
JB,
I don\'t agree that at times a new trainer can\'t legitimately move up horses. Arnold Zetcher,for years, had most of his stock with Mac Anally,I think. they did very little running/winning. He moved his stock to Baffert, maybe last few years, and the results are dramatically better TG figs including graded stakes wins.
So, by your logic, Baffert is a cheat.
Mike
Yeah, I\'m that simple. I wouldn\'t look at all the other Baffert horses too.
Would never say that JB, you did.Incidentally, unless you did not notice, Baffert went on a huge tear earlier this year with his whole barn.
Mike: That also coincided with the Santa Anita meet, and going back to dirt. There might be nothing more to it than that. Baffy is still not completely comfortable on the synthetics.
On the McAnally thing: He\'s been a great trainer over the years but it\'s no secret that the fastball isn\'t quite there anymore. Those horses may have shown improvement going to any trainer at the top of their game.
Car,
See your point, but I\'m very convinced that trainers are like appples in a barrel. I don\'t believe Wayne Lukas,Mac Anally or many others suddenly forgot how to train.I\'m convinced the horse is 90% of the equation, the vet 7%, the trainer 3%.There are only great horses imo not great trainers.
Mike
If we ever get a list of the horses Allday worked on we\'ll take a look at that 7% theory.
Listen, There\'s this conversation and then there\'s the serious, far more sophisticated one. a) Looking at figures gives you a much more accurate picture than win %, and b) there are things I KNOW. Factually. Not all of which I can say here. Like, for example, what a vet told the Jockey Club committee about the things HE had done.
\"a) Looking at figures gives you a much more accurate picture than win %\"
...agree if the figs were backed by science or at least in consistent agreement. For example, the Preakness from one end to the other between you, Beyer and Rags are 10 lengths apart.How does one get a good handle on exactly what represents \"a much more accurate picture\".
Mike
Again, trying to be nice here (and for the moment viewing this as someone who doesn\'t make figures he knows are extremely accurate)-- have someone who understands statistics explain this to you. (Though I will say this is somthing Ragozin doesn\'t understand either, in a different context-- he confuses methods used to measure small and larger sample sizes).
In an individual context the things you talk about matter-- if I was holding up as evidence ONE example, from a day where figure makers disagreed, it would not stand up as evidence. But over a larger sampling those things will wash out-- we will have some races faster than others do, and vica-versa. Neither I nor anyone else with a brain will make sweeping generalizations based on one or two examples, even when they are as extreme as the sheet I posted of the Scott Lake filly a couple of years ago. That was an example. A larger sampling is evidence. And you would see the same things I see if you looked at the figures of the other two guys as well.
And by the way, how do you get Beyer 10 lengths different? He\'s got it very close to what I did.
I\'ll try to be equally nice.After studying and comparing TG figs,Beyer figs and Rags figs for 5 years I have data that YOU don\'t.About 28% of the time, there is disagreement(2 points or more), about 72% of the time there is agreement(less than 2 points)
That does not qualify as isolated,as you suggest.There is no evidence, BASED on comparative results, that ANY of the three fig makers are more accurate, even though you think you make them better than Mark Hopkins and Len Friedman.
Coming soon, you can purchase the best translation table on the planet, TG to Beyer to Rags. Get em, you\'ll learn something you dont know.
I said from one end to the other, you left out Rags!
Read my previous post again until you understand it. Done being nice.
In this context Ragozin is irrelevant. I mean that seriously, for reasons I have gone into many times. By virtue of the rules they have, there will sometimes be huge differnces. The differences with Beyer will be of a different kind-- they don\'t make the mistakes Ragozin makes.
I can\'t wait to see the study of who\'s figures are more accurate, and the explanation of how you did it.
Racing needs to start \'doing the right thing\' They need to \'clean house\' and start making serious changes. If Dutrow is being singled out as Miff suggests, well, than that\'s too bad, he was just in the wrong place at the wrong time, he will just be a casualty in the house cleaning process.
If the game ends up \'clean\' in 5 years and Dutrow is out of the sport pumping gas somewhere, i doubt many will shed a tear. If that\'s the price we have to pay to clean this sport up, that\'s a price i\'m willing to pay.
Its time to put HORSE RACING in the same sentence with honesty and integrity.
Lets start somewhere.
TGJB:
NYSRWB still admits to some chain of custody procedural problems:
Jones testified that a shipment of urine and blood samples - which also contained the three syringes that were found in Dutrow' barn on Nov. 3 - were returned to the track because they had been sent to the wrong address[/b].
also:
Gonzalez said that following the notification of the positive he and a member of his staff did a search of Dutrow's Aqueduct barn on Dec. 18, during which no unauthorized drugs were found.
Koenig attempted to create a shadow of doubt over the chain of custody regarding the processing of the syringes. Gonzalez said he was given the syringes by state investigator Joel Leveson, but Gonzalez's name doesn't appear on a chain of custody sheet that was entered as evidence.
Jerry, to play devils advocate, stuff like this CANNOT continue to go on! Can we NOT GET this worked out? There CANNOT be any mistakes in the collection process and if any are uncovered they must be, unfortunately dismissed as evidence.
Surprising that they are going forward with problems that a first year law student could identify.
Are there other aspects of the case that are solid?
\"Are there other aspects of the case that are solid?\"
Albany,
There is no case. This comes down to the powers that be deciding whether Tricky\'s overall conduct is detrimental to NY racing.Calder used the same reason to banish Kirk Ziadie, thief extrodinaire!
Tricky is more guilty of being a persistent jackass in the blueblood controlled NY racing enviroment than a serious drug guy.Interesting how NY will handle say as Asmussen license renewal or a Mullins or whomever they perceive as a possible negative to NY racing.
Racing lightweight Albany phonies hold all the cards here.
Mike
Mike:
Got your point.
By the way, I am very familar with Albany-based politicians/bureaucrats who often need a search warrant to find their own butts.
Albany
It wouldn\'t be hard to reach some general consensus about a potential grandstanding play by said bureaucrats. They traffic in that on a daily basis. To make that the issue, however, is to let the tail do the heavy wagging. As JB said, the problem isn\'t the things he\'s been caught using. Sometimes karma requires an assist from misdirected forms of justice.
Mike,
I completely agree with your statement of \" there is no case \" any half ass lawyer would trash the chain of evidence debacle in a court of law and get him a stay or reinstatement. None of us should be surprised that the supreme idiots of NYRA could screw this up and continue the laughing stock that NY racing has become.
However his license does expire on August 2 I believe ? The easy way out will simply be a refusal to grant him a training license in NY for conduct detrimental to racing. They pretty much have carte blanche in that area without much recourse.
Tricky has spit in their faces as well as all of ours for years not caring about a post race positive or suspension. Why would he ? He\'s cashed 5 & 10 k bets and taken the money, partied his brains or lack there of out only to simply do it again next time he\'s broke ! He\'s no doubt a loathing self destructive character and a disgrace.
Worry not though, he eventually show up in a few years at Penn National or Charlestown and be hopping 2500 claimers into allowance scores taking down the slot money.
Meanwhile we\'ll still be having the same discussion about getting drugs out of the game and wondering why our archaic sport cannot attract any new plungers ?
Frank D,
The thing that may eventually destroy the game is more likely to be the politicians, the clueless clowns that are called racing execs, the NYRA\'s, Jockey Clubs et al.
Tricky, minutia in the big picture.
Mike
Actually, Tricky personally might be minutia in the big picture, but if he\'s the poster boy for cheating, it becomes a bigger deal than just him personally leaving the game never to return. I do agree with you that the clueless clowns as you put it will ruin the game....those are the ones who will permit Dutrow to continue to ply his trade at the expense of the backbone of the industry (the horseplayer).
It seems pretty odd that you would be defending this guy to the death, is someone paying you to say these things? Or, is he one of your relatives? I don\'t understand defending this guy with all the times he\'s cheated the system. Whether he\'s being singled out or not is \'minutia\' to the bigger picture which is cleaning up this game and cleaning it up any way we can. We have to start somewhere and kicking out the poster boy would be a great first step in a process that will rid the game of one cheater after another.
For many years, trainers have known that the punishments for drugging horses to rob purse money and betting money were light. The punishments are slaps on the wrists...why not take a shot? If i told you that the punishment in our society for armed bank robbery (for example) was a 2,500 fine and 30 days \'probation\' don\'t you think there would be a lot more bank robbery attempts? Sure there would, lots more.
Trainers need to know that you COULD be kicked out of the sport for life if they cheat. They need to know that the punishments are not \'light\' but strong and getting stronger.
I would throw a party (and invite all of you) if the racing industry would start viewing trainers sticking illegal drugs into horses as race fixing and make it a federal crime.....that would incite a party at my place.
(but i\'m not holding my breath)
Plastic,
The problem is also the perception of the Kool Aid drinker.There isn\'t ONE drug violation that Tricky has that is of consequence,including the excess for CO 2(discredited as a move up years ago by the aussies,check the data) You do not have any idea what drugs are purely move up/performance enhancers, I do, Tricky has never been caught with any.Never had a Class 1 or 2 violation, all else basic bullshit, widely used drugs by many,many trainers and permitted under the rules of the NYSWB within prescribed limits and time out from a race.
There are penalties on the books for offenders which are being enforced. If you banned trainers for class 3 viloations there won\'t be too many trainers left in the game eventually.Strong support in some circles to ELIMINATE many class 3 drugs from the list as they are MEDICINAL not performance enhancing.
The Kool Aid drinker has more conspiracy theories without even a little knowledge of the facts of exactly what is really performance enhancing.
I know Tricky 20 years, not a friend, he\'s a nitwit but a guy with the Magic bullet, not even close.
Mike
Miff-- please show me the data that discredits alkalyzing agents as a performance enhancer.
Already here on an old string.I have the study, there are several, indicating in some cases just the opposite, some horses performed worse after being tubed.
It\'s class 3 status speaks volumes.
Mike,
I don\'t always agree with you but have learned to respect your opinion and vast areas of knowledge in the game. In particular our similar views of the \" clueless clowns \" who are destroying whats left of this game.
BUT:
I have to say that your way off base here. I\'m far from a conspiracy theorist,I understand that chiropractors, acupuncturists, vitamins, equipment changes and legal non race day meds can move a horse up, yes even sometimes creating a new top of 2,3 or or more points.
I too know Tricky and have seen his bad act up close and personal ! His girlfriend, the mother of his daughter was murdered in the city I grew up in and do a lot of business in. He was and is a loud mouth drunk and junkie who has made his own bed and as plastic states has become the poster boy for our beloved clowns. First Kentucky now NY will follow suit and not renew his license no matter what comes out of the current hearings.
Most of our clowns do not know the difference between a class 1 or class 99 violation but they can see 64 positives at 13 different tracks in a 10 year period. The mob rules, thumbs down and off with his head. Good Riddance he has brought this upon himself. Yes he is a complete nit wit and you don\'t have to be a rocket scientist or chemist to give a substance to a horse that a knowledgeable person tells you that it will not make them get tired ?
From Oscar Barrera to Pistol Ferriola to every other juice trainer you can come up with in the past 30 years there is a common thread. Their horses do not tire, they keep going regardless of fractions, numbers, conditions etc... There lungs stay open and they do not produce lactic acid, case closed. Yes the cheats and chemists are way ahead of the testers. They can only test for a known entity, if they don\'t know what there testing for ?
So come on with Tricky and the only class 3 violations ? He\'s cheated, he\'s bragged about it in drunken stupors and has regularly been seen stuffing his pockets after a race. You can go even a step further and take a sample of horses that have been claimed from him or have changed hands and see what they\'ve done after for new connections ? Makes him look \" BRILLIANT \" !!!
There is no defending this guy his mouth and actions have brought it all upon himself.
Frank D.
Good. Show it to me.
Boy, you have to wonder why he loaded the horse up then. As I recall, the horse blew a 42. I mean, risk/reward seems kind of bad.., maybe Allday didn\'t know.
While you\'re searching for that study you might come across the California one from 4-5 years ago, also on a string here. The one that shows direct correlation between TCO2 level and finish position.
During cross-examination, Koenig pointed out several inconsistencies in Leveson's testimony and his written report, including the color of the substance found in the syringe and the volume of the syringe. Leveson initially thought the syringes were 6 cubic centimeters, when they were in fact 3 cubic centimeters. For a person with 14 years experience in drug testing, it\'s a little unbelievable how he can make that mistake
Koenig also noted that in the chain of custody of the handling of the evidence bag containing the syringes, the names of all the people who handled the bag were not recorded.
Though Leveson stated in his report that he "exhausted all leads" in his investigation, he testified that he did not investigate that claim nor did he interview three veterinarians whom Dutrow, in a subsequent interview, suggested he contact.
Joel Leveson, the board's director of investigations since 1997,was training two New York Racing Association employees how to do conduct a barn search. However, Leveson further testified that he did not conduct a "full-fledged" search, even after stumbling upon the syringes.
AND THIS IS OUR LEAD INVESTIGATOR FOR NYSRWB??? Did they wear gloves when they handled the syringes to then get proper fingerprints to lead them as to the ownership of them-whether it was in fact Dutrow, or vets, or asst trainer? Did they take photos? If they acting like this is a crime, then send in QUALIFIED people to collect evidence and treat it as such. I\'m NOT sticking up for Dutrow, BUT these types of things happen more frequently in racing than is needed!
4-5 years ago?? Milkshakes were detected in Australia in the 70\'s.Mid 70\'s I bought 15 horses in training in Australia and New Zealand who were shaked, some went forward some backward.
AGAIN, tubing is very OLD news, what part of that don\'t you get??
Show me a serious recent study or knock it off. There\'s a recent very detailed study on this subject, over a large sampling, in this country. A vague reference to a vague study from 30 years ago in another country ain\'t gonna cut it. Neither is an anecdote.
Last post, believe what you will.Horses that I owned and raced in THIS country at Yonkers and Roosevelt were given, in their feed, electrolytes, bicarbonate or baking soda and maybe something else( all the ingredients of a shake at that time). This was recommended by the Australian people we purchased the horses from.It was stated that this was a feed supplement used there and helpful to some horses.I am unaware if this was a forbidden practice at the time but we never got called in for it.
The results were supposed to be that the horse could sustain his best longer,not run faster.Well between gastric problems with a few, a few winners, and no positive effect on several others, my trainer abandoned the \"supplements\" after about 6 months. The horses performed no better or worse but the frequent gastric problems went away.
Don\'t know if there\'s a better shake concoction today, if not,old news, at least to me.
Mike
Well, that clears THAT up!
I think Mike\'s made 2 points:
First, even if you take Dutrow out of the business you won\'t have done anything serious to clean it up, other than to puff out your chest.
Second, trainers who regularly move up their horses are not all doing something illegal...so don\'t jump to conclusions.
In my experience, he is right on both counts. Some trainers are doing far more serious damage to their horses, the bettors and the business than Dutrow is doing. Some good trainers are achieving remarkable results by elevating the treatment of their horses, as you indicate.
At this point, I\'m mostly bored with this topic...all the bloviating on this site will change nothing. Hats off to Jerry for his hard work on the subject...I hope Mike has sharpened his focus even if he has annoyed the boss.
Far more importantly, after giving the topic a great deal of thought, I have come to a conclusion as to why Jerry Brown doesn\'t find Larry David funny....it\'s because these two characters share the same personality. Think about it.
Even when operating in full-tilt civil libertarian mode, I really find it hard to conjure up much sympathy for Dutrow. His offense is not mitigated by the fact that others do the same, nor that the tribunals before whom he appears shouldn\'t be giving out parking tickets. These are separate issues. In a game where we all operate with some kind of probability mindset, how difficult is it to feel anything other than confident that a man with 60+ transgressions really doesn\'t think that he needs to abide? In a sport that appears to be policed with a Barney Fife-like efficiency in some jurisdictions, the absence of iron clad evidence of wrongdoing doesn\'t engender much sympathy in the face of serial flaunting of more easily enforceable rules. I\'ll sleep easily with the rather slim possibility there is a miscarriage of justice afoot. The underlying issue is integrity. Rationalizations don\'t cut it. In another sport, not dependent in the least upon perceptions of a betting public, the most iconic and heroic sports figure of the past two decades, is about to come tumbling down from Mt. Olympus for cheating. If I don\'t have sympathy for him, even with my yellow bracelet, I sure as hell won\'t have any for this character. When they blow the whistle, lower the flag or open the starting gate, the bottom line is that there has to be a level playing field. It is not the kind of question where benefits of the doubt are doled out based on comparative offenses or administrative incompetency. Wrong is wrong. When we\'re done with him, bring on the next guy, and then the one after him.
Al,
What most don\'t get here is that I am not defending Dutrow or his personal very bad habits as Frank D also noted.
THEY\'RE after Tricky in an effort to deflect criticism from themselves and their detailed record of incompetence. EVERY major venue/Racing Association(e.g.Jockey Club) and Politician is hitching their wagons to the popular \"clean up the game theme\" for PR reasons and the obvious decline the game is in, handle wise.They want a major scalp.Who better than an in your face loud mouth drunk/ personal drug abusing gambler(more too, but this is PG rated)
None of them say why the \"wild west\" blind eye attitude was pervasive for so many prior years while the game was under the stewardship of many of these same of Clueless Clowns.
So if they get Tricky,the Clueless Clowns can stick out their chests but nothing meaningful was accomplished.The handle will most likely continue to slide, the game really no better off.
Mike
That\'s a very nice sentiment. Apply it throughout this sport and throughout time (such as taking trainers and their horses out of our Hall of Fame - the Horse of the Year for example) and you end up with a lot of blank walls and short fields.
However, and I don\'t mean to speak for Mike, he\'s tried to make the point that the diversion of going after an idiot is only wasting resources from going after the big time transgressors.
Mike-- you\'re about half right on this one. Some of the people in question do have good intentions but have no idea what to do to stop the drugs, some are full of crap and are only concerned with the \"perception\" problem. But there is now also the fear of Federal intervention, which scares these guys to death, and makes them want to show they are doing something.
There are actual, concrete steps that can be taken to begin to deal with the problem. The first is to force every jurisdiction to publish all drug test results in detail-- without baseline info there is no way to know what the hell is really going on. If you don\'t test for drugs it makes no difference what you ban, and if you don\'t announce the positives and punish those you catch it makes no difference what you test for.
Human nature being what it is, some people are always going to try to cheat. There are going to be a few bad cops, a few bad people in every profession. The problem is that the industry has been completely lacadaisical and incompetent in dealing with them. It\'s on the industry.
alm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That\'s a very nice sentiment. Apply it throughout
> this sport and throughout time (such as taking
> trainers and their horses out of our Hall of Fame
> - the Horse of the Year for example) and you end
> up with a lot of blank walls and short fields.
Yes, my post was full of platitudes, but it\'s nice to remember the sign posts once in a while. Now, if you clear out the Hall of Fame of transgressors, that\'s really not going to cause me any loss of sleep, but I doubt that\'s going to happen retroactively. As for the short fields, how many trainers have left the game because they can\'t compete? I really have no idea, but I think the law of supply and demand would start to balance the books soon enough. The horses won\'t disappear. Graham Motion might be an exceptional talent, but I doubt he\'s the only one capable of training without additives (unless he\'s just one very clever Brit). There are other good ones and they\'d start getting the stock.
moosepalm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wrong is wrong.
> When we\'re done with him, bring on the next guy,
> and then the one after him.
You know, if I thought this was actually going to happen, then I might be all for this trumped up kangaroo court they are dragging Dutrow through.
But they won\'t. They will fry one guy, then everybody will go back to their long nap, convinced that racing \"did something\" to fix the game.
It\'s a heaping pile of dung they are building. Everybody that is stoked with bloodlust, eagerly awaiting Dutrow\'s demise -- enjoy the view.
Rick B. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> moosepalm Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Wrong is wrong.
>
> > When we\'re done with him, bring on the next
> guy,
> > and then the one after him.
>
> You know, if I thought this was actually going to
> happen, then I might be all for this trumped up
> kangaroo court they are dragging Dutrow through.
>
> But they won\'t. They will fry one guy, then
> everybody will go back to their long nap,
> convinced that racing \"did something\" to fix the
> game.
>
> It\'s a heaping pile of dung they are building.
> Everybody that is stoked with bloodlust, eagerly
> awaiting Dutrow\'s demise -- enjoy the view.
While it may not be your intent, your words lend themselves to an interpretation favoring a game plan of inertia. I doubt anyone here who pays attention has any illusions about the efficacy of racing jurisdictions in their current configurations. One might even go so far as to say the entire industry, not just its enforcement mechanisms, is one of the most structurally inefficient, macro and micro, of any business model out there. Hardly a provable assertion, but impressionistically, not unfair either. None of that, however, mitigates the fact that one man currently stands accused, and railing against the \"system,\" is a bloodlust of its own. Battles are fought one at a time, and if this, as you suggest, is as far as it goes, then it\'s unfortunate, but failure to at least fight the first battle would even be more unfortunate.
moosepalm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Rick B. Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > moosepalm Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Wrong is wrong.
> >
> > > When we\'re done with him, bring on the next
> > guy,
> > > and then the one after him.
> >
> > You know, if I thought this was actually going
> to
> > happen, then I might be all for this trumped up
> > kangaroo court they are dragging Dutrow
> through.
> >
> > But they won\'t. They will fry one guy, then
> > everybody will go back to their long nap,
> > convinced that racing \"did something\" to fix
> the
> > game.
> >
> > It\'s a heaping pile of dung they are building.
> > Everybody that is stoked with bloodlust,
> eagerly
> > awaiting Dutrow\'s demise -- enjoy the view.
>
>
> While it may not be your intent, your words lend
> themselves to an interpretation favoring a game
> plan of inertia. I doubt anyone here who pays
> attention has any illusions about the efficacy of
> racing jurisdictions in their current
> configurations. One might even go so far as to
> say the entire industry, not just its enforcement
> mechanisms, is one of the most structurally
> inefficient, macro and micro, of any business
> model out there. Hardly a provable assertion, but
> impressionistically, not unfair either. None of
> that, however, mitigates the fact that one man
> currently stands accused, and railing against the
> \"system,\" is a bloodlust of its own. Battles are
> fought one at a time, and if this, as you suggest,
> is as far as it goes, then it\'s unfortunate, but
> failure to at least fight the first battle would
> even be more unfortunate.
Can\'t agree with this.
While it might not be your intent, what you are saying is, frying one guy to make us \"feel good\" -- then not doing anything else -- is better than nothing.
It\'s window dressing, Moose. Even a child can recognize a meaningless farce when he sees one.
Nope, Rick. That\'s the wrong read. Has nothing to do with \"feels good.\" That\'s at most, a collateral benefit. Or, as Michael Corleone might phrase it, \"it\'s not personal, just business.\" And farcical or not, how is it meaningless to Dutrow? You can\'t obscure the issue of wrongdoing by trying to turn the spotlight on the process employed in addressing the wrong.
from everything i understand, this is the wrong trainer/barn to go after.
this is an easy and meaningless scalp.
sloppy and disorganized.
moosepalm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nope, Rick. That\'s the wrong read. Has nothing
> to do with \"feels good.\" That\'s at most, a
> collateral benefit.
You are either naive, or you are being untruthful. Plenty of trainers have racked up violations, but Dutrow is everybody\'s favorite guy to kick. It\'s *exactly* why they are going after Dutrow. Don\'t try to put any perfume on this pig.
> You can\'t obscure the issue of wrongdoing
> by trying to turn the spotlight on the process
> employed in addressing the wrong.
Sure I can. Ever hear of due process? How about double jeopardy?
Dutrow has done wrong, been suspended, served time away, paid fines...and now his whole body of violations is being re-evaluated, with the possibility of him being banned from the game. If that happens, he will be paying TWICE for some or all of the same infractions.
Some \"process\". Why not just shitcan the guy, without all the hearings and the dog and pony show and the BS appearance of \"fairness\"? At least that would be honest.
Admirable principles, and they rule the day in an actual court of law.
I haven\'t seen anyone do anything other than criticize the process. My main interest in this thread is trying to separate issues. Some get enlarged at the expense of others, and in so doing, try to submerge the original concerns. In other places, facts and opinions have been used interchangeably.
My only strong opinion is that I have a really hard time viewing this guy as a victim. When you play fast and loose with the rules, you run the risk of kangaroo courts, lynch mobs, witch hunts, and other misused terms thrown around with reckless abandon. Kind of like that \"as you sow, so shall you reap,\" business.
MonmouthGuy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> from everything i understand, this is the wrong
> trainer/barn to go after.
>
> this is an easy and meaningless scalp.
>
> sloppy and disorganized.
REally? So nothing suspicious out of this outfit over the last 10 years?
I understand that you want Dutrow out, badly. So do many others.
But at what expense? Total abandonment of the usual principles of fairness and equitable punishment?
You say that they are not conducting the process in a court of law, which is true...but then you go on to say that the terms that are normally applied to such proceedings -- \"kangaroo court\", \"witch hunt\", etc., do not apply, either.
Well, then, what is it, exactly?
I see a process that is wide-open -- free from the constraints of rules and laws, free from those troublesome \"admirable principles\" of due process and double jeopardy...and with a bonus: the ability to make it up as they go along.
Where have I seen this before?
It\'s Animal House, with Dutrow as the entire Delta Tau Chi fraternity, on \"Double Secret Probation\", being held in judgment by empty suits: Albany\'s version of Greg Marmalard, Douglas Niedermeyer, and the hapless Dean Vernon Wormer.
(Here are the Albany guys at work: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0cF2piwjYQ&NR=1)
Similar contrived process, same pre-ordained result.
But hey, anything goes when the guy is as rotten as Dutrow, right? That seems to be your premise, Moose.
Alm, sort of bad reasoning not to enforce the rules though, isn\'t it? Yes, barring Dutrow doesn\'t stop ALL cheating trainers. Arresting a serial killer doesn\'t stop ALL or even MOST murders though, so who cares, right?
The difference is we don\'t arrest serial killers to make an example out of them.
Trust me, I have no real love for Dutrow. He is a good horseman, but he has also pushed the issue. Not exactly the Carlo Gambino type...
Problem I have with all of this is making an example of Tricky won\'t won\'t fix the problem. It\'s like the House Assassinations Committee hearings back in the 70\'s. Easier to go through the charade of making a spectacle of something rather than really deal with the issue at hand.
Better to change the testing rules and have a consistent set of consequences that are enforced.
And let\'s not forget about the vets.
Rick B. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But hey, anything goes when the guy is as rotten
> as Dutrow, right? That seems to be your premise,
> Moose.
Not exactly, Rick, but let me put it another way. When you sit down at a poker table, and are told the house rules, some of which are \"subject to whim\" should you cheat, and you cheat anyway, what recourse would you expect to have? This is a State Racing and Wagering Board. Whom was he expecting to adjudicate this? John Roberts? Is this the way I would conduct such a procedure? Of course not, but what does that have to do with the price of hay and oats? There is hardly anything about the thoroughbred industry (non-breeding) that I would conduct similarly to how its currently configured, so why should I be surprised about any of this? I will restate my premise, hopefully for the final time so that you do not try to re-frame it again. I have no sympathy for him, even in a Keystone Kops judicial operation (that was one that I forgot, above), because he assumed that risk when he kept pushing it, and pushing it in a system that can, effectively, make its own rules. Hell, he had recourse. He could have stopped doing it after the fiftieth time.
moosepalm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Rick B. Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > But hey, anything goes when the guy is as
> rotten
> > as Dutrow, right? That seems to be your
> premise,
> > Moose.
>
> I will restate my premise, hopefully for the final
> time so that you do not try to re-frame it again.
> I have no sympathy for him, even in a Keystone Kops
> judicial operation...
Well, good then, I don\'t have to \"re-frame\" anything: you don\'t care how they get Dutrow, as long as they get him. It\'s right there, in what I underlined. I mean, I sort of already knew, but it\'s better that you speak for yourself.
You could have just said as much 5 posts ago, instead of misguidedly attempting to confer any merit or legitimacy on the current proceedings.
Rick B. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Rick B. Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
> Well, good then, I don\'t have to \"re-frame\"
> anything: you don\'t care how they get Dutrow, as
> long as they get him. It\'s right there, in what I
> underlined. I mean, I sort of already knew, but
> it\'s better that you speak for yourself.
>
> You could have just said as much 5 posts ago,
> instead of misguidedly attempting to confer any
> merit or legitimacy on the current proceedings.
Well, Rick, you did it again. I never said that I \"don\'t care how they get Dutrow.\" My \"caring\" was not part of the premise upon which my \"lack of sympathy\" was based. It was based on his assumption of risk within a system with capricious regulatory bodies (and once again I have conferred \"merit or legitimacy on the current proceedings\" with the flattering characterization of it as \"capricious\"}.
So this time, instead of cherry-picking, why don\'t you specifically address my premise? Go back to the poker game example. If it\'s not on point, make the distinctions. If you\'re going to continue to disagree with me, it has to be with the point I\'m actually making, and not the one you want to argue against.
moosepalm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If you\'re going to continue to disagree with me, it
> has to be with the point I\'m actually making, and not
> the one you want to argue against.
As far as I can tell, your \"point\" is that Dutrow is bad for the game, he\'s brought it upon himself, and he needs to be out...and you will have no distracting issues from those of us who would question the process by which his removal from the game is going to be achieved.
If that is not your point, I apologize, and ask that you state your point directly.
Rick B. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> As far as I can tell, your \"point\" is that Dutrow
> is bad for the game, he\'s brought it upon
> himself, and he needs to be out...and you will
> have no distracting issues from those of us who
> would question the process by which his removal
> from the game is going to be achieved.
>
> If that is not your point, I apologize, and ask
> that you state your point directly.
No, that\'s not my point, but no need to apologize. This one was closer than the previous ones, but it is still spun in a way that seems to make it palatable to you as an opposing point of view. I\'ve said it three different times, and offered an analogy, so I\'ll assume I have a problem expressing myself. It was barely important enough to state once, so I think it\'s safe to say we can move on as I\'m certain people here would greatly prefer to see you share your thoughts on the Belmont rather than trying to parse my opinions. Feel free to contact me by private message if you want to continue this.
While the Clueless Clowns stump, purely for Public Relations reasons, the very ill game continues a downward trend.
Paulick Report
U.S. pari-mutuel handle falls again in May, this time by nearly 8%by The Paulick
Wagering on U.S. continued its downward spiral in May, with a decline of 7.80% from May 2010. Unlike several previous months, however, purses also declined though at a slower pace. Both declines in handle and total U.S. purses were exceeded by the drop in the number of race days, so the average bet per race day and average daily purses will show slight increases in May.
According to Equibase, a total of $1,163,454,383 was wagered in May, a decline of 7.80% from the same month in 2010 when $1,261,814,872 was bet. Purses dropped by 4.35% in May, from $100,348,921 to $95,983,896.
The number of racing days declined by 9.59% from May 2010 to May 2011, from 563 to 509.
Year to date, handle has fallen just over $400 million, from $5,049,378,245 in 2010 to $4,639,320,277 this year, a decline of 8.12%. Purses, fueled by slots subsidies and increases in California from higher takeout on certain wagers, have crawled upward by 2.33%, from $376,779,303 in 2010 to $385,543,651.
Live racing days in 2011 have decline 5.19%, from 2,044 in 2010 to 1,938.
Barring an unexpected turnaround, by year\'s end U.S. handle on Thoroughbred racing will have fallen for the sixth consecutive year and will be at its lowest level since the mid-1990s. There appears to be no concerted or coordinated effort by industry leaders to address the issue.