Twitter Post from our favorite VET:
Dr. Steve Allday @Fourlegsdoc 24m
Had the privilege of seeing some horses at TAP Stable today. Should not come as a surprise when he \"runs the table\" in The Oaks & Derby!
Yep,\"stuff\" works 20 days out,Brilliant!
A) Where do you get this was his last visit, B) some drugs (EPO and steroids for example) are not raceday drugs.
I\'m not coming to any conclusions about Pletcher\'s Oaks and Derby runners until I see how his other horses run Derby week.
That theory of yours is played out for some years now.Pletcher, his assistants, owners and vets have a far flung undetectable illegal drug thing going on.
Oakie dokie!
You mean the \"theory\" that Allday admitted to?
They test for EPO.
Again, you say many things that are not verifiable, lots of innuendo no facts.So,according to you,Allday outed himself re EPO,then turns around and continues to do what you claim he admitted to,illegally using EPO.
Makes perfect sense.
Again-- per a very recent discussion with Rick Arthur, what they\'re doing now, which is giving it 4 and 14 days out, doesn\'t test, unless you have out of competition testing. Period.
Everyone needs to read this short article from 2009
http://www.vet.upenn.edu/portals/0/images/Bellwether_general/bw70-spring09/Bellwether%20Spring%2009%20Scoping%20Out%20Doping.pdf
\"Scoping Out Doping - How Penn State Researchers Put The Brakes On Performance-Enhancing Drugs in Race Horses\"
It also doesn\'t make new red blood cells that can carry oxygen in that short amount of time.
They DO out of competition testing, don\'t they?
It\'s absolutley verifiable, it\'s not innuendo, it was a plain statement of fact in front of a roomful of VIP\'s. And as I have made clear it doesn\'t test.
Which is NOT to say it\'s necessarily what he\'s doing now. But what we do know is he has admitted doing it in the past, so there\'s no question he would cheat.
And use your head. If I was saying this about you publicly-- making a statement of fact about an admission you had made-- and it wasn\'t true, would you be keeping your mouth shut?
NO. They did at the BC, to some degree. And California is doing some now.
They are doing out of competition at the Derby.
Jerry - Steve Allday has said on the radio, to the general public, that he used to use EPO before it was banned, and he wasn\'t the only one. Said it a few years back.
He didn\'t say it only to the Jockey Club.
Race track vets used to milkshake, too, before that was banned, as a common practice.
If it wasn\'t illegal, it was done.
They are doing 72 surveillance at the Derby, if they are doing OOC testing that\'s good news but I haven\'t seen it.
Re the article, I scanned it quickly and will read it carefully when I get a chance. But a) Pennsylvania didn\'t even begin TCO2 testing until 2010, and b) his statement about the percentage of horses that test positive is unfounded. You can\'t get test results, so you can\'t come up with a percentage-- that\'s one of the problems. The number the RCI guy keeps quoting is BS-- he\'s extrapolating the number of positives against the number of starters without knowing how many horses are tested, what they\'re tested for, what type of tests are used, and what the actual results of any tests are.
Test results being made public is step one.
When exactly was EPO banned?
The public doesn\'t have a clue what to do with test results. Only positives should be made public.
Quote"People think [horseracing] is a very dirty
industry, nothing but drugs, but that's not true,"
said Dr. Uboh. "We know that only about 0.1
percent test positive. It's a very clean industry.
Very well regulated, believe me. Horses are very
intensely tested. We don't leave stones unturned.
Whenever we see something, we pursue it down.
2000? I\'d have to look it up.
That ridiculous statement-- and I say that advisedly, after talking to the top people working on this in the industry-- is exactly why the results have to be made public. There is not a single serious person working on this who thinks the percentage is close to that low.
Keep in mind the following which is a fact, as solid as a fact can be: Kentucky changed labs because they loaded some samples to see if the previous lab was doing the job, and got zero positives. Which means any \"percentages\" about Kentucky, or about Pennsylvania before they started TCO2 testing (at least that long), are a joke.
He admitted in 2008 that he had been doing it after 2000.
They have been doing out-of-competition drug testing in Kentucky since 2010.
Here\'s the state statute
http://www.lrc.ky.gov/kar/810/001/110.htm
QuoteSection 3. Out-of-Competition Testing. (1) Any horse eligible to race in Kentucky shall be subject to testing without advance notice for the substances specified in Section 2 of this administrative regulation. A horse is presumed eligible to race in Kentucky if:
Your conspiracy theories have grown old a long time ago.
JB,
1.For over two years NYRA has quietly conducted out of competition super testing on app 1200 horses, no positives for anything illegal out of competition.If Tricky gets his day in Federal Court, much will come out including the targeting certain trainers.
2.NYRA has a no question informant line, that has not rung(Im told)
3.NY,not Cali has the most sophisticated testing in the country having received a special grant of funds for this purpose(2 years ago)TAP runners have been tested in NY for several years.
4.Dr.Maylin will be the first to admit that there is no way to stop a trainer who is in possession of a PED for which no test exist.
Unsubstantiated bull does little but fuel the fires of the conspiracy idiots who do not have a shred of knowledge about what is really going on vs what is perceived.
Then I suggest YOU look up the banning date, if you want to make your accusation stick.
Interestingly that time frame fits with the lab change and Pletcher going 7 for 96 since then at CD. But that aside, all that statute says is that they can do it, not that they are. I\'m working with those people (one of whom frequents this board), I\'ll find out when I get a chance.
Okay, I\'m going to answer this one because I\'m getting pissed off, since neither of you two know what the f--k you\'re talking about. Miff, I may get around to that stuff another time, but in the meantime you were going to talk to Maylin about a syringe that got turned in, what happened to that.
Sight-- when I say FACT, I mean FACT. The extremely high ranking person who told me about the reason for the lab change told it to me face to face, and was one of the ones responsible for the decision to load the samples, and to switch labs. The word \"theory\" has no place in the disussion about what took place. I used the word FACT advisedly and you owe me an apology.
The last I\'m saying on this:
Horses are not testing positive, even when specific trainer\'s animals have been targeted with surprise out-of-competition testing in three different jurisdictions - Kentucky, California, and New York - yet some still allege certain trainers are doping with some magical undetectable incredibly effective move-up drugs on a large scale.
Nope.
Are there substances we can\'t detect yet? Of course - mostly various different chemical formulations of various steroids anybody can buy on the internet.
We readily detect erythropoetin, and separate it from the naturally-occuring hormone.
We easily and readily detect opiods, milkshaking, NSAIDS, meth, cocaine, heroin, and thousands of other drugs at minute, unable-to-even-affect-the-horse levels.
Should we test every horse, every time? I think so.
How dare you say I don\'t know what the f--k we are talking about.
I didn\'t say your statement that KY changed labs was wrong, and why, I know that is true.
Yeah. We can do all that, no problem. And yet when a bunch of samples are loaded we don\'t get a positive.
As a guy said in Atlas Shrugged (paraphrasing), when you have an apparent contradiction, check your premises.
You said it was a conspiracy theory.
Sorry, I was not clear and thus you\'ve misunderstood.
I intended to say that you have many conspiracy theories about drug use in race horses, attributable to certain trainers, that are unsupported by objective fact.
Not that KY changed labs because they blind tested and the lab wasn\'t consistently catching stuff - that is true.
But that lab didn\'t miss everything.
Just so we\'re all clear:
1-- The way I know Pennsylvania wasn\'t TCO2 testing before 2010 is that they ANNOUNCED in 2010 they were going to start.
2-- The way I know Allday was using EPO was he admitted it to a roomful of people.
3-- The way I know about the KY labs is I was told it by the guy who made the decision.
4-- The way I know about the NY syringe with EPO is I was told it by someone present.
None of these are theories or conclusions. I have plenty of those based on looking at data, and the Jockey Club, Rick Arthur, Senator Udall\'s office and the Ky testing people want to know about them. But they are not FACTS-- the above are.
JB,
Re the Syringe:
1.No horse in NY tested positive for EPO in the timeframe you told me about(recently)
2.No impending investigation of any possible violation is open for discussion.
All I could get but I assure you if any dots are connected on this, a major PR statement will come out of Albany.
If you want to see someone who doesn\'t have a f-king clue about reality vs bullshit racetrack innuendo re illegal PED\'s, look in the mirror.
That was cute. Disengenuous, but cute.
CORRECT--no HORSE tested positive for EPO. For reasons I have made clear.
CORRECT-- no violation, unless they plan to charge a syringe with something.
CORRECT-- there are no dots to connect, all they have is the syringe. With EPO.
CORRECT-- it was all you could get.
Smart ass, would you like DR.Malins number to call him yourself.What do you mean disingenuous?
Call him myself and find out WHAT? He\'ll tell me what he told you-- nothing.
Jerry - nobody is disputing any of the above.
It\'s extraneous leaps to conclusions, and characterizations about particular trainers, by ANYONE (not talking about you in particular here), with zero proof, that I find offensive and harmful to the sport.
PETA crap about beating race horses to make them run, assumptive crap about particular trainers in the face of zero objective evidence - it\'s one and the same to me.
Do we need clean racing? Of course. Can we always do better? Of course. Have I seen honest trainers unfairly characterized as cheaters at various times? So many times it disgusts me, and I\'m sick of it.
Don\'t know if this is a private party but I\'ll throw in an opinion from a fan who is completely uneducated as to the doping aspect of horse racing.
I watch every sport there is. In every one of them there are participants who are willing to bend (and break) the rules to gain an advantage. MLB, NFL, even NASCAR...all have humans whom make the decision to put their own health at risk by ingesting chemicals which will help them perform. I\'m supposed to believe that there aren\'t prominent horse trainers who are willing to risk an animal\'s (not their own) life to bring about their own success?? Especially when they know the testing procedures are lax & even if caught they penalties are soft? Right.
I read some on here defending horse trainers like they are somehow above living in (and beyond) the grey area of the rule book to win races. Like those who cast a suspect eye to trainers whose horses seem to defy conventional thinking & patterns have some nerve to even think such shady things could take place in the barns. I have no personal knowledge of anything, I\'m so far out of any loops I can\'t even see the barns; but if you want me to believe that the top trainers in this game are all squeaky clean, I am not that naive. I haven\'t been that naive since Sosa & McGwire pulled the wool over my eyes in 1998.
When I see Aaron Boone or Brady Anderson suddenly jump up & smack 40-50 HRs in a season, I get suspicious. I don\'t think \"they must really be hitting the gym\". When I see a trainer\'s horse run a figure well outside the scope of what I consider normal I get suspicious. Not doing so is foolish & only helps to embolden those who are cheating.
fwiw, the newest drug in cycling is gw501516--the tests on its efficacy as a performance enhancer are inclusive (and were conducted on rats), but since it works by shifting the body from running on glycogen to lipids, it should produce three performance enhancing \"side effects:\" allow the user to get his body weight very low without sacrificing power (the weight to power ratio is critical to overall performance); prolonging when muscle fatigue sets in by sparing glycogen uptake; and increasing the body\'s recovery rate by making glycogen more available to the muscles post exertion.
it was created as an anti-obesity drug but never made it past the trials--yet there\'s plenty available on the performance enhancing market, curiously. it is carcinogenic and causes liver fibrosis, a key factor in live disease
there is a test but the detection window is less then a week after administration.
its efficacy is increased in combination with AICAR, which is similar and was also created as an anti-obesity drug. both also dilate blood vessels...
actually AICAR has been used for a while in cycling so i guess i shouldn\'t call it new...
make of it what you will...
ps: there a many undetectable EPO variants--they work like EPO but are structurally different and can\'t be detected by EPO tests
pps: the performance enhancement from EPO and bloodpacking last much longer than most people think--i forget the half-life, but performance enhancement declines over time, not immediately--and small increases, less than 5% in over performance enhancement, translate into huge gains (one reason EPO was so detrimental, was that its greatest benefits are attained by the worst athletes--it raises them up to the elite level, but athletes at the elite level have very little room for improvement; there is a performance enhancement ceiling--so basically it took away their natural advantage).
The very idea that you \"know\" who is honest is a preposterous notion.
\"The vast majority of trainers and veterinarians do not cheat\"
Tom,
To the extent that the attending vet could \"know\" is what was meant.Someone could always be a thief without people knowing.
To the poster who wrote of lax testing,at present,at the main venues,have another Kool Aid. Penalties are relatively light for class 3,4,5 type overage violations because they are largely bullshit and are under review to no longer be considered \"violations\"
Mike
PonyBologna Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Don\'t know if this is a private party but I\'ll
> throw in an opinion from a fan who is completely
> uneducated as to the doping aspect of horse
> racing.
>
> I watch every sport there is. In every one of them
> there are participants who are willing to bend
> (and break) the rules to gain an advantage. MLB,
> NFL, even NASCAR...all have humans whom make the
> decision to put their own health at risk by
> ingesting chemicals which will help them perform.
> I\'m supposed to believe that there aren\'t
> prominent horse trainers who are willing to risk
> an animal\'s (not their own) life to bring about
> their own success?? Especially when they know the
> testing procedures are lax & even if caught they
> penalties are soft? Right.
>
> I read some on here defending horse trainers like
> they are somehow above living in (and beyond) the
> grey area of the rule book to win races. Like
> those who cast a suspect eye to trainers whose
> horses seem to defy conventional thinking &
> patterns have some nerve to even think such shady
> things could take place in the barns. I have no
> personal knowledge of anything, I\'m so far out of
> any loops I can\'t even see the barns; but if you
> want me to believe that the top trainers in this
> game are all squeaky clean, I am not that naive. I
> haven\'t been that naive since Sosa & McGwire
> pulled the wool over my eyes in 1998.
>
> When I see Aaron Boone or Brady Anderson suddenly
> jump up & smack 40-50 HRs in a season, I get
> suspicious. I don\'t think \"they must really be
> hitting the gym\". When I see a trainer\'s horse run
> a figure well outside the scope of what I consider
> normal I get suspicious. Not doing so is foolish &
> only helps to embolden those who are cheating.
^^^This.
You can put all the facts I know on the topic in a thimble and have room for popcorn. Human nature, however, might lend credence to certain opinions. I have yet to see a sport of national significance with strong monetary underpinnings in which the envelop of performance is not pushed by some form of chemical enhancement. That\'s an easy given, but the tougher part is to accept that it\'s more widespread than any form of current testing or enforcement can address. The benefit of the doubt will be extended beyond reason in the face of incredible, and barely explicable, performance and/or physical magnifications. We see that in all major professional sports, cycling, track, even among those once put on pedestals, yet our suspicions of dubious accomplishments in a sport where money changes hands every day, let alone the millions that ride on perceptions of breeding potential, are questioned because of lack of proof. This is not a level playing field. In any of these endeavors, the efforts expended to gain an edge will always outstrip the enforcement, whether it\'s new and currently undetectable substances, or ways to prevent detection of existing ones. It\'s a game of odds, and if my suspicions exceed what\'s currently known or provable, human nature suggests the odds are in my favor.
CHRB banned EPO Aug 21, 2002
sighthound Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Jerry - Steve Allday has said on the radio, to the
> general public, that he used to use EPO before it
> was banned, and he wasn\'t the only one. Said it a
> few years back.
>
> He didn\'t say it only to the Jockey Club.
>
> Race track vets used to milkshake, too, before
> that was banned, as a common practice.
>
> If it wasn\'t illegal, it was done.
Wait a second here. This isn\'t steroids we\'re talking about, where there was tacit approval of the drug prior to it being banned. Just because a drug isn\'t banned yet doesn\'t make it either right or legal. When drugs are given in secret, that\'s all you have to know about it and its legality.
Not disputing that the vast majority of trainers and vets don\'t cheat.
However the attending vet may not necessarily be the source of the illicit substances.
Not every PED needs to be injected as Victor Conte has proven and the black market from which most PED\'s emerge is open to all with knowledge of it and cash.
We understand that the most violations are for legal drugs found to be in the system at a slightly higher than allowable levels more akin to speeding tickets than murders, that isn\'t exactly what we are worried about is it?
In the case of the tweeting Dr are we really supposed to believe that he simply operates in the gray area\'s where specific rules for as of yet not tested for substances exist which in some way validates his activities? Not that he isn\'t trying to gain an illegal edge but that he takes advantage of the system until the system catches up?
But now since he fessed up he has turned over a new leaf?
Has he seen the light?
Highly doubtful as his ancillary businesses have given him the latitude to narrow down his \"work\" to a few choice clients, none of which seem to be of the empty wagon variety. By keeping the circle tight the small but select club benefits at an even greater level than if his clientele base was wider. The trainers and owners that he works for seem to not be scared off by the negative consternation that he evokes as shown by his tweets bragging about the work being done, when and for whom. His persona doesn\'t seem to be that much different than the movie version of a serial killer toying with the authorities.
Re supposed out of competition testing in NY--
In December 2012 a rule was passed allowing OOC testing for three specific types of drugs-- clenbuterol, corticosteroids, and methylprednisolone. The Jockey Club tells me that as far as they know there has been no other OOC testing in NY for 2 years or otherwise, and none for EPO.
\"In December 2012 a rule was passed allowing OOC testing for three specific types of drugs-- clenbuterol, corticosteroids, and methylprednisolone. The Jockey Club tells me that as far as they know there has been no other OOC testing in NY for 2 years or otherwise, and none for EPO\"
JB,
From PJ Campo, Director Of Racing NYRA
\"Since 2010 NYRA has averaged 1200 out of competition tests per year\"
...again,call him.
Mike
I just got an email that told me something similar. Problem is it also says the samples are being taken \"from entries\", which wouldn\'t be OOC. I\'m following up.
JB,
Only know what I\'ve been told from someone on the NYRA board, no details as you are looking for.Again, much about this will come out if Tricky gets a federal review of his case.
Doubt anyone is lying but the devil may be in the detail.
Mike
Meanwhile, supposedly Rudy implicated Dutrow somehow in the Ky hearing today, don\'t know details.
You sure he did not say that he was being linked to Tricky as opposed to implicating him? Tricky gave his horses excess banamine?
Has something to do with Wild Desert. Think it\'s a false entry situation rather than drugs, not sure.
JB,
Its that association thing.Mike Dubb suggesting to Kentucky Board that Tricky being a knucklehead has little to do with Rudy.Sounds like he will be licensed.
Mike
Nobody here has ever taken the position you say they have.
Far less preposterous than you telling a stranger what they \"know\".
You seem very passionate in your arguments, do you bet serious money at the windows? Or, are you a recreational or occasional bettor? The reason i ask is that it seems to me that many people who take your side of the argument arent serious bettors who are risking money on races that they are HOPING are clean. When you are putting big money at risk, knowing (or hoping) that the races are clean is your #1 priority.
Big/serious bettors arent on message boards trying to convince the \'tin foil set\' that trainers and vets are really good people and would never cheat.,..those serious bettors, who are risking their hard earned money, are on message boards hoping and praying that someone (ANYONE) will listen in this game and clean it up, get rid of the slime and hand down some serious penalties for cheating.
Just so you are awares, in your comparison, the physiology of equine energy production is not like human.
I\'m a veterinarian trying to protect the horses and the sport by injecting reality into the conversation.
Ignorance on the part of the general public, lack of knowledge, doesn\'t help further the cause of clean racing.
I\'ve never said that trainers and vets would never cheat, or do not. There are definitely trainers and vets that I know cheat.
But their numbers are far less than the uneducated general public blames.
I also watch the outsider general public - and if you put hundreds or thousands or millions through the windows a year, it really doesn\'t matter - falsely attribute many equine performances to cheating when that accusation is ridiculously false.
\"He cheats because ... I can\'t explain the horses performance otherwise\" is absurd, coming from people that know absolutely nothing about horses, training, physiology, or drugs, and the hundreds of things that also contribute to equine performance.
It\'s like me saying, \"Michael Phelps doped because I can\'t imagine swimming that fast - it\'s not natural. They tested him and found nothing, but that just means he was using stuff they couldn\'t find\". That would be a ridiculous accusation coming, not from my knowledge, but my ignorance.
You wanna learn something about horses that will help you at the windows? Pay attention.
Whether or not disgruntled bettors are correct or incorrect in their logic that they\'re losing because of the cheating and not losing because they are not good enough gamblers, the fact still remains that we all want clean racing.
You are correct in your comments that there are plenty of losing gamblers who are blaming the \'juice\' for their pari mutuel failures, no doubt those people exist out there, but we still have to just concern ourselves with cleaning up this game and being really aggressive in doing so.
QuoteWhether or not disgruntled bettors are correct or incorrect in their logic that they\'re losing because of the cheating and not losing because they are not good enough gamblers, the fact still remains that we all want clean racing.
My entire point is that there is something else beyond the either/or of \"losing because of cheating\" or \"losing because they are not good enough gamblers\" - it\'s \"losing because they don\'t know and understand how horses and training work\".
Every time I see a gambler laugh off \"dapples\", or a training/husbandry change, and discount them, I just figure that gambler has put himself in a far worse position to win.
You can gamble using only figures - and TGJB makes the best, obviously - but you\'ll not win as much as those that also can put an eye on a horse, literally see if he\'s ready to run his race today, or weigh and interpret the little information you get Derby week correctly.
And yes, we all want clean racing.
I see your points and i know that personally, i try to think as much like a horseman as i can in my own handicapping. I think the difference between you and the people who are screaming to get rid of the cheats is that the people who want rid of the cheats are willing to toss innocent trainers and vets under the bus while they\'re in the process of cleaning house...while you are not.
Anyone who\'s been a handicapper for a long time, as most of us have, know that sometimes a form reversal will just be something simple and honest like dental work or foot work or ulcer treatment, etc. We do realize that not every horse who runs off and hides and shows massive, overnight improvement was done thru cheating.
But, horseplayers don\'t really care whether or not a massive form reversal was done honestly or not, all they know is that it COULD be an undetectable drug. They dont know, as handicappers, what happened. The trainer and some insiders know, but the bettors don\'t know....the bettors are guessing.
This is why many will yell and scream \"CHEAT!\" when they see massive form reversals because to them, its all one in the same, because they can\'t ever know for sure WHY the horse moved up 20 lengths overnight. This is why people scream \"CHEAT\" and want sweeping changes in the game.
You have access to stuff that the average bettor doesnt have and that\'s why you can see the forest for the trees...to you, its obvious that a horse who moved up 20 lengths had a toothache that the previous trainer didnt see...but to the person who\'s betting these races from the outside, there\'s no way he can know that.
To make your example a little more appropriate, it\'s like a high school kid swimming times that are the best in his district, then changing coaches and immediately beginning to compete with Michael Phelps.
If we\'re way off base with how much cheating we think is going on vs what\'s actually going on then I don\'t believe the blame for that should be placed on our shoulders. Horse trainers are believed to be as crooked as boxing promoters, stereotypes don\'t appear out of thin air. I will admit that they do get overblown but it\'s the job of the trainers/industry to combat that perception, not blame and accost those with that opinion.
While we\'re on the word \"cheating\". In my opinion the betting public should be made more aware of what has been done to the horses before a ract. Bettors are the reason the NFL mandates an injury report each week. If we want the sport to survive we have to keep it an attractive betting sport.
As long as US racing is so dependent upon claiming races, we\'ll never get the transparency we want and need.
I want, when a favorite figures out of the money (didn\'t run a lick) for the stewards to announce, by the end of racing that day, what the trainer had to say to them about it (bled, threw a shoe, jock said just didn\'t fire, etc) and obviously the horse is tested.
I want all medical treatments of certain types to be freely discussed - but our system of racing, buying and selling rewards secrecy, not openness.
We have to change the openness of the sport.
The first story I\'ve seen about the Kentucky Derby in the \"mainstream\" sports media. Is it about an undefeated Verrazano? Nope. Maybe it\'s about Winstar, Borel & Pletcher together again? Nah. Could it be about doping and the cloud of cheating that hangs over the sport? Ding ding ding
Yahoo Sports (http://sports.yahoo.com/news/trainer-rudy-rodriguez-has-path-cleared-to-kentucky-derby--but-controversy-shows-underbelly-of-racing-010025257.html;_ylt=AkhJc.Id9QAwQhzTLXsqpk4LcykA;_ylu=X3oDMTFoZnA0Y2I3BG1pdANCbG9nIEluZGV4IGJ5IEF1dGhvcgRwb3MDMQRzZWMDTWVkaWFCbG9nSW5kZXg-;_ylg=X3oDMTFrODdzYXZuBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdANhdXRob3IEcHQDc2VjdGlvbnM-;_ylv=3)
I don\'t need to know you to know that you don\'t know everything that you claim to know.
Your analogy would carry more weight if the Olympic sports weren\'t such a cesspool of PED\'s.
Think Usain Bolt is setting world records with pure talent? Ask Angel Hernandez about that.