http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/othersports/as-kentucky-derby-approaches-racing-industrys-portrayal-of-steve-asmussen-as-a-rogue-trainer-ignores-widespread-issues/2014/04/27/5f33f444-ce0d-11e3-b812-0c92213941f4_story.html
TGJB, can you comment on this statement by Beyer?
\"His horses rarely display the kind of inexplicable, sudden improvement that raises suspicions of powerful illegal drugs.\"
I don\'t remember him really being on any of your previously suspected \"move-up\" trainers, but you are obv a lot closer to the data and research.
I have stayed out of this whole deal because my relationship with Steve is complicated. He trained about 50 horses I was involved with, we did great, he and I did not get along.
But suffice it to say I totally agree with Andy\'s statement, and said something to that effect here years ago. Whatever else he may be, Steve is a great trainer.
Asmussen has 31 drug violations, one for every 1,008 starts. Pletcher has 5, one for every 2,971 starts. Mott, 8 total, has one for every 2,669 starts. Clement and Shug have just one violation each, with 7,216 and 8,109 starts respectively. Graham Motion has never had a medication violation, with nearly 10,000 starts.
numbers from the end of last year.
Those kinds of violations are a separate issue, as Beyer discusses in the article.
As with lots of scandals, the scandal in racing is \"what\'s legal\".
Interesting stuff Michael.
TGJB, as a customer of the sport, I am not as willing as u are to disregard (or minimize) these violations. Sure, there are degrees of violations, just like there are degrees of crimes, but it says something to me that Motion hasn\'t never had a violation as compared with over 30 for Asmussen.
Not sure how this affects my wagering ideas. But interesting nonetheless
Good luck
Jim
I had a friend that called me after reading the article on DRF and said \"man that Motion guy is the best he has never been caught with a violation!\" lol So I guess its all in how you look at it and view whats going on in the sport. I look at it through rose colored glasses I guess thinking only some try and get an edge, but my buddy thinks everyone out there is always looking for an edge and some just push the envelope more then others and do it more often. I just hope those morons at PETA don\'t do to much news wise on Oaks and Derby day. I know the sport has problems and needs to get on the same page but PETA is a worthless bunch in my mind. If they had there way there would be no sport of kings, they will never be satisfied unless horse racing goes away completely.
I actually have to say something else about this.
I posted on this right after it happened, but a reminder-- a couple of weeks after the Times piece ran, Asmussen\'s 26yo stable foreman killed himself.
http://www.drf.com/news/former-asmussen-employee-commits-suicide
I did not know this.
You\'re exactly right, BB.
Anyone who truly believes that Asmussen\'s horses \"rarely display the kind of inexplicable, sudden improvement that raises suspicions of powerful drugs\" should have his head examined. But wait! Andy Beyer specifically said \"ILLEGAL\" drugs, so I take that back.
I like Steve Asmussen. I think he\'s a terrific trainer who works hard. And I have no doubt that he\'s a swell guy who occasionally walks little old ladies across the street when they\'re in need. But you can merely look at the sheet of his Kentucky Oaks entry, UNTAPABLE, to see a graphic example of what DOES raise suspicion about Asmussen\'s horses. Specifically, that filly came back off a short layoff this year with a 20 length improvement (running a preposterously fast negative ThoroGraph!). Does anyone in their right mind think she did this via hay, oats and water only? No. Then how? What provoked that performance? This filly was injected! Pletcher-ized. Steroided! In the spaces between the layoff. [Of course, so was CALIFORNIA CHROME. From the bowels of Los Alamitos he came! The signs being the four Thorograph 1\'s in a row. But that\'s another story...]
So if we put the word \"illegal\" back into to what Beyer said, I won\'t disagree with him. His real point was his final conclusion:
\"Through the industry, the indiscriminate use of drugs is business as usual.\"