O'Neill's horses to run in assistant's name

[jerry]

What a bother.

[Silver Charm]

I asked someone about this the other day. Would they run under and Assistants name or moved to a temporary guy for a week. This is a rule that now is more embarrassing for its lack off teeth than the intent to add some teeth!!

Shameful....

[TMW]

Silver Charm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I asked someone about this the other day. Would
> they run under and Assistants name or moved to a
> temporary guy for a week. This is a rule that now
> is more embarrassing for its lack off teeth than
> the intent to add some teeth!!
>
> Shameful....


You know, I have a number of horses with Doug. I like him as a person -- fun, engaging, smart. I am done with him. Took me too long but I am done. I blame the weakness not only on him but on the stewards and CHRB and others in authority. Just shaking my head...

[Fairmount1]

TMW wrote:  \"You know, I have a number of horses with Doug. I like him as a person -- fun, engaging, smart. I am done with him. Took me too long but I am done. I blame the weakness not only on him but on the stewards and CHRB and others in authority. Just shaking my head...\"

Fantastic post.  I hope you hold true to this.  Invokes the idea of penalizing owners of a trainer that has violations by making their horses \"ineligible\" to run for the same period as the trainer\'s suspension.  Would it effectuate change??

[TMW]

Fairmount1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> TMW wrote:  \"You know, I have a number of horses
> with Doug. I like him as a person -- fun,
> engaging, smart. I am done with him. Took me too
> long but I am done. I blame the weakness not only
> on him but on the stewards and CHRB and others in
> authority. Just shaking my head...\"
>
> Fantastic post.  I hope you hold true to this.
> Invokes the idea of penalizing owners of a trainer
> that has violations by making their horses
> \"ineligible\" to run for the same period as the
> trainer\'s suspension.  Would it effectuate
> change??

I will.
However, owners are not always complicit in what is going on with medication. Everyone thinks there is a conspiracy and that trainer, owner, and jockey know what is going on -- not true. At all. I have owned a hundred horses and have been told by a world-class trainer that \"I don\'t know the front end of a horse from the back end of a horse.\" Not entirely true -- still makes me laugh though.
I agree owners need to say \"no more and I am out of here\" more often and that is what I am doing.
Doug knows my handle and we will talk in the morning if/if not he is reading this.

[Dana666]

The interesting thing is the horses under Moro\'s care seem to be running out of their skin. This is counter-intuitive to me. Is there a detention barn out there? I have no idea how to approach runners from their barn. Any suggestions?

[Rick B.]

Dana666 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have no idea how to approach runners
> from their barn. Any suggestions?

My answer will tag me as a giant MOTO, but it\'s
the correct answer, IMO:

We know O\'Neill is notorious for being either
blazing hot or ice cold.

Use his runners no matter what they look like
on paper, until they start losing.

Then, discard all of his runners and wait for
the next cycle.

I know this seems too simple to be true, but
if you overthink it you might mess it up.
Just take the money.

[Dana666]

Of course, who wouldn\'t?! Right now, for example, Rudy R is on fire at Belmont--yeah, I\'ll take the money, but the issue I have is playing super-trainers or juice trainers or whatever you want to call them carries inherent risk b/c you\'re not really handicapping, and you never really know when the switch is turned on so to speak --it\'s a path frought with disaster for the gambler and the game. It\'s hard to explain but in the long run it\'s a really horrible way to bet. I mean why the hell buy sheets or even pps??? The game just requires integrity and I don\'t know how they\'ll ever restore that.

[Rick B.]

Dana666 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Of course, who wouldn\'t?! Right now, for example,
> Rudy R is on fire at Belmont--yeah, I\'ll take the
> money, but the issue I have is playing
> super-trainers or juice trainers or whatever you
> want to call them carries inherent risk b/c you\'re
> not really handicapping, and you never really know
> when the switch is turned on so to speak --it\'s a
> path frought with disaster for the gambler and the
> game. It\'s hard to explain but in the long run
> it\'s a really horrible way to bet. I mean why the
> hell buy sheets or even pps??? The game just
> requires integrity and I don\'t know how they\'ll
> ever restore that.

Dana? You are overthinking it.

Just cash. That is hard enough without worrying
about \"integrity issues\".

[Silver Charm]

Looks like this Rule is going to be changed which will only help clean things up!! This will for sure cause people to think and double check what they are doing!!!

http://www.drf.com/news/breeders-cup-expands-convicted-trainer-rule