Now even MLB is ahead of Racing

[derby1592]

Now even MLB is ahead of racing with regards to penalties associated with drug testing.

- Random, multiple drug testing year-round for all players.

- First offenders will be given immediate suspensions and will be MADE PUBLIC.

- Subsequent violations will result in escalating penalties.

What a concept - actually punish the cheaters and publicly release the names of those who fail any drug test.

Of course, the cheaters are probably one step ahead of the testers in MLB (and racing) but don\'t you think there are a lot of ballplayers out there today that are thinking \"I sure don\'t want to go through what Jason Giambi is going through right now.\"

I have a feeling that a lot more MLB players may \"shrink\" this off season rather than risk the chance of public humiliation.

As a breeder, owner, competing trainer, bettor, or fan, wouldn\'t it be nice to know the names of the horses and trainers (and their vets) that have failed all those recent milkshake tests in Cal (and now Fla)?

Strengthen testing and make results public (including milkshake testing, EPO testing, growth hormone testing, steroid testing, blood-doping testing, etc.)and we might see similar \"cooling\" off of some of the \"ti-trainers\" which would certainly improve the game for just about everybody else involved.

Even if it did not stop the cheating, at least making names public would enable breeders (e.g., choosing stallions to breed to) or owners (e.g., choosing a trainer to train their horse) or trainers (e.g., deciding to claim) or bettors (e.g., making a wager) or fans (e.g., deciding who to cheer for) to make more informed decisions.

Chris

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

Yeah,

They\'ve played games for as long as the game has existed. But, maybe the public is better informed now and the more informed the public becomes the more difficult it is to hide the inside information.

Racing is sensitive to cheating of course. They don\'t want to publicize cheating and the vet revelation could confirm integrity questions, but there's another way to play it:  \"Does a vet positively impact a horse in a similar manner the trainer does by keeping the horse free from disease and ascertaining treatment for injuries before the horse exacerbates them?\" That's the way racing has to present the issue. The answer of course is, yes the best vets are a factor and the public should know who is vetting a horse.

I see no downside for the industry in making vet information public.

[razzle]

Derby, I liked TGJBs\' list of requirements \"if he had his way\", and I certainly agree with your listing here.  It makes absolutely no sense to me that these crooks get such protection/anonymity.  It\'s been interesting reading here about the White Mercedes, the milkshakes, the metabolizing of Oxygen, etc.  I guess it\'s like the old government cliche for employing us ex-soldiers, \"Your best bet, hire a Vet!\"  

I did notice in the Cot Campbell article, which you may have read(cited by Indulto on the other board)which notes the difficulty with \"teeth\" and disciplinary action at these levels?  

Anyway, appreciated your post. raz

[gvido]

Hardly.

There are no provisions in this agreement for blood testing for the....ahem, ahhh, uhhh banned substances. The biggest culprit HGH, is undetectable via urine test.

As usual, Fehr and Selig piss on the fans with great gusto.