I'll Have Another treatments prior to Belmont

[BitPlayer]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/11/sports/ill-have-another-had-history-of-ailments-records-show.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp

[miff]

Too funny,clueless Joe Dope at it again not knowing, or ignoring for continued slanted bias, what he describes is PREVALENT in racing and PERMITTED!

[HP]

What do you see in this article that\'s a problem?  What slanted bias do you see?  I see three vets talking about this and I think it\'s a useful article that clears up any thoughts on a \"conspiracy\" to scratch the horse to conceal a positive drug test.  I don\'t see anywhere in this article where Drape shows that these were extraordinary measures that aren\'t prevalent or permitted.  In fact the article makes it clear that the horse\'s condition and problems were unique and posed special challenges for a three year old.  

He does put in the stats on breakdowns but if you see the FACTS as \"slanted bias\" maybe that\'s YOUR problem.  

HP

[miff]

HP,

The article is meant ot be negative, read it close.Had to follow Dope from the beginning of ALL the NY Times articles to get a feel for his mostly clueless slanted bias.Trust me he has an agenda that matches those stumping that the sky is falling in racing, it ain\'t!

Mike

[magicnight]

When you need to revert to mind-reading, name-calling, and \"trust me\" - in the course of a 52-word post - I tend to think you are the one with a biased agenda.

[miff]

Right Magic, Dope has just showered racing with positive spin in all of his articles.

Brilliant!!

[magicnight]

Actually, I didn\'t say a word about Drape.

[HP]

I read all the articles.  If you are in ANY business there are going to be problems.  When you are in a PUBLIC business like horse racing and your issues are out there in full view, you can\'t expect everyone to love you.  Breakdowns are a fact of life.  Anybody who loves horse racing would love to find a way to do more to avoid them.    

Investigative journalism and reporters aren\'t going away.  Best to meet things head on instead of calling these guys \"Joe Dope\" or whatever.  I stand by my original comment here.  Nothing outrageous or negative that is not supported by the facts.  I see very little in the way of \"editorializing\" or opinion in here.  In this day and age it\'s harder than ever to sweep things under the rug.  Maybe an informed public is part of the solution.  

HP

[TGJB]

The single worst thing that has happened to journalism is that neutrality and being objective are viewed interchangeably. Fair and balanced are two different things (to paraphrase Sorkin). Drape is doing his job-- he\'s not supposed to be a cheerleader.

Having said that-- context is important, and the article does not do a good job in that regard. Miff, the issue is not whether the drugs are legal, it\'s whether they should be. BUT-- anyone who has ever seen a vet report knows that all horses have imperfections and/or issues, some things are just a lot more relevant than others (which is why it should be trainers, not owners, who talk to vets). Drape has done a bad job in that through the whole series he has conflated quarter horse and thoroughbred racing, pulled stats out of context, and not explained that all athletes deal with physical issues all the time.

I would like to hear Sight\'s comments on IHA\'s issues.

[miff]

\"Drape has done a bad job in that through the whole series he has conflated quarter horse and thoroughbred racing, pulled stats out of context, and not explained that all athletes deal with physical issues all the time\"

JB,

Agree completely, which means:

1.The guy doesn\'t have a clue.

2.The guy is writing with a biased agenda, negative to racing.Negative in racing is sexy,sells esp well with the casual reader.

Pick one,though maybe both apply equally.

Mike

[HP]

Jerry you have commented many times on the inadequacies of testing, regulation, etc.  It\'s ironic that you would be so critical of this article since it appears that the \"New York authorities\" were actually trying to address these concerns, especially with a trainer shipping in for this HUGE race with a current suspension hanging over his head in California.  The article shows these guys were DOING THEIR JOB.  For a change!  Going over and above what they usually do.  That\'s a positive spin isn\'t it?  Isn\'t this what we want?  

Mullins is a CONFIRMED CHEATER.  Caught many times all over the place.  Yes, athletes deal with physical issues all the time.  Do they ALL use steroids and HGH?  No.  Do you treat a guy who has repeatedly tested clean the same way you treat Manny Ramirez?  Come on.  Comparing what goes on with guys like Mullins with what goes on with \"any vet report\" does not make sense to me at all.    

These two paragraphs below are dead on.  It\'s neither \"illegal or uncommon\" but I think quite a few of us are \"uneasy\" with it.  The way I feel any day I bet a race with a Dutrow horse in it.  Uneasy is a nice way of putting it.  Stop worrying about Joe Drape.  He\'s the least of our problems.  Most of America does not read the Times.  They need to start throwing some of these guys out to show they mean business.  Until then it\'s all BS.  

It\'s also clear that the physical issues in this individual case were somewhat unique.  Spells out that osteoarthritis is not common at this age.  With all due respect to Sighthound I think you have plenty from the vets in here.  It\'s not a hatchet job.  Sometimes the truth hurts.  Too bad.  

HP

\"New York authorities had access to the records only because they insisted that O'Neill, who has had repeated drug violations, provide them if they were going to license him in New York for the race.

The use of pain medication and anti-inflammatory drugs is neither illegal nor uncommon in racing. But the fact that drugs were being used on I'll Have Another in the days before a race of immense national interest, and were being ordered by a trainer with a controversial past, underscores the uneasiness the issue of drugs is creating in American racing.\"

[TGJB]

Rather than try to disentangle that I\'ll just say that my comments on the ARTICLE in no way conflict with my position on drug testing (and lack of it) BY THE INDUSTRY.

[TGJB]

About the article, briefly:

Osteoarthritis-- look it up. I would like to hear what Sight has to say, but it\'s basically normal wear and tear on a joint, like most of us got playing various sports. With me it was mostly knees and right elbow.

Anti-inflammatories-- I took prescription level stuff before, during and after my golf game Monday with no ill affects.

Synthetic joint fluid-- this is just a terrible misrepresentation. This stuff is not just benign, it\'s therapuetic-- it\'s a lubricant that prevents things like, uh, osteoarthritis.

I would have to know more about the \"painkillers\" to comment.

Context is everything. I commend Drape for getting into the drug issue as I have said. But as is true with way too much in our game, stuff gets confused and conflated. Right now the Lasix issue is holding up dealing with illegal drugs simply because the two issues have been conflated when they have nothing to do with each other.

[HP]

I\'ll try to dumb down my posts going forward.  

I think the average reader, and ESPECIALLY the average horse player, is capable of picking through that article and knowing where Drape is \"padding\" or sensationalizing a bit.  You\'d be hard pressed to find one article on ANY subject that isn\'t guilty on this score somewhere.  Surf\'s up!  

HP

[HP]

\"Dr. Sheila Lyons, a veterinarian who is testifying before the Senate panel Thursday and has examined many top-quality racehorses, said that osteoarthritis was not something a doctor expects to find in a relatively young horse like I'll Have Another.\"

Jerry did you have osteoarthritis when you were a relatively young horse or did you develop it later in life?  Or are you saying Dr. Lyons is wrong?  

HP