LISTEN UP.

[miff]

Allday story ancient history, aren\'t you tired of that played out info?

Lets hear about today!

[magicnight]

Mike, I would rather not see the \"who cheats? who doesn\'t?\" argument get adjudicated on a message board, but, until recently anyway, it sure hasn\'t been happening elsewhere. But you insult a lot of people here by lumping anyone who disagrees with you as being effectively in with the tin hat crowd. There is plenty of evidence, but the smoking guns are hard to come by. What\'s also hard to come by is any exculpatory evidence for those who are in the process of being tried by assertion on message boards. And that\'s the industry\'s fault, for not providing the comprehensive, effective testing and transparent reporting that could quiet the skeptics among us.

[makomaniac]

That statement is exactly what some of the posters don\'t get. Whenever there is above average scrutiny these \"suspects\" cant get their horses to perform. This is no coincidence!T he racing world is no different than other sports where every possible advantage is pursued, legal and illegal. Even when caught and confronted they deny to the end because they know that the case is circumstantial. Blood work is\"off\" but what they used can\'t be detected.

[Topcat]

Fairmount1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> These are sincere questions in reply miff.  
>
> You have discussed \"stacking\" before and other
> examples of legal things that are done for horses
> to legally run as well as possible.  Do you
> believe this is the trainer that has mastered
> this?  Or do you believe he/she has been able to
> hire vets that are able to master the chemistry of
> the game for owners that can afford it?
>
> I am truly curious your thoughts on the situation
> with Jane Cibelli.  A vet, presumably she hired,
> was injecting a horse\'s knee on race day and got
> caught.  Owner is told by Cibelli that the horse
> was mistakenly given an antibiotic and a reporter
> for drf wrote that investigators said the syringe
> did not contain an antibiotic as claimed.  The vet
> gets kicked off the grounds and ever since Cibelli
> has not been the same trainer as far as win
> percentage goes....not even close.  This low win
> percentage carried into the Monmouth meet.  This
> is all reported in Paulick Report and I\'m sure
> everyone on here is aware of it.
>
> http://www.paulickreport.com/news/ray-s-paddock/ve
> t-caught-injecting-cibelli-horse-suspended-90-days
> -agrees-to-cooperate/
>
> Now, Miff, I\'m not trying to antagonize or get
> into a war of words.  But you always ask for
> names, names, names of trainers that are doing
> nefarious things when people make bold statements
> that they distrust the game.  Obviously JC was not
> the vet but it is awfully coincidental she
> couldn\'t win at 30 percent plus since then.  In
> fact, last I saw I think she was approaching 10
> percent at Monmouth. So, I\'ll just leave it open
> ended to keep the discourse open hopefully.  What
> do you make of this situation?  I feel like this
> is just one of the situations where someone got
> caught doing something many, many trainers or vets
> are doing.  I also think jurisdiction where it
> happened mattered concerning testing but am open
> to being persuaded otherwise.  Your thoughts?


Cibelli is hitting at something resembling her historical batting average . . . at Delaware.   Above that level, not so much . . .

[richiebee]

makomaniac Wrote:h
-------------------------------------------------------
> That statement is exactly wat some of the posters
> don\'t get. Whenever there is above average
> scrutiny these \"suspects\" cant get their horses to
> perform.

David Jacobson set a Belmont Park record for wins by a trainer while his barn was
under 24 hour surveillance. Is 24 hour surveillance \"above average scrutiny\"?
I am well aware that I can be DQ\'d from the debate for citing facts, but there they
are.

[rayj54]

what are the chances of creating a central pharmacy at all tracks.all meds must come through here.any other found in post race result in immediate suspension of trainer and vet.

[TGJB]

Barry Irwin suggested that a few years ago. They do it someplace (Hong Kong)?

[catcapper]

JB,

Am I to conclude that you are pro-lasix? I was under the impression (call it an assumption) that you were campaigning for clean, drug-free racing. Now I realize I may have been mistaken, and that what you are campaigning for is only transparency in racing.  And is the solvency of some owners and field size the best determining issue behind a pro-lasix stance? If so, do you believe that is really taking a long-term perspective, or as I believe, just a short-term perspective?

This is not a simplistic or naive point. Yes maybe some horses won't be competitive. That means they weren't competitive to start with. With the use of Lasix and clenbuterol, horses with naturally strong cardio-pulmonary systems will not be distinguished from those with weaker, and when the weaker horses find some modicum of success with the help of "theraputic' drugs, and are then sent to the breeders shed, don't you think they will pass along their natural genetics and not the enhancements.  Don't get me wrong,  I believe medications have their valuable theraputic place in this sport. For one example, in the case of acute soft tissue injury. But being allowed to train and race on medications is a different use altogether. It is a MOST important distinction.

And yes, owners with weaker stock may not stay solvent.  And yes also, field size will diminish, but not necessarily. I have believed for some time that  for horseracing in the US to face the drug issue AND improve, it must consolidate. Yes, clean racing means fewer tracks and fewer races, and this equals better competition and better betting value. Along this point, there is an excellent article in The Business Review, courtesy of the Paulick Report, that is a discussion/interview with owner Rick Pitino. Here is a link. I highly recommend it. It addresses this very point far better than I can here and now.- The Business Review -Please, everyone, read it. (If the link doesn\'t work, go to The Paulick Report)

As you know, I am not an owner, nor a big time player, but I have spent enough years in many aspects of the industry, including the backstretch to have a first hand experience of medication usage. If anyone hasn't spent time on the backstretch on a day to day basis, they have no idea how much stuff is done to and given to the horses. And now I see the light!!! - That is exactly the problem with achieving transparency - if everyone, especially the public, sees what goes on, many many heads will spin off of many many shoulders for many different reasons because, like it or not, perception is reality. It is mind boggling  and can be heart wrenching  to see what goes on with the horses - unless you become inured to it. Kind of like war, I guess. Heck, even many owners are in the dark about what exactly is done to their horses. Some trainers eat those vet bills and get it back in the day rate.  Richiebee has it right, that the best reform happening in horseracing now is the broadening effort towards second careers for these animals.


I would like to pose two questions to everyone,
First: Is the racehorse an asset or is it a commodity?
Second: Is horseracing primarily a sport or is it a gambling entertainment?


For me, it is the former in both questions. And in that, perspective matters, i.e., short-term vs. long-term. We need a new model with consistent-for-all rules and regulations. We need a new, centralized structure to the management and drug usage/administration. Otherwise, we will just keep applying band-aids to sucking chest wounds. Instead of putting lipstick on a pig, let's be brave!, think the big thoughts, the concepts from which everything flows outward. Worrying about whether or not I know what a horse is getting 3 days out from his next race isn't the root issue. It is subsequent to the present sad state of affairs.

JB, you may consider me a purist at worst, but don't consider me naive or a utopian.  I am quite the realist who can see the forest, over the trees. And don't get me wrong, I think we all owe you for your tenacity and intelligence.

[catcapper]

JB, forgive me as I could post this to any number of members on this board, but I think it best I post it to you.

About Allday. Why is he such the whipping boy here? I sense some lower aspects of human nature at work in peoples' extreme and constant negative reactions to him. Is he more guilty that any others? Is he alot pregnant and everyone else just a little pregnant? From what I can see about Allday he is:
1.Very smart
2.Fearless
3.Has stones harder than anyone managing any racing jurisdiction, and maybe I should include The Jocky Club there.
4,And last but not least, he is rich. Not by needles, but by his other, very legal, products.

I am not arguing he is good or bad for racing. I am not defending him. He is just one of many.  He is just far smarter and more successful and that alone puts a target on anyone\'s back. (JB, you should be able to relate to this.) So, even if he did introduce EPO into the industry, it seems quite a few followed suit and enthusiastically jumped onboard. Anyone giving up their purse money over it?  Or their wagering coups? Pointing fingers won't change anything. Arguing about how much cheating is or isn't going on, or who is the biggest cheater, is a distraction of spinning wheels and misses the greater point, which to me, is the overuse of legal meds and short-cut theraputic? procedures. And either you are pregnant or you are not. There is no grey area there.

[TGJB]

Allday admitted to cheating on a massive scale. If others do or get nailed I\'ll put their names up in lights too.

Several good questions in the other post, if I have time before I head up to Saratoga I\'ll try to answer them. But for now, here\'s the question I posed to the head of the Jockey Club, who raised the same issue-- if the position is that letting horses run on lasix weakens the breed in the long run, why stop there? Why allow horses to run that have had throat operations, or other surgery? And if the position is a purist one (which you are not taking, but others do), why allow blinkers, or gelding horses?

[catcapper]

By the same logic, if you allow Lasix, why not allow EPO or any and all meds?

As far as surgeries go, very valid point. Let\'s take one quick example. Periosteal stripping. I can see it being allowed in order for the foal to have a chance at making it to the races, but this information must be fully disclosed and must follow the horse throughout its career, indeed, lifetime. Hence the medical \"passport\" idea.
Yes, we have to draw lines. My biggest point is that is is imperative to keep the long term health of the breed, and hence the sport, clearly in our sights. Lasix is on the wrong side of the line for me. Centralization is key - and anyone elected to a position of authority in such a model may not be allowed to have a conflict of interest.

I look forward to your response to the other post, but take your time. Enjoy the Spa!

(Could you pass along any inside tips you get there?! Ha ha, my wicked humor.)

[Fairmount1]

I believe that initially Jacobson was very, very cold after the surveillance began.  Then, he heated up.  Grenig reported this story both initially and after the meet.  Grenig\'s statements regarding the continued surveillance were based on Jacobson\'s comments to him the way I read the article.  Was there ever any NYRA confirmation of this surveillance or what exactly it included?  

I feel like there were more facts to the Jacobson story and I\'d love to know them.  It is fascinating how he transitioned from a cold streak as stated on this board to white hot thereafter.

[Silver Charm]

I did my best also. FWIW I have concerns about how we can grow the game when there probably needs to be some contraction. And if you contract how do you maintain or hold or even grow the fan base in markets. Medication obviously is and was a major part of everything else I discussed.

Well done by the sponsors!!!

[Flighted Iron]

Btw, i was also happy they asked for our input out of the gate. one question
was blanket type in its form regarding meds. I\'m pro Lasix.

[SoCalMan2]

One issue that I think needs to be faced but isn\'t getting enough attention is transition.  If we are going to go from wild wild west to a hay,oats, and water regime, well, that is fine as an end result 10 years from now, but if you take horses who were conceived for one game and have them running in another game, you are looking at some real dislocations up and down the line and could easily result in the transition doing more harm than good.

If there is going to be a severe change, then they need to do something like announce NOW that produce of 2014 breedings will have to run without pharmaceutical help.  That way, it is up to breeders making UPCOMING breeding decisions about what are they going to do....and then all down the line, people will be ready for crops coming that have to race under different rules.  Once this first crop gets old enough, the game can then be permanently changed and people will have had enough forewarning to plan for the transition.  However, the produce of 2014 breedings wont be 5 year olds until 2020, so we are looking at a lengthy period.  Of course, in 2017, 2yo racing would be clean, 2018 -- 2yo and 3yo racing.....may need to have vintaged condition books for a few years......but this is a logical and orderly way to do it.  I found the no lasix 2yo breeders cup races unfairly jarring, but would not find them so if an orderly transition was announced.