i told you guys Paulick is sharp

[lamboguy]

http://www.paulickreport.com/news/ray-s-paddock/chasing-the-frog-keeping-up-with-slippery-cheaters/

[1st time lasix]

maybe they just need to have Jamie Ness fess up

[Pensacola Pete]

Ness isn't the only one. How many 30% or higher trainers do we have out there? 100? 500?

[maclr11]

I wouldn't think this is what Ness is doing
From what I've read and from conversations with people who should know it wouldn't work on 100% of the horses.
Ness and a few of those guys move up every horse, I think there is more to that than demorphin. For as much as a problem demorphin is, I don't think it's the be all end all to what cheaters are using.

[Stillriledup]

Thank god for Paulick, seriously, if Ray decided to retire from this, there would be a HUGE void in the game.

[Segwin]

http://www.paulickreport.com/news/ray-s-paddock/chasing-the-frog-keeping-up-with-slippery-cheaters/

That actually is very sad - for the horse, jockey & last but not least the betting public. It seems so stone age.

If it were baseball there would be congressional hearings however this doesn't produce a ping on the radar.

[thaskalos]

As the trainers are busy looking for ways to increase the horses' "locomotion" through the use of illegal (and undetectable) drugs...the horseplayers better get busy too -- looking for another game to play.

[Stillriledup]

As the trainers are busy looking for ways to increase the horses' "locomotion" through the use of illegal (and undetectable) drugs...the horseplayers better get busy too -- looking for another game to play.

Isnt there other ways to "stop" people who "win too much" other than going thru legal channels with doped blood and tainted urine? How about racing secretaries writing races only eligible for trainers who have less than a 20% winning percentage at that current meet? This way, owners and trainer who rarely win actually have some shot.

[olddaddy]

Any horse player that has been around awhile and has had his eyes and ears open knows this kinda stuff has been going on forever. Its always been viewed as part of the game, this stuff doesnt make horse players find a different game to play.

[Stillriledup]

Any horse player that has been around awhile and has had his eyes and ears open knows this kinda stuff has been going on forever. Its always been viewed as part of the game, this stuff doesnt make horse players find a different game to play.

They write into the conditions of some claiming races "winners of a race in the last 1 year, ineligible" so, in other words, they give horses who don't win a better shot to win and not stick them with hard knocking claimers who won tons of races. They need to do this with trainers, if you win 20 percent, they need to write some races where these trainers are not eligible. Not all, just a few, to give the smaller barns a shot, the smaller barns need a shot to stay afloat, we need the smaller owners to stay in the game, they need to write races so that certain trainers don't win every dollar there is to win.

[Mineshaft]

Isnt there other ways to "stop" people who "win too much" other than going thru legal channels with doped blood and tainted urine? How about racing secretaries writing races only eligible for trainers who have less than a 20% winning percentage at that current meet? This way, owners and trainer who rarely win actually have some shot.




Trainers who don't win, usually theres a reason they don't win. I can point out 30 trainers down here who don't have a freakin clue what a horse is yet they have a license. And you want the racing secretary to write them a race? Makes no sense.

[Stillriledup]

Trainers who don't win, usually theres a reason they don't win. I can point out 30 trainers down here who don't have a freakin clue what a horse is yet they have a license. And you want the racing secretary to write them a race? Makes no sense.

Them "not having a clue" has to do with the other trainers having a clue...or, cheating. If nobody cheated, the clueless would win their share, you know, if they had an ok horse. They reason the clueless lose, is because they're being outdrugged by the cheaters, i'm trying to get an "oats and hay" type of event.

You would bet on the "under 20% trainers race" right?

[johnhannibalsmith]

Isnt there other ways to "stop" people who "win too much" other than going thru legal channels with doped blood and tainted urine? How about racing secretaries writing races only eligible for trainers who have less than a 20% winning percentage at that current meet? This way, owners and trainer who rarely win actually have some shot.

This has been asked (by you) and answered before (with my cynical opinion). Your solution just opens the door for a new layer of deceit. I suspect you'd see an "uptick" (I hate that counterfeit word, but it works here) in bills of sale and trainer transfers.

[Mineshaft]

Them "not having a clue" has to do with the other trainers having a clue...or, cheating. If nobody cheated, the clueless would win their share, you know, if they had an ok horse. They reason the clueless lose, is because they're being outdrugged by the cheaters, i'm trying to get an "oats and hay" type of event.

You would bet on the "under 20% trainers race" right?




It don't matter to me what trainer is in the race I bet accordingly. Super trainer or not, it does not interfere with my betting.


And if nobody cheated the clueless still would not win there share. There are some clueless trainers out there you just have to know who they are and how they operate. Some of these trainers send the horse out to gallop every day and then work on Saturday. Some trainers don't feed alfalfa. Some trainers just enter the horse and don't care what kind of race it is.

[Stillriledup]

This has been asked (by you) and answered before (with my cynical opinion). Your solution just opens the door for a new layer of deceit. I suspect you'd see an "uptick" (I hate that counterfeit word, but it works here) in bills of sale and trainer transfers.

You could make any horse ineligible who has had a trainer transfer (that was not via claim) in the last month or two. Problem solved? :)

You could also make any owner ineligible who has won X percent...that way, they would have to be doing all sorts of shenanigans to get into the very small percentage of races that i would write as "under 20% only". Im not saying write half the races, i'm saying write one race a night or one race every 2 nights that's not eligible to the cheaters...unless you want more, i can see what i can do!

[Stillriledup]

It don't matter to me what trainer is in the race I bet accordingly. Super trainer or not, it does not interfere with my betting.


And if nobody cheated the clueless still would not win there share. There are some clueless trainers out there you just have to know who they are and how they operate. Some of these trainers send the horse out to gallop every day and then work on Saturday. Some trainers don't feed alfalfa. Some trainers just enter the horse and don't care what kind of race it is.

The clue-D need the clue-less in order to survive...if the clueless all leave the game, the game suffers. People have a right to enjoy this game, as clueless as they are, having a clue isnt a prerequisite to be a participant.

[johnhannibalsmith]

You could make any horse ineligible who has had a trainer transfer (that was not via claim) in the last month or two. Problem solved? :)

You could also make any owner ineligible who has won X percent...that way, they would have to be doing all sorts of shenanigans to get into the very small percentage of races that i would write as "under 20% only". Im not saying write half the races, i'm saying write one race a night or one race every 2 nights that's not eligible to the cheaters...unless you want more, i can see what i can do!

You're talking to someone that tends to think that the simpler the rule, the better and the more you go to patching layer upon layer, the harder it becomes to enforce and the farther you get away from the actual solution. I suppose that if you excluded transferred horses, you would eliminate some of what I alluded to, but you'd also eliminate a fair amount of legitimate entrants at a lot of tracks. At a long term meet, like a Turf Paradise or Los Al, if you wrote them from mid-meet to the end as you intend, I guess it could at least conceivably work. I'll give you that. I'm not so sure that it would work very well at the start of any meet nor at a shorter meet without causing other problems (which I don't feel like enumerating at the moment, but I'm thinking that you are probably sharp enough to envision what I'm getting at.)

Anyway, I'm all for creativity out of necessity, including the book if need be. I'm not sold on this idea, but at least it recognizes a problem - which is step one to addressing it.

[olddaddy]

They write into the conditions of some claiming races "winners of a race in the last 1 year, ineligible" so, in other words, they give horses who don't win a better shot to win and not stick them with hard knocking claimers who won tons of races. They need to do this with trainers, if you win 20 percent, they need to write some races where these trainers are not eligible. Not all, just a few, to give the smaller barns a shot, the smaller barns need a shot to stay afloat, we need the smaller owners to stay in the game, they need to write races so that certain trainers don't win every dollar there is to win.


Im sorry my post was a response to the poster above you, not to your idea.

[Not4Love]

Trainers who don't win????? Jayne Vaders, Jane Cibelli, Mark shuman, Patrick Biancone, Ed Auwater. You get the idea. They got caught and they are useless.

You want low percentage trainers? Allen Jerkens, Jack VanBerg, Ron McAnaly. Hall of Famers that cant win becausse they don't cheat.



Trainers who don't win, usually theres a reason they don't win. I can point out 30 trainers down here who don't have a freakin clue what a horse is yet they have a license. And you want the racing secretary to write them a race? Makes no sense.

[Track Phantom]

The drug race is a competition between the trainers/owners/vets who are in an Indy Formula One race car and the oversight commitee who are teamed up in a Flintstone buggy.

[PaceAdvantage]

Thank god for Paulick, seriously, if Ray decided to retire from this, there would be a HUGE void in the game.Yeah, like we never discuss this topic on here... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[onefast99]

The drug race is a competition between the trainers/owners/vets who are in an Indy Formula One race car and the oversight commitee who are teamed up in a Flintstone buggy.
What makes you so sure the owner has any idea of what the trainer is up to or what the vet stumbled upon on his way to the barn? 99.9% of the time the owner knows what the horse was treated for by the vet once they get their monthly bill.

[Stillriledup]

Yeah, like we never discuss this topic on here... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Yeah, but who are we? Is Stillriledup of PA Message boards as famous within the industry as Paulick? :D

[PaceAdvantage]

Just saying...it's not like this is a subject that nobody every talks about or knows about...

[Charli125]

It don't matter to me what trainer is in the race I bet accordingly. Super trainer or not, it does not interfere with my betting

That can't be good for your ROI.

[Jeff P]

If racing jurisdictions really want to put a stop to cheating through the use of drugs they could.

To my way of thinking, the following rules changes would be a good start towards eliminating the problem:

1. Per rule, a 72 hour window is established. ALL horses entered to race must arrive on the grounds no later than 72 hours prior to post time for the race in which they are entered. All horses entered to race must remain on the grounds through race time.

Need to remove your horse from the grounds and break the 72 hour rule for some reason? Not a problem. Put him in the trailer and drive him off. (He's still your horse.) However, as soon as you remove him from the grounds (per rule) your horse is automatically scratched from its race. (No exceptions.)

2. Security cams, surveillance (at all times) for all horses on the grounds. (Security video footage to be stored electronically in an area off limits to owners, trainers, private vets, etc.)

3. Trainer of record (still) calls the shots - but ALL substances administered/procedures performed, etc. within the 72 hr window administered ONLY BY THE STATE OR TRACK VET(S) and all substances administered/procedures performed, etc. are limited to those specifically allowed in the rules.

By rule, trainers and private vets are barred from administering ANY substance to a horse within the 72 hour window. (Fair warning: Penalties for breaking this rule will have teeth.)

But what if your horse develops some problem while it is on the grounds within the 72 hour window leading up to its race? What if, from a welfare of your horse standpoint, you want YOUR vet to treat your horse?

Not a problem. Call your private vet and allow him to treat your horse. However, as soon as that happens (per rule) your horse is scratched from its race. (No exceptions.)

4. A medical log is created for each horse. By rule, ALL substances administered/procedures performed, etc. by the state or track vet on any horse within its 72 hour window are recorded in the horse's medical log.

Nothing terribly elaborate required. Just a sentence or so to accurately log each event... "10cc of X"... "18cc of Y"... along with date, time, and name of attending vet.

5. The medical log for each horse is disclosed to the betting public. Do it just like the Hong Kong Jockey Club does. (It works there. It'll work here.) Make each horse's medical record available on the track and/or Equibase website. Let it be listed in the past performances and/or track program. (Think transparency.)

By rule, conspiracy/collusion between trainer and attending vet resulting in omission of medical procedures performed during the 72 hour window from a horse's medical log to be taken VERY SERIOUSLY.

In my opinion, the above would be a good start.



-jp

.

[maclr11]

Ridiculous to enforce
The costs are enormous and the fight over who funds it would be a huge nightmare
Plus there is still so much grey area, this means a vet has to feed the horses cause supplements and other things are put in the feed. How do you control who feeds what and when.
Its a wonderful pipe dream but there are so many hurdles to cross
Think of the it costs and the staff it would take to watch all these horses 24/7 on video
Plus all the time horses are out of their stall that time has to be carefully recorded too
This sounds wonderful, cheaters are gonna try to cheat
I think the money would be much better spent on improvements in testing

[maclr11]

But I think graded stakes could be subject to these restrictions
Better access to funding and it would help the games image with fans who aren't totally involved. If it's better on top than hopefully it would trickle down but imposing crazy restrictions on everyday races is inefficient cost wise and it would really even out the playing field. Claiming would almost stop as horses problems would be exposed and that's not good for the public. The public does not need to know what a 3000 claimer gets to make it to the gate.
Rival trainers would get all the information they need and the racing game is very much monkey see monkey do and why are we punishing trainers for being better by allowing the rivals to learn their methods. It's a business not a friendly game .
Graded stakes yes, because there's no claiming Etc etc but the rest of racing I think there are better ways to fix the drug issue .

[Stillriledup]

But I think graded stakes could be subject to these restrictions
Better access to funding and it would help the games image with fans who aren't totally involved. If it's better on top than hopefully it would trickle down but imposing crazy restrictions on everyday races is inefficient cost wise and it would really even out the playing field. Claiming would almost stop as horses problems would be exposed and that's not good for the public. The public does not need to know what a 3000 claimer gets to make it to the gate.
Rival trainers would get all the information they need and the racing game is very much monkey see monkey do and why are we punishing trainers for being better by allowing the rivals to learn their methods. It's a business not a friendly game .
Graded stakes yes, because there's no claiming Etc etc but the rest of racing I think there are better ways to fix the drug issue .

Professional sports is also a business and not a friendly game....but they have salary caps so there's some parity and everyone has a chance, its better for business.

[Jeff P]

What I am suggesting is transparency. And a return to horse racing as athletic competition. (Because that's the ONLY way we are ever going to get the general public to embrace racing as a sport and a viable mainstream gaming option.)

It's not about punishing the "better" trainers for being good so much as giving horse racing a chance at a future.

At it's core, horse racing is about (or should be about) betting on the outcome of a race - with a race being defined as a test of attributes found in athletic competition: natural ability, speed, fitness, endurance, etc.

In my opinion, horse racing is NOT (and should NEVER be) about tapping joints, sneaking designer drugs past the guard at the gate, or who has access to the better chemist, etc.

If we really do have to hide what it takes to get a horse to the gate from the public then I hate to say it but horse racing doesn't have a future.


-jp

.

[rastajenk]

I wonder how many times frog juice gets used and doesn't produce an enhanced performance. Or how many times it moves a sixth place horse up to fifth.

Jeff's idea of being stabled on track 72 hours out would kill shipping, which introduces uncertainty into the handicapping. Smaller fields of same ol' same ol' helps no one except those that want to kill the game off faster. I know he gets and deserves a lot of credit for thinking things through, but I think he missed on this one.

[MJC922]

Isnt there other ways to "stop" people who "win too much" other than going thru legal channels with doped blood and tainted urine? How about racing secretaries writing races only eligible for trainers who have less than a 20% winning percentage at that current meet? This way, owners and trainer who rarely win actually have some shot.

I wouldn't mind seeing some tracks provide a real incentive to run completely clean, no lasix, no bute or anything else. A possible way to fund that might be to withold a small percentage of the purse from those who win races on these (or any other) drugs.

[maclr11]

Professional sports is also a business and not a friendly game....but they have salary caps so there's some parity and everyone has a chance, its better for business.

Your going to sit here and tell me there's parity in any pro sports league
The Yankees, Red Sox, cardinals with a luxury tax dominate
The heat dominate
The Blackhawks, bruins, and a group of like 5 other teams stand out
The nfl comes the closest I guess but when was the last time the browns, bills, dolphins, rams, jaguars etc were relevant in jan/feb
Plus it's two different models of sports leagues/businesses
There's no salary cap in nascar, that's a much closer model and prior to the recession nascar had huge profitability and shrunk a bit with the market shrinking . So don't tell me parity is commonplace in sports and I really don't think it should be. If people want to spend money to make money that's their right and how can you possibly take away people's livings by evening up the game when they are playing by the book better than anyone else. E.g. (Cool chiropractic techniques, methods of feeding, how they use preventive medicine etc etc)

[RacingFan1992]

We need people like Ben Jones, Jim Fitzsimmons, Eddie Arcaro, and Bill Shoemaker back in the racing world. Say what you want but those people were some of the best trainers and jockeys in the business. Just Saying

[castaway01]

Isnt there other ways to "stop" people who "win too much" other than going thru legal channels with doped blood and tainted urine? How about racing secretaries writing races only eligible for trainers who have less than a 20% winning percentage at that current meet? This way, owners and trainer who rarely win actually have some shot.

This is one of your "brilliant" ideas that you'll spend five pages of posts defending, then by the 6th page of the thread you'll be arguing against yourself and saying it's dumb. You'll get 20 posts out of it though.

[mountainman]

We need people like Ben Jones, Jim Fitzsimmons, Eddie Arcaro, and Bill Shoemaker back in the racing world. Say what you want but those people were some of the best trainers and jockeys in the business. Just Saying

An admirable sentiment, sir. But drugging was SO widespread and accepted back in the day, that Johnny Loftus once stood before the stewards and alibied a Sir Barton loss by blaming the trainer, Hard Guy Bedwell, for putting him on a "cold" horse.

Reportedly, officials considered that reason enough to reprimand both Loftus AND Bedwell. The unwritten policy simply asked that a horseman be consistent- Either dope a horse ALL the time, or none of the time.

And, of course, relating to Ben Jones....the occasional inference that Citation was addicted to cocaine.

[RacingFan1992]

I never heard about Citation being addicted to cocaine. Ah Horse Racing. It is kinda hard to tell which stories are real and which ones are not. A lot of the stories are about people who are long dead and some people today just don't care. I was surprised when Penny Chenery came out saying that she had an affair with Lucien Laurin her trainer. She said that was forty years ago and she is 91 and just doesn't care anymore. I hear it all the time that "Secretariat was doped up on drugs or Man o' War's races were rigged" That is all just hear say. I could not attest to either one of those stories. More mud is flung off the track than on the track.

[mountainman]

Ah Horse Racing. It is kinda hard to tell which stories are real and which ones are not.

For sure, pal.

[RacingFan1992]

I wish that a group of good hearted people (Jockey, trainer, owner, breeder) would come along with a race horse that is not on any drugs and has absolutely no native dancer blood would come and win the triple crown. That would show everybody. The racing gods speak every year. They do not want a bunch of cheats and druggies in their exclusive club. (Depending on who you talk to the racing gods are a bunch of cheats and druggies.)

[tophatmert]

An admirable sentiment, sir. But drugging was SO widespread and accepted back in the day, that Johnny Loftus once stood before the stewards and alibied a Sir Barton loss by blaming the trainer, Hard Guy Bedwell, for putting him on a "cold" horse.

Reportedly, officials considered that reason enough to reprimand both Loftus AND Bedwell. The unwritten policy simply asked that a horseman be consistent- Either dope a horse ALL the time, or none of the time.

And, of course, relating to Ben Jones....the occasional inference that Citation was addicted to cocaine.

And according to Grace Jones Citation spent the last years of his life standing in line at Studio 54 but he was no longer on the list.

[RacingFan1992]

Hahahahahaha. :lol: If he was on cocaine nobody cares. Look what happened when that one guy came out saying the battle of the sexes with BJK and Bobby Riggs was fixed. Somebody said on youtube who cares that was 40 years ago and it's tennis.

[PaceAdvantage]

An admirable sentiment, sir. But drugging was SO widespread and accepted back in the day, that Johnny Loftus once stood before the stewards and alibied a Sir Barton loss by blaming the trainer, Hard Guy Bedwell, for putting him on a "cold" horse.

Reportedly, officials considered that reason enough to reprimand both Loftus AND Bedwell. The unwritten policy simply asked that a horseman be consistent- Either dope a horse ALL the time, or none of the time.

And, of course, relating to Ben Jones....the occasional inference that Citation was addicted to cocaine.I know...people act as if this is some sort of new phenomenon, the drugging and juicing of racehorses.

As if steroids weren't available back in the days of Secretariat...I have news for people...humans were using steroids in the Olympics WAY BEFORE Secretariat was ever born...you draw your own conclusions.

The good old days are never as good as you remember them RacingFan1992.

[RacingFan1992]

To be honest with you I wasn't even born in the good ol' days. I have another 50 years before I can remember the good ol' days and then I will be in my 70's and I either won't remember or I just won't care. I actually think that Secretariat ran steroid free in the Belmont just because of his body. His huge heart he got from his mother by the way of her father. He had the pedigree for it. I am fond of his grandpappy Princequillo cause he was an endurance runner. Those are my thoughts. I rooted for Calidoscopio in the Brooklyn and the B.C. Marathon.

[Jeff P]

I agree. PED's in horse racing have been more widespread and have been around longer than most would care to admit.

That said, the world has moved on.

Mainstream sports: The Olympics, NCAA Track and Field, MLB, NFL, the NBA, etc. have moved on too. They haven't managed to eliminate PED's entirely from their sports but (at the very least) they are making a serious effort towards that goal and are doing it in a way that the general public can very clearly see.

By way of comparison racing refuses to move on. For whatever reason, racing's decision makers (leadership at horsemen's alphabet groups and track management) resist any and all efforts at change - ANY change.

As a result, racing has fallen so woefully far behind the times that it is no longer a mainstream sport.

If we ever want the public to accept racing as a mainstream sport again, at some point, we are going to have to embrace change and actually make a significant effort to eliminate PEDs from our sport.

Anything less than that will simply result in racing continuing its own (self made) downward spiral in terms of total customer spend on the product.


-jp

.

[Stillriledup]

I wouldn't mind seeing some tracks provide a real incentive to run completely clean, no lasix, no bute or anything else. A possible way to fund that might be to withhold a small percentage of the purse from those who win races on these (or any other) drugs.

I kind of like the idea. I like thinking outside the box and trying to come up with some incentives to run clean, because the current state of "drug testing" isnt working as well as it needs to work.

[Stillriledup]

I agree. PED's in horse racing have been more widespread and have been around longer than most would care to admit.

That said, the world has moved on.

Mainstream sports: The Olympics, NCAA Track and Field, MLB, NFL, the NBA, etc. have moved on too. They haven't managed to eliminate PED's entirely from their sports but (at the very least) they are making a serious effort towards that goal and are doing it in a way that the general public can very clearly see.

By way of comparison racing refuses to move on. For whatever reason, racing's decision makers (leadership at horsemen's alphabet groups and track management) resist any and all efforts at change - ANY change.

As a result, racing has fallen so woefully far behind the times that it is no longer a mainstream sport.

If we ever want the public to accept racing as a mainstream sport again, at some point, we are going to have to embrace change and actually make a significant effort to eliminate PEDs from our sport.

Anything less than that will simply result in racing continuing its own (self made) downward spiral in terms of total customer spend on the product.


-jp

.

They're stuck in the 1970s where they feel they are the "only game in town" and have a take it or leave it attitude.

Unfortunately for current customers, many are leaving it.

[Mineshaft]

This is one of your "brilliant" ideas that you'll spend five pages of posts defending, then by the 6th page of the thread you'll be arguing against yourself and saying it's dumb. You'll get 20 posts out of it though.




Post of the year...........

[Grits]

I never heard about Citation being addicted to cocaine. Ah Horse Racing. It is kinda hard to tell which stories are real and which ones are not. A lot of the stories are about people who are long dead and some people today just don't care. I was surprised when Penny Chenery came out saying that she had an affair with Lucien Laurin her trainer. She said that was forty years ago and she is 91 and just doesn't care anymore. I hear it all the time that "Secretariat was doped up on drugs or Man o' War's races were rigged" That is all just hear say. I could not attest to either one of those stories. More mud is flung off the track than on the track.

Secretariat, yes, he's still the "the incredible legend" as his records remain today. And well may. Always.

However, understand. On the matter of hear-say or subjectivity, one might not want to discount either thought. A new fan of the sport is always a good thing, still, the matter of drugs, steroids or anything else that has been injected into, shoved down the throat of, or put into a horse's gut with the thought of enhancing its performance on the racetrack was a strong possibility in the sport's past history. One that remains today--even with testing that continues to become more sophisticated. Whereas, in the days of Man O War, and decades following, there was no testing.

As others here have noted, if you don't believe that Secretariat's trainer, Lucien Laurin and others weren't aware of steroids decades ago, read Laurin's record of big wins, prior to coming out of retirement to train Riva and Secretariat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucien_Laurin

Secretariat may well have been the "Horse That God Built" as the book title goes, still, he and others that ran against him may have had the hand of human help by way of steroids. In lieu of his perfect confirmation and soundness, a great deal, other than Ronnie Turcotte, was riding on his back, as you know. Everything Penny Chenery's father had done and owned in his lifetime was what one could safely term as Red, "carrying a lot of weight."

Though, I have in the bookcase, Robertson's, "History Of Thoroughbred Racing In America". I may well be wrong, but I don't believe it was all hay, oats, and water back then. I simply don't. Read on of Sunny Jim's record, who trained Triple Crown winners, Gallant Fox and Omaha. Read of Ben Jones who trained exclusively for Calumet and won the Triple Crown with Citation and Whirlaway, who, by the way, was as board certified crazy as a rat in a coffee can! Couldn't run in a straight line to save his soul.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_E._Fitzsimmons

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_A._Jones

About the subject of hear-say, again, the oldest, most abused, feel good, pain killer known to man (and animal) heroin doesn't come by the nickname "horse" for nothing.

Oh, and welcome to horse racing's "puzzling" side. :lol:

[Grits]

We need people like Ben Jones, Jim Fitzsimmons, Eddie Arcaro, and Bill Shoemaker back in the racing world. Say what you want but those people were some of the best trainers and jockeys in the business. Just Saying

Again... I'd keep reading. ;)

[Grits]

I never heard about Citation being addicted to cocaine. Ah Horse Racing. It is kinda hard to tell which stories are real and which ones are not. A lot of the stories are about people who are long dead and some people today just don't care. I was surprised when Penny Chenery came out saying that she had an affair with Lucien Laurin her trainer. She said that was forty years ago and she is 91 and just doesn't care anymore/

HA! And rewards of this variety have gone on, not only in racing, but in all of life since the beginning of time. And racing thought to name its highest award after a horse named, "Eclipse". Sure it was the horse? What an afterthought. :lol:

[RacingFan1992]

Lets say they were to exhume to the body of some of these famous race horses, is there a possibility of drug testing or would the animals body be so deteriorated that there would be no way of detecting any substance at all? Like I said before there are always allegations of what happened back then and frankly many people do not care they just care about the "good points" of the story like Whirlaway and Citation winning the Triple Crown and not like "Grits" said Ben Jones was as crazy as a rat in a coffee can.

[reckless]

From the day I walked onto the racetrack people said that both Secretariat and Riva Ridge, along with other notable champions of that era -- Shuvee, Summer Guest, Genuine Risk to name a few -- were on steroids.

I initially dismissed it out of hand.

Yet, later, when both Secretariat and Riva Ridge had some trouble as stallions in those early years the same voices again pointed to the regular use of steroids as a reason for their failure as top notched stallions. This despite brilliant pedigrees, race records and the accomplished mares sent to their court.

Secretariat's better sons and daughters seemed to have come in later crops. Big Red would prove to be a truly great broodmare sire. Riva Ridge simply was a flop.

The produce record of the three champion mares I mentioned also added some credence to the steroid charges. They produced very little in volume much less replicate anything near their racetrack brilliance.

[Track Collector]

While newer drugs might be difficult to detect, one good aspect is that it seems test samples from race winners are being kept for much longer periods of time. Once a test IS developed for an illegal substance, older samples can be back-tested. The "bad" guys used to have comfort in knowing that once they "passed" the initial testing, they were pretty much home free. Times are now a changing.

The desire and attempts to cheat will never go completely away, but IMO the deterrent is for cheating is increasing as much stiffer fines/penalties are being implemented, and the time period over which one could still be caught for a past cheating practice is now much longer.

[Grits]

Lets say they were to exhume to the body of some of these famous race horses, is there a possibility of drug testing or would the animals body be so deteriorated that there would be no way of detecting any substance at all? Like I said before there are always allegations of what happened back then and frankly many people do not care they just care about the "good points" of the story like Whirlaway and Citation winning the Triple Crown and not like "Grits" said Ben Jones was as crazy as a rat in a coffee can.

No, no, don't misunderstand. Not Mr.Jones, not him. Whirlaway was as "crazy as a rat in a coffee can". He got his "nuts" gene as he was notorious for bolting--never knew where he was gonna be on the racetrack--post 3 or post 40... He'd come out of the turn and take a right, headed to the wire so far outside, fans could pet him as he flew by. lolol

To learn a great deal about thoroughbred history (and breeding of the 20th century) read Edward Bowen's, "Dynasties" or "Matriarchs" and the aforementioned, Robertson book which really IS the finest. It details racing's building of greats--horses, personalities and racetracks from colonial days all the way to about 1963. It even includes the creation of OTBs in NY. .... Its all good, and each book is a great teacher.