Charlatan Stripped Of Arkansas Derby??

[HHE10]

Was going on twitter last night and saw this

"Charlatan to be stripped of Arkansas Derby Title"

But it also said about Saddler horse also got a positive test.?

Again this is probably bs, but just wanted to share :coffee:

[cj]

Probably best to hold off on this kind of speculation. If true, it will be reported soon enough and I will re-open the thread. Closing until that happens, if it does.

[PaceAdvantage]

You mean twitter isn't always right? :pound::pound::pound::pound:

Good call.

[dilanesp]

https://twitter.com/HR_Nation/status/1265347139196145665

[cj]

Open a thread up because of an article that reveals next to nothing?

We'll open it when the time comes. Going to close this one too.

[cj]

Think it is safe to open now.

https://www.drf.com/news/charlatans-initial-test-comes-back-positive-after-arkansas-derby

https://www.horseracingnation.com/news/Split_samples_to_be_tested_on_Arkansas_Derby_day_p ositives_123

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/26/sports/horse-racing/charlatan-bob-baffert-doping.html

https://www.courier-journal.com/story/sports/horses/horse-racing/2020/05/26/2-bob-baffert-horses-test-positive-banned-substances/5260314002/

[Tom]

So how do the officials justify breaking their own rules?
If the second test comes back negative, should someone in the office be fired?

[burnsy]

It’s not hard to guess who leaked or ordered the leak . Just read Lois Cella’s statements. He’s a no bull, track operator and does not play along. There’s a reason that track is independently run. He pretty much says , This isn’t California And if the second tests comes out positive, it’s not gonna take 4 months. He goes on to say the Justify deal was an embarrassment to the business. Gee, I wonder who let this get out ........;)

[Fightingirish51195]

2 baffert horses failed tests. Imagine my shock level.

The chances of 2 false negs happening for the same drug seem low. Unless this kind of thing happens all the time and we don’t hear about it.

How long does it stay in the system. Any chance he cheated and can get away with it because it left the system since the first test? I don’t know anything about drugs effect horses

How come humans don’t get a retest in pro sports (unless they do and I don’t know about it)

[biggestal99]

So how do the officials justify breaking their own rules?
If the second test comes back negative, should someone in the office be fired?


The second one will also come back positive.

Baffert is in hot water.

Allan

[Parson]

and from Bloodhorse this morning:https://cdn.bloodhorse.com/daily-app/pdfs/BloodHorseDaily-20200527.pdf

[burnsy]

Louis Cella, the owner and president of Oaklawn Park, said the commission was “grabbing the bull by the horns.”
“We will not have a situation like in California, where a horse ran in the Kentucky Derby after failing a drug test,” Cella said, referring to a test failed by Justify, the 2018 Triple Crown winner. “That was an embarrassment to the industry. We will push to have this cleared up by the Belmont Stakes.”


Like I said .... lol. Who leaked it out there.??? Just wondering :popcorn::popcorn: ?????

[lamboguy]

the basic idea is to do what you have to do to win the big money, but more importantly, DON'T GET CAUGHT

[Tom]

The second one will also come back positive.

Baffert is in hot water.

Allan

Even it does, is that a reason to violate the rules?
Pretty much makes THEM the same as the offender.

I agree, though no matter WHO gets hurt, drugs have got to be stopped.
Racing needs to get it's act together and clean itself up.

[pandy]

Just my personal opinion, I've always felt that Baffert used illegal methods or substances. His success is simply too good to be true and his past is certainly suspect. He had 7 horses drop dead in a pretty short period of time, and most of them were just standing still when the fell and died. And that was because of a drug he was giving them. Justify looked like a juiced horse, and he was. Anyone with half a brain knew that Mark McGwire was juiced when he all of a sudden turned into Babe Ruth. Sometimes, it's obvious, and in my opinion, it's obvious that Baffert is a cheater.

Just buying the best-bred horses helps but his horses consistently run sensational races. Arrogate's mind-blowing Travers win and his win in Dubai simply looked like a juiced horse, and Baffert's horses often run crazy big races like that. If you compare him to Pletcher, as an example, Pletcher also gets the best bred expensive horses, and he also wins a lot of races, but his horses rarely turn in sensational out-of-their-mind performances. Pletcher's results are hard to question, they are in line with expectations. Baffert's are not. Yet many people believe that somehow Baffert is a much better trainer than everyone else, which isn't likely. There's only so much a trainer can legally do to make a horse run its best.

[classhandicapper]

Do we know which drug the horses tested positive for yet?

This is what I saw yesterday, but I have no idea if this is speculation or factual. It sounds like a stronger version of Bengay for horses that they somehow tested positive for.

https://www.casino.org/news/reports-claim-baffert-horses-including-kentucky-derby-prospect-failed-drug-tests-in-arkansas/

Both horses reportedly tested positive for lidocaine, a local anesthetic. According to the Association of Racing Commissioners International (ARCI), lidocaine is considered a Class 2 drug, which is defined as a substance with “a high potential to affect performance.”

If a horse needs lidocaine to perform, then the horse should be resting and not racing,” Irby added. “What the public may not realize is that lidocaine is typically a topical agent applied to the skin and limbs, and may be undetected by a blood test.

[burnsy]

I agree with Pandy and Lambo. After Justify and Max. It’s pretty apparent the code is if you can do it don’t get caught.

The other thing about these super trainers and all athletes for that matter. You can only be so big, so strong and so fast as humanly possible. Once it begins to look unreal it probably isn’t real. There’s artificial “ factors” involved. It’s one of the reasons I never cared much for this trainer. I always feel like he somehow gets under the radar without getting busted. And if you read the internet people he’s the best trainer since “Silent Tom” Smith. But you had to wonder with the performances and number of them. Right on Pandy.

Who knows what’s said behind closed doors. But Baffert May have been warned. If something happens in Arkansas I’m gonna make you look stupid. A little of that could be going on here too.

[MutuelClerk]

So how do the officials justify breaking their own rules?
If the second test comes back negative, should someone in the office be fired?

I like the way you phrased that Tom. Using the word JUSTIFY.

[classhandicapper]

Pletcher also gets the best bred expensive horses, and he also wins a lot of races, but his horses rarely turn in sensational out-of-their-mind performances.

Except at Gulfstream. ;)

[dilanesp]

Louis Cella, the owner and president of Oaklawn Park, said the commission was “grabbing the bull by the horns.”
“We will not have a situation like in California, where a horse ran in the Kentucky Derby after failing a drug test,” Cella said, referring to a test failed by Justify, the 2018 Triple Crown winner. “That was an embarrassment to the industry. We will push to have this cleared up by the Belmont Stakes.”


Like I said .... lol. Who leaked it out there.??? Just wondering :popcorn::popcorn: ?????

I love that quote. I wish I could put it up on a billboard.

California's racing establishment deserves all the shade Cella throws at it.

[HHE10]

I love that quote. I wish I could put it up on a billboard.

California's racing establishment deserves all the shade Cella throws at it.

I just posted it yesterday I saw from twitter. So whoever posted it on twitter maybe?

Of course it had to be someone big to have it leak

[HHE10]

It’s almost at bad as standardbred doping. 2 trainers doped like 50+ horses and are pretty much allowed to get let go and still race again.

I think if you dope once your done. No exceptions. Doesn’t matter if your Baffert or some small guy racing at Fonner, you should be banned for life.

Taking advantage on animals like this is just stupid. And then acting like I never did it is even worse.

[Magician]

baffert cheats and kills horses. just like servis. plenty of evidence to back up that statement. it was no shock the wests sent maximum security to baffert.


dutrow got 10 years. baffert deserves the same.

[Magician]

Louis Cella, the owner and president of Oaklawn Park, said the commission was “grabbing the bull by the horns.”
“We will not have a situation like in California, where a horse ran in the Kentucky Derby after failing a drug test,” Cella said, referring to a test failed by Justify, the 2018 Triple Crown winner. “That was an embarrassment to the industry. We will push to have this cleared up by the Belmont Stakes.”




this guy is great for the sport. i will support his track even more now.

[cutchemist42]

Breeding rights already sold correct?

[Suff]

Basically ignoring this as a part of my strategy to stay in.

But Lido-caine is nothing. Its over the counter humans no? Its in the toothache pain & and the medicated pad aisle at cvs.

Servis-Navarro
I’m not involved to know, but what I see coming is the trainers did nothing wrong. The drugs outpaced the regulation. Using new treatments that were undetectable was a function of the treatment.

The fall guys - the buyers- the mislabelers-vets. One vet, the one in NY—- he is in worse than anybody by far.

Lidocaine nothing though. Especially small amount as a topical.

[clicknow]

You mean race horses shouldn't be pin-cushions?

Wow. That is quite a novel concept.

[Suff]

Basically ignoring this as a part of my strategy to stay in.

But Lido-caine is nothing. Its over the counter humans no? Its in the toothache pain & and the medicated pad aisle at cvs.

Servis-Navarro
I’m not involved to know, but what I see coming is the trainers did nothing wrong. The drugs outpaced the regulation. Using new treatments that were undetectable was a function of the treatment.

The fall guys - the buyers- the mislabelers-vets. One vet, the one in NY—- he is in worse than anybody by far.

Lidocaine nothing though. Especially small amount as a topical.

[dilanesp]

Basically ignoring this as a part of my strategy to stay in.

But Lido-caine is nothing. Its over the counter humans no? Its in the toothache pain & and the medicated pad aisle at cvs.

Servis-Navarro
I’m not involved to know, but what I see coming is the trainers did nothing wrong. The drugs outpaced the regulation. Using new treatments that were undetectable was a function of the treatment.

The fall guys - the buyers- the mislabelers-vets. One vet, the one in NY—- he is in worse than anybody by far.

Lidocaine nothing though. Especially small amount as a topical.

I think doping rules is one situation where legal formalism has a lot of merit.

For instance, back in the day, sprinters took certain cold medications as stimulants. So the IAAF outlawed them. They still took them, of course, and claimed that they had colds. Didn't matter- the IAAF suspended them anyway.

"It's nothing" is simply not a defense to a charge of use of a banned substance. It isn't the trainer's authority to decide what's "nothing" and what's not "nothing".

If it's banned, and a trainer is caught using it, that should be the ball game (and, like track and field, it ought to be 2 years out of the sport for a first offense). One reason horse racing is so full of drugs is that the sport is always making excuses for positive tests.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Basically ignoring this as a part of my strategy to stay in.

But Lido-caine is nothing. Its over the counter humans no? Its in the toothache pain & and the medicated pad aisle at cvs.

Lidocaine nothing though. Especially small amount as a topical.

Lidocaine is a painkiller. Inject a lame horse with lidocaine and they run through their pain....and sometimes they breakdown as a result, as the underlying pain issue doesn't disappear with the injection, just the pain sensation. It's tested for, so I don't think this happens too often. But I suspect there are undetectable painkillers that do result in needless breakdowns.

[HHE10]

I think doping rules is one situation where legal formalism has a lot of merit.

For instance, back in the day, sprinters took certain cold medications as stimulants. So the IAAF outlawed them. They still took them, of course, and claimed that they had colds. Didn't matter- the IAAF suspended them anyway.

"It's nothing" is simply not a defense to a charge of use of a banned substance. It isn't the trainer's authority to decide what's "nothing" and what's not "nothing".

If it's banned, and a trainer is caught using it, that should be the ball game (and, like track and field, it ought to be 2 years out of the sport for a first offense). One reason horse racing is so full of drugs is that the sport is always making excuses for positive tests.

My dad when he raced horses, you were allowed to rub some stuff like "deep relief" or deep cold blue stuff we rub on our joints when it hurts.

It would make them more relaxed or help with the bumps on there legs. Of course now its illegal to do that now

[Racetrack Playa]

Lidocaine nothing though. Especially small amount as a topical.
Topical , where did the article state it was a topical lido-caine?

Do "WE" know If Bob Beffart was injecting it or not? hum..
asmussan was just pooped for beta-blockers right, lido-caine is a sodium-channel blocker , Baffert has a long history of being in the wrong ,really no BIG DEAL:bang: I say ban him, NOW.


google-

(Torsades de pointes)

[dilanesp]

My dad when he raced horses, you were allowed to rub some stuff like "deep relief" or deep cold blue stuff we rub on our joints when it hurts.

It would make them more relaxed or help with the bumps on there legs. Of course now its illegal to do that now

I'm totally in favor of a drug scheduling process whereby if trainers can show that a substance is really harmless, doesn't enhance performance, and/or is medically necessary, AND THE USE OF THE SUBSTANCE IS DISCLOSED TO BETTORS, it can be used.

But that's not at all what trainers want. They want to use whatever they want to use, not disclose it to anyone, perhaps even commit insider trading by cashing some bets on the knowledge at the public's direct expense, and then preserve the argument that it was no big deal if they get caught.

The former is a totally legitimate way to allow some medications and pain relievers into the sport. The latter is a desire to have no serious doping controls.

[Suff]

Topical , where did the article state it was a topical lido-caine?

Do "WE" know If Bob Beffart was injecting it or not? hum..
asmussan was just pooped for beta-blockers right, lido-caine is a sodium-channel blocker , Baffert has a long history of being in the wrong ,really no BIG DEAL:bang: I say ban him, NOW:rip:







I just am a degenerate dyslexic gambler, not smart enough to explain anything. a touch of research led me down a rabbit hole

, i did duckduck (Torsades de pointes) ,but me no reada french so well.

I’m not on top of it. I don’t know enough to speak on the issue.

I was mainly saying Lidocaine is everywhere.

Baffert can squeeze out of this using the ole’ cross-pollination argument.

[Racetrack Playa]

I’m not on top of it. I don’t know enough to speak on the issue.


Yeah me too, but something stinks

[pandy]

Except at Gulfstream. ;)

Nothing like Baffert's horses. And if you look at great horsemen like Clement and Motion, they certainly win but, once again, their horses don't go out, set a fast pace and draw off easily the way Baffert's do. His horses look juiced. And I'm amazed when people say that Baffert trains his horses fast and hard and that's why they do so well. That's bunk. Many trainers worked their horses fast and were average trainers and some of the greatest trainers of all time rarely worked their horses fast. You can't train class into a racehorse. Either the horse is a top horse or it isn't. But, if you have something up your sleeve, you can certainly take a good horse and make it better.

[pandy]

Topical , where did the article state it was a topical lido-caine?

Do "WE" know If Bob Beffart was injecting it or not? hum..
asmussan was just pooped for beta-blockers right, lido-caine is a sodium-channel blocker , Baffert has a long history of being in the wrong ,really no BIG DEAL:bang: I say ban him, NOW.


google-

(Torsades de pointes)

The CHRB has been protecting Baffert for most of his career. It's a joke. After those 7 horses mysteriously died they didn't even fine him!

[HHE10]

The CHRB has been protecting Baffert for most of his career. It's a joke. After those 7 horses mysteriously died they didn't even fine him!

he probably pays them lots of money just to get away with it. By the time he is ready to retire full time, then maybe he could get pounded and eases it up

[drib]

Just my personal opinion, I've always felt that Baffert used illegal methods or substances. His success is simply too good to be true and his past is certainly suspect. He had 7 horses drop dead in a pretty short period of time, and most of them were just standing still when the fell and died. And that was because of a drug he was giving them. Justify looked like a juiced horse, and he was. Anyone with half a brain knew that Mark McGwire was juiced when he all of a sudden turned into Babe Ruth. Sometimes, it's obvious, and in my opinion, it's obvious that Baffert is a cheater.

Just buying the best-bred horses helps but his horses consistently run sensational races. Arrogate's mind-blowing Travers win and his win in Dubai simply looked like a juiced horse, and Baffert's horses often run crazy big races like that. If you compare him to Pletcher, as an example, Pletcher also gets the best bred expensive horses, and he also wins a lot of races, but his horses rarely turn in sensational out-of-their-mind performances. Pletcher's results are hard to question, they are in line with expectations. Baffert's are not. Yet many people believe that somehow Baffert is a much better trainer than everyone else, which isn't likely. There's only so much a trainer can legally do to make a horse run its best.


Amen....I well remember Belmont Stakes Day, 2017. Baffert shipped in four horses for the undercard stakes. West Coast (8-5) won the Easy Goer; Abel Tasman (2-1) won the Acorn; American Anthem (9-5) won the Woody Stephens; and Mor Spirit (5-2) won the Met Mile. It was not just the victories; each of these horse ran insane races. Just looking at chart calls, one sees words like "surge", and "powerful", but no chart can really describe how these winners overcame pace, and traffic to crush. I am sure somewhere some trainer may have matched this 4-4 stakes winning day, but I doubt any trainer anywheret has ever gotten such efforts in one day.

[dilanesp]

he probably pays them lots of money just to get away with it. By the time he is ready to retire full time, then maybe he could get pounded and eases it up

I don't think he needs to pay them.

Bob Baffert is enormously important to the stakes racing in California. If he were really forced out, our stakes would be consistently mediocre. He trains 40 percent or more of the really top horses out here.

The CHRB treats him accordingly.

[GMB@BP]

Just my personal opinion, I've always felt that Baffert used illegal methods or substances. His success is simply too good to be true and his past is certainly suspect. He had 7 horses drop dead in a pretty short period of time, and most of them were just standing still when the fell and died. And that was because of a drug he was giving them. Justify looked like a juiced horse, and he was. Anyone with half a brain knew that Mark McGwire was juiced when he all of a sudden turned into Babe Ruth. Sometimes, it's obvious, and in my opinion, it's obvious that Baffert is a cheater.

Just buying the best-bred horses helps but his horses consistently run sensational races. Arrogate's mind-blowing Travers win and his win in Dubai simply looked like a juiced horse, and Baffert's horses often run crazy big races like that. If you compare him to Pletcher, as an example, Pletcher also gets the best bred expensive horses, and he also wins a lot of races, but his horses rarely turn in sensational out-of-their-mind performances. Pletcher's results are hard to question, they are in line with expectations. Baffert's are not. Yet many people believe that somehow Baffert is a much better trainer than everyone else, which isn't likely. There's only so much a trainer can legally do to make a horse run its best.

Plenty of good horses he has trained ran out of their eyeballs and turned into pumpkins.

He's also had horses die out of nowhere before.

[Magician]

I don't think he needs to pay them.

Bob Baffert is enormously important to the stakes racing in California. If he were really forced out, our stakes would be consistently mediocre. He trains 40 percent or more of the really top horses out here.

The CHRB treats him accordingly.


pretty sure he trains for some of them. total joke. corrupt leading the corrupt. the worst people are the ones who keep giving him horses. pretty sure the justify owners are part of the charlatan ownership. trash all around.

[Nitro]

baffert cheats and kills horses. just like servis. plenty of evidence to back up that statement. it was no shock the wests sent maximum security to baffert.


dutrow got 10 years. baffert deserves the same.

If you followed it at all you'd realize that Dutrow was set up!
That whole investigation was a farce and he became the fall guy.
In all his years of training he never had a single horse die.
That for me says a lot.

[Magician]

If you followed it at all you'd realize that Dutrow was set up!
That whole investigation was a farce and he became the fall guy.
In all his years of training he never had a single horse die.
That for me says a lot.


he was not set up. he was an arrogant idiot. all he had to do is be a fraud like baffert and he would still be training. his personality did him in. baffert is much worse than dutrow. he is on par with servis. cheats and kills horses. difference is he makes people a lot of money. many of his owners are trash just like him.

[HHE10]

I don't think he needs to pay them.

Bob Baffert is enormously important to the stakes racing in California. If he were really forced out, our stakes would be consistently mediocre. He trains 40 percent or more of the really top horses out here.

The CHRB treats him accordingly.

Well I think it would look weird with no baffert horses in any stakes at all

[GMB@BP]

Should we start a thread for Steve Asmusen as well since he just got popped for a drug violation, a human heart medication no less.

They are all doing it, doesn't make it right, but holding Baffert to a different standard is a bit hypocritical and wonders if it is a bit agenda driven, especially since there are so many drug positives from top barns around the country.

[pandy]

Amen....I well remember Belmont Stakes Day, 2017. Baffert shipped in four horses for the undercard stakes. West Coast (8-5) won the Easy Goer; Abel Tasman (2-1) won the Acorn; American Anthem (9-5) won the Woody Stephens; and Mor Spirit (5-2) won the Met Mile. It was not just the victories; each of these horse ran insane races. Just looking at chart calls, one sees words like "surge", and "powerful", but no chart can really describe how these winners overcame pace, and traffic to crush. I am sure somewhere some trainer may have matched this 4-4 stakes winning day, but I doubt any trainer anywheret has ever gotten such efforts in one day.

I remember that, and I agree.

[pandy]

Should we start a thread for Steve Asmusen as well since he just got popped for a drug violation, a human heart medication no less.

They are all doing it, doesn't make it right, but holding Baffert to a different standard is a bit hypocritical and wonders if it is a bit agenda driven, especially since there are so many drug positives from top barns around the country.

They are not ALL doing it. Perhaps that's why Baffert dominates the stakes events. Most of the juice trainers are claiming trainers. When you give a talented horse the juice, you get Baffert results. Asmussen has certainly tried to match Baffert with doping at times but I really don't think that most of the trainers that train the top-class horses are doping their horses. Some of them may have been tempted but after one or two positives they stopped. I could be wrong, just my opinion.

[GMB@BP]

They are not ALL doing it. Perhaps that's why Baffert dominates the stakes events. Most of the juice trainers are claiming trainers. When you give a talented horse the juice, you get Baffert results. Asmussen has certainly tried to match Baffert with doping at times but I really don't think that most of the trainers that train the top-class horses are doping their horses. Some of them may have been tempted but after one or two positives they stopped. I could be wrong, just my opinion.

Steve Asmusen is an elite world class trainer, have you heard of Gun Runner?

all is in general of course, majority of top class trainers, is that better?

If you asked me a for a % I would say 70% of the top 100 trainers on the money list.

[the little guy]

They are not ALL doing it. Perhaps that's why Baffert dominates the stakes events. Most of the juice trainers are claiming trainers. When you give a talented horse the juice, you get Baffert results. Asmussen has certainly tried to match Baffert with doping at times but I really don't think that most of the trainers that train the top-class horses are doping their horses. Some of them may have been tempted but after one or two positives they stopped. I could be wrong, just my opinion.

You sure are the king of baseless accusations.

[AMPHAR]

Amen....I well remember Belmont Stakes Day, 2017. Baffert shipped in four horses for the undercard stakes. West Coast (8-5) won the Easy Goer; Abel Tasman (2-1) won the Acorn; American Anthem (9-5) won the Woody Stephens; and Mor Spirit (5-2) won the Met Mile. It was not just the victories; each of these horse ran insane races. Just looking at chart calls, one sees words like "surge", and "powerful", but no chart can really describe how these winners overcame pace, and traffic to crush. I am sure somewhere some trainer may have matched this 4-4 stakes winning day, but I doubt any trainer anywheret has ever gotten such efforts in one day.

That was an epic day for Baffert. Crazy dominant performances. I remember thinking he would dominate Breeders cup. He didn’t.

Agree to many way roller coaster ups and downs.

[GMB@BP]

That was an epic day for Baffert. Crazy dominant performances. I remember thinking he would dominate Breeders cup. He didn’t.

Agree to many way roller coaster ups and downs.

the only one that ran above his established form was American Anthem.

Going into the BC I can definitely tell you the barn was less excited about their prospects.

[classhandicapper]

For me, the toughest part about dealing with Baffert is that his lightly raced horses often move up a lot. If you like someone else in the race, it's hard to take a strong stand against him because his horses will often move forward several lengths and beat you. At the same time, since everyone knows his horses are more eligible to move up, you can't get a price on them. If you are going speculate on improvement like that, you want to be rewarded.

[drib]

the only one that ran above his established form was American Anthem.

Going into the BC I can definitely tell you the barn was less excited about their prospects.

Come on; it wasn't the victories, but, rather, how the horses ran....All like they were on rocket fuel. Never, before or after, seen 4 performances from same barn on same day anywhere, and these were all in high class stakes races. I think this quartet, together, was more impressive (if that's the word u want to use) than any individual performance by a single horse, maybe, in racing history (and I am not being over dramatic).

[GMB@BP]

Come on; it wasn't the victories, but, rather, how the horses ran....All like they were on rocket fuel. Never, before or after, seen 4 performances from same barn on same day anywhere, and these were all in high class stakes races. I think this quartet, together, was more impressive (if that's the word u want to use) than any individual performance by a single horse, maybe, in racing history (and I am not being over dramatic).

Really, West Coast winning a glorified alw race, Abel Tasman coming off here Ky Oaks race in her 3rd start of the year winning a so so Acorn where she beat some deep closer from Chad Brown.

Mor Spirit ran very well but he was doing absolutely stellar coming into the race, so much so I even jumped in to bet him, and normally I dont bet those connections.

I agree that AA ran his eyes out.

Look, Baffert aint on the level...most of the trainers at the top end are not in my opinion. In a lot of ways I guess I agree with you. He cheats with better horses against those that cheat with lesser horses, been happening for 100 years.

[v j stauffer]

2 baffert horses failed tests. Imagine my shock level.

The chances of 2 false negs happening for the same drug seem low. Unless this kind of thing happens all the time and we don’t hear about it.

How long does it stay in the system. Any chance he cheated and can get away with it because it left the system since the first test? I don’t know anything about drugs effect horses

How come humans don’t get a retest in pro sports (unless they do and I don’t know about it)

The reason it's called a split sample is because they when they take urine and or blood after a race. They draw enough specimen that should a positive be detected they have enough saved to send more off to the second lab. Which BTW is chosen and paid for by the trainer.

[dilanesp]

Re: they all do it.

I can tell you this much about doping. In every other sport where there was widespread doping, all the major players did it, because you had to. Once your competitors dope, you have to dope.

And you can certainly see that pattern with widespread Lasix use in horse racing, with the caveat that it is legal. It started out as something certain trainers used, and when the performance enhancing aspect was clear, the entire industry adopted it. Again, you have to. If you insist on being pure, owners, who want to win races, will shun you in favor of your competitors.

[Spalding No!]

Anyone with half a brain knew that Mark McGwire was juiced when he all of a sudden turned into Babe Ruth.
Mark McGwire hit a record 49 home runs as a rookie...

[dilanesp]

Mark McGwire hit a record 49 home runs as a rookie...

That's true, but two things:

(1) it is entirely possible he was using from the start, and

(2) even if he wasn't, he then bulked up and hit 70....

[JustRalph]

I saw McGwire up close in his Mark vs Sammy season.

His forearms were so damn big .......it was all everybody was staring at.friggin tree trunks

[Spalding No!]

That's true, but two things:

(1) it is entirely possible he was using from the start, and

(2) even if he wasn't, he then bulked up and hit 70....

OP said McGwire "all of a sudden became Babe Ruth".

[Fightingirish51195]

The reason it's called a split sample is because they when they take urine and or blood after a race. They draw enough specimen that should a positive be detected they have enough saved to send more off to the second lab. Which BTW is chosen and paid for by the trainer.

Ahhhhhh makes sense. I wasn’t even aware it was called a split sample. Who takes the sample and sends it in though?

[v j stauffer]

Ahhhhhh makes sense. I wasn’t even aware it was called a split sample. Who takes the sample and sends it in though?

The sample is collected after a race by technicians who work for the Arkansas Racing Commission. The specimen is sent to a laboratory and tested anonymously. The lab doesn't know which sample is from which horse.

If the test comes back positive the trainer is notified and given the option to send a split sample to a different lab which the trainer chooses.

That test is also anonymous. The 2nd lab doesn't know whose horse it is. Or what it tested positive for.

If it doesn't confirm the positive the case never existed. If it confirms the finding an investigation is conducted.

[pandy]

You sure are the king of baseless accusations.

There's plenty of evidence that Baffert is a cheater. But he's been protected by CHRB throughout his career. When those 7 horses died they didn't even fine him. And then there was Justified, who tested positive but it was swept under the rug.

[pandy]

Mark McGwire hit a record 49 home runs as a rookie...

That doesn't change the fact that he was a good player that all of a sudden became the greatest home run hitter of all time, because he was using steroids.

[classhandicapper]

If it doesn't confirm the positive the case never existed.

This must be why Baffert was upset.

At this stage, no one should know about this case. Let's assume the split test comes back negative, then Baffert's name has been dragged through the mud for "a case that never existed".

[groupie doll]

This must be why Baffert was upset.

At this stage, no one should know about this case. Let's assume the split test comes back negative, then Baffert's name has been dragged through the mud for "a case that never existed".

another +1.
That begs the question why everybody and their proverbial brother not only knows about it, but also knows all the details including the specific horse and drug. Something's rotten somewhere alright... maybe on multiple levels and fronts.

[dilanesp]

another +1.
That begs the question why everybody and their proverbial brother not only knows about it, but also knows all the details including the specific horse and drug. Something's rotten somewhere alright... maybe on multiple levels and fronts.

Remember, the secrecy of the positive test is just something horse racing does to keep horsemen happy.

In other areas of law enforcement, people get publicly identified as suspects or even get charged, and later get cleared, all the time. Arguably, a first positive test is a public record and the public should know about it.

And I think Baffert, who, after all, won a TC by cheating and having the CHRB cover it up for him, is not in a position to complain about this being publicized. He is the poster boy for why the entire process should be public.

[Racetrack Playa]

Remember, the secrecy of the positive test is just something horse racing does to keep horsemen happy.

In other areas of law enforcement, people get publicly identified as suspects or even get charged, and later get cleared, all the time. Arguably, a first positive test is a public record and the public should know about it.

And I think Baffert, who, after all, won a TC by cheating and having the CHRB cover it up for him, is not in a position to complain about this being publicized. He is the poster boy for why the entire process should be public.


Racing needs fixing:rolleyes: , it's very obvious.

[cj]

As a bettor, I would argue a positive should be made public ASAP becasue the horses can run, often a few times, while the cases play out. If you want to keep it quiet, bench the horse until it is resolved.

[jay68802]

As a bettor, I would argue a positive should be made public ASAP becasue the horses can run, often a few times, while the cases play out. If you want to keep it quiet, bench the horse until it is resolved.

Joe Sharp at the Fairgrounds, as a example.

[classhandicapper]

As a bettor, I would argue a positive should be made public ASAP becasue the horses can run, often a few times, while the cases play out. If you want to keep it quiet, bench the horse until it is resolved.

That's a reasonable compromise. Pending the 2nd test, the horse shouldn't be allowed to run because his prior PPs can be misleading. That really argues for a much faster testing process because we can't have connections dragged through the mud on a false positive and we can't have horses sidelined for too long if they were clean.

[jay68802]

That's a reasonable compromise. Pending the 2nd test, the horse shouldn't be allowed to run because his prior PPs can be misleading. That really argues for a much faster testing process because we can't have connections dragged through the mud on a false positive and we can't have horses sidelined for too long if they were clean.

Want to cut the time down. Send a split sample out at the same time as the original. If the first comes back positive, have the other one done.

[classhandicapper]

Remember, the secrecy of the positive test is just something horse racing does to keep horsemen happy.

In other areas of law enforcement, people get publicly identified as suspects or even get charged, and later get cleared, all the time. Arguably, a first positive test is a public record and the public should know about it.

And I think Baffert, who, after all, won a TC by cheating and having the CHRB cover it up for him, is not in a position to complain about this being publicized. He is the poster boy for why the entire process should be public.

You're a lawyer.

Assume I'm a trainer, get a positive, it becomes public, I get dragged through the mud in the media and on social media, and my reputation gets damaged. Then it turns out the 2nd test does not verify the first. That second result isn't going to be put on blast the same way the positive was and doesn't necessarily prove I was 100% clean. That could be damaging to my business and reputation long term. In this case because it's Baffert and Charlaton it's going to get a lot of coverage either way, but I see some potential problems with announcing these positives until they are verified.

[cj]

You're a lawyer.

Assume I'm a trainer, get a positive, it becomes public, I get dragged through the mud in the media and on social media, and my reputation gets damaged. Then it turns out the 2nd test does not verify the first. That second result isn't going to be put on blast the same way the positive was and doesn't necessarily prove I was 100% clean. That could be damaging to my business and reputation long term. In this case because it's Baffert and Charlaton it's going to get a lot of coverage either way, but I see some potential problems with announcing these positives until they are verified.

Such is life, no? People get charged with murder...HUGE headlines. Charges get dropped, second page news, if that.

[classhandicapper]

Such is life, no? People get charged with murder...HUGE headlines. Charges get dropped, second page news, if that.

That's not so cool either, but unavoidable due to how slow the legal process works. There is also a fairly long look at the evidence before an arrest or charges are brought to begin with.

I don't have much of an issue with keeping a positive test result quiet until verified as long as the horses aren't running back. I don't know why a 2nd test takes so long to come back. Not that I know how these tests work, but I can't see why it would take longer than a week for a priority case.

[dilanesp]

You're a lawyer.

Assume I'm a trainer, get a positive, it becomes public, I get dragged through the mud in the media and on social media, and my reputation gets damaged. Then it turns out the 2nd test does not verify the first. That second result isn't going to be put on blast the same way the positive was and doesn't necessarily prove I was 100% clean. That could be damaging to my business and reputation long term. In this case because it's Baffert and Charlaton it's going to get a lot of coverage either way, but I see some potential problems with announcing these positives until they are verified.

Two points:

1. That would make you like any other person who is charged and eventually exonerated.

The issue here isn't whether it sucks to be charged and exonerated. It's whether we should keep charges and evidence secret because someone might be exonerated in the future. We don't do this in any other area. If the health inspector shuts down a restaurant, it's publicly reported even if it is later determined the shutdown was in error. If a criminal suspect is indicted, it is publicly reported even if it is later determined that the suspect is innocent.

That's how life works.

The question is whether horsemen should get some special exemption from that, where we protect them at the expense of the public. If anything, it should be the opposite, we ought to be MORE willing to put out information about horsemen because they voluntarily participate in a sport involving legalized gambling and therefore the bettors should come first.

2. I also don't buy that there are that many first test positives that are actually innocent.

And that's a crucial distinction here. Indeed, it's part of the reason there's no problem publicizing indictments. It's very possible to be found not guilty because of some problem with the evidence and still be guilty. Charging and trying people in public allows the public to differentiate between actually innocent people and people who got off on a technicality.

Yes, I suppose it is possible for someone to get a positive test and to actually be innocent. But the vast, vast, vast majority of the time, they are guilty. And there's really no reason to protect some person from publicity just because the lab screwed up the second test and we have to presume him legally innocent.

[Nitro]

Racing needs fixing:rolleyes: , it's very obvious.

That's an understatement for racing here in the States.

That's why there are many people who choose to play a fair and transparent game that's offered in Hong Kong.

There are no discussions even remotely close to the things being implied on this thread. In HK, first time is a huge fine and days penalized. Second time you're out PERMANENTLY!

[dilanesp]

A more general point:

If horse racing were run by outsiders- i.e., if racing commissions weren't filled with the buddies of owners and trainers and racetrack operators, there would be no way in a million years such outsiders would grant the horsemen all the special privileges that are granted them.

Not just the "don't publicize a positive test" thing, although that is one example, but also a ton of other stuff:

1. The designated race rule and the ability to use appeals to manipulate suspensions so they don't cost jockeys lucrative mounts;

2. The ability of a suspended trainer to turn the stable over to an assistant;

3. The right to bet on races involving one's own horses;

Etc.

The entire idea that people in this sport are conditioned to think "we can't do that, it will harm the occasional horseman who is innocent" rather than "this sport only exists because the state allows it to, and everything is to be strictly regulated with the primary objective being the integrity of the betting pools" shows how brainwashed we all are by this.

And of course, when you regulate a sport / form of gambling this way, surprise surprise, you end up with a ton of cheating and chicanery.

[classhandicapper]

I don't want to come off like I'm defending Baffert. But to be honest a drug that appears to be a stronger version of Bengay for horses is not exactly what I think a lot of super trainers are using.

I'm not a horseman, but from what I gather this product is used regularly on the backstretch to control muscle aches and tightness. This sounds more like a screw up than an attempt to move horses up.

https://www.horseracingnation.com/news/Lidocaine_ban_is_predominantly_a_safety_and_welfar e_concern_123

Whatever the rules are, they should be enforced, but this does not appear to be a juicing case.

[cj]

I don't want to come off like I'm defending Baffert. But to be honest a drug that appears to be a stronger version of Bengay for horses is not exactly what I think a lot of super trainers are using.

I'm not a horseman, but from what I gather this product is used regularly on the backstretch to control muscle aches and tightness. This sounds more like a screw up than an attempt to move horses up.

https://www.horseracingnation.com/news/Lidocaine_ban_is_predominantly_a_safety_and_welfar e_concern_123

Whatever the rules are, they should be enforced, but this does not appear to be a juicing case.

If it is lidocaine, it is a drug that is banned because it masks injuries and can lead to breakdowns. So juicing, no, probably not.

When all the horses died, Baffert was caught (without consequences, sadly) just throwing drugs at a horse to see what helps it run faster. Who knows if that is involved here, but if the second test comes back positive I hope he gets a serious suspension. Of all the things that could lead to horse racing being in danger of going away, drug use is at the top in my opinion.

[stuball]

Person gets accused by corrupt fbi and doj and news media ... found innocent no news sorry just an anology

[v j stauffer]

A more general point:

If horse racing were run by outsiders- i.e., if racing commissions weren't filled with the buddies of owners and trainers and racetrack operators, there would be no way in a million years such outsiders would grant the horsemen all the special privileges that are granted them.

Not just the "don't publicize a positive test" thing, although that is one example, but also a ton of other stuff:

1. The designated race rule and the ability to use appeals to manipulate suspensions so they don't cost jockeys lucrative mounts;

2. The ability of a suspended trainer to turn the stable over to an assistant;

3. The right to bet on races involving one's own horses;

Etc.

The entire idea that people in this sport are conditioned to think "we can't do that, it will harm the occasional horseman who is innocent" rather than "this sport only exists because the state allows it to, and everything is to be strictly regulated with the primary objective being the integrity of the betting pools" shows how brainwashed we all are by this.

And of course, when you regulate a sport / form of gambling this way, surprise surprise, you end up with a ton of cheating and chicanery.

The designated race rule was actually enacted as a protection to horse owners. Theory being they should not be forced to change riders at the 11th hour in a very important Stakes race. Mounts for these races especially graded are secured weeks and months in advance. They don't want to damage the owners chances because of a separate suspension that didn't involve their program. If a jockey rides in more than one designated race he has to serve a different, additional day of suspension.

[classhandicapper]

If it is lidocaine, it is a drug that is banned because it masks injuries and can lead to breakdowns. So juicing, no, probably not.

When all the horses died, Baffert was caught (without consequences, sadly) just throwing drugs at a horse to see what helps it run faster. Who knows if that is involved here, but if the second test comes back positive I hope he gets a serious suspension. Of all the things that could lead to horse racing being in danger of going away, drug use is at the top in my opinion.

I agree with everything you are saying, but with this particular drug it seems to have a necessary use in horse treatment and is in and out of the system in between 1.5 and 3 hours. It sounds way more like a timing screw up than an effort to run unsound horses or to move horses up.

This feels more like Shaq using Icy Hot at halftime and getting busted for it because it wasn't out of his system by the end of the game. Like I said, whatever the rules say, they should be enforced, but this one doesn't have me up in arms like the juicers.

I guess we'll get the details of why he was using it if the next test comes back positive.

[jay68802]

According to the Association of Racing Commissioners International (ARCI), lidocaine is considered a Class 2 drug, which is defined as a substance with “a high potential to affect performance.”

Class 2 drugs are also unacceptable for therapeutic use due to their high
performance enhancing ability. These drugs focus on cardiovascular and nervous system stimulants and neuromuscular blockers.

Sorry Class, might want to re-think this.

[Cholly]

You're a lawyer.

Assume I'm a trainer, get a positive, it becomes public, I get dragged through the mud in the media and on social media, and my reputation gets damaged. Then it turns out the 2nd test does not verify the first. That second result isn't going to be put on blast the same way the positive was and doesn't necessarily prove I was 100% clean. That could be damaging to my business and reputation long term. In this case because it's Baffert and Charlaton it's going to get a lot of coverage either way, but I see some potential problems with announcing these positives until they are verified.

And you're a handicapper--what do you think the odds are that the split sample test comes back negative? Almost never, I'd bet.

[classhandicapper]

And you're a handicapper--what do you think the odds are that the split sample test comes back negative? Almost never, I'd bet.

I'd say it's highly unlikely to come back negative.

Then we'll see what he has to say in his defense and what the penalty will be.

My guess is he's going to say it's a legal drug he occasionally uses to help with mild soreness and stiffness resulting from the tough training schedule he puts his horses through that on this occasion was administered to several horses at the wrong time. If I could get a bet down and we could find out the answer, I'd bet that Nadal was treated also but didn't come back positive because it was out of his system on schedule.

I have no idea what the rules are regarding this kind of thing. They should enforce them, but I suspect Baffert will go on from there winning everything in sight again.

[cj]

According to the Association of Racing Commissioners International (ARCI), lidocaine is considered a Class 2 drug, which is defined as a substance with “a high potential to affect performance.”

Class 2 drugs are also unacceptable for therapeutic use due to their high
performance enhancing ability. These drugs focus on cardiovascular and nervous system stimulants and neuromuscular blockers.

Sorry Class, might want to re-think this.

There is no way that lidocaine is a performance enhancer as people think of them. Sure, it can help a sore horse run through pain to its best level, but no horse is getting lidocaine and running a 20 point new top like we saw with horses from Servis and Navarro.

[classhandicapper]

According to the Association of Racing Commissioners International (ARCI), lidocaine is considered a Class 2 drug, which is defined as a substance with “a high potential to affect performance.”

Class 2 drugs are also unacceptable for therapeutic use due to their high
performance enhancing ability. These drugs focus on cardiovascular and nervous system stimulants and neuromuscular blockers.

Sorry Class, might want to re-think this.

Did you read this?

I think this more or less explains its use.

https://www.horseracingnation.com/news/Lidocaine_ban_is_predominantly_a_safety_and_welfar e_concern_123

It helps to the extent it alleviates pain and stiffness.

I think I've speculated enough on this. We'll hear from Baffert eventually.

[Magician]

There is no way that lidocaine is a performance enhancer as people think of them. Sure, it can help a sore horse run through pain to its best level, but no horse is getting lidocaine and running a 20 point new top like we saw with horses from Servis and Navarro.


that is the definition of a performance enhancer.

[cj]

that is the definition of a performance enhancer.

No, it really isn't. Lidocaine is never described as a PED that I've ever seen.

[dilanesp]

The designated race rule was actually enacted as a protection to horse owners. Theory being they should not be forced to change riders at the 11th hour in a very important Stakes race. Mounts for these races especially graded are secured weeks and months in advance. They don't want to damage the owners chances because of a separate suspension that didn't involve their program. If a jockey rides in more than one designated race he has to serve a different, additional day of suspension.

I do know why they say they do it, but I still think it's an obvious attempt to protect jockeys as well. If it weren't that way, they could, after all, say that the jockey can ride but can't get a percentage of the purse. :)

Other sports DO NOT do this. If you get yourself suspended for 5 games by the baseball commissioner, while your team is in the pennant race, the baseball commissioner does not say "well, I will let you serve the suspension in spring training next year, because it's really unfair to make the owner get another second baseman on short notice".

Same in football. Same in boxing- they don't let suspended boxers fight just because their promoters have invested a ton of money that they stand to lose.

ONLY horse racing does this. Which demonstrates my exact point- that horse racing is run as if the only people who matter are the insiders.

[v j stauffer]

I do know why they say they do it, but I still think it's an obvious attempt to protect jockeys as well. If it weren't that way, they could, after all, say that the jockey can ride but can't get a percentage of the purse. :)

Other sports DO NOT do this. If you get yourself suspended for 5 games by the baseball commissioner, while your team is in the pennant race, the baseball commissioner does not say "well, I will let you serve the suspension in spring training next year, because it's really unfair to make the owner get another second baseman on short notice".

Same in football. Same in boxing- they don't let suspended boxers fight just because their promoters have invested a ton of money that they stand to lose.

ONLY horse racing does this. Which demonstrates my exact point- that horse racing is run as if the only people who matter are the insiders.

Baseball and football players are all on the same team. Jockeys and owners have independent interests.

Also an owner may have only one chance to win a Grade 1 race and assure a big return on investment. Sports teams have a new chance every season. And many make the same amount of money win or lose.

What is an insider? Why aren't I one after 45 years? Who's in charge? Rules are written with the hope of an unbiased level playing field for all.

[Magician]

No, it really isn't. Lidocaine is never described as a PED that I've ever seen.


you want me to believe in a sport where finishes are often decided by 1/10ths of a second, that a horse running with lidocaine is not at an advantage over a horse that isn't. athletes perform better when they don't feel pain.

[classhandicapper]

that is the definition of a performance enhancer.

Many people tend to think of performance enhancers as drugs that enable you to perform at a higher level than you could naturally.

If you have an injury that prevents you from performing at your natural level and take something to relieve that pain or condition, you are technically enhancing performance from your current state but not your natural state.

That's the subtle distinction I think most people make.

[Magician]

Many people tend to think of performance enhancers as drugs that enable you to perform at a higher level than you could naturally.

If you have an injury that prevents you from performing at your natural level and take something to relieve that pain or condition, you are technically enhancing performance from your current state but not your natural state.

That's the subtle distinction I think most people make.


fair point. i think if we knew why the horse was getting a painkiller it would be easier to understand. his other horse is now being retired. are his horses being given medication to run through pain. it is a fair question.

[dilanesp]

Baseball and football players are all on the same team. Jockeys and owners have independent interests.

Also an owner may have only one chance to win a Grade 1 race and assure a big return on investment. Sports teams have a new chance every season. And many make the same amount of money win or lose.

What is an insider? Why aren't I one after 45 years? Who's in charge? Rules are written with the hope of an unbiased level playing field for all.

None of that has anything to do with my objection.

Let's start in a different place.

A jockey is suspended because he or she violates the rules. That's the point. And THAT'S NO DIFFERENT THAN ANY OTHER SPORT. An NBA player commits a horrendous foul, they suspend him a few days. An MLB player gets into a fight, he is suspended a few days. A tennis player, or a boxer, or a golfer, who plays for NO team, violates a rule and gets suspended for a period.

In all of those cases, there are investors. There may or may not be another chance. If Serena Williams or Roger Federer or Tiger Woods faces a suspension at this point in their career, it could be the end.

The reason we do it this way is the point of a suspension is to make the rules violator pay a price.

So you say, "well, but there's something special about jockeys".

That's wrong:

First, and most importantly, it's not the case that only one jockey can ride a horse. That's a rationalization. Indeed, these same owners whose investments we are protecting fire jockeys all the time.

Indeed, back in the day, THERE WASN'T A DESIGNATED RACE RULE. In the 1955 Californian, a HUGE race, Dave Erb rode Swaps, the best horse in the world at the time, in a match of Derby winners against Determine. Why did this happen? Because Willie Shoemaker was suspended.

And because racing officials had balls back then and were able to tell Rex Ellsworth "we don't care, find another rider". Swaps not only won- he set a world record in the race. So somehow Ellsworth survived without the services of Shoemaker.

Second, if there's really something special about jockeys, as I said, why not just allow them to ride but deny them a share of the purse? They can ride, and get a maximum of $1,000. That way the owner's investment is protected (not that it should be, but OK). And the jockey doesn't get to profit during a suspension.

Third, you have to view this in the context of another thing racing allows jockeys to get away with, which is to use appeals to not serve their suspensions at big race meetings. In other words, it isn't as though the designated race rule is some special exception for a very narrow situation. No. It's par for the course. Racing doesn't want to punish big name riders. So it doesn't.

[v j stauffer]

None of that has anything to do with my objection.

Let's start in a different place.

A jockey is suspended because he or she violates the rules. That's the point. And THAT'S NO DIFFERENT THAN ANY OTHER SPORT. An NBA player commits a horrendous foul, they suspend him a few days. An MLB player gets into a fight, he is suspended a few days. A tennis player, or a boxer, or a golfer, who plays for NO team, violates a rule and gets suspended for a period.

In all of those cases, there are investors. There may or may not be another chance. If Serena Williams or Roger Federer or Tiger Woods faces a suspension at this point in their career, it could be the end.

The reason we do it this way is the point of a suspension is to make the rules violator pay a price.

So you say, "well, but there's something special about jockeys".

That's wrong:

First, and most importantly, it's not the case that only one jockey can ride a horse. That's a rationalization. Indeed, these same owners whose investments we are protecting fire jockeys all the time.

Indeed, back in the day, THERE WASN'T A DESIGNATED RACE RULE. In the 1955 Californian, a HUGE race, Dave Erb rode Swaps, the best horse in the world at the time, in a match of Derby winners against Determine. Why did this happen? Because Willie Shoemaker was suspended.

And because racing officials had balls back then and were able to tell Rex Ellsworth "we don't care, find another rider". Swaps not only won- he set a world record in the race. So somehow Ellsworth survived without the services of Shoemaker.

Second, if there's really something special about jockeys, as I said, why not just allow them to ride but deny them a share of the purse? They can ride, and get a maximum of $1,000. That way the owner's investment is protected (not that it should be, but OK). And the jockey doesn't get to profit during a suspension.

Third, you have to view this in the context of another thing racing allows jockeys to get away with, which is to use appeals to not serve their suspensions at big race meetings. In other words, it isn't as though the designated race rule is some special exception for a very narrow situation. No. It's par for the course. Racing doesn't want to punish big name riders. So it doesn't.

Most jurisdictions have impeded the tactic of allowing suspended jockeys to appeal and take suspensions during down time or smaller meets.

There were a few that got days at the end of Oaklawn and the ruling said they must be served when racing resumes next Jan. A good development IMO.

Another aspect of designated races is the appeal process. Any athlete has the right to request an appellate hearing.

What if they are exonerated after missing the opportunity to ride the Stakes?

[cj]

What if they are exonerated after missing the opportunity to ride the Stakes?

Don't riders keep riding if they appeal?

[Blenheim]

It’ll be interesting to watch how this one plays out.

If the split sample comes back negative, he dodges a bullet. If it comes back positive, it’ll be headline news. No doubt the media will rehash the Justify case and coupled with the Charlatan case, Bob Baffert will become the Lance Armstrong of horse racing.

What makes it so terribly sad is horse racing has been doing well as of late . . . having a bit of a resurgence with some fine horse racing entertainment provided by Oaklawn Park and Churchill Downs. Now there is the possibility that the headlines will be dominated by news that the greatest trainer of our generation is nothing more than a lowly doper.

[v j stauffer]

Don't riders keep riding if they appeal?

They do. We were talking about designated races. That rule is in place for a number of reasons. First to protect owners who are counting on a particular rider for a Graded Stake. If the rule is allowed to be invoked a rider wouldn't consider an appeal. Especially if they agreed their suspension was correct. If the designated race rule wasn't in place it would force more tactical appeals which nobody is a fan of.

[castaway01]

It’ll be interesting to watch how this one plays out.

If the split sample comes back negative, he dodges a bullet. If it comes back positive, it’ll be headline news. No doubt the media will rehash the Justify case and coupled with the Charlatan case, Bob Baffert will become the Lance Armstrong of horse racing.

What makes it so terribly sad is horse racing has been doing well as of late . . . having a bit of a resurgence with some fine horse racing entertainment provided by Oaklawn Park and Churchill Downs. Now there is the possibility that the headlines will be dominated by news that the greatest trainer of our generation is nothing more than a lowly doper.


I find it really hard to have any sympathy for Baffert. To use your terminology, he's dodged about 15 bullets up to this point. And you, really REALLY have to stretch to say that Bob Baffert, of all freaking people, has received unfair media coverage. Lance Armstrong? Remember Lance cheated for a long time before it was finally proven too.

[dilanesp]

They do. We were talking about designated races. That rule is in place for a number of reasons. First to protect owners who are counting on a particular rider for a Graded Stake. If the rule is allowed to be invoked a rider wouldn't consider an appeal. Especially if they agreed their suspension was correct. If the designated race rule wasn't in place it would force more tactical appeals which nobody is a fan of.

Most suspensions involve race riding, where there are videos and the appeal should take less than an hour to decide.

If you are talking about a non-riding infraction, how about doing what we lawyers do in court? Most punishments are NOT stayed pending appeal, but in an exceptional case where you can show you are likely to win you can get a stay, or you can get a stay by posting a bond.

So jockey can post a bond and ride in the designated race, but if the suspension is affirmed he has to give back the purse share. Why doesn't that work?

[v j stauffer]

Most suspensions involve race riding, where there are videos and the appeal should take less than an hour to decide.

If you are talking about a non-riding infraction, how about doing what we lawyers do in court? Most punishments are NOT stayed pending appeal, but in an exceptional case where you can show you are likely to win you can get a stay, or you can get a stay by posting a bond.

So jockey can post a bond and ride in the designated race, but if the suspension is affirmed he has to give back the purse share. Why doesn't that work?

The process for a race riding appeal is complicated.

The original board of Stewards that issued the sanction can't hear the appeal.

They've already revealed their opinion with the ruling.

They have to convene a different panel of 3 stewards from the same state which has logistical constraints.

Often expert witnesses are called, former stewards or ones from other jurisdictions or often times other riders and the Jockey's Guild reps.

I'm not sure about the bond posting idea. Where would the money go if it later had to be forfeited?

[Jeff P]

Most jurisdictions have impeded the tactic of allowing suspended jockeys to appeal and take suspensions during down time or smaller meets.

There were a few that got days at the end of Oaklawn and the ruling said they must be served when racing resumes next Jan. A good development IMO.

Another aspect of designated races is the appeal process. Any athlete has the right to request an appellate hearing.

What if they are exonerated after missing the opportunity to ride the Stakes?

Re: The bolded part of the above quote --

That's not the way it works in California.

It's not terribly hard to find examples where the CHRB has allowed suspended riders to begin serving a well deserved suspension during the down-time between meets.


-jp

.

[airford1]

I do know why they say they do it, but I still think it's an obvious attempt to protect jockeys as well. If it weren't that way, they could, after all, say that the jockey can ride but can't get a percentage of the purse. :)

Other sports DO NOT do this. If you get yourself suspended for 5 games by the baseball commissioner, while your team is in the pennant race, the baseball commissioner does not say "well, I will let you serve the suspension in spring training next year, because it's really unfair to make the owner get another second baseman on short notice".

Same in football. Same in boxing- they don't let suspended boxers fight just because their promoters have invested a ton of money that they stand to lose.

ONLY horse racing does this. Which demonstrates my exact point- that horse racing is run as if the only people who matter are the insiders.

Dude Buy a race horse before you act the part.

[dilanesp]

The process for a race riding appeal is complicated.

The original board of Stewards that issued the sanction can't hear the appeal.

They've already revealed their opinion with the ruling.

They have to convene a different panel of 3 stewards from the same state which has logistical constraints.

Often expert witnesses are called, former stewards or ones from other jurisdictions or often times other riders and the Jockey's Guild reps.

I'm not sure about the bond posting idea. Where would the money go if it later had to be forfeited?

The expert witness issue is a rule of evidence. There's no particular reason why a state needs to allow expert witnesses on a riding infraction appeal. That, again, is something racing does, but it doesn't need to do.

Why do I know this? Because most states don't allow expert witnesses on disqualifications. Maximum Security's owners, famously, did not get to call any expert witnesses to opine on Luis Saez's ride. Obviously, it wouldn't make sense to say that expert opinion is relevant to whether Luis Saez fouled other horses with respect to a suspension, but it's irrelevant to the issue of whether he fouled other horses with respect to a disqualification. I realize the decision is a little different (in a DQ, the foul has to affect the placing, and can sometimes be unintentional), but in both cases the jockey's explanation for what happened is taken into account.

So if a state wants to allow expert witnesses, that's a pro-jockey decision, a decision that makes suspensions harder to stick. And I am not sure it's a particularly good one, especially since racing officials ought to watch enough videos of races to be expert themselves, and jockeys can, of course, offer their own testimony as to what they did.

You could do any number of things with a forfeited bond. States and localities use forfeited bonds to fund law enforcement; maybe forfeited jockey bonds could be used to help fund the racing commission's enforcement activities. Or maybe it could be thrown back into the purse fund where it can be used to pay for future races. Or donated to an equine retirement charity. It's a nice problem to have. :)

[dilanesp]

Dude Buy a race horse before you act the part.

My mother owns racehorses.

But I also don't see how this matters. The reason the sport is regulated by the state is not to protect owners. It's to protect bettors.

That's really fundamental. Owners take the game, and the risks that it holds, as they find it. State regulators are supposed to be there to protect the public. That's their mandate.

It's just like any other form of regulatory capture. The insurance commissioner is supposed to regulate insurance companies and protect the public, not protect the business investments of insurance companies. We had some insurance commissioners who forgot that a few decades ago, and in response made the insurance commissioner an elected official. Maybe we should replace the CHRB with an elected horse racing commissioner as well.

[clicknow]

I don't know much about lidocaine in horses. I do know that since I cannot take NSAIDS for my nerve pain with inflamed arthritis joints, my doctor will get me lidocaine for these issues.

When I apply, it has a definite numbing effect, as any local anesthetic would. First the area feels warm, and then it gets numb. I've also used the patch.... it works by causing a temporary loss of feeling in the area where you apply it.

One of the warnings for the TOPICAL kind says this medication passes into breast milk. And to not to drink any alcohol. So I assume that this topical drug is absorbed by the body and may enter the bloodstream.

I never use it when I am "well". I used it when I had shingles (for nerve pain), and when knees or back is having an acute arthritic episode (swelling, stiffness, pain).

I have never had the injectible kind, as that is used to treat heart rhythm problems. When used as a local anesthetic, lidocaine is injected through the skin directly into the body area to be numbed.

Oh wait, I did have the injectible kind at dentist once. For anesthesiology, My heart started beating out of my chest. That was pretty bad. He must have given too much. Maybe there was epinepherine in there, too, though.


So........not sure why a horse who is in top fit shape (and without an injury) would be needing this med?

[v j stauffer]

Re: The bolded part of the above quote --

That's not the way it works in California.

It's not terribly hard to find examples where the CHRB has allowed suspended riders to begin serving a well deserved suspension during the down-time between meets.


-jp

.

Actually there are similar protocols in place in Ca. When I was a steward we gave a jock days for careless riding the last week of Del Mar. He wanted to take them at Los Alamitos which we well knew he wasn't going to ride. We wrote the ruling for the first week at Santa Anita.

Many times we even went as far as assigning similar days of the week. If a rider was Dq'ed on a Saturday. He had to serve his days starting also on Saturday rather than Wednesday or Thursday when the available purse money was significantly less.

So to respond I think it WOULD be terribly hard to find suspensions served during down time.

[v j stauffer]

The expert witness issue is a rule of evidence. There's no particular reason why a state needs to allow expert witnesses on a riding infraction appeal. That, again, is something racing does, but it doesn't need to do.

Why do I know this? Because most states don't allow expert witnesses on disqualifications. Maximum Security's owners, famously, did not get to call any expert witnesses to opine on Luis Saez's ride. Obviously, it wouldn't make sense to say that expert opinion is relevant to whether Luis Saez fouled other horses with respect to a suspension, but it's irrelevant to the issue of whether he fouled other horses with respect to a disqualification. I realize the decision is a little different (in a DQ, the foul has to affect the placing, and can sometimes be unintentional), but in both cases the jockey's explanation for what happened is taken into account.

So if a state wants to allow expert witnesses, that's a pro-jockey decision, a decision that makes suspensions harder to stick. And I am not sure it's a particularly good one, especially since racing officials ought to watch enough videos of races to be expert themselves, and jockeys can, of course, offer their own testimony as to what they did.

You could do any number of things with a forfeited bond. States and localities use forfeited bonds to fund law enforcement; maybe forfeited jockey bonds could be used to help fund the racing commission's enforcement activities. Or maybe it could be thrown back into the purse fund where it can be used to pay for future races. Or donated to an equine retirement charity. It's a nice problem to have. :)

We are talking about appealing a suspension and designated races.

You're now talking about appeals of disqualifications which you are correct are not allowed in most jurisdictions.

[Jeff P]

Actually there are similar protocols in place in Ca. When I was a steward we gave a jock days for careless riding the last week of Del Mar. He wanted to take them at Los Alamitos which we well knew he wasn't going to ride. We wrote the ruling for the first week at Santa Anita.

Many times we even went as far as assigning similar days of the week. If a rider was Dq'ed on a Saturday. He had to serve his days starting also on Saturday rather than Wednesday or Thursday when the available purse money was significantly less.

So to respond I think it WOULD be terribly hard to find suspensions served during down time.

Wasn't terribly hard to find a recent case --

Golden Gate: Pair Of Jockeys Suspended 30 Days For Mid-Race Whip Exchange:
https://www.paulickreport.com/news/the-biz/golden-gate-pair-of-jockeys-suspended-30-days-for-mid-race-whip-exchange/

There was a thread here at Paceadvantage (starting with post #8) that saw a few of us discussing the "timing" of when the CHRB allowed the riders to begin serving out their suspensions:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2544641



-jp

.

[dilanesp]

We are talking about appealing a suspension and designated races.

You're now talking about appeals of disqualifications which you are correct are not allowed in most jurisdictions.

You are saying what "is"- and I get that, you are an absolute expert on these procedures, having been a steward at multiple tracks (plus close to the action as an announcer and jockey's agent).

I am saying that what "is" is a result of choices that racing regulators made to be nicer to jockeys than was necessary and appropriate, and that being nice in that way has the effect of making suspensions less punishing than they could be.

I am glad that jurisdictions are cracking down on the shenanigans as to when to serve suspensions. But the fact remains jockeys can drag these things out with appeals, and the designated race rule is a gaping loophole that no other sport would permit (and that horse racing didn't permit in the old days, as seen from the 1955 Californian).

[jay68802]

Saez began serving his suspension for last years Derby on May 20th, of this year.

[v j stauffer]

Wasn't terribly hard to find a recent case --

Golden Gate: Pair Of Jockeys Suspended 30 Days For Mid-Race Whip Exchange:
https://www.paulickreport.com/news/the-biz/golden-gate-pair-of-jockeys-suspended-30-days-for-mid-race-whip-exchange/

There was a thread here at Paceadvantage (starting with post #8) that saw a few of us discussing the "timing" of when the CHRB allowed the riders to begin serving out their suspensions:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2544641



-jp

.

You have to decide if the days served was appropriate to the infraction. I'm sure since it was 30 "calendar" days taking advantage of the timing was likely given consideration.

[v j stauffer]

Saez began serving his suspension for last years Derby on May 20th, of this year.

Was his suspension appealed? Was it adjudicated? Was it dropped?

For what it's worth IMO his serving 1 minute of suspension for his ride in the Derby is a travesty.

Jocks get days for careless riding. There was nothing careless about what happened. Maximum Security clearly ducked away from something on his inside.

Saez did his very best to correct as soon as possible.

While I think the DQ was unfortunately correct.

Losing the purse and notoriety is more than enough punishment.

[AMPHAR]

Derby 145 was stolen!

I’m not sure about the extra strength Ben Gay in Arkansas.

[Tom]

It was stolen, but the thief was DQ's in a nick of time!

[jay68802]

Was his suspension appealed? Was it adjudicated? Was it dropped?

For what it's worth IMO his serving 1 minute of suspension for his ride in the Derby is a travesty.

Jocks get days for careless riding. There was nothing careless about what happened. Maximum Security clearly ducked away from something on his inside.

Saez did his very best to correct as soon as possible.

While I think the DQ was unfortunately correct.

Losing the purse and notoriety is more than enough punishment.

Yes, it was appealed. My point is that taking over a year to get this done, is absurd. I agree with you about the ride in the Derby. Some of this stuff takes way to long, a year for careless riding, three years for a drug violation. And, IMO, way to much "buddy buddy" crap in this game.

[clicknow]

Derby 145 was stolen!

I’m not sure about the extra strength Ben Gay in Arkansas.

Well, if you stand at the paddocks for many of the lower level races, you can pretty much smell the linament coming off horses. Paddocks are indoors so smells tend to linger.

But I have not experienced that smell in the high level stakes races. I have a pretty good sniffer.

[Tom]

It might just be the old men standing behind you! ;)

By the time the feature race comes around, we are long fore for the day.....Early Bird dinner!!!

[cutchemist42]

So Twitter saying more trainers being named on Monday. I guess we will see....

[clicknow]

Ark derby was on May 2nd and Charlatan no works until 5/27

Seems like a long time? 25th day before a published work?

[dilanesp]

Ark derby was on May 2nd and Charlatan no works until 5/27

Seems like a long time? 25th day before a published work?

They have to wait for the drugs to wear off.

[Elkchester Road]

They have to wait for the drugs to wear off.

:ThmbUp:

[Cholly]

How long does it take to test that 2nd sample?

[dilanesp]

How long does it take to test that 2nd sample?

In California, whatever time is needed for the CHRB to legalize the drug in a secret session.

[depalma113]

I am sure somewhere some trainer may have matched this 4-4 stakes winning day, but I doubt any trainer anywheret has ever gotten such efforts in one day.

I guess you missed the 2003 Breeders Cup.

[Big Peps]

How long does it take to test that 2nd sample?

Under normal circumstances it can take some time. Sometimes it's a couple months after the race. Why? I don't know why but that seems standard

[jay68802]

Both split samples confirmed.

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/242181/split-samples-for-baffert-horses-come-back-positive

[classhandicapper]

The punishment will be interesting.

If the amount was actually way too small to impact performance then it is possible the horse won't be disqualified and Baffert will only get a slap on the wrist.

[groupie doll]

Toxicology reports normally take some time, so not surprising this took as long as it did.
I do wonder how lidocaine can accidentally get into a horse's system though. That seems less straight forward (when compared to the accidental caused by scopolamine, for example) though possible I suppose. Lidocaine isn't just hanging around akin to an environmental toxin.

[dilanesp]

The punishment will be interesting.

If the amount was actually way too small to impact performance then it is possible the horse won't be disqualified and Baffert will only get a slap on the wrist.

It is amazing to me the number of different ways our sport finds NOT to punish cheaters.

[Tom]

Has cheating been proven?
Not so sure.
Perhaps the problems is our drug testing is not adequate for the job.

Is this drug even of ANY benefit to a horse?
Could it have gotten into a horse by some nondescript method?

[GMB@BP]

Has cheating been proven?
Not so sure.
Perhaps the problems is our drug testing is not adequate for the job.

Is this drug even of ANY benefit to a horse?
Could it have gotten into a horse by some nondescript method?

I have seen no reporting that discusses the amounts of this drug and its impact on performance. Of course one could argue the amounts were left over from a period of time and not intended to enhance the day of the race performance.

[classhandicapper]

Baffert's lawyer responded to the NY Times article and suggested the amount was very low and did not impact performance. Of course, that's his lawyer saying that.

[PhantomOnTour]

Baffert is a cheating piece of shit, period.

Remember when you were all WOWED by Gamine's performance in the Acorn?
Seriously, as racing veterans, how can y'all fall for that again?
Her career will MAYBE last two more races
:lol:

[Appy]

If I understand it correctly the second test results said the incidence was of such minuscule amount (the fractional particulate was measured in trillionths) there is no way it could have affected performance of the horse. They also have a solid story put together regarding the pre-race handler of both horses in question wearing a patch on his back due to HIS condition...
I think Baffert walks away from this one. Again.

[GMB@BP]

Baffert is a cheating piece of shit, period.

Remember when you were all WOWED by Gamine's performance in the Acorn?
Seriously, as racing veterans, how can y'all fall for that again?
Her career will MAYBE last two more races
:lol:

you could have a point, if baffert was the only doing something. Which he is not.

You try keeping up with the servis's and navarro's of the world with hay, oats and water.:popcorn:

[jay68802]

Amazingly, since they changed the rules in CA. Both, Baffert and Sadler have blamed the bad test on a employee.:bang:

The sport keeps finding new ways to look the other way.

[BIG49010]

Anybody ever put a Salonpas Lidocaine 4% Pain Relieving Maximum Strength Gel-Patch on and end up with residue that would stick around for 2 and 1/2 hours on your hands? Are they that difficult to put on, Shack seems to be able to do it, my BS detector is going off?

[dilanesp]

Amazingly, since they changed the rules in CA. Both, Baffert and Sadler have blamed the bad test on a employee.:bang:

The sport keeps finding new ways to look the other way.

Right. And people defend this stuff. Meanwhile track and field suspends people two years for cold medication. For some reason, way too many people in this sport want to cut trainers slack rather than just strictly enforcing the rules.

[Robert Fischer]

Anybody ever put a Salonpas Lidocaine 4% Pain Relieving Maximum Strength Gel-Patch on and end up with residue that would stick around for 2 and 1/2 hours on your hands? Are they that difficult to put on, Shack seems to be able to do it, my BS detector is going off?

You think Shaq wouldn't take an edge, if there existed a substance that was icy to dull the pain, and hot to relax it away?

[burnsy]

Who knows the truth but a few people? All I can say is at least everyone knows about it. That hiding crap is more troubling. Do certain people get a “ pass” . I don’t but doing that is asking for trouble

[jay68802]

You think Shaq wouldn't take an edge, if there existed a substance that was icy to dull the pain, and hot to relax it away?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlc6xCPx60U

[Jeff P]

According to the BloodHorse article by Frank Angst (https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/242181/split-samples-for-baffert-horses-come-back-positive):
While both horses tested well above the threshold—Gamine was more than nine-times over the limit and Charlatan more than twice the limit—Robertson said the levels are still very small and he'll argue that neither horse was affected by the lidocaine in their system.

Imo, thresholds are there for a reason.

I don't care who the trainer is. When a trainer has a horse test at 9X the threshold and and another test at 2X the threshold:

The best decision the sport can make is simply enforce the rules.



-jp

.

[jay68802]

According to the BloodHorse article by Frank Angst (https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/242181/split-samples-for-baffert-horses-come-back-positive):


Imo, thresholds are there for a reason.

I don't care who the trainer is. When a trainer has a horse test at 9X the threshold and and another test at 2X the threshold:

The best decision the sport can make is simply enforce the rules.



-jp

.

To be nice on this subject, no punishment = no change.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzA_h1En8_E

[groupie doll]

So the accidental overage (9x in Gamine) was caused by an OTC, topical human product that somehow "accidentally" got onto two different animals each weighing roughly 7-8 times that of the average human that the product was designed to treat. Since the product is topical this trace amount just happened to be rubbed off onto two different horses and managed to be absorbed through the dermal layer, plus likely a haircoat (depending on where it accidentally wound up on the horse's body) to such an extent that it caused an overage in one horse 9 times above the allowed amount.

Yeah, I have a large bridge on the market as well...

[burnsy]

The “ gypsum weed” theory. Even if the overage is multiple the threshold...... somehow it expands like yeast in horses...

Hey, you are many times over...... answer: it was trace amounts of contamination......lol.... nothing to see here

[classhandicapper]

Honestly, I think the chances this was intentional are pretty close to zero.

If you are Bob Baffert and you are trying to cheat, you don't use something you know they will test for and it's almost certainly not a variation of Icy Hot. The story his lawyer is telling may be true or maybe it's used by Baffert in training and they got the withdrawal timing wrong etc... Who knows?

But that's a completely different issue than whether the horses should be disqualified and some sort of penalty should be imposed on the trainer according to the rules.

[dilanesp]

According to the BloodHorse article by Frank Angst (https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/242181/split-samples-for-baffert-horses-come-back-positive):


Imo, thresholds are there for a reason.

I don't care who the trainer is. When a trainer has a horse test at 9X the threshold and and another test at 2X the threshold:

The best decision the sport can make is simply enforce the rules.



-jp

.

Right. You don't get to argue out of a speeding ticket on an empty interstate by saying "there was no traffic so it was safe to go 90".

[dilanesp]

Honestly, I think the chances this was intentional are pretty close to zero.

If you are Bob Baffert and you are trying to cheat, you don't use something you know they will test for and it's almost certainly not a variation of Icy Hot. The story his lawyer is telling may be true or maybe it's used by Baffert in training and they got the withdrawal timing wrong etc... Who knows?

But that's a completely different issue than whether the horses should be disqualified and some sort of penalty should be imposed on the trainer according to the rules.

I think we should treat all drug positives as intentional.

If we did that, the trainers would take strong precautions to ensure their horses never got "accidentally" doped.

[JayTris07]

So the accidental overage (9x in Gamine) was caused by an OTC, topical human product that somehow "accidentally" got onto two different animals each weighing roughly 7-8 times that of the average human that the product was designed to treat. Since the product is topical this trace amount just happened to be rubbed off onto two different horses and managed to be absorbed through the dermal layer, plus likely a haircoat (depending on where it accidentally wound up on the horse's body) to such an extent that it caused an overage in one horse 9 times above the allowed amount.

Yeah, I have a large bridge on the market as well...


:ThmbUp::ThmbUp::ThmbUp:

[groupie doll]

I think we should treat all drug positives as intentional.

If we did that, the trainers would take strong precautions to ensure their horses never got "accidentally" doped.
I am not sure that a negative stance is required...they probably should be viewed in a neutral light. I think that if TPTB just enforced the actual rules it would cut down on these accidental overages tremendously. The reasoning/excuse given by the Baffert camp in this particular instance seems bogus, but it also doesn't mean it was necessarily intentional, in terms of overage.

My best guess is the horses were treated with lidocaine therapeutically either to reduce pain (maybe to avoid taking the horse out of training?) or to locally numb a spot for another injection (Lasix, etc....). Lidocaine is sometimes used at the operating site or an injection site in order to reduce local pain resulting from a clinical procedure (usually surgery, but I suppose also a painful injection, etc.). I've used Emla cream and local lido blocks on animals to numb the area for injections and to remove skin growths and such, mainly on dogs and it works great; they usually don't feel a thing. It also has a very short half life (around 2-3 hours), but I am not sure how fast it would clear a horse's system.
The main concern imho is that it appears Baffert was trying to keep at least one horse in training that possibly should not have been (i.e. Charlatan).

[Tom]

So I have to ask, if we are dealing with healthy, sound horses, why are we allowing them to train on drugs they cannot race on?

Should not all drugs banned for racing be banned for training as well, and have a threshold of 0 allowed?

Thanks, Jeff P,. for that post about overages of 9x and 2x - opened my eyes on a topic am admittedly not all that familiar with.

I assumed lidocane was not a performance enhancer and was surprised to see there was a limit on it at all. I thought - Icy Hot when I read about it!

[Andy Asaro]

Excerpt:

"We have limited ability to prosecute out-of-competition testing with current regulations. ... In reality, horse racing does not have a robust anti-doping program," Arthur said. "It can be best described as a medication control program. Medication control is very important and necessary. We not only need to test for performance-enhancing drugs, as is the focus in human sport testing, but for drugs that impact horse welfare and horse and jockey safety. ... Horse racing must also deal with performance-hindering drugs that could be used to stop a horse from its best performance, which is not generally considered a problem in human sport.

Arthur continued to point out the need for out-of-competition testing because "races are won in training," where he said doping is most effective.

https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/228171/chrb-delays-out-of-competition-testing-proposal via @BloodHorse

[Robert Fischer]

A lidocaine overage like this is a bit like celebrating that we found 'pine-tar' two inches too high on a Barry Bonds' bat.

Rules are there for a reason. We can't go along ignoring infractions.

Pretty much any decision by the sport here would be fine by me, although I'd be less favorable of giving a trainer a pass to break rules such as this in the past or future. We can't let top training/owning/breeding parties weasel out of the rules with silly excuses.

"the Bat Boy was practicing the violin, so rosin that was on the bow, got accidentally rubbed on my bat..."

If we go twelve or nineteen miles-per-hour over the speed limit, that 'open-road' excuse won't hold up in court, for us.

Let's just keep it in perspective. If an 'edge' existed, this wasn't the one. This is a rather trivial infraction that should be upheld, but it's not anyone's edge.

[dilanesp]

A lidocaine overage like this is a bit like celebrating that we found 'pine-tar' two inches too high on a Barry Bonds' bat.

Rules are there for a reason. We can't go along ignoring infractions.

Pretty much any decision by the sport here would be fine by me, although I'd be less favorable of giving a trainer a pass to break rules such as this in the past or future. We can't let top training/owning/breeding parties weasel out of the rules with silly excuses.

"the Bat Boy was practicing the violin, so rosin that was on the bow, got accidentally rubbed on my bat..."

If we go twelve or nineteen miles-per-hour over the speed limit, that 'open-road' excuse won't hold up in court, for us.

Let's just keep it in perspective. If an 'edge' existed, this wasn't the one. This is a rather trivial infraction that should be upheld, but it's not anyone's edge.

I don't think we should even think about whether it wasn't an edge. I will put it this way: almost all of this "accidental" stuff amazingly happens to occur in barns that are doing lots of intentional stuff.

At WORST, a long suspension for Baffert would be like nailing Capone for tax evasion.

[Elkchester Road]

I think we should treat all drug positives as intentional.

If we did that, the trainers would take strong precautions to ensure their horses never got "accidentally" doped.
Agreed, dilanesp. Racing could fix this problem anytime they wanted to. They CHOOSE not to. They only want to rule with an iron fist when it comes to certain trainers. Kind of why some of these trainers act the way they do. While we are busy assuming some of them are above the law...they KNOW it.

[classhandicapper]

Charlatan and Gamine ruled unplaced and Baffertt got 15 days. Stories coming at DRF soon.

Enforced the rules.

[Appy]

Surprised, and encouraged at he same time.

[Robert Fischer]

Charlatan and Gamine ruled unplaced and Baffertt got 15 days. Stories coming at DRF soon.

Enforced the rules.

Fair news.

Feel good for the sport, and also empathetic to the connections for the purse monies.

Trainer suspeneded, but, our 'trainer suspensions' more closely resemble an award to top assistants, than they do a punishment to guilty Trainers and Owners.

Does Charlatan (who is out, at least until Preakness/later big purse stakes anyway with injury) lose the 100pts? Basin , Gouverneur Morris, Winning Impression, and Anneu d'Or stand to gain derby points, in that scenario.

Suspension starts August 1-15 per the article.
An assistant would have to get a special day of promotion, with an appearance, and his name in print, if team Baffert aims for Derby Points in the Shared Belief/Travers/Ellis Stakes (ellis is surprising 50-20-10-5pts this year).

Looking forward to seeing Authentic run a brilliant race, as he's been pointed to the July 18th Haskell, and has kind of inherited the position of Baffert's 'ace' 3yo for the time being.

[Tom]

Be interesting to see if this has happened to other trainers, just not well known enough to rise to national news......seems impossible it has never happened before.

[cj]

Fair news.

Feel good for the sport, and also empathetic to the connections for the purse monies.

Trainer suspeneded, but, our 'trainer suspensions' more closely resemble an award to top assistants, than they do a punishment to guilty Trainers and Owners.

Does Charlatan (who is out, at least until Preakness/later big purse stakes anyway with injury) lose the 100pts? Basin , Gouverneur Morris, Winning Impression, and Anneu d'Or stand to gain derby points, in that scenario.

Suspension starts August 1-15 per the article.
An assistant would have to get a special day of promotion, with an appearance, and his name in print, if team Baffert aims for Derby Points in the Shared Belief/Travers/Ellis Stakes (ellis is surprising 50-20-10-5pts this year).

Looking forward to seeing Authentic run a brilliant race, as he's been pointed to the July 18th Haskell, and has kind of inherited the position of Baffert's 'ace' 3yo for the time being.

The 100 points don't matter, he isn't running anyway. But yes, he loses them and the others gain. At this point will they even have a full gate for the Derby? Feels like a longshot to me.

[Robert Fischer]

The 100 points don't matter, he isn't running anyway. But yes, he loses them and the others gain. At this point will they even have a full gate for the Derby? Feels like a longshot to me.

I have no idea, as far as a full gate. Number of contenders have injuries or have gone out of form. Also things just plain different, being later in the 3yo season.

Pros and Cons both ways

10-15 may even be 'safer' , also less random trouble

I know there may be a couple from overseas filling out the gate, but prefer to also see a few early-speed horses entered if there is a full gate.

[jay68802]

Lidocaine normally carries a penalty of a suspension of 15 to 60 days and a $500-$1,000 fine for the first offense. It is often used as a masking agent for other substances, which is why it has been banned.

[hacklimit]

Everybody cheats.

[GMB@BP]

Everybody cheats.

and many get caught and get a slap on the wrist, with a few exceptions its completely worth it to cheat.

[jay68802]

Lidocaine normally carries a penalty of a suspension of 15 to 60 days and a $500-$1,000 fine for the first offense. It is often used as a masking agent for other substances, which is why it has been banned.

and many get caught and get a slap on the wrist, with a few exceptions its completely worth it to cheat.

Got it.

[MONEY]

Cheating is as American as Rock and Roll.

I don't play video games, but know people that do.
Whenever and sometimes before a new video game comes out,
cheats codes get collected and memorized.

People cheat on everything they think that they can get away with.
That's why we have so many bank robbers, con-men and divorces.

Cheating is fundamental.

[Frost king]

If your not cheating, you are not trying.

[GMB@BP]

If your not cheating, you are not trying.

rubbn is racing.

[groupie doll]

Charlatan and Gamine ruled unplaced and Baffertt got 15 days. Stories coming at DRF soon.

Enforced the rules.
Good.

[GMB@BP]

appealing the decision and suspension, case to be decided by 2027.

[dilanesp]

appealing the decision and suspension, case to be decided by 2027.

One of the simplest things this sport should do is require suspensions to be served during appeals. Ordinary people have to go to jail or on probation while their appeals are heard.

If Baffert wants to clear his name, fine. He should serve the suspension though.

[rastajenk]

If you win the appeal, but you've served your time, what have you won? Or what can be returned to you? Your good name?

[dilanesp]

If you win the appeal, but you've served your time, what have you won? Or what can be returned to you? Your good name?

Correct. That's how the criminal justice system works too.

The basic idea is when you are convicted, you lose your presumption of innocence. You have been found guilty. And criminals would just stretch out appeals to avoid serving time.

I don't think people in the sport realize ALL the favors we extend to cheaters and wrongdoers that nobody else does. That is by design and it is bad.

[GMB@BP]

One of the simplest things this sport should do is require suspensions to be served during appeals. Ordinary people have to go to jail or on probation while their appeals are heard.

If Baffert wants to clear his name, fine. He should serve the suspension though.

this is why the whole "give the rider days and dont dq" for fouls is just one part of a silly argument.

they appeal the days and then just take them when convienant. In that scenario there really is not much incentive to foul.

I remember when Pval racked up 25 days in suspensions and then took them all during december at HP, just in time for SA winter.

[Frost king]

One of the simplest things this sport should do is require suspensions to be served during appeals. Ordinary people have to go to jail or on probation while their appeals are heard.

If Baffert wants to clear his name, fine. He should serve the suspension though.

Don’t most people who commit a crime get bail before their day in court? No different than Baffert appealing the suspension.

[GMB@BP]

Don’t most people who commit a crime get bail before their day in court? No different than Baffert appealing the suspension.

after their found guilty they typically do. the ruling was essentially being found guilty.

[dilanesp]

Don’t most people who commit a crime get bail before their day in court? No different than Baffert appealing the suspension.

Almost nobody gets bail pending an appeal after a conviction.

The decision of a racing commission is a conviction. It is not an indictment. The commission has already determined guilt. Baffert has received a day in "court" and a chance to argue innocence. It's the equivalent of a jury verdict. After a jury verdict, you go to prison.

[Tom]

A good reason to train in NYC! :lol:

[clicknow]

Charlatan and Gamine ruled unplaced and Baffertt got 15 days. Stories coming at DRF soon.

Enforced the rules.

Guess you gotta leave CA to have that happen.

We have enough problems in horse racing and don't need to normalize cheating with witty memes.


In the meantime, maybe Oaklawn wanted to put the word out about what they won't tolerate. Good for them, IMHO.


appealing the decision and suspension, case to be decided by 2027.

:D yeah, prolly

[Frost king]

In the meantime, maybe Oaklawn wanted to put the word out about what they won't tolerate. Good for them, IMHO.




The funny thing, they catch Baffert, but they can’t or refuse the ones that are doing it on daily basis during the meet.

[airford1]

so do we get our money back if we played the Arkansas Derby ? :headbanger::headbanger::headbanger:

[clicknow]

but they can’t or refuse the ones that are doing it on daily basis during the meet.

Oh, you must mean "all those other ones" who are winning those million dollar stakes races, sometimes more than one on the same day?.

[Frost king]

Oh, you must mean "all those other ones" who are winning those million dollar stakes races, sometimes more than one on the same day?.

There are a lot of things going on at Oaklawn, that go bump in the night. Too many form reversals, or new tops run older horses for certain trainers. Just look at the leading trainer standings to get your answer.

[green80]

In the meantime, maybe Oaklawn wanted to put the word out about what they won't tolerate. Good for them, IMHO.




The funny thing, they catch Baffert, but they can’t or refuse the ones that are doing it on daily basis during the meet.


I know for a fact that Oaklawn has told some trainers that they were not welcome there.