Some modest proposals

[vikingrob]

I'm wondering what the feelings on this board are on a couple proposals that are designed to try to quickly clean up racing.

On the issue of steroids in racing, my proposal is that any horse that tests positive for steroids will be suspended from racing permanently, and that any horse descended from a permanently-suspended horse is likewise suspended permanently, effective starting with the foal crop of 2011.

On disqualifications, I am proposing that disqualifications be disregarded in determining eligibility for overnight events.

What are your comments on my proposals?

[kenwoodallpromos]

So modest is permanently bar steroid horse from ever having descendents race?
If you are serious, why not start immediately? I would prefer the ban on stakes on the colt or filly or mare to be 3 years- that would kill any chance for a high-value breeding or from winning many high paying stakes, and keep some better horses around longer. Geldings depends on the type of steroid- but maybe more gelding-only races?

[HUSKER55]

From what I have been told most trainers give only one shot a month for horses that are healing from strained muscles and such. The real problem is the trainers that abuse the steroids. What I would be more concerned with steroids is the breeding farms. You keep a horse doped up and you have to wonder what the effects are. The industry wants horses for speed and the drug route won't work. I mean, what happens when the muscles are too big for the bone structure?

I was told that to have an impact you would have to exceed a blood-ratio of .01% in a 1200 lb horse. To me that sounds like an awful lot but I don't know. Aren't steroids regulated? If so, wouldn't improper use trigger a flag?

[onefast99]

Your on the right track but due to the fact that many states still allow steroids causes a lot of problems. For instance you have a horse that you just prepped using a steroid in NJ but the race doesnt go, 40 minutes down the road at Philly park the race is used but you cant go in it due to the fact you just gave your horse a steroid. Thats the big problem, uniformity. Everyone must be on the same page especially neighboring states!

[Brogan]

Like most drugs, human or equine, steroids have a legitimate use...it was one of the things at one time available to all horsemen.

Let me repeat that...steroids have a legitimate theraputic use in horses. Of course, without question, there are those that abuse their use, possibly to the detriment of the animal.

Steroid use is a hot topic button in sports in general, and has slipped over in the racing game. Their ban by so many jurisdictions is a knee jerk reaction to unpopular public reaction fueled by poorly informed media.

[Relwob Owner]

I'm wondering what the feelings on this board are on a couple proposals that are designed to try to quickly clean up racing.

On the issue of steroids in racing, my proposal is that any horse that tests positive for steroids will be suspended from racing permanently, and that any horse descended from a permanently-suspended horse is likewise suspended permanently, effective starting with the foal crop of 2011.

On disqualifications, I am proposing that disqualifications be disregarded in determining eligibility for overnight events.

What are your comments on my proposals?


Your first idea is probably too harsh....as I have said before, once you start punishing owners, drug use will decline.

About the DQ, are you talking about a drug DQ or one for an event during the race?

[Brogan]

Your first idea is probably too harsh....as I have said before, once you start punishing owners, drug use will decline.


You've hit the nail on the head. You fine and suspend the trainer for a drug infraction, you disqualify the horse from competition for the same period of time or until they test clean, whichever is longer, AND you fine and suspend the owner, disqualify them from entering any horse into a race and not allow a transfer of ownership or control of any horse currently in their name.

[slewis]

People on this board who want to suspend owners for what trainers do are totally clueless and need to get real.

First of all.... Owners would be out of this game in a heartbeat except the very very wealthy (which is want the racing elite like the Phipps's and the Arabs want anyway so they can dominate it easier).

Seconly, have you clueless fools have any idea what it costs to keep a horse even on the farm???

Thirdly... This steroid thing is blown way way out of reality. Like any theraputic drug they just need to be regulated properly. Ive stated before that I have no problem the way Dutrow administered Winstrol...
When I had horses with him years ago he said to me (and I quote) "I never liked steroids and dont believe in the mass muscle growth, I give them a shot of winstrol once a month or so just to keep them eating and their coat's healthy". That is NOT an aggressive steroid program.
But other trainers who are much more aggressive building large muscle mass on a frame that wasn't genetically meant to carry that mass, leads to breakdowns. This needs addressing.
Most top trainers have incorporated soft steroid programs into their training programs.
Also, I dont want to burst bubbles but the new steroid rules are not a BAN, it's window dressing for the media to report and the clueless to think everything is tidy.
If you really want to clean up the game, hire the top top chemists like in the Olympics (where if you so much walk by a pharmacy and breathe the air, you might get a positive) and find what the top guys are really doing.
But remember, you're going to spend a LOT of money (which the game doesen't have) and if the "cheaters" have developed a LEGAL edge, which is VERY possible (using a combo of legal substances which I know for a FACT some are doing) you just spent a lot of money for nothing.
(Remember last summer at Monmouth when they raided Bruce Levine's barn and tested every horse??? They came up with ZIP!)

[thespaah]

I'm wondering what the feelings on this board are on a couple proposals that are designed to try to quickly clean up racing.

On the issue of steroids in racing, my proposal is that any horse that tests positive for steroids will be suspended from racing permanently, and that any horse descended from a permanently-suspended horse is likewise suspended permanently, effective starting with the foal crop of 2011.

On disqualifications, I am proposing that disqualifications be disregarded in determining eligibility for overnight events.

What are your comments on my proposals?
Ya can't consider it a modest proposal when ruling as draconian as a lifetime ban from racing is included.
First, why ban the horse? Did the animal administer the drugs him/herself?
If you want to puinish then punish the people who actually did the deeds.

And as in the case of a high pct harness trainer in NJ,none of this nonsesne of some state politicians stepping in and letting the jerk have his license back.

[Brogan]

People on this board who want to suspend owners for what trainers do are totally clueless and need to get real.


The hope is the mere threat of owner suspensions would make people wary of using a trainer with questionable methods.

[DSB]

People on this board who want to suspend owners for what trainers do are totally clueless and need to get real.

I dont think anyone said to suspend/fine/punish an owner if a trainer does something illegal to someone else's horse. Just if he does something illegal to HIS horse. Big difference.

First of all.... Owners would be out of this game in a heartbeat except the very very wealthy (which is want the racing elite like the Phipps's and the Arabs want anyway so they can dominate it easier).

No they wouldn't. They would just be very careful about who they give their horses to. The same owners who flock to the cheaters now would avoid them like the plague if others were punished. It would be a deterrent to those who have been enabling this kind of activity. The honest trainers might have a chance to land some of the owners who are currently supplying these guys with 50, 100, 200 head.

Oh, and a great many of these cheaters play the claiming game. Do you think owners who race in these events have to fear the Arabs or Phipps' dominating there?

Seconly, have you clueless fools have any idea what it costs to keep a horse even on the farm???

Yes, and that's the deterrent. Financial loss.

(Remember last summer at Monmouth when they raided Bruce Levine's barn and tested every horse??? They came up with ZIP!)

Yeah, and if memory serves me correctly, his lofty 50% winning percentage took a precipitous drop immediately. Coincidence? I guess it's possible. Just as possible might be that once the heat got turned up, they got awfully careful around there.

Guess it's a matter of opinion.

[vikingrob]

Your first idea is probably too harsh....as I have said before, once you start punishing owners, drug use will decline.

About the DQ, are you talking about a drug DQ or one for an event during the race?

For punishing the owners, the sooner the steroid use stops, the better, IMO. The idea is not just to hit them in the wallet at the track, but also at the breeding shed.

For the DQ's, this is intended at the very least at the drug suspensions but the idea is to do what is possible to ensure that cheaters will lose. If a horse is disqualified after winning a maiden special weight or N1X by 20 lengths, I fail to see how it is fair for the next horse to lose the condition. After all, it is the future racing success of other horses that comes into play here.

The reasoning behind the permanent suspensions is due to the fact that a suspension issued in one jurisdiction will be honored by all other jurisdictions. The point of this is that the purpose of the steroids is to give a horse a long-term advantage (or at least reduce a long-term disadvantage) over horses not so treated. And then you have the horses whose success on the track can be attributed in whole or in part to steroids go to the breeding shed after their racing days are over, which is the reason for the progeny suspension.

[Brogan]

So then, hay, water and oats it is! Try to fill a race card like that.

What so many just don't understand is that steroids have a legitimate purpose, its the ABUSE of steroids that causes trouble.

[DSB]

So then, hay, water and oats it is! Try to fill a race card like that

Exactly. Racing started to descend the slippery slope of medication many years ago, and there is no return.

When there were a great many trainers racing on H. O. W. years ago, it was not uncommon for horses to race 25-30 times in a 9 month season. A horse that raced in the beginning of the month might get in 4 starts by month's end.

Try that with today's typical TB.

The breed is weaker and a good argument could be that medications are at the root.

Unsound stallions who couldn't have raced without meds have been steadily weakening the breed. Now most horses need medication - lasix and in most instances several others - to continue racing.

One thing is for sure. Take lasix away and in short order you'd have a hard time filling a card.

Hard to prove, but that's my opinion....

[thespaah]

People on this board who want to suspend owners for what trainers do are totally clueless and need to get real.

First of all.... Owners would be out of this game in a heartbeat except the very very wealthy (which is want the racing elite like the Phipps's and the Arabs want anyway so they can dominate it easier).

Seconly, have you clueless fools have any idea what it costs to keep a horse even on the farm???

Thirdly... This steroid thing is blown way way out of reality. Like any theraputic drug they just need to be regulated properly. Ive stated before that I have no problem the way Dutrow administered Winstrol...
When I had horses with him years ago he said to me (and I quote) "I never liked steroids and dont believe in the mass muscle growth, I give them a shot of winstrol once a month or so just to keep them eating and their coat's healthy". That is NOT an aggressive steroid program.
But other trainers who are much more aggressive building large muscle mass on a frame that wasn't genetically meant to carry that mass, leads to breakdowns. This needs addressing.
Most top trainers have incorporated soft steroid programs into their training programs.
Also, I dont want to burst bubbles but the new steroid rules are not a BAN, it's window dressing for the media to report and the clueless to think everything is tidy.
If you really want to clean up the game, hire the top top chemists like in the Olympics (where if you so much walk by a pharmacy and breathe the air, you might get a positive) and find what the top guys are really doing.
But remember, you're going to spend a LOT of money (which the game doesen't have) and if the "cheaters" have developed a LEGAL edge, which is VERY possible (using a combo of legal substances which I know for a FACT some are doing) you just spent a lot of money for nothing.
(Remember last summer at Monmouth when they raided Bruce Levine's barn and tested every horse??? They came up with ZIP!)
Wow! Tell us how you really feel!
Look, you're spot on here. Suspending an owner for the actions of his contractor(trainer) is not the answer. Unless of course the owner's complicity can be proved.
In any event if a trainer feels compelled to use illegal stimulants omn his racing stock to get and edage well he isn't very good at what he does.
These guys should be banned form the game. There are lots of variables though. The reason IMO why guys cheat is because they think everyone else is cheating. That said, it is up to the racing jurisdiction to have better oversight and create a system where the penalty for cheating is such a horrible alternative a trainer would NEVER think of cheating.
That right there would clean up the game and most importantly give horseplayers and fans of the game the notion that there is nothing shady going on.
And IMO that would bring people to the track.
All we want is an honest game.

[ralph_the_cat]

IMO, I dont think the breed is getting weaker at all... the breed is getting pushed earlier and harder than ever... and those that dont think, need to understand a few things... How many horses use to sell at 2yo in training sales 50 years ago?... none, if any... do you know which ones would sell?.... it was the horses with little to no bloodline... Good bred horses with lots of back class were sold right off the farm, were put into training right off the farm by the trainer who was going to race him, or they were sold at yearling sales, before ever getting worked like they do now... People started taking their 2yos that they couldnt sell off the farm or auction, or maybe they just didnt want to put into training themselves because there wasnt a lot of class behind them... so they would take them to a 2YO IN TRAINING SALE... It was a way to say, hey, this horse might not have a ton of class/bloodline behind him(value)... but look! he can still run!... 2yo in training sales were where they took horses with little ability and pushed them hard to make them look good during a short work down the stretch... eventually a few superstars emerged... while other more valueable 2yo were slowly brought into racing, and pushed only at a respectable pace.... After some serious horses were sold and won big stake from these 2yo in training sales... people started taking horses with value, horse with bloodlines to these sales... they were pushed to run their absolute best by April/May of their 2 yo season!!!!!.... then throw steriods into their yearling/2yo season in the early 80's... the last 20+ years, horses especially horse sold at these 2yo sales began to become pushed to early, even those not sold at a 2yo training sale, but rather sold private were loaded up and pushed to hard to show off to potential buyers... there is NO doubt, when a horse is pushed too hard as a 2yo, they CANT be fixed... when horses are developed too late, they have trouble as well... they need to be introduced to training/racing slowly as a 2yo, and pushed at the end of their 2yo season or beginning of their 3yo season, not 3-5months into their 2yo season like they have been doing the last 20 years... when most of them are still 1year, and 11 months old... this part of the game changed soooo much the last 20+ years.... soooo much....

Look at Eight Belles... pushed hard as a 2yo...
Look at greats years ago... Colon, pushed too hard as a 2yo...
They started testing horses for steriods at sales a year or 2 ago... you will see an improvement over time... although they will still be pushed fairly hard young, just without/or little roids now...


with drugs on the streets, the user has the least amount of worries, a buyer could get in more trouble, a seller can get into even more trouble, and one who grows/manufactures too sell, gets in the most trouble... its the complete opposite in horse racing... only the user faces penalty... also, like I stated for years... monitor the drugs going into YOUR race track from the vets... MONITOR the vet bills so they match... Misuse of drugs can be monitored...

[DSB]

Interesting theory. I just have a couple of questions.

If there are some people who believe as you do, and I'm sure there are some because a segment of the racing population either don't start at two or have very limited starts late as a 2YO, are their horses starting 25-30 times in 9 or 10 months? Do they start every 10-12 days? Do they have careers of 120-150 starts? Why not?

I don't see ANY horses fitting this scenario nowadays.

Not even the ones who have been managed the way you contend they should be managed.

I agree unsoundness has been bred into the breed, I just don't agree you can lay it all on the way young horses are managed.

[Relwob Owner]

The hope is the mere threat of owner suspensions would make people wary of using a trainer with questionable methods.


EXACTLY-hey slewis, any better ideas????? I wouldnt describe myself as "clueless", as you would say-clueless is a description of anyone who thinks that the current methods of punishment do anything at all, because they dont.

I own horses and I would have no problem with suspending owners whose trainers fail tests......this is the only way to really hold trainers accountable-the way it stands now, an owner can just rotate trainers without taking any responsibility hen their horse fails a test outside of maybe losing a purse.

[Relwob Owner]

People on this board who want to suspend owners for what trainers do are totally clueless and need to get real.

First of all.... Owners would be out of this game in a heartbeat except the very very wealthy (which is want the racing elite like the Phipps's and the Arabs want anyway so they can dominate it easier).

Seconly, have you clueless fools have any idea what it costs to keep a horse even on the farm???

Thirdly... This steroid thing is blown way way out of reality. Like any theraputic drug they just need to be regulated properly. Ive stated before that I have no problem the way Dutrow administered Winstrol...
When I had horses with him years ago he said to me (and I quote) "I never liked steroids and dont believe in the mass muscle growth, I give them a shot of winstrol once a month or so just to keep them eating and their coat's healthy". That is NOT an aggressive steroid program.
But other trainers who are much more aggressive building large muscle mass on a frame that wasn't genetically meant to carry that mass, leads to breakdowns. This needs addressing.
Most top trainers have incorporated soft steroid programs into their training programs.
Also, I dont want to burst bubbles but the new steroid rules are not a BAN, it's window dressing for the media to report and the clueless to think everything is tidy.
If you really want to clean up the game, hire the top top chemists like in the Olympics (where if you so much walk by a pharmacy and breathe the air, you might get a positive) and find what the top guys are really doing.
But remember, you're going to spend a LOT of money (which the game doesen't have) and if the "cheaters" have developed a LEGAL edge, which is VERY possible (using a combo of legal substances which I know for a FACT some are doing) you just spent a lot of money for nothing.
(Remember last summer at Monmouth when they raided Bruce Levine's barn and tested every horse??? They came up with ZIP!)


I do know how much money it costs to keep a horse and that proves my point-----the owners will be so afraid of their operation shutting down that they will be forced to police their own trainers and not use ones who blow tests.....this is ACTUAL accountability-----I know this would be a HUGE blow to the owners who use a "dont ask, dont tell" policy but it would be a huge help for those of us who dont use trainers who juice or cheat and would be huge overall boost to the sport as a whole

[Relwob Owner]

People on this board who want to suspend owners for what trainers do are totally clueless and need to get real.

First of all.... Owners would be out of this game in a heartbeat except the very very wealthy (which is want the racing elite like the Phipps's and the Arabs want anyway so they can dominate it easier).

Seconly, have you clueless fools have any idea what it costs to keep a horse even on the farm???

Thirdly... This steroid thing is blown way way out of reality. Like any theraputic drug they just need to be regulated properly. Ive stated before that I have no problem the way Dutrow administered Winstrol...
When I had horses with him years ago he said to me (and I quote) "I never liked steroids and dont believe in the mass muscle growth, I give them a shot of winstrol once a month or so just to keep them eating and their coat's healthy". That is NOT an aggressive steroid program.
But other trainers who are much more aggressive building large muscle mass on a frame that wasn't genetically meant to carry that mass, leads to breakdowns. This needs addressing.
Most top trainers have incorporated soft steroid programs into their training programs.
Also, I dont want to burst bubbles but the new steroid rules are not a BAN, it's window dressing for the media to report and the clueless to think everything is tidy.
If you really want to clean up the game, hire the top top chemists like in the Olympics (where if you so much walk by a pharmacy and breathe the air, you might get a positive) and find what the top guys are really doing.
But remember, you're going to spend a LOT of money (which the game doesen't have) and if the "cheaters" have developed a LEGAL edge, which is VERY possible (using a combo of legal substances which I know for a FACT some are doing) you just spent a lot of money for nothing.
(Remember last summer at Monmouth when they raided Bruce Levine's barn and tested every horse??? They came up with ZIP!)


Also, I gotta ask.....in what world does one use the phrase "clueless fools" in what would hope to be an intelligent discussion---with phrases like that, i cannot imagine you are the type of person who would be good at getting along with anyone and actually having a mature intelligent debate

[ralph_the_cat]

Interesting theory. I just have a couple of questions.

If there are some people who believe as you do, and I'm sure there are some because a segment of the racing population either don't start at two or have very limited starts late as a 2YO, are their horses starting 25-30 times in 9 or 10 months? Do they start every 10-12 days? Do they have careers of 120-150 starts? Why not?

I don't see ANY horses fitting this scenario nowadays.

Not even the ones who have been managed the way you contend they should be managed.

I agree unsoundness has been bred into the breed, I just don't agree you can lay it all on the way young horses are managed.

Im not saying that unsoundness has been bred into the bred... I dont think it has... Im just saying the way we bring horses into the game has changed... If we changed this you would see an improvement... over time...

its not like they're not out there either, there are a number of horses that hit the 20+ start mark.... nothing worth bragging about, but they are out there, and believe me... theres some tracks where trainers dont have the races come up as often (dont fill) so they get added time between races...not to mention racinos, where there are too many entries to run the horses as often as you'd like... But the biggest factor of them all is that the business end has changed... as a trainer... you dont want to run a horse every 10-14 days for an owner, god for bid the horse gets injured, you're out a day rate... check out trainers that own their own horses... how quick they run back or how often they run a year... Dale Baird would run a horse 6 times in 2 months... now trainers dump horses with minor injuries too quick as well... lots of money to run horses in todays world... even 4k claimers train up to races for 30 days as if its the Derby... it all about win % now... before, it was run the horse every week, you're bound to win a race here and there... now its, collect the owners day rate... we have some time, we need to make sure hes ready to win next month...

LOOK at how they train now... people say the breed is week, they dont run as often... LOOK AT HORSES LIKE AFLEET ALEX... the horse went to the race track EVERY day... it takes a sound horse to do that... but people think he was unsound because he only ran a handful of times before he got a stress fracture (that could be healed in 8 weeks)... the horse went to the track every day for a year straight... he could have run a race every 10 days, instead he worked 5F every couple days... the entire mind set of training and racing has changed... before it was run as often as you can and get lucky... now its limit your starts and make sure the horse is ready to run his eye balls out or else my win % will drop...

and Im not saying horses shouldnt run or race as a 2yo... Im just saying they are pushed TOO HARD TOO EARLY... nothing wrong with galloping horse like the seasbiscuit days... galloping a horse 5 miles thru the woods... like the eruos do... we didnt breed for speed!!!... we trained for speed!!!!... now its all about how fast a 2year old can work an 1/8th of a mile in April... just plan stupid IMO... gallop them with small stretch workouts, but let the horse do it on his own... by the summer put some solid works together and run... having these horses absolutely drilled in April of their 2yo season to be in top shape is insane, the horse should be galloping with a select amount of workouts, and drilled later in the summer... and race... each month that goes by for a 2yo is important, the horse is still growing...

Look at Zitos comments... who I admire by the way, but disagree... he said they show up at his barn as a 2yo with issues already... and then he shrugged his shoulders... "I dont know, it makes you think the breed is weaker these days"...

"shows up" at his barn...

These horse are drilled to draw a price tag, privately or at a 2yo sale.... guys buy them and send them to Zito... Zito thinks the breed is lame... but has never touched most of these horses until they are full grown...

these horse are trained hard before Zito ever sees them... goes back to what I said earlier... horses use to be broke and trained by similar connections (in house guys)... now the trainer thats breaking him as a 2yo wants the best for the horse, but by best, I mean a fast time and muscles bulging at the 2 year old sales... the game has forever changed...

Gimme the breed 100 years ago... Ill drill them by april for the sales... throw in some steroid too... same results...

[onefast99]

Also, I gotta ask.....in what world does one use the phrase "clueless fools" in what would hope to be an intelligent discussion---with phrases like that, i cannot imagine you are the type of person who would be good at getting along with anyone and actually having a mature intelligent debate
The juice isnt worth the squeeze. he attacks mostly everyone due to the fact he doesnt read the post first before typing his response. He does offer some interesting thoughts every once in a while. No need to get upset over anyones responses here it is a way of life on this forum.

[Relwob Owner]

The juice isnt worth the squeeze. he attacks everyone mostly due to the fact he doesnt know how to read a post! Better off not even attempting to have any sort of dialogue with this forum member.:bang:


gotcha:)

[vikingrob]

So modest is permanently bar steroid horse from ever having descendents race?
If you are serious, why not start immediately? I would prefer the ban on stakes on the colt or filly or mare to be 3 years- that would kill any chance for a high-value breeding or from winning many high paying stakes, and keep some better horses around longer. Geldings depends on the type of steroid- but maybe more gelding-only races?

The reason I chose the effective date I did was to be certain that I close off an avenue of possible legal attack.

[Thomas Roulston]

Well maybe if U.S. breeders went back to breeding for stamina instead of obsessively for speed, horses would be able to run more times per year.

[Brogan]

Well maybe if U.S. breeders went back to breeding for stamina instead of obsessively for speed, horses would be able to run more times per year.

The breeders are only chasing the money...can't lay all the blame on them.

[slewis]

Wow! Tell us how you really feel!
Look, you're spot on here. Suspending an owner for the actions of his contractor(trainer) is not the answer. Unless of course the owner's complicity can be proved.
In any event if a trainer feels compelled to use illegal stimulants omn his racing stock to get and edage well he isn't very good at what he does.
These guys should be banned form the game. There are lots of variables though. The reason IMO why guys cheat is because they think everyone else is cheating. That said, it is up to the racing jurisdiction to have better oversight and create a system where the penalty for cheating is such a horrible alternative a trainer would NEVER think of cheating.
That right there would clean up the game and most importantly give horseplayers and fans of the game the notion that there is nothing shady going on.
And IMO that would bring people to the track.
All we want is an honest game.


I am for very very stiff penalties for guys that get caught.
I wonder ow many racetracks sweep positives under the rug and give the "dont do it again" speech. Remember racetrack mangagement answer to no one.

[slewis]

Also, I gotta ask.....in what world does one use the phrase "clueless fools" in what would hope to be an intelligent discussion---with phrases like that, i cannot imagine you are the type of person who would be good at getting along with anyone and actually having a mature intelligent debate

I agree wholeheartedly with you.

I dont get along with most people...... have a nasty edge to me......

I am who I am.......but I am VERY honest... will tell it like it is.

I'll tell you your full of shit when I think you are and humbly apologize when I'm wrong.

I also really dont want anyone to take what I say here personally.

[onefast99]

I agree wholeheartedly with you.

I dont get along with most people...... have a nasty edge to me......

I am who I am.......but I am VERY honest... will tell it like it is.

I'll tell you your full of shit when I think you are and humbly apologize when I'm wrong.

I also really dont want anyone to take what I say here personally.
That is well put one of the few that actually apologizes for something he said. Most just say "I was only joking".

[slewis]

That is well put one of the few that actually apologizes for something he said. Most just say "I was only joking".

To set the record straight regarding this thread:

When I use the term "clueless" I'm talking about THIS topic, not looking to insult any/everyone.
Regarding the thread...
Most postees that would accept those discussed terms (suspend the owner and trainer) have never owned a horse. If you dont own a horse you dont know the expenses associated with owning a horse. So thinking that it's a good deterant to suspend owners if a trainer is suspended shows poor judgement and lack of understanding the ramifications.

For example: Let's say I'm Ken Ramsey and I have horses with a dozen trainers incl stakes runners on the east coast. My trainer in Finger Lakes gets a positive with my horse and suspended 1 month.
Now I cant race my stakes horses in the next month because of a cheap claimer in Finger Lakes?
I'd bet 99.% of owners would be out of this game before you can ask your local racing secretary "Why does every race have 5 horse fields"?

For those that own horses that still think it's a good idea... Are you seeing the problems the sport is having filling races, field sizes and handle?
How did you make your money in life to afford an expensive hobby like this because if you apply common business sense to this thread it's not even REMOTELY possible to implement. (Not to mention probable litigation by wealthy owners who are going to go into court and argue they are being punished for something THEY didn't do.)

Ever think of these things guys??? (Relwob) or do you just type type away?

And stop taking s...t so personally, nothin' wrong with a good oldfashioned mud slingin debate....and I've eaten my share of mud...

[proximity]

i can respect that you're good enough to win (big) just playing those 9-10 races a day that nyra cards. because i certainly am not. but there is racing outside of new york and alot of us like to bet and own (relwob) at these other circuits.

now what would attract new owners to a game at circuits where every trainer that begins training for certain owners suddenly starts winning at 30%+?

and what would attract new owners to a game where if one of the above mentioned trainers is "suspended" that the show just goes on with the new "trainer"?

this may not be your reality, but it is the environment that relwob is trying to compete in.
to answer your question if the finger lakes claiming positive was the first positive for a horse owned by mr ramsey then of course he should still be permitted to run his stakes horse the next month. but just how many positives should ramsey owned horses be allowed to rack up though?

[Brogan]

I am for very very stiff penalties for guys that get caught.
I wonder ow many racetracks sweep positives under the rug and give the "dont do it again" speech. Remember racetrack mangagement answer to no one.

This is my whole point. Make the penalties severe enough so that people won't push the envelope as hard.

And yes, there will be collateral damage, i.e. unsuspecting owners sucked into the fallout of a positive. If you want the game clean, tough measures need to be enacted AND enforced.

You can't make an omelette without cracking a few eggs.

[DSB]

You can't make an omelette without cracking a few eggs.

Exactly. And you can't make chicken salad out of chicken manure.

I think I've made my point.

[Relwob Owner]

To set the record straight regarding this thread:

When I use the term "clueless" I'm talking about THIS topic, not looking to insult any/everyone.
Regarding the thread...
Most postees that would accept those discussed terms (suspend the owner and trainer) have never owned a horse. If you dont own a horse you dont know the expenses associated with owning a horse. So thinking that it's a good deterant to suspend owners if a trainer is suspended shows poor judgement and lack of understanding the ramifications.

For example: Let's say I'm Ken Ramsey and I have horses with a dozen trainers incl stakes runners on the east coast. My trainer in Finger Lakes gets a positive with my horse and suspended 1 month.
Now I cant race my stakes horses in the next month because of a cheap claimer in Finger Lakes?
I'd bet 99.% of owners would be out of this game before you can ask your local racing secretary "Why does every race have 5 horse fields"?

For those that own horses that still think it's a good idea... Are you seeing the problems the sport is having filling races, field sizes and handle?
How did you make your money in life to afford an expensive hobby like this because if you apply common business sense to this thread it's not even REMOTELY possible to implement. (Not to mention probable litigation by wealthy owners who are going to go into court and argue they are being punished for something THEY didn't do.)

Ever think of these things guys??? (Relwob) or do you just type type away?

And stop taking s...t so personally, nothin' wrong with a good oldfashioned mud slingin debate....and I've eaten my share of mud...


Solid post-I wasnt taking anything personally, just firing back and I like going back and forth too my friend:)

First, I made the money that enabled me to own horses because of good business sense and an ability to play by the rules----that is what is missing from owners in some cases.

Your example of the claimer at FL coming up positive and shutting things down is a good example of how I severe "one strike" penalty for owners is not realistic. I am not proposing that at all and agree that with all the money owners have to put up, one positive shutting things down isnt realistic or fair and you are right-it would lead to owners bailing and races not filling.

However, I do believe that you cpould set up something that punishes owners in some fashion for multiple positives. You could also not let that owner use that suspended trainer for a period as well....just a few thoughts. It is clear, though, that at small and large tracks, the punishments are really no detrrent at all.


I think the answer for this, as in other instances, is somewhere in the middle.

Lastly as the other poster mentioned, I do own at CT mainly and here, the situation is simply absurd, with one owner and one trainer hitting at percentages that are just ridiculous.

[thespaah]

To set the record straight regarding this thread:

When I use the term "clueless" I'm talking about THIS topic, not looking to insult any/everyone.
Regarding the thread...
Most postees that would accept those discussed terms (suspend the owner and trainer) have never owned a horse. If you dont own a horse you dont know the expenses associated with owning a horse. So thinking that it's a good deterant to suspend owners if a trainer is suspended shows poor judgement and lack of understanding the ramifications.

For example: Let's say I'm Ken Ramsey and I have horses with a dozen trainers incl stakes runners on the east coast. My trainer in Finger Lakes gets a positive with my horse and suspended 1 month.
Now I cant race my stakes horses in the next month because of a cheap claimer in Finger Lakes?
I'd bet 99.% of owners would be out of this game before you can ask your local racing secretary "Why does every race have 5 horse fields"?

For those that own horses that still think it's a good idea... Are you seeing the problems the sport is having filling races, field sizes and handle?
How did you make your money in life to afford an expensive hobby like this because if you apply common business sense to this thread it's not even REMOTELY possible to implement. (Not to mention probable litigation by wealthy owners who are going to go into court and argue they are being punished for something THEY didn't do.)

Ever think of these things guys??? (Relwob) or do you just type type away?

And stop taking s...t so personally, nothin' wrong with a good oldfashioned mud slingin debate....and I've eaten my share of mud...
Well stated.
Too many people tend to react with thoughtless knee jerk reactions to certain situations.
All one has to do it think clearly.

[onefast99]

To set the record straight regarding this thread:

When I use the term "clueless" I'm talking about THIS topic, not looking to insult any/everyone.
Regarding the thread...
Most postees that would accept those discussed terms (suspend the owner and trainer) have never owned a horse. If you dont own a horse you dont know the expenses associated with owning a horse. So thinking that it's a good deterant to suspend owners if a trainer is suspended shows poor judgement and lack of understanding the ramifications.

For example: Let's say I'm Ken Ramsey and I have horses with a dozen trainers incl stakes runners on the east coast. My trainer in Finger Lakes gets a positive with my horse and suspended 1 month.
Now I cant race my stakes horses in the next month because of a cheap claimer in Finger Lakes?
I'd bet 99.% of owners would be out of this game before you can ask your local racing secretary "Why does every race have 5 horse fields"?

For those that own horses that still think it's a good idea... Are you seeing the problems the sport is having filling races, field sizes and handle?
How did you make your money in life to afford an expensive hobby like this because if you apply common business sense to this thread it's not even REMOTELY possible to implement. (Not to mention probable litigation by wealthy owners who are going to go into court and argue they are being punished for something THEY didn't do.)

Ever think of these things guys??? (Relwob) or do you just type type away?

And stop taking s...t so personally, nothin' wrong with a good oldfashioned mud slingin debate....and I've eaten my share of mud...
You hit the nail on the head. Owners very rarely even know what meds their stock is getting let alone some sort of steroid or race enhancer. We rely solely on the trainer for our information. As in any business there are those who elect to cheat to get to the top and those who play by the rules. Unfortuneately those who have figured out a way to beat the system and cheat, or give horses race enhancers that are not detectable by the tracks testing procedure hurt all of us in the long run. There is no simple answer for who is directly responsible. Punishing the entire group including the owner will result in less horses going to the gate. Educating the trainers the owners and all affiliated parties including the vets on how dangerous steroids and illegal enhancers are may be the only way to stop the current problems. How is this going to be paid for? Increase the license fees by $25 per person to pay for this mandatory course.

[stuball]

regulations should be put in place that all vets and trainers
are required to submit reports with all (ALL) drugs given to
all the horses....copies of reports to go to racing secretary--
owner--and state vet....a cross checking system should be done to assure complete transparency...3 strikes and your out system. I at one time owned a few greyhounds and I can tell you that the owner has no insight into what is going on
in the kennel..I tried to be very hands on as an owner but was constantly shut out and turned away...I finally quit and got all my dogs good homes when they retired. I cared too much I guess...one kennel told me A dogs deserve the best
and C dogs are a dime a dozen....Kennels and Stables are much the same -- the really good horses get all the best
the lower claimers...not so much..

Stuball

[Relwob Owner]

You hit the nail on the head. Owners very rarely even know what meds their stock is getting let alone some sort of steroid or race enhancer. We rely solely on the trainer for our information. As in any business there are those who elect to cheat to get to the top and those who play by the rules. Unfortuneately those who have figured out a way to beat the system and cheat, or give horses race enhancers that are not detectable by the tracks testing procedure hurt all of us in the long run. There is no simple answer for who is directly responsible. Punishing the entire group including the owner will result in less horses going to the gate. Educating the trainers the owners and all affiliated parties including the vets on how dangerous steroids and illegal enhancers are may be the only way to stop the current problems. How is this going to be paid for? Increase the license fees by $25 per person to pay for this mandatory course.


Good discussion and from it, I have seen some of the challenges in holding owners responsible---one thing everyone could probably agree on is that the current system stinks-it is laughable that a trainer can blow a test, hand a horse off and have it back 3-6 months later and nothing happens. So, if we are now putting the responsibility and accountability back on the trainer, what do we do? How do we make it so the trainers are actually scared of blowing a test? Well, why not mandate it that the trainer is not allowed to ever train for the owner of the horse he/she blew the test for? Too extreme?That keeps the owner free to keep owning with a different outfit while the trainer gets a really stiff punishment and cant do the "three month handoff"...

Another thing would occur to me as well----it seems to me as if it would be worth the time of whoever is supposedly enforcing the current rules to cehck out the books of the trainers who are supposedly "suspended"....would be an interesting look.....

[Relwob Owner]

regulations should be put in place that all vets and trainers
are required to submit reports with all (ALL) drugs given to
all the horses....copies of reports to go to racing secretary--
owner--and state vet....a cross checking system should be done to assure complete transparency...3 strikes and your out system. I at one time owned a few greyhounds and I can tell you that the owner has no insight into what is going on
in the kennel..I tried to be very hands on as an owner but was constantly shut out and turned away...I finally quit and got all my dogs good homes when they retired. I cared too much I guess...one kennel told me A dogs deserve the best
and C dogs are a dime a dozen....Kennels and Stables are much the same -- the really good horses get all the best
the lower claimers...not so much..

Stuball


Very good ideas but in my experience, toiugh to do simply because of the general motivational and ethical levels of those involved with enforcement

[slewis]

Here's an eye opener relating to this thread:

What if I were to tell everyone that I am convinced that UPPER RACETRACK MANAGEMENT sweeps positives of certain trainers "under the rug" .

I also believe that when they catch a major trainer (depending on who he is) with something new they've tested for THE PUBLIC WILL NEVER KNOW ABOUT IT.

In NY, horsemen testified in the state capital regarding their perceptions of what is taking place in the sport and NYRA fought hard (and still does) to keep all regulatory power UNDER THEIR ABSOLUTE CONTROL.

There is one top trainer who used to win at a much greater rate and dominated top meets who is mysteriously no longer doing that and "some bad stock" cannot be the only reason. Yet, you don't hear of anything. ..and we wont.

I would like to see the day that when major guys get nabbed, it's on the front page of the daily racing form.
But no, the perception is "this is bad for racing so we'll hush hush things up".

Trying to nail Rick Dutrow to the cross every chance they get because he's the guy who beat's the eliteist's at THEIR perceived sport, is not the answer to correcting the game's problems.

[DSB]

Here's an eye opener relating to this thread:

What if I were to tell everyone that I am convinced that UPPER RACETRACK MANAGEMENT sweeps positives of certain trainers "under the rug" .

I also believe that when they catch a major trainer (depending on who he is) with something new they've tested for THE PUBLIC WILL NEVER KNOW ABOUT IT.

In NY, horsemen testified in the state capital regarding their perceptions of what is taking place in the sport and NYRA fought hard (and still does) to keep all regulatory power UNDER THEIR ABSOLUTE CONTROL.

There is one top trainer who used to win at a much greater rate and dominated top meets who is mysteriously no longer doing that and "some bad stock" cannot be the only reason. Yet, you don't hear of anything. ..and we wont.

I would like to see the day that when major guys get nabbed, it's on the front page of the daily racing form.
But no, the perception is "this is bad for racing so we'll hush hush things up".

Trying to nail Rick Dutrow to the cross every chance they get because he's the guy who beat's the eliteist's at THEIR perceived sport, is not the answer to correcting the game's problems.

Horsemen have suspected this for a long time. If one needs to know "why", there are a couple of obvious answers.

1. Almost all of those you are using illegal substances / medications are big stable trainers. Do you think that any racing secretary wants problems with a guy who is filling races everyday?

2. Catching a bigtime trainer cheating is the kind of publicity no track wants. It almost reinforces what the public has been saying for years: "the game is rigged."

How complicit management is in looking the other way is debatable. I, for one, am fairly certain that these "protected" ones are at the very least being allowed to slide on borderline positives. At worst, outright cheating is being overlooked and, therefore, condoned.

One final thought about Ricky Dutrow. I was hoping that Big Brown wouldn't win the TC because he, along with St Liam and others, would have just about assured Dutrow an eventual berth in the HOF. In addition, it would have made Dutrow just about untouchable for the rest of his career for reasons outlined above.

[Brogan]

Here's an eye opener relating to this thread:

What if I were to tell everyone that I am convinced that UPPER RACETRACK MANAGEMENT sweeps positives of certain trainers "under the rug" .

I also believe that when they catch a major trainer (depending on who he is) with something new they've tested for THE PUBLIC WILL NEVER KNOW ABOUT IT.


I concur 100%!

Management is fearful of losing horses and therefore busines..

Gives a definite advantage to the big boys that play fast and loose with the rules, when the penalty is "...if this happens again we're going to slam you hard, and this time we really, really, really mean it."

A major jurisdiction needs to step up to the plate and clamp down on the cheaters. New York or So Cal can certainly survive losing a major trainer or two. It would send a strong clear signal to the sport.

[supercap]

Here's an eye opener relating to this thread:

What if I were to tell everyone that I am convinced that UPPER RACETRACK MANAGEMENT sweeps positives of certain trainers "under the rug" .

I also believe that when they catch a major trainer (depending on who he is) with something new they've tested for THE PUBLIC WILL NEVER KNOW ABOUT IT.

In NY, horsemen testified in the state capital regarding their perceptions of what is taking place in the sport and NYRA fought hard (and still does) to keep all regulatory power UNDER THEIR ABSOLUTE CONTROL.

There is one top trainer who used to win at a much greater rate and dominated top meets who is mysteriously no longer doing that and "some bad stock" cannot be the only reason. Yet, you don't hear of anything. ..and we wont.

I would like to see the day that when major guys get nabbed, it's on the front page of the daily racing form.
But no, the perception is "this is bad for racing so we'll hush hush things up".

Trying to nail Rick Dutrow to the cross every chance they get because he's the guy who beat's the eliteist's at THEIR perceived sport, is not the answer to correcting the game's problems.

I would 100% agree with you. Just reading these posts how some trainers get held in high regard is pathetic. For those of you who think the top trainers are clean just because they dont get positives is absurd. Then when they do get positives they take it to the highest court to show everyone how they have been wronged!! Like taking it to the courts will somehow seperate them from thier counterparts. The best part is they normally lose there as well!

[Relwob Owner]

Here's an eye opener relating to this thread:

What if I were to tell everyone that I am convinced that UPPER RACETRACK MANAGEMENT sweeps positives of certain trainers "under the rug" .

I also believe that when they catch a major trainer (depending on who he is) with something new they've tested for THE PUBLIC WILL NEVER KNOW ABOUT IT.

In NY, horsemen testified in the state capital regarding their perceptions of what is taking place in the sport and NYRA fought hard (and still does) to keep all regulatory power UNDER THEIR ABSOLUTE CONTROL.

There is one top trainer who used to win at a much greater rate and dominated top meets who is mysteriously no longer doing that and "some bad stock" cannot be the only reason. Yet, you don't hear of anything. ..and we wont.

I would like to see the day that when major guys get nabbed, it's on the front page of the daily racing form.
But no, the perception is "this is bad for racing so we'll hush hush things up".

Trying to nail Rick Dutrow to the cross every chance they get because he's the guy who beat's the eliteist's at THEIR perceived sport, is not the answer to correcting the game's problems.


Wow-now this I like.....I would believe all of that_I also like the idea that Dutrow takes the hit for the other "ggod guys"----see, I can be swayed! Without knowing the ins and outs of NY racing like you, i wouldnt know any of this to be true, but man does it make sense.

The older I get the more I realize that most things are fixed and that anything controlled by people is probably run by those people's motivations.

[Relwob Owner]

I would 100% agree with you. Just reading these posts how some trainers get held in high regard is pathetic. For those of you who think the top trainers are clean just because they dont get positives is absurd. Then when they do get positives they take it to the highest court to show everyone how they have been wronged!! Like taking it to the courts will somehow seperate them from thier counterparts. The best part is they normally lose there as well!


Pletcher-Wait a While-underreported, no?

If racing would spend as much time trying to nail the cheats as it does trying to cover them up, racing would be in better shape.

If everyone was only as talented as Stephanie Beattie here in the Mid Atlantic and could hit 44 percent off the claim using nothing but pure, clean training ability, horse racing would be in better shape----strange how she doesnt ship to NY that much and when she does, doesnt win.....hmmmmmm

[supercap]

Pletcher-Wait a While-underreported, no?

If racing would spend as much time trying to nail the cheats as it does trying to cover them up, racing would be in better shape.

If everyone was only as talented as Stephanie Beattie here in the Mid Atlantic and could hit 44 percent off the claim using nothing but pure, clean training ability, horse racing would be in better shape----strange how she doesnt ship to NY that much and when she does, doesnt win.....hmmmmmm

Funny , Pletcher gets the suspension a couple of years ago, and another with wait a while. Suddenly the golden boy is not winning like he used to, think he has gotten gun shy to cheating? Cant afford another mistake ,lest he tarnishes his image. Think anyone will mention his positive when Dunkirk wins the Derby? No, it will be about how long Todd has struggled to win the derby!

[slewis]

I've never had so many people agree with me in my life.


TO HELL with horse racing.... I'm taking on OBAMA in 2012!!!!!!!!!!!!:jump:

[Brogan]

"Slewis won't screw us!" Get out the vote! lol

[onefast99]

I've never had so many people agree with me in my life.


TO HELL with horse racing.... I'm taking on OBAMA in 2012!!!!!!!!!!!!:jump:
I will vote for you but you need to read the entire stimulus bill before passing it!!!

[onefast99]

Treat offenses like DWI's.

1) 1st offense loss of license 45 days
2) 2nd offense loss of license 90 days and mandatory blood samples from all stock under the trainer.
3) 3rd offense loss of license in that state for 1 year. Racing board to hold a hearing prior to re-instatement.
4) 4th offense loss of license in that state forever. May be appealed after one year from infraction and heard thru an appeal process to the racing board.

The horse in question may not be moved to the trainers assistant or associate. The horse may not compete in any races at the current meet unless a blood test comes back negative for the banned substance 24 hours prior to competing. All costs associated with the blood tests will be the responsibility of the trainer and not passed on to the owners. If the trainer has any ownership in the horse all applicable testing fees must be paid prior to entering the horse in any other races at the meet. Failure to pay the fees will result in a ban on the horse for the remainder of the meet.

[proximity]

Punishing the entire group including the owner will result in less horses going to the gate. Educating the trainers the owners and all affiliated parties including the vets on how dangerous steroids and illegal enhancers are may be the only way to stop the current problems....

sure punishing the entire group will probably result in less horses going to the gate..... in the short run. but in the long run this stuff is driving honest trainers and owners (as well as fed up players) out of the game and certainly isn't attracting any new blood into the sport.

you want to "educate" nefarious connections in pa, del, wv, minn, az...... on the dangers of what they're doing?? :rolleyes:

[proximity]

I would like to see the day that when major guys get nabbed, it's on the front page of the daily racing form.
But no, the perception is "this is bad for racing so we'll hush hush things up".

Trying to nail Rick Dutrow to the cross every chance they get because he's the guy who beat's the eliteist's at THEIR perceived sport, is not the answer to correcting the game's problems.

i agree with what you're saying, but racing needs to wake up.

baseball is alot more popular than racing, but when it became clear to the general public that more was being juiced than just the balls, the sport didn't hesitate to begin to expose cheaters..... NO MATTER WHO IT TURNED OUT TO BE!! and to your average joe on the street the names clemens, bonds, a-rod,.... mean a thousand times more than the name rick dutrow (who is actually a pathetic trainer winning in only the lower 20%s compared to some of the operations we're talking about).

[slewis]

I will vote for you but you need to read the entire stimulus bill before passing it!!!

The entire bill???

I still struggle with Green eggs and ham!

[onefast99]

sure punishing the entire group will probably result in less horses going to the gate..... in the short run. but in the long run this stuff is driving honest trainers and owners (as well as fed up players) out of the game and certainly isn't attracting any new blood into the sport.

you want to "educate" nefarious connections in pa, del, wv, minn, az...... on the dangers of what they're doing?? :rolleyes:
The connections that continue to do this must be dealt with severely. Not dealing with the problems is the worst thing that can happen to this sport.

[Relwob Owner]

Treat offenses like DWI's.

1) 1st offense loss of license 45 days
2) 2nd offense loss of license 90 days and mandatory blood samples from all stock under the trainer.
3) 3rd offense loss of license in that state for 1 year. Racing board to hold a hearing prior to re-instatement.
4) 4th offense loss of license in that state forever. May be appealed after one year from infraction and heard thru an appeal process to the racing board.

The horse in question may not be moved to the trainers assistant or associate. The horse may not compete in any races at the current meet unless a blood test comes back negative for the banned substance 24 hours prior to competing. All costs associated with the blood tests will be the responsibility of the trainer and not passed on to the owners. If the trainer has any ownership in the horse all applicable testing fees must be paid prior to entering the horse in any other races at the meet. Failure to pay the fees will result in a ban on the horse for the remainder of the meet.



I like it!


I would still like to see the owners somewhat responsible, only because many of them either have direct knowledge of the infractions or just use a "dont ask dont tell" policy.....Now, Obama's future challenger(slewis) has brought up some good points about punishing the owner but there could be some sort of compromise.....

Either way, I am backing Slewis.....

[slewis]

I like it!


I would still like to see the owners somewhat responsible, only because many of them either have direct knowledge of the infractions or just use a "dont ask dont tell" policy.....Now, Obama's future challenger(slewis) has brought up some good points about punishing the owner but there could be some sort of compromise.....

Either way, I am backing Slewis.....


You guys are just Lobbying for cabinet positions.....

[Relwob Owner]

You guys are just Lobbying for cabinet positions.....


I always need money for buying more horses so a cabinet position seems like a good fit.....bribes and under the table money seems like the way to go and politics seems good!


OK-enough of this nice stuff-can we find something to argue about??????:)

[proximity]

You guys are just Lobbying for cabinet positions.....

secretary of racing as opposed to racing secretary?:)

[PaceAdvantage]

Here's an eye opener relating to this thread:

What if I were to tell everyone that I am convinced that UPPER RACETRACK MANAGEMENT sweeps positives of certain trainers "under the rug" .

I also believe that when they catch a major trainer (depending on who he is) with something new they've tested for THE PUBLIC WILL NEVER KNOW ABOUT IT.

In NY, horsemen testified in the state capital regarding their perceptions of what is taking place in the sport and NYRA fought hard (and still does) to keep all regulatory power UNDER THEIR ABSOLUTE CONTROL.

There is one top trainer who used to win at a much greater rate and dominated top meets who is mysteriously no longer doing that and "some bad stock" cannot be the only reason. Yet, you don't hear of anything. ..and we wont.

I would like to see the day that when major guys get nabbed, it's on the front page of the daily racing form.
But no, the perception is "this is bad for racing so we'll hush hush things up".

Trying to nail Rick Dutrow to the cross every chance they get because he's the guy who beat's the eliteist's at THEIR perceived sport, is not the answer to correcting the game's problems.I disagree, especially about your particular "hush-hush" example. The reason why I disagree specifically in the case you mention, is because at the time this supposed positive occurred (and was supposedly swept under), NYRA was under the harsh spotlights of federal and state investigators, teetering on the brink of extinction. At the time in question, you couldn't even get away with taking some leftover "giveaways" without someone looking to cross some Ts or dot some Is.

So I have a hard time believing that at this very same perilous time in NYRA's history, they were about to try and cover up some big-name stable positive.

[Brogan]

NYRA was certainly quick to throw Mario Sclafani and Braulio Baeza under the bus.

Was this part of their attempt at a squeeky clean image....or just a diversion, sacrificing two minor players to avoid focusing the spotlight elsewhere?

[PaceAdvantage]

NYRA was certainly quick to throw Mario Sclafani and Braulio Baeza under the bus.

Was this part of their attempt at a squeeky clean image....or just a diversion, sacrificing two minor players to avoid focusing the spotlight elsewhere?Make sure you blame the state investigators and the governor as well. Their serious lack of knowledge when it came to racing was as much to blame.

Can you blame NYRA for cooperating with state and federal investigators? If they tell you to jump, you basically jump, don't you?

Sclafani and Baeza I'm sure will find relief in a civil court, if they haven't already.

[Brogan]

Very true that everyone screwed this up...but it was the late Peter Karches, the co-chairman of NYRA that got Spitzer on the case against the two who were accused. What was his motivation? Guess we'll never know for sure.

[proximity]

to see how it works at charles town, look at the pps of git r' done granny in tonight's 6th race.

*27 point beyer jump after claim.... off a win!!

*new trainer kevin joy is now 22% with 8 wins already this year. last year he was 5% with only 7 wins for the entire year!!

[Relwob Owner]

to see how it works at charles town, look at the pps of git r' done granny in tonight's 6th race.

*27 point beyer jump after claim.... off a win!!

*new trainer kevin joy is now 22% with 8 wins already this year. last year he was 5% with only 7 wins for the entire year!!


Yep, PERFECT example----amazing how the owner in that case makes every trainer better and it raises more red flags than I can count....that example proves that it isnt better stock, just the "unbelievable improvement" that owner gets out of his horses......that owner also seems to always get in off the also eligible list when the race suits him and other trainers seem to always have a reason to scratch in those cases and let him in....he must be very persuasive. Check out Melodic Escapade. last week, I believe who got in of the A/E when a horse who looked like he would have been the favorite scratched

[onefast99]

Nothing new here Scott lake has taken 60 beyer horses and added 20 or even 30 beyer points to them the next time they ran. Levine has been in the money about 68% of the time at Monmouth park with an unreal win % in 2008 at MP. Eddie broome followed Kelly Breen in the trainers stats for several years before having a poor year in 2007, like Breen, and rebounding nicely in 2008. The difference here is that Broome doesnt have the stock Levine does!

[proximity]

Nothing new here Scott lake has taken 60 beyer horses and added 20 or even 30 beyer points to them the next time they ran. !

i hear scott is training one in the 9th at ct tonight too. don't know who it's for though!!

[proximity]

also, speaking of scott lake, does anyone have figures for met a miner on february 12 at lrl?

this mare was 0-16 in 2008 with a top beyer of 66, and lost her 1st st of '09 for ann merryman on jan 22, running a beyer of only 58. mr lake claimed her out of the race for 14,000 for repole.

13 days later the 6yo reappears and wins an allowance at lrl with a lifetime best beyer of 81!! and i actually don't have a problem with this, BUT: then she comes back again just 8 days later and goes wire to wire at lrl in 21 3/5, 44 1/5, 109 4/5!!! :rolleyes:

[supercap]

also, speaking of scott lake, does anyone have figures for met a miner on february 12 at lrl?

this mare was 0-16 in 2008 with a top beyer of 66, and lost her 1st st of '09 for ann merryman on jan 22, running a beyer of only 58. mr lake claimed her out of the race for 14,000 for repole.

13 days later the 6yo reappears and wins an allowance at lrl with a lifetime best beyer of 81!! and i actually don't have a problem with this, BUT: then she comes back again just 8 days later and goes wire to wire at lrl in 21 3/5, 44 1/5, 109 4/5!!! :rolleyes:

Nice training job!

[slewis]

I disagree, especially about your particular "hush-hush" example. The reason why I disagree specifically in the case you mention, is because at the time this supposed positive occurred (and was supposedly swept under), NYRA was under the harsh spotlights of federal and state investigators, teetering on the brink of extinction. At the time in question, you couldn't even get away with taking some leftover "giveaways" without someone looking to cross some Ts or dot some Is.

So I have a hard time believing that at this very same perilous time in NYRA's history, they were about to try and cover up some big-name stable positive.

PA.... Once Meyocks was FORCED out and Barry Schwartz resigned it no longer was NYRA vs the state and Spitzer.
Spitzer got what he wanted out of this and once that occurred everything else was meaningless. Getnick & co were paid significantly and the whole thing was a charade. Once the juice started to flow, Bruno and state Rep's threw a tissy to get their piece of the pie.
I STATED THIS BEFORE: A guy like Spitzer does NOT do a 360 and award a 25 yr bonus because "you guys have turned a new leaf and are most qualified"
Think, just think how the political game is played now in this country (and state).
Your suggesting that NYRA was under intense scrutiny, I say it was mission accomplised for the Spitzer camp and I (he) can give a crap about horse racing as long as the right people contribute wisely and realize I'm (he's) the sheriff.
Do you really think Spitzer cared about the integrity of the sport?

Secondly, I never gave a timeframe as to when positives were swept and next I never mentioned a specific track.

Bernanke and co just convinced the entire political spectrum to print 700B for him and his pals... some to pay bad decisions and some to go into their pockets.. Were they fooled in Washington. NO WAY.. it's all part of the political game.

This situation is no different. I wont say what I do or dont know for certain, but I will say that if you or anyone else think that sweeping a positive is going to cause sirens to off and politicians to start swinging an axe, you're very very mistaken.
It would at most be an excuse for political postuing, if that.

[slewis]

Oh, and by the way.


I still insist that if the state wanted to go to trial on the land issue they would have won this case in a heartbeat.

Politico's didn't give anything away, they were never going to privatize racing.
For the politicians it's a question of how much juice we get and who could we get better to run it anyway and do we rally care?

I'd love for someone to investigate campaign contributions by NYRA board members over the last three years....
Maybe then the picture might be a bit clearer for everyone.

[cj]

Why is it Lake is so much better with sprinters?

Met a Miner was given an 89 for the latest win.

This is what I have for her:

1 Met a Miner 6yo m

Lrl 02/12/09 6.0 | 108 87 108 87 | 97*
Lrl 02/04/09 6.0 | 73 80 73 80 | 77*
Lrl 01/22/09 7.0 | 84 72 84 61 | 66
Lrl 12/26/08 5.5 | 78 78 54 50 | 49
Lrl 12/13/08 6.0 | 71 70 71 66 | 66
Lrl 11/28/08 5.5 | 76 60 55 55 | 54
Lrl 10/30/08 6.0 | 83 64 75 44 | 45
Lrl 10/18/08 5.5 | 76 73 72 65 | 67
Lrl 10/04/08 8.0 | 78 69 62 48 | 49
Lrl 09/19/08 6.0 | 77 68 77 61 | 67

[cj]

This just shows again many times it isn't about the horses any more, it is about the people. Here is a horse that lost 13 times at the same exact condition, switches trainers, and wins in a laugher 4 to 5! You think people were betting the horse here?

[proximity]

Why is it Lake is so much better with sprinters?

Met a Miner was given an 89 for the latest win.

This is what I have for her:

1 Met a Miner 6yo m

Lrl 02/12/09 6.0 | 108 87 108 87 | 97*
Lrl 02/04/09 6.0 | 73 80 73 80 | 77*
Lrl 01/22/09 7.0 | 84 72 84 61 | 66
Lrl 12/26/08 5.5 | 78 78 54 50 | 49
Lrl 12/13/08 6.0 | 71 70 71 66 | 66
Lrl 11/28/08 5.5 | 76 60 55 55 | 54
Lrl 10/30/08 6.0 | 83 64 75 44 | 45
Lrl 10/18/08 5.5 | 76 73 72 65 | 67
Lrl 10/04/08 8.0 | 78 69 62 48 | 49
Lrl 09/19/08 6.0 | 77 68 77 61 | 67


look at that pace figure:eek: :eek: :eek:

[cj]

I did some research on the previous trainer. She has had 35 horses claimed away in the last 5 years, and 10 have won. She runs horses where they belong and doesn't mind losing them it appears.

Of those 10 winners, most won running pretty much as in the past. Nearly all won at the same, or lower, class level. Two improved, both when claimed by Scott Lake. Met a Miner is one, and the other was a horse named Secret Look. Apparently Scott Lake is the only person who can improve Merryman's horses. He is some horseman.

[kenwoodallpromos]

Lrl 02/04/09 6.0 | 73 80 73 80 | 77*
This is the first race on shown figures that the 2nd stat is higher than the 1st, and the first race in which the 4th stat is higher than the 3rd- so is the horse juiced, or just trained more compatable with the horse's stamina? Is lake giving the horse a breather during the race?
Personally, I do not like either trainer racing the horse back so soon.

[cj]

The horse won in a romp with no pressure at any point. Whenever a horse wins up front with a slower pace than speed figure, there is always the possibility the horse has a lot more in the tank.

With older horses it is usually easy to figure out by looking back at other races. With lightly raced younger horses, it is tougher but the visual can help. With super trainers, you can usually assume there is a lot more to come.

[kenwoodallpromos]

Also the first race in which the horse ran the same distance twice!!! Lake decided to stop trying to get the horse to guess the distance each race!! ;)

[proximity]

Lrl 02/04/09 6.0 | 73 80 73 80 | 77*
This is the first race on shown figures that the 2nd stat is higher than the 1st, and the first race in which the 4th stat is higher than the 3rd- so is the horse juiced, or just trained more compatable with the horse's stamina? .

that was actually part of the reason i said i "didn't have a problem" with the lifetime top directly off the claim.

[cj]

Also the first race in which the horse ran the same distance twice!!! Lake decided to stop trying to get the horse to guess the distance each race!! ;)

This is just peachy. You think that horse wasn't winning if the races were at 5, 6, or even 7 furlongs? Come on, take the blinkers off.

[DeanT]

Yep, PERFECT example----amazing how the owner in that case makes every trainer better and it raises more red flags than I can count....that example proves that it isnt better stock, just the "unbelievable improvement" that owner gets out of his horses......that owner also seems to always get in off the also eligible list when the race suits him and other trainers seem to always have a reason to scratch in those cases and let him in....he must be very persuasive. Check out Melodic Escapade. last week, I believe who got in of the A/E when a horse who looked like he would have been the favorite scratched

A standardbred owner was banned up in Canada. He had some history. Then he came back with a groom listed as a trainer. The groom started winning off the claim etc. About a year later he was caught with EPO on three horses. Apparently the owner tried to switch to another groom and make him a new star, but the commission would not let him. The same thing happens in thoroughbred racing (we all did not just fall off a turnip truck) but it seems they do not have the balls to do it like harness does.

http://www.harnesslink.com/www/Article.cgi?ID=51556

If people believe that drugs are not prevalent on some of these improvements, they are incredibly naive. Kentucky does not want to institute and fund OOC testing because they have nothing better to do.

[kenwoodallpromos]

This is just peachy. You think that horse wasn't winning if the races were at 5, 6, or even 7 furlongs? Come on, take the blinkers off.
I thinkl there could be a number of reasons the horse won 2 in a row with Lake, positive changes or negative. My past postings on him are not at all kind about overworking horses.
"09-07-2006, 05:32 AM
Replies: 3 13 Year Old Stormy Do
Views: 237 Posted By kenwoodallpromos
Scott Lake

Lake was last trainer- 9-6-06 was the 13th race for the horse in 2006. Everybody ran the hell out of it. Lake worked it July 8, raced it July 10 ("used up early"), then gave the horse a whole 21 days... "
The above horse broke down and died.

[proximity]

Also the first race in which the horse ran the same distance twice!!! Lake decided to stop trying to get the horse to guess the distance each race!! ;)

personally i don't think merryman could get this horse moving that fast if she had starving bears chase it down a mountain. maybe she could avoid half furlong distance changes by moving to harness!! :)

[proximity]

I thinkl there could be a number of reasons the horse won 2 in a row with Lake, positive changes or negative. My past postings on him are not at all kind about overworking horses.
"09-07-2006, 05:32 AM
Replies: 3 13 Year Old Stormy Do
Views: 237 Posted By kenwoodallpromos
Scott Lake

Lake was last trainer- 9-6-06 was the 13th race for the horse in 2006. Everybody ran the hell out of it. Lake worked it July 8, raced it July 10 ("used up early"), then gave the horse a whole 21 days... "
The above horse broke down and died.

i think most super (and some not so super) trainers have a script for these situations:

(insert horse name) was only happy at the racetrack..... he was kicking down the barn door.... he only wanted to race....

[Thomas Roulston]

NYRA was certainly quick to throw Mario Sclafani and Braulio Baeza under the bus.

Was this part of their attempt at a squeeky clean image....or just a diversion, sacrificing two minor players to avoid focusing the spotlight elsewhere?


Maybe someone still has a grudge against Baeza for "stealing" the '69 Belmont with Arts and Letters?

[kenwoodallpromos]

i think most super (and some not so super) trainers have a script for these situations:

(insert horse name) was only happy at the racetrack..... he was kicking down the barn door.... he only wanted to race....
__________________
Lake after SD was DOA called the horse "the barn pet". Here's ESPN earlier in the year:
"Updated: April 26, 2006, 3:11 PM ET
Stormy Do still does at 13 By Bill Finley
Special to ESPN.com
Archive
Stormy Do doesn't know when to quit. He's 13 now, has his aches and pains and his owner has promised a cushy retirement for him when he's ready to hang it up. He won't have any part of it. He must love what he's doing. How else do you explain a horse winning 15 races since his 10th birthday?"

[ezrabrooks]

Yep, PERFECT example----amazing how the owner in that case makes every trainer better and it raises more red flags than I can count....that example proves that it isnt better stock, just the "unbelievable improvement" that owner gets out of his horses......that owner also seems to always get in off the also eligible list when the race suits him and other trainers seem to always have a reason to scratch in those cases and let him in....he must be very persuasive. Check out Melodic Escapade. last week, I believe who got in of the A/E when a horse who looked like he would have been the favorite scratched

It seems that the Trainer in question also does his share of scratches, so maybe there is something to that. I don't know the average scratch rate at CT, but it seems this guy scratches a lot.

Ez

[Relwob Owner]

It seems that the Trainer in question also does his share of scratches, so maybe there is something to that. I don't know the average scratch rate at CT, but it seems this guy scratches a lot.

Ez


They both do and as an owner, it is maddening because you cant gauge whether or not you are going to get in off the A/E or enter in another-owner has rep of doing whatever is necessary to make sure races go or have his horses in right spot....if you track CT closely, you will be amazed at how much shady stuff goes on

[Niko]

A standardbred owner was banned up in Canada. He had some history. Then he came back with a groom listed as a trainer. The groom started winning off the claim etc. About a year later he was caught with EPO on three horses. Apparently the owner tried to switch to another groom and make him a new star, but the commission would not let him. The same thing happens in thoroughbred racing (we all did not just fall off a turnip truck) but it seems they do not have the balls to do it like harness does.

http://www.harnesslink.com/www/Article.cgi?ID=51556

If people believe that drugs are not prevalent on some of these improvements, they are incredibly naive. Kentucky does not want to institute and fund OOC testing because they have nothing better to do.


It's all in the shoes Dean....all in the shoes..., oh yeah and the de-worming ;)

[proximity]

They both do and as an owner, it is maddening because you cant gauge whether or not you are going to get in off the A/E

as a handicapper who usually plays at a live track or off track betting facility, i wish they (ct) would eliminate the also eligibles completely. too many different scenarios to handicap for......

sorry to get off topic.....

[vikingrob]

I do know how much money it costs to keep a horse and that proves my point-----the owners will be so afraid of their operation shutting down that they will be forced to police their own trainers and not use ones who blow tests.....this is ACTUAL accountability-----I know this would be a HUGE blow to the owners who use a "dont ask, dont tell" policy but it would be a huge help for those of us who dont use trainers who juice or cheat and would be huge overall boost to the sport as a whole

This outcome is exactly what I had in mind.

[Relwob Owner]

This outcome is exactly what I had in mind.


I am afraid it will never happen-just makes too iuch darn sense.....more committees, more pie in the sky ideas and the usual lack of results....it is discouraging but I love racing so much I put up with it.

Anothe rposter had a really interesting idea and that was to suspend the horse along with the trainer-at least that would give the owner some sort of punishment