Breeders' Cup: Hollendorfer vs The Stronarch Group
 

I want to see how this plays out:

https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-rac...se-record-time

"Hall of Fame trainer Jerry Hollendorfer said Vasilika, the former claimer turned grade 1 winner, turned in a run that would merit a chance at the World Championships.

"She came from way back. The pace was fast and I think (jockey Flavien) Prat thought he could make up a lot of ground and he did in the end, but the stretch is too short here," Hollendorfer said. "We want to run in the Breeders' Cup. If we can do that, we'd like to do that, for sure."

Hollendorfer has been prohibited from racing or stabling at Santa Anita Park, where the World Championships will be held, since track owner The Stronach Group banned him June 22. But he said he does not believe he would need TSG permission to run Vasilika in the Breeders' Cup Filly & Mare Turf at the Southern California track.

"I don't have to get an OK from Santa Anita because the Breeders' Cup is totally in charge of the racetrack during that time period," Hollendorfer said. "I don't really know where I stand there, but I think we'll be all right."
Asked for comment, Breeders' Cup provided the following statement: "Breeders' Cup does not comment on the status of potential 2019 World Championships starters."

That’s a chicken shite answer from the BC people.

That sounds like something his lawyers came up with. And I am not at all sure it is true.

She runs under Dan Ward's name as the trainer. Problem solved.

I dont believe a licenced trainer can have a horse they own part of run under another trainers name, he would have to sell his share.

Never heard of that rule.

So are there exceptions to that when a family name is involved?
Mick and Shelbe Ruis; Jack and Tim Van Berg; Mike and Patricia Harrington.

Yea not sure, just heard that was part of the issue with Vasilika and just transferring to Ward.

if the ownership issue is really the only issue behind transferring to Ward, Hollendorfer should transfer his ownership for the time period of the BC to some aftercare organization thereby donating any of V's BC earnings to a good cause. Good PR move for Jerry and would speak volumes against Stronarch Group if they still didn't allow...Might get them all past this junk..

Santa Anita
 

PETA is on the move to knock out Santa Anita as a counter puncher!:headbanger:

So a double farce? No, let’s not promote even the single farce of Ward being transferred the horse.

The BC is in control on this one and I suspect they’ll allow JH entries.

I am not sure. It depends on what the contract says, as well as whether California law permits a contract that waives the racetrack's right to rule off undesirables.

Jerry Hollendorfer
 

regardless of the trainer, the horse did not test positive...

So, let the court decide the punishment for Mr. H..

The only restriction on the power to rule off a trainer in California is it can't be based on nothing at all. (That's why Hollendorfer got an injunction against Del Mar.)

Interestingly, his lawyers have not obtained an injunction against SA. That suggests they know that Santa Anita has enough evidence to bar him.

Which means, as I said, that it comes back to whether the BC really contractually is granted the power to overturn track rulings barring people from the grounds, and whether that is legal under California law.

That last part is clueless.

The reason Hollendorfer got an injunction against Del Mar is that Del Mar operates under a contract with horsemen which is not identical to something similar at Santa Anita.

If SA were under an identical contract then Jerry H.'s angle would be that despite so many other would-be scofflaws flaunting the rules resulting in so many other horse deaths, he was "arbitrarily" singled-out (and "denied the privileges of the grounds") while many of the others were allowed to keep on flaunting the rules on those same grounds.

The fact that SA doesn't have that same wording in a contract with horsemen is what lets SA/TSG (arbitrarily, if so inclined) keep Jerry H. away, which establishes exactly nothing relating to how much "evidence" SA might or must have against him.

Tiz far, far more probable that Jerry Hollendorfer is and will always remain the same consistent training force he's always been no matter whether training at Golden Gate, Thistledown or Tillamook, than it is that SA/TSG has some special evidence to show that he's suddenly taken to drugging race horses illegally and resulting in some of their deaths.


Hollendorfer may be stubborn in his unwillingness to change long-term practices just to abide by the whimsical new guidelines as offered by BS (when BS is reacting like a deer in the headlights to what BS perceives to be media pressure {brought on entirely by her own stupid reactions in the first place}) but nothing at all suggests unique evidence relating to Hollendorfer.


Besides, Joe Drape wouldn't have bothered wasting time on some stupid Jimson Weed detail about a Triple Crown winner when he could have more easily unearthed damning "evidence" against the 3rd leading trainer of all time (had there been any "evidence" to unearth, that is).

The judge's ruling in the Del Mar case, which you can find online, has nothing to do with the terms of the Horsemen's contract. It's a straight analysis of whether the power to rule off undesirables extends, under California law, to ruling off an undesirable simply because he causes bad public relations for the track. That was the reason Del Mar argued they could rule him off.

The Court said no- they said the standard is minimal, but there must be some evidence against the undesirable.

Santa Anita has plenty of evidence against the undesirable here, and that's why he is trying to do a backdoor through the BC rather than just going to court and having the Del Mar ruling extended to Santa Anita.