:ThmbUp:

What's pitiful is the way some people excuse his record at the expense of the Industry and the expense of the Horses he trains.

Why Cox? Based on what? Then wouldn't you ban Sadler, Mott, Asmussen, Rudy Rodriquez, Doug O'Neill ? I think you have a personal bias toward some trainers and forgive the others or just let it pass. They all do it. Some are better than others at masking it.

To be frank I still watch the races, but I only occasionally wager on horses that I have seen had bad trips.

Thats ridiculous!

So by your logic a person smuggling in 1 gram of fentanyl should be treated no differently than a person smuggling in 100 pounds of fentanyl.

Personal bias has nothing to do with it.

Straw man narrative. Doping horses has nothing to do with abusing children. This is quite different. Nyra has trainers in their own circuit that dope horses on a regular basis but won't ban them. Can you explain why? Because it wouls affect their bottom line. If Pletcher, Brown or Mott were caught doing the same thing I doubt Nyra would do anything. Those trainers provide Nyra with a lot of horses. Baffert does not.

What don't you understand about me being against the drugging of horses with the intent to cheat?

At the top of the list of "other worldly" performances is Baffert with Cox second. A marvel comic book is where their accomplishments belong IMO

Geography has nothing to do with it.

Wrong again . The courts have shown over and over again you can't discriminate against someone based on race, sexual orientation or religion or criminal history. OJ was also acquitted.

Actually it does. Why is California so quiet on the issue?

Go to law school! Just because someone else does it doesn't mean that you can also violate laws.

Why Cox? Which of his horses. The good ones anyway have ever tested positive? Or is that just something you believe?

Honestly, I think the positive itself would not have damaged the integrity of the sport nearly as much if it was explained to the general public in terms they could understand that it was a legal therapeutic drug, a very small overage, and not performance enhancing, but he would get due process and be punished appropriately.

Then when I talk to non racing people about the case they wouldn't all think he was juicing horses with all kinds of illegal steroids, EPO, and designer drugs that human athletes sometimes get busted for. He may be, but that's not what this case is about and we have no wire taps or syringes etc to prove that.

But in the haste to convict him because a lot of people want him out of the sport and think he does way worse than just use therapeutics recklessly, the narrative became WAY worse than the reality. The media being more interested in controversy and a story than the facts didn't help much either. Then Baffert became his own worst enemy and enemy of the industry by going on TV, not taking responsibility, and fighting the appropriate suspensions.

The idea should have been to minimize the story and maximize the punishment. Instead it became maximize the story and fight the punishment. Of course it's all Baffert's fault to start, but it has been a debacle.

Why? Please explain.