Quote:
|
Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing
Everyone wants the crooks out of the game.
When you think of trainers who got a slap on the wrist, who are you thinking of? What about jurisdictions where rules are treated as suggestions? Which ones come to mind? I assume you follow this stuff closely and you've got some statistics to back up your claim.
How exactly do you think cross-contamination occurs? Here's a true story. A stable girl has a cat and the cat gets an ear infection. The vet gives her a topical steroid to treat the infection. She applies it to the cat's ear, and later puts a bit in a horse's mouth. The horse tests positive for the topical steroid at a very small picogram level. The trainer goes into the hearing with the stewards with the stable girl, the tube of the topical steroid, and pretty clear testimony that it was cross contamination. Did he get a slap on the wrist? Actually, no. He was found culpable and fined anyway.
Here's another true story. A horse trailer was used as a meth lab. After the drug makers were nabbed and convicted, the trailer was sold at auction. It was carefully cleaned and went into service as a horse trailer. A horse that was transported in the trailer tested positive for meth, again at a very low picogram level. They tested the trailer, and sure enough there was still residual meth in the trailer. So in your mind, should the trainer have been fined and suspended for what was cross-contamination on the part of a horse transport company?
One thing we agree on is that there are perceptions about how rampant cheating is. Unfortunately, the facts don't support many of the perceptions. I've spent enough time on the backside to know that there is a significant difference between the super trainers and the blue collar guys, only it doesn't have to do with PEDs. There is a significant difference in the horseflesh the super trainers have. No broken down rehabilitation projects in their stable. There is a significant difference in being able to afford to give horses that have minor injuries sufficient time to recover. There is a significant difference in the quality of feed and dietary supplements. There is a significant difference in the ratio of grooms to horses. The super trainers never put off shoeing a horse for a week or two just to save a few bucks. Super trainers don't skimp on vet care. They have chiropractors and massage therapists.
One half of one percent of all tests come back positive, which is about as good as you would see in any major sport. Most of those positives are for legal therapeutics. About 0.001% are for Class 1 or 2 substances. Yes, we agree that horse racing has a perception problem.
One last thing. If you believe most people lose and leave the game because of cheating trainers, you haven't sat if front of three drunk guys trying to figure out what a three horse trifecta box costs. There are plenty of things wrong with horse racing that are more important to bettors than drugs.
|
I'm think of incidents that prompted me to start this thread.
The scenarios you presented are so rare, they are statistically near impossible to repeat.
The issue here is in your second to last paragraph. The perception.
Why the US cannot take a page out of the books of other jurisdictions where any kind of drug violations are met with stern sanctions and mandate those is a mystery.
"There are plenty of things wrong with horse racing that are more important to bettors than drugs."
On that we will have to agree to disagree.
