Quote:
Originally Posted by VigorsTheGrey
It could be Not-in-competition performance drugs administered prior to racing...maybe trainers are realizing that future races are “won” in training weeks prior to their actual running...I think the CHRB is trying to address out-of-competition drug issues as we speak...if the rules don’t address it, they aren’t doing anything wrong, I guess...
See the part on medication about half-way through this doc...good stuff they talk about here... http://www.chrb.ca.gov/Board/board_m...t_18-06-21.pdf starts at the bottom of page 58... |
The sticking point on out of competition testing was that the owner and trainer were going to be held responsible if a horse failed a out of competition test. The CHRB caved, and will allow the owner or trainer to designate who is responsible for the horse when it is not in competition. This means that the owner and trainer can now say that "Joe", the farm manager, or "Jose" the groom, are responsible for the horse if it fails a test. Allowing them to point a finger somewhere else and avoid any fines or suspensions.
In the end the CHRB can thump its chest and say "Look how tough we are being by passing this rule." And the owners and trainers can go about their "business as usual" and not worry about any punishment.
