Masochistic DQed from BC Sprint

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by SuperPickle

Yeah but CJ you're going down the EMD/SRU PA Forum Rabbithole of what should happen versus what can happen.

You're a smart guy you have to grasp the CHRB is in a pretty crapy spot on this. They can't force the horse to scratch based on it might fail a drug test. Even a crappy chemist and a crappy lawyer could testify the horse had a reasonable chance of coming back clean. No court would back up the CHRB decision to scratch that horse. Either the Seigel's could have gotten an injunction to force him into the gate or a 3rd year law student could have taken the Breeders Cup and the CHRB to court and gotten the 1st prize money plus damages.

You're the voice of reason on this forum. Surely you grasp due process. You can't arrest a guy who's thinking about robbing a bank and you can't scratch a horse who might fail a drug test. Welcome to America.

Here's where you outrage should be...

Elis had an out of this mess and choose not use it. He should be suspended for months not weeks, denied entry for at least one Breeders Cup and lose his TVG work.

The real crime is if this guy gets two weeks and shows up on TVG this summer that's a MASSIVE slap in the face to integrity.

That's where the outrage should be.

Btw... you can already tell in the DRF article where it mentions how clean he is how its going to go down.

i disagree.
Ellis is a class act.



CHRB should consider changing their protocol for dealing with such situations. To have a 10% chance of a failed drug test, and put the trainer, owners, and bettors in such a situation is irresponsible.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

i disagree.
Ellis is a class act.



CHRB should consider changing their protocol for dealing with such situations. To have a 10% chance of a failed drug test, and put the trainer, owners, and bettors in such a situation is irresponsible.

You know Ron Ellis personally?

[Psychotic Parakeet]

Good thing that horse is a gelding, because he would have been possibly rendered useless as a stallion. That medication screws with fertility big time. It is not the greatest medication for long-term use, which it sounds like because of weight problems.

Wasn't O'Neill banned from one of the Breeders' Cup events not too long ago because of some positives? Pretty sure Ellis will get the same treatment.

[SuperPickle]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

i disagree.
Ellis is a class act.



CHRB should consider changing their protocol for dealing with such situations. To have a 10% chance of a failed drug test, and put the trainer, owners, and bettors in such a situation is irresponsible.

I mean if you consider running a horse on performance enhancing drugs in a Championship horse race a "classy" move by that definition he certainly is a class act.

You must be a lot of fun at parties.

[dilanesp]

Anyone who bets on a race with this horse in it IS masochistic.

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by SuperPickle

I mean if you consider running a horse on performance enhancing drugs in a Championship horse race a "classy" move by that definition he certainly is a class act.

You must be a lot of fun at parties.

Not sure that I get the personal comment.

Originally Posted by cj

You know Ron Ellis personally?

No, I haven't had the pleasure of meeting him personally.

[SuperPickle]

Originally Posted by cj

Why not tell the public then? Let them know a horse might very well fail a drug test. What is the point of that out of competition testing leading up to the BC if you can't use it for anything. This whole thing stinks to high heaven.

I 100% agree with you on Ellis. He should be hammered. But we all know he won't be. He'll keep running his horses two or three times a year so he can drug them up in between races. I smelled a rat when he skipped the prep race and commented on it. Something was fishy then, I just knew it.

Btw... I just realized the CHRB's best option was to let him run for purse money only.

And we know how that decision would have been greeted in this forum.

[Cholly]

Originally Posted by SuperPickle

I mean if you consider running a horse on performance enhancing drugs in a Championship horse race

precisely why the bettors got screwed here

[Jeff P]

Originally Posted by cj

Also, if it wasn't that big a deal, why not tell the public beforehand?

That's a very good question.

Why not be transparent?



-jp

.

[cj]

Originally Posted by SuperPickle

Btw... I just realized the CHRB's best option was to let him run for purse money only.

And we know how that decision would have been greeted in this forum.

I think that would have been fine.

[outofthebox]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

Someone should get hammered for this.

Stanazolol (Winstrol) is a Class 3, Penalty B on the RCI ruling page. Ist offense is a 15 day and $ 500 fine. That's what were looking at for Ellis.

[SG4]

I really don't understand all the outrage here.

How are the bettors screwed? If you had the knowledge that one horse was going to have 200 picograms more of steroids in his system than the others, does this all of a sudden alter your handicapping of the race? I'm not a chemist, but from what I can gather this sounds like someone ate a poppy seed yesterday & now they're thrown under the bus for a positive opium test.

Considering 60 days lead time is the recommendation for withdrawal and they gave 68, how can you pin anything on the trainer? Seems to me either new lead time guidelines have to be established or a different threshold for trace amounts. All parties involved were put between a rock and a hard place, but don't see why such anger should be directed to Ellis & his owners here. They're the only ones penalized here when all is said & done, spare me the sadness for the bettors in this instance unless you truly really 100% believe this "drugged" horse's performance was moved up in this situation.

[cj]

How do we know it was 68 days, the "he said so" rule?

[Psychotic Parakeet]

This horse sure is a walking pharmacy. His previous trainer got in serious trouble with overages on this horse, like 40 times over the limit on acepromazine use. It is obvious that this horse has some talent, but how much drugs do you need to get him to the races? Sounds like an accident waiting to happen. :/

[foregoforever]

Originally Posted by cj

How do we know it was 68 days, the "he said so" rule?

According to the story on Paulick, the horse ran on Aug 27 and was put on the vet's list on Aug 29, which presumably was a result of Ellis reporting it. The steroid administration requires the horse to be on the list for 60 days. So things seem to add up.

Ellis said the race day test showed less than 200 picograms. I'd like to know the limit and the levels and dates of the out-of-competition tests. This might indicate whether it was reasonable for him to think it a 90% chance that it would clear by race day.