The Greatest of All Time - Bob Baffert

[Tom]

Is #4 correct? And if it is, how important is it?

Twitter

__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?

[classhandicapper]

Based on my Twitter feed it seems like the core of NYRA's case is that Baffert is very high profile. Therefore when he has therapeutic overages, especially in major races, it erodes confidence in the sport and in the care of horses. That in turn damages racing ability to remain a socially acceptable activity (see dog racing, circus elephants etc.. as examples of the problem). So NYRA is trying to protect its own reputation.

What's kind of interesting is that Baffert's team was imo appropriately trying to make the distinction between therapeutics and clear cut PEDs (Servis/Navarro). The fact that the public doesn't seem to understand the difference is a factor against him. Of course the media is a huge problem with the public "understanding" of anything because the truth rarely matters.

The case is more interesting than some of the races I'm forced to handicap even though I'm only getting second hand blow by blow on my Twitter feed.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

Based on my Twitter feed it seems like the core of NYRA's case is that Baffert is very high profile. Therefore when he has therapeutic overages, especially in major races, it erodes confidence in the sport and in the care of horses. That in turn damages racing ability to remain a socially acceptable activity (see dog racing, circus elephants etc.. as examples of the problem). So NYRA is trying to protect its own reputation.

What's kind of interesting is that Baffert's team was imo appropriately trying to make the distinction between therapeutics and clear cut PEDs (Servis/Navarro). The fact that the public doesn't seem to understand the difference is a factor against him. Of course the media is a huge problem with the public "understanding" of anything because the truth rarely matters.

The case is more interesting than some of the races I'm forced to handicap even though I'm only getting second hand blow by blow on my Twitter feed.

One thing that's important is that I don't think the therapeutic/PED distinction, even if I bought it (and I don't- most PED's in horse racing are purportedly therapeutic), matters one bit in terms of the rules. If horse racing bans something, you follow the rule. Period. If that means you can't race your horse, too bad. Lobby, in public (not in secret) to change the rule, and in the meantime, follow it.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

One thing that's important is that I don't think the therapeutic/PED distinction, even if I bought it (and I don't- most PED's in horse racing are purportedly therapeutic), matters one bit in terms of the rules. If horse racing bans something, you follow the rule. Period. If that means you can't race your horse, too bad. Lobby, in public (not in secret) to change the rule, and in the meantime, follow it.

I can't agree with you on this one.

IMO, there's a difference between an overage of a legal therapeutic that typically comes with a small fine/suspension and the kinds of illegal performance enhancing products Servis and Navarro were accused of using. IMO, that's a distinction that should be made.

If you want make the penalties stiffer, I'd be fine with that. IMO, NYRA is also correct in its concern about the social acceptability of racing and what this whole episode has done to damage the sport.

I've thought from the start the industry should have done more to clarify things so the public understood what was actually going on. That would have helped limit the damage a little. Insiders understand it, but the public does not. They could have done that while simultaneously moving towards DQ'ing the horse and all this other stuff.

I think what Baffert has been doing is inexcusable. I'm not qualified to know what the penalty should be and no one cares what I think anyway, but I'm not "all in" on the Baffert hate either.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

One thing that's important is that I don't think the therapeutic/PED distinction, even if I bought it (and I don't- most PED's in horse racing are purportedly therapeutic), matters one bit in terms of the rules. If horse racing bans something, you follow the rule. Period. If that means you can't race your horse, too bad. Lobby, in public (not in secret) to change the rule, and in the meantime, follow it.

Does lobbying actually happen in public for anything? Should he do it on Twitter and Facebook?

[affirmedny]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I can't agree with you on this one.

IMO, there's a difference between an overage of a legal therapeutic that typically comes with a small fine/suspension and the kinds of illegal performance enhancing products Servis and Navarro were accused of using. IMO, that's a distinction that should be made.

this

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I can't agree with you on this one.

IMO, there's a difference between an overage of a legal therapeutic that typically comes with a small fine/suspension and the kinds of illegal performance enhancing products Servis and Navarro were accused of using. IMO, that's a distinction that should be made.

If you want make the penalties stiffer, I'd be fine with that. IMO, NYRA is also correct in its concern about the social acceptability of racing and what this whole episode has done to damage the sport.

I've thought from the start the industry should have done more to clarify things so the public understood what was actually going on. That would have helped limit the damage a little. Insiders understand it, but the public does not. They could have done that while simultaneously moving towards DQ'ing the horse and all this other stuff.

I think what Baffert has been doing is inexcusable. I'm not qualified to know what the penalty should be and no one cares what I think anyway, but I'm not "all in" on the Baffert hate either.

I think the penalties are stiffer. The Kentucky rules do make distinctions between different classes of medication, but they don't contain a hard "therapeutic / PED" distinction, and for repeat offenders, they call for penalties all the way up to revocations of trainer licenses and 5 year waiting periods for reinstatement.

But the point is, if there's a rule, you follow it. When I first started seriously playing the races, New York still banned Lasix. Maybe they were depriving bleeders of needed medication. Some would surely say that. But here's the thing- if anyone's horse tested positive for Lasix and NYRA said "you will never run a horse at our track again", I would have supported them. Period. It wouldn't even be close. They told people don't run your horse with this supposedly therapeutic medication. They gave you fair warning. You did. They can refuse to do business with you.

I don't want to digress too far off topic, but every time I fly these days, the airline announces that if you violate the mask rules they will never allow you on another one of their flights. The point I am now going to make has nothing to do with whether you agree with that or not. The airline might be dead wrong on masks. Maybe they are right. It doesn't matter. If you refuse to wear a mask and they ban you, it's fair. You broke their rules. If you think it's wrong, lobby to get the rule changed.

Bob Baffert has had multiple medication violations. He always hires good lawyers and he always seems to skate. There's no reason to say "Oh, OK, it was therapeutic, you're off the hook". This is a man who literally stole a Triple Crown, the greatest laurel in the American turf, by asserting that the PED he administered to his horse illegalliy was therapeutic and getting the rule changed in secret.

Horse racing needs to completely stop this "therapeutic" stuff. If you are one molecule over any test threshold, it should be a 2 year ban, and a second time should be a lifetime ban. That's the rule in track and field and it is the right rule. Trainers are experts- they can figure out how to comply with rules. Many trainers have never had a positive test. The ones who are repeat offenders, like Baffert, are cheaters.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by AndyC

Does lobbying actually happen in public for anything? Should he do it on Twitter and Facebook?

He should go testify before the Horse Racing Commission in a public hearing. And yes, stakeholders give public testimony to administrative agencies all the time.

[rastajenk]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

But the point is, if there's a rule, you follow it.

That goes for the regulatory commissions as well.

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Horse racing needs to completely stop this "therapeutic" stuff. If you are one molecule over any test threshold, it should be a 2 year ban, and a second time should be a lifetime ban. That's the rule in track and field and it is the right rule. Trainers are experts- they can figure out how to comply with rules. Many trainers have never had a positive test. The ones who are repeat offenders, like Baffert, are cheaters.

Why do you want to kill our sport?

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by rastajenk

That goes for the regulatory commissions as well. Why do you want to kill our sport?

If we are so beholden to powerful trainers that we can't enforce drug rules, at some point the public will kill our sport and we will only have ourselves to blame for it.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

He should go testify before the Horse Racing Commission in a public hearing. And yes, stakeholders give public testimony to administrative agencies all the time.

So if Baffert were your client you would send him up to testify before the Horse Racing Commission while he is being investigated for breaking the rules?

[azeri98]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

If we are so beholden to powerful trainers that we can't enforce drug rules, at some point the public will kill our sport and we will only have ourselves to blame for it.

If you enforce all the rules, racing would be done anyway. They all cheat.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by AndyC

So if Baffert were your client you would send him up to testify before the Horse Racing Commission while he is being investigated for breaking the rules?

If Baffert were my client I might tell him to pursue basically the same strategy he is pursuing.

But one reason it is working is because the regulators want it to work.

[dilanesp]

Looks like they finally set a hearing on the DQ in the Derby.

https://www.paulickreport.com/news/t...ase-for-feb-7/

[dilanesp]

https://mobile.twitter.com/home