Why only Baffert and not Assmussen?

[Brisk Urging]

https://twitter.com/ThruTheBridle/st...764552/photo/1

Twitter

TweetleD
@ThruTheBridle
·
1h
So NONE of the keyboard cowboys/cowgirls pose a single question probing about the sudden death of a Asmussen horse post workout… ��

Be advised that I’m neither accusing Steve of anything or defending Baffert it just seems odd that this unfortunate incident goes unchallenged…

[castaway01]

I wish someone had a better argument to defend Baffert than "whataboutism". That's very simple-minded logic, more of an excuse than anything.

And do you think Asmussen was never investigated or suspended? You must have missed the 2000s and 2010s. Maybe do a Google search if you're that clueless?

[Brisk Urging]

Fair

#P6K
@jonathanstettin
·
30m
RIP Midnight Bourbon. 💔 I’m no reporter or journalist just a gambler who writes a column BUT how does a horse trained by the trainer who has the
@KentuckyDerby
favorite die in his stall
@ChurchillDowns
Sunday AM and not a peep until Wed? If Bob B trained that horse 👇🏻Bath News?

[$w1fT]

Are we aware that MS and MB died of completely different issues? Such a straw man argument

[the little guy]

It's not unreasonable to ask this question. Maybe it's fair to say the answer is the rush to judge one is why it's unfair. The reality is that most people, at least on the internet, judge individuals differently ( not just in racing.....that's for sure ) based on their own personal biases and conclusions.

The reality is that both horses likely got insanely great care and their deaths were unfortunate, but in no way due to anything untoward.

[burnsy]

The truth to every matter is “ the devil is in the details”. People do what others are saying here…….. especially on the internet as was already said. They attempt to wrap up everything in a neat little “generalized “ ball. The horses dying has nothing to do with positive tests unless it can proved otherwise. But of coarse, every event becomes some kind of infraction or indictment regardless of if there’s any proof. I call it the blanket clause. Once people judge someone they’re guilty of every thing under the sun. It’s like dealing with little children. But it is what it is.

Politics is even worse . Reading that crap makes my head spin. Both sides do virtually the same thing, point fingers and blame each other over crap neither one should be involved in or have control of. Then the Classic goof ball argument that just kills me. “ Well , they did it so it’s alright if we do too. “ like that’s the litmus test between wrong or right….,,,, . What a society. See you in church Sunday. Not !

[classhandicapper]

WHy only Baffert and not Assmussen?

1. Some successful people are more likeable than others.

2. Most people will spin things whatever way supports their prior conclusion.

It's extremely difficult to change anyone's mind about anything even in the face of mountains of evidence. In fact, trying to change their mind typically causes the opposite reaction. They'll dig in even harder.

If you dislike Baffert, "something he did that we can't test for and don't know about yet must have killed Medina Spirit".

If you like Assmussen, "it's an unfortunate tragedy for connections that loved the horse".

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by the little guy

The reality is that both horses likely got insanely great care and their deaths were unfortunate, but in no way due to anything untoward.

+1

[Elkchester Road]

Originally Posted by the little guy

It's not unreasonable to ask this question. Maybe it's fair to say the answer is the rush to judge one is why it's unfair. The reality is that most people, at least on the internet, judge individuals differently ( not just in racing.....that's for sure ) based on their own personal biases and conclusions.

The reality is that both horses likely got insanely great care and their deaths were unfortunate, but in no way due to anything untoward.

[cj]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

1. Some successful people are more likeable than others.

2. Most people will spin things whatever way supports their prior conclusion.

It's extremely difficult to change anyone's mind about anything even in the face of mountains of evidence. In fact, trying to change their mind typically causes the opposite reaction. They'll dig in even harder.

If you dislike Baffert, "something he did that we can't test for and don't know about yet must have killed Medina Spirit".

If you like Assmussen, "it's an unfortunate tragedy for connections that loved the horse".

I would argue Bob was much more liked before all the positives. It wasn't even close, really. I don't think there are a lot of Steve Asmussen fans out there, to be honest. A big part of that is he doesn't really seem to want to be in the spotlight.

[Robert Fischer]

Asmussen said it was ( colic? or other ) "acute gastrointestinal situation".

Sounds reasonable. I have no special info or competence in this. Sad to lose Midnight Bourbon <3

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by cj

I would argue Bob was much more liked before all the positives. It wasn't even close, really. I don't think there are a lot of Steve Asmussen fans out there, to be honest. A big part of that is he doesn't really seem to want to be in the spotlight.

I'd have to agree with you, but sometimes part of being liked is not putting the spotlight on yourself too much.

I've tried to remain somewhat level headed about his positives. My position is fairly similar to that of Andy Beyer, Steve Crist, and Jerry Brown who have all made some comments on the matter.

I think we know who most of the really bad guys are. We got rid of a couple, but imo there are still plenty more. That's who we have to get rid of first.

IMO Baffert is more in that grey area of trying to use legal therapeutics to maximize performance and get an edge. Like others that do the same, he occasionally gets a positive. We can probably do a better job with those kinds of positives too, but imo it's incorrect to lump him in with Servis/Navarro and others like them with no evidence at all. It's probably a mistake for the industry to allow that to happen also. Of course he screwed himself a bit with that media tour.

[Track Phantom]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I'd have to agree with you, but sometimes part of being liked is not putting the spotlight on yourself too much.

I've tried to remain somewhat level headed about his positives. My position is fairly similar to that of Andy Beyer, Steve Crist, and Jerry Brown who have all made some comments on the matter.

I think we know who most of the really bad guys are. We got rid of a couple, but imo there are still plenty more. That's who we have to get rid of first.

IMO Baffert is more in that grey area of trying to use legal therapeutics to maximize performance and get an edge. Like others that do the same, he occasionally gets a positive. We can probably do a better job with those kinds of positives too, but imo it's incorrect to lump him in with Servis/Navarro and others like them with no evidence at all. It's probably a mistake for the industry to allow that to happen also. Of course he screwed himself a bit with that media tour.

I heard Beyer say the same thing the other day. It's ridiculous. To claim Baffert is on the up-and-up and the "real bad actors" are out of the game isn't backed up by reality given the mountains of circumstantial evidence. I will not listen to another person who draws a paycheck from this industry tap-dance around this behavior. I respect they can't come out and say something that is not 100% iron-clad proven. But to defend him without any real evidence, and in the face of more common sense conclusions, is tough to stomach.

Look back at social media pre-March 2020. You'll find similar defenses of Jason Servis and Jorge Navarro. Almost to the letter identical.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by Track Phantom

I heard Beyer say the same thing the other day. It's ridiculous. To claim Baffert is on the up-and-up and the "real bad actors" are out of the game isn't backed up by reality given the mountains of circumstantial evidence.

I doubt anyone said or thinks ALL the bad actors are out of the game.

It's a matter of putting people in the correct category and thankfully having some evidence before making accusations or punishing them for suspicions.

If we left it up to the average horseplayer, virtually every jockey is fixing races, virtually every trainer is juicing, and every steward is blind as a bat. So they should all be in jail or thrown out of the industry.

[Vinnie]

Originally Posted by Track Phantom

I heard Beyer say the same thing the other day. It's ridiculous. To claim Baffert is on the up-and-up and the "real bad actors" are out of the game isn't backed up by reality given the mountains of circumstantial evidence. I will not listen to another person who draws a paycheck from this industry tap-dance around this behavior. I respect they can't come out and say something that is not 100% iron-clad proven. But to defend him without any real evidence, and in the face of more common sense conclusions, is tough to stomach.

Look back at social media pre-March 2020. You'll find similar defenses of Jason Servis and Jorge Navarro. Almost to the letter identical.

Excellent post.