The Greatest of All Time - Bob Baffert

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

They did NOT test anything for other Otomax compounds yet.

The point of this is to show that the other Otomax compounds are in the urine sample and match the vet records and photos of Medina Spirit that show he had some kind of skin condition that needed treatment.

The goal is to change public perception from Medina Spirit was injected with illegal performance enhancing steroids (which is not even an accurate description even if he was injected) to Media Spirit had a skin condition that was treated with a legal therapeutic ointment that contained betamethasone and caused an accidental positive. In other words, someone just screwed up.

The difference has huge implication for Baffert and may even be better for the sport if true!

Beyond that there may be a Hail Mary pass by the owners to prevent a DQ because of the intent of the rule (they claim to prevent injection), but Baffert is not Doug Flutie. This horse is going to get DQ'd.

Now if they get the required urine sample and don't do the tests, that would indicate that Otomax wasn't used and they are full of crap. But to know that, they have to give him the urine sample first.

If they have any intention to test at all, it will be to try and create a defense, either with the public or with the KHRC.

And I have to say, I don't think Baffert making this argument is "good for the sport". I think what would be good for the sport is if he didn't demand splits, had a press conference, said "I accept that I had a positive test in violation of the rules and will accept a severe punishment for it, but please don't punish my owners by disqualifying the horse", and then accepted a several years long suspension from the sport.

The reason this sport has a black eye is that every time Baffert or any other powerful figure cheats, they find a way to get away with it (with Justify being the most egregious example of it). And those ways often involve hiring lawyers to concoct complicated theories of supposed innocence and skin creams and accidental ingestions and everything else they claim. The public thinks we go easy on dopers, in the same way the public correctly thought MLB went easy on steroid users in the 1990's.

The way out is not to give Baffert another pass and accept yet another excuse for yet another positive drug test, but to put our foot down and say "this stops now".

And Baffert's conduct here has been entirely dishonorable. As I said above, the honorable thing to do would be to try and protect his owners and the horse, and take the fall if necessary. He has zero interest in doing that.

[classhandicapper]

The best path forward for the sport is the truth. It's not speculation, assertion, or overly harsh suspensions of trainers you hate. I know what I think, but I'm not seeing any evidence of it yet. All I'm seeing is a positive test of a legal therapeutic drug that a lot of trainers use responsibly and that would probably typically get a short suspension if not cleared by race time.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

The best path forward for the sport is the truth. It's not speculation, assertion, or overly harsh suspensions of trainers you hate. I know what I think, but I'm not seeing any evidence of it yet. All I'm seeing is a positive test of a legal therapeutic drug that a lot of trainers use responsibly and that would probably typically get a short suspension if not cleared by race time.

I want to make this clear. I do not hate Bob Baffert. Overall, I actually kind of like the guy. He can be fun to listen to. And I admire the job he did with horses such as Game on Dude. This has nothing to do with hating him.

I think the only way to ever convince the public that our sport is clean is to be harsh and consistent with cheaters. And "cheaters" include ALL people whose horses fail multiple drug tests. (It does not include an occasional mom and pop positive test as you referred to earlier.)

As it stands now, trainers have few incentives not to cheat. We allow them a powerful masking agent (Lasix), so many doped horses pass their tests. And when a test is failed, we accept a whole litany of excuses and rarely give them any real time away from the sport. Why wouldn't you dope your horses if you were Bob Baffert and you knew you could get away with it and win the Triple Crown?

In contrast, if every positive test were to lead to a certain, major suspension, with NO lawyers and NO bull, trainers would start taking enormous precautions to make sure their horses get nowhere near performance enhancers. And in that set of conditions, I am sure Bob Baffert would still be a great trainer after he served the suspension he is due.

[pandy]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

If they have any intention to test at all, it will be to try and create a defense, either with the public or with the KHRC.

And I have to say, I don't think Baffert making this argument is "good for the sport". I think what would be good for the sport is if he didn't demand splits, had a press conference, said "I accept that I had a positive test in violation of the rules and will accept a severe punishment for it, but please don't punish my owners by disqualifying the horse", and then accepted a several years long suspension from the sport.

The reason this sport has a black eye is that every time Baffert or any other powerful figure cheats, they find a way to get away with it (with Justify being the most egregious example of it). And those ways often involve hiring lawyers to concoct complicated theories of supposed innocence and skin creams and accidental ingestions and everything else they claim. The public thinks we go easy on dopers, in the same way the public correctly thought MLB went easy on steroid users in the 1990's.

The way out is not to give Baffert another pass and accept yet another excuse for yet another positive drug test, but to put our foot down and say "this stops now".

And Baffert's conduct here has been entirely dishonorable. As I said above, the honorable thing to do would be to try and protect his owners and the horse, and take the fall if necessary. He has zero interest in doing that.

I agree.

[VeryOldMan]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

The reason this sport has a black eye is that every time Baffert or any other powerful figure cheats, they find a way to get away with it (with Justify being the most egregious example of it). And those ways often involve hiring lawyers to concoct complicated theories of supposed innocence and skin creams and accidental ingestions and everything else they claim. The public thinks we go easy on dopers, in the same way the public correctly thought MLB went easy on steroid users in the 1990's.

Nailed it.

Baffert's lawyers are spreading chaff to cloud the radar. Period.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

I think the only way to ever convince the public that our sport is clean is to be harsh and consistent with cheaters. And "cheaters" include ALL people whose horses fail multiple drug tests. (It does not include an occasional mom and pop positive test as you referred to earlier.)

I agree with that.

However, I know that if I honestly screwed up with a Class C therapeutic ointment and my career was in jeopardy I'd also have my lawyer trying to get that urine sample to demonstrate it was an ointment mistake and not a deliberate attempt to skirt the rules with an injection closer to the race than allowed. imo there is a huge difference between the two and that SHOULD weigh in on the appropriate punishment.

My gut feelings about what happened are irrelevant. I'd like to see the result of the urine test.

[cj]

I'm waiting to hear from the vet. Have I missed it where he says he was foolish to prescribe a cream that had a banned drug listed right in plain sight?

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by cj

I'm waiting to hear from the vet. Have I missed it where he says he was foolish to prescribe a cream that had a banned drug listed right in plain sight?

The only thing I read was that Baffert submitted a vet report that showed that the horse was treated with Otomax, but I've seen things written in the press a couple of times that turned out to be false.

You are making a good point.

If a vet did prescribe it he/she screwed up royally. You would think there would be some kind of statement unless they consider a vet report enough.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I agree with that.

However, I know that if I honestly screwed up with a Class C therapeutic ointment and my career was in jeopardy I'd also have my lawyer trying to get that urine sample to demonstrate it was an ointment mistake and not a deliberate attempt to skirt the rules with an injection closer to the race than allowed. imo there is a huge difference between the two and that SHOULD weigh in on the appropriate punishment.

My gut feelings about what happened are irrelevant. I'd like to see the result of the urine test.

There's no reason to even entertain the notion that Baffert made an innocent screwup, given all of his priors and the fact that top trainers don't innocently screw up the most important race of the year.

[zico20]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

If they have any intention to test at all, it will be to try and create a defense, either with the public or with the KHRC.

And I have to say, I don't think Baffert making this argument is "good for the sport". I think what would be good for the sport is if he didn't demand splits, had a press conference, said "I accept that I had a positive test in violation of the rules and will accept a severe punishment for it, but please don't punish my owners by disqualifying the horse", and then accepted a several years long suspension from the sport.

The reason this sport has a black eye is that every time Baffert or any other powerful figure cheats, they find a way to get away with it (with Justify being the most egregious example of it). And those ways often involve hiring lawyers to concoct complicated theories of supposed innocence and skin creams and accidental ingestions and everything else they claim. The public thinks we go easy on dopers, in the same way the public correctly thought MLB went easy on steroid users in the 1990's.

The way out is not to give Baffert another pass and accept yet another excuse for yet another positive drug test, but to put our foot down and say "this stops now".

And Baffert's conduct here has been entirely dishonorable. As I said above, the honorable thing to do would be to try and protect his owners and the horse, and take the fall if necessary. He has zero interest in doing that.

You sound 100% certain the drug was injected into the horse. Do you have any proof whatsoever that that is the case? These drug tests are going to determine one way or another what really happened. If it turns out it was just from the cream why would Baffert accept several years suspension. The Kentucky Horse Racing Commission doesn't differentiate between an injection and a cream, which they should since the cream has no bearing on the performance of a horse. I think Baffert is going to win the case from this Judge Wingate and then the appeals court will have their say. The judge sounds sympathetic to Baffert.

[zico20]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

I want to make this clear. I do not hate Bob Baffert. Overall, I actually kind of like the guy. He can be fun to listen to. And I admire the job he did with horses such as Game on Dude. This has nothing to do with hating him.

I think the only way to ever convince the public that our sport is clean is to be harsh and consistent with cheaters. And "cheaters" include ALL people whose horses fail multiple drug tests. (It does not include an occasional mom and pop positive test as you referred to earlier.)

As it stands now, trainers have few incentives not to cheat. We allow them a powerful masking agent (Lasix), so many doped horses pass their tests. And when a test is failed, we accept a whole litany of excuses and rarely give them any real time away from the sport. Why wouldn't you dope your horses if you were Bob Baffert and you knew you could get away with it and win the Triple Crown?

In contrast, if every positive test were to lead to a certain, major suspension, with NO lawyers and NO bull, trainers would start taking enormous precautions to make sure their horses get nowhere near performance enhancers. And in that set of conditions, I am sure Bob Baffert would still be a great trainer after he served the suspension he is due.

But the drug isn't a performance enhancer. If you didn't have lawyers and recourse the cheating would be even worse as you wouldn't be drugging your horses but your competitors so they would have a positive test plus your rival trainer would be suspended when they didn't do anything wrong. Just a horrible idea!

[Blenheim]

I don't know if the RICO Doping Suit against Baffert has been discussed in this thread.

Bob Baffert, the trainer of winning Kentucky Derby horse Medina Spirit who was later found to have been doped with a performance-enhancing substance, was hit with a racketeering suit in California federal court by bettors who had money on the second place finisher.

The proposed class action, filed Thursday in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, seeks to pursue claims on behalf of all Kentucky Derby bettors who would have “won their bets and winnings had Medina Spirit been properly prohibited from competing in the Kentucky Derby on May 1, 2021 or competed without the aid of an illegal drug.”

Question:
If the betamethasone is found to be administered through Otomax will that benefit the defendant?


Question:
If the betamethasone is not found to be to administered through Otomax will that benefit the plaintiff[s]?

[GMB@BP]

The Vets play a huge part in the whole scheme...learned a long time ago, you take care of your vets.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by zico20

You sound 100% certain the drug was injected into the horse. Do you have any proof whatsoever that that is the case? These drug tests are going to determine one way or another what really happened. If it turns out it was just from the cream why would Baffert accept several years suspension. The Kentucky Horse Racing Commission doesn't differentiate between an injection and a cream, which they should since the cream has no bearing on the performance of a horse. I think Baffert is going to win the case from this Judge Wingate and then the appeals court will have their say. The judge sounds sympathetic to Baffert.

Baffert's current suit is premature and frivolous.

According to the statutes, he basically has no chance in court even if they revoke his license.

I am, indeed, certain he cheated.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by zico20

But the drug isn't a performance enhancer. If you didn't have lawyers and recourse the cheating would be even worse as you wouldn't be drugging your horses but your competitors so they would have a positive test plus your rival trainer would be suspended when they didn't do anything wrong. Just a horrible idea!

The KHRC decides what you can't test positive for. Even if Baffert weren't cheating (and there's zero reason to think this), it wouldn't matter. His job is to keep substances that will result in positive tests away from his horses, and he has plenty of money to do it.

I don't mind people hiring lawyers for situations where there's something to argue. But Baffert (1) has no argument under the text of the rules and (2) filed a frivolous premature lawsuit to try and strongarm the KHRC.