Bill Finley - Cheaters: Lock them up

[thespaah]

Originally Posted by andymays

The Trainer Insurer rule is a problem for "Locking People Up". Most people know that there is no real security in the barn area. All it takes is for someone to walk up and touch the horses nose to get a positive of some kind because the tests now are so sensitive.

Hmm, I cannot just walk into the barn area of a racetrack without proper credentials.
Gotta tell ya though, security is pretty soft at Saratoga. No one without credentials is permitted past the union ave gate near the top of the stretch. But I was able to walk right by the guards. I had a pass to park there and had to get something out of my car. I forgot my credential and the guard just let me go right on by. So you have a point.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Originally Posted by affirmedny

Are quarterhorse trainer violations listed there?

The demorphin rulings are all QH runners as far as I know. I'm pretty sure that I saw plenty of names that I would immediately associated with strictly QH, but I'll take another look.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Originally Posted by affirmedny

Are quarterhorse trainer violations listed there?

I looked specifically for a few people that I knew had QH rulings and found that some appeared and others that didn't - but some of those omitted are known to be pending appeal. From looking at a selection of about a dozen or so obvious names from the southwest region, I found plenty of QH trainers with rulings, and several specific to medication violations - though the more recent rulings seem to be more specific.

Knowing John though, I must say that I'm a wee bit surprised that there isn't a ruling for an unlicensed owner/ineligible or something clerical in there somewhere. It definitely isn't an exhaustive list, but I've known him since I moved west to one degree or another and can't really remember him or Joe with a bad test that would be newsworthy. Of course, I hate to speak on behalf of my memory anymore, so after checking a bit, I couldn't find anything easily spotted.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by Itamaraca

Right. I want a system that puts Dahlman (and other owners like him) on the same level as Dubb, Riccio, the Ramseys, and any of the many other owners that employ super trainers.

Why don't we start at the top and then work our way down? Assuming we want to actually make an impact, that is.

So you want a biased list, that I'm sure you would be happy to provide, rather than an objective and fair system that treats ALL violators the same?

IS this about cleaning up the game our your "revenge" for stupid bets you lost

[Jeff P]

In my humble opinion, the FIRST order of business for running a successful gambling game is that the game itself be regulated in such a way that there is very little question among the wagering public that the game itself is on the up and up.

In my humble opinion, racing's status quo in no way shape or form leads ANYONE to believe that racing as a gambling game is currently being regulated in such a way that the game itself is on the up and up.

Personally, I LIKE the way the drug issue is currently handled by the Hong Kong Jockey Club. There, only the track vet can administer drugs or perform veterinary procedures for horses that are "in training." Every substance administered and every procedure performed is handled by the track vet.

Further, info about meds administered and procedures performed are LOGGED by the track vet as part of the horse’s medical record. From there, one can navigate to the entries page at the official Hong Kong Jockey Club website and view the entries info for any horse entered to race - and when one does this - there is a clickable link where one can view a brief description of the horse’s medical record.

The result?

Transparency and integrity are two things that come to mind.

Compared to North American horse racing, cheating through the use of drugs at Hong Kong’s two tracks (Happy Valley and Sha Tin) is pretty much unheard of. More importantly, there is a prevailing belief among the wagering public that both the racing conducted by the Hong Kong Jockey Club and that regulation of said racing is on the up and up.

Allow me to play "What If" for a second –

What if one or more MAJOR racing jurisdictions (NYRA, SOCAL, KY, etc.) decided to LEAD and implement the following? Or what if they collectively decided to LEAD and implement the following?

While a horse is in training, ALL medications administered (both therapeutic and race day) must be administered by the state or track vet.

While a horse is in training, ALL veterinary procedures performed must be performed by the state or track vet.

While a horse is in training, ALL veterinary procedures performed and ALL medications administered by the state or track vet must be recorded on a document that acts as the horse’s (for lack of a better term) "medical passport."

When a horse is claimed, sold, or otherwise changes hands, the medical passport document accompanies the horse (just like foaling papers do.)

Medical passport documents for ALL horses in training are made available for the world to see (just like horse past performance data.)

Horses shipping in from a racing jurisdiction where the above rules have not (yet) been adopted, or horses that have been "out of training" can enter "into training" but must first undergo a 45 day quarantine period (where the state/track vet is the one who administers all meds and/or performs all procedures and logs same on the horse’s medical passport) before the horse becomes eligible to race and earn purse money.

Horses shipping in from a "recognized" racing jurisdiction where the above rules are already in place face NO such quarantine period.

I would argue that if the above model were implemented by NYRA, SOCAL, KY, FL, etc., 90% of the other smaller racing jurisdictions would do the same shortly afterwards. I would also argue that this would go a long way towards pretty much ending racing’s drug problem (and the negative perception among the wagering public that goes with it.)

Thoughts?


-jp

.

[thespaah]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Isn't that what the article was all about? Criminal prosecution of trainers who are caught using performance enhancing drugs on their horses?

I just skimmed the article. I should have read it through.

[andymays]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

In my humble opinion, the FIRST order of business for running a successful gambling game is that the game itself be regulated in such a way that there is very little question among the wagering public that the game itself is on the up and up.

In my humble opinion, racing's status quo in no way shape or form leads ANYONE to believe that racing as a gambling game is currently being regulated in such a way that the game itself is on the up and up.

Personally, I LIKE the way the drug issue is currently handled by the Hong Kong Jockey Club. There, only the track vet can administer drugs or perform veterinary procedures for horses that are "in training." Every substance administered and every procedure performed is handled by the track vet.

Further, info about meds administered and procedures performed are LOGGED by the track vet as part of the horse’s medical record. From there, one can navigate to the entries page at the official Hong Kong Jockey Club website and view the entries info for any horse entered to race - and when one does this - there is a clickable link where one can view a brief description of the horse’s medical record.

The result?

Transparency and integrity are two things that come to mind.

Compared to North American horse racing, cheating through the use of drugs at Hong Kong’s two tracks (Happy Valley and Sha Tin) is pretty much unheard of. More importantly, there is a prevailing belief among the wagering public that both the racing conducted by the Hong Kong Jockey Club and that regulation of said racing is on the up and up.

Allow me to play "What If" for a second –

What if one or more MAJOR racing jurisdictions (NYRA, SOCAL, KY, etc.) decided to implement the following?

While a horse is in training, ALL medications administered (both therapeutic and race day) must be administered by the state or track vet.

While a horse is in training, ALL veterinary procedures performed must be performed by the state or track vet.

While a horse is in training, ALL veterinary procedures performed and ALL medications administered by the state or track vet must be recorded on a document that acts as the horse’s (for lack of a better term) "medical passport."

When a horse is claimed, sold, or otherwise changes hands, the medical passport document accompanies the horse (just like foaling papers do.)

Medical passport documents for ALL horses in training are made available for the world to see (just like horse past performance data.)

Horses shipping in from a racing jurisdiction where the above rules have not (yet) been adopted, or horses that have been "out of training" can enter "into training" but must first undergo a 45 day quarantine period (where the state/track vet is the one who administers all meds and/or performs all procedures and logs same on the horse’s medical passport) before the horse becomes eligible to race and earn purse money.

Horses shipping in from a "recognized" racing jurisdiction where the above rules are already in place do face NO such quarantine period.

I would argue that if the above model were implemented by NYRA, SOCAL, KY, FL, etc., 90% of the other smaller racing jurisdictions would do the same shortly afterwards. I would also argue that this would go a long way towards pretty much ending racing’s drug problem (and the negative perception among the wagering public that goes with it.)

Thoughts?


-jp

.

You sound radical.

Maybe we should go to Santa Anita and make a stand. LOL. Double LOL.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

...Thoughts?


-jp

.

Do we get either enough full-time vets to handle "off-hour" emergencies or can we get a little exception for a tube of banamine paste and some ace pills in case of a midnight colic?

[thespaah]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

In my humble opinion, the FIRST order of business for running a successful gambling game is that the game itself be regulated in such a way that there is very little question among the wagering public that the game itself is on the up and up.

In my humble opinion, racing's status quo in no way shape or form leads ANYONE to believe that racing as a gambling game is currently being regulated in such a way that the game itself is on the up and up.

Personally, I LIKE the way the drug issue is currently handled by the Hong Kong Jockey Club. There, only the track vet can administer drugs or perform veterinary procedures for horses that are "in training." Every substance administered and every procedure performed is handled by the track vet.

Further, info about meds administered and procedures performed are LOGGED by the track vet as part of the horse’s medical record. From there, one can navigate to the entries page at the official Hong Kong Jockey Club website and view the entries info for any horse entered to race - and when one does this - there is a clickable link where one can view a brief description of the horse’s medical record.

The result?

Transparency and integrity are two things that come to mind.

Compared to North American horse racing, cheating through the use of drugs at Hong Kong’s two tracks (Happy Valley and Sha Tin) is pretty much unheard of. More importantly, there is a prevailing belief among the wagering public that both the racing conducted by the Hong Kong Jockey Club and that regulation of said racing is on the up and up.

Allow me to play "What If" for a second –

What if one or more MAJOR racing jurisdictions (NYRA, SOCAL, KY, etc.) decided to LEAD and implement the following? Or what if they collectively decided to LEAD and implement the following?

While a horse is in training, ALL medications administered (both therapeutic and race day) must be administered by the state or track vet.

While a horse is in training, ALL veterinary procedures performed must be performed by the state or track vet.

While a horse is in training, ALL veterinary procedures performed and ALL medications administered by the state or track vet must be recorded on a document that acts as the horse’s (for lack of a better term) "medical passport."

When a horse is claimed, sold, or otherwise changes hands, the medical passport document accompanies the horse (just like foaling papers do.)

Medical passport documents for ALL horses in training are made available for the world to see (just like horse past performance data.)

Horses shipping in from a racing jurisdiction where the above rules have not (yet) been adopted, or horses that have been "out of training" can enter "into training" but must first undergo a 45 day quarantine period (where the state/track vet is the one who administers all meds and/or performs all procedures and logs same on the horse’s medical passport) before the horse becomes eligible to race and earn purse money.

Horses shipping in from a "recognized" racing jurisdiction where the above rules are already in place face NO such quarantine period.

I would argue that if the above model were implemented by NYRA, SOCAL, KY, FL, etc., 90% of the other smaller racing jurisdictions would do the same shortly afterwards. I would also argue that this would go a long way towards pretty much ending racing’s drug problem (and the negative perception among the wagering public that goes with it.)

Thoughts?


-jp

.

All of that is fine. Here's the rub. People are able to sneak contraband into racetracks with ease. For regulations and laws to have any teeth all racetracks should have absolute authority to search without consent of horsemen and stall, tack box, vehicle, groom's quarters, storage areas, muck pits and anywhere else track security wants to look.
Just the the threat of being scrutinized at any time of the day or night should put notice that if it is found, the person or people responsible will be sanctioned by the racing jurisdiction AND prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

[Jeff P]

Originally Posted by johnhannibalsmith

Do we get either enough full-time vets to handle "off-hour" emergencies or can we get a little exception for a tube of banamine paste and some ace pills in case of a midnight colic?

That's a fair question. IMHO, to make such a system work there has to be a track vet on call 24/7 to handle emergencies.


-jp

.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Originally Posted by thespaah

All of that is fine. Here's the rub. People are able to sneak contraband into racetracks with ease. For regulations and laws to have any teeth all racetracks should have absolute authority to search without consent of horsemen and stall, tack box, vehicle, groom's quarters, storage areas, muck pits and anywhere else track security wants to look.
Just the the threat of being scrutinized at any time of the day or night should put notice that if it is found, the person or people responsible will be sanctioned by the racing jurisdiction AND prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

This is my knee-jerk as well. The idea would probably solve a lot of problems and would definitely lead to an improved perception, but folks would still point out, just like testing - that you can only catch what you can catch. If I can give a shot, or tube a horse - having that system is an improvement, but we're not all the way there yet.

[Jeff P]

Originally Posted by thespaah

All of that is fine. Here's the rub. People are able to sneak contraband into racetracks with ease. For regulations and laws to have any teeth all racetracks should have absolute authority to search without consent of horsemen and stall, tack box, vehicle, groom's quarters, storage areas, muck pits and anywhere else track security wants to look.
Just the the threat of being scrutinized at any time of the day or night should put notice that if it is found, the person or people responsible will be sanctioned by the racing jurisdiction AND prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

IMHO, you raise some valid points.

Suppose for the sake of argument that I as a horse owner (or trainer) have to sign a "lease" for the stalls afforded me by the track? (Even if stall rent is $1.00 for a block of stalls for all of my horses for the entire meet?) What if, as a condition of being given free stall space there was a paragraph in my lease where I granted consent to track and/or state personnel access to my free stalls at any time?

Could that work?

My belief system tells me the vast majority of horsemen are honest, work hard, and might even welcome seeing the playing field leveled in the interest of giving them an honest shake at competing on it.

IMHO, there HAS to be a way to get there.


-jp

.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

IMHO, you raise some valid points.

Suppose for the sake of argument that I as a horse owner (or trainer) have to sign a "lease" for the stalls afforded me by the track? (Even if stall rent is $1.00 for a block of stalls for all of my horses for the entire meet?) What if, as a condition of being given free stall space there was a paragraph in my lease where I granted consent to track and/or state personnel access to my free stalls at any time?

....

Most of the places I've raced at, searches are permissible as a condition of licensing, stall approval, or both. Anything on racetrack property or under the jurisdiction of the D.O.R. -- now, generally they bring a "neutral" 3rd party, such as an HBPA rep to accompany them so as to make sure they don't get burned by the "they planted it" defense -- especially if the responsible person of record isn't present. Of course, most of the time they just find roaches in the ashtrays of the trucks and wind up catching the wrong illegal stuff, but........

[Stillriledup]

[QUOTE=Ernie Dahlman]

Originally Posted by Tom

Still too soft,IMHO, but it is a start
I think owners need to made to hurt severely

My family has owned horses for almost 50 years. None of our horses has ever had a positive. I have nothing to do with my perfect record, yet you think I should be "hurt severely" if one of my horses tests positive?

While your 50 years in the game without a positive is a proud accomplishment, Tom (post 10) is right when he essentially says that horseplayers don't really care about the past 50 years, they just care about the horse that's running today. You don't get 'brownie points' from horseplayers, all they care about is the next horse you run comes up clean.

The proper way to punish an owner is to suspend the positive horse from racing. If a trainer gets a 60 day ban, so should the horse in question.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

In my humble opinion, the FIRST order of business for running a successful gambling game is that the game itself be regulated in such a way that there is very little question among the wagering public that the game itself is on the up and up.

In my humble opinion, racing's status quo in no way shape or form leads ANYONE to believe that racing as a gambling game is currently being regulated in such a way that the game itself is on the up and up.

Personally, I LIKE the way the drug issue is currently handled by the Hong Kong Jockey Club. There, only the track vet can administer drugs or perform veterinary procedures for horses that are "in training." Every substance administered and every procedure performed is handled by the track vet.

Further, info about meds administered and procedures performed are LOGGED by the track vet as part of the horse’s medical record. From there, one can navigate to the entries page at the official Hong Kong Jockey Club website and view the entries info for any horse entered to race - and when one does this - there is a clickable link where one can view a brief description of the horse’s medical record.

The result?

Transparency and integrity are two things that come to mind.

Compared to North American horse racing, cheating through the use of drugs at Hong Kong’s two tracks (Happy Valley and Sha Tin) is pretty much unheard of. More importantly, there is a prevailing belief among the wagering public that both the racing conducted by the Hong Kong Jockey Club and that regulation of said racing is on the up and up.

Allow me to play "What If" for a second –

What if one or more MAJOR racing jurisdictions (NYRA, SOCAL, KY, etc.) decided to LEAD and implement the following? Or what if they collectively decided to LEAD and implement the following?

While a horse is in training, ALL medications administered (both therapeutic and race day) must be administered by the state or track vet.

While a horse is in training, ALL veterinary procedures performed must be performed by the state or track vet.

While a horse is in training, ALL veterinary procedures performed and ALL medications administered by the state or track vet must be recorded on a document that acts as the horse’s (for lack of a better term) "medical passport."

When a horse is claimed, sold, or otherwise changes hands, the medical passport document accompanies the horse (just like foaling papers do.)

Medical passport documents for ALL horses in training are made available for the world to see (just like horse past performance data.)

Horses shipping in from a racing jurisdiction where the above rules have not (yet) been adopted, or horses that have been "out of training" can enter "into training" but must first undergo a 45 day quarantine period (where the state/track vet is the one who administers all meds and/or performs all procedures and logs same on the horse’s medical passport) before the horse becomes eligible to race and earn purse money.

Horses shipping in from a "recognized" racing jurisdiction where the above rules are already in place face NO such quarantine period.

I would argue that if the above model were implemented by NYRA, SOCAL, KY, FL, etc., 90% of the other smaller racing jurisdictions would do the same shortly afterwards. I would also argue that this would go a long way towards pretty much ending racing’s drug problem (and the negative perception among the wagering public that goes with it.)

Thoughts?


-jp

.

I do agree that the major tracks and jurisdictions need to 'come together' and take a leadership role in cleaning up the game.

The 64 dollar question is: What are they waiting for?

I have an idea what they're waiting for and what they're waiting for is some definitive proof that your ideas (or anyone else's ideas that make sense) will make them money. They're looking for an idea, any idea, that they can implement that will be a profitable business decision.

Now, we view this from a horseplayer standpoint and as players, we want clean and honest races and we could really care less how that gets done. One of the biggest problems that horseplayers currently face is that we keep betting races that are tainted. By continuing to bet these races, we're saying "we accept the way things are being run" our dollars speak louder than anything our mouths can say. Now, while some tracks have suffered some declines in betting, it seems that they havent suffered enough of a decline to make them take action.

Tracks dont view the 'drug problem' the same way as the horseplayer. Tracks know that running a much tighter ship will mean less and less horses will be able to race and many more horses will not pass the daily vet inspections. So, less horses mean less betting interests and there seems to be some pretty strong proof that larger fields create bigger betting pools.

So, if the tracks implement much tighter rules and get shorter fields because of that tightness, they're going to have to make that revenue up in some other way. I think if you can come up with something to convince the tracks that the revenue they lose by having shorter fields will be made up by more bettors betting more money because of the perception that the races are more honest, than i think tracks might listen.

Do you have any proof that what you are suggesting will entice horseplayers to raise the sizes of their normal bets? Sure, logically it makes sense that players will come back to the game if they see major progress in the cheating department, but unless you have actual proof, iron clad proof, something in writing, some kind of study, im not sure tracks are too interested in 'gambling' that your ideas might make them more money.

Your idea and other ideas that talk about how to clean up the game has a fatal assumption. It assumes that all track owners deeply care about the integrity of the actual sport of horse racing. I believe that most owners just care about money, and since they have a license to conduct horse races and have a license to offer gambling on those horse races, we assume that they care about the actual horse races themselves. We assume they deeply care about the sport as a sport, im not sure that's a good assumption.

I truly believe that if a person comes up with an idea that will make the track MONEY, those tracks will listen.

Cleaning up the sport is a noble challenge, but if there's no proof that implementing your plan (or anyone else's plan) will be profitable, why should tracks even consider it?