CHRB considering DQ of Justify

[GMB@BP]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

You can also watch Ben Johnson run 9.79 in the 100 meters at the Seoul Olympics.

That doesn't mean he's the 1988 Olympic Champion, though. He isn't, because track and field has the guts to disqualify a doper from its most important honor.

If we are using that logic, then I think all baffert horses in all instances, that had any medication issue along their careers, should be disqualified from all subsequent races. It doesnt matter the test on the day clean, the test in the past should result in full forfeiture of all wins and money returned.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by GMB@BP

If we are using that logic, then I think all baffert horses in all instances, that had any medication issue along their careers, should be disqualified from all subsequent races. It doesnt matter the test on the day clean, the test in the past should result in full forfeiture of all wins and money returned.

That's not the logic. Justify, specifically, failed a drug test. Other Baffert horses didn't.

[GMB@BP]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

That's not the logic. Justify, specifically, failed a drug test. Other Baffert horses didn't.

There have been other baffert horses, in fact in socal a large number of horses have had positives, following your logic all their subsequent wins should be disqualified if racing had guts. It would be interesting to see that hold up in court.

That doesn't mean he's the 1988 Olympic Champion, though. He isn't, because track and field has the guts to disqualify a doper from its most important honor.

.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by GMB@BP

There have been other baffert horses, in fact in socal a large number of horses have had positives, following your logic all their subsequent wins should be disqualified if racing had guts. It would be interesting to see that hold up in court.

.

Why the heck do you guys all seem to think that horse racing stewards and commissions are not allowed to punish wrongdoers because "it won't hold up in court"?

Rick Dutrow couldn't get his suspension reduced in court. Gary West couldn't get a hearing in court on the Derby disqualification.

The rules of court proceedings are EXTREMELY deferential to whatever stewards and commissions do, and your average judge has absolutely zero desire to second guess horse racing regulators.

The reason why we have so much cheating in the sport is because stewards and commissions protect cheaters. Period. They have been doing it for decades.

If we decided to stop protecting cheaters and started acting like the rest of the sports world, you would find that for a short period of time all the cheaters would hire lawyers and bring a bunch of suits- and almost every one of them would lose. The legal system isn't what's standing in the way. What is standing in the way is the people who run this sport are buddy-buddy with the cheaters.

[GMB@BP]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Why the heck do you guys all seem to think that horse racing stewards and commissions are not allowed to punish wrongdoers because "it won't hold up in court"?

Rick Dutrow couldn't get his suspension reduced in court. Gary West couldn't get a hearing in court on the Derby disqualification.

The rules of court proceedings are EXTREMELY deferential to whatever stewards and commissions do, and your average judge has absolutely zero desire to second guess horse racing regulators.

The reason why we have so much cheating in the sport is because stewards and commissions protect cheaters. Period. They have been doing it for decades.

If we decided to stop protecting cheaters and started acting like the rest of the sports world, you would find that for a short period of time all the cheaters would hire lawyers and bring a bunch of suits- and almost every one of them would lose. The legal system isn't what's standing in the way. What is standing in the way is the people who run this sport are buddy-buddy with the cheaters.

If we banned everyone bending the rules it would be a two horse field. Your obsession with Baffert seems to be personal. I dont see you going off on Miller, Sadler, O'neil, and thats just on one circuit.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by GMB@BP

If we banned everyone bending the rules it would be a two horse field. Your obsession with Baffert seems to be personal. I dont see you going off on Miller, Sadler, O'neil, and thats just on one circuit.

I have called O'Neill "Drug O'Neill" for years.

I particularly don't like Justify because he embarrasses the sport. He's like the guys who were hitting over 60 home runs in baseball back in the day- the high profile symbol of a sport that tolerates cheaters.

[affirmedny]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

I have called O'Neill "Drug O'Neill" for years.

I particularly don't like Justify because he embarrasses the sport. He's like the guys who were hitting over 60 home runs in baseball back in the day- the high profile symbol of a sport that tolerates cheaters.

I have heard him called "Drug O'Needle"

[zico20]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Not necessarily. Other sports write people out of the history. Pete Carroll's win streak at USC doesn't exist anymore. As I said, Ben Johnson is no longer recognized as either an Olympic or World Champion.

There's no reason we have to say that a horse that was doped and should have never been allowed to enter the Derby is a TC winner. Indeed, sports with some self respect refuse to say things like this.

For all those who favor going back in time and denying a horse or athlete their award, what if it was the opposite? What if Gary Stevens confessed to having a buzzer on Victory Gallop? Do we go back and make Real Quiet a Triple Crown winner? Do we?

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by zico20

For all those who favor going back in time and denying a horse or athlete their award, what if it was the opposite? What if Gary Stevens confessed to having a buzzer on Victory Gallop? Do we go back and make Real Quiet a Triple Crown winner? Do we?

Why don't we wait until something like that actually happens.

FWIW, Forward Pass's TC attempt was considered legitimate.

[burnsy]

People can argue till the cows come home. The major problem is the way that was handled. Information like that cannot be with held. To me, that is borderline criminal considering the money and fiduciary trust involved. This crap of deflecting to other people and other incidents is just that...... crap. For something like that to go undisclosed/without action or immediate resolution is about as shady as it gets. I used to bet that circuit a lot. Not only has the product gone down hill but how can one possibly trust it with deals like that. And I don’t care who was involved. Besides the BC and last Saturday for the Classic. I won’t bet there. Screw complaining , I’ll just stay elsewhere. That kind of thing , in a sport that takes wagers directly and makes billions off of the breeding is bad karma. And damn if it hasn’t hit those bone heads in spades.

[GMB@BP]

Originally Posted by burnsy

Besides the BC and last Saturday for the Classic. I won’t bet there. Screw complaining , I’ll just stay elsewhere. That kind of thing , in a sport that takes wagers directly and makes billions off of the breeding is bad karma. And damn if it hasn’t hit those bone heads in spades.

Obviously a lot of people agree with your sentiment because if you look at handle the past 20 years its a reflection of that sentiment. Racing would like to blame someone for their issues, and its usually other forms of competition, when they really need to do some self reflection.

1) They are not competitive because their price is way to high for the average person compared to other forms of gambling.

2) The sport from a gambling standpoint relies on information, that information is either expensive or hard to get. Why in the world is there a charge for the information when its the key component to the actual gambling?

3) Racing has either largely ignored or not kept up with drug practices that directly impact the gambling aspect. Now IMO its a keeping up with the Jones kinda of things.

4) Racing has no coordinated messaging, and often times in the heat of public scrutiny, falls flat on their faces in terms of messaging.


Just a few random thoughts of my own, I am sure many will disagree.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by GMB@BP

Obviously a lot of people agree with your sentiment because if you look at handle the past 20 years its a reflection of that sentiment. Racing would like to blame someone for their issues, and its usually other forms of competition, when they really need to do some self reflection.

1) They are not competitive because their price is way to high for the average person compared to other forms of gambling.

2) The sport from a gambling standpoint relies on information, that information is either expensive or hard to get. Why in the world is there a charge for the information when its the key component to the actual gambling?

3) Racing has either largely ignored or not kept up with drug practices that directly impact the gambling aspect. Now IMO its a keeping up with the Jones kinda of things.

4) Racing has no coordinated messaging, and often times in the heat of public scrutiny, falls flat on their faces in terms of messaging.


Just a few random thoughts of my own, I am sure many will disagree.

All good points. I would only add that drugs not only harm bettors but also harm us as a sport. When horse racing was healthy, we had a fair number of fans who didn't bet or bet $2 as well as gamblers. Having a TC winner who failed a drug test hurts us as a sport too- it's a black eye (just like the breakdown issue).

[The_Turf_Monster]

Nobody outside of the small margin that follow horse racing will have any idea what the Santa Anita Derby is or that Justify failed a drug test following its win it. All they’ll know when NBC comes on is that Justify is a Triple Crown winner that is likely putting a horse or two in the Derby every so often

The KD will likely change its entry rules to allow for a panel to vote in a couple horses they believe should be in the race that don’t have the requisite points and this problem goes away

[horsefan2019]

Originally Posted by The_Turf_Monster

Nobody outside of the small margin that follow horse racing will have any idea what the Santa Anita Derby is or that Justify failed a drug test following its win it. All they’ll know when NBC comes on is that Justify is a Triple Crown winner that is likely putting a horse or two in the Derby every so often

The KD will likely change its entry rules to allow for a panel to vote in a couple horses they believe should be in the race that don’t have the requisite points and this problem goes away

Not to mention the "Road to the Kentucky Derby" is more of a recent addition. If you gave the track the discretion of what other horses can enter this problem like you said goes away.


Also legislating what happened in a race 2 years ago makes the sport look terrible. It tells the viewer than the results are subject to review at a later date.

[horsefan2019]

Originally Posted by GMB@BP

Obviously a lot of people agree with your sentiment because if you look at handle the past 20 years its a reflection of that sentiment. Racing would like to blame someone for their issues, and its usually other forms of competition, when they really need to do some self reflection.

1) They are not competitive because their price is way to high for the average person compared to other forms of gambling.

2) The sport from a gambling standpoint relies on information, that information is either expensive or hard to get. Why in the world is there a charge for the information when its the key component to the actual gambling?

3) Racing has either largely ignored or not kept up with drug practices that directly impact the gambling aspect. Now IMO its a keeping up with the Jones kinda of things.

4) Racing has no coordinated messaging, and often times in the heat of public scrutiny, falls flat on their faces in terms of messaging.


Just a few random thoughts of my own, I am sure many will disagree.

The biggest reason why horse racing isn't as popular as say 20 years ago has a lot to do with the fact that there is much more competitors for the gambling dollar. Sports betting, fantasy sports, growth of card games enticed the youth more than betting on the ponies.