The Greatest of All Time - Bob Baffert

[GMB@BP]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

And, as the old Los Al QH announcer Bobby Doyle might have said, "they're running!".

https://twitter.com/ericcrawford/sta...79712617852930

Yuck. What a black eye for our sport.

there goes racings clean reputation

[Hambletonian]

You can't be both the best trainer in the country and the guy who does not know how to read the labels on the stuff he is giving to his horses. Skin cream? He risked it all for skin cream? The horse must have had some really bad skin lol. Were the girl horses making fun of him or something?

Considering the very substantial history across all sports of athletes, both human and otherwise, testing positive for substances that were an ingredient in something else, you think he would know better and be more careful.

On the other hand, a good ways back I owned a small piece of a cheap horse whose Beyers jumped from the mid single digits into the thirties and forties as a result of a dietary supplement given to increase appetite. I remember it was expensive and wondered what was up...turns out it had steroids as one of the main ingredients. Too bad the poor horse broke a few months later...

[biggestal99]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

I hope he wins the TC.

Would only be fitting.

It’s almost 100% guaranteed that MS will be dq from the derby.

Only chance at the crown this year will be mandaloun.

And he ain’t running.

Allan

[paulbenny]

This is not a performance enhancer. This is a drug to eliminate inflammation.


It does not improve the horse but allows it to not be inflamed. My question is really, do people really believe that BB is like JN? or JS? If they do, then who is left?


I do not believe they are even comparable situations. Not even close.



I once downloaded the 600 page document by the horse racing commissioners. I was exhausted just scanning it. Maybe the VET did mess up. Again, I still think the DQ is OK. The complexity of a lot of things is not that easy to understand. If you have a skin rash, it is possible it could be absorbed into the bloodstream.



There is a point that some of these rules are a bit absurd too. Where is the line drawn. Then lets have pre race testing for Graded stakes.

[Gander36]

People keep saying Baffert wouldn't be stupid enough to do this. Just like they might say "Ben Johnson would never be dumb enough to use PED's knowing there's a chance he'd get caught."

But Ben Johnson's reasoning may be, "I can do this and win gold taking a chance of being caught, or I can not take the chance and be an also ran..." This is not bad thinking, just like it's not bad thinking for an NFL lineman to decide to use steroids and take the chance of getting caught over being cut from the NFL.

Now, given the minute chances of getting caught in racing, taking the chance and winning (if that's what you think you need) is even more enticing.

The rules need to be clear, and the punishment to a degree that it makes more sense to adhere to them.

[stlseeeek]

Baffert has 35 positives tests, 5-7 deaths under his care, and he's still the toast of the sport.

LOL

Horse racing is a joke, as bad as Harness racing and Bicycle racing. Cheaters ahead of the testers. Best chemists in Cali. Bob has his pick


He lied, lied, then his lawyer comes clean, proving Bob is a liar.

[paulbenny]

Ben is on his own. Bob has clients. There is a huge difference here. Bob has to face Walden in the face. This trickles down to even these big money breeders and stables.



BJ trickled down to himself. The parallel makes no sense. This is not BJ or LA, yet people try to draw parallels. These guys were sole proprietors of themselves.



Yes, the rules might be complex, maybe they are. Then simplify them. We are not chemists and after reading about this steroid, I would never take it upon myself to apply it to my skin if I had a skin condition.

[Gander36]

Originally Posted by paulbenny

This is not a performance enhancer. This is a drug to eliminate inflammation.


It does not improve the horse but allows it to not be inflamed. My question is really, do people really believe that BB is like JN? or JS? If they do, then who is left?


I do not believe they are even comparable situations. Not even close.



I once downloaded the 600 page document by the horse racing commissioners. I was exhausted just scanning it. Maybe the VET did mess up. Again, I still think the DQ is OK. The complexity of a lot of things is not that easy to understand. If you have a skin rash, it is possible it could be absorbed into the bloodstream.



There is a point that some of these rules are a bit absurd too. Where is the line drawn. Then lets have pre race testing for Graded stakes.

To your point, the current substance rules are impractical. Many of these banned substances are to a horse the equivalent of giving a human Aleve or rubbing on Ben Gay.

Other sports wouldn't ban these types of substances on game day. I'm sure Tiger Woods and Tom Brady both use NSAIDS and soreness relief.

Anti-inflammatories reduce pain by reducing inflammation. They are not pain-killers (blockers) per se. It's believed by vets and horsemen these can actually make running more safe for horse an rider by keeping a horse from over-favoring theirs sound joints, bones, and muscles.

So racing has a lot of work to do on its rules, and after they fix them, they have to do a better job of enforcing them.

[SG4]

Originally Posted by Half Smoke

the NYT is not thought of as a great source for racing news
but Joe Drape has been covering racing there for 23 years
IMHO he is one of the best


https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/10/s...sultPosition=1


*

I think Drape must be paid a bonus per negative adjective he uses per article nowadays. Last few years it's been incredibly frustrating to read NYT's (meager) coverage of horse racing. I know it seems prescient now, but considering his day-of recap of the Derby began with "On another first Saturday in May, the beauty of America’s oldest sport battled neck and neck down the stretch with its unseemliness..." it'd be nice if his recap could make it 1 single line without going negative. Article never mentioned the humble beginnings of this horse, how he could've been had for $1000, all things that were nice stories & actually related to the winner. For a recap of the race there didn't need to be multiple paragraphs about Sheikh Mohammed or even a mention of Jason Servis' name, but that's how they handle racing.

[Gander36]

Originally Posted by paulbenny

Ben is on his own. Bob has clients. There is a huge difference here. Bob has to face Walden in the face. This trickles down to even these big money breeders and stables.



BJ trickled down to himself. The parallel makes no sense. This is not BJ or LA, yet people try to draw parallels. These guys were sole proprietors of themselves.



Yes, the rules might be complex, maybe they are. Then simplify them. We are not chemists and after reading about this steroid, I would never take it upon myself to apply it to my skin if I had a skin condition.

I assume you're talking to me since i used a Ben Johnson analogy. You're focusing on the differences to object instead of the similarities.

And you assume OWNERS are all about integrity. Yes, they are when scrutinized, but I would offer that a trainer like Karl Broberg doesn't continue to grow his stable to the point he's putting other claiming trainers out of business because owners put INTEGRITY ahead of WINNING...

[SG4]

With all the talk about picograms & how that amount can't affect performance etc, I have never once seen someone say what pp/ML would indicate an obvious drugging? If a horse got a shot of betamethasone today, would their drug test tomorrow show up as 50,000 pp/ML, 5000, 50?? It'd be nice if there was context to this just once.

[mountainman]

Routine procedure just slightly mistimed and or sloppily performed. Not sexy or satisfying to the aggrieved masses-but none the less true, in my opinion.

Missing a joint even partially, btw, and hitting some subcutaneous would effect this substance's presence in a horse's system. Again, not sexy.

Whatever the case, life will never be the same for Bob Baffert.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by Gander36

To your point, the current substance rules are impractical. Many of these banned substances are to a horse the equivalent of giving a human Aleve or rubbing on Ben Gay.

Other sports wouldn't ban these types of substances on game day. I'm sure Tiger Woods and Tom Brady both use NSAIDS and soreness relief.

Anti-inflammatories reduce pain by reducing inflammation. They are not pain-killers (blockers) per se. It's believed by vets and horsemen these can actually make running more safe for horse an rider by keeping a horse from over-favoring theirs sound joints, bones, and muscles.

So racing has a lot of work to do on its rules, and after they fix them, they have to do a better job of enforcing them.

This isn't right.

Track and field bans cold medications. Seriously. There have been athletes who were barred from the sport for 2 years because of cold medications.

Why? Because cheaters exploit angles. I've referenced before here the notion in poker of the "angle shooter". An angle shooter isn't necessarily a rules violator, but rather a player who takes advantage of whatever rules are there to play unfairly. So, for instance, at a poker table where a betting line is enforced, the angle shooter will move chips right up to the line to get a reaction.

The ultimate goal here isn't to have perfect regulations. It's to make life as hard as possible for cheaters. If, as a result, some anti-inflammatory drug is banned that, in a perfect world, should be legal, that's not a big cost to the sport. You know what is a big cost to the sport? Cheating.

So there's nothing wrong with rules that ban substances some people say are harmless. What is "wrong" is that we don't punish anyone seriously for violating the rules, and, with the notable exception of Rick Dutrow, we don't kick people out of the sport. Let's fix THAT before we worry about whether some drug is on the prohibited list that shouldn't be there.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by SG4

I think Drape must be paid a bonus per negative adjective he uses per article nowadays. Last few years it's been incredibly frustrating to read NYT's (meager) coverage of horse racing. I know it seems prescient now, but considering his day-of recap of the Derby began with "On another first Saturday in May, the beauty of America’s oldest sport battled neck and neck down the stretch with its unseemliness..." it'd be nice if his recap could make it 1 single line without going negative. Article never mentioned the humble beginnings of this horse, how he could've been had for $1000, all things that were nice stories & actually related to the winner. For a recap of the race there didn't need to be multiple paragraphs about Sheikh Mohammed or even a mention of Jason Servis' name, but that's how they handle racing.

This sport gives Drape plenty of ammunition. It isn't the media's fault we are a sport full of doping. It's the fault of the people in it.

[paulbenny]

If he had bothered to mention that this is also a topical steroid, or gotten into some details, maybe I would respect the guy. He characterizes this once again as a doping scandal. Moreover, the Armstrong thing is mentioned. Lets then elevate this even more to:


Baseball
Football
College sports (why exclude any)


The point is, there is a fine line with the wording here. Doping is not steroids one to one in this case. It is an anti inflammatory agent used even for face cream and I have a permanent scar because of this, which is why I hesitate all medications, etc.


Now lets add a list of every trainer who had a horse die under their care. I suspect we must include Ruffian's trainer. It must have been Whitley's fault, because she was too young to race that fast.