Cheating in Racing Today

[NorCalGreg]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Yes...I know for a fact that Greg can't win. Mainly because he has said so right here on this board. Of course...you would have known this if you spent a little more time on your own site.

The only things "distasteful" here are your interruptions, when you have nothing of value to add to the ongoing discussion. May I suggest another "vacation"?

Is that really what I said, thask?

[Ruffian1]

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

You are assuming that testing of biological samples will detect all possible violations. This is not the case.


Although there is an obvious difference between the effects of different substances, that does not mean that legal therapeutics cannot be used illegally. Hence the highlighting of the 24-hour rule in the article.


There's a catch here. The main goal of out-of-competition testing is to deter cheating. So a low violation level can mean 3 things: (1) there is no cheating going on, (2) the cheating has been suspended because there is testing, and/or (3) the testing is unable to pick up certain substances that would constitute cheating.


What's interesting in the article is that there is no mention of the veterinarian who was suspended for rampant rule violations related to medications and administrations both legal and illegal, which happened in his own backyard in 2014.

There is also no mention of the 3 trainers and multiple veterinarians who were cited and convicted at Penn National regarding systemic cheating through illegal administration of drugs on raceday.

Is this proof of an endemic problem? It depends on if you think these are simply isolated cases or willing to extrapolate and consider the possibility that others are doing the same or similar things elsewhere (or at the same facility).

It's also interesting to note that >90% of horses race on lasix, a similar figure utilize NSAIDs the day before the race, and before stricter regulations were put in place large proportions of race horses were raced or trained on clenbuterol and anabolic steroids, possibly the same with corticosteroids. This suggests indiscriminate use of medication for all racehorses, regardless of any actual individual indications for the use of such medications. Is it a far cry to think there are other substances being given routinely that are not legal to administer?

This part I can speak directly to:

No opinions, just fact.

Quote:
How many of these violations were for legal therapeutics and how many were for illegal PED's?

Although there is an obvious difference between the effects of different substances, that does not mean that legal therapeutics cannot be used illegally. Hence the highlighting of the 24-hour rule in the article.

End Quote.

This is soooo spot on I can't tell you how much I appreciate it.

I have probably told the story so I will save all the dramatics and get to the point.

I watched a vet and trainer do exactly this in the receiving barn a couple of hours before the race we were both in.

He beats me a nose.

I go up to the Stewards stand and explain what happened.

They said to me that there is nothing they can do.

I said, how about uphold the rules of racing !!

They said sorry.

I said so am I because as of this conversation I now realize I can no longer play a game I have played for 25+ years unless I cheat.

The Stewards were floored.

One was a former rider I rode quite a bit.

I left the game several months later.

Don't feel bad for me, I am doing great !

Best decision I ever made.

Instead, feel bad for the game and all that is in it.

It is the real loser.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by NorCalGreg

Is that really what I said, thask?

Greg...my reply to you was made in jest...just as your reply to EasyGoer wasn't meant to be taken seriously either...right? I mean...just because we are "bitching" about the cheating in this game does not mean that we are currently LOSING in the game...right? We could be WINNING in the game now, but wanting to win even MORE. Or...we could be winning players today, but we could be worried about our playing status TOMORROW...should this "cheating" increase in the future. My reply to you was my attempt at HUMOR...just as I felt your reply to EasyGoer was humorous as well.

And yet...PA-Mike saw fit to call my reply to you "distasteful"...without stopping to notice that, if MY reply to you was "distasteful"...then YOUR reply to EasyGoer, which PROMPTED my reply, was "distasteful", as well. I mean...when you told EasyGoer to "Learn the game the way it's played...unless you prefer bitching to winning"...you were as wrong as I was. You implied that he was a "loser in this game"...even though you know nothing about him.

At least I know enough about you to say that you didn't win money betting horses last year.

[PaceAdvantage]

So I'm playing favorites again...but at least this time, you can't blame it on political affiliation.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

So I'm playing favorites again...but at least this time, you can't blame it on political affiliation.

But I can still BLAME you...right?

[NorCalGreg]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Greg...my reply to you was made in jest...just as your reply to EasyGoer wasn't meant to be taken seriously either...right? I mean...just because we are "bitching" about the cheating in this game does not mean that we are currently LOSING in the game...right? We could be WINNING in the game now, but wanting to win even MORE. Or...we could be winning players today, but we could be worried about our playing status TOMORROW...should this "cheating" increase in the future. My reply to you was my attempt at HUMOR...just as I felt your reply to EasyGoer was humorous as well.

And yet...PA-Mike saw fit to call my reply to you "distasteful"...without stopping to notice that, if MY reply to you was "distasteful"...then YOUR reply to EasyGoer, which PROMPTED my reply, was "distasteful", as well. I mean...when you told EasyGoer to "Learn the game the way it's played...unless you prefer bitching to winning"...you were as wrong as I was. You implied that he was a "loser in this game"...even though you know nothing about him.

At least I know enough about you to say that you didn't win money betting horses last year.

Hey! I "broke even"

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I've seen you post your opinion on this issue here plenty of times, Rich...and YOU'VE never posted any "facts" here either. You THINK that you have "the facts", because you have access to certain people within the game...who relay to you whatever is "convenient" for them to have reported. And, once armed with these "facts"...you come here to give us more of the same old "company line". "Only a few of the samples taken come back tainted...so this means that our game is basically honest."

We patronize a sport where no money can be found for updating the means by which the game times the races and handles the money...and you expect the allocation of sufficient funds to equip the testing laboratories to the extent needed in order to adequately deal with today's drug problem in the sport? How can any "real proof" of the extent of the cheating in this game ever be gathered...when no one is willing to PAY for the accumulation of such proof? In whose best interest would it be to fully expose today's drug problem to the comparatively few remaining horseplayers out there? Don't you see that there is virtually no "investigative reporting" at ALL in this game? Which "independent source" out there is supposed to REVEAL this "proof" to us...if such proof ever was to surface?

The horseplayer can't afford to wait for what you call "real proof" to come along...because he knows that such proof isn't forthcoming. He looks around and sees previously-unknown trainers winning with 35%+ of their horses after sizable sample sizes...and he sees that these aren't Hall-Of-Fame training candidates that we are talking about. And he wonders how long the "honest" trainers can remain honest...when the DISHONEST ones are posting numbers which dwarf the percentages of the HOF trainers of old.

A singe voice rose up to say that baseball had a major drug problem...but because that voice wasn't deemed "respectable", the "establishment" and all its players LAUGHED. But Jose Canseco alone was right...and everybody else was LYING. The only difference between baseball and horse racing is that, in OUR game...the "truth" will surely KILL this game...so, this "truth" cannot be tolerated.

I've posted plenty of facts. And taken plenty of crap from people who have "opinions." My position has never changed. I oppose the use of PEDs and support harsh penalties for trainers who use them. I also believe if you are going to destroy a trainer's living, you should set scientifically supportable standards, and to a greater extent than you might believe, standards are not always defensible. You should be able to tell the difference between environmental contamination and feeding a horse a PED. My job isn't to simply support the company line, but to defend trainers who have been abused by the system. Is that most trainers? No. It's a select few. The vast majority of trainers who ask for my help wind up with the advice, "pay the fine."

I've never suggested is that racing is lily white. I've only suggested that when you look at the number of violations and the number of tests, the extent of the problem may be expected, but is certainly manageable. Especially when you consider less than 1% of all violations are for illegal substances. Comically, you think all my information comes from a few trainers who "feed" me what they want.

As I said, you act as if the statistics should be completely irrelevant. No, it makes more sense to believe scientific genius trainers are defeating testing machines that could find a needle in all the hay in all the world.

Interestingly, I have published about what I think are the failures of racing to catch scofflaws before the race is declared official. I've argued for much greater investigation. When a trainer is nailed for substance X, and nobody tries to find the source of it, you get criticized by me. When RMTC does a poor job of testing supplements, they get criticized by me. My job is not to paint a Pollyanna-ish picture of drugs in racing. It's to make sure the standards are fair and scientific. It's to make sure resources are being directed at the right places. It's to make sure that lazy and inept racing commissions treat trainers fairly. People should be thanking me for trying to clean up the game from my end. You are absolutely wrong that horseplayers should not demand real proof. You keep letting the racing commissions off the hook, and you have nothing better than what we have always had. Post race testing. Violations long after the race is official.

I've argued that if there is a BALCO out there somewhere, racing has an obligation to find it. But there are only two possible reasons they haven't. It isn't there or they won't look. Give me the Joe Valachi of racing. Show me where racing commissions have gone after the all of a sudden 35% trainers to prove to the public nothing nefarious is going on. What kind of idiot sport allows the speculation to achieve the equivalent of fact? My job is to tell racing, give us the goods, one way or the other. At least I'm making an effort to bring the truth to light.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

I've posted plenty of facts. And taken plenty of crap from people who have "opinions." My position has never changed. I oppose the use of PEDs and support harsh penalties for trainers who use them. I also believe if you are going to destroy a trainer's living, you should set scientifically supportable standards, and to a greater extent than you might believe, standards are not always defensible. You should be able to tell the difference between environmental contamination and feeding a horse a PED. My job isn't to simply support the company line, but to defend trainers who have been abused by the system. Is that most trainers? No. It's a select few. The vast majority of trainers who ask for my help wind up with the advice, "pay the fine."

I've never suggested is that racing is lily white. I've only suggested that when you look at the number of violations and the number of tests, the extent of the problem may be expected, but is certainly manageable. Especially when you consider less than 1% of all violations are for illegal substances. Comically, you think all my information comes from a few trainers who "feed" me what they want.

As I said, you act as if the statistics should be completely irrelevant. No, it makes more sense to believe scientific genius trainers are defeating testing machines that could find a needle in all the hay in all the world.

Interestingly, I have published about what I think are the failures of racing to catch scofflaws before the race is declared official. I've argued for much greater investigation. When a trainer is nailed for substance X, and nobody tries to find the source of it, you get criticized by me. When RMTC does a poor job of testing supplements, they get criticized by me. My job is not to paint a Pollyanna-ish picture of drugs in racing. It's to make sure the standards are fair and scientific. It's to make sure resources are being directed at the right places. It's to make sure that lazy and inept racing commissions treat trainers fairly. People should be thanking me for trying to clean up the game from my end. You are absolutely wrong that horseplayers should not demand real proof. You keep letting the racing commissions off the hook, and you have nothing better than what we have always had. Post race testing. Violations long after the race is official.

I've argued that if there is a BALCO out there somewhere, racing has an obligation to find it. But there are only two possible reasons they haven't. It isn't there or they won't look. Give me the Joe Valachi of racing. Show me where racing commissions have gone after the all of a sudden 35% trainers to prove to the public nothing nefarious is going on. What kind of idiot sport allows the speculation to achieve the equivalent of fact? My job is to tell racing, give us the goods, one way or the other. At least I'm making an effort to bring the truth to light.

Mr. Halvey...it was YOU who turned this thread into a conversation about Joe Gorajec and Indiana Racing. Before your interjection, we were talking about cheating in GENERAL...and we were voicing our opinions about it. NONE of us here are trying to "destroy" anyone; we are just commenting about a topic that's "near and dear" to all of us -- a topic that directly affects our finances.

And if we are "speculating" here...SO WHAT? Isn't that what horseplayers are SUPPOSED to do? Are you attempting here to deprive the horseplayer of his inherent right to SPECULATE?

[GatetoWire]

Not the infamous spleen argument again!!
The spleen argument is complete BS

I guess the horses that I have seen put on Epogen and improved exponentially must have been missing their spleens!!

Or maybe the trainers used an anti-coagulant in conjunction with the EPO!!!

[Ruffian1]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

I've posted plenty of facts. And taken plenty of crap from people who have "opinions." My position has never changed. I oppose the use of PEDs and support harsh penalties for trainers who use them. I also believe if you are going to destroy a trainer's living, you should set scientifically supportable standards, and to a greater extent than you might believe, standards are not always defensible. You should be able to tell the difference between environmental contamination and feeding a horse a PED. My job isn't to simply support the company line, but to defend trainers who have been abused by the system. Is that most trainers? No. It's a select few. The vast majority of trainers who ask for my help wind up with the advice, "pay the fine."

I've never suggested is that racing is lily white. I've only suggested that when you look at the number of violations and the number of tests, the extent of the problem may be expected, but is certainly manageable. Especially when you consider less than 1% of all violations are for illegal substances. Comically, you think all my information comes from a few trainers who "feed" me what they want.

As I said, you act as if the statistics should be completely irrelevant. No, it makes more sense to believe scientific genius trainers are defeating testing machines that could find a needle in all the hay in all the world.

Interestingly, I have published about what I think are the failures of racing to catch scofflaws before the race is declared official. I've argued for much greater investigation. When a trainer is nailed for substance X, and nobody tries to find the source of it, you get criticized by me. When RMTC does a poor job of testing supplements, they get criticized by me. My job is not to paint a Pollyanna-ish picture of drugs in racing. It's to make sure the standards are fair and scientific. It's to make sure resources are being directed at the right places. It's to make sure that lazy and inept racing commissions treat trainers fairly. People should be thanking me for trying to clean up the game from my end. You are absolutely wrong that horseplayers should not demand real proof. You keep letting the racing commissions off the hook, and you have nothing better than what we have always had. Post race testing. Violations long after the race is official.

I've argued that if there is a BALCO out there somewhere, racing has an obligation to find it. But there are only two possible reasons they haven't. It isn't there or they won't look. Give me the Joe Valachi of racing. Show me where racing commissions have gone after the all of a sudden 35% trainers to prove to the public nothing nefarious is going on. What kind of idiot sport allows the speculation to achieve the equivalent of fact? My job is to tell racing, give us the goods, one way or the other. At least I'm making an effort to bring the truth to light.

The cheaters destroyed this trainers living and my scientific standards are I watched them do it. Make no mistake, it was not an isolated case. What I spoke to about legal drugs but well past the legal time line happens constantly.
I don't want to argue about it, but if racing won't clean up this problem, with rules already in place, and all I got was "sorry", what does that leave us with?

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Ruffian1

The cheaters destroyed this trainers living and my scientific standards are I watched them do it. Make no mistake, it was not an isolated case. What I spoke to about legal drugs but well past the legal time line happens constantly.
I don't want to argue about it, but if racing won't clean up this problem, with rules already in place, and all I got was "sorry", what does that leave us with?

Ruffian 1...may I ask you an honest question?

You had the option and the means to move on to something else instead of compromising your integrity...but, what about those "honest" trainers who have no other readily identifiable way of earning a living? When the stewards turn their backs on these trainers...what else are they left to do? Sit there and watch the cheaters ply their trade undisturbed?

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by Ruffian1

The cheaters destroyed this trainers living and my scientific standards are I watched them do it. Make no mistake, it was not an isolated case. What I spoke to about legal drugs but well past the legal time line happens constantly.
I don't want to argue about it, but if racing won't clean up this problem, with rules already in place, and all I got was "sorry", what does that leave us with?

If you've seen this situation happen on more than one occasion, why didn't you take out your I-phone, I-pad, etc. and gets this on video? If you REALLY cared about what you say, wouldn't it behoove you to get evidence, at the least, in this manner?.....I'm not buying your devotion to the integrity of the sport when you just walk away.

[cj]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

Right before Gorajec was fired I was getting ready to do a piece on how he seemed to be interested in destroying the careers of those who wouldn't play ball with him. In Gorajec's world, he was most often unmerciful, even when mercy was called for. Like many zealots, he never believed their was a line that shouldn't be crossed. To quote Barry Goldwater, Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice!

CJ is right. I was not a Gorajec fan, but that had a lot to do with the myriad stories I heard from people who were railroaded by him. When he got fired, I believed he got what he deserved.

Thask, you did the same thing Gorajec did. The drug dominated landscape without the macro statistic to back it up. Citing Masochistic as Exhibit A doesn't prove rampant drug use. But for those who wish to believe it, the ARCI statistics - most importantly less than one-half of one percent of all tests come back positive and there are less than 100 Class 1 and 2 violations a year - are either made up or misleading.

One Masochistic gets more press than 100,000 races with negative tests. If you want to believe the sport is drug dominated, just provide the statistics. That's all I asked Gorajec to do.

The whole point of the article was that horses are being drugged with things that won't show up in tests. What good are positive test stats in that light?

[cj]

Originally Posted by NorCalGreg

Here's a thought....learn the game the way it's played--and has been played for a hundred years--not the way you want it to be played.

Unless you prefer bitching to winning.

What is wrong with a bettor wanting a clean game? Can't the two be separate issues?

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

You are assuming that testing of biological samples will detect all possible violations. This is not the case.

I can't tell. Either you are saying current technology will miss positives from substances for which they are testing, or there are substances for which there are not acceptable tests. If it's the former, thanks for throwing the entire post race testing protocol into chaos. I know that the GCMS they have can detect 1,800 different substances, including all those for which there are standards, all the commonly available PED's, and even substances that haven't been sold in the U.S. for decades, like Nikethamide, and they can detect them at levels so small it borders on the incrediblle. It is possible that there are effective PEDs for which tests have not been developed, but not likely. You don't have to believe me. You have access to the two Ricks in CA. Ask them for the rates of false positives, missed negatives and potential unknown substances.

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

Although there is an obvious difference between the effects of different substances, that does not mean that legal therapeutics cannot be used illegally. Hence the highlighting of the 24-hour rule in the article.

Of course they can be used illegally. And if a trainer gets nailed for phenylbutazone after giving the recommended dose at the recommended withdrawal time, we know two things. He was trying to comply, which should count for something. And he's going to pay a fine. And if he was trying to use legal therapeutics to gain some sort of edge, he may pay a bigger fine.

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

There's a catch here. The main goal of out-of-competition testing is to deter cheating. So a low violation level can mean 3 things: (1) there is no cheating going on, (2) the cheating has been suspended because there is testing, and/or (3) the testing is unable to pick up certain substances that would constitute cheating.

Doesn't a low post-race testing violation rate mean the same thing? And doesn't a low post-race testing violation rate mean that out-of-competition testing will also show a low rate, perhaps even making it a waste of money that could be better spent elsewhere? The inference in the article is that without out-of-competition testing, the post race violation rate will skyrocket. ARCI's own numbers say the post-race violation rate is less than one-half of one percent, and almost all of those are legal therapeutics. You'd have to do some selling to spend limited resources on out-of-competition testing, and you'd have to show some evidence that trainers are using illegal substances that have the PE effect but are washed out by race day. In essence, some evidence that trainers are juicing with steroids, getting the anabolic effect, and are smart enough to (almost) never get caught.

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

What's interesting in the article is that there is no mention of the veterinarian who was suspended for rampant rule violations related to medications and administrations both legal and illegal, which happened in his own backyard in 2014.

I won't say a lot about that, other than Gorajec was on a crusade to get Ross Russell. There is quite a bit to that story that never came out, but it is reasonable to say it helped hasten his demise.

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

There is also no mention of the 3 trainers and multiple veterinarians who were cited and convicted at Penn National regarding systemic cheating through illegal administration of drugs on raceday.

If there is a poster boy for the ills of racing, Penn National may be it.

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

Is this proof of an endemic problem? It depends on if you think these are simply isolated cases or willing to extrapolate and consider the possibility that others are doing the same or similar things elsewhere (or at the same facility).

I actually do believe there are pockets where the culture of racing is unscrupulous. I won't mention tracks, but they are all in the Penn National classification. The problem with racing at smaller venues is that you have far too many owners and trainers living on very slim margins, and far too many horses that are running on three legs, and that may drive the trainers in a bad direction. But I similarly believe at many of the larger venues the problems are far more isolated.

It's also interesting to note that >90% of horses race on lasix, a similar figure utilize NSAIDs the day before the race, and before stricter regulations were put in place large proportions of race horses were raced or trained on clenbuterol and anabolic steroids, possibly the same with corticosteroids. This suggests indiscriminate use of medication for all racehorses, regardless of any actual individual indications for the use of such medications. Is it a far cry to think there are other substances being given routinely that are not legal to administer?[/QUOTE]

And there is the rub. Speculation without facts serves no one well. If there is rampant cheating, then give us a plan to root it out.