Ask The Experts
General Category => Ask the Experts => Topic started by: TGJB on January 08, 2007, 03:00:15 PM
-
As mentioned in the article I attached to the \"Progress, Maybe\" post, there is a meeting scheduled for 10:00 a.m Tuesday Pacific time in the Baldwin Room at Santa Anita to discuss proposed changes in the drug rules in California. I urge any of you that might be in the area to attend and make yourselves heard. I know of one TG poster so far that will be there.
I have been in contact with some of the local powers-that-be, suggesting that it is not only horsemen that have a dog in this fight, and they have been much more responsive than those in their positions usually are. Specifically, I have been pushing 3 things-- listing a vet of record in the program, freezing of blood samples, and publishing of C02 results on a daily basis. The last is significant because it tells us that a) the samples really are being taken, b) the tests are really being done, and c) the results are not being sat on. Yes, they could falsify the results-- but that would make the tracks active participants in what might very well be criminal activity, and I don\'t think they would risk it.
Just to make the scope of the problem clear, I have reason to believe that one major racing jurisdiction, which has rules against milkshakes, was not testing at their most recent meet. Possibly not even on a very big day. The problem is not that the cheaters are ahead in technology-- it\'s that there is little or no serious enforcement.
-
Wish I could be there in person.
I can tell you whatever testing they were doing at the recently concluded Hollywood Park meet was either ineffective or non-existent, and,interestingly, certain smoking-hot trainers at the Hollywood Park meet have gone ice cold -- perhaps it\'s just a coincidence???
My guess is they must have already stepped up the testing at Santa Anita because I\'ve seen far fewer (but still a few) \"suspicious\" races.
Your suggestions mentioned in your post would be an excellent start.
I hope someone at the meeting mentions the plight of gamblers who wager large sums of money on a regular basis and their growing discontent at the obvious cheating going on. If they keep this up, they are going to lose us to other racing circuits.
-
Geez,So it\'s not just in N.Y. !!!
-
Dana-- I have been told that someone is going to make EXACTLY that point at the meeting. If others show up and do it it will be even better.
-
I don\'t know anything about the drug situation in CA, but couldn\'t the switch to an artificial surface at Hollywood and now back to real dirt have something to do with the results at Hollywood vs. SA. Perhaps training over it, training for a certain running style, or other factors were at work. If I recall, they were actually having difficulty stabilizing the Hollywood track early on. They were adding water and reducing and increasing the work on the track for awhile.
-
fkach-- look, I\'m trying to be polite, but you are completely uninformed about this stuff when you talk about contamination of samples, unpredictable results, track conditions, etc. Serious handicappers-- who use serious data-- can see that certain trainers REPEATEDLY are getting horses\' performances to improve DRAMATICALLY overnight. On top of that, some of us within the industry are privy to FACTUAL information about non-published positives, vets who are making things happen, high CO2 readings, and other things. We\'re having a completely different conversation than you are.
-
\"certain trainers REPEATEDLY are getting horses\' performances to improve DRAMATICALLY overnight.\"
Oh, I wholeheartedly agree with that. A few trainers are almost obviously cheating.
However, I have also seen many strange form reversals at the artificial tracks outside CA. There was a tendency for early speed to be disadvantaged relative to normal, deep closers to do better than expected, and turfers to do better than you would typically expect on dirt.
So if we are talking about the last two meets specifically, I think that\'s going to make it difficult to the make the case against any of the trainers in question without clear cut positives as evidence. I hope they have them. Otherwise, they\'ll just claim their horse liked one surface and didn\'t like the other.
-
comon this last few moths have been the greatest.have you ever seen better prices in ca? there are big fields and horse that have wonderful form on dirt that are paying big big numbers. the switch back and forth from astro dirt to dirt has been wonderful
-
I\'m not seeing as many wire jobs on the new surfaces , although in recent months , I do notice more of them . My big question is not amplitude or degree of a given track bias , but rather the duration of the cycle ( if indeed there is one ) .
I can\'t say too much more about poly/synth surfaces except that it\'s still so new and initial results are barely in ... Jerry has mentioned that the new suface\'s are no problem to work with in terms of making speed figures , so there must be some trends evolving in how to bet it as well .
Tommorrow\'s meeting in Ca will have a bigger impact on racing than the new surfaces , and it looks like anything less than what Jerry has proposed is not real refrorm - so if doesn\'t happen tomorrow , it might never happen ...
-
For those of us that can\'t make the meeting, is there an e-mail address we can send comments to?
-
if you dial in a live search , you can get to the CHRB web site . i\'m going to contact them in the morning and pass along on Jerry\'s recomendations with the added suggestion or two - including , where they can go by not doing anything now ... and also , in all seriousness - the creation a \" med web site \" to be used in addition to the track program for disemination of info and disclosure ...
-
As Marcus says, the CHRB is probably the place. I would focus on horseplayers being irate and unwilling to bet on races unless we get proper info and something is done about the cheating, rather than on specific recommendations.
I should know something about the meeting by late afternoon eastern time.
-
First reports are that the meeting lasted 4 hours (just broke up), and went as well as possibly could have been expected. Don\'t have full details yet, but there is some very radical stuff on the table, with a follow-up meeting two weeks from today. More to follow, we\'ll see what happens.
-
From the DRF:
\"The medication committee of the California Horse Racing Board on Tuesday recommended that California adopt stricter penalties for drug infractions..... and begin to draft rules banning the use of anabolic steroids.\"
I can think of a bunch of very famous trainers that have have been using this \"legal\" advantage that are going to be impacted negatively if this ever gets implemented nationally at some point in the future!
-
Anabolic steroids are used by many outfits big and small and is a non issue in the real illegal performance enhancer problem.
Mike
-
Steroids are performance enhancers. If they aren\'t being used by everyone all the time or no one any of the time then some people have an advantage. It\'s bad enough people are doing illegal things, why in the world would an industry allow an obvious performance enhancer like steriods to be used legally. They should be banned from top to bottom including and maybe especially by breeders looking to inflate yearling prices at the expense of owners.
In addition, when they are used by some outfits, it makes it more difficult to tell why a horse improved sharply after a few months in the hands of a new trainer.
Did it improve because of legal activity or illegal activity?
They sometimes get lumped together.
-
Fkach,
Anabolic steroids have been used on horses for over 20 years that I am aware of.There has never been too much of an issue about them since they are legal. Some trainers are concerned about higher risks of bleeding and other side issues.Breeding has been affected imo since no one really knows what the long term effect of steroid use does to a stud or their offspring.Many blame pure speed breeding but I think there are other factors too.
Giving a horse steroids for the first time is probably not going to do much, performance wise, since they are usually administered in \"program\" fashion over time(like gym guys/athletes sometimes use them)
There seems to be far too many people taking their eye off the \"real\" ball re the drug thing. For two years I have followed this detention barn, shake test thing and I see the same usual suspects winning at their normal rate at all the major tracks, for the most part.This is a bandaid on an gunshot wound and talk to 10 honest trainers in NY and they will tell you the same thing.
Guys gotta have their money forefeited as ill gotten gains, go to jail, and be banned for life if caught deliberately administering a performing enhancing substance. Short of that, all players are being jerked o-- by the people who run racing in this country.There is an expensive promising solution on the table, a serious super test,and yet no venue will move on it.How come?,if they are serious about doing away with illegal stuff.In fairness to NYRA, they can just make payroll at this time.
Instead of some of these bullshit positives for nano contaminations, let them freeze samples and let all the trainers know that super testing is here along with possible jail, banishment and loss of their money.Wanna bet things change in a new york minute.
Incidentally, in California, not surprisinly,they speak of making the owners liable and changing barns during suspension etc.They are smoking good stuff out there to think that the multi-millionaire owners won\'t have that killed in court in a heartbeat or just tell them to shove it.Can\'t you just see Sheik Mohammed,e.g. being told he is going to be held responsible for a drug infraction, BRILLIANT!!
Mike
-
Miff,
I agree with everything you said. I just also believe that steroids are a problem. In fact, I think you did a very good job of creating a list of the potential problems even though you don\'t seem equally concerned.
I don\'t think it\'s a good thing when a mediocre horse is taken over by a high percentage trainer, sent to a farm for 2 months, and returns a wonder horse. I think that makes it more difficult for cencerned parties to tell if he\'s a great horseman, used legal high octane steroids to turn the horse around, or used illegal drugs.
As I mentioned before, I just bet the damn horses if I can find a subset of them that are profitable over the long haul. So it has no impact on me personally. I no longer own horses and never trained. I just can\'t see how it can be a good thing overall. I\'d prefer 100% clean racing other than treatment for physical problems with a long enough timeframe between treatment and racing to ensure the horse is clean for race day.
F.Kach
-
check out today\'s DRF online - interesting comments by Baffert and Knapp.
And check out, \"LaBocetta pleads guilty\"
-
interesting drf ca med article\'s that seem to ( perhaps inadvertantly ) advance the case and need for national standards ...