Fairmount1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> However,......What I\'m \"upset about\" as richiebee
> states about all of this is Why Wasn\'t Scollay or
> others telling us that unidentified substances
> were showing up in the tests in Kentucky before
> this change?
??
I think it is unreasonable for horseplayers to expect full disclosure from the Racing powers that be. Racing would rather handle incidents internally and without fanfare, leading me to believe that what is concealed from horseplayers might drive many away from the game (or at least alter their wagering behavior), that what horseplayers do know is the proverbial tip of the iceberg.
When the law finally caught up with leading NYRA trainer Oscar Barrera, and confronted him with evidence that his horses were racing on Lasix long before the diuretic was made legal in New York, the decision was made to handle the matter internally. Oscar was told to cease and desist or face permanent expulsion. No hearing, no suspension, no redistribution of purse monies. OSB went from miracle worker to a trainer who went 0 for 130 between May 1988 - January 1989.
Barrera died of a heart attack in April of 1991. An obituary of sorts was published by Andrew Beyer in the
Washington Post of April 11, 1991. Excerpting from that article:
\"It is doubtful that any trainer, in any country, at any time in the history of the thoroughbred species has performed feats to equal Barrera\'s. Depending on whether he accomplished them with horsemanship or with chemistry, he either deserved to be enshrined in the Hall of Fame or banished from the sport.\"
Just to show how long we have been playing on an uneven playing field, and how little conditions have changed since the days of NY\'s \"Unholy Trinity\" (Oscar, Pistol and the Gas Man) consider the following excerpt, from the same article, written slightly less than a quarter of a century ago:
\"Even after the magic had disappeared and Barrera ceased to be a significant factor as a trainer, he left a permanent mark on New York racing. Most other trainers believed that Barrera was cheating flagrantly, and many of them concluded from his success that crime does pay. For all its pretense of being the great citadel of the sport, New York may have the most drug ridden racing in America. Implausible trainers regularly emerge from obscurity to perform mini miracles and, in some cases, to move to the top of the trainer standings. Bettors in New York speak matter-of-factly about \"juice trainers,\" and many are surely alienated by the presumption that so many people in the game are cheating...\"
[I do not recall if the Beyer article was reprinted in the industry house organ, the
Daily Racing Form.]
Another example of less than full disclosure: I have been told by two reliable sources that a fairly prominent trainer at Monmouth had five or six of his horses die suddenly a few summers ago, allegedly from what has been described as the misuse or abuse of a bronchial dilator. This most unfortunate incident was not addressed publicly; apparently Bob Kulina told the trainer to be off the grounds by sundown. (Bob Kulina and Lou Raffetto gave yours truly the same ultimatum in 1986, but thankfully it did not involve equine mortality).
My point Fairmount (and excuse me for being overly anecdotal) is that Racing has an interest in covering up incidents which reflect badly on Racing, which show that the watchdogs (track officials, stewards, state racing commissions) are asleep at their posts. That is part of the reason that \"unidentified substances\" will probably remain unidentified. Racing really does not want an incident involving a prominent vet, breeder, owner or trainer to come to light. When violations and misdeeds do become public, Racing is repeatedly and surprisingly reluctant to punish the offenders to a point where the punishment will have the desired deterrent effect.
