Not again ....

[ELA]

Same issue, same problem and unfortunately, never the same solution. Absent of zero tolerance, there is no universal solution -- not on the regulatory side, nor on the self-governing or self-policing side vis a vis the owners in this industry.

Regardless, you are not going have trainers given lifetime suspensions for a second or third offense of a legal drug that has therapeutic, everyday use on the backstretch. Period. Not only does it not happen, personally, I don't think it should. You want to talk about snake venom, designer or exotic drugs that have zero therapeutic use, steroids, etc. -- OK, great, I am all for it -- however, that is a different discussion as far as I am concerned, a very different one.

In addition, there is an entirely different dimension to this problem. Many people here critisize others -- others who don't live up to, or abide by the standards they themselves claim they would adhere to. That's fine. It's easy to be a critic. Let's see how much that changes the industry. That will never be the standard in the industry.

If you are in this game, and you run your business that way -- great, I don't think anyone should have a problem with that, nor should they care. And, Terry Finley runs his business the way he runs it, as does Jess Jackson, Satish Sanan, Cot Campbell, Coolmore, Barry Irwin, and the guy who owns the nickel claimer at Penn National. Everyone is entitled to run their business anyway they want. You don't like it -- OK, your entitled.

However, that is not going to be governing standard for the industry. Can self-policing work? In some ideal world, perhaps. In practical application, reality, I don't think so. There certainly needs to be change, drastic change, and I've supported that for years. I've contributed time, efforts, money, resources, and more to change in this business and in this sport. I've been in this game my entire adult life. I love this game. But change can go in different directions.

BTW, in this case -- postive test -- gulity! Gary will do his time, pay his fine and he'll come back. He is, should be and must be held accountable.

Eric

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

Yes, that's true, but this gets to Cardus's point: how come the same individuals never seem to learn from their errors?

because there's no oversight. the industry polices itself, poorly.
asmussen is a mention for the eclipse for trainer. perfect example right there. 20-some drug positives, just came off a six month suspension, but everyone loves a winner, right? when's the last time anyone mentioned his six month 'vacation'? not since that big preakness win as far as i know...

[ELA]

Originally Posted by Danzig

because there's no oversight. the industry polices itself, poorly.
asmussen is a mention for the eclipse for trainer. perfect example right there. 20-some drug positives, just came off a six month suspension, but everyone loves a winner, right? when's the last time anyone mentioned his six month 'vacation'? not since that big preakness win as far as i know...

You know, that's a very interesting point; very thought provoking.

Is it the industry's responsibility to police or govern itself? Is this the case in other sports? Rhetorical question, as this sport is very different than others. However, should it be the industry's responsibility to govern and police itself -- because the goeverning bodies can't?

Eric

[blackthroatedwind]

I find it interesting that the same trainers who have received both numerous and serious suspensions related to drug violations are also the same trainers whose horses often show dramatic improvement when said trainers take over their care.

It's probably just a coincidence.

[paisjpq]

Originally Posted by Cardus

Your post just went clearly over my head.

mine too.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I find it interesting that the same trainers who have received both numerous and serious suspensions related to drug violations are also the same trainers whose horses often show dramatic improvement when said trainers take over their care.

It's probably just a coincidence.

yes, there is likely no connection whatsoever.

[GPK]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I find it interesting that the same trainers who have received both numerous and serious suspensions related to drug violations are also the same trainers whose horses often show dramatic improvement when said trainers take over their care.

It's probably just a coincidence.

Yeah...and one of those horses won the 5th at the Big A today.

[Scav]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

yes, there is likely no connection whatsoever.

I think what is telling is the CONSTANT movement. I mean if you move up 40% well then you are a good trainer, but when you are moving up 80%-90% of your claiming stock, it isn't hard to come to the assumptions that we are coming to.

It is like when Brady Anderson hit 50 HR's, everyone knew he was roiding, but Major League Baseball.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by ELA

Same issue, same problem and unfortunately, never the same solution. Absent of zero tolerance, there is no universal solution -- not on the regulatory side, nor on the self-governing or self-policing side vis a vis the owners in this industry.

Regardless, you are not going have trainers given lifetime suspensions for a second or third offense of a legal drug that has therapeutic, everyday use on the backstretch. Period. Not only does it not happen, personally, I don't think it should. You want to talk about snake venom, designer or exotic drugs that have zero therapeutic use, steroids, etc. -- OK, great, I am all for it -- however, that is a different discussion as far as I am concerned, a very different one.

In addition, there is an entirely different dimension to this problem. Many people here critisize others -- others who don't live up to, or abide by the standards they themselves claim they would adhere to. That's fine. It's easy to be a critic. Let's see how much that changes the industry. That will never be the standard in the industry.

If you are in this game, and you run your business that way -- great, I don't think anyone should have a problem with that, nor should they care. And, Terry Finley runs his business the way he runs it, as does Jess Jackson, Satish Sanan, Cot Campbell, Coolmore, Barry Irwin, and the guy who owns the nickel claimer at Penn National. Everyone is entitled to run their business anyway they want. You don't like it -- OK, your entitled.

However, that is not going to be governing standard for the industry. Can self-policing work? In some ideal world, perhaps. In practical application, reality, I don't think so. There certainly needs to be change, drastic change, and I've supported that for years. I've contributed time, efforts, money, resources, and more to change in this business and in this sport. I've been in this game my entire adult life. I love this game. But change can go in different directions.

BTW, in this case -- postive test -- gulity! Gary will do his time, pay his fine and he'll come back. He is, should be and must be held accountable.

Eric

Exactly. Well Done, Eric.

[declansharbor]

Originally Posted by Scav

I think what is telling is the CONSTANT movement. I mean if you move up 40% well then you are a good trainer, but when you are moving up 80%-90% of your claiming stock, it isn't hard to come to the assumptions that we are coming to.

It is like when Brady Anderson hit 50 HR's, everyone knew he was roiding, but Major League Baseball.

Brady Anderson was roiding??? Here I thought he was the best leadoff batter in the history of leadoff batter. joking of course.

[declansharbor]

Originally Posted by Scav

I think what is telling is the CONSTANT movement. I mean if you move up 40% well then you are a good trainer, but when you are moving up 80%-90% of your claiming stock, it isn't hard to come to the assumptions that we are coming to.

It is like when Brady Anderson hit 50 HR's, everyone knew he was roiding, but Major League Baseball.

Brady Anderson was roiding??? Here I thought he was the best leadoff batter in the history of leadoff batter. joking of course.

[blackthroatedwind]

You can say that again!

[Scav]

Originally Posted by declansharbor

Brady Anderson was roiding??? Here I thought he was the best leadoff batter in the history of leadoff batter. joking of course.

I can't wait until that list comes out. I bet you there is ZERO Cubs on it besides Sosa, which is why we have sucked for so long. Haven't had the GOOD STUFF!!!

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Scav

I can't wait until that list comes out. I bet you there is ZERO Cubs on it besides Sosa, which is why we have sucked for so long. Haven't had the GOOD STUFF!!!

Yeah, steroid use has really helped the Os.

[Scav]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Yeah, steroid use has really helped the Os.

Ok, they are clean too....

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I find it interesting that the same trainers who have received both numerous and serious suspensions related to drug violations are also the same trainers whose horses often show dramatic improvement when said trainers take over their care.

It's probably just a coincidence.

i find it interesting that a guy who claims he's for integrity in the sport hired one of those trainers.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by ELA

You know, that's a very interesting point; very thought provoking.

Is it the industry's responsibility to police or govern itself? Is this the case in other sports? Rhetorical question, as this sport is very different than others. However, should it be the industry's responsibility to govern and police itself -- because the goeverning bodies can't?

Eric

all major sports have a national governing body. racing does not. and that's a big part of the problem. we have a crazy quilt of states with their own rules and regs for racing. there should be national standards in place, and rules with real teeth in them for those who don't play by them.

[paisjpq]

Originally Posted by Cardus

My apologies to everyone who participated in this thread, for I'm told that lidocaine is not a pain killer.

It is a nerve blocker, which means that no pain gets through, as opposed to a pain killer, which minimizes pain. No pain gets through, which makes a nerve blocker like lidocaine more powerful than a pain killer.

same family as mepivicain and cocaine...

[ELA]

Originally Posted by Cardus

Is lidocaine theraputic? If it numbs pain that allows a horse to run through it, when he/she is otherwise unaware of pain that would preclude a horse from giving his/her all, doesn't that make it performance enhancing?

I asked, and I've been told it's a legal drug to have on the vet's truck, it has everyday use and it's cosidered to be therapuetic in nature. I don't know if that's subject to interpretation or not.

I would think that if it wasn't therapeutic, it would have a more severe classification, stronger penalty, fine, etc. and we wouldn't be looking at 15 days or something of the like. Maybe one of the resident vets or trainers can shed light on this.

Eric

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Scav

I think what is telling is the CONSTANT movement. I mean if you move up 40% well then you are a good trainer, but when you are moving up 80%-90% of your claiming stock, it isn't hard to come to the assumptions that we are coming to.

It is like when Brady Anderson hit 50 HR's, everyone knew he was roiding, but Major League Baseball.

I saw Brady Anderson at the HOF this summer. Smoking wife...Chicks dig the long ball...