Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > Main Forum > The Paddock
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-25-2009, 07:41 AM
freddymo freddymo is offline
Belmont Park
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,091
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
Aspirin and heroin are both drugs. One is legal, one is not. Still following?

If something isnt allowed but not yet tested for it is still illegal according to the rules of racing. Meaning just because you havent gotten a positive doesnt mean you havent broken the rules. Your version of "legal" has nothing to do with the actual rules. You have simply made them up as you believe that this makes sense in the Freddy mo world.
In my world its pretty simple, if the ruling body isnt specifically testing for a dangerous substance then clearly it can not be illegal. There are laws on the books that are valid, those are the ones enforced, you know tested for etc. You elect to avoid medication which you know will be beneficial to your stock because you have concerns that in 2037 there might be enforcement of a ridiculous law without teeth? More power to you if you can make folks money and earn a living being concerned about 2037 testing in 2010 congrats.

So let me get this right.. People use certain meds that the State Authorities have deemed illegal yet they did as such under the broad spectrum of "Anything Unnaturally Occuring", they failed to set guideline on use and allowable amounts(how could they they have no clue what it is they are talking about) and deemed ANY existence in ANY quanitity offensible eventhough guidelines haven't been established. I guess they figure they can set the guidelines after they figure out what indeed they are looking for. So you figure these people are cheaters because they are using meds that the state hasn't given any friggin structure on at all.. So you figure you will self police yourself and you will determine in Chucky's world what is Aspirin vs. Heroin. More importantly, your definitions as such will be the guidelines for whom you call smug cheaters and whom you call squeaky clean. Anything else you would like to share with us? How about an 11th commandment? Thou shall live by Chuck's self righteous self serving views.. . Again always root for you and your success just because I think your completely insane doesnt mean I dont wish you and yours the very best of success and luck.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-25-2009, 09:38 AM
parsixfarms parsixfarms is offline
Churchill Downs
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Saratoga Springs
Posts: 1,779
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by freddymo
In my world its pretty simple, if the ruling body isnt specifically testing for a dangerous substance then clearly it can not be illegal.
So, you were OK with Biancone using cobra venom? After all, we're told that there's currently no test for it.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-25-2009, 09:46 AM
freddymo freddymo is offline
Belmont Park
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,091
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by parsixfarms
So, you were OK with Biancone using cobra venom? After all, we're told that there's currently no test for it.
Cobra venom is most likely dangerous for a horse to run on. ANYTHING that would endanger a horses welfare is WAY off base.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-25-2009, 10:08 AM
parsixfarms parsixfarms is offline
Churchill Downs
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Saratoga Springs
Posts: 1,779
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by freddymo
Cobra venom is most likely dangerous for a horse to run on. ANYTHING that would endanger a horses welfare is WAY off base.
So now you're drawing the following distinction: (1) if they can't test for it but it would endanger a horse's welfare, it's not OK; versus (2) if they can't test for it but it would not endanger a horse's welfare, it's OK.

Isn't the question of whether something would endanger a horse way too subjective a standard? After all, there are plenty of legal therapeutic medications that, if abused, could endanger a horse's welfare.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-25-2009, 10:12 AM
freddymo freddymo is offline
Belmont Park
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,091
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by parsixfarms
So now you're drawing the following distinction: (1) if they can't test for it but it would endanger a horse's welfare, it's not OK; versus (2) if they can't test for it but it would not endanger a horse's welfare, it's OK.

Isn't the question of whether something would endanger a horse way too subjective a standard? After all, there are plenty of legal therapeutic medications that, if abused, could endanger a horse's welfare.
BTW I posted that if the meds endangered the horse they shouldnt be used and the state is obligated to test for them.

To answer your question you cant endanger a horse with meds legal or "Not Tested/illegal" But the stuff that could be illegal maybe just stuff that doesnt endanger a horse it could be stuff that truly makes them feel better not feel nothing at all.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-25-2009, 10:26 AM
parsixfarms parsixfarms is offline
Churchill Downs
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Saratoga Springs
Posts: 1,779
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by freddymo
BTW I posted that if the meds endangered the horse they shouldnt be used and the state is obligated to test for them.
The issue, in the terms that you previously framed it, isn't whether the state should be testing for them. Rather, the issue is whether it's OK to use something simply because they are not testing for it.

Ten years ago, they didn't have a test for EPO. Now they do, and evidence suggests that EPO's use is harmful to the horse. That there was not a test for it ten years shouldn't mean that the trainers that used it back then were doing something that was OK.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-25-2009, 10:28 AM
randallscott35's Avatar
randallscott35 randallscott35 is offline
Idlewild Airport
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 9,687
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by parsixfarms
The issue, in the terms that you previously framed it, isn't whether the state should be testing for them. Rather, the issue is whether it's OK to use something simply because they are not testing for it.

Ten years ago, they didn't have a test for EPO. Now they do, and evidence suggests that EPO's use is harmful to the horse. That there was not a test for it ten years shouldn't mean that the trainers that used it back then were doing something that was OK.
Those glorious EPO days when horses rebroke during the race....And Lance Armstrong won at will. Those were the days.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-25-2009, 10:34 AM
freddymo freddymo is offline
Belmont Park
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,091
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by parsixfarms
The issue, in the terms that you previously framed it, isn't whether the state should be testing for them. Rather, the issue is whether it's OK to use something simply because they are not testing for it.

Ten years ago, they didn't have a test for EPO. Now they do, and evidence suggests that EPO's use is harmful to the horse. That there was not a test for it ten years shouldn't mean that the trainers that used it back then were doing something that was OK.
how many horses died or were hurt from EPO? How many horse die or hurt from a Hyperbaric Chamber? Running a horse at 35mph is way more dangerous to them then EPO. Its a brutal game.. Any med improperly used is harmful jjust noy necessarily dangerous. You can have your liver fail from too much Tylenol.. the point is always to not overdue any meds
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-25-2009, 01:52 PM
Cannon Shell's Avatar
Cannon Shell Cannon Shell is offline
Sha Tin
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 20,855
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by freddymo
In my world its pretty simple, if the ruling body isnt specifically testing for a dangerous substance then clearly it can not be illegal. There are laws on the books that are valid, those are the ones enforced, you know tested for etc. You elect to avoid medication which you know will be beneficial to your stock because you have concerns that in 2037 there might be enforcement of a ridiculous law without teeth? More power to you if you can make folks money and earn a living being concerned about 2037 testing in 2010 congrats.

So let me get this right.. People use certain meds that the State Authorities have deemed illegal yet they did as such under the broad spectrum of "Anything Unnaturally Occuring", they failed to set guideline on use and allowable amounts(how could they they have no clue what it is they are talking about) and deemed ANY existence in ANY quanitity offensible eventhough guidelines haven't been established. I guess they figure they can set the guidelines after they figure out what indeed they are looking for. So you figure these people are cheaters because they are using meds that the state hasn't given any friggin structure on at all.. So you figure you will self police yourself and you will determine in Chucky's world what is Aspirin vs. Heroin. More importantly, your definitions as such will be the guidelines for whom you call smug cheaters and whom you call squeaky clean. Anything else you would like to share with us? How about an 11th commandment? Thou shall live by Chuck's self righteous self serving views.. . Again always root for you and your success just because I think your completely insane doesnt mean I dont wish you and yours the very best of success and luck.
http://www.lrc.state.ky.us/kar/810/001/018.htm

Here are the rules Freddy. Yes my "self righteous, self serving views" happen to be the rules of racing in at least one state.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-25-2009, 02:18 PM
freddymo freddymo is offline
Belmont Park
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,091
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
http://www.lrc.state.ky.us/kar/810/001/018.htm

Here are the rules Freddy. Yes my "self righteous, self serving views" happen to be the rules of racing in at least one state.
Thanks for the laundry list. Apparently its worthless since Ky. has rules without enforcement. Who wouldn't rob a bank if there wasnt any penalty? Apparently you and James Jerkins.. You want people to obey the states rules when the state doesnt test? More magic beans Jack haven't you bought enough? Plus the meds that people apparently are helping their stock with aren't listed in name only in medical theory. Theory leaves the door open for interpatation, thats were I come in. Again, we are talking about meds that help a horse to feel better so it runs better not meds which endanger a horses life!!

While I wish you the very best clearly this crap isnt as cut and dry as you think otherwise people would be extremely fearful of penalties, they aren't nor should you be. Get on the stick... embrace success.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 12-02-2009, 02:03 AM
Rupert Pupkin Rupert Pupkin is offline
Del Mar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by freddymo
In my world its pretty simple, if the ruling body isnt specifically testing for a dangerous substance then clearly it can not be illegal. There are laws on the books that are valid, those are the ones enforced, you know tested for etc. You elect to avoid medication which you know will be beneficial to your stock because you have concerns that in 2037 there might be enforcement of a ridiculous law without teeth? More power to you if you can make folks money and earn a living being concerned about 2037 testing in 2010 congrats.

So let me get this right.. People use certain meds that the State Authorities have deemed illegal yet they did as such under the broad spectrum of "Anything Unnaturally Occuring", they failed to set guideline on use and allowable amounts(how could they they have no clue what it is they are talking about) and deemed ANY existence in ANY quanitity offensible eventhough guidelines haven't been established. I guess they figure they can set the guidelines after they figure out what indeed they are looking for. So you figure these people are cheaters because they are using meds that the state hasn't given any friggin structure on at all.. So you figure you will self police yourself and you will determine in Chucky's world what is Aspirin vs. Heroin. More importantly, your definitions as such will be the guidelines for whom you call smug cheaters and whom you call squeaky clean. Anything else you would like to share with us? How about an 11th commandment? Thou shall live by Chuck's self righteous self serving views.. . Again always root for you and your success just because I think your completely insane doesnt mean I dont wish you and yours the very best of success and luck.
So are you saying that Biancone should not have gotten into trouble for using snake venom since they don't normally test for that?

The drugs you mentioned like gastrogard and adequan are totally legal. I don't think anyone would call a trainer a cheater for using legal drugs such as those.

I don't think Chuck is saying anything controversial. He is saying that using illegal drugs is cheating. He is saying that using legal drugs is not cheating. I think anyone would agree with that.

Let's take a doping drug like CERA. Using that drug is totally illegal. They don't test for it as of right now but it is still totally illegal. If a trainer got caught using CERA, he would be in huge trouble. Are you saying that you persoanlly don't consider CERA to be illegal since they don't test for it? If you have any question as to it's legality, you can call any racing board, stewards' office, or racing office and ask the question. I can assure you that they will tell you that the drug is totally illegal. It's not a grey area. It's black and white. It is 100% illegal to use that drug or similar drugs. The fact that they don't test for it as of right now does not change the fact that the drug is 100% illegal. If a trainer is caught with it in his barn, he would be in huge trouble.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.