Do we have to be on "automatic" vitriol? That's been the norm. Can't we wait until plasma levels come back at least before crucifying the guy? See if levels support raceday administration that absolutely justifies crucifying?

Big difference between Pletcher's "whiff" mepivicaine positive and the high levels of multiple Assmussen offenses. They are not the same. They both do not deserve the same spewing and vitriol.

That's where the difference lays for me. Not in the name or previous rep as you assume.

How do they hide the nebulizer for this drug? It has no efficacy when given orally or when absorbed through the mucus membranes (lets say they place it in the mouth).

If this is the drug, they are nebulizing as close to walkover to the pre-race holding as possible (as the drug effect is so short). I can only think they would be trying to give COPD horses an advantage after their pre-race clenbuterol withdrawal, but it sure wouldn't be much with this.

BTW, this drug has been shown not to have any change on exercise ability. It's not much alone.

These discussions are circular at best for a variety of reasons. Let me preface my comments by saying I am defending no one. Period. I am in this for the sport, for the game that I am passionate about.

So, you have the label of "cheater" -- Dutrow being mentioned here. You want to call him a cheater, OK. Who is next? The next guy comes up positive one time, for X, is he a cheater? I'll bet to some people he is and to others he's not. I'll also bet it has something to do with "I met him and he's a nice guy" or "my friend has horses with him and says he's a super guy" and everything else along those lines. Next -- two positives? Three? The label is part of the problem here. Clenbuterol? Etorphine? Something really exotic?

With Dutrow, or some of the other "bad guys" -- there is never an excuse. Never. It's not allowed. It's a burn them at the stake mentality. But when one of the nice guys comes up positive, every excuse in the world is put forth. It's natural, we defend who we like, care about, etc. Sometimes we see the same thing with victimization.

We've seen this time and time again. Some people have asked for unform medication rules -- how about uniform prosecution, persecution, penalization or whatever else is going to happen in this sport?

Eric

It does in the world of horse handicappers. Some don't even have to see real horses or watch any races, they can tell by sheet numbers.

(If only sheet numbers were that accurate ... we'd all have a much higher win percentage ;)

Steve, what exactly would you expect? An uproar or uprising? Why should this be any different than when a "friend" of yours or mine, or anyone else's comes up positive or gets caught?

I agree with your point, absolutely. However, I don't think it can be a shield and sword position.

Eric

I think the reality is that it does. I think owners who lose often automatically label high % winning trainers as cheaters. I see it, I hear it, first hand. I think other trainers sometimes do. And, I think handicappers often do as well. Some are right, some are wrong, and some have no idea what they are talking about.

For the most part, I still think in this business there is a "where there's smoke, there's fire" mentality.

Eric

Good post. 100% on.
Can you imagine if Dutrow had the kind of Saratoga meet Linda Rice did and then went as cold as a block of ice at Belmont? Love the excuses made for her too, like the lack of turf sprints at Belmont Park. As if 48 races arent enough.

No comment on Brilliant Son Chuck? He seemed finished when he left you....

Thank you. This is more about mindset than it is about anything else.

A couple of years ago, Bill Mott was leading trainer at the Spa. He had a super meet, shot a really strong win % number by the end of the meet. I think he won between 25 and 30 races, with about 90 to 100 starts maybe.

Anyway, hHe strolls into Belmont and starts off with something like 0 for 20. Later is something like 1 for 25 and ends up with 2 or 3 from 30-35. I don't remember the details.

You should have heard the talk, reasons, excuses, etc.

Eric

This post is truly insane.
I have no agenda.. Dutrow career is not a product of simply juicing horses. We all have seen juiced horses run we know what they look like.. I could name a few and even more then a few from alledgely squeaky clean trainers. Dutrow has had his fair share. Would A Rod still have been a great hitter without steriods? Would Ben Johnson still have been super fast? Its a performance industry not a professional law firm. It is no more or less morally bankrupt then Baseball , Football or Cycling etc.

I hope one day you enjoy the success that any hard working professional is worthy of. Clearly denying on Dutrow's tremendous success and alluded to it as DrugS Driven is quite suspect.

Again, I make absolutely no excuses for his medication violations as they are real and wrong! The fastest kid on the football team could be the fast kid with or without cheating. Dutrow got busted a few times for violating certain protocol doesn't mean he isnt brilliant.

Who did you learn that from Mr Squeaky?

The guy from Woodbine that trains Hollywood Hit, Terry Jordan is an example of where there was smoke there was fire, you knew something was amiss but didn't have the ammo to say it publically at the time, most knowledgable horseplayers know when something is up by watching how horses perform day in day out.

In his case his horses were winning at a ridiculous rate of 50%(maybe higher I don't have the exact % needless to say it was eye catching) up until that horse tested positive, one of the leading Trainer's at the time was Scott Farlie who was winning at a mere 20% in comparison, there is no way a Trainer should be that far ahead statistically given a genuine sampling of horses running.

Right, I'm saying that it shouldn't. Should everyone who regularly plays Aqueduct right now believe that Mike Hushion is cheating?

It's a generalization that's made that's unfair IMO and the more it's propagated, specifically by bringing in a trainer with a clean record like was done in this thread (Calhoun), the worse it will get.

NT

:confused: ......maybe a softer forum crowd, with thanksgiving just around the corner.

Brilliant Son had just won an allowance race at Keeneland when he left our barn (two weeks prior) that is hardly finished....

Touchy touchy...His best races were run under Kiaran, that is not a slight on Chuck at all...especially if "years of this" have been going on.

Sure as hell looked that way, especially with the badger comment of "No comment at all Chuck"

Right Tom, you would think that. I would think if you are going to take a stance on Kiaran and say he was doing this for years, this is a horse who popped into my head as having been trained by both. If you have another example please use it. In fact as a 2 year old the horse did quite well for Chuck....I don't have the PPs at my fingertips.

Sure it is frustrating but I keep hoping that the dopes in charge (no pun intended) will finally bridge the gap a bit and the OWNERS who knowingly support the multiple offenders will stop accepting what really amounts to dirty money. The problem with this topic is that positive tests can widely vary in degrees of seriousness and intent yet all seem to fall into a catagory based more upon the likability factor than the revelant evidence.

Short acting bronchodialoters are not only performance enhancing but show absolute intent. These weren't mistakes. The only mistake was getting caught.

Further, it would bother me as a trainer if someone pulls the "we did some shoeing and worming and look what happened," if I trained the horse legit....I would rather have my horses trained by Chuck than Kiaran...I guess that doesn't help your argument much.

that may have been the nicest thing anyone has ever said about me! Wish I had his black book skills.

I love the "guilt by relation" play by some.

Because Rick has been accused of cheating, then Tony and Chip must do the same.

I am waiting for Godolpin positives by the way. Brown has been out in front of talking about how the entire barn turned at the end of June. Every horse seemingly running tops.

Surely like the various assistants under Lukas who set out on their own and somehow find positives at their fingertips.

I'll try to say this a kindly as possible but you are putting out misleading info while being absolutely offbase.

Uh I cant say much more but .......



Of course there are the Barrera brothers as an example. They were completely seperate juicers.

I wasn't referring to either of Rick's brothers when I made my "who is next" statement. However, in my mind Chuck, it's not that easy. As a matter of fact, it could easily happen to one of the "good guys" -- like you.

In my experience, where there's smoke there's fire, almost always has collateral damage so to speak. Stricter rules, universal and uniform medication rules and governance, yes, I am absolutely all for that. But I think we need to be very careful when emotions, what we "just know, etc., supersedes what we are really trying to obtain.

Sure, the present system doesn't work. But not every system will be better than what we have.

Eric

Everybody is always off base if their opinion is different then yours.

Actually Eric it cant happen to me. While I am certainly eligible to get a positive test as is anyone who runs a horse under the current system but the pattern of abuse of some is damning. The danger is the Freddy mo message that the guys are good horseman who feel the need to keep up. That is simply not acceptable. Zero tolerence is not the answer because the system is flawed but in cases like this latest positive that headlines this thread, it is far fetched to believe this wasn't a cut and dried case of cheating.

Obviously there is a lot left unsaid and much of the truth never reaches the public but the fact is that there are very few guys with "suspicious" reputations that aren't well deserved.

:tro: :tro: :tro:

now he will get some new owners...

Has Tony Dutrow ever had a positive? Been fined/suspended ?

Perhaps because my opinion is reality based using facts and the truth? I would certainly be in the position to "know" a whole lot more than most, no? Perhaps because I actually know these people, the people that work and have worked for them? Maybe because i have interactions with medications and vets every day? Maybe because I have still have contacts from my days on the other side of the table? Perhaps I might know what I am talking about because I have lived this game everyday for years in just about every capacity? Ever think that I may have to bite my tongue on occasion because I know things in confidence?

Dont know.

Then you probably shouldn't imply it. Would kind of be like me implying that you cheat. Nothing to base it on.

You asked me about the past, not the upcoming future.

Tactic? Read between the lines a little.

So you are saying he is gonna get nailed for a positive. I didn't know you could predict the future.


Impressive.

I called McLaughlin. Even said what class of drug it would be.