As a trainer of multiple Grade 1 winners for some for some of the most respected owners in the industry certainly suggests Dutrow is a qualified trainer and practices outstanding horsemanship. Denying him an opportunity to practice his trade because of multiple speeding tix that he has paid for in full shouldn't qualify him for the death penalty.

http://www.drf.com/news/dutrows-atto...onal-president

Would that really do any good though?

All he would need is a groom or hotwalker license and a program trainer. Remember how Cleveland Johnson was like a 40% trainer when Dutrow got 60 days and he filled in about 9 or 10 years ago? Cleveland Johnson went out on his own - and was like a low profile Jeff Odintz.

This is one of the stupidest defenses I have heard yet.

Acting as though Dutrow is being singled out is laughable. As Steve posted earlier in the thread, if you can afford to hire a competent lawyer to just keep fighting and fighting via the legal system eventually the states tire of the continued legal battles and settle. That doesn't mean he should be allowed to keep his license, just the states really don't care about horseracing enough.

And if your chosen field of profession requires a license than you should be forced to adhere to the rules in order to keep your license.

If a Doctor continually violates the rules, they lose their license.


You acting as though 64 violations, speeding tickets or otherwise, is no big deal is telling

Losing your license means more than just transferring the horses to someone else. They can refuse to license him in any capacity. Plus after a period of time if you apply and receive a license many times it will be conditional on not getting any violations of any manner. When I worked at Yonkers for a few years there were plenty of people who were denied licenses. Can you work around it for a period of time? Sure but it makes things a whole lot more difficult.

Shouldnt you consider Dutrow has had thousands of starters in 25 years of training. 2.5 violations a year should disqualify a man from earning a living? Until you set up rules that call for the death penalty if broken you have have to stay consisent or face major legal battles that you cant win.

You don't think it will turn into something that happened at Philly Park when McCaslin had all of his problems ... and supposedly his operation started using laughable phony program trainers like Jayne Vaders and Ed Auwarter ... who both turned from 3% trainers into 30% Alchemist wonders overnight?

This is a pathetic argument. 25 years of training? Try about 12. Most of those other years he had 1 or 2 horses.

2.5 violations a year? Are you serious? You think that is an acceptable number?

The problem with this business is that no one has been willing to throw guys who refuse to follow the rules out. No other sport would ever allow such blatant rules violations to keep continuing. If he was a NCAA football coach he would have been fired long ago and no one would be crying about his rights. He makes Barry Bonds and Roger Clemons look like good citizens.

Someone has to be first. Dutrow has earned it.

Each case is different. No one cares about Philly Park.

Dutrow's attorney responds to ARCI president
By David Grening

The attorney representing trainer Richard Dutrow Jr. lashed out at a racing official who earlier this week called upon the New York State Racing and Wagering Board to consider revoking the trainer’s license for repeated rules violations. In an e-mail, attorney Gerard Romski wrote that Ed Martin, president of the Association of Racing Commissioners International, unfairly singled out “Mr. Dutrow while ignoring the actions of others.”

“In our opinion, Mr. Martin’s recent politically motivated letter, is just another example of such an attempt to unfairly prejudice and harm Mr. Dutrow without due cause. We hope that Mr. Martin did not rush to judgment and that he paid more attention to the actual facts when he was in charge at the New York State Racing and Wagering Board than he has demonstrated in his recent unfounded and irresponsible letter."

The ARCI of 50-years-ago was the greatest friend the bettor ever had in horse racing.

Their leadership bitterly tried to fight against takeout increases and had blistering rhetoric of HANA proportions - and that when the takeout was 12% at most tracks.

I don't remember a peep out of the ARCI about Santa Anita's takeout increase. Not only has horse racing lost the ARCI ... but the DRF columnists of the 20's, 30's, and 40's were very good friends of the bettor. Things started to go down hill fast in the 70's ... the DRF of today isn't a mass producer of silly fluff like in the 70's ... but in terms of the writing (not the data) certainly no one there today is sticking up for the bettor...even though many of them are bettors themselves. As great and talented a writer as Crist is - you couldn't possibly find a guy any more anti-firebrand than him.

:tro::tro:

it's not as tho the sport would miss him either. plenty of trainers out there, many who follow the rules.

Dutrow
 

Kentucky Derby (gr. I)-winning trainer Rick Dutrow Jr. has some explaining to do.

New York racing authorities deemed Dutrow ”obnoxious” and “unbecoming” and ordered him to show why he should not be suspended, lose his license, and be kicked off state tracks after years and dozens of sanctions.

The New York State Racing and Wagering Board suspended Dutrow twice last month. The suspensions totaled 90 days for hypodermic needles in his barn and for a winning horse's positive test for a banned painkiller at Aqueduct last year.

Dutrow has appealed and the board scheduled hearings for March 30-31.


http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...oss-of-license

1 year suspension.

interesting that jocks can get banned for life for personal drug use, but trainers can't for drugging the horses. how does that make sense?

That is one helluva good point....:tro:

Trainers most certainly can be banned for 'drugging' horses, with the most egregious and serious of narcotics, and I know of no jock whose personal drug use resulted in a lifetime ban. As in every case with this topic, generalizations cannot be applied. As has been discussed this week with Migliore, Haskin and Allday, the problem you have, specifically with Rick Dutrrow, is that suddenly saying after the fact that previous history is now part of a new penalty, is patently unfair... The 'double secret probation' mentality.

You want to admonish him and set up a set of ground rules he's required to follow going forward, fine. That's fair. But the way this is being gerrymandered isn't right and won't hold up legally. Even Allday, who has had a very public breakup and fight with Dutrow, said that you better apply the same standards to EVERYONE if you're going to go down this road.

And has been said here before, there's several 'angels with dirty halos' around that get away with as much or more envelope pushing as Rick Dutrow. Would be curious to see the reaction of the public if some of them were dragged out into the spotlight. Dutrow brings a lot of negative focus on himself, but the doctrine of fair play has to be part of whatever attempt there is to provide an atmosphere of integrity in the sport.

Do you think Dutrow invokes "the doctrine of fair play" in his daily activities?
In my opinion, the sport would be better off without Rick Dutrow (and IEAH). I don't believe he should be singled out, they should go after every trainer "pushing the envelope", but you have to start somewhere.

That's fine, but start somewhere with an established framework of what constitutes eligibility for license revocation or similar exclusion. Because the inclination to single out individuals based on perceived image isn't right or fair. And more importantly, because it may not be accurate.

I'll reiterate that there are individuals and operations out there doing things far worse than whatever people think Dutrow, or IEAH for that matter, are doing. Those just seem to be convenient pinatas for the public and media and low-hanging fruit for regulators. In the meantime, the wolves in sheep's clothing operate freely.

100% accurate.. Dutrow is a terriffic trainer and a great personality that the sport needs. He also has cheated way to much and the SHIIT needs to stop. So make new rules that apply to all and sets the ground work for such penalty!

As for this question, I'd say that Dutrow's program tries to take every advantage it can under the rules to get the best performance possible from its' horses. There are dozens of large outfits that operate the exact same way. But its' funny that when those outfits catch medication positives, apologies are made FOR them by the public and media. It's not equitable.

howie tesher cant wait for this to play out:rolleyes:

i just found this comment funny when we are talking about cheaters!

Dutrow ruins the integrity of the sport with his actions.

I think Riot stole Steve's login info.

Owners have no problem in fact demand that such trainers push the enevelope as far it can go without crossing the line.

The million dollar question is: If a substance NOT ILLEGAL then is it LEGAL? If the answer is legal than the sport will always be playing catch-up to the chemists.

And? this is news, or just the way it is. They are banning horses from going into oxygen chambers. The only reason why is because some people cant afford it and some can. Why wouldnt you allow a horse to breathe oxygen whats next you cant give your horse a vitamin or organic supplement because it makes them feel better? Oxygen is now illegal.. Wouldnt want them breathing to much air?

He's no phuckin good babe. A real low life babe. Not sayin' others aren't the same, babe. He's just no damn good for the game....BABE!!

The "same standard" argument is really weak in this case. Even if you believe that there are several other top outfits that "push the envelope," aside from a guy like Asmussen, how many other trainers have a laundry list of infractions as long as Dutrow? In this regard alone, a harsher penalty may justifiably be imposed upon him.

You are also confusing the "rules" from the "penalties" here. The states already have set the ground rules that he's required to follow, and he's repeatedly shown that he's incapable (or unwilling) of following them. That racing has been lax on the penalties in the past doesn't mean that it is unfair to come to a point, even without providing notice of such intent, to impose harsher penalties. This argument essentially becomes: if I really knew that you were going to be tough on me, then I might have decided to follow the rules, but since I didn't fully appreciate what could be the consequences of my actions, it's unfair if you don't slap me on the wrist for the umpteenth time.

All that being said, from a purely legal perspective, NYSRWB may be making a mistake in joining the recent Fastus Cactus/syringe infractions with the broader eligibility issue at this time. If they waited until it was time for him to renew his license in August and simply declined to do so, he'd be hard-pressed to get such a determination overturned, given the very deferential "arbitrary and capricious" (agency decision would be upheld so long as there is a rational basis for denying the license, and with his history, such a denial would likely stick) standard of review that would apply to a legal challenge to that administrative determination.

Could that be why the attorney whose representing Dutrow has recently worked in-house for Michael Dubb?

I expect Dutrow will get a minimum 6 month suspension and, more likely one year.

Will it hold in court? Nobody knows but how much is Dutrow willing and able to spend on legal fees to challenge?

That seems to be the real question to me.

Does it really matter as his string will be passed to his assistants and he will manage from the clubhouse so to speak. You want to put teeth into this then ban all horses currently under training by Durtow from New York racetracks for the duration of his ban. This will certainly be a major detterent to this type of crap.

I don't know, all I do know is that Dubb is a savvy real estate developer, and Dutrow is a great horseman. I realize that Dutrow has had a ton of issues and I dodnt condone it but certainly those issues in the past cant be the basis for current punishment unless others of his ilk are treated in the future in kind. It's a slippery slope they are attempting to head down

In almost every other area of life, the person's past history forms part of the context for current punishment. For example, a doctor with multiple incidents of malpractice is more likely to get his license revoked by the Department of Health for incompetence than a doctor with an otherwise "clean" record. How is this any different?

You get a speeding ticket you pay your fine and your license gets points affixed to it. As long as you dont go above a prescribed fig you keep you priviledge to drive. Is there points system in racing? If there was you would have a case otherwise it becomes a subjective circus with lots of room for capricious claims. Getting back to the example above if get 1 speeding ticket for 84mph in a 55 every 15 months you never have more then X pts on your record because every clean year you lose 2 pts.

What are you going to do with Assumssen and Pletcher when they get popped again?

I'd want them to do the same thing. But I think we know that's not going to happen. Dutrow's big problem is his mouth. That makes him an easy target.

I don't know what his problem is..There is no denying he has been a cheat and most likely will cheat again. The answer is not getting rid of him its getting a penial system established that all could reside within.

freddy send him to dubai and cut him loose..it will be fun to see

I know he just sent out a stakes winner on 6 days rest to win again. And Pat said american trainers and stock couldnt do that. The guy ran Golden Man 3 times in 10 days

then he drops them into a 12.5 claimer and wins easy ..no claims..lol

Dutrows seems to find a few horses every year that he races on very quick turnbacks. Why not?