Quote:
Originally Posted by paulo537
I read the article and while I thought it was good, I don't share the same level of enthusiasm as others. I do agree the problem is a lack of consistent medication policy across the sport but I would ask these questions:
1. How much longer should fans and gamblers be asked to wait until the sport starts to manage the issue itself?
2. What makes US horse racing so very different than racing in other countries with much stricter medication rules?
3. Why don't we have penalties on owners for medication violations? If trainers are held strictly liable, why not owners?
I also found the paragraph where he asked why "these well-heeled people don't ... just prove the theory yourself without dragging the rest of the racing industry down with you?" to be rather odd.
4. Who are these people? And, why should anyone who doesn't want to invest in the negative expectation business of horse ownership be expected to prove anything to anyone?
|
1. What issue are you referring to? Be more specific
2. Most countries don't have much stricter rules other than Lasix. tht is simply a myth. You don't think there is much difference between European turf rcing and American dirt racing?
3. We have few enough owners as it is though perhaps suspending all of a trainers horses throughout a trainers suspension would give owners pause to use guys who regularly get days.
4. Get up to speed on the issue and ask again. Many of the people pushing this crap bill are breeders who refuse to take any responsibility for the supposed weakening of the breed despite the fact it is they who produce the horses. Like I said if American horses are so weak then why not take advantage of this a create a better breed using foreign breeding stock?