Ellis used Winstrol he knew or should have known the drug is not made in states is created abroad and is banned. He should have known that established withdrawal rates were published when drug was created in states not compounded aboard. They knew what they were doing and they thought they would be ok after 60 days. They were told TRACE elements were still present by authorities they ELECTED to run in BC. Allegedly it was Ellis's call, he after researching the situation with vet's decided that it was worth the risk. Once you weigh options and make the decision to run educated that days previous your horse was still showing trace elements you had better be willing to deal with ramifications and not play the woe is me card.
What's important not to lose track of is Ellis was transparent. Also don't lose sight of the fact the horse had no appreciable drugs in his system to have made him race better.The whole cycling in and out BS is ridiculous.
IMO Ellis took a calculated risk, first using a banned, foreign made compounded substance to treat bleeding and appetite loss(there are alternatives), then running a horse he had been advised was still showing trace elements of a banned drug. Is it his fault absolutely. Should he be admonished, fined, suspended? of course, he knew better then to run that horse.
What's difficult in this case you know the connections and you know they were not being nefarious or under handed, so you feel bad for them or at least I do. I don't feel bad for Ron Ellis he knew exactly what was in store for him if he had a hot test.
|