15 days for Biancone

[gamblin4ever]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

It amazes me that he has apparently not lost a single owner despite all his transgressions this year. First, Martin Schwartz pulls a Dean Martin/Thorton Mellon when asked about Biancone by DRF, and then the West Point guys thank him for the wonderful job he did with Irish Smoke before he went on his little state-imposed "holiday." Are these guys actually that naive, or is it that they simply do not care if they are associated with trainers that have the track record that a Biancone has?

The owners just don't seem to care as long as Pat keeps winning races and making them money.

[ELA]

I am not condemning or condoning. However, there is more to it and it is not as simplistic as it's made to appear here.

Eric

Originally Posted by ELA

I am not condemning or condoning. However, there is more to it and it is not as simplistic as it's made to appear here.

Eric

Yeah well we're not all as smart as you, Eric.

[ELA]

Originally Posted by Pillow Pants

Yeah well we're not all as smart as you, Eric.

Right, that's it. Look how much talent it takes to mock and name-call.

Eric

Originally Posted by ELA

Right, that's it. Look how much talent it takes to mock and name-call.

Eric

GFY, insider.

[theiman]

Poor timing by Bianconne on giving the medication on that day.

In California, the Biancone-trained Iron Butterfly tested positive for the bronchodilator Salmeterol following the *2nd race at Santa Anita Park Jan. 7. The class 3 medication is prohibited in a horse during a race, A hearing is pending on the disqualification of the horse

That race was a maiden race at 7F. The winner of the race was some filly named Rags to Riches.


Article said it was the third race, it actually was the 2nd race.

[Fearless Leader]

I think it is sad that so many of you choose to criticize a successful, top notch, hard working trainer who's integrity is beyond reproach. The guy has had international success, has a top notch client base and people want to whine because he does the best for his horses and his clients.

How any of you think he is any different than the "big time" trainers many of you worship is laughable. Don't single him out for he operates the same as the rest of them.

[sumitas]

Originally Posted by ELA

Right, that's it. Look how much talent it takes to mock and name-call.

Eric

Keep your chin up. I appreciate your input.

[pmacdaddy]

And the Cobra Venom - Toxin was part of smoking cessation program...

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by ELA

I am not condemning or condoning. However, there is more to it and it is not as simplistic as it's made to appear here.

Eric

With all due respect, what's so complicated about this situation? The trainers with whom I've been associated have always erred on the side of not doing anything that might result in a positive. As a result, on occasion, we've had to not enter horses in certain races (particularly "extras") because the horse had received this treatment or that treatment, and the trainer did not want to push the envelope on withdrawal times.

Forget Biancone's history overseas. This year alone, he has been suspended once in KY, fined twice in CA, and that says nothing of the alleged cobra venom found in his barn. Despite all this, these owners stick with him. What am I missing? As an employment lawyer, it's black-letter law that when a company learns of wrongdoing by an employee, it either takes appropriate corrective action, or the company will be found to have condoned and ratified the wrongdoing. This is exactly the same situation. Apparently, Biancone's owners have no problem being associated with a character of his ilk, and in doing so, they are condoning his behavior.

[ELA]

One of the things you are missing is that these owners -- are not you. Unfortunately, we don't have black-letter of the law here. That is truly the foundation of the problem. Time and time again, all over, people who are and are not in this game hold others to their own standards. It's all hypothetical, because it's not you, it's not me, it's not whoever. I have 25-30% trainers who have never had a positive, and I have some who have.

My concern about what else is missing are the positive tests that aren't brought to public light. I know one -- high-profile trainer, who has spoken out against drugs, super-trainers, etc. regularly -- who came up positive 3 times this year (one meet, one track) for something that is not part of everyday use on the backstretch. You want to know where that's going? Nowhere -- because it never got started. Are the ones who are caught any more guilty than the ones who aren't?

However, I don't see Jess Jackson -- who is calling for "transparency" and drastic reform to certain aspects of the industry -- leaving his trainer. I don't see Satish Sanan --who himself has called for and acted as a catalyst for change and reform -- I don't see him leaving any of his trainers. What about Cot Campbell? Barry Irwin? WinStar? And the numerous others. Where does the judgemental line get drawn? With which drug? Which positive?

People will often stick by their friends, sometimes to a flaw -- at least a flaw to others. There's your side, my side, and his side. In this case, the owners who are the target of the hecklers, they are on their trainer's side -- and it's always going to be that way, until we have change.

I would suggest that people attend The Jockey Club Symposium, and all of the other industry events. This summer, in Saratoga, Ogden Phipps said that the Jockey Club board was very disturbed (I don't remember the actual words he used, but it was not soft-spoken) that this is going on and for the first time said that the Jockey Club would like to see owners held accountable. While it may bring us to entirely new and unknown world, something drastic is in fact needed -- a national governing body with bite behind the bark to enforce uniform medication rules, nationwide.

I think there is in fact a great deal more to it -- not that it would change your view or mine. A great deal to the point where it's beyond a discussion in an internet chatroom/BB/etc. There are many opinions here that I respect, read, and think about. For example, you brought up some very good points -- as perhaps benchmarks that should be looked for and the industry should look at. I put credence in those opinions becuase they come from a perspective of credibility. Then of course, there are the ramblings of armchair experts, internet trainers, etc.

I never take a myopic or one-dimensional view of anything. Either people are going to be in the stands or in the game. I for one like to see accountability in every aspect of the game, including the judge and jury. Unfortunately today, we have very little. But that will change.

Eric

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by ELA

Are the ones who are caught any more guilty than the ones who aren't?

No, but we need to start somewhere. I hear what you are saying about where are lines drawn (perhaps at Class I medication violations at a minimum), but to me, the Biancone situation is an easy one.

At the end of the day, it's about right and wrong, and maybe my moral compass is different from others. I agree that the "industry leaders" that you cite in your message do nothing but perpetuate the notion that racing will never be serious about cleaning up its own house. However, in order to get racing cleaned up, good people need to start becoming more judgmental. I'd rather do it that way than have some knucklehead in Congress with absolutely no understanding of the racing industry tell us involved in it what's "right and wrong." I think that their uninformed view on that subject would not please anyone in racing.

Having attended some industry events in Saratoga over the years, people talk and talk about these issues, but nothing ever seems to get accomplished. Maybe it's that the "powers that be" want to maintain the status quo, because they're happy making money in the game as it is today. I hope that's not the case. I hope that Dinny Phipps's recent comments at the Jockey Club Roundtable will prove to be a wake-up call to all industry leaders, and those of us involved in the game need to show our support for them. I hope that, if the Jockey Club stewards are really serious about cleaning things up, their leadership, coupled with an "unshackled" NYRA running NY racing, will start to effect the change that the racing game needs so badly on this subject. I know that's hoping for a lot. But if we lose that, we might as well get out of the game.

[Danzig]

there shouldn't be limitless fining and suspending. sooner or later, there should be an 'enough is enough' rule...a lifetime ban for chronic cheating and drug positives. that way, it isn't up to an owner, a state board...it's up to the trainer to modify his own behavior, or he'd be out of the business permanently. then it isn't up to perception, believability, friendship, etc. after X amount of rule-breaking, you're gone.

[Honu]

Hopefully here in California they will procede with the idea of punishing owners along with trainers for positives. There is alot they have to work out before they can put it in stone but I think it will make owners accountable for the trainers they employ , if you want a cheat then when he gets busted for a positive with one of your horses you get to do the time with him .
I dont subscribe to the B.S. that the owners dont know what goes on , because believe me when you are paying day rates of 75 to 125 dollars you will research the trainer you employ.

[ELA]

Originally Posted by Danzig

there shouldn't be limitless fining and suspending. sooner or later, there should be an 'enough is enough' rule...a lifetime ban for chronic cheating and drug positives. that way, it isn't up to an owner, a state board...it's up to the trainer to modify his own behavior, or he'd be out of the business permanently. then it isn't up to perception, believability, friendship, etc. after X amount of rule-breaking, you're gone.

I agree. Question though -- for what drugs? Class 1? 3? I think a graduated scale is needed without quuestion, and for more harsh violations, there should be a X strikes and you get a year. More harsh, 5 or 10 years. For the most severe violations -- lifetime could be applicable.

But it needs to be clear cut. I don't want contamination issues coming into play, sabotage, etc. There will always be exceptions.

Eric

[ELA]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

No, but we need to start somewhere. I hear what you are saying about where are lines drawn (perhaps at Class I medication violations at a minimum), but to me, the Biancone situation is an easy one.

At the end of the day, it's about right and wrong, and maybe my moral compass is different from others. I agree that the "industry leaders" that you cite in your message do nothing but perpetuate the notion that racing will never be serious about cleaning up its own house. However, in order to get racing cleaned up, good people need to start becoming more judgmental. I'd rather do it that way than have some knucklehead in Congress with absolutely no understanding of the racing industry tell us involved in it what's "right and wrong." I think that their uninformed view on that subject would not please anyone in racing.

Having attended some industry events in Saratoga over the years, people talk and talk about these issues, but nothing ever seems to get accomplished. Maybe it's that the "powers that be" want to maintain the status quo, because they're happy making money in the game as it is today. I hope that's not the case. I hope that Dinny Phipps's recent comments at the Jockey Club Roundtable will prove to be a wake-up call to all industry leaders, and those of us involved in the game need to show our support for them. I hope that, if the Jockey Club stewards are really serious about cleaning things up, their leadership, coupled with an "unshackled" NYRA running NY racing, will start to effect the change that the racing game needs so badly on this subject. I know that's hoping for a lot. But if we lose that, we might as well get out of the game.

I agree with you. However, notice, how on such a simple situation, we've already address many related issues -- and in this simple situation, the positive that I know for a fact Biancone got hit with, was for a drug that has an everyday, therapeutic use on the backstretch. The cobra/snake venom is still alleged and I won't touch that being completely absent of facts. Regardless, I don't know enough about Biancone's other offenses to say what I would or would not do. Be that as it may, yes, in a simple situation -- knowing all of the facts -- I think it's easy for someone to take a stand.

Like others here, I've been in this game my entire adult life. I think we all learn over time and the learning curve can be everchanging. I've served on committees that have actually made recommendations, and served on others where there's been "paralysis by analysis" -- we see everything in our industry. The Biancone situation is going to be clear cut to some, and perhaps not to others. Until there is a clear-cut, quantifiable benchmark where people will be guilty or innocent, then we might not see change.

About the owners, Martin Schwartz might be different than the Coolmore gang, Gary Tanaka -- or might not. Personally, I don't know. However, and this may sound very simplistic, I don't hold people -- strangers might I add (hence the hecklers) -- to my standards. I think there is a difference between a qualified and unqualified opinion, an educated and uneducated one, and I think that and more adds or subtracts to/from credibility.

Now, I hold my partner to that standard and if a trainer of mine becomes involved in a scandal, comes up positive for some designer/exotic/super-drug, etc. -- not without a conversation or discussion -- I would ultimately pull my horses from that trainer. But for clenbuterol? One positive? Two positives? Three? No, I don't think I am pulling horses for that (depending on the trainer, a 5 horse barn would have a different bearing than a 200 horse barn). Too me, it's too hypothetical and not that simple. Biancone perhaps, but not all others.

Excellent points.

Eric