Another negative NYT article timed with BC

[reese]

Originally Posted by SuffolkGirl

Another piece of fine work from Joe Drape - anyone know why he has such an ax to grind against Thoroughbred racing? And hey, kudos to the NYTimes for publishing this, thanks for the support. Honestly the timing is just awful. It would be one thing if this were one article about horse racing among many in the Sports section, but to be the only one? Shame on the NYTimes

Kudos to the NYT for tellling "IT LIKE IT IS"

Why shouldn't this problem get attention, and the best time, obviously, is when the sport is in the spotlight. Steroids were banned in most racing jurisdictions AFTER Dutow blabbed about Big Brown before the Belmont.

The steroid issue in the spotlight made the steroid problem "go away"
What is the difference in this scenerio?

[philcski]

"In fact, of the top 10 American-based trainers in purse winnings this year, only one, Christophe Clement, has never been cited for a medication violation, according to industry records."

LOL

The article isn't terrible, it's factually correct, but as usual with Drape the timing sucks.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by reese

Kudos to the NYT for tellling "IT LIKE IT IS"

Why shouldn't this problem get attention, and the best time, obviously, is when the sport is in the spotlight. Steroids were banned in most racing jurisdictions AFTER Dutow blabbed about Big Brown before the Belmont.

The steroid issue in the spotlight made the steroid problem "go away"
What is the difference in this scenerio?

This is an opinion piece posing as news. There is no new news, nothing that hasnt already been said over and over again. And interestingly enough the same writer seems to break this storyline out for every big event.

And since you brought up steroids, how exactly has that ban changed anything? As far as I can tell it hasn't changed perceptions or results.

I dont read the NYT on a regular basis but perhaps they could have run the story "Admitted drug cheats Pettite and Arod celebrate World Series Win" story this morning?

They arent covering the event, they are sensationalizing an old story. But considering the writer and paper that isnt a shocker.

[reese]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

This is an opinion piece posing as news. There is no new news, nothing that hasnt already been said over and over again. And interestingly enough the same writer seems to break this storyline out for every big event.

And since you brought up steroids, how exactly has that ban changed anything? As far as I can tell it hasn't changed perceptions or results.
I dont read the NYT on a regular basis but perhaps they could have run the story "Admitted drug cheats Pettite and Arod celebrate World Series Win" story this morning?

They arent covering the event, they are sensationalizing an old story. But considering the writer and paper that isnt a shocker.

So you are saying, Tb's still race on steroids and the steroid ban is a facade?
Maybe some states still allow "raceday steroids" or don't test for them, you'd know that.


In NY, steroids are banned medications in post raceday race horse drug test results. Notoriety worked there. Or are you saying, steroid ban is ignored in NY as well and every state that has this rule, and the NYT article on drugs is nothing but grandststanding becasue the steroid hubbub is a facade and horses race on steroids" "That is your point, isn't it"?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by reese

So you are saying, Tb's still race on steroids and the steroid ban is a facade?
Maybe some states still allow "raceday steroids" or don't test for them, you'd know that.


In NY, steroids are banned medications in post raceday race horse drug test results. Notoriety worked there. Or are you saying, steroid ban is ignored in NY as well and every state that has this rule, and the NYT article on drugs is nothing but grandststanding becasue the steroid hubbub is a facade and horses race on steroids" "That is your point, isn't it"?

No my point is that steroids are barred in virtually every jurisdiction yet there hasnt been any noticable change in racing form, trainers winning or not , horse health, etc. Steroids are extremely overrated as a performance enhancer for horses.

[SuffolkGirl]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

This is an opinion piece posing as news. There is no new news, nothing that hasnt already been said over and over again. And interestingly enough the same writer seems to break this storyline out for every big event.

And since you brought up steroids, how exactly has that ban changed anything? As far as I can tell it hasn't changed perceptions or results.

I dont read the NYT on a regular basis but perhaps they could have run the story "Admitted drug cheats Pettite and Arod celebrate World Series Win" story this morning?

They arent covering the event, they are sensationalizing an old story. But considering the writer and paper that isnt a shocker.

Exactly - it would be different if this were on the Opinion page but it is in the Sports Section. It is NOT reporting it is opinion.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by SuffolkGirl

Exactly - it would be different if this were on the Opinion page but it is in the Sports Section. It is NOT reporting it is opinion.

You may not like the content or timing of the article, but it is not an "opinion" piece. Does it have slant? Yes, but what story doesn't. With perhaps the exception of the quotation below, the article simply weaves factual information to relate the reporter's sense of what kind of job racing has done with its medication offenders:

It is part of an evolving culture in horse racing that ultimately rewards those who seek any means, legal and otherwise, to get an edge. When illegal drug use goes undetected, trainers walk away with the winnings and an enhanced reputation. But when they are caught, they are all too often handed punishments that are in name only. Their horses still run and their stables still operate, usually under the name of a trusted assistant.

I'm not a Joe Drape apologist, as his recent article on NYSRWB efforts to require owners to produce veterinary records "on demand" was poorly written, IMO, but he hasn't only written this week about racing's drug issue, as evidenced by the linked story about Zenyatta: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/04/sports/04racing.html

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

You may not like the content or timing of the article, but it is not an "opinion" piece. Does it have slant? Yes, but what story doesn't. With perhaps the exception of the quotation below, the article simply weaves factual information to relate the reporter's sense of what kind of job racing has done with its medication offenders:

It is part of an evolving culture in horse racing that ultimately rewards those who seek any means, legal and otherwise, to get an edge. When illegal drug use goes undetected, trainers walk away with the winnings and an enhanced reputation. But when they are caught, they are all too often handed punishments that are in name only. Their horses still run and their stables still operate, usually under the name of a trusted assistant.

I'm not a Joe Drape apologist, as his recent article on NYSRWB efforts to require owners to produce veterinary records "on demand" was poorly written, IMO, but he hasn't only written this week about racing's drug issue, as evidenced by the linked story about Zenyatta: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/04/sports/04racing.html

It may not be an opinion piece per say but no new ground was covered, no new items were brought up, no new twists to the issue, etc. This is old, tired news. It isnt as though there arent stories out there to be had about a signature event with 14 races and hunderds of people. Instead we are focusing on two guys running two longshots in the lesser races who have had their stories told over and over again.

As a matter of fact if Drape is of the opinion that NYRA is somehow doing something signifigant with the Mullins "suspension" as possibly evidenced by the inclusion of the Dunker quote at the end, we are in for more of this.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

It may not be an opinion piece per say but no new ground was covered, no new items were brought up, no new twists to the issue, etc. This is old, tired news. It isnt as though there arent stories out there to be had about a signature event with 14 races and hunderds of people. Instead we are focusing on two guys running two longshots in the lesser races who have had their stories told over and over again.

I have not done a search as to whether Drape has written on the subject before, but I don't recall him previously writing on the lax penalty aspect of the medication issue. These stories may be "old" and "tired" in racing circles, but they have not been re-hashed that much in the general sports section, largely because racing does not receive that much coverage anymore in most newspapers. Of course, as johnny pinwheel notes above, we wouldn't hear about these "tired" stories if racing leaders actually addressed the issue by handing out tougher penalties.

The irony of the articles that I have seen this week about medication and the Breeders' Cup's "efforts" to address the issue is that there has been no mention of Pletcher's positive with Wait a While in last year's Breeders' Cup or of the fact that the CHRB has not yet handed down a penalty. Amazing that this little tidbit did not make it into Drape's article (or does he not want to tarnish Pletcher's "golden boy" image to the general public).

[Scurlogue Champ]

Drape is solid. I doubt there would be any racing coverage in the Times were it not for him.