Pletcher BC positive; Hearing pending

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

Well, my intention in that post wasn't to assert that Pletcher definitively used local anesthetics to block horses. I was just pointing out that, regardless of it being outdated, the NY rule was in a affect and he violated it. Hence the mepivicaine level, however minute, was "significant". Not significant (perhaps) in terms of performance enhancement, but certainly significant in terms of post-race testing.

My second point was that, while a legal and therapeutic medication, local anesthetics such as mepivicaine and procaine can alter soundness dramatically in a short time frame (whether or not no one in their right mind would use them) and thus, IMO, positives of that nature are not on par with things like tranquilizers or anti-inflammatories or muscle relaxants that are more obvious management snafu's.

Just for the record, whoever I was responding to originally did bring up a good point, that there is a huge difference between a positive for a therapeutic medication and one for an altogether illegal medication. All positives are not created equal, and the public should be aware of this. At the same time, however, I don't think that all therapeutic positives are necessarily created equal, either.

I understand where you are coming from. But racing has done a terrible job of creating fair, uniform and reasonable regulations and has done an even worse job of explaining the system (though if I had a system like they do i would be embarrassed to try to explain it too). Just the fact that NY had neglected to alter it's rule to come into line with modernized testing is embarrasing. The truth of the matter is that the system is so screwed up and arbitrary that if you understand the medications, levels, suggested withdrawls and tesing procedures you could make the analogy of driving down the highway where the speed limits change every few miles but there are no signs to tell you when. Then when you get the ticket there are are rumors that you may have killed someone too because you were caught speeding. Maybe that doesnt make sense to some but the Pletcher mevipicaine positive was really a bad deal for him. The latest though was an error IMO in judgement by Pletcher for taking a chance with a highly volitile medication regardless of what the vet said. But the procaine found in minute levels would have no effect on performance. The big issue horse racing faces is that they really need to explain to everyone that these positives are very rarely performance enhancing and then explain why they are positives if they arent. I for one would like to hear an explanation because everytime I go to a meeting conserning medication with state authorities I ask for a clarification and never get an answer that doesnt involve stammering about funding for research or horseman wanting liberal regulations or some other form of passing the buck.

[CSC]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

In this instance the medication was used on raceday in an attempt to break the rules. Supposedly the shot was to the throat to try to get a horse with breathing problems through a race. (the horse ran up the track as the fav which is why it was tested) According to the information I received about the incident which is from an extremely reliable source, they had been getting away with this until the LA lab began a different test for the drug where before it had not been detected which is why the levels were so high.

Here's a question, when you train a horse and you see a trainer winning at 35-40% entering in the same race let's use Wayne Catalano as an example, how do you resist not levelling the playing field? Do you scratch...It can't be fun running for second purse. The reason I ask is what goes on in the mindet of the Trainer's playing it straight.

[CSC]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The difference in other sports is the allowable levels are far greater than the allowable levels in horses. A masking agent is usually used to just dilute the sample. Not to mention that there is a thousand times more research done on human testing than there is on horses. The recent NFL suspensions were for th presense of masking agents, a diuretic used for weight loss. It is debatable that it would even mask most drugs ested for.

Good point, that's why we are left speculating who the juicers are and aren't. Any heady horseplayer knows who they are, with or without drug positives.

[Honu]

Originally Posted by CSC

Mepivacaine basically allows a horse to run his/her heart out because it dulls any pain to a horse. You can imagine the effect this would have on a horse's performance. Notable trainer's to have tested positive for having Mepivacaine in their horses are Dutrow, Mullins, Asmussen, and Pletcher. The how many nanograms is a mute issue if you ask me, the question should be why was it in a horse's system in the first place, the answer to me is obvious if you see what the common trait of the vast majority of these trainers horses strengths are/were. There's a common thread.

Mepivicane is also used as a diagnostic tool to find lameness , you block a horse out starting at the foot and work your way up until it blocks out or not .
My thought on the Mepivicane positive is that most likely one of the Asst. had a horse blocked out found the problem treated it and then perhaps didnt bother to tell the boss exactly when the horse was blocked to avoid being entered too early , the boss entered and boom he gets a positive, because I just cant imiagine someone actually thinking they could get away with treating a horse with Mepivicane for a race and thinking thay can get away with it , at least not at the level TAP races at. Once again Im sticking with knocking all the Asst, Trainers heads together and telling them to either pull their heads out of their ass or leave. Its just plain retarded that someone cant keep track of what the hell is going on.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Honu

Mepivicane is also used as a diagnostic tool to find lameness , you block a horse out starting at the foot and work your way up until it blocks out or not .
My thought on the Mepivicane positive is that most likely one of the Asst. had a horse blocked out found the problem treated it and then perhaps didnt bother to tell the boss exactly when the horse was blocked to avoid being entered too early , the boss entered and boom he gets a positive, because I just cant imiagine someone actually thinking they could get away with treating a horse with Mepivicane for a race and thinking thay can get away with it , at least not at the level TAP races at. Once again Im sticking with knocking all the Asst, Trainers heads together and telling them to either pull their heads out of their ass or leave. Its just plain retarded that someone cant keep track of what the hell is going on.

you might have a reasonable point except this was WAIT A WHILE... maybe the best horse in his entire barn and everyone knew where her next start would be, in what race, on what day.

[Honu]

Originally Posted by philcski

you might have a reasonable point except this was WAIT A WHILE... maybe the best horse in his entire barn and everyone knew where her next start would be, in what race, on what day.

Exactly my point......

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Honu

Exactly my point......

so you think the asst trainer f*cked up and gave her the medvipcane too close to race time and didn't tell him for fear of getting fired or something?

[Honu]

Originally Posted by philcski

so you think the asst trainer f*cked up and gave her the medvipcane too close to race time and didn't tell him for fear of getting fired or something?

I think with Wait A While and her Pen. positive they most likely thought they were in the clear but didnt bother to absolutly sure , I know I would have had her tested to make sure.
With the Mepivicane positive I really do think the Asst. screwed up , he and the vet prolly blocked the horse out for whatever reason , found the problem and then perhaps didnt relay the 411 in detail to the boss.

[CSC]

Originally Posted by Honu

Mepivicane is also used as a diagnostic tool to find lameness , you block a horse out starting at the foot and work your way up until it blocks out or not .
My thought on the Mepivicane positive is that most likely one of the Asst. had a horse blocked out found the problem treated it and then perhaps didnt bother to tell the boss exactly when the horse was blocked to avoid being entered too early , the boss entered and boom he gets a positive, because I just cant imiagine someone actually thinking they could get away with treating a horse with Mepivicane for a race and thinking thay can get away with it , at least not at the level TAP races at. Once again Im sticking with knocking all the Asst, Trainers heads together and telling them to either pull their heads out of their ass or leave. Its just plain retarded that someone cant keep track of what the hell is going on.

Come now, that's just way to easy an excuse. I'm sure Mr. Pletcher knows exactly what is going on in his stable. From what I have read and heard of him he is a person of immaculate detail.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by CSC

Here's a question, when you train a horse and you see a trainer winning at 35-40% entering in the same race let's use Wayne Catalano as an example, how do you resist not levelling the playing field? Do you scratch...It can't be fun running for second purse. The reason I ask is what goes on in the mindet of the Trainer's playing it straight.

It is of course frustrating yet I know that what you guys see in the papers about drug positives arent the problem. We all use those meds. It is the same as steroids. Virtually every trainer used them in one form or another. Everyone had access to them. The guys that abused them were pretty obvious just in watching their horses. But those horses rarely lasted long which was the downside of heavy use. The problem is throwing the book at guys for mistakes and trace levels of insignifigence. That distracts everyone from the real drug problem, the one that you wont see coming up in a positive test any time soon. The one that the authorities are barely aware of and seemingly unconcerned about.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by philcski

so you think the asst trainer f*cked up and gave her the medvipcane too close to race time and didn't tell him for fear of getting fired or something?

Wait a While got a procaine pen positive and they knowingly treated her 18 days out. The CA drug rules supposedly state that 15 days is the reccomended withdrawl time (which is really strange since almost everyone agrees that 21 days is not even a safe day) for PP. The vet assured him and supposedly they have that in writing that the horse would be ok. Why they didnt prerace test her and be safe I dont know. Why anyone would think that PP would be 99% (there is no 100% sure) chance of being clear is unknown. It is a readily known fact that the detectable levels of PP can linger for up to 28 days and considering the Breeders Cup has as complete testing as any race in this country it was a really bad mistake. But I would strongly suggest that there was zero percent chance that the levels found were performance enhancing.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Wait a While got a procaine pen positive and they knowingly treated her 18 days out. The CA drug rules supposedly state that 15 days is the reccomended withdrawl time (which is really strange since almost everyone agrees that 21 days is not even a safe day) for PP. The vet assured him and supposedly they have that in writing that the horse would be ok. Why they didnt prerace test her and be safe I dont know. Why anyone would think that PP would be 99% (there is no 100% sure) chance of being clear is unknown. It is a readily known fact that the detectable levels of PP can linger for up to 28 days and considering the Breeders Cup has as complete testing as any race in this country it was a really bad mistake. But I would strongly suggest that there was zero percent chance that the levels found were performance enhancing.

Of course. I have no doubt about that, especially given which specimen the positive was found on (a filly that didn't need any "enhancing".) I'm just trying to grasp what Honu was suggesting.

Question... if they prerace test and find a trace level, is she automatically scratched?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by philcski

Of course. I have no doubt about that, especially given which specimen the positive was found on (a filly that didn't need any "enhancing".) I'm just trying to grasp what Honu was suggesting.

Question... if they prerace test and find a trace level, is she automatically scratched?

I dont know but in HK they give you the option to scratch or take your chances the drug will be out of the system before the race. of course if it isnt there is hell to pay.

the other positive was pretty close to Honu's explanaation as the story goes. it is entirely plausible considering that these guys have huge outfits and hundreds of horses and the assistants are doing most of the training in some places. That is one of the downsides of having a huge stable

[Riot]

Pletcher vs New York State Racing Board

http://asci.uvm.edu/equine/law/cases...g/pletcher.htm

[CSC]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

That distracts everyone from the real drug problem, the one that you wont see coming up in a positive test any time soon. The one that the authorities are barely aware of and seemingly unconcerned about.

Interesting what that may be? There are drugs that are undetectable in the Olympics and I would venture to say that their testing is much more thorough than what Horseracing's is. Androl a household name now was untectable for awhile, like I said before the cheaters always seem a couple of steps ahead of the testers. Plus I am not sure horseracing really has shown an appetite to clean up the game, even with recent improvements in testing.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by CSC

Interesting what that may be? There are drugs that are undetectable in the Olympics and I would venture to say that their testing is much more thorough than what Horseracing's is. Androl a household name now was untectable for awhile, like I said before the cheaters always seem a couple of steps ahead of the testers. Plus I am not sure horseracing really has shown an appetite to clean up the game, even with recent improvements in testing.

I think that there are lots of differences in human and horse testing. One is that the scope of the sport of horse racing is so much larger than any comparable human sport. There are hundreds of races a day through out the country with horses training at a wide variety of facilities. There are very few olympic class athletes. Not to mention that humans have control over everything they put into their body and are in control of themselves 24 hours a day. Horses have no control what they ingest and are not under direct supervision 24 hours a day. Among the problems with horse racings testing is that we have different levels allowed of the same meds on a state to state basis, differnt states have varying levels of funding to conduct testing and different labs have similar but often different capabilities. There is no doubt that horseracing wants to clean up the sport but it is a complicated process wherein no one has complete control or authority and different jurisdiction simply havent done much to work together. However dont forget that most of the regulatory control over the drug testing in this country is directed by non racing government appointees. cheaters will always be one step ahead regardless of what they are cheating at.

[Honu]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Wait a While got a procaine pen positive and they knowingly treated her 18 days out. The CA drug rules supposedly state that 15 days is the reccomended withdrawl time (which is really strange since almost everyone agrees that 21 days is not even a safe day) for PP. The vet assured him and supposedly they have that in writing that the horse would be ok. Why they didnt prerace test her and be safe I dont know. Why anyone would think that PP would be 99% (there is no 100% sure) chance of being clear is unknown. It is a readily known fact that the detectable levels of PP can linger for up to 28 days and considering the Breeders Cup has as complete testing as any race in this country it was a really bad mistake. But I would strongly suggest that there was zero percent chance that the levels found were performance enhancing.

Its actually 14 to 21 days in cali. depending if it was topical or injectable , for topical its 21 days is the suggestion and for injectable its 14.
Either way , if Tap is so meticulas and into fine detail he would have tested the horse , I would have , we have done it with maidens so why wouldnt you do it with your big horse. If I were your asst, Shell wouldnt you want me to say hey boss I wanted you ask about the Pen. treatment for our mare , do you think we should test her to make sure? Im just asking as a person who is your second command wouldnt you want that compitence.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Honu

Its actually 14 to 21 days in cali. depending if it was topical or injectable , for topical its 21 days is the suggestion and for injectable its 14.
Either way , if Tap is so meticulas and into fine detail he would have tested the horse , I would have , we have done it with maidens so why wouldnt you do it with your big horse. If I were your asst, Shell wouldnt you want me to say hey boss I wanted you ask about the Pen. treatment for our mare , do you think we should test her to make sure? Im just asking as a person who is your second command wouldnt you want that compitence.

No question about it. Hell Pletcher knew what they were treating her with and the time frame so really it isnt the assistants responsibility in this case, it is Todds. I dont understand why they didnt test her beforehand like you said. Personally we are very conservative with our withdrawl times as i find it hard to believe that most meds have much effect at the listed withdrawl time so why not give yourself a little more leeway. I had a positive for a med last summer and we stopped 48 hours before the suggested withdrawl time in KY which is 72 hours longer than every other state. Since it was a minor violation we were just fined and no purse change or suspension but the withdrawl times listed dont necessarily mean you are safe.

[Honu]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

No question about it. Hell Pletcher knew what they were treating her with and the time frame so really it isnt the assistants responsibility in this case, it is Todds. I dont understand why they didnt test her beforehand like you said. Personally we are very conservative with our withdrawl times as i find it hard to believe that most meds have much effect at the listed withdrawl time so why not give yourself a little more leeway. I had a positive for a med last summer and we stopped 48 hours before the suggested withdrawl time in KY which is 72 hours longer than every other state. Since it was a minor violation we were just fined and no purse change or suspension but the withdrawl times listed dont necessarily mean you are safe.

We are also very safe at our barn , we withdrawl like you at 48 hrs before the suggested time , and like Ive said before Ive had to go into the office with my tail between my legs when I have made a mistake and believe me it isnt easy . But I take pride in my job and I have respect for my boss and our team and the owners and would rather suffer the ass chewin than do something to discredit the barn.
I know its Todd's job to be on top of things but with 250 or more horses in training or at least that many to think about that is when the Asst. is supposed to step up to the pump and help with a reminder or whatever the way is they go about it .