Andy Beyer, Dutrow, DRF

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by gales0678

Rick , Ricky , Richard , Dick = all the same person know?

Actually, I can only recall one person on message boards referring to him as Ricky.

Makes me wonder.

[gales0678]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Actually, I can only recall one person on message boards referring to him as Ricky.

Makes me wonder.

i will refer to him as Mr Dutrow in the future so as to not cause any confusion

will that be sufficent?

[CSC]

Originally Posted by gales0678

i will refer to him as Mr Dutrow in the future so as to not cause any confusion

will that be sufficent?

Well there's Anthony or Sydney also, that might cause some confusion.

[gales0678]

Originally Posted by CSC

Well there's Anthony or Sydney also, that might cause some confusion.

Mr R Dutrow work ?

[justindew]

This discussion has reached the point of ridiculousness.

[Riot]

Learn how to read. That's not what I wrote. You blindly defend trainers, because as a vet, if a trainer is cheating, you understand that a vet is helping he/she. So essentially the vet is just as much to blame as the trainer. Essentially you are blinly defending your profession. Again, i get it, but at least be honest about what your particular motives and agendas are.

You learn to read. I do not blindly defend all trainers, never have, and I never defend the scum in my profession that cheat.

As for the moronic stuff, you've set the bar pretty high with your performance here. Now, i won't beg any of my friends to come on now and tell you your ignorance is showing. And I certainly won't admit it afterwards. That's pretty moronic, don't you think?

Don't mind at all having friends that know me and are willing to defend me from ignorant personal attack. Internet list bullies are just that. As you know.

You don't like my opinion on matters concerning horse racing? Too bad.

I know pharmacology, drugs (legal and otherwise), physiology and anatomy of the horse, and I talk to fellow vets working tracks around the country.

It's not that big a secret what some few idiots are currently trying to use on horses, or what the "hot new thing" in cheating is.

To see some gamblers - pardon me, horseplayers - jump blindly and willing on the, "Everybody is cheating with magic undetectable expensive designer moveup drugs that make a horse improve by 15 lengths and win the Triple Crown!" bandwagon is sad, uneducated, and a misdirected waste of good bile away from those that do cheat.

The public can imagine whatever magical fantasy drug effects they want or dream they are seeing, but in reality one also has to actually be able to build such a drug to pull that fantasy off - without whacking out or killing the horse (or a current drug's side effects have to be both desireable and attainable).

Railing away with with broad accusations against whatever trainers are the current popular whipping boys, forgetting that what they are being accused of has to also at least be remotely technically possible - not for me, and I sure as hell don't apologize for not jumping on that bandwagon.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cardus

That's a little over the top, don't you think? The suspicions posted here encompass a few trainers, hardly "everyone is cheating."

I'm talking of the general way I hear most horseplayers talk about trainers and cheating - this trainer has alot of drug overages and is on the bad list, that trainer has alot but the public never mentions him, the next trainer has nothing but is widely thought of as being an unquestioned and absolute cheat.

Here's another question that will probably cause a huge dustup: can anybody's speed figures accurately identify drug using trainers, when the figures are educated assessments of performance, not really stand-alone and merely reported data points?

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Actually, I can only recall one person on message boards referring to him as Ricky.

Makes me wonder.

0000000000000000

[Riot]

Ah, yeah you do. Anytime a discussion comes up involving trainers, and drugs you blindly defend trainers. I'm not making it up. Take a look at the discussions that have happened here.

Naw. I just refuse to jump on the "I say, therefor he's guilty" bandbox.

It's not that I don't like your opinion, you're giving yourself way too much credit. I just don't care. Like i don't care that you're a vet. I know why you defend these guys, and I called you on it.

You don't have a clue about me, so your calling me a cheat in my professional life shows how remarkably without validity much of what you have to say is.

But, to deny that these guys, who perform miracles and have had numerous issues with drugs in the past aren't doing something to get an edge makes you look silly.

So? My opinion isn't weighted by peer pressure. Sorry.

Do I trust Dutrow? See post #12

(Oh, yeah - btw, please don't assume, overspeak or just guess at what my opinion is)

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Speaking of shady trainers saying silly things.....

Here's a quote from the SA stable notes featuring Monsieur Cobra Venom's take on handicapping the Super Bowl.

Trainer Patrick Biancone—“The Cardinals have a better defense, and I like the ‘under.’”

[ELA]

FYI -- "Letter to the Editor" commentary.

http://www.drf.com/news/article/101397.html


Letters to the Editor
By DRF Readers
Debate detracts from greater story of a horse on the rise

I was very disappointed to see Mr. Richard Dutrow's response to Andrew Beyer's Jan. 28 column in the Racing Form ("Dutrow expresses ire over column," Jan. 31).

Reading his comments, it seems as though he is lost in the forest and can't see the trees. When This Ones for Phil was purchased for six figures two and half months ago, he was already a stakes winner on the dirt and stakes-placed on the turf, with earnings of almost $100,000. (Considering the cut in the purses at Calder this past meeting, that was a feat in itself.)

Mr. Dutrow should have considered himself lucky, having a proven and still-upcoming young horse added to the barn. As the horse is now a maturing 3-year-old, it didn't seem like a total shock that he ran a terrific race on Sunshine Millions Day. The fact that he returned only a $25.40 public mutuel attested to that fact, too. He certainly had a dream trip (as noted by Dutrow himself) and a brilliant ride from Edgar Prado.

It is a shame that the focus now seems to be on Dutrow and not a nice up-and-coming horse. Calder continuously has showcased many such stars (Big Drama, In Summation, Blazing Sword, and Chatter Chatter, to name a few). I also think that it is a shame the two and a half months that had passed since This Ones for Phil left my barn was not enough time to have the name and colors of the new owner, Paul Pompa Jr., in the program. Time would be better devoted to the horse, This Ones for Phil, and his new owner in the risky business of horse racing, where any race can be the last - and all the knocking be put aside.

Kathleen O'Connell - Fort Lauderdale, Fla.

[Pedigree Ann]

Originally Posted by Cardus

I listened to the archived ATR interview with Wolfson. I loved his account of how Laz Barrera trained a sprinter, Bold Forbes, "to win the Belmont Stakes in a walk." 'Forbes held a large lead throughout the race, and at the top of the stretch had a six-length lead; he held on to win by a neck.

So, in a manner of speaking, he might have been correct, but I don't think he was playing semantics with "win[ning] in a walk."

Bold Forbes had a lot of natural speed, like his forebear Bold Ruler, but it did not mean he was deficient in other departments; he HAD won the Kentucky Derby on the lead with fast fractions. (And Bold Ruler beat Round Table and Gallant Man over 10f carrying 130 lbs in the fall.) He was the only horse in that Belmont field who as a SW at the time and only one other of the field members ever did win a stakes. Forbsie won the Belmont on grit and class and the effort cooked him; he never regained his earlier form after that race.