Horse Racing Forum

Hosted by Cindy Dulay (CindyDulay)

This is a place for friendly and civil discussion of horse racing of all types including handicapping.

  • 416
    MEMBERS
  • 21106
    MESSAGES
  • 6
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

Justify failed drug test in SA derby   General Discussions

Started 9/11/19 by beachwood; 2349 views.
smartyslew

From: smartyslew

9/15/19

I would breed to Run Happy(drug free) before many of the high profile stallions of today.

coolmore got their 60 million back some time ago. 3 matings a day during mating season.

Gerh

From: Gerh

9/15/19

Sea the Stars costs about the same as Justify while Golden Horn is considerably cheaper.

In reply toRe: msg 32
Wintertrian

From: Wintertrian

9/16/19

Wasn't Ron Ellis banned from entering any horses into the 2017 BC races due to a posiitve for a trace amount of banned substance when his horse ran 2nd the year before?
 

Will baffert be allowed to have horses in the  BC races?  (since they are always bragging about integrity, etc. )

In reply toRe: msg 28
PISTOL9

From: PISTOL9

9/16/19

I've told people for the last 8 years I would not breed to any horse trained by Baffert.  He has been making them run further than their pedigree appears to be suited.

Not surprised by the news, sort of glad the veil may be coming off, but still looks like many still trying to brush things under the rug.  I've seen reports of 3-5 times the legal amount and that to get that, it is not just simple contamination of feed.   Has it been reported who were the other horses who tested over, how much they were over, and were a lot of them top tier horses?    Now makes me wonder even more about the standard "pointing" to a race phrase.   Also possibly shows why training and racing has changed as they mentioned they should not be over trained or worked.  So it is not the training, but lack of training and why they do not race as much.  The messenger is also tainted it has been obvious from past articles that guy is out to take racing down, but does not change the underlying facts.

And speaking of Runhappy, I was sick of all the Runhappy stuff on Travers day, then saw it heavily at Kentucky Downs.  Just how much money are they making on that horse?  That is another I would not breed to. 

Wintertrian

From: Wintertrian

9/16/19

PISTOL9 said...

Has it been reported who were the other horses who tested over, how much they were over, and were a lot of them top tier horses?   

A good question.  Another one I had was for his TC races, was justify tested for that same substance?  I'ts not a stupid question.   We don't know what all they test for and don't test for.  I think this would be important but we are not getting any answers.

Agree about the messenger........the point is that the only value that article really had was that it uncovered a fraud/cover-up.   Nobody, not even baffert's lawyers or the CHRB really "contested" anything that was said in the article.  Drape isn't a scientist, and he isn't a horse trainer.  His job was to just "put it out there" ....... and it turned out that there WAS something under the rug.  ;) 

This isn't about who won a race.  This is about a cover up and fraud has been committed, and also a huge level of conflict of interest (people on the board have horses trained by baffert; baffert was given special treatment, etc. ) . 

Gerh

From: Gerh

9/16/19

Interesting to note that the 2 horses in Baffert’s barn who have “underachieved”(Coliseum and Garth) are both Godolphin homebreds.We know Sheikh Mo’s opinion of drugs in racing

Msg 1316.37 deleted
TexSquared

From: TexSquared

9/17/19

PISTOL9 said:

And speaking of Runhappy, I was sick of all the Runhappy stuff on Travers day, then saw it heavily at Kentucky Downs. Just how much money are they making on that horse? That is another I would not breed to.

What would be truly ironic is if they shuttled Runhappy to the southern hemisphere and he picked up this sponsorship:

The Runhappy Melbourne Cup

In reply toRe: msg 22
Wintertrian

From: Wintertrian

9/18/19

Gerh said...

was a little skeptical of the contamination story when I saw he had 3 times the threshold.To be honest,my immediate reaction was “how much did he eat”

Here's the deal with all this.  

It doesn't MATTER if the "contamination" was intentional or not.  A result for a banned illegal substance was found in extremely high amounts.  And was swept under the rug.  

Now, what about the safety of all the other horses at SA?    A contamination level of that magnitude, if you read the studies, coming from bedding or feed SHOULD HAVE triggered a broad and widespread announcement, to every barn and every horseman at SA ......becuase it's not safe and it's not normal. 

BY covering it up, the CHRB acted irrecponsibly and negligently toward all the horses stabled under their care and premises......and if indeed, it wasn't intentional, but that level of contamination is coming from feed or bedding, then the supplier of said materials really needed to be contacted, informed, questioned, investigated, and more tests done. 

HOw can anyone NOT see this?    

So, yeah, we also need to know what the levels were that the other horses tested had.  


Any horseman who had a barna and horses around that time there should be livid, however.  There was zero regard for their safety when all this was swept under the rug.  Zero.  


Again, 4x over the level, which by the way, in Australia, would have been 12x the acceptable level!  Yet nobody was informed????????

Msg 1316.40 deleted
TOP