This is a place for friendly and civil discussion of horse racing of all types including handicapping.
Latest Jul-22 by Oldbettowin
Latest Oct-14 by DogsUp
Latest Oct-13 by RAESFAN
Latest Oct-10 by Wintertrian
Latest Oct-9 by Wintertrian
Latest Oct-6 by RAESFAN
Latest Oct-5 by TexSquared
Latest Oct-2 by chroses
Latest Sep-28 by princeofdoc
Latest Sep-27 by princeofdoc
Latest Sep-27 by DogsUp
Latest Sep-24 by Gerh
Latest Sep-19 by TexSquared
Latest Sep-19 by DogsUp
Wow, just wow. So Hollendorfer was kicked out of Santa Anita but Baffert gets to stay?
Forgive me if my question has been asked and answered here already. Is it possible that Baffert could have used the ointment AND injected the drug? Would the presence of the ointment ingredients necessarily mean he is innocent? Could it be that's why the residual amount was so high?
Possible... the ointment being used as an excuse to hide the injected drugs? And if the WP article is any indication, Kentucky will find a way to let him get away with it.
The only people sticking up for Baffert are 1) his lawyers; 2) his apologists; 3) people who sat on Boards together with Baffert and for whom he made gobs of money.
The intermingling and conflicts of interest would make the most crooked parish in Lousiana look clean. :)
Few others are fooled. Of course Baffert wants fines, not suspensions. $20K in fines against a $361 million dollar in earnings is like less than half a penny in punishment out of his pocket.
Read what Monty Roberts ("he pushes the envelope to the extent that they (horses) give their lives for his bank account.”), Barry Irwin, Jockey Club Pres James Gagliano, Arthur B. Hancock III, and other respectable persons have to say.
Also read about our pathetic lack of regulatory oversight, as well as how we treat racehorses in the U.S. as disposable widgets because nobody is even keeping track of the deaths by trainer and/or deaths and injuries are barred from data sharing because of contracts with tracks, and how underhanded any and every effort to look further into Baffert has been politically stymied or met with a battalion of attorneys.
Medina Spirit has such a "kind eye". (ever notice some of the sweetest nicest horses get stuck with the worst owners and trainers (Big Brown). I wish Medina Spirit the very best. I really only care about the horses.
If one goes back to 2011/12 during a 16 month period Baffert had 7 horses drop dead suddenly & it was these events & how he responded that cemented my opinion of him as a horse killer.
Imagine the lack of attention or sheer callousness it would take to continue to employ the same pharmaceutical methods as not one, not 2, not 3 or 4 or even 5 horses dropped dead on your watch. To only stop at 7 when the racing media got hold of the story.
That's Beta Bob. Always extracting more from the sport & from the horses than what he gives.
There isn't an international jurisdiction on the planet that would allow him to keep his trainer's license with the kind of record Baffert sports.
However, I will not be surprised if he weasels his way back to full standing here in the US.
Looks like a great article.....but you have to subscribe to read?
I'm not subscribed to the Post (or any other news source). Click it, it should show.
SameSteve G said...There isn't an international jurisdiction on the planet that would allow him to keep his trainer's license with the kind of record Baffert sports.
That's the FACE OF U.S. RACING.
Let that sink in.......
(I can't even tell you how many times I've been told off by fellow racing fans whenever I said anything negative about him starting back in 2011.)
So, give the people what they want already. This is what they want.
Saying otherwise got me branded as a PETA sypathizer. hahahahahaha.
As a matter of fact, to this day, I am still being told "this is how it is done, everywhere". hahahhahaahaha
The same people who say, "these horses are treated & cared for better than you're treated."
Sure. That statement only flies as a trite bromide to paper over the far too frequent instances when that is decidedly not the case.
Without getting too far out in leftfield, my position is that there is an imperative to consider the immaterial (and far more potent) consequences of one's actions.