50 to 1 long shot, Mine That Bird pulled off a giant upset yesterday at Churchill Downs in the 135th running of the Kentucky Derby.
Costing $9,500 and coming from dead last to win the race by 6 and 3/4 lengths is an incredible story....possibly an unbelievable one. When pre race favorite, I Want Revenge, trained by now suspended Jeff Mullins, pulled out of the race earlier in the day, Friesan Fire then became the favorite. However, that horse would finish second to last. How could the so-called experts be so wrong?
Earlier in the week, The New York Times inquired with the 20 owners what medications, if any, their horses were using. Only three owners responded. One reason given for not sharing their veterinary records was to protect the horse's privacy. 15% of the owners responded - this after a year in which the curtain was removed from the general public's eyes with the secrets of horse racing: steroids, legal, yet morally questionable, injections and a Congressional hearing. After all that, one would expect more transparency. Apparently, the owners in this year's Derby did not get that memo.
Of course the owners of Mine That Bird did not disclose any information to the NYT. Is this story too good to be true or the fairy tale ending the sport needed to get over the death of Eight Belles?
Showing posts with label Eight Belles. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Eight Belles. Show all posts
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Friday, March 20, 2009
3 Breakdowns a Day Since the Derby
William Rhoden of The New York Times attempts to address this issue in his column from today's paper. In it, he looks at whether or not legal medications are allowing race horses the ability to perform when in another era they would not be out on the track.
Rhoden cites that since January there have been seven fatal breakdowns at New York's Aqueduct Race Track. The breakdowns are not reserved to race conditions at the Aqueduct, a dirt surface; Santa Anita in California, a synthetic surface, has also seen seven fatal horse breakdowns since late December.
Paul J. Campo, the vice president and director of racing for the New York Racing Association, believes there is no rhyme or reason for the recent surge in fatal breakdowns. “I don’t think there is any explanation to it. It’s an unfortunate part of our industry that we don’t like. But we try to minimize any type of breakdowns we have using all the policies and procedures we have in place.”
I think I’ve heard that type of thinking before from other sports leagues in the past. Deny, deny, deny and think that all protections and procedures are in place when in reality they are not. Far from it, especially in a sport like horse racing when the horses have no say in what goes in their bodies. Rhoden lays out three types of legal drugs that should be curtailed. They are: Lasix (race-day drug used to prevent bleeding of the lungs), nonsteroidal, anti-inflammatory drugs (i.e. phenylbutazone, flunixin and ketoprofen since they mask deficiencies in certain horses) and steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (used to decrease inflammation).
If more fatal breakdowns occur on horse racing’s biggest stage, look for more outcry leading to even more change for the sport. Hopefully, the leaders will look at the numbers and instead of citing bad luck, realize that there is something bigger and more pronounced going on and that they have the ability to curtail more horse breakdowns in the future. Perhaps policies and procedures will need to change…again.
Friday, March 6, 2009
Kentucky Derby to "Super Test" Winning Horses
It's been awhile since my last two posts on horse racing, but the sport is making news two months before the Kentucky Derby.Churchill Downs in a release this past Monday said it will implement new safety measures for this year's Derby and all of its tracks. All winning horses will get a "super test" for more than 100 types of drugs exceeding the previously required amount. Other safety measures included are extending the safety tests for track surfaces, banning certain types of whips and prohibiting horses younger than 24 months old from racing.
Good for Churchill Downs for instituting the "super test", but one has to wonder why not provide the test for all participants? If the goal is to prevent all the cheats, super test everyone, not just the winners.
Any good news is a step in the right direction for this sport after the year horse racing had. Since last year's Derby, there was a Congressional hearing, another suspension for trainer Rick Dutrow, the euthanizing on the track last year of Derby runner up, Eight Belles, and the realization that Derby winner Big Brown was roided out of its mind on Winstrol and didn't win the Triple Crown when he wasn't on the juice.
This racing season will probably have its share of drama, shocking revelations and a suspension or two. In other words, business as usual.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Big Brown's Stable to Go Roid Free...by Oct. 1st
Big Brown's owners are leading the charge in cleaning up horse racing when they announced Sunday that they would immediately begin withdrawing all steroids and any unnecessary medications from their horses. "Immediately" is a bit of a misnomer since the ban will be in place October 1st, conveniently after Big Brown's next race, August 3rd in the Haskell Invitational. This action is on the heels of Congress raising serious doubts that the sport can govern itself as currently constructed and considering adopting a national authority to oversee the sport.
Michael Iavarone, a co-president of International Equine Acquisitions Holdings (IEAH) which owns Big Brown among other horses, said that the more than 50 horses owned by his stable would be drug free by Oct. 1, and to quell speculation of roided up horses, that they would pay for tests to be administered by state or track veterinarians before and after each of their races to prove it.
He's confident that his stable does not need the juice to be successful out on the track. “I know Big Brown or any of our horses do not need this stuff to win,” he said. “I’m not worried about an uneven playing field, either. The cost of the drug tests are a small price to pay for the integrity of the sport. I’m urging other owners to join us, and let’s turn the game around.”
Controversial trainer, Rick Dutrow, is on board with the self-imposed ban on all medications perceived to be performance-enhancing. However, not all PED's and medications are off the table. The stable’s horses will continue to run on the legal anti bleeding medication Lasix when necessary.
IEAH might not have won the Triple Crown, but they struck gold when they brokered a deal to sell Big Brown’s breeding rights for about $60 million. For a relatively new outfit, IEAH has had quite a bit of success. So far in 2008, their stable has won more than $5.7 million in purses and won at a 23 percent clip. Bolstering their claim that their horses do not need the juice, they have won in Dubai, where the rules against drug use are the most stringent in the world. Dutrow, in written testimony submitted to the Congressional subcommittee last week, cited his horses’ victories in two $1 million races in Dubai as evidence that his horses could thrive in a drug-free environment.
Losing the Triple Crown was costly to IEAH. Besides the controversy of whether or not Big Brown is a "chemical horse", Iavarone said that performance cost at least $50 million in the breeding shed and in future marketing deals.
Just how costly was the Belmont? Try $60,000 - $125,000 per breeding session. According to the New York Times, "if Big Brown, a bay colt, never raced again, he might attract $40,000 to $75,000 for a breeding session versus the $100,000 to $200,000 he would have earned as a nobly defeated Triple Crown challenger or the 12th horse to sweep the series".
A novel twist to just going drug free for your stable was Iavarone's suggestion that racetracks and Daily Racing Form print in their programs that horses owned by IEAH, and any owner who adopts the policy, be listed as drug free. From a punishment standpoint, Iavarone also said that if any of his horses failed a drug test that IEAH pays for, the company would return the purse money. No word on what the punishment would be if a horse failed a drug test that IEAH did not pay for.
Whenever Congress gets involved in any one's business, that's when participants start circling the wagons. A few good ideas in this proposal and the glaringly obvious conflict of interest issues need to be addressed. Nice p.r. stunt to be an "early adopter" and "on the cutting edge" of drug testing and PED's in the sport. There is some history to back up IEAH and Dutrow's claims that they both won under the most stringent drug testing circumstances. Why not institute this policy before your most famous horse, Big Brown's, next race? The speculation will just continue to rise if Big Brown wins at the Haskell.
Given the conflict of interest, the general public will not buy that this process is being handled independently. This is exactly why Congress got involved and felt that the sport cannot police itself and is leaning to create a national, independent governing body. Nice try IEAH, a step in the right direction, but too little, too late and I'm not buying it.
Michael Iavarone, a co-president of International Equine Acquisitions Holdings (IEAH) which owns Big Brown among other horses, said that the more than 50 horses owned by his stable would be drug free by Oct. 1, and to quell speculation of roided up horses, that they would pay for tests to be administered by state or track veterinarians before and after each of their races to prove it.
He's confident that his stable does not need the juice to be successful out on the track. “I know Big Brown or any of our horses do not need this stuff to win,” he said. “I’m not worried about an uneven playing field, either. The cost of the drug tests are a small price to pay for the integrity of the sport. I’m urging other owners to join us, and let’s turn the game around.”
Controversial trainer, Rick Dutrow, is on board with the self-imposed ban on all medications perceived to be performance-enhancing. However, not all PED's and medications are off the table. The stable’s horses will continue to run on the legal anti bleeding medication Lasix when necessary.
IEAH might not have won the Triple Crown, but they struck gold when they brokered a deal to sell Big Brown’s breeding rights for about $60 million. For a relatively new outfit, IEAH has had quite a bit of success. So far in 2008, their stable has won more than $5.7 million in purses and won at a 23 percent clip. Bolstering their claim that their horses do not need the juice, they have won in Dubai, where the rules against drug use are the most stringent in the world. Dutrow, in written testimony submitted to the Congressional subcommittee last week, cited his horses’ victories in two $1 million races in Dubai as evidence that his horses could thrive in a drug-free environment.
Losing the Triple Crown was costly to IEAH. Besides the controversy of whether or not Big Brown is a "chemical horse", Iavarone said that performance cost at least $50 million in the breeding shed and in future marketing deals.
Just how costly was the Belmont? Try $60,000 - $125,000 per breeding session. According to the New York Times, "if Big Brown, a bay colt, never raced again, he might attract $40,000 to $75,000 for a breeding session versus the $100,000 to $200,000 he would have earned as a nobly defeated Triple Crown challenger or the 12th horse to sweep the series".
A novel twist to just going drug free for your stable was Iavarone's suggestion that racetracks and Daily Racing Form print in their programs that horses owned by IEAH, and any owner who adopts the policy, be listed as drug free. From a punishment standpoint, Iavarone also said that if any of his horses failed a drug test that IEAH pays for, the company would return the purse money. No word on what the punishment would be if a horse failed a drug test that IEAH did not pay for.
Whenever Congress gets involved in any one's business, that's when participants start circling the wagons. A few good ideas in this proposal and the glaringly obvious conflict of interest issues need to be addressed. Nice p.r. stunt to be an "early adopter" and "on the cutting edge" of drug testing and PED's in the sport. There is some history to back up IEAH and Dutrow's claims that they both won under the most stringent drug testing circumstances. Why not institute this policy before your most famous horse, Big Brown's, next race? The speculation will just continue to rise if Big Brown wins at the Haskell.
Given the conflict of interest, the general public will not buy that this process is being handled independently. This is exactly why Congress got involved and felt that the sport cannot police itself and is leaning to create a national, independent governing body. Nice try IEAH, a step in the right direction, but too little, too late and I'm not buying it.
Friday, June 13, 2008
Congress Sets Sights on MLB & Horse Racing
Congress is ready to jump back into the PED fray over the next two weeks and is targeting MLB and horse racing. The horse hearing will be held next week while Congress awaits responses from a letter issued to MLB and the players union within two weeks.
The horse racing hearing was called due to the public outcry over Eight Belles being euthanized on the track after the Kentucky Derby. A statement from the committee called that recent deaths "point to a persistent and widespread problem, raising significant questions about the sport and its governance."
Controversial Big Brown trainer, Rick Dutrow Jr., will testify at the hearing. He has admitted publicly that he injects his horses with Winstrol on the 15th of each month. Steroids are legal in 28 of 38 racing jurisdictions including the three where the Triple Crown takes place.
He stated that Big Brown did not receive an injection in May. There has been much speculation that the reason why Big Brown finished last at the Belmont and did not have the "kick" that he normally has, was due to the lack of roids. Dutrow is aware that the committee will ask him about roids which is why he'll have his veterinarian with him so he answers the questions "fully and informed."
A world class trainer who has been shooting up his horses with roids needs his vet to be there so he can answer questions fully and be informed? Are you kidding me, RD Jr.? No one pops pills or puts anything in their body without "being informed". You make your living by training horses and I would assume you are already fully informed of the benefits and consequences of each steroid you inject in your animals. Something does not add up, and Dutrow can sense that the committee will see this. A little misdirection and preparing to be the sacrificial lamb for his sport seems like a nice p.r. stunt.
"I'm also interested in answering the questions about surfaces and fatal injuries. I'm coming here in good faith. And if they want to kill me, I'm going try to be prepared for that." Answering questions about surfaces? Congress does not call hearings regarding surfaces in horse racing. The topic is recent deaths and governance issues in the sport. Stay on topic or prepare for death, Mr. Dutrow, because Congress will be looking for blood.
"MLB has "done it once again" by appearing to be less than forthright in their 2005 Congressional testimony. Both MLB Commissioner Bud Selig and the head of the players union, Donald Fehr appear to have contradicted the Mitchell Report findings when they testified in 2005.
The issue at the center of the controversy is MLB's claim that positive PED test results were dramatically reduced from 2003 to 2004 (from more than 100 to 12). What MLB and the players union failed to disclose in their testimony was drug testing in 2004 was suspended for a portion of the season. Congress wants to know, if the program was suspended, why this information was not disclosed in their testimony. Congress also asked whether some players were given advance notice of upcoming tests and if this was the case, why this information was not disclosed in their testimony.
In the Mitchell Report, it was uncovered and confirmed by baseball and union officials that the random drug testing program was suspended for a large part of the 2004 season. Also in the report, at least one player was informed by Gene Orza, the chief operating officer for the players union, that he would be tested within two weeks.
Donald Fehr and MLB were both on the same page regarding the integrity of the testing program in 2005. Fehr said, "no player knew when he was going to be tested" and Rob Manfred, baseball's executive vice president for labor relations, wrote to the Congressional committee in 2005 "no notice was provided to players prior to testing."
The testing was suspended in 2004 after the 2003 positive results were seized as part of the BALCO investigation in April 2004. For the players who tested positive in 2003, they were not tested until the end of the 2004 season. It was determined that those players were not to be tested until they had been notified that their results had been seized. Orza did not notify the players until late in the season, leaving little time for the annual test to occur.
It doesn't take an average IQ MLB'er, who still thinks the pie in the face is high hilarity, to know when it's time to cycle off the juice. This group of 100 players who were being notified late in the season, already tested positive in 2003 and more than likely were still using. Orza already advised one player that he would be tested in two weeks, how many other players did he notify?
Gene Orza declined to provide additional details to George Mitchell when he declined Mitchell's interview request. Nice work on the transparency and legitimatizing your constituency Mr. Orza. You served your people well.
The horse racing hearing was called due to the public outcry over Eight Belles being euthanized on the track after the Kentucky Derby. A statement from the committee called that recent deaths "point to a persistent and widespread problem, raising significant questions about the sport and its governance."
Controversial Big Brown trainer, Rick Dutrow Jr., will testify at the hearing. He has admitted publicly that he injects his horses with Winstrol on the 15th of each month. Steroids are legal in 28 of 38 racing jurisdictions including the three where the Triple Crown takes place.
He stated that Big Brown did not receive an injection in May. There has been much speculation that the reason why Big Brown finished last at the Belmont and did not have the "kick" that he normally has, was due to the lack of roids. Dutrow is aware that the committee will ask him about roids which is why he'll have his veterinarian with him so he answers the questions "fully and informed."
A world class trainer who has been shooting up his horses with roids needs his vet to be there so he can answer questions fully and be informed? Are you kidding me, RD Jr.? No one pops pills or puts anything in their body without "being informed". You make your living by training horses and I would assume you are already fully informed of the benefits and consequences of each steroid you inject in your animals. Something does not add up, and Dutrow can sense that the committee will see this. A little misdirection and preparing to be the sacrificial lamb for his sport seems like a nice p.r. stunt.
"I'm also interested in answering the questions about surfaces and fatal injuries. I'm coming here in good faith. And if they want to kill me, I'm going try to be prepared for that." Answering questions about surfaces? Congress does not call hearings regarding surfaces in horse racing. The topic is recent deaths and governance issues in the sport. Stay on topic or prepare for death, Mr. Dutrow, because Congress will be looking for blood.
"MLB has "done it once again" by appearing to be less than forthright in their 2005 Congressional testimony. Both MLB Commissioner Bud Selig and the head of the players union, Donald Fehr appear to have contradicted the Mitchell Report findings when they testified in 2005.
The issue at the center of the controversy is MLB's claim that positive PED test results were dramatically reduced from 2003 to 2004 (from more than 100 to 12). What MLB and the players union failed to disclose in their testimony was drug testing in 2004 was suspended for a portion of the season. Congress wants to know, if the program was suspended, why this information was not disclosed in their testimony. Congress also asked whether some players were given advance notice of upcoming tests and if this was the case, why this information was not disclosed in their testimony.
In the Mitchell Report, it was uncovered and confirmed by baseball and union officials that the random drug testing program was suspended for a large part of the 2004 season. Also in the report, at least one player was informed by Gene Orza, the chief operating officer for the players union, that he would be tested within two weeks.
Donald Fehr and MLB were both on the same page regarding the integrity of the testing program in 2005. Fehr said, "no player knew when he was going to be tested" and Rob Manfred, baseball's executive vice president for labor relations, wrote to the Congressional committee in 2005 "no notice was provided to players prior to testing."
The testing was suspended in 2004 after the 2003 positive results were seized as part of the BALCO investigation in April 2004. For the players who tested positive in 2003, they were not tested until the end of the 2004 season. It was determined that those players were not to be tested until they had been notified that their results had been seized. Orza did not notify the players until late in the season, leaving little time for the annual test to occur.
It doesn't take an average IQ MLB'er, who still thinks the pie in the face is high hilarity, to know when it's time to cycle off the juice. This group of 100 players who were being notified late in the season, already tested positive in 2003 and more than likely were still using. Orza already advised one player that he would be tested in two weeks, how many other players did he notify?
Gene Orza declined to provide additional details to George Mitchell when he declined Mitchell's interview request. Nice work on the transparency and legitimatizing your constituency Mr. Orza. You served your people well.
Thursday, June 5, 2008
Big Brown Cycling Off the Juice
After appearing on Jim Rome is Burning yesterday, Rick Dutrow Jr said Big Brown did not get his monthly shot of Winstrol. He's been off roids, according to Dutrow, since mid-April. Apparently horses have to cycle off their roids like humans.
I'm sure Big Brown going off the juice had nothing to do with the firestorm that erupted after Dutrow admitted to shooting up the Triple Crown favorite with Winstrol last month. What happens if Big Brown doesn't win the Belmont on Saturday? People will say the horse wasn't roided up enough! The guy cannot win on this one.
More curious is why mainstream media has refused to question why Eight Belles was the only horse tested for steroids, yet all horses from the Kentucky Derby were tested for banned substances. I'm sure the horse racing honks would say it's because steroids are legal in 28 of the 38 states where horse racing occurs including the three states where the Triple Crown takes place. The honks would also toe the company line and say that there is no advantage gained by injecting a horse with roids. If there's no advantage, why are trainers doing it.
The simple solution to this controversy is level the playing field by banning all steroids in the 28 states where it's legal. At least the sport will appear it is out in front on this issue unlike baseball which had to be pushed to act by Congress. The cheaters will still move on to some undetectable PED, but at least we can stop reciting the same statistics and rehash the same annual controversy every May and June when discussing the Triple Crown.
I'm sure Big Brown going off the juice had nothing to do with the firestorm that erupted after Dutrow admitted to shooting up the Triple Crown favorite with Winstrol last month. What happens if Big Brown doesn't win the Belmont on Saturday? People will say the horse wasn't roided up enough! The guy cannot win on this one.
More curious is why mainstream media has refused to question why Eight Belles was the only horse tested for steroids, yet all horses from the Kentucky Derby were tested for banned substances. I'm sure the horse racing honks would say it's because steroids are legal in 28 of the 38 states where horse racing occurs including the three states where the Triple Crown takes place. The honks would also toe the company line and say that there is no advantage gained by injecting a horse with roids. If there's no advantage, why are trainers doing it.
The simple solution to this controversy is level the playing field by banning all steroids in the 28 states where it's legal. At least the sport will appear it is out in front on this issue unlike baseball which had to be pushed to act by Congress. The cheaters will still move on to some undetectable PED, but at least we can stop reciting the same statistics and rehash the same annual controversy every May and June when discussing the Triple Crown.
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Eight Belles Negative for Roids
Now that the test results came back negative for Eight Belles, we can breathe a sigh of a relief and know that the sport is clean. Well, not exactly. It turns out, Eight Bells was the only horse tested for steroids.
A closer reading of the article states that all horses from the Kentucky Derby and Kentucky Oaks including winner Big Brown, tested negative for all banned substances, but that only Eight Belles was tested for steroids. What's interesting about that statement: it's a tacit admission that roids are not considered banned substances.
After Big Brown's easy victory at the Preakness, perhaps Eight Belles should have been on monthly injections of Winstrol like Big Brown was, as mentioned here last week. Winstrol might have given the win to Eight Belles then; it's certainly been beneficial to Big Brown.
A closer reading of the article states that all horses from the Kentucky Derby and Kentucky Oaks including winner Big Brown, tested negative for all banned substances, but that only Eight Belles was tested for steroids. What's interesting about that statement: it's a tacit admission that roids are not considered banned substances.
After Big Brown's easy victory at the Preakness, perhaps Eight Belles should have been on monthly injections of Winstrol like Big Brown was, as mentioned here last week. Winstrol might have given the win to Eight Belles then; it's certainly been beneficial to Big Brown.
Thursday, May 15, 2008
Big Brown Trainer Admits to Roiding Horses
The trainer for the Kentucky Derby winner Big Brown, Rick Dutrow Jr., has admitted to legally using the steroid Winstrol on his horses. This is the same steroid that Barry Bonds was allegedly using per "Game of Shadows". Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel also confirmed this story on the program that aired on May 13th.
Per the article from HBPA.com, the Feb. 27th House Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection's hearing on PED's was uneventful until Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-KY) shed some light on the current situation in horse racing. Whitfield advised that rampant drug use requires a universal drug-testing program to eradicate doping in the sport.
"Trainers and vets make the decisions, and the horse cannot say no," Whitfield said. "England, for instance, banned steroids in racing over 30 years ago." He also said steroids are contributing to the injuries of the racehorses. Eight Belles broke both front ankles and had to be euthanized after finishing the Kentucky Derby.
Dr. George Maylin, the director of the NY State Racing and Wagering Board drug testing and research program at Cornell University, is optimistic that the sport can clean up on its own. I do not share the doctor's optimism. It was this same optimistic thought that has baseball still backpedalling from their Congressional hearings in 2005.
Per the article from HBPA.com, the Feb. 27th House Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection's hearing on PED's was uneventful until Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-KY) shed some light on the current situation in horse racing. Whitfield advised that rampant drug use requires a universal drug-testing program to eradicate doping in the sport.
"Trainers and vets make the decisions, and the horse cannot say no," Whitfield said. "England, for instance, banned steroids in racing over 30 years ago." He also said steroids are contributing to the injuries of the racehorses. Eight Belles broke both front ankles and had to be euthanized after finishing the Kentucky Derby.
Dr. George Maylin, the director of the NY State Racing and Wagering Board drug testing and research program at Cornell University, is optimistic that the sport can clean up on its own. I do not share the doctor's optimism. It was this same optimistic thought that has baseball still backpedalling from their Congressional hearings in 2005.
As for trainer Rick Dutrow Jr., he gives his horses Winstrol on the 15th of every month. If authorities advise the trainer he cannot use the steroid, he'll cease using it. Dutrow does believe doping is going on in the sport. "I don't know how but I'm sure it happens every day. Some people just want to make their horses run faster."
Mr. Dutrow, sure you don't know how the doping is taking place. Abusing steroids, such as Winstrol, would be considered doping. It's comforting to know that the MLB home run champ and the Kentucky Derby champ are roiding up on Winstrol.
Good luck to you and Big Brown at the Preakness....Barry will be pulling for you.
Saturday, May 10, 2008
Horse To Be Tested For Steroids
After the tragedy that befell Eight Belles, the runner up in last week's Kentucky Derby, the trainer of the horse ordered drug testing as a part of the autopsy to dispel any notion that the horse was 'roided up.
Larry Jones, the trainer, "guaranteed" that there were never any steroids on the horse. Jones was responding to the criticism that the horse was so large.
I don't know if there is roid testing in horse racing. If there isn't testing, there should be. Just as Larry, you better be right in your guarantee or your backpedaling act will be more entertaining to watch than the Preakness.
Larry Jones, the trainer, "guaranteed" that there were never any steroids on the horse. Jones was responding to the criticism that the horse was so large.
I don't know if there is roid testing in horse racing. If there isn't testing, there should be. Just as Larry, you better be right in your guarantee or your backpedaling act will be more entertaining to watch than the Preakness.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
