Hogville Info
• 10,921,849 Posts
• 424,832 Topics
• 24,851 Hogvillians
THE RULES (Read 'em!)
Quick Links
Pick'Ems:Football      Basketball      Baseball
Sister Sites:Gridiron HistoryFearless Friday
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Violators v cheaters  (Read 303 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ghostzapper

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Total likes: 69
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,597
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Violators v cheaters
« on: June 21, 2020, 07:28:45 am »

I thought this probably deserved its own thread though it will likely devolve into a Baffert Gamine topic. 

I am not naive to the idea that people will do anything to get an edge in this game.  But it seems to me that racing fans are cynics by nature and will immediately default to the idea that any trainer who has sustained success or whose animals perform at exceptional levels is cheating.  It has already been suggested in this thread that Baffert had to cheat in order to get Gamine to do what she did yesterday.  It gets old to me when it isnít backed up by anything, and when the suggestion defies common sense and logic. 

There are those who try and stay ahead of the game and drug detection techniques by creating or using yet-to-be-detected drugs to enhance a horseís performance (though I have yet to see a drug that can make a slow horse run fast). These are generally smart guys who understand the testing methodologies and know the drug manufacturors and plan accordingly to avoid detection.  Servis and Navarro fall into that category and I will call them cheaters.

There is a subset of that category of cheaters and that is the dumb trainer who simply believes he can get away with overuse of a drug when it is easily detected by testing.  I found these to be few and far between in my experience in racing.

Then there are those who try things that havenít been approved but which do not appear to violate any prohibitions.  Milkshakes fit this description in my day.  They were made up of ingredients that werenít prohibited but people who used them thought they had an effect on oxygenation (or something), they didnít hurt the horse, so why not?  I never understood why anyone used them (as they were initially designed) but they did.  Not cheating, but also not using something generally accepted by the medical world or approved by Racing Commissions.  Kind of like rubbing garlic on a horse for good luck.

Then there are the violators, those who get popped with negative drug tests for whom the most logical explanation is the drug made it there by human error (a vet) or via human contamination.  The amounts are generally low, suggesting the trainer did not intend the administration to be a performance enhancer.  To conclude otherwise attributes a special stupidity to the trainer that puts him or her in the subset of cheaters I describe above.  Violators must absorb the penalties that come from their violations, but they are afforded a process to, and generally succeed at, prove mitigating circumstances that show they arenít cheaters. 

Cheaters are usually detectable because of the trainers gaudy win percentages and miraculous turnarounds they achieve in a horseís performance.  They do so while passing tests.  Violators donít generally have gaudy win totals or form reversals and are caught by routine testing. 

Lots of people assume Baffert is a cheater.  Based on what?  I am not asking because I am certain he is not a cheater, but nothing in his history to date defines him as anything but a violator.   Same for Asmussen, Pletcher, Mott or any of the other long term, successful trainers.   Rumors swirl around Diodorino and others.  I just get tired of hearing final determinations Based on rumor.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2020, 08:49:47 am by ghostzapper »
Logged

HawgWild

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Total likes: 122
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 5,694
  • "You didn't choose me. I chose you." Coach Pittman
Re: Violators v cheaters
« Reply #1 on: June 21, 2020, 08:07:36 am »

From the comments on this I heard from Jerry Bailey and Randy Moss yesterday, they seemed to be in the latter camp; Baffert will provide a logical explanation once the Arkansas Racing Commission frees him to speak after finishing up with sample "B".
Logged

Sponsored Ad



Hogville encourages you to do business with the following...

ghostzapper

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Total likes: 69
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,597
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Violators v cheaters
« Reply #2 on: June 21, 2020, 08:47:05 am »

The stuff about which I am incredibly ignorant is blood doping. 

The thing that gives me pause to assume it occurs as frequently as we say it does is the number of people who would likely be involved in the cheating and the absence of whistleblowers. 
Logged

HogFanInBryant

Re: Violators v cheaters
« Reply #3 on: June 21, 2020, 09:17:36 pm »

I thought this probably deserved its own thread though it will likely devolve into a Baffert Gamine topic. 

I am not naive to the idea that people will do anything to get an edge in this game.  But it seems to me that racing fans are cynics by nature and will immediately default to the idea that any trainer who has sustained success or whose animals perform at exceptional levels is cheating.  It has already been suggested in this thread that Baffert had to cheat in order to get Gamine to do what she did yesterday.  It gets old to me when it isnít backed up by anything, and when the suggestion defies common sense and logic. 

There are those who try and stay ahead of the game and drug detection techniques by creating or using yet-to-be-detected drugs to enhance a horseís performance (though I have yet to see a drug that can make a slow horse run fast). These are generally smart guys who understand the testing methodologies and know the drug manufacturors and plan accordingly to avoid detection.  Servis and Navarro fall into that category and I will call them cheaters.

There is a subset of that category of cheaters and that is the dumb trainer who simply believes he can get away with overuse of a drug when it is easily detected by testing.  I found these to be few and far between in my experience in racing.

Then there are those who try things that havenít been approved but which do not appear to violate any prohibitions.  Milkshakes fit this description in my day.  They were made up of ingredients that werenít prohibited but people who used them thought they had an effect on oxygenation (or something), they didnít hurt the horse, so why not?  I never understood why anyone used them (as they were initially designed) but they did.  Not cheating, but also not using something generally accepted by the medical world or approved by Racing Commissions.  Kind of like rubbing garlic on a horse for good luck.

Then there are the violators, those who get popped with negative drug tests for whom the most logical explanation is the drug made it there by human error (a vet) or via human contamination.  The amounts are generally low, suggesting the trainer did not intend the administration to be a performance enhancer.  To conclude otherwise attributes a special stupidity to the trainer that puts him or her in the subset of cheaters I describe above.  Violators must absorb the penalties that come from their violations, but they are afforded a process to, and generally succeed at, prove mitigating circumstances that show they arenít cheaters. 

Cheaters are usually detectable because of the trainers gaudy win percentages and miraculous turnarounds they achieve in a horseís performance.  They do so while passing tests.  Violators donít generally have gaudy win totals or form reversals and are caught by routine testing. 

Lots of people assume Baffert is a cheater.  Based on what?  I am not asking because I am certain he is not a cheater, but nothing in his history to date defines him as anything but a violator.   Same for Asmussen, Pletcher, Mott or any of the other long term, successful trainers.   Rumors swirl around Diodorino and others.  I just get tired of hearing final determinations Based on rumor.

My comment in the other thread was based solely on what I was seeing on Twitter.  It seems like many who work in the industry have lost a lot of respect for BB and they seem to not be shy about it on a public forum like Twitter.  I am new on Twitter, so I guess I was just a little naive to see how many seem to be turning on him. 
Logged

ghostzapper

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Total likes: 69
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,597
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Violators v cheaters
« Reply #4 on: June 22, 2020, 07:07:25 am »

My comment in the other thread was based solely on what I was seeing on Twitter.  It seems like many who work in the industry have lost a lot of respect for BB and they seem to not be shy about it on a public forum like Twitter.  I am new on Twitter, so I guess I was just a little naive to see how many seem to be turning on him.

I have seen those too.  Go read the comments section of any Paulick Report article and you will see the same thing.  None of those people seem to ever suggest they know something to back up their claims.
Logged

HogFanInBryant

Re: Violators v cheaters
« Reply #5 on: June 22, 2020, 07:58:10 am »

I have seen those too.  Go read the comments section of any Paulick Report article and you will see the same thing.  None of those people seem to ever suggest they know something to back up their claims.

I just wonder if there will be a Lance Armstrong type history turner with Justify and AP if things get really ugly and there becomes date to back things up?
Logged

showhimthewhip

  • Varsity
  • ****
  • Total likes: 1
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 452
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Violators v cheaters
« Reply #6 on: June 24, 2020, 12:31:20 pm »

From the comments on this I heard from Jerry Bailey and Randy Moss yesterday, they seemed to be in the latter camp; Baffert will provide a logical explanation once the Arkansas Racing Commission frees him to speak after finishing up with sample "B".

Simply stating my opinion here and you can derive from it what you wish.  If Bob Baffert goes down, so would the sport of horse racing as we know it.
Logged

cbhawg03

Re: Violators v cheaters
« Reply #7 on: June 24, 2020, 01:54:21 pm »

I thought this probably deserved its own thread though it will likely devolve into a Baffert Gamine topic. 

I am not naive to the idea that people will do anything to get an edge in this game.  But it seems to me that racing fans are cynics by nature and will immediately default to the idea that any trainer who has sustained success or whose animals perform at exceptional levels is cheating.  It has already been suggested in this thread that Baffert had to cheat in order to get Gamine to do what she did yesterday.  It gets old to me when it isnít backed up by anything, and when the suggestion defies common sense and logic. 

There are those who try and stay ahead of the game and drug detection techniques by creating or using yet-to-be-detected drugs to enhance a horseís performance (though I have yet to see a drug that can make a slow horse run fast). These are generally smart guys who understand the testing methodologies and know the drug manufacturors and plan accordingly to avoid detection.  Servis and Navarro fall into that category and I will call them cheaters.

There is a subset of that category of cheaters and that is the dumb trainer who simply believes he can get away with overuse of a drug when it is easily detected by testing.  I found these to be few and far between in my experience in racing.

Then there are those who try things that havenít been approved but which do not appear to violate any prohibitions.  Milkshakes fit this description in my day.  They were made up of ingredients that werenít prohibited but people who used them thought they had an effect on oxygenation (or something), they didnít hurt the horse, so why not?  I never understood why anyone used them (as they were initially designed) but they did.  Not cheating, but also not using something generally accepted by the medical world or approved by Racing Commissions.  Kind of like rubbing garlic on a horse for good luck.

Then there are the violators, those who get popped with negative drug tests for whom the most logical explanation is the drug made it there by human error (a vet) or via human contamination.  The amounts are generally low, suggesting the trainer did not intend the administration to be a performance enhancer.  To conclude otherwise attributes a special stupidity to the trainer that puts him or her in the subset of cheaters I describe above.  Violators must absorb the penalties that come from their violations, but they are afforded a process to, and generally succeed at, prove mitigating circumstances that show they arenít cheaters. 

Cheaters are usually detectable because of the trainers gaudy win percentages and miraculous turnarounds they achieve in a horseís performance.  They do so while passing tests.  Violators donít generally have gaudy win totals or form reversals and are caught by routine testing. 

Lots of people assume Baffert is a cheater.  Based on what?  I am not asking because I am certain he is not a cheater, but nothing in his history to date defines him as anything but a violator.   Same for Asmussen, Pletcher, Mott or any of the other long term, successful trainers.   Rumors swirl around Diodorino and others.  I just get tired of hearing final determinations Based on rumor.

Um do what?  Honestly, we have went back and forth, so have you and a number of others on BSF, but man this takes the cake as for as for the most asinine comment ever. Have you ever looked at the form of horses that have been trained by others and then Navarro or Servis?  What happens to their figures when they are no longer trained by them?  What happens when Navarro or Servis claim another horse?  They have never made a slow horse run fast yet have improved their figures substantially? 

I guess you will argue that slow is relative or the horse had a certain figure within him.  Yet, you can look at a number of Navarro / Servis horses that would run 40-60 BSF or any other comparative figure and then Navarro / Servis get the horse and the horse is winning stakes races. 

What about Saffie down at GP?  He has fallen off the map since that FBI raid.  What do you contribute that to?  Just some bad luck?

You lump Mott in with Asmussen and Pletcher?  I've never seen Mott lumped in with them guys. 

Diodoro, last year at Oaklawn (I believe it was last year), was winning at like 80+% in claiming route races for a majority of the meet.  If you think that isn't cheating, there is ocean front property to be sold to you in any land locked place. 

Logged

husker71

Re: Violators v cheaters
« Reply #8 on: June 24, 2020, 07:38:52 pm »

Um do what?  Honestly, we have went back and forth, so have you and a number of others on BSF, but man this takes the cake as for as for the most asinine comment ever. Have you ever looked at the form of horses that have been trained by others and then Navarro or Servis?  What happens to their figures when they are no longer trained by them?  What happens when Navarro or Servis claim another horse?  They have never made a slow horse run fast yet have improved their figures substantially? 

I guess you will argue that slow is relative or the horse had a certain figure within him.  Yet, you can look at a number of Navarro / Servis horses that would run 40-60 BSF or any other comparative figure and then Navarro / Servis get the horse and the horse is winning stakes races. 

What about Saffie down at GP?  He has fallen off the map since that FBI raid.  What do you contribute that to?  Just some bad luck?

You lump Mott in with Asmussen and Pletcher?  I've never seen Mott lumped in with them guys. 

Diodoro, last year at Oaklawn (I believe it was last year), was winning at like 80+% in claiming route races for a majority of the meet.  If you think that isn't cheating, there is ocean front property to be sold to you in any land locked place. 


Doesnt seem like every year a new trainer comes in and stats winning lots of races at certain tracks   Kurt Zaidie was winning everything in South Florida for awhile and then I think went up to Pennsylvania (which to me is the hot spot of cheating now) 
Logged

ghostzapper

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Total likes: 69
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,597
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Violators v cheaters
« Reply #9 on: June 24, 2020, 08:21:49 pm »

Um do what?  Honestly, we have went back and forth, so have you and a number of others on BSF, but man this takes the cake as for as for the most asinine comment ever. Have you ever looked at the form of horses that have been trained by others and then Navarro or Servis?  What happens to their figures when they are no longer trained by them?  What happens when Navarro or Servis claim another horse?  They have never made a slow horse run fast yet have improved their figures substantially? 

I guess you will argue that slow is relative or the horse had a certain figure within him.  Yet, you can look at a number of Navarro / Servis horses that would run 40-60 BSF or any other comparative figure and then Navarro / Servis get the horse and the horse is winning stakes races. 

What about Saffie down at GP?  He has fallen off the map since that FBI raid.  What do you contribute that to?  Just some bad luck?

You lump Mott in with Asmussen and Pletcher?  I've never seen Mott lumped in with them guys. 

Diodoro, last year at Oaklawn (I believe it was last year), was winning at like 80+% in claiming route races for a majority of the meet.  If you think that isn't cheating, there is ocean front property to be sold to you in any land locked place.

Whoa dude.  Seriously?  Torture some stuff to make it mean what you want but half of what you claim isnít what I said.

Off the chart success is an indicator of a drug advantage.  I said that.  But you canít make a slow horse run fast with drugs.  You can free a fast horse to run to his best with pain maskers, but you canít make a plodder run stakes race time. 

Did you honest to god believe I was saying there were no cheaters?
Logged

ghostzapper

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Total likes: 69
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,597
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Violators v cheaters
« Reply #10 on: June 24, 2020, 08:36:58 pm »

I just wonder if there will be a Lance Armstrong type history turner with Justify and AP if things get really ugly and there becomes date to back things up?

There could be.  I always wonder how these guys keep all of their accomplices quiet.   
Logged

cbhawg03

Re: Violators v cheaters
« Reply #11 on: June 24, 2020, 11:36:25 pm »

Whoa dude.  Seriously?  Torture some stuff to make it mean what you want but half of what you claim isnít what I said.

Off the chart success is an indicator of a drug advantage.  I said that.  But you canít make a slow horse run fast with drugs.  You can free a fast horse to run to his best with pain maskers, but you canít make a plodder run stakes race time. 

Did you honest to god believe I was saying there were no cheaters?

Man they do take slow horses and make them run faster by masking horse problems.  Do you not realize how many horses have issues? 

So these horses they claim that are slow and then turn them into stakes horses, you just somehow naive enough to believe all these horses were that fast?!

Do you not think Arrogate had issues hence the reason he didnít come around for so long.  His issues caught up to him and you were the only one that wouldnít listen. 

Carry on tho man.
Logged

ghostzapper

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Total likes: 69
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,597
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Violators v cheaters
« Reply #12 on: June 25, 2020, 05:38:47 am »

Man they do take slow horses and make them run faster by masking horse problems.  Do you not realize how many horses have issues? 

So these horses they claim that are slow and then turn them into stakes horses, you just somehow naive enough to believe all these horses were that fast?!

Do you not think Arrogate had issues hence the reason he didnít come around for so long.  His issues caught up to him and you were the only one that wouldnít listen. 

Carry on tho man.

I have owned slow horses and there wasnít a drug in the world that was going to make them fast.  We arenít disagreeing that drugs that mask pain can make horses that have talent reach that talent.
Logged

kingoftherapids

Re: Violators v cheaters
« Reply #13 on: June 25, 2020, 04:04:43 pm »

I'm just going to leave this  here...
Logged

ghostzapper

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Total likes: 69
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,597
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Violators v cheaters
« Reply #14 on: June 25, 2020, 08:57:46 pm »

What is that supposed to prove?
Logged

kingoftherapids

Re: Violators v cheaters
« Reply #15 on: June 29, 2020, 09:22:53 am »

to show the slimeball that chad brown is and how obvious his cheating is.
What is that supposed to prove?
Pages: [1]   Go Up
 

KARK
KWNA
Fox 16 Arkansas