Will Justify get DQ'd?

[minethatbird08]

Originally Posted by clocker7

So the evidence is that only the SA Derby tests produced a positive, while the others didn't?

That seems odd.

Cleared his system by the Derby.

[clocker7]

Originally Posted by minethatbird08

Cleared his system by the Derby.

My wonder is about the thinking of the Justify connections just before the SA Derby.

Was someone amongst them so concerned about winning KD points that they threw caution to the wind, and for the only time ever loaded him up?

That seems like a longshot explanation.

[FakeNameChanged]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Regulatory capture. The Meatpacking Commission is generally full of meatpacking plant owners. The Cemetery Board is full of funeral directors. And the Horse Racing Board is full of people who have interests in the industry.

A certain amount of this is actually unavoidable, because you actually need some level of expertise. If you just took 7 random California civilians who knew nothing about horse racing, they wouldn't know the first thing about regulating the sport.

But this is why the Brown Act and open meetings are so important. This way, they have to do whatever they do IN PUBLIC. And this entire thing would have gone down differently if they had done it in public. There would have been calls to disqualify Justify as soon as the positive test was revealed, NBC would have covered it as a major story and a major embarrassment to the sport going into the Kentucky Derby, there would have been pressure on Churchill not to accept the entry, etc.

The sport needs a Kenesaw Mountain Landis running the whole damn thing. Give him or her absolute control and permanent bans on the whole damn bunch to restore some level of integrity. The Belmont was last time I bet on a race, not sure when it happens again.

[War of Will]

The KY Derby is not the story. The story is a racing board, with close ties to the trainer, committing a crime. It is a sport with wagering, and the public must be protected. How do we know the CHRB has not been looking the other way for Baffert on other drug tests? Does anyone really believe this is the first time this has happened? Horses don't test at 4x a legal amount due to contamination. It can only occur at that rate intentionally. The CHRB and Dr Rick Arthur are well aware of this. They committed a crime. Best guess is they will be prosecuted and Baffert will get some 15 day suspension. Worse for him though, he is now forever known in racing and the public as a cheater. Right or wrong Justify AND American Pharoah are tied to a cheater in the public's eye.

As for KY, MD, and NY. They can do whatever they want, as long as the law allows them to do it.

This is why the US needs uniform Hong Kong type testing. Unless it gets that type of testing, the sport will die.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Twitter

[acorn54]

war of will, i'm with you on this call. the naivety on this topic amazes me. horseracing is a fraternity of the privileged and has always been. if you have money you get in the door. money doesn't talk in this case, it screams. i have always said that in america, there are no brown, black or white people, the only color the american system knows is green.

[biggestal99]

Originally Posted by bob60566

The board disposed of the inquiry altogether during a closed-door executive session. It decided, with little evidence, that the positive test could have been a result of Justify’s eating contaminated food.

This is what is so wrong and life goes on , Nudge nudge wink wink, Were is the carpet.

House of cards in this present game.

It was well above the allowed levels. to dismiss the level present just as food contamination in closed session is laughable.


Allan

[War of Will]

Originally Posted by biggestal99

It was well above the allowed levels. to dismiss the level present just as food contamination in closed session is laughable.


Allan

Not to mention no other horses in his barn tested positive for this substance, just the horse that needed the points to run in the KY Derby. Apparently only his feed got contaminated and amazingly it was so contaminated that 4x the legal amount was in his system. It is IMPOSSIBLE to test at that high a rate via contamination. Dr Arthur knows this too, which means he a cheater.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by clocker7

So the evidence is that only the SA Derby tests produced a positive, while the others didn't?

That seems odd.

No more odd than the fact that doping baseball players and track athletes sometimes passed tests.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by War of Will

The KY Derby is not the story. The story is a racing board, with close ties to the trainer, committing a crime. It is a sport with wagering, and the public must be protected. How do we know the CHRB has not been looking the other way for Baffert on other drug tests? Does anyone really believe this is the first time this has happened? Horses don't test at 4x a legal amount due to contamination. It can only occur at that rate intentionally. The CHRB and Dr Rick Arthur are well aware of this. They committed a crime. Best guess is they will be prosecuted and Baffert will get some 15 day suspension. Worse for him though, he is now forever known in racing and the public as a cheater. Right or wrong Justify AND American Pharoah are tied to a cheater in the public's eye.

As for KY, MD, and NY. They can do whatever they want, as long as the law allows them to do it.

This is why the US needs uniform Hong Kong type testing. Unless it gets that type of testing, the sport will die.

They are both stories.

There's a great desire of the breeders to say "this has nothing to do with his TC". Sorry, it has everything to do with it, as well as with the CHRB. Hopefully the media and the public keep the pressure on the sport so that it doesn't squirm away from this.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by clicknow

So a horse who is DQed in a race still gets 100 points, for "winning"? Is that what you're saying? That sounds crazy and absurd.

Justify had ZERO points before the SA Derby.

It was the only race he ran to qualify for the KY Derby. His other races were an allowance and a maiden. So "subsequently" he would have no points at all, unless he ran another race after the SA Derby, to get into the KY Derby gate.




D'Oro was already in I think? As for Justify, a horse with a drug positiive isn't like interference during a race!!! They don't get put 2nd or 3rd.. They should be DQed altogether, for a drug positive. (which is what should have happened).

Even Lance Armstrong was stripped of his titles over drug use

This is an important point. Ben Johnson was also stripped of numerous titles and records, not just the 1988 Olympics where he tested positive.

There's no reason horse racing is required to impose the narrowest possible punishment here.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by bob60566

Bob will clear this story up in the morning with his press release and we all can get back to what is now the norm.

"It was all an accident," Bob said. "The horse got a hold of Bodie's lunch bag and ate it before we could take it away from him."

[clicknow]

Originally Posted by biggestal99

It was well above the allowed levels. to dismiss the level present just as food contamination in closed session is laughable.

That level of contamination with the kind of hay a wealthy barn like that uses? Are we to believe a top money barn gets "cheap hay" --- the kind that would be highly contaminated with a whole buncha jimsom weed in it? C'mon.

IF what has been written is true, EVERYTHING, and I mean everything, in the way this was handled, is unprecedented.

CHRB knew the rule had already been broken, and shortly after they LESSEN the penalties for Scopolamine? G'ah!

[Tom]

Originally Posted by jay68802

My guess is that second place horse gets the points and would be in the Kentucky Derby. It was a D' Oro horse, can't quite remember the exact name.

ScreweD' Oro.

[clicknow]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Also, it's rich for the DRF to be publishing this unrebutted, sycophantic defense of the CHRB. If this was really business as usual, how come the Form hadn't informed its readers about it in the past?

I am sitting here trying to figure out their purpose for doing this.