One reason why . . . .

[Dave in TJ Mex]

. . . horse racing is no longer worth supporting as a sport.

Its ongoing, longstanding refusal to properly police itself.

Pletcher and Baffert are the two biggest names in the training world.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/23/sports/despite-the-evidence-trainers-deny-a-doping-problem.html?src=recg

[Ballerina]

TB racing accounts for less than 1% of the sports audience.  No incentive to cater to that small a fan base by any group - federal or private.  We do have a group of ethical horsemen, but they too draw the line on certain aspects of the sport which they feel is not unethical.

It's a dying sport.  They just haven't nailed the lid on the box yet. 

[The Tin Man]

 Seems to me that Baffert figured out why his horses were dying ... being that he stopped using it after killing Uncle Sam, if my math is right ...

Not sure why CHRB wouldn't know what was killing them then ...

[Catalina]

Seems to me that Baffert figured out why his horses were dying ... being that he stopped using it after killing Uncle Sam, if my math is right ...

Not sure why CHRB wouldn't know what was killing them then ...

That would assume Uncle Sam to be the last horse in the series to die of this.  He wasn't.  He was the third of the seven, dying on supposedly 1/6/12.   The most recent probably was Miner's Daughter on 3/14/2013.

It IS troubling that CHRB couldn't figure this out until there was huge negative publicity (thank you, Ray Paulick).  It's equally puzzling that all Baffert horses in that barn were reputed to have been on thyroid supplements.  I find it hard to believe that these horses were all hypothyroid, because they'd likely not have been racing at all in that case.  And if they were put on thyroid medication anyway, was it to make them better racehorses?  It certainly didn't seem to do anything positive for the health of the seven that dropped dead.  Equally appalling, it took the public outcry for this regimen to be stopped.  That makes it hard to argue that wellbeing of horses was a consideration, much less a main consideration.

Which brings up O'Neills milk-shaking violation which he opted to accept in spring of... last year?  Didn't O'Neill get charged for using something that wasn't a true milkshake, but something technically legal that worked just like a milkshake?  Shouldn't Baffert's thyroid supplements be covered by the same legalese argument?

[peeptoad]

IMHO the crux of the problem is that there is no federal inspection agency that covers horse racing. The USDA covers large animals used in research, teaching, etc., but they do not cover horses used for sport (among a few other animals) and they give no reason for the lack of coverage in this area (though my guess is staffing problems/shortage).
Bring in an outside agency and I can almost guarantee these incidents would be cut way, way down in number... as it stands you can practically falsify a medical record (if they even use them) for a racehorse and nobody would really know or give a rats' ass.

[Vic in Chicago]

The conduct outlined in the NY Times report is outrageous, but unfortunately not that surprising. 

And if it takes a federal government agency to police the sport adequately, what does that say about the so-called "leadership" of the industry...the state racing boards, major tracks, NTRA, BC, etc?

Sad.  And just one reason (of many) the sport is dying, as Dave and Ballerina say.

[peeptoad]

The conduct outlined in the NY Times report is outrageous, but unfortunately not that surprising. 

And if it takes a federal government agency to police the sport adequately, what does that say about the so-called "leadership" of the industry...the state racing boards, major tracks, NTRA, BC, etc?

Sad.  And just one reason (of many) the sport is dying, as Dave and Ballerina say.

I am not big on government involvement in most things, but I do believe that, where non-human animals are involved (that are used as commodities of sorts) the feds should oversee things. I work in research and I can tell you that if the regulatory agencies were not around the animals would have a really tough time of it. And I'm not the one doing the experiments, but making sure that people are following protocol and treating the animals humanely (i.e. I am on the animals' "side", and I couldn't do it alone because the egos, I mean researchers, largely do not think of welfare issues first).

[Dave in TJ Mex]

The conduct outlined in the NY Times report is outrageous, but unfortunately not that surprising. 

And if it takes a federal government agency to police the sport adequately, what does that say about the so-called "leadership" of the industry...the state racing boards, major tracks, NTRA, BC, etc?

Sad.  And just one reason (of many) the sport is dying, as Dave and Ballerina say.

I am not big on government involvement in most things, but I do believe that, where non-human animals are involved (that are used as commodities of sorts) the feds should oversee things. I work in research and I can tell you that if the regulatory agencies were not around the animals would have a really tough time of it. And I'm not the one doing the experiments, but making sure that people are following protocol and treating the animals humanely (i.e. I am on the animals' "side", and I couldn't do it alone because the egos, I mean researchers, largely do not think of welfare issues first).

Yes, let's get the same people overseeing the Obamacare computer system to handle horse racing oversight!  :HT1:

But you make a valid point, Peeptoad.

[Zenyatta]

The conduct outlined in the NY Times report is outrageous, but unfortunately not that surprising. 

And if it takes a federal government agency to police the sport adequately, what does that say about the so-called "leadership" of the industry...the state racing boards, major tracks, NTRA, BC, etc?

Sad.  And just one reason (of many) the sport is dying, as Dave and Ballerina say.

I am not big on government involvement in most things, but I do believe that, where non-human animals are involved (that are used as commodities of sorts) the feds should oversee things. I work in research and I can tell you that if the regulatory agencies were not around the animals would have a really tough time of it. And I'm not the one doing the experiments, but making sure that people are following protocol and treating the animals humanely (i.e. I am on the animals' "side", and I couldn't do it alone because the egos, I mean researchers, largely do not think of welfare issues first).

Yes, let's get the same people overseeing the Obamacare computer system to handle horse racing oversight!  :HT1:

But you make a valid point, Peeptoad.

Horse racing needs 1 national body that's not govt affiliated to help police itself. Get representatives from all over who know the industry, but don't have a "dog in the fight," so to speak, and place them on a board / commission. This way what's good in New York will be good in California, and vice versa.

[peeptoad]

Horse racing needs 1 national body that's not govt affiliated to help police itself. Get representatives from all over who know the industry, but don't have a "dog in the fight," so to speak, and place them on a board / commission. This way what's good in New York will be good in California, and vice versa.

This I agree with... been saying this for years. It's a bit different than federal oversight though.

[Dave in TJ Mex]

What racing needs is not one national private regulatory agency (or federal government oversight), but instead state racing commissions with guts, who would give trainers and vets the death penalty for repeated (i.e., 3) drug offenses.  Why are the same offenders (Rick Dutrow being the poster child) being allowed to have multiple violations for over a decade before any significant sanctions are issued?

What good is a national regulatory agency going to do if it just mirrors the impotence of state racing commissions?

State regulatory commissions have the proper powers to enforce anti-drug rules; they just don't issue sanctions for violations that are punitive enough.

[peeptoad]

What racing needs is not one national private regulatory agency (or federal government oversight), but instead state racing commissions with guts, who would give trainers and vets the death penalty for repeated (i.e., 3) drug offenses.  Why are the same offenders (Rick Dutrow being the poster child) being allowed to have multiple violations for over a decade before any significant sanctions are issued?

This will never happen... I can almost guarantee you that. There are just way too many people involved. You're basically asking for some sort of utopian system that is structurally exactly the same as what we've currently got.

What good is a national regulatory agency going to do if it just mirrors the impotence of state racing commissions?

So, you know exactly how this figment of a national racing body is going to work even though it doesn't exist yet? That's a new one... can you tell me what tomorrow night's winning Powerball numbers are while you're at it?


...enough of the devil's advocate stance since we all care about racing (I assume) and want it to continue on. Bottom line is you cannot make anyone care or make them more ethical. What you can do is ban their ass and make it stick. That's really what needs to change, whether it's at the state or national level.

[Ballerina]

When the U. S. government does more to protect wild horses and stops exporting American horses to other countries for the sole purpose of slaughter, I'll then trust them to have the God given sense to protect horses.  Too many Congress members in the back pockets of special interest groups.

[Dave in TJ Mex]

What racing needs is not one national private regulatory agency (or federal government oversight), but instead state racing commissions with guts, who would give trainers and vets the death penalty for repeated (i.e., 3) drug offenses.  Why are the same offenders (Rick Dutrow being the poster child) being allowed to have multiple violations for over a decade before any significant sanctions are issued?

This will never happen... I can almost guarantee you that. There are just way too many people involved. You're basically asking for some sort of utopian system that is structurally exactly the same as what we've currently got.

What good is a national regulatory agency going to do if it just mirrors the impotence of state racing commissions?

So, you know exactly how this figment of a national racing body is going to work even though it doesn't exist yet? That's a new one... can you tell me what tomorrow night's winning Powerball numbers are while you're at it?


...enough of the devil's advocate stance since we all care about racing (I assume) and want it to continue on. Bottom line is you cannot make anyone care or make them more ethical. What you can do is ban their ass and make it stick. That's really what needs to change, whether it's at the state or national level.

Peeptoad, you are right when you say:

"Bottom line is you cannot make anyone care or make them more ethical. What you can do is ban their ass and make it stick. That's really what needs to change, whether it's at the state or national level."


State racing commissions already have the power to do that, but don't.  So why should we assume a national racing board of some sort would be any different?

What racing needs is state racing commissions with the courage and determination to clean up racing.  They already have the power to do so, but they won't exercise it.  I presume that is so because the relevant interest groups --- race tracks, owners, and trainers --- don't want that to happen.