This was posted on The Paulick Report:http://www.theatlantic.com/entertain...egrity/257714/
Never thought too much of her myself - just another "blue blood"
This was posted on The Paulick Report:http://www.theatlantic.com/entertain...egrity/257714/
Never thought too much of her myself - just another "blue blood"
A
Her comments are good, but I think too often the case against performance-enhancing drugs has been the public relations case. That it makes the sport seem crooked and rigged, and the problem with this is that it's exactly the reason why so much cheating has been pushed under the rug. So I think the case for equine welfare has to be made.
Hmmm has she forgotten that Laurin was once banned for life as a jockey because they found a buzzer on him or that there were rumors swirling around both Secretariat and Riva Ridge because of the alleged fertility problems they had coming out of Laurin's barn?
The past always looks more noble than it was IMO.
I think it is the one sport that once you get to the highest level
that the playing field is pretty level. Seems there is cheating/larceny
in almost every sport. Look at the NO Saints, that wasn't much to
be proud of
A
I agree with her that owners should take some responsibilities and tell their trainers, no overages, no positives or no horses.
wind
Since the beginning of my life, it's been "Always The Horse".
I respect Penny Chenery, but the adulation given to her in that article makes me a little uncomfortable.
Her comments are good, but I think the article in general confuses the issue. I think there's a distinction to be drawn between the active use of illegal drugs and carelessness/overuse of legal ones, and a lot of mainstream articles, like this one, are lumping these together.
This adulation seems somewhat tame compared to the Disney movie, which wouldn't give you the impression that it was her second year in a row winning the Kentucky Derby with Secretariet. But what are you gonna do?
NBC was clear in pointing out that distinction in the Preakness telecast. That O'Neil had no performance-enhancing drug infractions. But, is that completely true? There's a very hazy line with bicarbonates, as far as their classification. But I think they're clearly performance-enhancing.
I've said it here before. I have read and spoken with folks in the industry that said Sec was on steroids. Was it a fact, I truly cannot say as I wasn't in his barn. But I've heard it about many others, including my fav, Slew. I will never know for certain but I truly believe this stuff has been around forever and been used forever.
Secretariat would have been all but unmanageable on steroids, and Riva Ridge was like a housepet except between the fences in the afternoon. Not the profile of horses on Equipoise or Winstrol.
If there is a distinction to be made here--it is what is/was legal vs what is right. Did the trainers of these past eras break the rules in using steroids? If there was no ban on steroids you can't say what someone would or wouldn't do. IMO you have to look at the rules that were in place at the time and determine if they were broken not if a horse ran on something that was legal then but would be illegal now.![]()
Poverty is another word for owning a horse
Not condoning the drugging but in the cases of horses like Secretariat and Slew being doped, I'm sure it was a much more common thing back then, so it wasn't like Big Red was the only one being drugged and that's WHY he ran so fast, when the other horses were probably running on the same stuff
If that were true, Lucien could have shouted that from the top of the barn and it wouldn't have mattered: anabolic steroids didn't become illegal in horse racing until after the Big Brown brouhaha.
In fact, I've had plenty of people tell me that some trainers still cycle their horses on and off steroids in training.
See, whatever Doug did is illegal. The presence of an elevated level of TCO2 is, in itself, a violation, regardless of how it got that way. And I'm pretty sure that in most jurisdictions, the stewards and commission aren't required to prove the act of milkshaking: the overage is the offense.
Four violations for O'Neill -- 3 in CA, 1 in IL. From what I've read, no other trainer in all of California has more than one. Hmmmm.
Sorry, but integrity is not the first word that comes to mind when I think of Reddam and O'Neill.
Last edited by second_glance; 05-29-2012 at 03:05 PM.
First rule: Try always to do what's right for the horse. The people part will work out. -- Josh Pons, Merryland, 2007
From his obituary in the NY Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/27/sp...l?pagewanted=2
Speculation is the same as saying "Yeah, but...." Anything after "but" is bullsh!t. Perhaps the good and great horses of the past were not run on only hay, oats, and water, however until it's clearly proven they were not run on h/o/w it's all speculation...and that's a huge "but".
I find all this speculation about Riva Ridge and Secretariat a bunch of but = bullsh!t. I agree with the thought that giving steroids to Sectretariat would make him more unmanagable, and Riva Ridge who was rather mellow in personality....steroids would have made him more rowdy, which he wasn't.
I recently read "Secretariat's Meadow" and it was written he was a very assertive and rambunctious colt. At one point his mama came back to the barn without him and the folks on the farm ran out to the pasture to search for him only to find him down in the river swimming and having a grand time of it. Then one time he broke free and was running down the road when a truck driver pulled over to stop and save the colt from getting into further trouble. So maybe, just maybe, this one horse had it in his inner spirit to be crazy enough to win the TC without drugs. One never knows, unless one was there when he was racing. Speculation is without substance, IMHO.
Bookmarks