2021 kentucky derby | Horse Racing Free Tips

Baffert Attorneys Claim Test Proves Ointment Led To Medina Spirit’s Failed Drug Test

Attorneys for the owner and trainer of Medina Spirit, first-place finisher in the 2021 Kentucky Derby, claim tests conducted by a New York laboratory have “definitively confirmed” the horse tested positive for a corticosteroid not through an injection but because of an ointment used to treat a skin rash.

Craig Robertson, attorney for Bob Baffert, and Clark Brewster, representing owner Amr Zedan's Zedan Racing Stables, said tests conducted by Dr. George Maylin, who heads a drug testing laboratory at New York's Morrisville State College, showed the presence of betamethasone valerate, which they claim is found in Otomax ointment. Otomax, manufactured to treat ear infections in dogs, lists betamethasone as one of its ingredients. The test, Robertson and Brewster said, also confirmed the absence of betamethasone acetate, the injectable corticosteroid used to treat inflammation.

“In other words,” Robertson said in a statement, “it has now been scientifically proven that what Bob Baffert said from the beginning was true – Medina Spirit was never injected with betamethasone and the findings following the Kentucky Derby were solely the result of the horse being treated for a skin condition by way of a topical ointment – all at the direction of Medina Spirit's veterinarian.”

The Paulick Report has asked Robertson and Brewster for a full copy of Maylin's report.

Robertson said the test result “should definitively resolve the matter in Kentucky and Medina Spirit should remain the official winner of the 2021 Kentucky Derby.” Brewster had similar sentiments, stating that “Zedan is proud to have stood by Bob and is ecstatic that Medina Spirit will receive the honor of his great victory.”

The Kentucky Horse Racing Commission and board of stewards have yet to conduct a hearing on Medina Spirit's failed drug test, and until a hearing is conducted Medina Spirit will remain the Kentucky Derby winner. In the ewake of the failed drug test, Baffert was ruled off all tracks owned by Churchill Downs Inc. through the conclusion of the 2023 spring-summer meet at the company's flagship track in Louisville, Ky. Churchill Downs also said horses trained by Baffert are not eligible for qualifying points for the Kentucky Derby.

A spokesperson for the commission could not be reached for comment on Maylin's testing, which attorneys for Baffert and Zedan sought through a court order.

The rules of Kentucky racing do not appear to differentiate between administration of betamethasone or other drugs through injection or other means. In section 1 in the regulations relating to medication, testing procedures and prohibited practices, the definition for “administer” states: “to apply to or cause the introduction of a substance into the body of a horse.”

The full statements from Robertson and Brewster follow:

Craig Robertson: The testing of the split urine sample of MEDINA SPIRIT has now been completed by Dr. George Maylin, Director of the New York Drug Testing & Research Program. By Order of the Franklin Circuit Court in Kentucky, this urine was tested “to determine if the alleged topical administration of OTOMAX could have resulted in the finding of betamethasone” in MEDINA SPIRIT following the 2021 Kentucky Derby. Those results have now definitively confirmed that the betamethasone present in MEDINA SPIRIT's system did indeed come from the topical ointment OTOMAX and not an injection. In other words, it has now been scientifically proven that what Bob Baffert said from the beginning was true – MEDINA SPIRIT was never injected with betamethasone and the findings following the Kentucky Derby were solely the result of the horse being treated for a skin condition by way of a topical ointment – all at the direction of MEDINA SPIRIT's veterinarian.

The betamethasone in an injection is betamethasone acetate. The betamethasone in the topical ointment is betamethasone valerate. Only betamethasone acetate is addressed and regulated in the rules of racing in Kentucky. Thus, the presence of betamethasone valerate in MEDINA SPIRIT, which resulted from a topical ointment, is not a rules violation. Dr. Maylin's testing not only confirmed the presence of betamethasone valerate, but also the absence of betamethasone acetate. This should definitively resolve the matter in Kentucky and MEDINA SPIRIT should remain the official winner of the 2021 Kentucky Derby.

Since May, Mr. Baffert has been the subject of an unfair rush to judgment. We asked all along that everyone wait until the facts and science came to light. Now that it has been scientifically proven that Mr. Baffert was truthful, did not break any rules of racing, and MEDINA SPIRIT's victory was due solely to the heart and ability of the horse and nothing else, it is time for all members of racing to come together for the good of the sport. Mr. Baffert has been a tremendous ambassador for the sport throughout his 46 year Hall of Fame career and he has every intention of continuing to do so.

Clark Brewster: As Legal counsel for, and on behalf of, Abr Zedan and Zedan Racing Stable, owner of Medina Spirit, winner of the 147th Kentucky Derby, it is extremely gratifying to learn that the New York Racing Laboratory through its Director Dr George Marlin has scientifically confirmed that no Betamethazone Acetate was found in the post race urine specimen of Medina Spirit. Dr Maylin reported that components of an ointment used to treat a skin lesion was confirmed through metabolite confirmation and that no Acetate that is part of the injectable Betamethazone was present. The Kentucky Racing Commission has steadfastly enacted rules relating to corticosteroid joint injection and have drawn a bright line rule that no injections are permitted within 14 days of a race. Now there is zero doubt that the 14 day rule some thought might have been violated by the earlier less specific testing is revealed as premature judgment. That groundless accusation is without scientific merit.
Zedan is proud to have stood by Bob and is ecstatic that Medina Spirit will receive the honor of his great victory.

The post Baffert Attorneys Claim Test Proves Ointment Led To Medina Spirit’s Failed Drug Test appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

Judge Dismisses Baffert Contempt Claim Against NYRA

BROOKLYN, NY–Judge Carol Bagley Amon dismissed Bob Baffert's charge of contempt against the New York Racing Association Tuesday morning in federal court, saying that her previous injunction of NYRA's attempted suspension of Baffert in May applied only to enforcing that suspension, and not the issue at hand of NYRA scheduling a hearing and issuing official charges against Baffert in a Sept. 10 statement. The ruling clears the way for NYRA to proceed with its proposed hearing process, which is scheduled to begin Oct. 11 and may result in Baffert once again being suspended from racing at NYRA tracks.

Baffert's attorney Craig Robertson attempted to argue that NYRA only created rules and procedures for giving a Baffert hearing after the fact in an attempt to suspend Baffert for the same reasoning as it had in May. Amon dismissed that argument, interrupting Robertson several times to note that a hearing process for Baffert is legally separate from NYRA's enjoined May 17 attempt to suspend him.

“That suspension is no longer in effect,” she said. “I don't know how you can read that [injunction] order to say they cannot now proceed with a hearing. They're not seeking [to suspend him], they're simply seeking to give him a hearing. What was enjoined was the fact that they suspended him without a hearing … I didn't reach a merits decision as to [the suspension]. What I said was that your client was entitled, before someone decided to suspend him, to put forth his answers to all of the charges that they had brought. He can do that now.”

Robertson again tried to argue that NYRA was creating “ex post facto” rules for its original suspension, but Amon again interrupted to say, “No, they're not, because this is a whole new proceeding. You're missing the import of the court's original order … The lawsuit that you brought dealt with a suspension in May … This is an entirely different scenario.”

Robertson returned to his argument that the reasoning behind the scheduled hearing process and potential resulting suspension for Baffert is the same as it was for NYRA's initial attempt to suspend Baffert, to which Amon said, “What difference does that make? We're talking about contempt here. I did not make a ruling that their reasons were invalid in the last hearing, I said he should get a chance to answer [the charges] … They are giving him the opportunity to address all of this.”

Robertson then pivoted to criticizing the nature of NYRA's proposed due process hearing, saying, “They have said, 'Here is your due process, Mr. Baffert. You can have a hearing in front of a hearing officer we appoint. That hearing officer then makes recommendations to a panel that we appoint, and that [NYRA CEO] Mr. [David] O'Rourke appoints. And Mr. O'Rouke has already submitted multiple affidavits in this case in support of the suspension of Mr. Baffert. That panel that Mr. O'Rourke appoints then can do whatever they want, impose whatever penalty they want, and then you have no right of appeal.'”

Amon was more sympathetic to that argument but ultimately found it unrelated to the case in front of her, saying, “I understand your point on that … But I don't know that at this point in time, I [can] prejudge something that hasn't happened yet, particularly in the context of this lawsuit, which pertains to the May 17 suspension, not something that may happen in the future.”

Robertson then argued that NYRA had no rule on the books justifying a suspension for offenses occurring outside of New York, saying “they've now made that rule up,” but Amon shot that down as well, saying, “That's a different lawsuit. That's not this lawsuit.”

Chiming in for the first time, NYRA attorney Henry Greenberg said, “A contempt proceeding is not an appropriate vehicle to raise issues, either procedural or substantive, [about] the hearing. Those arguments should be raised before the hearing officer, retired [New York State] Supreme Court Justice Peter Sherwood, a distinguished jurist, who the Court can be confident and certain will provide a fair, impartial, neutral proceeding for opposing counsel. Those arguments, all of which we address in our paper on the merits, respectfully, are not appropriately heard [here].”

Greenberg then referenced Robertson's opening statement that he did not want to be in court Tuesday but was left with no choice due to NYRA's actions, and said that, to the contrary, NYRA was providing precisely what the earlier injunction directed them to.

“When opposing counsel says he had no choice but to bring this proceeding … In fact, what NYRA is doing today by this administrative proceeding is providing exactly–exactly–what he argued he was entitled to. When [the] July 14 order from the Court was issued, your Honor, NYRA took every word, every syllable. It provided–although that wasn't the intent, perhaps–it provided us guidance about how we could establish a due process mechanism that would allow us to fairly provide the accused to tell their side of the story.”

NYRA also pushed back against the notion that it was creating a retroactive process simply to enforce its original suspension against Baffert, noting that it has also scheduled hearings and issued charges for disgraced trainer Marcus Vitali.

“The problems that we are addressing are not limited to Mr. Baffert,” Greenberg said. “On the same day that we brought the proceeding against Mr. Baffert, we brought it against another trainer, a gentleman by the name of Marcus Vitali, and selected a retired Court of Appeals judge to preside over the proceeding … I leave the Court with the thought that NYRA has taken to heart the guidance and analysis contained in your decision, is committing to this Court that our faithfulness and fidelity to due process will be observed. Mr. Baffert will be given a punctilious compliance with a due process hearing.”

As the proceeding wound down, Robertson left the door open to amending his complaint before disputing what he said was NYRA lumping Baffert in with Vitali.

“To the extent that the Court believes I need to amend my complaint, I would ask for leave to do that, number one,” he said. “Number two, I want to make sure the record is clear, comparing Mr. Baffert to Mr. Vitali is comparing apples to oranges. They have only brought a proceeding against Mr. Vitali to give them cover. Mr. Vitali has a history of 84 drug violations, animal cruelty charges, numerous license suspensions throughout the East Coast and in fact, at one point in time was charged with when investigators came to his barn, running to a refrigerator, grabbing a bubble-wrap bag out of a refrigerator and running off. To compare the two, it's not without import. It has no merit.”

Robertson concluded by saying of a potential future suspension of Baffert by NYRA, “It's the same suspension. The only thing that's changed is the date on the letterhead.” But Amon was unmoved.

“The plaintiff has not proved clearly and convincingly that the September statement of charges violates the July 14 order,” the judge said in her official ruling. “The plaintiff mischaracterizes that order as enjoining NYRA from suspending Baffert for the reasons set forth in the May 17 letter until the conclusion of this case. But the text of the July 14 order bars the defendant only from enforcing the May 17 suspension. It says nothing about the May 17 letter's reasoning … This is not a case in which the Sept. 10 statement of charges can be equated to the May 17 suspension, because there had been significant and material alterations. Unlike the summary suspension ordered in the May 17 letter, the Sept. 10 letter does not suspend Baffert without a hearing. Sept. 10 proceedings create a hearing to consider a possible suspension, not to implement one. And unlike the May 17 suspension, the Sept. 10 statement of charges brings with it a full hearing, evidentiary disclosures, the standard of proof, an impartial hearing officer [and a] right to appeal any decision by the hearing officer to a panel. As [NYRA] counsel has pointed out, contempt proceedings are not a proper vehicle to challenge later actions. So I'm going to deny the request for a stay at this point.”

NYRA was quick to issue a statement praising the decision. “Earlier today, Judge Carol Bagley Amon denied Mr. Baffert's motion seeking to hold NYRA in civil contempt and to stay the administrative hearing,” said Patrick McKenna, Senior Director of Communications for NYRA. “We are gratified by the court's decision allowing NYRA to move forward with its administrative hearing against Bob Baffert. The court found that NYRA's actions were consistent with both the letter and spirit of the July 14 order. NYRA's focus in this matter is protecting the integrity of the sport of Thoroughbred racing in accordance with the requirements of due process.”

Robertson said afterward, “I'm disappointed. But the injunction remains in place and Mr. Baffert is still able to race in New York. We will review the court's ruling and determine next steps.”

The post Judge Dismisses Baffert Contempt Claim Against NYRA appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Baffert Alleges NYRA Violating Court Order in ‘Sham Hearing’ Attempt

Trainer Bob Baffert filed a motion Wednesday asking a federal judge to hold the New York Racing Association (NYRA) in civil contempt for trying to schedule a hearing under its newly created exclusionary procedures that could once again bar him from participating at NYRA's tracks.

The basis for the contempt allegation is NYRA's “failure to comply with the terms of the Court's July 14, 2021, Memorandum & Order enjoining it from enforcing its unlawful suspension of Baffert from New York racetracks.”

According to a Sept. 22 filing by Baffert's legal team, “NYRA seems to believe now that it can simply offer a sham hearing and get around the Court's ruling by creating rules after the fact.”

The seven-time GI Kentucky Derby-winning trainer with a history of highly publicized equine drug violations wants the court to issue an order “staying NYRA's renewed attempt to suspend him.”

Baffert is also requesting that the court “admonish NYRA for its behavior” and immediately order it to 1) Cease and desist from all conduct concerning or relating in any way to any suspension of Baffert until after the full conclusion of the case; 2) Order NYRA to pay a $5,000 fine for each day that it does not comply with the court's directives; 3) Reimburse Baffert for his attorneys' fees and court costs related to the new motion for contempt.

“Baffert's requests are reasonable given that NYRA's violations were plainly taken in bad faith,” the trainer's legal team wrote. “The Court has already warned NYRA concerning its efforts to suspend Baffert indefinitely and without due process of law. Clearly, and despite the existing injunction, NYRA believes it may nonetheless disregard any traditional constitutional safeguards and proceed however it wants. This behavior is precisely what Baffert's injunction was intended to halt.”

Patrick McKenna, NYRA's communications director, told TDN via email that all actions taken by NYRA have been in compliance with court orders.

Wednesday's filing is the latest salvo in the increasingly litigious saga that began May 17 when NYRA informed Baffert via letter that he was temporarily not welcome to stable or race at Saratoga Race Course, Belmont Park and Aqueduct Racetrack because of his string of recent equine drug positives.

NYRA's banishment came 16 days after the Baffert-trained Medina Spirit (Protonico) tested positive for betamethasone after the colt won the GI Kentucky Derby. Even though that case has still not resulted in any Kentucky ruling against Baffert, in the 12 months prior to Medina Spirit's positive, four other Baffert trainees also tested positive for banned substances, two of them in Grade I stakes.

Baffert responded June 14 by filing a civil complaint alleging that the NYRA ban violated his constitutional right to due process.

On July 14, the eve of the lucrative Saratoga season, Judge Carol Bagley Amon of United States District Court (Eastern District of New York) granted Baffert a preliminary injunction that allowed him to race at New York's premier tracks until the lawsuit was adjudicated.

But Amon also wrote in that ruling that “Baffert should have been given notice of all of the reasons that NYRA intended to suspend him….[The] benefits of providing notice and a pre-suspension hearing would likely have been substantial.”

In the wake of that ruling, NYRA has since drafted and distributed a new set of rules and procedures for holding hearings and issuing determinations designed to suspend licensees who engage in injurious conduct.

After those rules were made public, NYRA, on Sept. 10, wrote a letter summoning Baffert to appear at a video conference hearing Sept. 27. (Separately, NYRA had already moved for dismissal of the entire lawsuit).

On Tuesday, Baffert's legal team submitted a letter to the judge that gave notification that a contempt filing was imminent. That letter also asked for a pre-motion hearing on the subject.

But Judge Amon–as she has already done once in this case when NYRA's attorneys made a similar request for a pre-motion hearing on another matter–nixed the idea of adding another time-consuming appearance to the growing court docket in this case.

In a handwritten note penned atop the Sept. 21 letter from Baffert's legal team, Amon wrote that there would be no pre-motion conference, and that Baffert's attorneys instead had to file any “contempt” motion by 10 a.m. Sept. 22. NYRA then would have one week to respond to it.

The Wednesday filing emphasizes three key points for why the judge should find NYRA in contempt: “A) The Court's Order is clear and unambiguous…B) NYRA's recent actions are clear and convincing evidence of noncompliance with the Court's Order…C) NYRA's actions are not an attempt to comply in a reasonable manner.”

Baffert's filing also alleges that NYRA isn't even following the procedures outlined in its just-implemented hearing process.

“[NYRA's] newly created rules make clear that the notice of hearing is required to include the 'proposed penalty being sought.' Nothing in its 12-page letter and notice to Baffert makes any reference to the length of the suspension NYRA seeks to impose. The Court has already found this to be problematic…. This is the exact same thing NYRA seeks to do again-impose an indefinite suspension…All of these deficiencies in NYRA's newly implemented procedures indicate why due process is so important…

“Further, Baffert cannot reasonably expect a fair proceeding when NYRA controls the outcome of the hearing, refuses to tell him what punishment he may face and gives him no right to appeal. Due process plainly requires 'notice and an opportunity to be heard at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner,'” the filing continues. “None of those basic components have been met here, which is the entire reason Baffert brought this action against NYRA in the first place.”

The post Baffert Alleges NYRA Violating Court Order in ‘Sham Hearing’ Attempt appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

View From The Eighth Pole: Will Breeders’ Cup Officials Act To Protect Their Brand?

On June 2, Churchill Downs Inc. suspended trainer Bob Baffert from running horses at any of its racetracks, including its flagship facility in Louisville, Ky., for two years, meaning the sport's most recognizable face and name will not be eligible to add to his record number of Kentucky Derby victories until 2024, at the earliest.

The New York Racing Association is similarly taking steps to ban Baffert, scheduling a Sept. 27 hearing where the Hall of Fame trainer and his attorneys will have an opportunity to respond to the statement of charges against him.

The actions by these two major racing associations – each exercising their private property rights – were triggered by the failed drug test of Medina Spirit, who was found to have impermissible levels of betamethasone in his system after crossing the line first in the 147^th running of the Kentucky Derby on May 1. The win was Baffert's seventh in the Derby, giving him one more – at least for now – than Ben Jones, whose runners won the roses six times from 1938-'52.

But there is a very good chance Medina Spirit will be disqualified from his victory and placed last whenever the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission gets around to conducting a hearing on the matter. If Medina Spirit has the Derby title taken away, you can bet this case will work its way through civil courts over the next several years.

A Kentucky Derby drug disqualification would be an embarrassment to the sport and to the brand that Churchill Downs Inc. cherishes so much – and profits from greatly. Medina Spirit's failed test came less than eight months after Gamine tested positive for the same corticosteroid after finishing third as the odds-on favorite in the Kentucky Oaks – the second most important race held annually at Churchill Downs. She was disqualified and Baffert was fined $1,500 for the medication violation.

Baffert blamed withdrawal guidelines for Gamine's failed drug test. In the case of Medina Spirit, he said something called “cancel culture” led to the suspension by Churchill Downs officials. Baffert took his bizarre blame game on a media tour for several days where he denied ever using betamethasone on a horse (except, presumably, for Gamine) and complained that “we live in a different world now. This, this America is different.”

And then, one week later, it was … oops, never mind. Baffert's team did treat Medina Spirit with betamethasone, he admitted in a written statement, but it was in an ointment called Otomax designed for ear infections in dogs the trainer said was used to treat a skin rash Medina Spirit developed a month before the Kentucky Derby. This was “good” betamethasone, he and his attorneys argued, not the injectable form of the drug that was given to Gamine.

And then, wisely, Baffert left the talking up to his attorneys.

The damage was already done. The trainer had become a sad punchline on late night TV and even on the ESPY award show on ESPN. The sport and its marquee event suffered collateral damage.

Churchill Downs tried to restore some sense of integrity with its temporary suspension of Baffert on May 9 and the more definitive two-year suspension handed him on June 2 after the split sample also came back positive for betamethasone.

“Reckless practices and substance violations that jeopardize the safety of our equine and human athletes or compromise the integrity of our sport are not acceptable and as a company we must take measures to demonstrate that they will not be tolerated,” Churchill Downs Inc. CEO Bill Carstanjen said about Baffert's pattern of medication violations.

But like everything else in racing, nothing is uniform and the Churchill Downs ban did not extend outside of the boundaries of its properties. Baffert ran Medina Spirit back in the Preakness Stakes on May 15, and he was welcome to return to his home base in Southern California and race at Santa Anita and Del Mar as if nothing had happened.

[Story Continues Below]

Baffert's attorneys won the first round in a court battle against the New York Racing Association, reinstating his right to race at NYRA tracks at least until he is given a hearing. That comes in less than two weeks. A hearing officer will listen to the testimony, weigh the evidence and make a decision on the matter. But that, too, will only affect Baffert's right to race in New York.

NYRA's statement of charges against Baffert cites three additional positive drug tests the trainer accumulated over a 365-day period: lidocaine positives for Charlatan in a division of the Arkansas Derby and Gamine (yes, her again) in an Oaklawn Park allowance race, both on May 2, 2020; and a dextrorphan positive in Merneith after a second-place finish in an allowance race at Del Mar July 25, 2020.

Of course, Baffert had excuses for those three failed drug tests. Gamine and Charlatan tested positive, the trainer said, because his assistant trainer was wearing a pain patch on his lower back that contained lidocaine and it must have somehow contaminated the horses. Merneith tested positive, he said, because a groom who had been taking cough syrup urinated in the filly's stall.

Members of the Arkansas Racing Commission bought the pain patch pitch, overruling a stewards ruling to disqualify both Charlatan and Gamine from their Oaklawn victories. And the CHRB stewards put on their kid gloves before fining him $2,500 for Merneith's failed drug test.

After four failed drug tests in just over four months, Baffert pledged to “get better,” and said he was hiring Dr. Michael Hore of the Hagyard Equine Medical Institute in Kentucky to “add an additional layer of protection to ensure the well-being of horses in my care and rule compliance. … I am increasing the training and awareness of all my employees when it comes to proper protocols. … I am personally increasing my oversight and commitment to running a tight ship and being careful that protective measures are in place.

“I want to raise the bar and set the standard for equine safety and rule compliance going forward,” Baffert said.

That was last Nov. 4, Breeders' Cup week at Keeneland.

It all sounded fine, except Hore was never hired to monitor the Baffert operation. And apparently, neither his vet, his staff or Baffert himself read the Otomax packaging or label to see that one of the ointment's three ingredients was betamethasone.

Last week, Churchill Downs dropped another hammer on Baffert, saying that horses in the care of a trainer suspended by Churchill Downs (meaning Baffert) could not earn official qualifying points on the Road to the 2022 Kentucky Derby. That move is designed to put pressure on owners who currently have their horses with Baffert to move them to another trainer before the points races begin in earnest.

The fact that Baffert is ineligible to run horses in the 2022 or 2023 Kentucky Oaks or Derby does not seem to have phased some of his owners, including SF Bloodstock and Starlight Racing, which spent nearly $3 million on five yearlings before the first two sessions of the Keeneland September Yearling Sale had ended, reportedly with the intention of sending them to Baffert to train.

One group that has not been heard from is the Breeders' Cup, whose two-day world championships take place this year at Del Mar on Nov. 5-6. As of now, Baffert will be eligible to race, and it seems unlikely that will change, given the fact that his five failed drug tests do not constitute a violation of the Breeders' Cup Convicted Trainers Rule. That rule disqualifies a trainer from participating if he or she has been sanctioned in the previous 12 months for a Class 1 violation carrying Category A or B penalties or a Class 2 violation carrying a Category A penalty. Those classifications (with Class 1 considered the most serious) are determined by the Association of Racing Commissioners International. None of Baffert's violations are Class 1 or Class 2, including the pending case involving Medina Spirit.

The Breeders' Cup board presumably could opt to take action against Baffert by further refining the Convicted Trainers Rule. The board consists of 13 men and one woman – all but two of whom have a direct or indirect financial relationship with the trainer, starting with chairman Fred W. Hertrich III, who has had ownership interests in several Baffert runners, including the disqualified and then reinstated Arkansas Derby winner Charlatan. Eleven others either own horses in Baffert's stable or stand stallions that he once trained and several hope to catch his eye with their yearlings sold at public auction.

As fiduciaries working on behalf of the breeders and owners who help fund the program through foal, racehorse and stallion nominations and entry fees, the board must do what is right for the Breeders' Cup and the brand it has developed over the last 37 years as a championship event that attracts the best Thoroughbreds in the world. They have the same responsibility to protect that brand as the officials at publicly traded Churchill Downs Inc. who decided enough is enough.

That's my view from the eighth pole.

The post View From The Eighth Pole: Will Breeders’ Cup Officials Act To Protect Their Brand? appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post