HISA | Horse Racing Free Tips

ARCI Questions HISA’s Effectiveness in New Report; HISA Claims Report `Factually Inaccurate’

A staff report from the Association of Racing Commissioners International (ARCI) was issued today providing “data and a programmatic analysis HISA Programs after its first year,” with the conclusion that HISA has done little to deter the doping of racehorses or effect the catastrophic breakdown rate, according to a press release from the ARCI. HISA responded to the report, saying it was “riddled with factual inaccuracies and mischaracterizations.”

ARCI claims that after one year of being responsible for equine and racetrack safety in thoroughbred racing and six months responsibility for anti-doping and medication control, that HISA's “biggest success lies in common rules and drug testing.” Moreover, they claim, “HISA/HIWU Testing Labs have not found any new drugs that had not been found under the previous state based programs,” and “based on HIWU statements as to the extent of testing and HIWU website postings, it appears the rate of adverse analytical findings triggering regulatory review or action is roughly the same as the previous state-based program.”

The ARCI went so far as to say that, “the equine fatality rate remains small and results are mixed as to whether HISA has had any effect, either way.”

“HISA has just been made aware of the Association of Racing Commissioner International (ARCI) report released publicly today,” said a HISA spokesperson. “The report is riddled with factual inaccuracies and mischaracterizations as evidenced by data and information that is publicly available on the HIWU website. HISA remains focused on enforcing and improving upon its Racetrack Safety and Anti-Doping and Medication Control Programs to advance safety and integrity in the sport.”

ARCI said that the prepared the report in anticipation of being asked for it by state racing commissions. They also said that “HISA receives considerable help from State Racing Commissions who are expected to provide almost $18 million in funding or services in the coming year, and that “HISA's almost $81 million proposed budget for next year relies on the thoroughbred racing industry paying almost $60 million in assessments.”

The post ARCI Questions HISA’s Effectiveness in New Report; HISA Claims Report `Factually Inaccurate’ appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Second Stab At Synthetics In California? The Trainers’ View

Under the toughest of spotlights, the industry's collective eyes often turn to the stuff under foot. At least, that's what trainer Mark Casse did in a widely-shared TDN Q&A.

“I think we really, seriously, need to look at more synthetic tracks,” Casse said, triggering yet another cavalcade of commentary on the conceived benefits and blights of synthetic surfaces. “I believe in them. I believe they've got plenty of data to back that up.”

Former TDN writer Lucas Marquardt followed it up with an analysis of race-day fatality data through The Jockey Club's Equine Injury database.

Marquardt calculated how from 2009 through 2022, there were 6,036 fatal injuries from 3,242,505 starts on dirt in North America. That's a rate of 1.86 fatalities per 1000 starts.

On synthetics, there were 534 fatal injuries from 482,169 starts, a rate of 1.11. That's a 68% difference.

“Put another way, had dirt tracks matched the safety of synthetic tracks during that stretch, there would have been 2,437 fewer fatalities,” Marquardt wrote.

The state with arguably the deepest-albeit most contentious-relationship with synthetic surfaces is California, which mandated in 2006 the switch from dirt to synthetic surfaces at its four major tracks.

The state reversed course a few years later in the face of broad dissatisfaction with the decision. It's no easy story to tell, riven by tales of cost-cutting and skirted corners, ill-chosen materials and drainage problems.

Some point the finger, at least in part, at the failure of industry leaders to adequately study the efficacy of different materials before putting the new surfaces down.

Since then, California's relationship with synthetic surfaces has grown even more complicated, thanks to Del Mar's dirt track consistently proving among the most statistically safe nationwide-dirt or synthetic. Nevertheless, Del Mar's experiences haven't been replicated state-wide.

In 2021, California's fatality rate on the dirt (1.51) was more than twice the synthetic rate (0.73), according to Marquardt's calculations. In 2022, it was more than three times larger (1.44 vs. 0.41).

This issue promises to remain a prominent one for the near future. The Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority recently announced that it is establishing a blue-ribbon committee to “work toward the study and ultimate introduction of more synthetic surface options in Thoroughbred racing.”

Among a fleet of promises, The Stronach Group (TSG) announced that it intends to replace the dirt training track at Santa Anita with a synthetic alternative.

Given the state's flip-flopping history with different surfaces, the TDN asked several long-time California-based trainers this question: Given the re-ignited debate on synthetics and all its accompanying arguments, should California mandate once again the replacement of its dirt surfaces with synthetics?

Eoin Harty
“Of course. I don't think they should even have to mandate it. I should think that somebody should show some f*&^ing leadership for a change and do the right thing. Instead of looking down, looking up, looking sideways and dancing around the issue, we need to address the elephant in the room: That we're in a position basically brought on by ourselves.”

“I think the time for hand-wringing and regurgitating old cliches about needing more data, more science, blah, blah, blah-that time has come and gone. No more committees, just do the right thing and put down synthetics. It's time to get on the right side of history. There won't be a Mulligan on this one.”

Note: Harty later explained the curse reflected the gravity of the situation.

John Shirreffs
“I like to tell the story of Tiago, who had won the Santa Anita Derby. In his four-year-old year at Del Mar, I had his exercise rider work him a half [mile]. He breaks off the half mile pole, the horse goes a 16th of a mile and pulls himself up, doesn't want to work.”

Trainer John Shirreffs | Benoit

“I tell the rider, 'don't worry, Mike Smith will be here tomorrow. He gets along with him really well.' Break Tiago off again, goes about a 16th of a mile, pulls himself up and refused to work on that synthetic track.”

“After Zenyatta won the G1 Clement Hearst S., she refused to gallop around the [Del Mar] racetrack. She'd go about two thirds of the way around then just stop and refuse to go. The only thing we could do is walk her to the nearest gap and take her off the track.”

“Zenyatta and Tiago were both big, strong horses that really ran hard. Those type of horses really did not like synthetic tracks. I think that if you just look at how long it takes horses to adjust to the synthetic tracks when they first go in, all you do is find horseshoes on the outside of the track because they're all grabbing themselves. Their feet stop so quickly in it. Synthetic tracks only get bearable as they get older. When they first go in, they're really sticky and tough on horses.”

“As you've seen in the statistics in California, our breakdowns are really reduced. So, I don't think synthetics are the answer. Synthetics are a nice alternative. I mean, it'd be great to have a synthetic track here on the training track because you can't use the main track when it's wet. So, maybe they'd let us use a synthetic track when it was wet.”

Richard Mandella
“I think Santa Anita has the right idea to put it on the training track here to learn more about it, and hopefully it will be waterproof to train through the winter. I would take one step at a time.”

Leonard Powell
“I think the option of having a synthetic track to train on is very good. But to mandate to have all racing on synthetic, I don't think that's a necessity.”

“The notion of a bad step has been proven incorrect. We've found out through a lot of studies, when it comes to injuries, it's not a one-day, one-time thing. It's an accumulation of the pounding from the training, day-in, day-out. So, having the option to have a synthetic to train on would help that, and would lessen the number of catastrophic injuries on dirt on race-day. And it could be very useful on rainy days.”

“However, synthetics are always called all-weather tracks. But they're not really all-weather tracks. They're bad-weather tracks-they're good tracks in bad weather. In Europe, they've had problems with them in the summer months, like we had here. When it's hot and sunny, those tracks are not that good.”

John Sadler
“If you put synthetic tracks back in here, you have to have all the tracks in the country on synthetics. You can't go half and half. That doesn't work. You can't train on synthetic and expect to do well on dirt. You can't train on dirt and expect to do well on synthetic.”

John Sadler | Benoit

“If you go back to when we had synthetics in California, I did very well on it. I could live with one surface nationwide. But because I can train on what you give me, it doesn't mean I prefer that. Not necessarily.”

“I would prefer good dirt. I think it's preferable for these horses. Why? Well, for one, they need a lot of upkeep. They need to be replaced. They need to be refreshed. They're expensive to maintain. And anybody that tells you they're not expensive to maintain is–I don't think they're being truthful.”

“There are other arguments. Are there really fewer fatalities [on synthetics]? Stats probably show that. But is that the real number, if you also look at [career ending] injuries? You don't know, right? It's hard for me to just take one study number and say, 'okay, that's all there is.' It doesn't work like that.”

“What I'm trying to say it's very nuanced. You'd have to give time for the breeders to adjust. You'd have to give time for people to purchase the right horses to adjust. A lot of what we did here wasn't well planned out. We did it and then lived with the consequences.”

Carla Gaines
“Let me start by saying I am not that well-educated on the various types of synthetic tracks. I know there have been improvements on them since they were mandated here in California in 2006.”

“Santa Anita is installing a synthetic surface here on our training track this fall and with the expected increase in rainfall this winter that would give us an alternative place to train the horses when the main track is sealed. It would also be a nice option for our grass horses as we do not have grass workouts here.”

“But for racing, I would have no interest in it. We as trainers are held responsible for every single injury. The spotlight is on us-rarely the surfaces we train on and race over. Instead of getting rid of dirt tracks, let's keep a closer eye on them, and try very hard to improve them. As one old timer told me once, 'we can put a man on the moon, why can't we figure out dirt?'”

Doug O'Neill
“I love the fact they're putting it on the training track. At Santa Anita you'll have all three surfaces. And when we get the rainy weather, you can train on a synthetic. If we had weeks of crazy weather, you could potentially run on synthetic.”

“But to replace the main track dirt for synthetic, I would be anti that. Just wouldn't want to replace the dirt.”

“We've had a pretty good sampling with Hollywood Park and Santa Anita and Del Mar all being synthetic at one time. It had its little perks during rainy season. But all in all, not a good experience for me.”

“They're really good in inclement weather, which a lot of the world has, as opposed to Southern California. So, I just don't think they're good for Southern California tracks.”

The post Second Stab At Synthetics In California? The Trainers’ View appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

The Wait Begins: Fifth Circuit Hears HISA Constitutionality Appeal Arguments

A 2 1/2-year-old legal fight led by the National Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association (NHBPA) to try and overturn the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act (HISA) based on alleged constitutional flaws got distilled into one hour of oral arguments on Wednesday in the case's second go-round before the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans.

As expected, lawyers for the two sides stuck to the finer points of constitutionality law, and there were only several passing references related to horse racing. The arguments centered on the non-delegation doctrine, which is a legal principle that holds that Congress cannot delegate the power to legislate to executive agencies or private entities.

The panel of three judges–the same trio that declared a previous version of HISA unconstitutional last November, leading to an amended version of HISA that became law in December–did not overtly tip their hands as to which arguments they might be favoring based on the questions they asked of the attorneys. Nor did the judges conclude the session by declaring any timetable for issuing their decision.

The National NHBPA, 12 of its affiliates, and a number of Texas-based racetrack entities, plus the state of Texas itself and its racing commission, are the plaintiffs/appellants.

The HISA Authority, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and officials from each organization are the defendants/appellees.

“Congress did not, with this meager amendment, fix the fatal non-delegation problems plaguing HISA,” said William Cole, an attorney for the state of Texas who was among those who argued for the appellants.

“Again, there's at least three areas where the lawmaking power is not sufficiently subordinated, because, as we've mentioned time and again, the Authority's rules govern unless they can shove a rule through notice-and-comment rulemaking. The upshot is that for years, it's likely going to be the case that the Authority's rules govern, not the FTC's,” Cole said.

Joseph Busa, an attorney for the FTC, argued that the appellees believe the Fifth Circuit already settled the outstanding non-delegation issues when the same panel identified the constitutional flaws that led to Congress's rewrite of HISA.

“What [the appellants] are presenting to you, is they are saying no private entity can wield this kind of power, regardless of how subordinate they are, regardless of the degree of supervision that the public agency has over them. That is squarely inconsistent with almost 100 years of Supreme Court precedent,” Busa said.

The panel of judges referenced the “voluminous” number of pre-argument briefs filed by both sides in the case.

The HBPA had written in a pre-argument brief that it has problems with the Authority allegedly portraying itself as both a governmental body or a private organization “depending on which suits its interests on any individual argument,” according to an Aug. 25 court filing.

“Sometimes [the Authority] wants to be like a government entity, with the power to compel registration, collect mandatory fees, conduct searches, draw blood and urine samples, and impose sanctions with 'the force of federal law,'” the HBPA brief stated.

“Other times it wants to be a private business league, choosing its own board, running its own corporate affairs, and exempt from the Appointments and Appropriations clauses, the Freedom of Information Act, etc…” the brief continued.

This purported dual nature of the Authority, the HBPA alleged, “exposes the overall flaw” by which the 2022 rewrite of the HISA law should be struck down.

“Nothing could be more unfair or inequitable than to have a regulator with all the powers of government but exempt from all the democratic accountability and safeguards for liberty imposed on government,” the HBPA's filing stated.

The Authority defendants had asserted to the Fifth Circuit in their own pre-argument brief filed Aug. 4 that the HBPA's “feeble attempts” to contrast HISA with other statutes upheld against private non-delegation challenges rest on supposed differences that are either factually inaccurate or constitutionally irrelevant.

The Authority's brief put it this way: “Congress, the Executive, and all three federal courts that have considered the amended Act have reached the same conclusion: HISA is now constitutional. As every court to consider Congress's amendment has held, HISA no longer violates the private-nondelegation doctrine because the Authority is now subordinate to the FTC,” the filing stated.

The first time the HBPA plaintiffs attempted to challenge the original 2020 version of the HISA statute in federal court, on Mar. 15, 2021, the suit was dismissed, on March 31, 2022.

The HBPA plaintiffs then appealed, leading to the above-referenced Fifth Circuit Court reversal on Nov. 18, 2022, that remanded the case back to the lower court. In the interim, an amended version of HISA got passed by Congress and was signed into law by President Joe Biden on Dec. 29, 2022.

On May 4, 2023, the lower court deemed that the new version of HISA was constitutional because the rewrite of the law fixed the problems the Fifth Circuit had identified.

The HBPA plaintiffs then swiftly filed another appeal back to the Fifth Circuit, which led to an “expedited” scheduling of the Oct. 4 oral arguments.

The three judges on this Fifth Circuit panel are Stuart Kyle Duncan and Kurt D. Engelhardt (both nominated to their positions by President Donald Trump in 2018) and Carolyn Dineen King (who was nominated by President Jimmy Carter in 1979).

The post The Wait Begins: Fifth Circuit Hears HISA Constitutionality Appeal Arguments appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Weekly Stewards and Commissions Rulings: Sept. 26–Oct. 2.

Every week, the TDN publishes a roundup of key official rulings from the primary tracks within the four major racing jurisdictions of California, New York, Florida and Kentucky.

Here's a primer on how each of these jurisdictions adjudicates different offenses, what they make public (or not) and where.

The TDN also posts a roundup of the relevant Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act (HISA) related rulings from the same week. These include decisions from around the country.

California

Track: Santa Anita

Date: 09/29/2023

Licensee: Jose Valdivia jr., jockey

Penalty: Three-day suspension

Violation: Careless riding

Explainer: Having received notice from the California Horse Racing Board that the appeal of DMTD Ruling #07 (July 22, 2023) has been withdrawn, the original ruling is reinstated. Jockey Jose Valdivia jr. is suspended for 3 racing days (October 14,15 and 20, 2023). Pursuant to California Horse Racing Board Rule #1766 (Designated Races), the term of suspension shall not prohibit participation in designated races.

Track: Santa Anita

Date: 09/30/2023

Licensee: Dino Baccari, owner

Penalty: Restoration of good standing

Violation: N/A

Explainer: Owner Dino Baccari, having complied with the provisions of California Horse Racing Board rule #1876 (Financial Responsibility – $633.79 to Kingfisher Farms) is restored to good standing. Ruling LAQL #109 issued at Los Alamitos Quarter Horse Association on September 9, 2023, is set aside.

New York

Track: Aqueduct

Date: 09/26/2023

Licensee: Jose Lezcano, jockey

Penalty: Three-day suspension

Violation: Careless riding

Explainer: Jockey Jose Lezcano is hereby suspended 3 NYRA racing days having appealed a stay has been granted. For careless riding during the running of the 5th race on September 21, 2023. Nyxed ridden by Jockey Jose Lezcano was disqualified from 4th and placed 11th.

Track: Aqueduct

Date: 09/28/2023

Licensee: Linda Rice, trainer

Penalty: Fourteen-day suspension, $2,000 fine

Violation: Medication violation

Exlainer: Linda Rice as responsible trainer under 9 NYCRR 4043.4 (a), violated commission rules in that Linda Rice trained horse “Afleet Arlene” that finished 1st in the 4th race at Aqueduct Racetrack on January 21st 2023, and having received a report from the New York Drug Testing and Research Program that a race-day sample taken from the horse “Afleet Arlene” had the substance Phenylbutazone present at a concentration, including an assessment of the measurement and imprecision of the quantitative threshold, in excess of the quantitative threshold, in excess of 0.3 mcg/ml in plasma in violation of 9 NYCRR 4043.4 (a) 26. Trainer Linda Rice is hereby suspended fourteen (14) days and fined the sum of two thousand ($2,000) dollars having appealed a stay has been granted. Furthermore, the Stewards order horse “Afleet Arlene” disqualified from any part of the purse and the purse redistributed as follows:

(#2) Darn That Song
(#4) Handle the Truth
(#5) America's Pride
(#6) Sheza Rajun Cajun
(#3) Predetermined
(#8) Midmon

Rice has appealed the ruling. More on the story here.

NEW HISA/HIWU STEWARDS RULINGS

The following rulings were reported on HISA's “rulings” portal and through the Horseracing Integrity & Welfare Unit's “pending” and “resolved” cases portals.

This does not include the voided claim rulings which were sent to the TDN directly. Some of these rulings are from prior weeks as they were not reported contemporaneously.

One important note: HISA's whip use limit is restricted to six strikes during a race.

Violations of Crop Rule

Santa Anita

Cesar Ortega – violation date Sept 24; $250 fine and one-day suspension, 8 strikes

Pending ADMC Violations

Date: 09/08/2023

Licensee: Clarence King, trainer

Penalty: Pending

Alleged Violation: Medication violation

Explainer: For the presence of Dimethylsulfoxide—Controlled Medications (Class C)—in a sample taken from Indirectly. This is a possible violation of Rule 3312—Presence of Controlled Medication Substance and/or its Metabolites or Markers (Post-Race/Vets' List).

Date: 09/07/2023

Licensee: Ismael Bahena, trainer

Penalty: Pending

Alleged Violation: Medication violation

Explainer: For the presence of Diclofenac—Controlled Medications (Class C)—in a sample taken from Yammy Yammy Bella, who finished second at Kentucky Downs on 9/7/23. This is a possible violation of Rule 3312—Presence of Controlled Medication Substance and/or its Metabolites or Markers (Post-Race/Vets' List).

Date: 09/06/2023

Licensee: Carl James Deville, trainer

Penalty: Pending

Alleged Violation: Medication violation

Explainer: For the presence of Tapentadol and Butalbital—banned substances—in a sample taken from Eurobeliever, who was pulled up and vanned off at Presque Isle Downs on 9/6/23. This is a possible violation of Rule 3212—Presence of a Banned Substance and/or its Metabolites or Markers (Post-Race/Vets' List).

Date: 08/28/2023

Licensee: David Wayne Baker, trainer

Penalty: Pending

Alleged Violation: Medication violation

Explainer: For the presence of Phenylbutazone—Controlled Medications (Class C)—in a sample taken from Gerlach's. This is a possible violation of Rule 3312—Presence of Controlled Medication Substance and/or its Metabolites or Markers (Post-Race/Vets' List).

Date: 08/28/2023

Licensee: Shane Meyers, trainer

Penalty: Provisionally suspended

Alleged Violation: Medication violation

Explainer: For the presence of Altrenogest—a banned substance—in a sample taken from Mugsy Malone. This is a possible violation of Rule 3212—Presence of a Banned Substance and/or its Metabolites or Markers.

Date: 08/27/2023

Licensee: Mark Hibdon, trainer

Penalty: Pending

Explainer: For the presence of Flunixin—Controlled Medication (Class C)—in a sample taken from D'wild Muffin, who won at Arapahoe on 8/27/23. This is a possible violation of Rule 3312—Presence of Controlled Medication Substance and/or its Metabolites or Markers (Post-Race/Vets' List Workout).

Date: 08/25/2023

Licensee: Sammy Stevens, trainer

Penalty: Pending

Alleged Violation: Medication violation

Explainer: For the presence of Phenylbutazone—Controlled Medications (Class C)—in a sample taken from Pandora Who. This is a possible violation of Rule 3312—Presence of Controlled Medication Substance and/or its Metabolites or Markers (Post-Race/Vets' List).

Date: 08/17/2023

Licensee: John Guciardo, trainer

Penalty: Pending

Explainer: For the presence of Dexamethasone and Trichloromethiazide—Controlled Medications (Class C)—in a sample taken from Cuz, who won at Presque Isle Downs on 8/17/23. This is a possible violation of Rule 3312—Presence of Controlled Medication Substance and/or its Metabolites or Markers (Post-Race/Vets' List Workout).

Date: 08/15/2023

Licensee: Jeffrey Crozier, trainer

Penalty: Pending

Alleged Violation: Medication violation

Explainer: For the presence of Phenylbutazone—Controlled Medications (Class C)—in a sample taken from Orb of the Boro, who won at Belterra Park on 8/15/23. This is a possible violation of Rule 3312—Presence of Controlled Medication Substance and/or its Metabolites or Markers (Post-Race/Vets' List).

Date: 08/04/2023

Licensee: Philip Aristone, trainer

Penalty: Pending

Alleged Violation: Medication violation

Explainer: For the presence of Lamotrigine—Controlled Medications (Class B)—in a sample taken from Field Letters, who won at Penn National on 8/4/23. This is a possible violation of Rule 3312—Presence of Controlled Medication Substance and/or its Metabolites or Markers (Post-Race/Vets' List).

Resolved ADMC Violations

Date: 08/29/2023

Licensee: Scott Young, trainer

Penalty: A fine of $500; imposition of 1.5 Penalty Points

Explainer: For the presence of Phenylbutazone—Controlled Medications (Class C)—in a sample taken from Our Davina. This is a possible violation of Rule 3312—Presence of Controlled Medication Substance and/or its Metabolites or Markers (Post-Race/Vets' List).

Date: 08/29/2023

Licensee: Conor Timothy Murphy, trainer

Penalty: A fine of $3,000; imposition of 3 Penalty Points

Explainer: A possible violation of Rule 3314—Use or Attempted Use of a Controlled Medication Substance or a Controlled Medication Method—on the horse, Dixie Supreme. This is also a possible violation of Rule 4222—Intra-Articular Injections Within Seven (7) Days of Timed and Reported Workout.

Date: 08/26/2023

Licensee: Jeff Mullins, trainer

Penalty: A fine of $3,000; imposition of 3 Penalty Points

Explainer: A possible violation of Rule 3314—Use or Attempted Use of a Controlled Medication Substance or a Controlled Medication Method—on the horse, Dandy Man Shines. This is also a possible violation of Rule 4222—Intra-Articular Injections Within Seven (7) Days of Timed and Reported Workout.

Date: 08/23/2023

Licensee: Juan Alvarado, trainer

Penalty: 7-day period of Ineligibility, beginning on October 4, 2023; a fine of $1,000; imposition of 2 Penalty Points

Explainer: For the presence of Acepromazine—Controlled Medications (Class B)—in a sample taken from Evelyn. This is a possible violation of Rule 3312—Presence of Controlled Medication Substance and/or its Metabolites or Markers (Post-Race/Vets' List).

Date: 08/23/2023

Licensee: Dan Blacker, trainer

Penalty: 7-day period of Ineligibility, beginning on October 3, 2023; a fine of $1,000; imposition of 2 Penalty Points

Explainer: For the presence of Acepromazine—Controlled Medications (Class B)—in a sample taken from Miss O'Brien. This is a possible violation of Rule 3312—Presence of Controlled Medication Substance and/or its Metabolites or Markers (Post-Race/Vets' List).

Date: 08/15/2023

Licensee: Robert Kinmon, trainer

Penalty: Disqualification of the Covered Horse's race results, including forfeiture of all purses and other compensation, prizes, trophies, points, and rankings and repayment or surrender (as applicable); a fine of $500; imposition of 1.5 Penalty Points

Explainer: For the presence of Methocarbamol—Controlled Medication (Class C)—in a sample taken from Vamonos, who finished sixth at Belterra Park on 8/15/23. This is a possible violation of Rule 3312—Presence of Controlled Medication Substances.

Date: 05/28/2023

Licensee: Ray Handal, trainer

Penalty: Withdrawal of EAD Notice

Explainer: For the presence of Zeranol—a banned substance—in a sample taken from Barrage, who finished second at Belmont Park on 5/28/23. This was a possible violation of Rule 3212—Presence of a Banned Substance and/or its Metabolites or Markers. Pursuant to ADMC Program Rule 3247(e), HIWU has lifted the Provisional Suspension based upon information submitted by the Covered Person and the review of relevant scientific information. The Equine Anti-Doping Notice has not been withdrawn.

Read more on the story here.

The post Weekly Stewards and Commissions Rulings: Sept. 26–Oct. 2. appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post