santa anita | Horse Racing Free Tips

Hollendorfer Files Petition Against CHRB

Hall of Fame trainer Jerry Hollendorfer has filed a petition for writ of mandate and damages in San Diego County Superior Court against the California Horse Racing Board (CHRB) arguing the agency has failed to exercise its regulatory authority and intercede in disputes where several California racing associations have barred the trainer from their grounds.

The petition also raises bias and conflict of interest concerns within the CHRB, contending that these issues have compromised the board’s ability to exercise its oversight authority in an impartial manner.

In June of last year, The Stronach Group (TSG) banned Hollendorfer–one of California’s most prolific trainers–from Santa Anita after four of his horses were catastrophically injured between the end of 2018 and the first half of 2019, when the facility experienced a well-publicized spike in equine fatalities. The trainer remains barred from all TSG facilities in California, including Golden Gate Fields.

Last summer, Del Mar management similarly attempted to bar Hollendorfer from their facility—an action that Hollendorfer subsequently overturned in court. Del Mar president, Josh Rubinstein, said that Hollendorfer requested and was granted 25 stalls this summer at Del Mar.

In an email, Drew Couto, Hollendorfer’s attorney, wrote that the CHRB has failed to exercise its statutory and legal obligations towards Hollendorfer in a “timely or impartial fashion,” and as such, “Jerry’s career has been damaged beyond comprehension, despite his being a licensee in good standing at all times. The CHRB has left Jerry languishing in uncertainty in California for over a year. That’s simply inexcusable.”

Couto added that it appears the CHRB “implicitly condoned” actions taken by the racetracks whereby they intentionally “shifted the narrative” from safety issues “inherent to dirt racing surfaces and poor track management” onto Hollendorfer.

The CHRB’s actions “deprived Hollendorfer of his occupational rights as a licensee, without any of the protections and processes afforded licensees under the law” Couto added, describing the CHRB’s legal obligations as “some of the most important duties and responsibilities of a state regulatory body and licensing agency.”

When asked for a response to the petition, CHRB spokesperson Mike Marten wrote that the board does not comment on pending litigation.

The petition argues that those California tracks that have barred Hollendorfer from training and racing on their premises have used him as a “scapegoat” in response to much broader horse welfare problems, and took these actions in breach of the race meet agreements signed between the trainers and the racing associations.

Because the CHRB is charged with “implementing and enforcing the law equally within its statutory authority and jurisdiction,” it has failed to afford Hollendorfer his rights as a licensed trainer, the petition contends.

“Petitioner seeks judicial relief because, despite his possession of a valid license and subsequent denial of occupational rights and privileges, and substantial economic interests, the CHRB has wrongfully refused to act in conformity with the law, and has thus further deprived Petitioner of his vested fundamental rights–the ability to pursue his licensed occupation and livelihood–without due process and/or equal protection under the law,” the petition states.

Perhaps most damningly, the petition lays out an argument that the CHRB has “abused its discretion and abrogated its duties,” including suppressing evidence and information, covering-up its own involvement in “exclusionary actions,” and denying the existence of possible conflicts of interests among board members.

The petition states that at the end of August last year, Hollendorfer’s legal representative told the CHRB’s chief investigator of concerns that the board was unable to adjudicate on Hollendorfer’s complaints, related to his exclusion, as a result of a “pattern of concealed acts and conduct, the appearance of impropriety, and actual and potential conflicts of interest on the part of several CHRB board members.”

One of the examples given in the petition includes the much-publicized co-ownership of the Richard Mandella-trained Fravel between former board members Chuck Winner and Madeline Auerbach, Tim Ritvo, former TSG CEO, and Stacie Clark, wife of Mike Rogers, president of the TSG’s racing division.

As a result of that discussion, the petition claims, “Petitioner’s counsel understood Respondent’s Chief Investigator to have confirmed that the CHRB was suspending its investigation into Hollendorfer’s complaints.”

Also detailed is an email that Rubinstein sent to Winner, Auerbach, former CHRB executive director Rick Baedeker, and the board’s legal counsel in light of the San Diego Superior Court’s tentative ruling last year allowing Hollendorfer to train and race at the facility during the summer meet.

In the email, Rubinstein argues that the track’s attorney “may be able to sway the judge in person tomorrow,” but also lays out alternate contingency plans in the event Hollendorfer is successful, including rough ideas as to an official track statement.

The petition contends that the email “reflects a preliminary, additional and continuing level of coordination between Respondent and the Racing Associations, and confirms both Respondent’s willingness to abrogate its licensing duties and responsibilities to those private entities, and to act with bias toward Petitioner.”

Rubinstein failed to respond to a request for comment before deadline.

The petition–which calls for the CHRB to conduct a hearing on Hollendorfer’s track bans before “impartial neutral hearing officers”–is the latest in a long series of legal actions that Hollendorfer has taken over the past year as he seeks a professional return to the California racing circuit as a whole, along with redress for the economic toll that events of the past 12 months have had on his career.

At the end of April, Hollendorfer filed a first amended complaint against the Santa Anita-based Los Angeles Turf Club (LATC) in the Los Angeles County Superior Court.

The trainer currently has a string at Monmouth Park, and throughout the past year, has never been barred from the Long Beach-located Los Alamitos racetrack, in Southern California.

The post Hollendorfer Files Petition Against CHRB appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Santa Anita PET Scans Allowing Horsemen To ‘Assess The Response Of An Injury’ Over Time

The equine Positron Emission Tomography (PET) scanner pioneered by the UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine, in collaboration with LONGMILE Veterinary Imaging, is now in heavy use at Santa Anita Park in Southern California. In just over six months since the installation in December 2019, with the financial support from the Stronach Group, more than 100 scans have been performed with the “MILEPET” (Molecular Imaging of Limbs in Equids), the PET scanner specifically designed to acquire images on horses without the need to lay them down.

Overall, 65 different horses were imaged with the scanner, with several horses imaged multiple times, several weeks apart. In total, images of 186 front ankles, 28 hind ankles, 16 knees, and 11 feet were acquired. As shown by these numbers, the front ankles are the main area of interest, as these are the joints most commonly involved in severe injuries in racehorses.

The first objective after installation of the scanner at the racetrack was to complete a study, funded by the Grayson Jockey Club Research Foundation, aiming at assessing the value of PET for identification and follow-up of ankle injuries. The study called for 24 horses with signs of fetlock injuries to be imaged three times with the PET scanner, with follow-up scans six and 12 weeks after the initial scans. All 24 horses have now been enrolled, and over half of these horses have completed all three scans.

All scans were successful, providing very interesting preliminary results.

“The PET scans provide very precise information about the injury,” said Dr. Mathieu Spriet, associate professor of diagnostic imaging at UC Davis and lead veterinarian on the study. “With a classic 'bone scan,' we usually can associate the injury with one of the bones of the ankle, but with the PET, we can really localize the abnormality to a specific area in a bone.”

This is of particular importance, as injuries to specific areas of the ankle bones are known to predispose horses to catastrophic breakdown.

Another benefit of the PET scan is the ability to see changes over time.

“As we have repeated scans six weeks apart, we have seen marked improvement on many of the injuries following treatment and rest, whereas other injuries remained active,” continued Dr. Spriet. “Being able to assess the response of an injury is very helpful to decide the course of action: deciding whether a horse needs more time off, a different treatment, can go back to the track or should be retired from racing – these are very challenging decisions to make for the veterinarians at the track. The PET images have provided objective data to support these decisions.”

In addition to the 24 horses in the Grayson Jockey Club study, more than 40 horses have been scanned at the request of their veterinarians. Horses were sent in by 14 different veterinarians coming from 26 different trainers, demonstrating how broadly the technique has already been embraced by the Santa Anita racing community.

As a Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scanner was also installed at Santa Anita Park earlier this year, another on-going study, supported by the Oak Tree Foundation, aims at comparing PET and MRI findings in the ankles of racehorses. Twenty horses have been enrolled in this study with preliminary results demonstrating the complementarity of both techniques to provide the best assessment of various injuries.

Another study, supported by the Dolly Green Research Foundation, has recently started. This study aims at monitoring horses who are resuming training after being laid-up due to ankle injury. The goal is to assess the ankle on a regular basis to be able to adapt the training, if early signs of injury were to recur.

“It is very impressive how much has been accomplished and how much we have learned in the last six months, thanks to the support of key partners and the hard work of the technical staff and the veterinarians at Santa Anita Park,” said Dr. Spriet. “We have been able to establish this new technology as a reliable, high-precision diagnostic tool for racehorses.”

It is likely that the knowledge about PET will keep growing quickly. In addition to the different on-going studies at Santa Anita Park, this technology is now available outside of California, as a MILEPET scanner has just been installed at New Bolton Center, the equine veterinary hospital of the University of Pennsylvania. There are also on-going efforts to secure the funding to install another MILEPET at the UC Davis Veterinary Medical Center, where it would be available for racehorses from Golden Gate Fields and for sport horses across Northern California.

The post Santa Anita PET Scans Allowing Horsemen To ‘Assess The Response Of An Injury’ Over Time appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

Lasix Debate: The Stronach Group Refusing To Card 2-Year-Old Races In Maryland

Unless the Maryland Racing Commission directs otherwise, there will be no 2-year-old races in Maryland in 2020 in light of the refusal of The Stronach Group, owner of the Maryland Jockey Club, to card 2-year-old races unless they are lasix-free.

In March 2019, TSG announced that it would impose a ban on lasix in horses born after 2018 at its racetracks. The action stemmed from a series of catastrophic injuries at Santa Anita—though it was widely acknowledged that lasix had nothing to do with that situation and the announcement was considered a misdirection to deflect criticism of the company's safety and welfare practices and track maintenance. Subsequently, TSG joined with a coalition of racetracks that announced they would seek to ban lasix in 2-year-olds beginning in 2020 and all stakes races beginning in 2021.

The Boards of Directors of the MTHA and Maryland Horse Breeders Association, in response to the TSG announcement, met jointly to review the TSG lasix announcement. The Boards determined to issue a joint statement in opposition, and it was released on April 24, 2019. In response, TSG President Belinda Stronach asked to meet with both groups, and a meeting was held at Laurel Park during Preakness week in 2019.

At the meeting, the group discussed the situation and sought to have Ms. Stronach appreciate how the racing industry in the Mid-Atlantic region works collaboratively to ensure that jurisdictions adopt the same rules and regulations in an effort to continually build upon uniformity for the benefit of horsemen, racetracks and the public. She acknowledged that Maryland is not California or Florida—the other states where the company owns racetracks—and agreed to work collectively with Maryland leaders on the lasix issue and not impose any mandates that would put Maryland at a severe competitive disadvantage with its surrounding states.

The groups also indicated a willingness to discuss lasix policies and told Ms. Stronach that they would be willing to provide meaningful funds for research to find a suitable alternative to Lasix that would control respiratory bleeding in the horse and not be necessary on race day. Both the MTHA and MHBA invited Ms. Stronach to join in the funding effort.

To date, Ms. Stronach has made no effort to meet with the horsemen and breeders or engage in any discussion about changing lasix policy in Maryland or the Mid-Atlantic region.

At the same time, the MRC was asked whether TSG could impose a lasix ban by “house rule.” The Attorney General's Office, in a letter of advice to the MRC, stated:

“Clearly, COMAR 09.10.03.08 permits administration of race-day lasix. Accordingly, because the administration of lasix is allowable on race day, implementing a house rule forbidding its administration would be in contravention of the current regulations … Accordingly, it is the advice of this office that the potential imposition of a house rule by the licensee to prohibit the administration of race-day lasix is not allowable without modification of COMAR 01.10.03.08.”

Subsequently, during the negotiations last fall for funding the proposed Racing and Community Development Act for Pimlico Race Course and Laurel—in which substantial funding was sought from the horsemen and breeders for the next 30 years—both Boards made clear that a process for future medication policy, among other items, would need to be resolved in order for any permanent funding commitments could be finalized. In reliance on the belief that such a process would be agreed upon in any long-term agreement required in legislation, both groups agreed to support the plan to make it financially viable. Had TSG been forthright with both Boards at the time about its plans to impose its own lasix policies without any discussion or regulatory review, and the manner in which TSG actually planned to proceed, it is highly unlikely that either Board would have committed to funding the Redevelopment Plan for the next 30 years.

As it became apparent when live racing resumed May 30 that the MJC was not carding 2-year-old races, repeated inquiries to the MJC and TSG by the MTHA were met with explanations having nothing to do with lasix policy until June 18 when suddenly, and without any prior notice or discussion with the MTHA and MHBA, TSG advised the MRC by letter, and in a Press Release issued at the same time, that it intended to begin carding non-lasix 2-year-old races beginning June 24 by “house rule” despite the Attorney General's opinion to the contrary.

In a legal brief filed with the MRC, TSG asserted that it did not need the racing commission's approval, that the regulations did not apply to the company, that it had the right to card such races under its common law powers, and that the regulation on bleeders was poorly written and permitted TSG to card such races. In an acrimonious and contentious meeting June 25, the MRC rejected TSG's arguments, advised the company that it could not card non-lasix races for 2-year-olds without a rule change, and referred the lasix issue to its newly formed Equine Health, Safety and Welfare Committee that was mandated by the Racing and Community Development Act of 2020.

In response to a question about whether TSG planned to card 2-year-old races under current regulations in addition to non-lasix races, TSG announced that it would refuse to card races in which the horses could be administered lasix, notwithstanding that Maryland law permits horses to receive such a medication.

In an effort to defuse the crisis, get 2-year-old races carded, and help the industry continue to recover from the economic crisis caused by the COVID-19 outbreak, the MTHA Board of Directors on July 1 offered to TSG to permit 2-year-old races to be carded for the next 90 days, with 50% of such races to be run under the current rules and 50% of the races to be run lasix-free, and commence discussions with TSG and the new MRC Safety and Welfare Committee on future lasix policy.

The offer was promptly rejected by TSG, but TSG offered that it would be willing to card some non-lasix Maryland-bred 2-year-old races with bonuses paid by TSG. The MTHA unanimously rejected this offer.

Which brings us to the current situation. The manner in which this matter has been raised and handled by TSG, particularly in light of the history of this issue over the past year, commitments it made to the Maryland racing community that were not honored, and the current economic crisis in Maryland racing where it has lost two-and-a-half months of live racing, pari-mutuel revenue and video lottery terminal revenue because of the shutdown and currently can only afford to race twice a week, is bewildering to say the least.

Trainers have been conditioning 2-year-olds for months waiting for a race. Owners and breeders are taking a major financial hit, particularly with Maryland-bred 2-year-olds that must race in state to qualify for the lucrative owner and breeder bonuses that are depended upon to sustain their operations. On July 1, a $40,000 maiden special weight event at Delaware Park was split into two divisions, each with seven horses—almost all Maryland-based.

We are appalled and disheartened by the defiant manner and tone in which TSG has chosen to act. We have no problem discussing and reviewing Lasix policy in racing. It has been a decade since the industry conducted an intensive scientific and political review of its Lasix program, and the current regulatory scheme, the most uniform in racing, should be reviewed.

To its credit, the MRC wants to undertake a review before changing current regulatory policy and agrees the discussion shall be regional in scope. There are scientific, equine safety and welfare, integrity and public policy issues to be considered. Apparently, TSG does not want this discussion. Rather, it simply wants to dictate policy to trusted partners without any discussion and review and is holding Maryland racing and breeding hostage to achieve its goals.

In the process, TSG is causing economic havoc and has badly damaged a decade of partnership, trust and progress in Maryland racing—the renaissance of Maryland racing—as all stakeholders and the MRC have worked collectively to lift the industry and keep disagreements behind closed doors. If successful in its strategy,TSG could set a precedent going forward that could have them dictating industry policy without any input from horsemen and breeders or regulatory oversight by imposing their own rules and regulations and in the process, reduce this industry to division and acrimony.

The MTHA regrets that the possibility remains there will be no 2-year-old racing in Maryland this year. As was stated at the June 25 MRC meeting: “Maryland racing deserves better.” We trust the MRC recognizes it powers and responsibilities and will firmly deal with a track owner who believes it can do what it wants and without any regard for the industry at large.

The post Lasix Debate: The Stronach Group Refusing To Card 2-Year-Old Races In Maryland appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

Sadler Fined, Suspended for Medication Violations

In a settlement agreement and mutual release with the California Horse Racing Board (CHRB), leading California trainer John Sadler has been fined $15,000 and handed a 60-day suspension–45 days of which are stayed–for three medication violations dating from 2019. The suspension runs June 29 through June 13.

As part of the agreement, Sadler has been placed on probation for one year, ending June 28, 2021. If he incurs any medication violations during that period, the 45 days of stayed suspension will be imposed following a noticed hearing.

As first reported in the Paulick Report, the CHRB stewards delivered their ruling Sunday, June 28.

The three violations occurred in April and May of last year. Jasikan (Ire) (Bated Breath {GB}), who finished third in the Singletary S. at Santa Anita Apr. 28, and Field Bet (Sidney’s Candy), fifth in a maiden claiming at Santa Anita Apr. 14, both tested positive for gabapentin. Sneem (Ire) (Sir Prancealot {Ire}), who won a maiden special weight at Golden Gate Fields May 10, tested positive for clenbuterol.

The Association of Racing Commissioners International lists both gabapentin and clenbuterol as Class 3/Penalty B medications.

Sadler finished the recently concluded six-month Santa Anita meet in sixth place on the trainers’ standings, with 18 wins and over $1.7 million in earnings, including the $360,000 that Combatant earned for winning the GI Santa Anita H.

Sadler provided the following statement on the CHRB stewards ruling:

“Trainers are liable for the condition of their horses regardless of the acts of third parties. The imposition of the trainer insurer rule requires only the detection of a prohibited substance in an official sample and identification of the trainer of the horse. The trainer insurer rule is not based on actual administration of a drug or negligent care. Fault is not an element of liability under the trainer insurer rule.

“The incidents covered by the settlement agreement and the penalties imposed under the agreement reflect the fact that these incidents resulted from circumstances beyond my control but which nonetheless are my responsibility. Two of these cases involved the passive transmission by a groom of a medication prescribed for his own medical condition. The other involved detection of a prohibited substance in a horse over which I did not have actual custody or control.

“I want to thank the CHRB for their consideration of the mitigating circumstances underlying these complaints in reaching this agreement. My decision to enter into the settlement agreement was based upon the costs involved in defending against these allegations and recognition of the impact of the trainer insurer rule. Over my 40 years as a trainer, I can unequivocally state that I neither administered nor had knowledge of the administration of any prohibited substance to any of my horses.”

The post Sadler Fined, Suspended for Medication Violations appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post