The Paddock | Horse Racing Free Tips

Irwin: Independent Overseer Will Ensure Integrity

What's the big deal about the new racing legislation?

When I called for horseracing to find a way to install the United States Anti-Doping Agency as the overseer of drugs in an Op/Ed for The Blood-Horse back in 2004, I did so with some specific goals in mind. My overriding reason, however, was to have an agency that was independent.

Now that USADA will be given the job, nobody knows whether the hopes and dreams of those who worked so tirelessly to make USADA's presence a reality will be fully accomplished. One thing that everybody in the sport can be sure of is that special interests will no longer be able to tilt the playing fields or the halls of justice.

Over the years people have asked me why special interests fought so hard to keep the legislation from being enacted. The answers are many but they all boil down to unethical participants in racing being stopped from running their games and not paying any price when they get caught.

As I explained to my peers who fought side by side to bring the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act to fruition, the one thing the bill's opponents dread is that when they or members of their team get caught breaking the rules they will be unable to find a way in a boardroom, steward's stand, men's club or corporate office to obtain a favorable outcome.

Anybody paying the least bit of attention to what is going on right now will know exactly what I am writing about. An unbeaten young stallion's reputation is on the line in an ongoing battle that involved a racing board, a steward's office and selective interpretation of rules. Another case is going through the adjudication process involving a positive for a banned substance and a bonus reportedly worth millions of dollars.

We have all seen horsemen and owners break rules yet escape with favorable rulings or slaps on the wrist.

At the same time we have seen trainers cheat with impunity and watched as those charged with the responsibility of going after them sit on their hands or shrug their shoulders. Why, one may wonder, would racetracks, stewards, medical directors and racing boards protect the guilty?

Well, they all have conflicts of interest. Racetracks all think that it is trainers who bring in owners and racetracks need owners to supply their racing cards. Stewards, by and large, are concerned first and foremost with keeping their jobs and they learn early on in their tenure that the best way to accomplish this goal is not to rock the boat. Racing boards, like racetracks, are loath to bring cheating trainers to justice for fear of tarnishing the sport, as though by the cheating trainers' actions they had not done so already.

I really hate to have to write this next part of this Op/Ed because it is so embarrassing to racing, but I humbly submit to you that some owners at the highest level of the sport only participate because they can game the system and get away with it.

And these people, as well as their trainers, live in mortal fear of not being able to find a get-out-of-jail card after they break the rules. They count on this aspect of the sport. They know the tracks will not turn them in. And plenty of others feel the same way.

So what scares the hell out of these miscreants is an agency like USADA headed by a world-renown sports cop being in charge, because they know Travis Tygart is not going to roll over and play dead.

Owners and trainers who play by the rules in the main understand how important and liberating this concept is and can be, but there have been others—especially trainers—who have fought against the legislation. They don't want trainers held up to scrutiny or caught and adjudicated because these innocent horsemen think that all of them will be unfairly painted with the same brush. It is the same philosophy engaged in by racetracks, who worry racing will be put in a bad light by trainers being exposed as cheats.

Nothing could be further from the truth. It is only when a sport takes itself seriously, like Major League Baseball has done from time to time, that it can thrive and soar to new heights of popularity.

As important as it is for fans and gamblers to believe in the integrity of racing, it is just as important for owners and trainers to believe in it as well. In a sport well-managed and adjudicated, pride of ownership can return in North America and trainers can once again go to restaurants or walk in the front door of their house carrying a Daily Racing Form without fear of embarrassment.

So, yeah, passage of the “Integrity” aspect of the new law is a big deal. It is, in fact, such a big deal that it might very well save our sport.

Passage of the bill, it must be said in closing, is only the beginning. In order for USADA to be successful it must rely on assistance from ethical owners and trainers. So instead of mimicking silent officials in racing who sat by and let cheating take place, we will need owners to report on a new hotline any instances they know of regarding cheating so that Travis Tygart and his team can root out evil wherever they find it.

I have every faith that owners will comply, and some faith that a lot of trainers will comply. I do, however, fear that the code of silence among those of the current generation will prevail and make USADA's job harder. Perhaps as in many things today the next generation will save our sorry asses, because in order to keep this sport on the level and make it fair for everybody, help will be required.

Barry Irwin is founder and chief executive officer of Team Valor International.

The post Irwin: Independent Overseer Will Ensure Integrity appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

What Happens Next? Interstate Horseracing Integrity And Safety Act FAQs

With Monday's late-night passage of the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act as part of an omnibus government spending bill, there are many questions about when the newly created Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority will begin to take shape and begin its national oversight of medication policies and safety standards for the sport, how it will be governed, and what it will cost.

To get answers to some of the most frequently asked questions, we went to Marc Summers, vice president and general counsel for The Jockey Club, which helped steer the legislation through the United States House of Representatives and Senate.

When will the Authority be operational?
By law, the latest it can go into effect is July 1, 2022, and it could be much earlier than that. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) will first have to approve the anti-doping and medication control program and racetrack safety program. The FTC will review programs developed by the Authority, allow for public comment, and once approved it will go into effect.

Once President Trump signs the legislation, what happens next?
The key will be for the previously established nominating committee to continue their work, looking at all suggestions received from the industry and public about who should fill the nine positions on the Authority board of directors. Five of the board members will fill independent seats, with four seats to be filled by industry representatives – from among owners, breeders, trainers, racetracks, veterinarians, state racing commissions and jockeys. No more than one from each equine constituency group is permitted on the board at any time. Industry representatives on the board may not currently serve as an official or officer with an of equine industry representative group or have a financial interest in, or provide goods and services to, covered horses.

The board chairman shall be an independent member.

Two standing committees – an anti-doping and medication control committee and a racetrack safety committee – will also be appointed with four independent members and three industry members. The chair of the anti-doping and medication control committee shall be an independent member and the chair of the safety committee shall be an industry member.

How soon could the board and committee members be in place?
Summers said he is not counsel to the Authority but understands the nominating committee may have a board in place during the first quarter of 2021, with committee memberships to follow.

When and how does the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) come into play?
USADA is identified within the bill as the anti-doping and medication control enforcement entity. What will get them directly involved is execution of an agreement between the Authority and USADA, but the Authority's board will have to be in place before that happens.

When will it be determined exactly what the cost will be to racing participants?
That's going to evolve. There will be an initial budget for the Authority covering 2021. But until the anti-doping and medication control and racetrack safety programs go live, the Authority will not be assessing the states. More will be known early in 2022.

There is a misconception that the Authority's cost will be allocated to individual members on a per-start basis. That is not true. Budgets will be allocated to individual states based upon the total anticipated number of starts in that state for the succeeding year, and it will be up to each state to determine how the money will be raised and whether a per-start fee or some other form of calculation will be used.

Will riding crop rules fall under the safety aspect of the Authority? What other activities would the Authority regulate?
Riding crop rules would fall within this in that it involves in-race and workout safety. There also may be some rules regarding racetrack surfaces, pre-race vet exams and such.

What opportunities are there for horsemen to have input with the Authority
Enshrined in the HISA, when the Authority has proposed rules, they go to the FTC for approval, and there is a requirement for public comment. Furthermore, the HISA allows for horsemen to be on the Authority's board and representatives from horsemen's groups can also serve on the Authority's standing committees.

What will happen to existing state racing commissions?
By the language in the statute, the racing commission rules with regard to anti-doping medication control and racetrack safety will be pre-empted. Commissions do significantly more than that, including licensing, establishing and overseeing rules of racing, overseeing operation of stewards and variety of other activities. This will lighten the load on commissions and allow them to focus on those other areas. Also, the HISA expressly contemplates that USADA and the Authority may work with state racing commissions in implementing the Authority's programs. We can anticipate seeing many states playing a significant role in boots-on-the ground anti-doping activities such as sample collections and investigations.

The post What Happens Next? Interstate Horseracing Integrity And Safety Act FAQs appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

View From the Eighth Pole: Truth Or Consequences

I've been observing the “lads” at Coolmore Stud in Ireland and at their Kentucky farm, Ashford, for more than 30 years. They have revolutionized the bloodstock world, maximized stallion revenue, and elevated customer service and marketing.

Through early identification and acquisition of promising stud prospects, embracing large books for their stallions (including no small number of their own mares), and shuttling them to Australia or South America for dual hemisphere breeding seasons, Coolmore and Ashford can “get out” financially on many of these horses before their first foals hit the racetrack.

In a business where nine out of 10 new stallions will fail to sustain or increase their initial value, it's highly advantageous for a stud farm to break even or show a modest profit before the marketplace has a chance to see whether or not a horse's offspring can run.

Yet the lads aren't perfect. No one is.

I was reminded of that when I saw their recent advertisement for first-year stallion Maximum Security. It was, without a doubt, the most unconventional stallion ad I've ever seen.

Under the banner, “MAXIMUM SECURITY – the facts,” the ad began normally enough, citing races won, achievements, and awards.

Then it gets weird. Bullet point No. 12 in the ad states: “NEVER TESTED POSITIVE for an illegal or prohibited substance during his career despite comprehensive testing at the world's best laboratories.”

That statement is true (though I might disagree that post-race testing for all of his races was done at “the world's best laboratories.”). But let's remember how many times cheating cyclist Lance Armstrong said he'd never failed a drug test: “Twenty-plus-year career, 500 drug controls worldwide, in and out of competition. Never a failed test. I rest my case,” he said in May 2011, a little more than a year before he was stripped of his seven Tour de France titles because of doping.

But wait, there's more.

In addition to a complimentary quote from Bob Baffert, who trained Maximum Security for the second half of his 4-year-old campaign in 2020, there is this closing argument: “MAXIMUM SECURITY is a bona fine CHAMPION that raced on water, hay, oats & fresh air!”

Everyone knows what this is about.

Less than three months after the announcement that Coolmore had purchased a significant share in the racing and breeding interests of Maximum Security – who was voted an Eclipse Award winner as outstanding 3-year-old male of 2019 – the colt's trainer, Jason Servis was among those rounded up and arrested by the FBI as part of a broad multi-year investigation into doping of racehorses in the United States.

The indictment states that Servis and co-conspirators “concealed the administration of PEDs from federal and state government agencies, racing officials, and the betting public by, among other things, concealing and covertly transporting PEDs between barns where Servis' racehorses were stabled, falsifying veterinary bills to conceal the administration of SGF-1000, and using fake prescriptions.”

Even worse, there were specific references to Maximum Security in the March charging document and the superseding indictment filed Nov. 5.

“Jason Servis, the defendant, was the trainer for a particularly successful racehorse, 'Maximum Security,' that briefly placed first at the Kentucky Derby on May 4, 2019, before racing officials disqualified the horse for interference,” the superseding indictment states.

“Following the Kentucky Derby,” it continues, “Maximum Security continued to compete in high-profile races, including in Oceanport, New Jersey. Servis worked with (veterinarians) Kristian Rhein and Alexander Chan, the defendants, among others, to procure and administer adulterated and misbranded PEDs, including the adulterated and misbranded PED SGF-1000 and invalidly administered Clenbuterol, for the purpose of doping several racehorses under Servis' control, including Maximum Security.”

The FBI intercepted a March 5, 2019, phone call between Servis and co-defendant Jorge Navarro in which Servis is heard recommending SGF-1000 to Navarro, adding, “I've been using it on everything almost.” Navarro allegedly admitted also giving SGF-1000 to some of his horses, then ended the call, saying: “I don't want to talk about this shit on the phone, OK.”

The indictment states that SGF-1000 is a “customized PED purportedly containing 'growth factors,' including fibroblast growth factor and heptocyte growth factor, which are intended to promote tissue repair and increase a racehorse's stamina and endurance beyond its natural capability.”

So it appears, based on the indictment, that Maximum Security was getting a little something more than the “water, hay, oats, and fresh air” claim in the ad.

No one is suggesting original owners Gary and Mary West or the Coolmore partners who bought into the horse had any knowledge of what is documented in the indictment.

The Maximum Security ad also includes an excerpt from a story in the Thoroughbred Daily News stating Servis may have been buying “some fake PEDs” from Chan and Rhein, based on comments from prosecutors at a pre-trial hearing.

The arrest of Servis came just over a week after Maximum Security had won the inaugural running of the $20-million Saudi Cup. The Saudis have yet to pay the purse money, pending the outcome of what they said is their own investigation into Servis. More likely, they're waiting to see what happens in court.

That could take a while. There is another pre-trial conference scheduled on May 14, 2021.

Maximum Security did win two of his four post-Servis starts while trained by Baffert, including the G1 Pacific Classic at Del Mar. He was retired following a fifth-place performance in the G1 Breeders' Cup Classic at Keeneland, finishing behind two Baffert barnmates – winner Authentic and runner-up Improbable – Global Campaign, and Tacitus. He beat race favorite Tiz the Law.

I'm not going to knock Maximum Security, who could turn out to be a great success at stud. As the late Hall of Fame trainer Charlie Whittingham is often quoted as saying, “Never say anything bad about a horse until he's been dead at least 10 years.”

But we know from other sports that suspected cheating has consequences. Barry Bonds, Major League Baseball's all-time leading home run hitter and single-season record holder, has been shut out of the Baseball Hall of Fame. So, too, have Roger Clemens, Sammy Sosa, and Mark McGwire, all with Hall of Fame qualifications but accused of using steroids. None failed a drug test.

Servis (and by way of extension Maximum Security) is innocent until proven guilty, but the charges against him and the others named in the case are serious. If Servis is found guilty, no amount of spin is going to chase the dark clouds away from his most accomplished horse.

That's my view from the eighth pole.

The post View From the Eighth Pole: Truth Or Consequences appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

Gilligan: Lack Of Voided Claim Rule ‘Creates Mortal Moral Hazard’

The current claiming rules in Louisiana harken back to the Stone Age, horseman, author, and jockey Jack Gilligan's father Patrick Gilligan wrote in an op/ed for the Thoroughbred Racing Commentary. Those rules state that the claimant becomes the owner of a horse as soon as that horse becomes a starter in the race, and that the claimant owns the horse “whether alive or dead, sound or unsound, or injured at anytime after leaving the starting gate, during the race or after.”

In states like California, Kentucky, and New York, voided claiming rules are written into racing regulations. These negate a claim if a horse suffers a catastrophic injury, and depending on the state, may also negate the claim for a horse that's lame or suffers EIPH during or after a race.

Gilligan cites a study of claiming horses by Professor Tim Parkin utilizing the Equine Injury Database, which reveals that when a voided claim rule goes on the books, the rate of catastrophic injury drops by as much as 25 percent (depending on the strictness of the rule).

Louisiana's claiming “rule creates mortal moral hazard,” Gilligan wrote. “It allows and implicitly accepts the possibility that trainers and their owners could engage in behavior of grossest negligence, and possibly profit from it.”

Read more at the Thoroughbred Racing Commentary.

The post Gilligan: Lack Of Voided Claim Rule ‘Creates Mortal Moral Hazard’ appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post