The Friday Show Presented By The Jockey Club: Heleringer On Linda Rice Ruling Reversal

The decision by a court of appeals on June 8 to reverse the New York State Gaming Commission's minimum three-year ban of trainer Linda Rice focused on unwritten rules and common practices in a racing office. Specifically, Rice had been charged with improperly receiving names and past performances of horses entered in overnight races before the entries closed, allegedly giving her an advantage over other trainers.

In some of those races, racing office personnel will call trainers to “hustle” entries to help get enough runners to make the race fill, giving them some information about the other horses already entered.

Attorney Bob Heleringer joins Ray Paulick and bloodstock editor Joe Nevills to discuss the Rice case and how the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court may have come to their decision. Heleringer is uniquely qualified: not only is he the author of the book “Equine Regulatory Law,” he once worked in racing offices and was one of those people calling trainers and “hustling” entries. He understands how the system is supposed to work but as an attorney believes everyone would be better off with written rules vs. unwritten ones.

Watch this week's episode of The Friday Show below:

The post The Friday Show Presented By The Jockey Club: Heleringer On Linda Rice Ruling Reversal appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

Will Todd Get ‘The Baffert Treatment’?

With each news story about another therapeutic medication positive for trainer Todd Pletcher in recent weeks, racing fans have asked a question that's likely uncomfortable for racetracks – when will Todd get the Bob Baffert treatment?

Read our previous reporting on the legal history of racetracks and exclusion here.

As of this week, Pletcher has racked up six medication violations in less than a year, though many of them have only recently been made public. There was the much-publicized disqualification of Forte from last year's G1 Hopeful Stakes for an overage of meloxicam. That race was in September but before that, Pletcher runner Capensis was found to have an elevated phenylbutazone level after an allowance race at Saratoga in July 2022. In September, Mind Control won the Parx Dirt Mile but is alleged to have tested positive for an unidentified substance afterwards.

After races held at Gulfstream on Dec. 10, two Pletcher horses tested positive in Florida – one for omeprazole and one for dexamethasone. A third horse picked up a stacking violation in Florida for levels of ketoprofen and phenylbutazone after a Feb. 3 race.

To many people, that doesn't sound so dissimilar from the case of Baffert, who was much scrutinized in the aftermath of Medina Spirit's positive test from the 2021 Kentucky Derby for having had seven drug violations in 21 months. Baffert's therapeutic medication violation history was cited by both Churchill Downs Inc. in their decision to ban him from the Kentucky Derby for two years and by the New York Racing Association in their decision to deny him stalls and entries for one year. Baffert fought to have both bans dropped and was ultimately unsuccessful. His appeal of the stewards' disqualification of Medina Spirit from the 2021 Kentucky Derby is ongoing.

There are a few key differences between the Pletcher situation and Baffert's. For one thing, several of Baffert's violations were in high-profile races. The disqualification of Charlatan from the Grade 1 Arkansas Derby for a lidocaine positive was ultimately reversed, but carried significant weight since it had an impact on Kentucky Derby qualifying points. Then, Gamine tested positive for the corticosteroid betamethasone after the rescheduled 2020 Kentucky Oaks, after Baffert said the filly received injections of the medication into both hocks outside the prescribed withdrawal window.

[Story Continues Below]

The Kentucky Horse Racing Commission has pointed out that Medina Spirit's positive for betamethasone falling after Gamine's in the same jurisdiction under the same regulations negates any argument that Baffert was unaware of what the rules may be regarding that drug. (Baffert's attorneys have claimed that the origin of the drug in Medina Spirit was a topical cream and that it therefore shouldn't count per Kentucky's rules.)

For his part, Pletcher's recent drug offenses haven't been repeats, other than the commonly-used phenylbutazone (though we still don't know what the substance of concern may be in Pennsylvania). He hasn't made the same mistake in the same jurisdiction, and neither the Hopeful nor the Parx Dirt Mile can be said to carry the same weight as the Kentucky Derby or Kentucky Oaks.

Baffert went on a tour of mainstream media in the days after he announced Medina Spirit's betamethasone positive, and some of his remarks needled Churchill Downs. Baffert's shifting public story and invocation of “cancel culture” as the reason for what he considered mistreatment was an aggravating factor for the racing commission and both racetracks. Pletcher, by contrast, has had little to say publicly about the therapeutic overages, and those have gone mostly undetected by mainstream media.

It's also true that while all substances for both trainers are therapeutic drugs that are considered to have legitimate purpose in the horse, corticosteroids and anesthetics do have stricter withdrawal times regarding their use in relationship to a race, for fear they could have a greater impact on a pre-race veterinary exam. One of Pletcher's positives was for a corticosteroid, while Baffert had two, plus two for lidocaine, which can be used as a local anesthetic or nerve block (although he attributed its presence to contamination from human use of an over-the-counter pain patch).

The timing and location of the violations also probably makes a difference in how they are handled. Pletcher's most recent violations were in Florida, and while the February overage was his sixth, it's likely that Florida tracks didn't find that out until trade press reported on the accumulation this month. Likewise, Pennsylvania officials probably didn't know about his New York positives last fall, because the New York cases were only recently adjudicated and had rulings published. Stewards in Pennsylvania and Florida haven't made initial decisions on his positives there, and he's appealing the rulings against him in New York, so none of these cases are final.

Support our journalism

If you appreciate our work, you can support us by subscribing to our Patreon stream. Learn more.

The timing of Baffert's civil cases fighting racetrack exclusion decisions meant that stewards had issued rulings in all his positives at the time judges had to make decisions about whether racetracks were right to exclude him. Even if he was still appealing one or more of those stewards' rulings, the tracks could at least say that those rulings existed.

Is all of that splitting hairs? Perhaps the differences are minute and shouldn't shield Pletcher from private track exclusion while Baffert got pushed out. Or perhaps they're a lot of little subtleties that mean this comparison isn't apples and apples.

Of course, it can't escape notice that while Baffert's violations did not take place in New York, NYRA still felt compelled to act against him. Two of Pletcher's cases originated there, but he is also one of the largest barns on the NYRA circuit, if not the very largest and one of the most successful. When he transfers his horses to South Florida, he has a tremendous impact on entries at Gulfstream, too. Baffert ships horses for high-profile graded stakes races in Kentucky and New York, but his presence at those facilities isn't a deciding factor in whether races fill. It would be a tough business decision for NYRA to exclude Pletcher, who has already run roughly a quarter of his 445 starts this year at their facilities.

And this, no doubt, is one of the elements that keeps racetracks from enacting their private property rights more often to exclude trainers. (That, and the certainty that a well-funded licensee will drag them to civil court to dispute their right to exclude.) If you're going to exclude one person with one set of circumstances, you're opening the floodgates to people who will ask you why you didn't rule off someone else. But that was the bargain Churchill and NYRA made when they chose to exclude Baffert. Time will tell how they handle the flood.

The post Will Todd Get ‘The Baffert Treatment’? appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

Motion Supports HISA: ‘Let’s Give What We Have A Chance’

Respected trainer Graham Motion shared the following statement on Twitter Tuesday in support of the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act.

“Let's give what we have a chance,” he wrote.

“I have read a lot of well-informed opinions from well-spoken representatives of our sport recently, all of them with good intentions and suggestions. I am going to give you one more.

“Finally, we have a governing body for our sport in the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority; and we have leadership who can speak for us in HISA's CEO Lisa Lazarus. We have an opportunity to get behind her and what she represents, something our sport has been crying out for since I first got involved 30 years ago. Other progress can be made from that model once HISA has had a chance to become firmly established. There are going to be growing pains, but give it a chance because the alternative is not great. You can joke or fuss about their stance on the whip rules, but not too much is said about the whip anymore and our sport is better for it. You can complain about the lack of Lasix in stakes races, but I barely hear it mentioned on the big days anymore and we are better for it. We run for extraordinary purses in our sport and with that should come increased integrity and responsibility.

“Things are not going to remain the same, the world is constantly changing around us. We need to do better, we must before its too late.”

The post Motion Supports HISA: ‘Let’s Give What We Have A Chance’ appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

Letter To The Editor: We Need More ‘Throwback Horses’

As a casual fan with no financial investment in the industry, I can objectively state that from my outsider's perspective the problems associated with the horse racing industry are troubling. No one is okay with any horse injury or death. Horse people love and care so well for the horses.

I find it difficult to believe the major contributing factors to horse injuries today are caused by racing surface issues and improper use of medication.  Advancements in equine medicine and care are drastically improved to what was available during the 20th century. Racing surfaces, if anything, are better and safer than in the 1970s and 80s. Tracks are kinder, and face strict testing. They are built with better drainage, and there aren't nearly the amount of “bull rings” and lower-level tracks in operation. These tracks lacked resources to spend on the surface or facilities.

The injury problem lies elsewhere.

When our family was breeding and racing horses in 80s, horses made more starts per year with less time between starts. Most horses started at least eight to 12 times a year. It was not unusual for a horse to race twice a month. Horses often made starts weekly. They might race 10, 15, and even 20 times per year. Kelso made nine or more starts five times. John Henry double digit starts five times and nine starts at age nine! Affirmed and Spectacular Bid made at least nine starts each of the three years they raced.

We need “throw back horses” today. There are fewer foals being born each year, and there are more “fragile” foals, percentage wise, than ever before.  It's no wonder there is difficulty carding races. When you have less foals and they make less starts, the numbers will play out as we are seeing.

Forty years after their racing career, I can still recall some good “throw back horses.” Dusky Duke raced mostly in Chicago, and made 96 starts between ages two and nine and won 20 races. Our friends, the Kelleys, had a mare named Wolf Creek Girl who made 88 starts from two to eight, most of which took place at Fairmount Park. I'm not sure, but she made have made a few starts at local county fairs too, and she retired sound as far as I recall.

I remember horses campaigned in New York by Oscar Barrerra, who entered them often. One was named Starbinia, who made 31 starts at six and 24 the next year at age seven. And, by the way, he was regally bred, being by Graustark out of Never Bend mare.

We have arguably more regally bred foals born each year, but we don't have many “throwback horses” to show for it. Is it not obvious the major contributing factor in horse on-track injuries is due to having more foals from stallions (and mares) not genetically oriented to produce long-term soundness? The top stallions are bred to twice the number of mares they would have been forty years ago. So many of these stallions won big races, earned a great deal of money, but they weren't hard-knocking grinders who showed up in the entry box often. We need  more “throwback horses.”

Thoroughbred industry leaders need to face reality. They can either keep breeding horses that may fetch a big price at the sale, perhaps be able to produce high speed numbers, maybe win a graded stakes, and who knows, maybe even a classic, that will race a few times a year, and if they aren't a race track casualty or broken down and sent to early retirement, sent to the breeding shed to reproduce their own fragility, and go out of business as the pressures mount from animal rights activists, or they can look for the “throwback horses” that have always been the backbone of every aspect of the Thoroughbred industry.

Brett Beasley
Fan of Thoroughbred Breeding and Racing
Creal Springs, Illinois

*************************************

If you would like to submit a letter to the editor, please write to info at paulickreport.com and include contact information where you may be reached if editorial staff have any questions.

The post Letter To The Editor: We Need More ‘Throwback Horses’ appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

Verified by MonsterInsights