HISA Invites Applications To Join Horsemen’s Advisory Group

Edited Press Release

The Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority (HISA) is now accepting new applications for experienced industry experts to join HISA's Horsemen's Advisory Group. The Advisory Group was formed by HISA in 2022 to provide formal feedback to HISA's executive team and standing committees on the implementation and evolution of its Racetrack Safety and Anti-Doping and Medication Control (ADMC) regulations. The Advisory Group has been responsible for recommending a number of substantive modifications to the HISA Rules that were ultimately approved by the HISA Board.

Now that 18 months have passed since the Advisory Group's establishment, HISA is beginning the process of rotating members off to allow new perspectives to join. Five members will rotate off on May 1, 2024, and another five will rotate off on Nov. 1, 2024.

HISA is inviting all racing participants who wish to be considered for membership in the Advisory Group to email horsemensadvisory@hisaus.org indicating their interest and qualifications by Friday, Apr. 5, 2024. Applicants should also indicate whether they would like to be considered for the next round of openings in November 2024, should they not be selected to join in May 2024.

The Advisory Group's membership includes trainers, owners, veterinarians, backstretch employees and representatives of racing offices and aftercare initiatives who collectively represent a wide variety of viewpoints across racing. Advisory Group members are expected to join monthly virtual (and occasionally in-person) meetings with HISA leadership to provide feedback on HISA's rules and processes, as well as be available to weigh in on time-sensitive issues affecting horsemen as needed.

The post HISA Invites Applications To Join Horsemen’s Advisory Group appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Facing A Two-Year Suspension For Clenbuterol, Trainer Jeffrey Englehart Says They’ve Got The Wrong Guy

On the surface, the case against trainer Jeffrey Englehart seems pretty cut and dried. He had a horse test positive for Clenbuterol, the bronchodilator that is on the Horseracing Integrity and Welfare Unit's (HIWU) list of banned substances. Trainers found using banned substances can be suspended for up to two years. But Englehart, who races at the NYRA tracks and at Finger Lakes, is adamant that he never gave the drug to the horse in question.

“We don't use Clenbuterol. Period,” Englehart said.

So is there more to this story? Dig a little deeper and you might conclude that there is. To Englehart, it's not about the fact that the horse tested positive. He doesn't dispute that finding. But when was the horse given Clenbuterol and by whom? He hopes the answers to those questions will clear his name and lead to HIWU dropping the case against him.

The horse that tested positive for Clenbuterol was an unnamed 2-year-old by Classic Empire out of Fast Heart. Englehart bought the horse on behalf of owner Marcello Rosa for $14,000 at the OBS auction June 15. The horse broke down while training and had to be euthanized at Finger Lakes Nov. 21.

Englehart's problems were just beginning.

HIWU performed a battery of tests on the deceased horse, including blood, urine and hair. The blood and urine tests were negative. According to Rick Arthur, former equine medical director for the California Horse Racing Board, a standard dose of Clenbuterol will typically be detectable in the blood for about three to four days after administration. For urine, the detection window would typically be between 10 to 17 days after administration.

But HIWU also performed a hair test, which revealed the presence of Clenbuterol. Englehart claims that hair tests can show the presence of the substance for up to a year after it was given to a horse. According to Arthur, Clenbuterol can be found in hair samples for at least six months after the drug was administered.

Dr. Rick Arthur | Horsephotos

“We've certainly seen Clenbuterol in hair up to six months,” said Arthur. “It could probably stay longer, we just haven't tried to look at it. We did a lot of hair testing for Clenbuterol in Quarter Horses at Los Alamitos. Trainers have contended that horses past six months have tested positive.”

After learning about how long after administration Clenbuterol can be found in a hair sample, Englehart started to do the math. The horse broke down exactly five months and six days after the purchase at OBS. That means, Englehart contends, that it is entirely possible that someone gave the horse the drug before he purchased it and that he could be suspended for something someone else did.

“(HIWU) say it's in the horse's system, so you are guilty,” said Englehart, who is still training while awaiting he results of the split sample test done on the Classic Empire colt. “It doesn't matter to them that it can stay in the system for up to a year and I only had the horse for less than six months. That's completely unfair. They are trying to upend my life.”

The unraced colt was sold for $4,000 at the Fasig-Tipton Kentucky October Yearling Sale Oct. 26, 2022. The consignor was Vinery Sales and the purchaser was Juan Centeno. The latter, who sells under the name of All Dreams Equine, turned around and put the horse in OBS June. It was one of five horses who successfully went through the ring, including a horse named She She's Shadow (Bucchero), who was also purchased by Englehart.

When asked if She She's Shadow was tested and what the results were, Alexa Ravit, the director of communications & outreach for HIWU, said in an email response to the TDN: “HIWU cannot comment on what horses have been sampled or their subsequent test results beyond what is published on our website in accordance with the ADMC Program's public disclosure requirements.”

Englehart's theory is that Centeno gave the Clenbuterol to the horse in hopes that it would help the colt have a fast pre-sale workout. The horse put in a two-furlong breeze in :22.

“I don't know the gentleman from All Dreams Equine,” Englehart said. “I just know it had to be him because I know it wasn't me.”

Centeno did not respond to emails, text messages and phone calls from the TDN requesting a comment.

Englehart alleged that Clenbuterol use is “rampant” at the 2-year-old sales.

“This horse was probably training on (Clenbuterol) right up to day he sold,” Englehart said. “It's very well known that Clenbuterol use is rampant at sales. Every trainer knows that. I think if they did a hair test on every horse 70 to 80 percent would be positive for Clenbuterol.”

Under OBS's conditions of sale, no medication may be administered within 24 hours of a horse's under-tack performance. Several specific medications may not be administered on the sales grounds or present in a test sample, including Clenbuterol. OBS tests around 10-15% of the horses who are going to sell, but does not do hair-sample tests, just blood and urine. This colt was not one of those randomly tested in June, the sales company said.

Tom Ventura | Patty Wolfe

When asked to elaborate on the sales company's rules regarding Clenbuterol, OBS President Tom Ventura said every step possible is taken to make sure that no horse in the sale has been given that particular drug.

“With our policy for bronchodilators, including Clenbuterol, we were ahead of the racing curve, because the sales companies have the ability within the conditions of sale to put policies in place maybe a little quicker than jumping through the regulatory hoops that are required at the racetracks,” Ventura said. “OBS, in October of 2019, prohibited bronchodilators. Period. In any animal at any level, in any type of sale.

“Since the very beginning of the tests, I think we had two early on who tested positive and didn't go through the ring, so two positives that we have had for Clenbuterol in four years. I know there weren't any in the last year. We test them as they're coming off the racetrack, and then the buyers have the right to test when they sign the sales ticket. We haven't had any returns for Clenbuterol from those tests.”

In limbo while awaiting the results of the split sample, Englehart has continued his own investigation. He believes the answer to his problems may lie in what is called a segmented drug test, which can provide a time line so far as when a drug was used.

According to the website cellmark.co.uk, by segmenting head hair samples into monthly one-centimeter sections, a month-by-month historic profile of drug use can be obtained. That goes for humans and horses.

If the segmented test shows that the Clenbuterol was administered prior to the day when Englehart bought the horse, it would seem to prove his point that someone else must have given the drug to the horse and lead, he believes, to him being exonerated.

Englehart has sent a hair sample off to the lab at Texas A&M and asked it to do a segmented test.

“I'm just hoping they look at the science and I don't have to do the suspension,” he said.

The problem is that he doesn't know if HIWU will also do a segmented test. Will they? Have they? HIWU won't say.

“HIWU cannot publicly comment on the specific facts of pending cases, including whether segmented analysis was conducted on samples taken from specific horses,” Ravit said in another email.

Finger Lakes | Sarah Andrew

That's not reassuring to Englehart, who points out that the problem extends beyond sales. Horses often change hands, whether being bought at auction, being claimed or being privately purchased, and if they test positive for Clenbuterol through hair tests it would be unfair to automatically penalize the person who had the horse at the time it tested positive.

“The average horseman who bought a horse or has a horse in their possession for only a short period of time, they can't be dropping the hammer on them when something can still show up in these tests after a year,” Englehart said. “You have to know when the horse was given the Clenbuterol.”

We posed this question to HIWU: “Could a horse be given Clenbuterol by someone prior to being transferred to a new trainer and test positive? That would mean the current trainer would be getting penalized for something someone else did. Is this a plausible scenario?”

Ravit's response did not answer that question.

“HIWU cannot comment on the specific questions regarding Englehart's pending case, including the samples collected and type of testing conducted on Fast Heart 2021, the expected timeline to receive the B Sample results, and the plausibility of his defense,” she wrote. “Additionally, HIWU cannot speculate on the adjudication of the hypothetical case you described, for the outcome would depend on the specific facts of the case.”

Englehart is worried that he is running short on time. Once the results of split sample are in and as long as it also shows the presence of Clenbuterol, he will be facing what could be an immediate suspension that can last as long as two years.

“I'm just hoping that the tests comes back and vindicates me,” he said. “I will fight this as hard as you can and take this as far as necessary. I'm ready to take it to the courts. Meanwhile, this has been a nightmare for me.”

Dan Ross contributed to this story.

The post Facing A Two-Year Suspension For Clenbuterol, Trainer Jeffrey Englehart Says They’ve Got The Wrong Guy appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Letter to the Editor: ‘Absolute Insure Rule is a Farce’

I appreciated Bill Finley's conversation with Alan Foreman on TDN Writers' Room. Your question to him about trainers who are not guilty of cheating hit home for me. As a trainer who is dealing with this same issue prior to HISA in the state of Florida, I was hoping to make a brief comment.

The banned substances provisions are more complicated than they want it to be in an era where the testing has become so fine any trainer can get a banned substance positive at any time no matter what precautions and provisions have been implemented. Nanogram results can pick up any contamination that occurs in places that the trainer cannot protect the horse from. Inadvertent touching by anyone between the morning of the race up to and in the test barn can cause a positive. Receiving barns where horses are housed prior to racing are notorious for contamination (see testing at Charles Town).

This issue of “Testing” becoming so fine was not addressed in your conversation with Mr. Foreman. He and HISA still blame the trainers. Not their protocols. The trainer still spends many thousands of dollars defending themselves from something they cannot control. The absolute insure rule is a farce in this regard. No one at HISA wants to discuss this aspect of the problem.

Sincerely,
Donald L. Brown

The post Letter to the Editor: ‘Absolute Insure Rule is a Farce’ 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

Verified by MonsterInsights