Well, something is better than nothing!
2 Likes
That is one tough Vet! Good for her!
5 Likes
Well, BB is definitely getting his moneys worth out of his attorneys.
This legal headache is such a bad look for Baffert and the sport. I do NOT find the rules to be unclear, no matter how much his lawyers pontificate and fuss, smoke and mirrors… the rule says his horse had an amount of impermissible medication in its system; it doesn’t matter how it got there. Now they are arguing that approx 25pg isn’t enough to cause pharmacological effects…yet they didn’t use this justification last year when Gamine popped positive with 27pg betamethasone.
Shut up and go away, Bob. The world would have mostly forgotten about this clustercluck if he would accept his responsibility and move on.
16 Likes
It’s amazing how many trainers have little to no problems with these types of overages in their horses… even ones who run similar operations in size and scope… 
7 Likes
One.More.Time.
It doesn’t matter Where It came from or whether the horse’s performance was actually affected.
The rule prohibits the presence of the drug.
14 Likes
It’s not really all about Baffert at this point. Amr Zedan wants to be known as the owner of a Derby winner. Zedan has the funds to take this to every court that will hear him and he has publicly stated that he will do just that.
1 Like
So a one man “Lawyers Full Employment Act”.
Nice.
6 Likes
Or, instead of fighting the law… maybe move your horses out of the care of someone experiencing this problem on a regular basis?
Nah…
2 Likes
He has several horses (that he’s paid many millions for) training with Baffert. Zedan wants to win the Derby and believes Baffert is “the best.”
1 Like
Hearing concluded, recommendation within 90 days. How about 90 seconds? The stuff should not have been in the horse.
5 Likes
I’m sure the disqualification will stand. However, we’ll not see the end of this anytime soon.
From February of this year;
So, in the next 90 days, we’ll hear what we are probably already expecting?
I just don’t comprehend the thinking here. They are trying to say it was a prescribed ointment, not like they injected him with the banned substance. Hiding behind some preconceived belief that because it was an ointment for skin-condition treatment; this is ok and testifying in court in this manner.
Its a BANNED SUBSTANCE; regardless of how it is used, why it is used, or if it was prescribed. Even if there is no malicious intent here at all; they used it and he tested positive; the DQ is justified.
This has been repeatedly held up in court.
And for the life of me I cannot quite comprehend why the BB team continues to fight this and repeatedly lose. I mean, I have seen people repeatedly dig their own graves on things but this one honestly takes the cake. Do they like dragging their names and reputation repeatedly through the mud to scar themselves for life over and open and shut case or… ??
I just do not understand the logical, or lacktherof, thinking on their behalf here. You were treating a horse for a skin infection with a banned substance within the window of a race, your horse tested positive and therefore was DQ’d, rightfully so. Case closed.
8 Likes
Because of ego; stupidity; a disconnection from reality; more money than sense; indignation that they were caught; loss of face?
3 Likes
I don’t think he is a really dirty trainer. I think he may have learned his lesson with the Thyroxin debacle as far as off label or illicit medications. He knows that people are eager to catch him now at any cost. I think he just cuts it too close with permitted medications although Gamine’s was actually given at an appropriate time, she just did not clear the medication. Individual clearance rates vary. It also seems that his barn management might be lacking, even sloppy. Any medication given to a racehorse should be checked for ingredients and clearing times. Just because a vet prescribes it doesn’t mean it is legal to have in the system on race day.
I agree. The rules are plain, the horse should be DQ’ed and it should have been done immediately. The only question the court should possibly be deciding is the penalty for the trainer.
2 Likes
2 Likes
Here we go again…and then it may actually be over…
3 Likes
