Motion's positive upheld by the KY Court of Appeals - Absolute Insurer Rule Constitutional

As much as I like and respect Graham and Anita, I do feel that there needs to be accountability in racing.

https://www.paulickreport.com/news/ray-s-paddock/kentucky-court-of-appeals-absolute-insurer-rule-is-constitutional-kittens-point-medication-dq-upheld/

“The Court of Appeals said the racing commission’s powers are broad, citing state statute that reads: “…it is in the interest of the public health and safety to vest in the commission forceful control of Thoroughbred racing. Inherent in such control is the right to enact and enforce rules which are necessary to fulfill that mission. Moreover, the statutes permit rules which condemn the presence of prohibited substances which affect the speed or health of a horse.””

Yeah, although contamination issues are a huge problem, but that’s usually when a horse tests positive for something it never got, whereas here they admit they gave the horse methocarbamol but thought they were within the time limit. I’m glad to see it too, because what irritates me is when a low level, non famous trainer gets a bad test everybody thinks she/he is a bad apple or a screw-up, but when a famous, likeable trainer gets a bad test, everybody at once thinks it was an honest mistake or contamination or just unfair; how unfortunate and that’s really onerous and your owner has a gazillion dollars to spend on an attorney to make our lives miserable how about we’ll just give you a warning and don’t do it again.

1 Like

I agree - the better trainers who have bigger barns and a higher win percentage actually get tested way more often (more starters and more winners) than the smaller trainers who have much fewer starts and much fewer winners. I don’t know Graham’s number of winners off the top of my head and i’m not going to bother looking it up, but he’s been around for decades, and after you get tested XXXX times without a positive, you develop a reputation for being clean.

1 Like