While I won’t ask anyone to retract their statement, I’ll take anything from Joe Drape with a grain of salt.
He HATES horse racing.
9 Likes
Although I’m reluctant to jump in here, this horse does seem to have another black mark on him now.
2 Likes
Pop quiz!
How many drug overages has Todd Pletcher had in his entire career?
Answer: 4 (since 1996*). 3 of them are so benign it is laughable— a lasix overage, omeprazole (gastrogard), and dex. 1 is for mepivacaine back in 2004. If it happens once a long time ago, I’m willing to chock that up to a mistake.
How many horses has Todd Pletcher trained during that time?
Answer: I don’t know, a gazillion? He has one of the largest stables in the country.
Joe Drape is going to have a field day with this story, but it is more of an unfortunate coincidence than a “where there’s smoke there’s fire” situation.
*Edited: I shorted TAP credit for nearly an extra decade of training horses
15 Likes
Forte is okay. He didn’t voluntarily take the drugs; thus, the story has no impact on him. He didn’t cheat. Baffert’s situation is hardly shocking. Rember Justify and others? I wouldn’t say Joe Drape “hates racing,” but he doesn’t conceal the truth. He doesn’t appear to have a “blind alliance” with the racing industry. Is that a sign of despising the sport? I’m not sure. However, I value candor and openness in his writing. Since they must, the NYT typically presents accurate facts. Thanks for posting this.
When I say “he didn’t cheat,” I refer to Forte and his team. By comparison, Baffert’s" situation may be different when. you consider Justify.
Chatbots have spell check.
19 Likes
I can’t with you anymore.
You are a clueless numpty 
11 Likes
Look in the mirror, because what you said/suggest doesn’t make sense.
In my opinion, just an unfortunate circumstance resulted in a positive test result. Even though the drug had been discontinued/withdrawn, the blood/serum levels may have been very low and the concentration might have potentially been triggered by the horse’s sluggish rate of metabolism. Or just a poor lab error?
What is wrong with that? Are you alleging that there is something else at play??? Because that is NOT WHAT I said and I would not agree with what you have to say…
I’m surprised anyone on the backside would talk to Joe Drape.
6 Likes
Well, this is a surprise! Would Forte even have had enough points without this win?
Forte Disqualified From '22 Hopeful; Pletcher Suspended - BloodHorse
Yes. Easily.
Thanks!
Should “trace amounts” of a "disallowed " (some use teh word "illegal) be permitted in horse racing? Please support your position with actual DAT\A SCIENCE, and FACT. I don’t care if the “trace amount” of a prohibited drug had no impact on the horses’ performance. had no drug effect, and may have been caused by the analysts’ contamination of an analytical sample or mishandling of teh blood sample… That is not what the la
Racing has had the situations like this. Should the legislation be changed to permit the trace of disallowed substances that do not impair a horse’s performance or have physiological? If so, what impact would this change in the law have on other horse sports? Please stick to this above question, rather than of on your own tangent or BS…
I am sure I will regret commenting but the term you are looking for is “threshold levels.” I haven’t seen anyone here saying it shouldn’t have been a positive. I personally think it was environmental contamination but as I said until I was blue in the face about Medina Spirit, it doesn’t matter how it got in there, if it’s there it’s a bad test and the trainer needs to take the days and go on with their lives.
22 Likes
I took a very conservative approach to my comments and I doubt that one could claim that the “meloxicam” result was caused by “environmental contamination.” I chose the phrase “cross-contamination” because I reasoned that the environment (such as the air, water, dirt, and bedding) surrounding the racing barn would not generally have high concentrations of meloxicam in the environment.
The presence of meloxicam in the barn environment would suggest considerable use of this drug “off-label” as a pain reliever. I am aware that I could be VERY WRONG in this case, and some trainers may utilize meloxicam off-label purposes for their horses, but I would not expect it to be at levels/concentrations that it leaves an environmental residue. Without analytical;l data I would be VERY RELUCASNYANT to make that type of allegation. I definitely rely on the racing experts here.
I used the term “cross-contamination” because it is possible that the meloxicam could have been due to lab sample contamination or due to the inadvertent introduction of the drug to the sample through other use. Those two examples do not constitute “environmental contamination.”
Science uses the term. “threshold level,” but for points of causal discussion in the lab, those of us in a lab use the term interchangeably.
Thanks for your comments, They were really useful.
There is not the slightest chance on the face of the earth that two separate labs had the exact same contamination of the exact same drug four months apart. Better chance of winning mega millions twice than that happening. FYI Meloxicam isn’t an unusual drug for hard working human beings to take for their aches and pains. People who work a very physical job 7 days per week for example. Follow the clues, you can do this!
12 Likes
@penelopeandthecats there is an outrage thread in current events. Could you spare us and go there? I read the racing forum for educated comments.
11 Likes
How can someone “in the lab business” think cross contamination which is the accidental introduction of a substance to a sample can be used interchangeably with the term threshold level which is the amount of substance that is allowed to be in a sample without being considered a positive test? Don’t answer that, it’s rhetorical which is interchangeable with I don’t care.
21 Likes
Correct, you are. That is cross-contamination of a sample or sample source…
11 Likes
