|
|
 BHW Resident Surgeon
Posts: 25352
  
Location: Bastrop, Texas | 1DSoon - 2017-01-17 2:36 PM
Bear - 2017-01-17 3:13 PM linds - 2017-01-17 1:26 PM Bear - 2017-01-17 12:01 PM I guess the idea would be to get a deterrent effect. We haven't talked about penalties or consequences. That would run the gamut. If even the top 2-3 in the 1D were to be automatically flagged for testing, I would think the toughest competitors would realize the risk and they'd have to decide whether it's worth it. Testing the top 2-3 in each D would automatically be random, because where you land is fairly random anyway. Winning the 3D just means you were lucky, even though you may have made a good run. That seems to be the simplest approach. You'll always have clever cheaters who will figure out a way to stay ahead with new cheating schemes, but that's nothing new. Lance Armstrong taught us that, for example. Eventually he was caught. It's good that this is talked about. I know I've learned a few things. We'll have to see what happens. I believe it would have to be random if it would work at all. Â If draw #1 wins the 3D - well, you don't know that until hours after they ran. Â Depending on the drug, it could be long gone. Â If it's a Sunday and I'm draw #1... Â I'm outta there by about draw #50. Â Then, there are the costs to have a vet on-site, running the test, etc. Â Holding up checks until tests clear.
AQHA and racing commissions regulate their testing. Â WPRA regulates theirs. Â There is no overseeing commission in the barrel racing world. Â NBHA maybe? Â All the offenders have to do is switch associations. Â Or, heck - start their own! I'm pretty sure all these drugs would be detectable within 24 hours of administration. Of course urine is better than blood for this, because a drug that may be quickly eliminated from the serum can linger in the urine for quite a bit longer. Again, I think the easy way to at least initially set things up would be to look at how organizations and rodeos set up their system. There's no need to re-invent the wheel. If the system is flawed to the extent that someone has already picked up a check, there's still value in drug testing. First, they can be banned. Second, word gets out. One could argue that is the most powerful deterrent. If "Jane Doe" has a dirty test, it's humiliating and even damaging. Even now certain competitors have a reputation for doping, regardless of the veracity, and that's based on rumor and heresay. I would think that would be harmful to any prospects of future business ventures. I know there are a couple out there from whom I wouldn't even consider buying any horse older than 3 years.
Â
LOL......that doesn't narrow it down very much! They didn't need Frog Juice to beat me. | |
| | |
Nut Case Expert
Posts: 9305
Location: Tulsa, Ok | linds - 2017-01-17 2:24 PM Bear - 2017-01-17 2:13 PM linds - 2017-01-17 1:26 PM Bear - 2017-01-17 12:01 PM I guess the idea would be to get a deterrent effect. We haven't talked about penalties or consequences. That would run the gamut. If even the top 2-3 in the 1D were to be automatically flagged for testing, I would think the toughest competitors would realize the risk and they'd have to decide whether it's worth it. Testing the top 2-3 in each D would automatically be random, because where you land is fairly random anyway. Winning the 3D just means you were lucky, even though you may have made a good run. That seems to be the simplest approach. You'll always have clever cheaters who will figure out a way to stay ahead with new cheating schemes, but that's nothing new. Lance Armstrong taught us that, for example. Eventually he was caught. It's good that this is talked about. I know I've learned a few things. We'll have to see what happens. I believe it would have to be random if it would work at all. If draw #1 wins the 3D - well, you don't know that until hours after they ran. Depending on the drug, it could be long gone. If it's a Sunday and I'm draw #1... I'm outta there by about draw #50. Then, there are the costs to have a vet on-site, running the test, etc. Holding up checks until tests clear.
AQHA and racing commissions regulate their testing. WPRA regulates theirs. There is no overseeing commission in the barrel racing world. NBHA maybe? All the offenders have to do is switch associations. Or, heck - start their own! I'm pretty sure all these drugs would be detectable within 24 hours of administration. Of course urine is better than blood for this, because a drug that may be quickly eliminated from the serum can linger in the urine for quite a bit longer. Again, I think the easy way to at least initially set things up would be to look at how organizations and rodeos set up their system. There's no need to re-invent the wheel. If the system is flawed to the extent that someone has already picked up a check, there's still value in drug testing. First, they can be banned. Second, word gets out. One could argue that is the most powerful deterrent. If "Jane Doe" has a dirty test, it's humiliating and even damaging. Even now certain competitors have a reputation for doping, regardless of the veracity, and that's based on rumor and heresay. I would think that would be harmful to any prospects of future business ventures. I know there are a couple out there from whom I wouldn't even consider buying any horse older than 3 years.
Maybe Bear should start a regulatory committee to write all the rules, gather the costs. Start approaching producers and sell your policies. Here is the WPRA model you can start from. There are a lot of forms! http://www.wpra.com/index.php/office/equine-medications-prohibited-substances
I agree that logistically random testing is the only workable possibility. To guarantee clean tests every horse would have to be quarantined from the time they run until the time the test is obtained. Pretty tuff to do if you are waiting for the results from a race that goes on 12 to 16 hours with the placing changing every few minutes. How many horses can reasonably held and which ones are you going to hold??
From years of being around tracks I can guarantee you that the real pros are always one step ahead of the testing process. They know exactly what substances the labs have the capability of testing for and their substance of choice will not be on the latest testing panels.
| |
| | |
 Expert
Posts: 3815
 
Location: The best kept secret in TX | SC Wrangler - 2017-01-17 3:55 PM linds - 2017-01-17 2:24 PM Bear - 2017-01-17 2:13 PM linds - 2017-01-17 1:26 PM Bear - 2017-01-17 12:01 PM I guess the idea would be to get a deterrent effect. We haven't talked about penalties or consequences. That would run the gamut. If even the top 2-3 in the 1D were to be automatically flagged for testing, I would think the toughest competitors would realize the risk and they'd have to decide whether it's worth it. Testing the top 2-3 in each D would automatically be random, because where you land is fairly random anyway. Winning the 3D just means you were lucky, even though you may have made a good run. That seems to be the simplest approach. You'll always have clever cheaters who will figure out a way to stay ahead with new cheating schemes, but that's nothing new. Lance Armstrong taught us that, for example. Eventually he was caught. It's good that this is talked about. I know I've learned a few things. We'll have to see what happens. I believe it would have to be random if it would work at all. If draw #1 wins the 3D - well, you don't know that until hours after they ran. Depending on the drug, it could be long gone. If it's a Sunday and I'm draw #1... I'm outta there by about draw #50. Then, there are the costs to have a vet on-site, running the test, etc. Holding up checks until tests clear.
AQHA and racing commissions regulate their testing. WPRA regulates theirs. There is no overseeing commission in the barrel racing world. NBHA maybe? All the offenders have to do is switch associations. Or, heck - start their own! I'm pretty sure all these drugs would be detectable within 24 hours of administration. Of course urine is better than blood for this, because a drug that may be quickly eliminated from the serum can linger in the urine for quite a bit longer. Again, I think the easy way to at least initially set things up would be to look at how organizations and rodeos set up their system. There's no need to re-invent the wheel. If the system is flawed to the extent that someone has already picked up a check, there's still value in drug testing. First, they can be banned. Second, word gets out. One could argue that is the most powerful deterrent. If "Jane Doe" has a dirty test, it's humiliating and even damaging. Even now certain competitors have a reputation for doping, regardless of the veracity, and that's based on rumor and heresay. I would think that would be harmful to any prospects of future business ventures. I know there are a couple out there from whom I wouldn't even consider buying any horse older than 3 years.
Maybe Bear should start a regulatory committee to write all the rules, gather the costs. Start approaching producers and sell your policies. Here is the WPRA model you can start from. There are a lot of forms! http://www.wpra.com/index.php/office/equine-medications-prohibited-substances
From years of being around tracks I can guarantee you that the real pros are always one step ahead of the testing process. They know exactly what substances the labs have the capability of testing for and their substance of choice will not be on the latest testing panels.
Cause that's not a scary statement at all....   | |
| | |
 Guys Just Wanna Have Fun
Posts: 5530
Location: OH | SC Wrangler - 2017-01-17 4:55 PM
linds - 2017-01-17 2:24 PM Bear - 2017-01-17 2:13 PM linds - 2017-01-17 1:26 PM Bear - 2017-01-17 12:01 PM I guess the idea would be to get a deterrent effect. We haven't talked about penalties or consequences. That would run the gamut. If even the top 2-3 in the 1D were to be automatically flagged for testing, I would think the toughest competitors would realize the risk and they'd have to decide whether it's worth it. Testing the top 2-3 in each D would automatically be random, because where you land is fairly random anyway. Winning the 3D just means you were lucky, even though you may have made a good run. That seems to be the simplest approach. You'll always have clever cheaters who will figure out a way to stay ahead with new cheating schemes, but that's nothing new. Lance Armstrong taught us that, for example. Eventually he was caught. It's good that this is talked about. I know I've learned a few things. We'll have to see what happens. I believe it would have to be random if it would work at all. Â If draw #1 wins the 3D - well, you don't know that until hours after they ran. Â Depending on the drug, it could be long gone. Â If it's a Sunday and I'm draw #1... Â I'm outta there by about draw #50. Â Then, there are the costs to have a vet on-site, running the test, etc. Â Holding up checks until tests clear.
AQHA and racing commissions regulate their testing. Â WPRA regulates theirs. Â There is no overseeing commission in the barrel racing world. Â NBHA maybe? Â All the offenders have to do is switch associations. Â Or, heck - start their own! I'm pretty sure all these drugs would be detectable within 24 hours of administration. Of course urine is better than blood for this, because a drug that may be quickly eliminated from the serum can linger in the urine for quite a bit longer. Again, I think the easy way to at least initially set things up would be to look at how organizations and rodeos set up their system. There's no need to re-invent the wheel. If the system is flawed to the extent that someone has already picked up a check, there's still value in drug testing. First, they can be banned. Second, word gets out. One could argue that is the most powerful deterrent. If "Jane Doe" has a dirty test, it's humiliating and even damaging. Even now certain competitors have a reputation for doping, regardless of the veracity, and that's based on rumor and heresay. I would think that would be harmful to any prospects of future business ventures. I know there are a couple out there from whom I wouldn't even consider buying any horse older than 3 years.
Maybe Bear should start a regulatory committee to write all the rules, gather the costs. Â Start approaching producers and sell your policies. Â Here is the WPRA model you can start from. Â There are a lot of forms! Â http://www.wpra.com/index.php/office/equine-medications-prohibited-substances
From years of being around tracks I can guarantee you that the real pros are always one step ahead of the testing process. Â They know exactly what substances the labs have the capability of testing for and their substance of choice will not be on the latest testing panels.
Â
Plus, the really good cheaters will give something else that will mask and hide the illegal substance. | |
| | |
 Dog Rescue Hero
Posts: 1660
Location: Oklahoma City OK | Sorry to keep barging in....it's my job to always be the devil's advocate and come up with the other side of the story. The producer mandating drug testing (rah rah!!) also better have a great legal team of lawyers standing behind him/her. Often times when a test comes back positive and the perpetrator is denied winnings, or their name sullied due to the test results being leaked without discretion, come back and sue to contest the decision. That's why the "chain of command" for any drug test has to be absolute and unquestionable - from the person greeting the horse at the gate, or wherever, to the acquisition of the sample, to the storeage of the sample in a place where NO ONE can get to it, even if in a vet's care or possession, to the shipping and handling....the collection and processing need to be SO well defined and documented - the possible loop holes are potentially disasterous for a show producer. It's a real mud hole and without a central governing body standing behind the rules and results and ramifications, it's a pitfall most producers don't want to tackle. | |
| | |
BHW Resident Surgeon
Posts: 25352
Location: Bastrop, Texas | smmthbr - 2017-01-17 4:05 PM
Sorry to keep barging in....it's my job to always be the devil's advocate and come up with the other side of the story. Â The producer mandating drug testing (rah rah!!) also better have a great legal team of lawyers standing behind him/her. Â Often times when a test comes back positive and the perpetrator is denied winnings, or their name sullied due to the test results being leaked without discretion, come back and sue to contest the decision. Â That's why the "chain of command" for any drug test has to be absolute and unquestionable - from the person greeting the horse at the gate, or wherever, to the acquisition of the sample, to the storeage of the sample in a place where NO ONE can get to it, even if in a vet's care or possession, to the shipping and handling....the collection and processing need to be SO well defined and documented - the possible loop holes are potentially disasterous for a show producer. Â It's a real mud hole and without a central governing body standing behind the rules and results and ramifications, it's a pitfall most producers don't want to tackle. Â Â
Maybe the answer to that is some sort of disclaimer, that everyone signs in order to enter, in which the consequences are clearly outlined.
I'll set things up for anyone......for a small fee  | |
| | |
Expert
Posts: 3815
Location: The best kept secret in TX | Bear - 2017-01-17 4:19 PM smmthbr - 2017-01-17 4:05 PM Sorry to keep barging in....it's my job to always be the devil's advocate and come up with the other side of the story. The producer mandating drug testing (rah rah!!) also better have a great legal team of lawyers standing behind him/her. Often times when a test comes back positive and the perpetrator is denied winnings, or their name sullied due to the test results being leaked without discretion, come back and sue to contest the decision. That's why the "chain of command" for any drug test has to be absolute and unquestionable - from the person greeting the horse at the gate, or wherever, to the acquisition of the sample, to the storeage of the sample in a place where NO ONE can get to it, even if in a vet's care or possession, to the shipping and handling....the collection and processing need to be SO well defined and documented - the possible loop holes are potentially disasterous for a show producer. It's a real mud hole and without a central governing body standing behind the rules and results and ramifications, it's a pitfall most producers don't want to tackle. Maybe the answer to that is some sort of disclaimer, that everyone signs in order to enter, in which the consequences are clearly outlined. I'll set things up for anyone......for a small fee
A disclaimer wouldn't do much if they find that the samples were easily accessible to anyone. They could then argue the samples were tampered with.
I see what smmthbr is saying. Unless the sample taking was so air tight in the choosing, collection, storage, testing, etc anyone who wanted to contest could. And win.  | |
| | |
Location: Not Where I Want to Be | IRunOnFaith - 2017-01-17 5:23 PM Bear - 2017-01-17 4:19 PM smmthbr - 2017-01-17 4:05 PM Sorry to keep barging in....it's my job to always be the devil's advocate and come up with the other side of the story. The producer mandating drug testing (rah rah!!) also better have a great legal team of lawyers standing behind him/her. Often times when a test comes back positive and the perpetrator is denied winnings, or their name sullied due to the test results being leaked without discretion, come back and sue to contest the decision. That's why the "chain of command" for any drug test has to be absolute and unquestionable - from the person greeting the horse at the gate, or wherever, to the acquisition of the sample, to the storeage of the sample in a place where NO ONE can get to it, even if in a vet's care or possession, to the shipping and handling....the collection and processing need to be SO well defined and documented - the possible loop holes are potentially disasterous for a show producer. It's a real mud hole and without a central governing body standing behind the rules and results and ramifications, it's a pitfall most producers don't want to tackle. Maybe the answer to that is some sort of disclaimer, that everyone signs in order to enter, in which the consequences are clearly outlined. I'll set things up for anyone......for a small fee
I see what smmthbr is saying. Unless the sample taking was so air tight in the choosing, collection, storage, testing, etc anyone who wanted to contest could. And win.
with out proper chain of custody any testing is worthless.
get your arse sued off | |
| | |
Expert
Posts: 3815
Location: The best kept secret in TX | 1DSoon - 2017-01-17 4:27 PM IRunOnFaith - 2017-01-17 5:23 PM Bear - 2017-01-17 4:19 PM smmthbr - 2017-01-17 4:05 PM Sorry to keep barging in....it's my job to always be the devil's advocate and come up with the other side of the story. The producer mandating drug testing (rah rah!!) also better have a great legal team of lawyers standing behind him/her. Often times when a test comes back positive and the perpetrator is denied winnings, or their name sullied due to the test results being leaked without discretion, come back and sue to contest the decision. That's why the "chain of command" for any drug test has to be absolute and unquestionable - from the person greeting the horse at the gate, or wherever, to the acquisition of the sample, to the storeage of the sample in a place where NO ONE can get to it, even if in a vet's care or possession, to the shipping and handling....the collection and processing need to be SO well defined and documented - the possible loop holes are potentially disasterous for a show producer. It's a real mud hole and without a central governing body standing behind the rules and results and ramifications, it's a pitfall most producers don't want to tackle. Maybe the answer to that is some sort of disclaimer, that everyone signs in order to enter, in which the consequences are clearly outlined. I'll set things up for anyone......for a small fee
I see what smmthbr is saying. Unless the sample taking was so air tight in the choosing, collection, storage, testing, etc anyone who wanted to contest could. And win.
get your arse sued off
Touche 1D, Touche.  | |
| | |
BHW Resident Surgeon
Posts: 25352
Location: Bastrop, Texas | I don't see chain of custody as something insurmountable.
Again, of those doing it now, how is it handled? Serious question. | |
| | |
 Extreme Veteran
Posts: 575
| I've never paid much attention, but now I'll have to ask about it more this weekend. At the cuttings there will sometimes be the 'drug lady' (omg what a jerk I am, I can't remember her name) walking around with a cup on a stick. It's just a known fact that she will randomly select horses to be tested after they show. Every contestant pays a drug fee in their entry's. Same horse entered in 2 classes pays the drug fee twice. There have been a few people to be suspended for drugged horses just at the local shows. | |
| | |
| Why do you think Lasix is used on practically every horse on the track??
NOT FOR BLEEDERS .... it is to pee off any excess drugs so they can't be
detected in the testing barn after the race has burned up what remained
in the spleen and muscles of the horse ... blood samples are also
taken and results takes about 2 weeks ..
New Mexico .. snake juice, pig juice, elephant juice, frog juice and
beef growth hormones had gotten so rampant they now allow
no haul ins and pre race random testing is done.
HAVE YOU FORGOTTEN ABOUT THIS ..
http://www.paulickreport.com/news/ray-s-paddock/all-american-futuri...
AND THIS ..
http://www.paulickreport.com/news/the-biz/hubbard-cheaters-a-cancer...
AND watch how dead tired #3 is at the end of this video and how stressed and tyed up he is ... they cut the video short and he never made it to the winners circle before being vanned off ... along with his stable mate an hour earlier ..
https://youtu.be/PEiV9dAGa9o
Edited by BARRELHORSE USA 2017-01-17 5:50 PM
| |
| | |
Guys Just Wanna Have Fun
Posts: 5530
Location: OH | Â Ok, I will play devil's advocate also, what about sabotage. Someone sneaks in and gives someone else's horse something illegal, don't think it couldn't happen. It could. | |
| | |
BHW Resident Surgeon
Posts: 25352
Location: Bastrop, Texas | Mighty Broke - 2017-01-17 5:42 PM
 Ok, I will play devil's advocate also, what about sabotage. Someone sneaks in and gives someone else's horse something illegal, don't think it couldn't happen. It could.
OK now we are starting to get just a little ridiculous.
Stuff like that happens now, doesn't it?
What if a cobra crawls up Nellie's ass and bites her and she tests positive for cobra venom? Don't think it couldn't happen. It could.
Hell, just the other day I saw it with my own eyes. | |
| | |
| Bear - 2017-01-17 6:07 PM
Mighty Broke - 2017-01-17 5:42 PM
 Ok, I will play devil's advocate also, what about sabotage. Someone sneaks in and gives someone else's horse something illegal, don't think it couldn't happen. It could.
OK now we are starting to get just a little ridiculous.
Stuff like that happens now, doesn't it?
What if a cobra crawls up Nellie's ass and bites her and she tests positive for cobra venom? Don't think it couldn't happen. It could.
Hell, just the other day I saw it with my own eyes.
Ok everyone ... crawl out of your rabbit holEs
AND >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
YOU DECIDE IF THESE 4 HORSES GOT SABOTAGED OR NOT ..
6 months after the All American incident and rulings by R D Hubbard owner
of Ruidoso Track ...
http://www.paulickreport.com/news/ray-s-paddock/horse-co-owned-by-r...
http://www.paulickreport.com/news/ray-s-paddock/hubbard-ruidoso-dow...
Most trainers swear their positive testing horses were due to hired help
doing meth, heroin, accidental injecting clenbuterol in the wrong horse
or snorting coke too close to their horses ... lol
HAVE FUN ....
Edited by BARRELHORSE USA 2017-01-17 6:42 PM
| |
| | |
I just read the headlines
Posts: 4483
| Bear - 2017-01-17 6:07 PM
Mighty Broke - 2017-01-17 5:42 PM
 Ok, I will play devil's advocate also, what about sabotage. Someone sneaks in and gives someone else's horse something illegal, don't think it couldn't happen. It could.
OK now we are starting to get just a little ridiculous.
Stuff like that happens now, doesn't it?
What if a cobra crawls up Nellie's ass and bites her and she tests positive for cobra venom? Don't think it couldn't happen. It could.
Hell, just the other day I saw it with my own eyes.
Yeah, it happens. A girl we rodeoed with was at the BFA years ago and she was good enough (made the NFR the year before) that someone drugged her horse. He went apes*^t crazy and she didn't get to run. She had the vet there drug test him and it came back positive for drugs. | |
| | |
BHW Resident Surgeon
Posts: 25352
Location: Bastrop, Texas | GLP - 2017-01-17 6:50 PM
Bear - 2017-01-17 6:07 PM
Mighty Broke - 2017-01-17 5:42 PM
 Ok, I will play devil's advocate also, what about sabotage. Someone sneaks in and gives someone else's horse something illegal, don't think it couldn't happen. It could.
OK now we are starting to get just a little ridiculous.
Stuff like that happens now, doesn't it?
What if a cobra crawls up Nellie's ass and bites her and she tests positive for cobra venom? Don't think it couldn't happen. It could.
Hell, just the other day I saw it with my own eyes.
Yeah, it happens. A girl we rodeoed with was at the BFA years ago and she was good enough (made the NFR the year before ) that someone drugged her horse. He went apes*^t crazy and she didn't get to run. She had the vet there drug test him and it came back positive for drugs.
So you are saying it happens, regardless of a drug testing policy.
I'm sure it does. Some dink can slip my horse a Mickey Finn and do damage to me and my horse with far greater certainty than doing it to lead to a dirty drug test. | |
| | |
I just read the headlines
Posts: 4483
| Bear - 2017-01-17 7:01 PM
GLP - 2017-01-17 6:50 PM
Bear - 2017-01-17 6:07 PM
Mighty Broke - 2017-01-17 5:42 PM
 Ok, I will play devil's advocate also, what about sabotage. Someone sneaks in and gives someone else's horse something illegal, don't think it couldn't happen. It could.
OK now we are starting to get just a little ridiculous.
Stuff like that happens now, doesn't it?
What if a cobra crawls up Nellie's ass and bites her and she tests positive for cobra venom? Don't think it couldn't happen. It could.
Hell, just the other day I saw it with my own eyes.
Yeah, it happens. A girl we rodeoed with was at the BFA years ago and she was good enough (made the NFR the year before ) that someone drugged her horse. He went apes*^t crazy and she didn't get to run. She had the vet there drug test him and it came back positive for drugs.
So you are saying it happens, regardless of a drug testing policy.
I'm sure it does. Some dink can slip my horse a Mickey Finn and do damage to me and my horse with far greater certainty than doing it to lead to a dirty drug test.
Yes sir, I am saying exactly that. And if they will do that to your horse, you can bet they are using drugs on their horses for their own benefit. I don't believe it's just some of the big dogs doing it, the 4D girl trying to hit the 3D money does it too.
| |
| | |
Guys Just Wanna Have Fun
Posts: 5530
Location: OH | Â I am just saying it COULD happen, people are crazy. Jealousy can drive people to do insane things. | |
| | |
BHW Resident Surgeon
Posts: 25352
Location: Bastrop, Texas | Mighty Broke - 2017-01-17 7:15 PM
 I am just saying it COULD happen, people are crazy. Jealousy can drive people to do insane things.
Yup....if I ever caught some sonnavab!tch slipping my horse anything he/she will wish they'd never been born.
We need more video cameras. | |
| |
| |
Folks on-line