Printable View
Mark,
I am sorry if you found my comments in relation to Luke Mccarthy driving 3 group 1 winners as offensive.
Under the rules, whether they be right or wrong, he was permitted to drive and participate in that day on a stay of proceedings. In the excitement of calling group one races I may of gone off in saying what I did but they were not designed to offend you or anyone else....
Look at this as an example.Quote:
Originally Posted by roosters
http://www.harness.org.au/news-artic...?news_id=18568
http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-re...E261111&ms=nsw
Courageous Kiwi gets caught with an EPO like substance and runs 9th by +40 metres in a Group2 race at Menangle.
This could raise a few questions.
1. is this the first time that the trainer used it? I'd guess that he'd tried it before such a big race to get the dosage right for that horse, however anything is possible.
2. if he's got access to it and used it repeatedly, then how is this guy not near the top of the trainers premiership? maybe the other guys are using something better or know how to better use EPO?
Keep in mind that in this race he was racing against some of the best in Australia and there are other variables that you'd need to consider.
We can only work with the information that's in front of us. Look at the variation of success that trainers are having. Are the top trainers of today the same as those a few years ago? Why not? Have they forgotten how to train? Look up a horse called Min Min Lights. It was a plodder who miraculously won multiple races at Harold Park with a change in trainer. The trainer had similar results with a few other horses, however now is back to an average strike rate again. I don't think he got caught cheating, however something was different during that time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by doinmabest
[VVV] Geeze, I just can't sit on the sidelines any longer on this one fellas.
Fred, I thought they were quite reasonable and for mine, no need to apologise.
Luke drove 3 GROUP 1 WINNERS on the one program. That's worth remarking on and especially so for the fact that he drove two of them for another stable.
Perhaps Mark's view has been somewhat jaundiced by way of Luke & Grand Stride giving Waldenberg the stare and then going on to win the race whilst Waldenberg folded up his tent and faded out of contention.
Mark, mate, honestly, if you really want to get pissed at someone here, get pissed at Blake. He gave your horse NO CHANCE in that race. I like Blake a lot, he's a good fella & a very good horseman/driver, but that was not one of his best moments in the bike.
Now I might be completely wrong but I & a good many others I know see your bloke as a stone cold sit sprinter.... and it is inescapable that he wasn't driven that way in that race. Sit him up and he's capable of blousing anyone on his day but drive him like a Smoken Up style front end warrior & he will not. Interested in your views there.
Jaimie
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark diegutis
[VVV] There are no such things as masking agents.
There are only substances that may serve to interfere with & so endeavour to exploit the shortcoming/s of an existing testing regime/procedure.
If you you have enough sample on hand, you know exactly what are looking for & you know exactly where & how to look for evidence of its presence then you will ultimately find it. It all depends on how much time you are willing to spend in doing so and also how much expense you are willing to go to in order to achieve it.
[QUOTE=Triple V;21883][VVV] There are no such things as masking agents.
There are only substances that may serve to interfere with & so endeavour to exploit the shortcoming/s of an existing testing regime/procedure.
Jamie,
please forgive my ignorance,what then, are these substances called if not "masking agents"?
[QUOTE=Danno;21885][VVV] G'day Dan,Quote:
Originally Posted by Triple V
Mate, it's not ignorance, rather it's just a common misnomer.
I guess you could call them any number of things other than any name that suggests or states that they actually 'mask' the presence of another substance..because they do not. Interference agents perhaps?
That being said, rather than such substances being the main reason to point to as to why anyone who chose to walk down that road might continue to skate by on testing, there is another far more likely Boogey Man lurking in the bushes.
It is a fact that completely unrelated types of drugs which nevertheless have completely like pharmacological effects can be administered to horses in micro doses. This is termed 'stacking'...a process whereby such drugs are effectively 'stacked' one atop of the other in order to achieve the desired result that otherwise a full dose of any single one of them would have achieved...only by way of having been 'stacked'... individually none of them will be present in a large enough amounts to cause a positive test to occur.
To put it in very simple terms...you can for example, as a Human, decide to take small doses of Panadol, Aspirin and Nurofen and do it all at the same time in order to achieve an overall pain killing/anti-inflamatory effect...while chemically speaking each of those drugs is completely unrelated to the other two. US & CAN Vets have been doing this with both equine related & I guess various other drugs for quite some time.
To some degree I think our testing regime is different here and I suspect it might well pick up at least some attempts at this practice...however I'm sure you get the picture.
Nevertheless, and without going so far as to put a blue print on here of how to be a dodgy bastard insofar as adopting the practice here, a Vet of similar dodgy views and with some reasonable insight into how to apply it could get any horse tuned up, no problems at all.
Like all such things, I suspect it all depends on what you are willing to pay in order to do so and how bent the Vet is. Fortunately here in Australia, at least to my knowledge, bent Vets are few & far between. That is far from being the case in the US however.
PS. This is what the authorities in NJ & NY are suggesting Lou Pena's Vet/s has/have been doing.
Hi Jaimie . I'm not pissed off at anything Blake has done . In fact if it wasn't for Blake our horse would never had made it to the races . I sanctioned his drive . Nothing I have said on this forum has anything to do with our horse or his performances . I have been carefull not to bring our horse into any of my comments . I can't respond to the rest of your post as I will be banned . ThanksQuote:
Originally Posted by Triple V
Thanks for the clarification Jamie, between "interference agents" and "stacking" it sounds like if one were to spend some time in North America, in the company of people who have been using these techniques to avoid detection for quite some time, one would surely be able to duplicate the "systems" in Australia as long as they were able to access the pharmaceuticals.
Having had plenty of experience administering various medicines to my own horses over the years, I'm certain this could be achieved without the need for a bent or desperate vet, simply the ability to copy the techniques and access to the substances would get the job done no doubt.
If this has been going on for years in the states and their authorities have not closed the loop yet, it doesn't look good for our sport here long term either I wouldn't think.If tiny amounts of each drug are used then we are headed for a total ban on everything ( clearly can't happen ??) or an open slather system which would have the animal welfare groups working hard to shut us down!
cheers,
Dan
[QUOTE=Triple V;21883][VVV] There are no such things as masking agents.
Hi Jaimie . We recently had a meeting with the president of the Australian Anti Doping Council {ASADA} . The recent downfall of Lance Armstrong was only because they detected the masking agent used . More will come out soon . Micro dosing is used to mask the use of drugs . This inclides the use of EPO to mask the presence of other drugs . This is from a guy who is on the board of the World Anti Doping Council and was a part of the team that brought down Lance Armstrong . He used the term "masking agent" . I'll take his word for it .
Hi Fred . I was in the marque when you made that statement . The people around us were infuriated and you must understand that alot of people are finding life in harness racing really hard . When they are being destroyed by a bloke who has a positive swab then that sort of comment hits a raw nerve regardless of how many stays or appeals that person can drag out . Why don't you talk a few of the lesser trainers up a bit . Might give them a lift . This has nothing to do with driving 3 group 1 winners , its been since December when he was caught . Call it Mccarthy Park , but I would like a sign over the mens urinal calling it the Ben Johnson urinal where you piss into a plastic bottle ........Just trying to lighten things up . You call a great race FredQuote:
Originally Posted by doinmabest