Reply With QuoteDidn't offend me Fred i nearly fell off the chair laughing. Keep up the good work.Originally Posted by doinmabest
Scary for triple thats for sure, Mark sounds fair Dinkum!!!
Didn't offend me Fred i nearly fell off the chair laughing. Keep up the good work.
Have whoever you want on but don't ever have yourself on
Not so fast VVV I said I'm not interested in your testosterone levels but your nuts ARE mine, though you will be disappointed no doubt to learn that they will not be taking pride of place in my collection. It's quite extensive you know after 30 years in a male dominated industry, I have left and rights and more then a few pairs. Mark I'm happy for you to complete the task, though a tad disappointed that you have chosen to sharpen your implement of choice.[VVV] Geeze, you sure know how to hurt a guy Dot.
I don't think I've ever felt more rejected than I do right now. I offer you your very own pair of Jatz crackers, namely mine, & you turn around and knock me back.
Seriously though, can you point to the section of/words within the HRA rules where it actually says that the Boldenone threshold for geldings is in fact zero? I can't find it.
I just went and cut and pasted and posted what appeared to be the applicables from the HRA website. Is there a further piece there that applies to geldings which I have missed?
All I can see is that it says, in male horses other than geldings?
Is that perhaps a rule by inference as opposed to it being stated in black & white...you know, what the reader happens to read into it as opposed to what it actually says? What am I missing?
The school of thought here is that if it is as the rule states 'at a mass concentration of 15 micrograms per litre in urine' then, a by default a gelding...sans his Jatz, could still be be given a dose of boldenone that comes in under that 15 micrograms & effectively it skates because no threshold appears to have been mentioned anywhere.
All it says as far as I can see is 'other than geldings'.
If it is as you suggest and this is simply another example of a badly worded rule ala the inspired blood versus cardiovascular system defence mounted by Geoff Small's Law Talkin Guy then I can hear Lionel Hutzs across the country who's practices defend such racing transgressions already writing that one down on their memo pads.
VVV the rules are quite clear if you actually choose to read them.
188A (1)The following are prohibited substances...
(b)Substances falling within, but not limited to, the following categories.....
then 7 down is "anabolic agents" ( NB Boldonone is an anabolic agent)
then further down
(2) the following substances when present at or below the levels setout are excepted from the provisions of sub rule (1)
then 9 down is
(i)Boldenone in male horses other then geldings,(including both free boldenone and boldenone liberated from conjugates) at a mass concentration of 15 micrograms per litre in urine.
190(1) A horse shall be presented for a race free of prohibited substances
So that means if your horse is a gelding then Boldenone (an anabolic agent) is a prohibited substance. The threshold level for ALL prohibited substances bar those that are listed in sub rule 2 as being excepted from sub rule 1 is ZERO.
The only thing you are missing VVV is your NUTS, as I said previously they are MINE!
Hey Mark and Lee,
forget your other stuff at $1 a go, you can sell tickets to this event and with the right marketing........geez a few bob to be made,of course triple will want HIS CUT!
Dot...I'm starting to get a rather uncomfortable twinge in my crotch areaso I hand on heart promise to call the Stewards in the morning and clarify this. Your reading of those rules doesn't make much sense to me because nowhere does it specifically state in black & white the obvious, spelt out. Call me a simpleton who's looking to save his Jatz from an all out assault if you must. Allow me one last roll of the dice.
On that general score, I do wonder, as things pertain to your reading of that rule....has anyone given any thought to the horses currently racing that are officially noted as being colts/entires but are actually geldings and have been for some time?
How, if at all, are they ever identified at point of testing in order to allow for systemic vs additional boldenone?
Does anyone show up and with a warm & gentle hand reach in underneath in order to locate...or conversely make note of the lack of that...which, in my case, both Dot and Mark seem so very keen to get their mits on?
Does the Swabbing Steward 'go the grope' in order to confirm Jatz or sans Jatz?
Another reason I ask is that now and again out at Menangle I've seen Dennis Wilson standing quietly in cross ties and with a rug over him and that in and of itself makes me think that maybe there is someone who does actually does do this and that from time to time there is some level of intentional Jatz handling involved.
Last edited by Triple V; 07-19-2012 at 09:59 PM. Reason: spelling- wouldn't want to upset Lee. :-P
Sorry Jaimie . No stays or appeals for you . Dot will have her trophy's and , Ok , Dot I'll ditch the Joseph Rogers and we'll just pop em out like 2 festered pimples
As stated last night, I rang this morning. Stewards confirm Dot's reading of said rules. Further he suggested that I hang my keyboard up which wasn't very supportive of him. My bad one for thinking boldenone and testosterone were pretty much one & the same.
Mark, that's a bit harsh. They're more like a couple of sizeable rockmelons have a fight under a chaff bag so you'd best bring a machette...and make sure your hands are warm.
Thanks for putting your hand up on that one Jamie. I felt like it was another red herring from you anyway. There's not much that you don't have expertise or an opinion on.
Dots reading of the rules is the way that most people interpreted them. You seem to be missing the point on a few things and getting really upset. I think that you could be letting your emotions get in the way of your judgement and that's a good example of same.
You took a crack at Richard Freedman at the start of this thread, however his comments seem to be true that drug testing is not catching or stopping the cheats. Luke cheated with Boldenone and is still operating and will continue to do so directly or through his associates. It was introduced endogenously and it raises more questions when Karloo Kix goes on it at the same time.
I wasn't have a crack at his comments...for the most part I think he is probably right about a lot of what he says...rather I was having a crack at the credibility person who made them, at him apparently seeking to take the moral highground especially so post his brother's/their stable's saga with Encosta De Lago & that in the years prior to that Lee had also been done for substituting a horse at an official barrier trial. It was the old living in glass houses and throwing stones routine for mine.
Last edited by Triple V; 07-19-2012 at 04:49 PM. Reason: spelling
We all might might wonder why it was so important to 'Shoot the messenger' rather than discuss the message.
Posting Permissions
