Reply With QuoteAbsolutely. Mind is blown at that part. Even so, imo, there is no way either Muscat or Golding would have driven like that if there was only one in the field.Originally Posted by dizzy
G'day Dot,
I am saying right here, right now, straight up, carved in stone then gold paint applied to the lettering, for all the world to see...that in terms of Harness Racing Punters having confidence and faith that the form for our wagering product is of a consistent, valid, handicappable nature, performance enhancing drugs are most definitely of a secondary concern. Not to me, not to you, no doubt not to most if not all Industry Participants but in the big scheme of things it is not us that drives the bus. The battle against performance enhancing drugs is almost entirely a participant driven one.
By & large the Punters could not give a fat rats arse if each and every horse went out onto the track in a full sweat with their eyes rolling in the heads and tuned up like an F1 car, just so long as they did so each and every time and they raced accordingly, as in they raced the same way, each and every time.
Why do you think that TCO2 testing was instituted?
Despite what Officialdom generally might like the Industry Participants to believe, in reality it was NOT and never had anything whatsoever to do with any performance enhancing aspects.
Rather it was wholly and solely to do with the press button ability to manipulate form a box of good old Arm & Hammer affords someone who might choose to take a walk down that road and that ability to manipulate form threatened the integrity of the wagering product and that in turn threatened turnover and that in turn threatened the rivers of gold flowing into State Government coffers as a result of wagering taxation.
Don't drench for weeks on end then Bi-carb one week and down the road we go at 30/1, then don't do so the next and the arse falls back out of them again. The core reason for TCO2 testing is no more noble than that. The level playing field aspect of it is a convenient and no doubt a welcome by-product but it was always PUNT driven.
Last edited by Triple V; 08-04-2012 at 07:08 PM. Reason: spelling plus added a bit & re-worded
Absolutely. Mind is blown at that part. Even so, imo, there is no way either Muscat or Golding would have driven like that if there was only one in the field.
Pretty much agree with this post.
VVV I've no doubt that punters want a consistent wagering product and without it they will stray, but if you think it is acceptable to produce "consistency" through all parties using performance enhancing drugs then think again. The public will not accept us training off the end of a needle, the end result being that those very politicians in the government into which our declining river of wagering gold flows will gladly cast us asunder in order to save their own jobs. There are far far more votes in animal welfare then there ever will be in harness racing.
Actually Dot
Jamie like it or not is 100% right team driving will do more to harm the sport long term than any positive swab inquiries.
I say this because there are no drugs being used in Harness Racing that are not also being used in the gallops if you doubt me check the RacingNSW website and check out their penalties for their Trainers it will list the same substances.
As you know both codes are funded by betting turnover, turnover is driven by customer confidence, in racings case that means punter confidence.
Now the names Red Hots, Cheats On Seats, Jokes On Spokes ect that all Harness People rightly detest did not come about or continue in popular vernacular because of positive swab cases they all came about and continue to be used in reference to racetrack indiscretions as you put it.
As I have said and continue to shout loudly the fast majority of positive swabs in both this code and the gallops with the exception of TCO 2 are therapeutic administrations gone wrong .... There will be no march to any politician because a vet recommends the use of a registered therapeutic substance.
EPO is being looked for and people using it will be punished just as they have been in Victoria in both codes.
Apparently the gallops in the UK tried the ban steroids completely idea I am told on good authority with Zero success.
There is no indication there is widespread misuse in either code of Illicit drugs and when someone is found to be using same such as EPO they are punished...now you are a little older than me I think and I am not sure how I will collect but I am happy to take evens there will be no animal rights people marching down Maquarie street on this issue in your or my lifetime..... on the other hand we have already witnessed a huge march away from the TAB windows in relation to betting on trotting.
Its time to get real, unless the overall image improves in relation to the competitiveness of Harness races its all over... it will kill the game quicker than positive swabs.
Last edited by Thevoiceofreason; 08-05-2012 at 05:27 AM.
Bill you make some good points and really its a bit like asking what will kill a drug abuser with cancer sooner. But I wouldn't discount the power of the animal welfare lobby, that one VVV is the one that really is in growth mode not the drug testers. And they did make both codes change the whip rules though VVV probably has a theory that that was the TAB too.
We may race the same species Bill but apart from that its like comparing a chihuahua with a rotweiller in terms of income and public support. As Mark said its not that the TB"s arent up to any shenanigans its that they are big enough to survive the fallout. At about the time I went on the odd foxhunt I was also riding trackwork, many a gallops trainer then, and I doubt that its changed now, would have gladly dispensed with harness racing in order to expand gallops racing, taking both our time slots and punters. Though actually back then I don't think they would have been interested in Friday nights. Interesting how that wheel has turned, we have abandoned our inner city friday night under lights time slot in favour of a big track in the back blocks whilst the ATC works frantically towards having friday night racing under lights at Randwick.
Bill they obviously don't teach it in Manager school but it is taught in ATC-never assume. You have continually stated the majority of positives are to therapeutic drugs, and thats true but you haven't established that these have been obtained and administered legally. Lets take Boldonone for example (though it is a moot point if its a therapeutic or performance enhancing drug) When Gai Waterhouse was fined for a positive swab to boldonone the administration was traced back to a vet on a spelling farm, a legal administration. Yet when Mr's Lew and McCarthy had horses return positive post race swabs to Boldonone both claimed that they didn't even know what the drug was. How do you reconcile that with a legal therapeutic adminstration?
I don't know if they tried to ban anabolic steroids in the UK or not, but I do know that harness racing in the UK is a hobby only, and I do think that most people know the state of UK wagering and purses on gallops racing, they are miniscule in comparison with ours. But in Sweden, where harness racing is the big deal in town as far as racing goes the Swedish Administration banned a trainer for eight years for giving steroids to three of his horses. This was not in conjuction with racing but for an out of competition test. Perhaps Tee Cee can help out here -Harnesslink carried the story, I think it was december last year.
Speaking of things Swedish you may be interested to know that Sharon Lang after returning from the Elitlopp this year told me that Swedish citizens can and do sue drivers in civil court if they have been "offended" by the manner in which a driver used the whip in a race.
You have me at a disadavantage on the age thing Bill as I don't know you at all but lets say if you are who a number of people in the past have speculated on who you are then you are correct, I am a little older then you but I'm sure I don't look it!! I don't share your certainty on the future actions of the animal welfare exponents but given that I doubt that my life span has that much longer to run-high stress job, bad genes, bad eating habbits, high risk hobbies-I will decline to bet.
I've no doubt that our contribution to turnover is in serious decline but aren't you and VVV neglecting the agreement that guarantees our share, you know the one the greyhound people are currently rallying against? So wouldn't that make the real issue for harness racing with regard to both the use of performance enhancing drugs and on track collusion not the driving away of the punter but the driving away of the participant? At least in the short term because doesn't that agreement have the better part of 99 years to run?
[VVV] Although we said exactly the same thing, Bill has said it all far more eloquently than I ever could Dot so I'll leave it there.
You'll have to excuse me now if you don't mind. I'm heading off on a 4 week trip to the Arctic Ice Shelf in order to club some Fur Seal pups & harpoon a few Whales, outlaw animal hater that I am. Taking a 12-guage and hoping to blast a few Penguins as well if weather permits.
Dot
I like VVV am about to bow out of this argument but a few final corrections to what you have said,
Boldenone is naturally occurring in male horses unlike the Gai Waterhouse case you rely on which was a filly and therefore no Boldenone as a naturally occurring substance in other words it had to be administered.
The Uk turnover on racing on a per race basis oustrips the Aussie turnover, if you doubt me go to the IFHA for the stats we run approxomatly 4 times more races which is the only reason we hold more and by the way we do not hold even twice as much its the funding model that is floored there no the actual amount that is bet.
If you think that the 99 year agreement known as the Intercode Agreement will stand up for 99 years, you are kidding yourself we as an industry are guaranteed a certain percentage return today that is true but the gallops and the dogs are as you know are lobbying government to have it reviewed and make no bones it will happen sooner than later, whilst it is clear you care about the sport it is its racetrack image that is driving people away from betting not positive swabs.
I doubt your a punter and to be honest I doubt if you know any professional punters to source there actual views be assured I do and have.
Bill I fear you are confused or being deliberately confusing.
Yes Gai's horse was a filly and like geldings has a zero threshold for boldonone, so it must be administered to cause a positive swab. And it was by a vet which made it a legal therapeutic administration. Yes you can give steroids to a filly, its administered exactly the same as in a male horse but perhaps with more hesitation as a result of the possible impact on future reproduction, not something someone worries about with a gelding.
Entires have naturally occuring boldonone so they have a different threshold to fillies and geldings, and guess what its set a level that the experts determined that only a deliberate administration would result in a positive swab. So yes that means for an entire such as Mach Wiper or Karloo Kix it had to been administered and in order to be therapeutic and legal had to be prescribed by a vet. Without a prescription anabolic steroids are no more legal the cocaine, heroin or methamphetamine. The Poisons and Therapeutic Goods Act provides for up to 2 years in gaol for possession of anabolic steroids without a prescription, The Customs Act up to 5 years in gaol for unauthorised importation.
No comment on the swedish trainer banned for eight years for using anabolic steroids then Bill? His name is Nils Enqvist, the swedes wanted to give him life.
Of course I don't think the agreement will last which is why I said in the short term, IMO everything needs to be done to increase the participation level firstly. Afterall its much harder to team drive with a full field all from different stables.
Your right Bill I'm not a punter but you should be gratefull I didn't accept your bet as afterall it was actually a sure thing. There was nothing in your terms that prevented me from say organising Mark, Trish, Lee, Jett, Danno, and a rent a crowd of uni students and a few PETA radicals from face book to protest at parliment house before enjoying a little hospitality somewhere at your expense!
Posting Permissions