What if we had a National Racing Czar?

stark
Posts: 4152
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 9:55 am
Location: SoCal

Thu Jun 21, 2018 8:34 pm

The California Horse Racing Board delayed a proposal on out-of-competition testing changes, which would have aligned California with several major racing states and with the Racing Medication and Testing Consortium's National Uniform Medication Program, during its scheduled monthly meeting June 21 at the Alameda County Fairgrounds in Pleasanton.

Lots more @
https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing ... ium=social
I've found it easier to tear up tickets at 8/1 instead of 8/5.
User avatar
Sparrow Castle
Posts: 4959
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 6:44 pm

Thu Jun 21, 2018 8:39 pm

Sigh...here we go again...sounds like it got a bit testy.

Jeremy Balan Verified account @BH_JBalan
More Jeremy Balan Retweeted BloodHorse
First story out of today's CHRB meeting, with one more to come.

CHRB Delays Out-of-Competition Testing Proposal
The California Horse Racing Board delayed a proposal on out-of-competition testing changes, which would have aligned California with several major racing states and with the Racing Medication and Testing Consortium's National Uniform Medication Program, during its scheduled monthly meeting June 21 at the Alameda County Fairgrounds in Pleasanton.

The proposal, which sought to alter procedures, set guidelines, and apply penalties for "non-compliance" of out-of-competition testing rules in the state, was opposed by the California Thoroughbred Trainers and the Thoroughbred Owners of California, although both parties said they don't object to out-of-competition testing in principle.

After a lengthy discussion between CHRB members, CHRB medical director Dr. Rick Arthur, and representatives from the TOC and CTT, the board, albeit reluctantly, decided to send the proposal back to the committee.

Although CTT executive director Alan Balch was asked several times by CHRB board members to distill the organization's reasoning for opposing the proposal, he largely declined to explain and instead pointed to a document submitted to the board June 6 that was drafted by lawyers who represent the CTT and TOC.

The document from the law offices of Yoka & Smith, LLP lays out several bullet points to explain the groups' opposition, including that the board has not provided "evidence of necessity" for the proposed changes, issues with liability to owners and trainers with horses outside of racing facilities, lack of evidence "that any of the extensive list of (proposed) substances ... to ban in out-of-competition testing could affect racing performance if administered in an out-of-competition setting," and that the CHRB proposal would "improperly restrict or prohibit outright the veterinary use of legally compounded medications."

Balch's tactic was not taken well by CHRB chairman Chuck Winner and vice chairman Madeline Auerbach.

"Let's not obliterate the process by throwing all this junk at it," Auerbach said. "Let's be really candid here. That's a lot of 'blah, blah, blah.' Get specific. What is the problem? Come on."

"I believe the specifics are set forth very clearly in our letter (from) June 6," Balch responded.

"We're asking you now to synopsize it, Alan, so everybody on this board, without going through the gobbledygook—what is it in the proposed rule that is so objectionable to you that we should start this process all over again?" Winner said.

One of the main issues from both groups appears to be who will be held responsible for a horse that tests positive off racetrack grounds at a non-racing facility, and Balch eventually voiced that concern.
More: https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing ... g-proposal

Jeremy Balan Verified account @BH_JBalan
4h4 hours ago
CHRB equine medical director Rick Arthur, seemingly expecting this result, has already sent out a lengthy written statement to a list of horse racing media. Here are the final two paragraphs.
Image
Catalina
Posts: 3203
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 5:08 pm
Location: South Texas

Fri Jun 22, 2018 12:39 pm

So who all doesn't have out-of-competition testing? Could the states that do have it mandate California etc horses to be stabled at their OOCT track 4 or 6 weeks prior to the race they're hoping to run in, and to be submitted to OOCT testing at least twice prior to running? Or are the trainers objecting to OOTC worried that their horses suddenly won't eat up?
User avatar
Sparrow Castle
Posts: 4959
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 6:44 pm

Fri Jun 22, 2018 3:55 pm

The RMTC is tracking progress towards the adoption of the model rules. Seven states have passed the model rule on Out of Competition Testing: Arkansas, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Washington. The rule is "in process" in an additional four states, including California and New York, and "under consideration" in an additional five states.

State-by-State Comparison of Model Rule Adoption
https://rmtcnet.com/national-uniform-me ... iontesting
User avatar
Sparrow Castle
Posts: 4959
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 6:44 pm

Fri Jun 22, 2018 4:01 pm

No consensus at congressional hearing over Lasix, regulation
A congressional hearing Friday to discuss federal legislation that would nationalize some aspects of racing regulation and ban the race-day use of the anti-bleeding medication furosemide yielded no consensus from either the racing industry or legislators on the bill, underscoring the slim chances for the legislation’s passage anytime soon.

The hearing was largely a replay of other congressional hearings on issues that have divided the racing industry for decades, namely, the effort to align racing states under one set of rules and the controversial use of furosemide, commonly known as Lasix, on race day. It was the first hearing to discuss a bill that was introduced last year, but one in a string of hearings over the past 10 years to delve into racing’s regulation, with a typical cast of characters reiterating many of the same arguments.

The bill, introduced by U.S. Reps. Andy Barr (R.-Ky.) and Paul Tonko (D.-N.Y.) would appoint the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, a private, nonprofit company, to oversee the regulation and enforcement of the industry’s medication policies. The provision explicitly banning the race-day use of Lasix was added last year in order to gain the support of Frank Stronach, the owner and breeder who controls The Stronach Group, a vertically integrated private racing company.

Much of the question-and-answer session of the hearing focused on the use of Lasix, with supporters claiming that the medication is an effective way to treat bleeding in the lungs, and opponents arguing mostly along the lines that the use of the diuretic presents a public-perception problem for the sport’s bettors and international buyers of racehorses. Lasix is legal to use on race day in every North American racing jurisdiction but is banned on race day in most other major racing countries.

Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R.-Ill.) began by asking questions designed to point out that most horsemen consider use of the drug to be a humane response to bleeding in the lungs. He asked one of the witnesses invited to testify, Kitty Block, president of the Humane Society of the United States, why race-day use of the drug should be banned given the belief that the drug mitigates a health problem, and Block responded by saying that “injecting a horse in the neck” on race day is “not a perception you want projected.”

“In that case, maybe optics should take second place to the protection of horses,” Kinzinger responded.

Supporters of the ban countered that the problem of bleeding has been overstated, and that the phasing out of the race-day use of the drug would not lead to widespread problems in the industry, citing the experiences of foreign jurisdictions.

“The concern that the sky will fall if we prohibit Lasix is wrong,” said Craig Fravel, chief executive of the Breeders’ Cup, in response to a question from Rep. Janice Schakowsky (D.-Ill.), who indicated in her remarks that she was opposed to the race-day use of Lasix.

The time devoted to the back-and-forth over Lasix underlines one of the most significant hurdles facing the bill in a Congress in which many House members are facing tough re-election races this fall. In the past, most racing lobbyists have said that efforts to pass legislation similar to the bill introduced last year have little chance if the racing industry does not provide a united front.

Witnesses were equally divided on the other main component of the bill, the appointment of USADA as a national overseer of the sport’s policies. Proponents of the current state-by-state regulatory system contended at the hearing that regulators are doing an adequate job of overseeing the sport, though those supporters also acknowledged that racing states are not all aligned under one set of rules, despite decades of effort to accomplish national uniformity.

Supporters of the bill used that failure as a talking point.

“Everyone here said we need uniformity,” said Stuart Janney, vice chairman of The Jockey Club, which has led a coalition of groups in support of the legislation. “This is the quickest way.”
More: http://www.drf.com/news/no-consensus-co ... regulation
User avatar
Sparrow Castle
Posts: 4959
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 6:44 pm

Fri Jun 22, 2018 4:03 pm

FEDERAL COMMITTEE HEARS PROS, CONS OF MEDICATION REGULATION BILL
By: Tom LaMarra
A June 22 congressional subcommittee hearing on the Horseracing Integrity Act of 2017 didn’t come close to offering a consensus on whether the legislation is necessary, but it did give lawmakers a much better view of the regulatory landscape given unusually balanced testimony.

In a major change from previous federal hearings on related bills, the witness panel was equally split between supporters and opponents of the measure, which would create an entity controlled by the United States Anti-Doping Agency and, though not stated in the bill, the industry groups pushing for its passage. The bill, which would also ban race-day administration of the anti-bleeding medication Lasix, was introduced in May 2017 and remains without a sponsor in the United States Senate.

Members of the Digital Commerce and Consumer Protection Subcommittee, which falls under House Energy and Commerce Committee, expressed much interest in hearing about the overall health and welfare of racehorses. In fact, Rep. Tony Cardenas of California said it was “unfortunate” there wasn’t a veterinarian on the panel to address the use of Lasix and other health-related issues.
More: http://tharacing.com/federal-committee- ... tion-bill/
stark
Posts: 4152
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 9:55 am
Location: SoCal

Fri Jun 22, 2018 4:20 pm

Fascinating stuff, thanks for sharing.
I've found it easier to tear up tickets at 8/1 instead of 8/5.
User avatar
Sparrow Castle
Posts: 4959
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 6:44 pm

Fri Jun 22, 2018 5:38 pm

Lasix Dominates Congressional Drug Reform Hearing
Thoroughbred industry witnesses representing both pro and con sides of a federal bill requiring a uniform anti-doping and medication control program testified before a Congressional subcommittee on Friday, marking the first time that proponents and opponents of HR 2651 have been able to voice arguments while facing questioning from politicians who will decide if the measure advances.

No clear-cut “winner” emerged from the June 22 proceedings before the Digital Commerce and Consumer Protection subcommittee. The most salient points of the two-hour debate came near the end, when questioning drifted away from the cumbersome subplot of Lasix usage and drilled down to the more specific issue of whether Congress needs to step in and impose independent oversight based on the fact that the sport crosses state lines during the course of everyday wagering, breeding, sales and racing commerce.

...

Rep. David McKinley (R-WV) made a point of noting that the witnesses in opposition to the bill brought more verbal fire to their arguments than the supporters did.

“When people come before the panel, sometimes there’s a little bit of confusion over whether they’re with [or against] any particular bill.” McKinley said. “Not one this one. You two–Hamelback and Martin–I don’t know whether you didn’t get the memo, but your passion came out pretty strongly about where you stand on this. So I’m fascinated by that, but I want to hear the counter to it as we debate this.”

McKinley then asked Fravel to point out where those in opposition to HR 2651 were wrong in their reasoning.

“The gist of a lot of this [anti-intervention] testimony is things are going fine, we’re doing well, don’t mess with us; that we don’t need a national program, we can do it all ourselves,” Fravel said. But, he added, in terms of bringing about meaningful change, “the current system takes too long. It takes forever.”

Near the end of the hearing, Janney was asked why he didn’t have confidence in allowing the feds to just step back and allow the various racing state regulators to come to a consensus on adopting the model rules that already exist.

“I’m 69 years old,” Janney replied. “It’s my considered opinion that I would never be around to see that day. It will not happen. I’ve worked for the last 20 years being involved with other people to try to figure all this out. And the status quo, for a lot of people, is exactly what they want. What I’m here to do is to try to provide the things that are going to be necessary for this industry so that my children can enjoy it.”

The next step in the legislative process will be for the subcommittee to report their findings from this hearing to the full Energy and Commerce committee.

Watch the entire hearing (beginning at 13:50) below.
More: http://www.thoroughbreddailynews.com/la ... rm-hearing
stark
Posts: 4152
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 9:55 am
Location: SoCal

Sun Jul 01, 2018 11:47 am

Kenny McPeek
‏@KennyMcPeek
Jun 29

Trying to watch my horses to run @Churchill and @TVG doesn’t show on either channel. Can’t watch on an ADW because I’m in New Jersey to run a horse @MonmouthPark Can’t watch on @HorseRacesNow either,sport is ridiculous in how inept it is towards fans. Someone figure this out

Lots more rant in the history on the 29th @ https://twitter.com/KennyMcPeek
I've found it easier to tear up tickets at 8/1 instead of 8/5.
BaroqueAgain1
Posts: 9879
Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2013 6:16 pm

Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:11 pm

Trying to watch my horses to run @Churchill and @TVG doesn’t show on either channel.

Really? I'm under the impression that TVG2 always shows the races from Churchill. Even watching on TVG, I can see the graphic for the MTP for the Churchill races, the on-air analysts discuss those races and tell viewers to go to TVG2 to watch them. Yesterday, Nick Hines was in the TVG2 chair, and he came on TVG to show his ticket for an upcoming wager at Churchill. :?
I wonder what happened during the times Kenny was trying to watch his horses? :shock:
But I agree that the situation is ridiculous.
Catalina
Posts: 3203
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 5:08 pm
Location: South Texas

Sun Jul 01, 2018 4:35 pm

stark wrote:Kenny McPeek
‏@KennyMcPeek
Jun 29

Trying to watch my horses to run @Churchill and @TVG doesn’t show on either channel. Can’t watch on an ADW because I’m in New Jersey to run a horse @MonmouthPark Can’t watch on @HorseRacesNow either,sport is ridiculous in how inept it is towards fans. Someone figure this out

Lots more rant in the history on the 29th @ https://twitter.com/KennyMcPeek
I'm thinking that CD might have had some areas blacked out, like what often happens with other sports events. Strictly guessing, of course.
stark
Posts: 4152
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 9:55 am
Location: SoCal

Sun Jul 01, 2018 5:14 pm

Loooch Racing Stable
‏@LooochRacing

If ever a sport was in need of a commissioner it’s horse racing - and not a former anyone with any allegiance - someone objective !! Only way to start making a fair playing field
https://twitter.com/LooochRacing/status ... 2480027648



If the Supreme Court has trouble picking somebody objective, what makes you think there's somebody available for horse racing?
I've found it easier to tear up tickets at 8/1 instead of 8/5.
User avatar
Sparrow Castle
Posts: 4959
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 6:44 pm

Tue Jul 03, 2018 8:01 pm

Ray Paulick @raypaulick
6m6 minutes ago
Florida has no racing commission and now the @Floridadbpr has stopped updating status of Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering licensees and possible violations on the http://myfloridalicense.com website. A major industry like horse racing deserves better from state regulators.
User avatar
Sparrow Castle
Posts: 4959
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 6:44 pm

Tue Jul 03, 2018 8:39 pm

Just to clarify, I am not anti-Lasix. I think there's a proper use for it when race horses are prone to excessive bleeding and have had and currently have lovely horses who are in that category. I have supported a phase-out of Lasix use in Graded Stakes races as a compromise, but the industry couldn't get behind that either.

WaterHayOatsAlliance @waterhayoats
Retweeted Eva McKend
HR2651 - IMPORTANT NATIONAL OVERSIGHT TO REPLACE OUR CURRENT FAILING SYSTEM.

Eva McKend @evamckend
Typically Republicans stay away from regulation but #KY @RepAndyBarr says something needs to be done about horse racing industry. He argues it has gone unregulated for too long, working w/ #NY Dem. @RepPaulTonko on legislation to push for new national set of rules #HorseRacing
Video: https://twitter.com/evamckend/status/10 ... 2848066560
stark
Posts: 4152
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 9:55 am
Location: SoCal

Sat Oct 06, 2018 6:39 pm

Dear Czarina,

There's some new technology out there (see football) that would really be helpful to horseplayers.....
On the TV screen, can you please paint an imaginary line across the track where the finish line is?

Just watched a head-on replay of an inquiry where the bumping was near the finish line, sure would have been nice to know if the bump was actually after the wire.

If there's more than one objection to advancing technology and showing the "first down line" I'd be shocked.

Thank you.
I've found it easier to tear up tickets at 8/1 instead of 8/5.
stark
Posts: 4152
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 9:55 am
Location: SoCal

Tue Nov 27, 2018 12:23 pm

DW Lukas has a few ideas he shared in this interview.....

If you could change one thing in racing, what would it be?
The Jockey Club have to step up and declare that they will not sanction or recognize races [at tracks that don’t operate in the] best interest of the sport. That’s the only leverage they have. They’re not going to recognize Santa Anita’s races if they don’t come along and do what’s best for Del Mar. And Del Mar’s not going to be sanctioned if they don’t do what’s best for Churchill Downs. Bring it all together under one umbrella, and you can do that with a governing committee or a commissioner.
The thing that makes the National Football League so strong is they lock all the owners in a room and they argue and fight, but when they come out, they’re unanimous in what they’re going to do that’s best for the league. That’s exactly what we need to do.


What do you see as the biggest challenge racing faces today?
Without a doubt, it’s the medication issue. There’s no doubt we need to have uniform medication — the public are never going to have the confidence they need until we give them, whether the perception or the reality that everybody is getting a fair shake out on the racetrack.

more..... https://www.thoroughbredracing.com/arti ... e-way-nfl/
I've found it easier to tear up tickets at 8/1 instead of 8/5.
User avatar
Sparrow Castle
Posts: 4959
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 6:44 pm

Tue Nov 27, 2018 11:34 pm

Amen, Coach!
thinair
Posts: 1642
Joined: Mon Sep 16, 2013 1:46 pm

Wed Nov 28, 2018 11:54 am

I like Wayne, but he said some pretty absurd things in that interview. If he had given that to me, I would not have printed it.
stark
Posts: 4152
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 9:55 am
Location: SoCal

Wed Nov 28, 2018 12:04 pm

thinair wrote:
Wed Nov 28, 2018 11:54 am
I like Wayne, but he said some pretty absurd things in that interview. If he had given that to me, I would not have printed it.
I guess that's one form of Freedom of the Press that's been in the political news every day.
Just print what you like and whatever you determine not to be absurd.
I've found it easier to tear up tickets at 8/1 instead of 8/5.
stark
Posts: 4152
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 9:55 am
Location: SoCal

Wed Dec 12, 2018 11:37 am

The Kentucky Horse Racing Commission on Tuesday placed three drugs on its prohibited substances list following positive findings for two of the substances in horses that raced in the state this fall.

The two positives were both reported to commission staff in September by the commission’s testing laboratory, one for cannabidiol, which is widely available and marketed as a pain reliever to humans, and the other for carbanine, a drug that was developed to prevent tumors but has now been repurposed among internet pharmacies as a purported stamina builder.

continue reading @ https://www.drf.com/news/positive-tests ... edications
I've found it easier to tear up tickets at 8/1 instead of 8/5.
Post Reply