Chicago Barn to Wire BRIS
Home | News | Bloggers | Forums | Resources | Links | Marketplace | Gallery | Contact Us | Search


August 30, 2014, 09:29:26 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: If you don't remember your password, email me.

New  registration procedures -- Some ISPs have been bouncing the verification emails.  Please email me to be activated or if you have any problems.  Click Contact Us above.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Another NJ EPO Positive  (Read 2073 times)
njhorseman
Guest

« on: May 18, 2006, 08:06:44 PM »

My reliable sources have told me about a second NJ EPO positive. Unlike the first,  it is not on a big time trainer, so you folks in Chicago will likely not recognize the name.

I will withhold the name until an official announcement is made, but remember...you heard it here first .  Wink
Report to moderator   Logged
ChargingHard
Full Member
***
Posts: 141




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: May 18, 2006, 10:03:37 PM »

S L L Huh
Report to moderator   Logged
casemania
Guest

« Reply #2 on: May 19, 2006, 08:53:23 AM »

youll know in a week or two!! punishment wont be as bad as rucker though!! Wink
Report to moderator   Logged
casemania
Guest

« Reply #3 on: May 19, 2006, 04:20:11 PM »

S L L Huh
CG Wink
Report to moderator   Logged
njhorseman
Guest

« Reply #4 on: May 19, 2006, 04:23:59 PM »

CG Wink

Correct
Report to moderator   Logged
theiman
Full Member
***
Posts: 199




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: May 19, 2006, 04:52:03 PM »

NJ,

Any idea if the agreement Rucker signed with the Big M or NJ, was he the only one to have to sign one? Or did all horseman have to sign it too? Perhaps only horsemen with prior positives?

I only ask as if he was the only one, perhaps a lawyer can argue causes for discrimination of some sort. However, if all had to sign it Joe D's excuse of "state or frame of mind" wont matter. Either way I dont think state of mind in signing an agreement would be a good defense. That would cause anyone to attempt to escape from a business contract because of frame of mind? The courts would be flooded with these claims and it doesnt seem to hold any credible acid test.

If this was answered in a prior post I am sorry that I missed it. Alot going on out there.
Report to moderator   Logged
njhorseman
Guest

« Reply #6 on: May 19, 2006, 08:26:14 PM »

NJ,

Any idea if the agreement Rucker signed with the Big M or NJ, was he the only one to have to sign one? Or did all horseman have to sign it too? Perhaps only horsemen with prior positives?

I only ask as if he was the only one, perhaps a lawyer can argue causes for discrimination of some sort. However, if all had to sign it Joe D's excuse of "state or frame of mind" wont matter. Either way I dont think state of mind in signing an agreement would be a good defense. That would cause anyone to attempt to escape from a business contract because of frame of mind? The courts would be flooded with these claims and it doesnt seem to hold any credible acid test.

If this was answered in a prior post I am sorry that I missed it. Alot going on out there.

I really don't know the exact nature of the agreement Rucker signed, or whether anyone else was made to sign something similar.

Every trainer racing at the Meadowlands has to sign an agreement to follow their rules, and to be subject to various detention barn requirements in the event of serious or repeated positive tests. I think we can be pretty certain that Rucker's record and reputation played a large role in his having to sign something more stringent.

Only time will tell whether the Big M's action will hold up in court (assuming Rucker will challenge it).
Report to moderator   Logged
ChargingHard
Full Member
***
Posts: 141




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: May 20, 2006, 12:23:16 PM »

Heard yesterday there's 5 more coming.
Report to moderator   Logged
bettor2belucky
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1782




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: May 20, 2006, 04:44:23 PM »

I heard he was asked to sign it in 2005 because of the positives in Chi.. What I don't understand is why sign it and then use EPO knowing that they test for it?

 Ego or Stupidity?



 Bettor
Report to moderator   Logged

"A government big enough to give you everything you want,is a government big enough to take away everything you have."  Thomas Jefferson

"I'm the President I can afford better." Barack Hussein Obama
njhorseman
Guest

« Reply #9 on: May 20, 2006, 07:02:21 PM »

I heard he was asked to sign it in 2005 because of the positives in Chi.. What I don't understand is why sign it and then use EPO knowing that they test for it?

 Ego or Stupidity?



 Bettor

My guess is he was using Aranesp, which generally doesn't cause a positive, but did in this horse.
Report to moderator   Logged
ChargingHard
Full Member
***
Posts: 141




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: May 21, 2006, 01:23:04 AM »

There's a test for aranesp in humans, its only a matter of time before they have for horses, if they haven't already.


http://www.clinchem.org/cgi/content/full/48/11/2057

Read the last paragraph.
Report to moderator   Logged
tonymfan
Guest

« Reply #11 on: May 21, 2006, 01:30:38 AM »

I heard he was asked to sign it in 2005 because of the positives in Chi.. What I don't understand is why sign it and then use EPO knowing that they test for it?

 Ego or Stupidity?

Or miscalculation since the tests started only recently. Might have thought he could keep using it right up to some date in March then the antibodies would be gone by the time the tests were done. Or antibodies were still in the horse system since the old trainer. Wasn't there someone who signed on here and said he claimed a horse full of EPO off the former trainer last year?
Report to moderator   Logged
njhorseman
Guest

« Reply #12 on: May 21, 2006, 10:53:34 AM »

There's a test for aranesp in humans, its only a matter of time before they have for horses, if they haven't already.


http://www.clinchem.org/cgi/content/full/48/11/2057

Read the last paragraph.


Yes, I'm familiar with this article. It's a different type of testing than is done on horses.
Report to moderator   Logged
trotter1
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2089




Ignore
« Reply #13 on: May 21, 2006, 01:26:53 PM »

My guess is he was using Aranesp, which generally doesn't cause a positive, but did in this horse.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've decided on a new penalty for a trainers use of illegal substances on their horses:

No detention
No time off
No penalty
No loss of purse to owner

However, the trainer shall be injected by a licensed physician with the same substance(s)
that were given to the horse in question.

"Kenny Rucker, please bend over for your Aranesp injection--your red blood cell count is
a little too low right now!
Report to moderator   Logged
tarafarm
Newbie
*
Posts: 11




Ignore
« Reply #14 on: May 21, 2006, 04:55:43 PM »

Here, here, Trotter 1!
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.072 seconds with 16 queries.

Home
Upcoming events
Arlington Million
Horse slaughter in IL
Racing TV schedule
News Updates
Legislation

Galloping Out

Previous stories

Arlington
Balmoral
Hawthorne
Maywood
Chicago Sun-Times
Chicago Tribune
Blood-Horse
Daily Racing Form
Thoroughbred Times
Harness Link
Illinois Racing Board

 

2014

Arlington Million
Triple Crown
Illinois Derby

2013

Breeders' Cup
Hawthorne Gold Cup
Arlington Million
Triple Crown
Illinois Derby

2012

Breeders' Cup
Hawthorne Gold Cup
Arlington Million
Triple Crown
Illinois Derby

More ebay items

 

Home | News Updates | Bloggers | Forums | Search
Resources | Links | Marketplace | Gallery | Advertising | Contact Us

Copyright © 2000-2014 Chicago Barn to Wire. All rights reserved.
Privacy policy