Kentucky Derby

Great piece in the RP yesterday from James W and I have only read it now. The horse (Big Brown) is given steriods once a month.....completely compromises my opinion of the horse now.
 
Dutrow spoke about this before the race on the US coverage. Said that it's something that his vet "talked him into doing" a couple of years back, and that all of his horses get a shot of it on the first and fifteenth of the month. Winstrol (Stanozolol) is the steroid in question, which is obviously not banned in the US.

He also said that if they do ban it, which may now happen, he'll happily comply. Also said something along the lines of "I'm not sure if it has much of an effect, but it doesn't do them any harm" which is an odd thing to say!
 
Yes, I am not naive to suggest a lot of American horses do not race on drugs but the use of steroids and in particular Winstrol is particularly alarming. It was the drug that Ben Johnson tested positive for in the Olympics. If we cannot take his results seriously how on earth can we take this horse’s results – its even worse when you think about it as Johnson would have had to have taken his drugs in such a way as to try to avoid detection (probably then not getting their absolute full effects) but Big Brown can be given his whenever and wherever best suits.
 
No more seriously than you can take High Chaparral's win at Santa Anita whilst on performance-enhancing drugs that are banned in the rest of the world.

There's no doubt that steroids should be banned. But until they are, I don't necessarily blame anyone for using them.
 
Dutrow has been banned before for using illegal medications as well, as have Steve Asmussen (who served a six month ban) and Todd Pletcher.

I would say rampant is quite an understatement.
 
Not to mention Bobby Frankel (or Dr Frankelstein as Willoughby calls him), and Patrick Biancone (cobra venom. yes, cobra venom.)
 
Originally posted by Gareth Flynn@May 20 2008, 02:22 PM
No more seriously than you can take High Chaparral's win at Santa Anita whilst on performance-enhancing drugs that are banned in the rest of the world.

There's no doubt that steroids should be banned. But until they are, I don't necessarily blame anyone for using them.
Click to expand...
Completely agree that win is tainted, but the difference of course being High Chaparral proved his ability time and time again without the aid of such drugs.

Whats more High Chaparral would have been racing presumably with bute and salix. Both drugs and both helpful for horses performing for various reasons but he would not have been racing on a performance enhancing steriod like Winstrol who's benefits are only displayed after an period of time and training.
 
Tainted for me too even if he does win the Triple Crown - sad to say


Posted elsewhere this morning, but of interest here perhaps - apologies if I've posted them before!
There is a massive debate going on in the US now, with racing under the media spotlight:

This is the most recent relevant article on steroid use in 'The Bloodhorse' which is the premier US publication on the thoroughbred:

http://news.bloodhorse.com/article/45322.htm

Fairly typical articles from the New York Times [sentiments and concern repeated in other mainstream papers]:

Editorial: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/06/opinion/06tue4.html

From Breeder Jim Squires:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/05/sports/o...rts/05rail.html
 
Who knows how many other winners of the American Classics were also given steroids?

The important point is how is it affectingthe soundness of the breed? If horses give enhanced performances because of the drugs they're on, there are two main considerations in my book.

1. How would they have compared racing without the drugs and would they be as valuable stud/paddock prospects if they'd raced 'clean'? Could be a major reason why so many prmising looking stallions fail in the US

and

2. I would be extremely wary of the risk to fertility for racehorses on a continued period of steroid use. Further, the coCktail of drugs some of those horses get given may well have a long term impact on producing defective or mutative genes.

Interesting how many high profile horses recently retired to stud have had fertility problems, isn't it?
 
Originally posted by Galileo@May 22 2008, 09:00 AM
Just because everyone else is doing it does not mean its not tainted.
Click to expand...
Virtually every major American race won by a horse on bute or lasix is also tainted then?
 
Originally posted by Gareth Flynn+May 22 2008, 10:13 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Gareth Flynn @ May 22 2008, 10:13 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Galileo@May 22 2008, 09:00 AM
Just because everyone else is doing it does not mean its not tainted.
Click to expand...
Virtually every major American race won by a horse on bute or lasix is also tainted then? [/b][/quote]
Certainly are, how can they not be? But the use of steroids in particular are real performance enhancers.
 
They're all performance enhancers.

If you think the whole sport in the US is institutionally tainted due to rubbish rules that allow the use of performance enhancing drugs then you probably wouldn't get too many arguments.

But singling out Big Brown's achievements as being tainted when (as far as we know) they were not aided in any way by the breaking of any rules - as they stand - is simply unfair.
 
Originally posted by Colin Phillips@May 22 2008, 09:40 AM
......Songs, are you suggesting horses such as George Washington might have been on steroids at some point?
Click to expand...
If you read my post carefully, Colin, I do say winners of the American Classics - don't think GW won one of those! And further down the post, stallions in the US....

Nice try, though!
 
I thought your last para/sentence was separate from the rest of the post and was referring to world-wide infertility problems! :P

What do you mean by "nice try"? shrug:: :D
 
Originally posted by Gareth Flynn@May 22 2008, 10:29 AM
They're all performance enhancers.

If you think the whole sport in the US is institutionally tainted due to rubbish rules that allow the use of performance enhancing drugs then you probably wouldn't get too many arguments.

But singling out Big Brown's achievements as being tainted when (as far as we know) they were not aided in any way by the breaking of any rules - as they stand - is simply unfair.
Click to expand...
Yes all are technically performance enhancers. Bute and salix certainly have shown to enhance a performance by masking or hiding problems (bleeding, soundness problems etc) while steroids are used to build up and improve the horse’s systems.

Yes Big Brown is only following the system that’s there…but James Willoughby gave the stat of 60% of horses race on steroids in the States…disadvantage to the 40% who don’t if that’s true?

Curlin at least proved his brilliance off drugs at Dubai…twice. Just leaves a very sour taste the more I think of it.
 
Back
Top