Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

re: Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

Giddyup — Tue, 13 Sep 2011 11:41:32 GMT

For his part in the LAT fiasco the industry presents Pletcher with the Eclipse award. Is it any wonder fans of the NFL, NASCAR or MLB look at thoroughbred racing's attempts to gain mainstream respect and giggle?

re: Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

Dennis — Mon, 12 Sep 2011 16:50:18 GMT

Personally,I would like to think that John Veitch is a respectable

man, and not knowing him, only saw him at New York racetracks training

horses,I always respected him, as he carried himself as most of us should, and appears to be positive

and generally a good person.

a few years ago, John Veitch was the chief operation steward at the same Kentucky Circuit, and that year during the Kentucky Derby, he had all derby runners subjected to a saliva test, and no one gave him credit for this, he is a good steward, and should not be blamed for this Life At Ten "Fiasco"

this is your homework racing fans..

just look up the year when John Veitch had these tests conducted, to prove my argument..probably the year when Pletcher ran 5 horses, in that year's Kentucky Derby, and they all finished off the board

like 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th & 9th...

do we all now remember?

John Veitch is a great Steward, and the only thing why they are now fighting him could be when he initiated those drug tests before

the Derby,and they were not happy, and were awaiting for something to try to hang John Veitch with, but even this cannot find John Veitch Guilty of not doing his Job properly, and it now seems that someone is carrying a grudge for John Veitch, apparently one of those in high places, whose horse was tested, and want to now return the favor to John Veitch, but I am

in JOhn Veitch's corner and as a public Steward, I will now declare

all clear for John Veitch, Mr.John, have a nice dinner this evening, and keep smiling,as they cannot touch you, for their own

incompetence, and failure to report to the track veterinarians

(the Jockey riding this Horse)

that the horse was sick, or ate too

much, and had a full stomach, and probably had no interest to race on that day, and therefore should advise to have the Filly scratched..this now by me., ends this......

and sends this witch hunt back to the Barn where this all started..

re: Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

Bellwether — Sun, 11 Sep 2011 09:36:27 GMT

ps...& TY WILDKAT FROM THIS CAMP...TIME IS ON OUR SIDE...

re: Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

Bellwether — Sun, 11 Sep 2011 09:33:30 GMT

"SHE WAS A BIT OFF"...HOW BLIND CAN humans BEE???...AFTER ALL THIS TIME IT STILL $MEEL$ VERY BAD HEAR N VIRGINIA!!!..."IT WAS A PUBLIC $CREW N"!!! LIVE ON TV BABY!!!...ty...

re: Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

nedjohnsonsux — Sun, 11 Sep 2011 02:06:54 GMT

Scapegoat my gluteus maximus. He knew she wasn't right and didn't scratch her. He wasn't bold or noble, he was at best lazy and inept and at worst crooked. Either way he should be summarily dismissed as he defrauded the public and hurt a defenseless animal he had a duty to protect.

re: Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

Paula Higgins — Sun, 11 Sep 2011 01:45:42 GMT

Well said Wildkat. Nice to see your comments.

re: Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

WildKat — Sat, 10 Sep 2011 19:57:54 GMT

I, as a Trainer, have never let my horses run without making sure they were ready. In March I had one scratched as he banged a shin on the stall gate at Turfway and it was "suspect". Heartbreaking as he was, as he was ready to run. It took a lot to get him there! But I chose to call in 2 other vets after the state vet looked him over, and chose to scratch. That was MY job as a trainer! End result, the injury was minor but could have been major if he had run. I have even scratched one 2 yrs ago that had a hair line fracture that other vets had missed, but I had noticed something slightly off. There was no heat or swelling, but I couldn't put my finger on it. It took an old vet with sharp eyes and mind to find it (fracture was only 2 cm long). I had to smile as I knew if he had ran that next day, his cannon bone would have split and I was able to prevent it. It's not always easy to catch everything, but a trainer makes the call on most counts. Better to put the horse on the Vets list than to risk hurting the horse.

re: Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

Paula Higgins — Sat, 10 Sep 2011 19:01:14 GMT

Dawn in MN don't agree that Veitch bears responsibility for this at all. One person "should have done something" but didn't and he has gotten off without so much as a mention. The other one got fined, but the fine was excessive. Veitch had very little information to make any decision one way or another. They need to look at procedures in place whenever there is a question about a horse's fitness. As it is currently, it is too vague and not quantifiable. Make the guidelines/chain of responsibility crystal clear, formalize them on paper, make sure a vet. has input, and put the horse first. That would be a positive outcome from all this and one everyone could respect. The sport could do itself alot of good by using this as learning experience to improve the safety of the horses and the profile of horse racing instead of prolonging this witch hunt.

re: Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

Matthew W — Sat, 10 Sep 2011 17:48:19 GMT

It was incredible television, I watched it live and was fortunate to have the winner of the race--how that's not the jock's fault I cannot fathom! He SAID she was NOT right--then he walked her out of there--and she's a speed horse, so it looked like this: Jock tells everybody his horse isn't right/jock loads into the gate/jock procedes to take her out of the race immediately! I mean, we're talking about a professional--right?! Then BE one--Johnny V needs to own this, and own it ALL! And that's Johnny V--not John V!

re: Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

SUNNY FARM — Sat, 10 Sep 2011 13:54:30 GMT

ALEX'S BIG FAN; Excellent comment.

The original racing rule was NOT followed. IE: Trainer is responsible.

In lieu of that I am thinking : "Why not fine everyone involved, from the owner on down & make that $5K each party.''

Give the money to B.C. charity, Disabled Jockeys fund et al.

It would avoid a lot of hassles and ensure that everyone paid a small part in the fine AND the blame.

Next time enforce the rules and laws that have always been in place.

re: Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

Dawn in MN — Sat, 10 Sep 2011 13:22:52 GMT

Mr. Schulman,

Thank you for keeping this situation in the spotlight. I was appalled when they loaded Life At Ten (LAT) in the gate that day. Even I could see that something was wrong. She did not look like a filly ready to run anywhere, much less in the Ladies Classic.

Almost a year later and still nobody steps forward to say what was truly wrong with Life At Ten. Someone must know, surely a valuable filly like her should have been worked up by a vet to Identify Her Ailment especially after that fiasco. I seem to remember that Life At Ten took a looong time off after that, and I watched her first race back just hoping to see the same filly we saw before the Breeders Cup. Someone DOES know what happened, and the real investigation should start there, with discovery. What was really wrong with her?

I don’t even think that Velazquez should have been fined until the truth was discovered, like someone said I would like to see LAT’s REAL vet record. At least Velazquez had the sense to take the fine and move on. I have always maintained that Velazquez would have been under too much pressure to race her, and would have been vilified if he called for the scratch. The fact that he did not prevail, or whatever you want to call it, was the best call made that day.

Before that day I didn’t have an opinion about Pletcher one way or the other. I just saw him as one of a few household-name, big-time trainers. Based on the size of his stable he probably delegates most of the actual training to his staff. Pletcher saw her in the saddling paddock, and I have always maintained that he is responsible.

I stated in a comment earlier this year that I don’t see

***What Part of Training Involves Sitting There In The Stands, In An Expensive Suit, While A Sick Horse Goes To The Gate***?

It really burns me up that Pletcher has gone unpunished for this. I felt this way before I learned, in your article today, that state law that holds him responsible.

Veitch has already shown class because he has not thrown Pletcher under the bus where he belongs. Nobody loves a lawyer unless they need one, and right now even 50K in legal fees has not discovered the truth.

I am with Barry Irwin regarding politics on this one, and steve shahinian makes some good points, too;

“…authorities should instead revisit the protocols that attend scratching horses during the last 30 minutes before a race to see whether a repeat of the underlying event can be avoided…”

Dennis said it best; “the game needs a scrub brush, with powerful detergents, and good clean rinsing water...”

Slew pointed out another thing in writing that the situation was “mis-management of the BC by CD.”

About the grooms and hot-walkers, they knew that something was wrong. I bet they even told Pletcher, or whoever Pletcher delegated to do his job. The problem grooms and hot-walkers face is the same one Velazquez faced, taking a stand to scratch her could have cost them more than they could afford.

Sceptre-I don’t agree with everything you wrote, but I do grasp your train of logic, and while it isn’t the light at the end of the tunnel, you make a good point in saying that Veitch should have done something, even if it was wrong.

re: Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

Alex'sBigFan — Sat, 10 Sep 2011 05:37:15 GMT

Lenny your blog brought out some great people. We got Barry Irwin of Team Valor, we got bloodstock agent Steve Shahinian who picked Soldat, we got a veterinarian who posted. Excellent views here. We all seem to agree the trainer needs to assume responsiblity and draconian laws need to be reviewed.

Time for some proactive thinking in the industry instead of reactions to fiascos.

re: Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

Paula Higgins — Sat, 10 Sep 2011 05:11:02 GMT

@Karen In Texas, yes, I saw that about Dr.Bentz. ITA with your point totally. @sceptre, the problem with your point of view is that it isn't logical. You jump to where Veitch enters the scene, peripherally, and ignore everything leading up to it. You cannot absolve everyone else of their responsibilities to LAT when they were aware there was some kind of problem. As Lenny entitled this thread, he is being made a SCAPEGOAT. He is not the one who is primarily respsonsible for this situation. He did not even SEE the horse. He had no physical contact with the horse whatsoever, unlike the others involved. They noted something was wrong. Veitch had every right to expect them to act in the best interest of the horse as jockey and trainer. Since they felt the horse was o.k. to run why should he have been the one to say "No?" He expected them to make the appropriate decision and had no reason at that time to think they wouldn't. Whatever information he had was nebulous at best (from the t.v. for goodness sakes) and not enough to make any decision one way or another. In the sequence of events, Veitch was down the totem pole. To single him out of all the people involved, as one of the two people responsible for this debacle, is ludicrous. It's like the powers that be said eeny, meeny, miney, mo, out goes Y-O-U and that's how they decided. What rubbish.

re: Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

Needler in Virginia — Sat, 10 Sep 2011 03:23:21 GMT

Gin, you're right; Barry Irwin is, indeed, Barry of Team Valor. Love him or hate him, he's not afraid to say what he thinks, and for that he gets huge props from me.

For Pete's sake, guys, at the end of the day Todd Pletcher is being paid HUGE bucks to do what he does, and if THIS is how he cares for his horses, then I'll send mine to a NOT big-box trainer. . Pletcher proved, that BC weekend, if not since, that being a big-box trainer only guarantees that your horses will live in big barns. I seem to remember that he had another favorite going off on Saturday... errmm, oh, yes! That one was Quality Road who ran only a bit better than Life at Ten ran on Friday.

Since when do stewards bear the responsibility for the condition of horses leaving their stalls and heading to the saddling paddock or walking ring? Todd Pletcher's job is training and caring for Life at Ten, Quality Road, Flibbertyjibit Sam, et. al., AND to do the best job for his owners and horses that he can do. THAT'S ALL. If this is his best, then racing is pretty sad, after all.

LIke I said before: cheers and safe trips to almost all..........

re: Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

Alex'sBigFan — Sat, 10 Sep 2011 02:55:26 GMT

Turnbackthealarm,

I said the groom's word should be considered. I don't care what language they voice their concerns in but if they notice something not right I meant they should speak up and alert the trainer of a possible unhealthy situation. No one better than them to know the horse's gait, character, demeanor, temperament, breathing pattern, etc. I didn't mean they run up to the stewards and suggest a scratch, I meant their viewpoint needs to be considered via the respective trainer. The bottom line is a revision is needed in the rule. Lasix, itself, seems to be the main culprit and it's side effects and reaction on LAT were overlooked by the responsible parties, trainer and then jockey.

re: Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

sceptre — Sat, 10 Sep 2011 02:16:35 GMT

Ok, you're Veitch-chief steward. You receive word from a reliable source who reports that JV has told the TV audience that LAT isn't right. Well, what then to do? Do you simply scratch her?-no, since the evidence received is insufficient. Do you simply ignore it-as Veitch in fact did? No. Do you try to accumulate more evidence? This would seem the logical approach. Now, do you assume that the on-track vets would have spotted the problem? No, that's an absurd assumption. Rather, you then alert them to "investigate" the matter-which Veitch failed to do...Once Veitch received that heads-up the ball was in his court-and as cheif steward he had the last word. Instead, Veitch chose to ignore the warning-and do nothing. While others involved may, or may not be also culpable, it is crystal clear that Veitch chose to risk the well-being of LAT. He is not a scapegoat, and deserves to be held accoutable for his INACTION. The fact that others, by their inaction, may have placed Veitch in this position does not, in any way, absolve or lessen the flavor of Veitch's irresponsible behavior. For the life of me, I can't understand why so many find it difficult to grasp this train of logic.

re: Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

Paula Higgins — Sat, 10 Sep 2011 00:34:36 GMT

GKM that was a hypothetical comment about being on a jury. If I was called to one, and truly held a firm conviction either way, then I would tell them up front. It doesn't mean you will automatically be diqualifed either. There have been several high profile criminal trials where jurors have declared their positions and still made the jury. Go figure. PipeDope, comments are not incompetent, people are.

re: Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

Jon — Sat, 10 Sep 2011 00:30:57 GMT

@Karen in Texas

Thanks for the link

@ Paula

I agree with your point to my post, but, just to it clear something mentioned there I have never mentioned grooms/hot walkers ever in any of my posts. Yes there are some posts that mention them, but, these people (grooms, hot walkers, etc.) they job is to report to the trainer. In something to this reference I have mentioned that the track vets. Should have reported to John Veitch if they had noticed something wrong with LAT the help him make a decision, but, whether they did or not I'm not sure.

re: Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

Karen in Texas — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 23:39:04 GMT

Paula H.----Yes, you're welcome-- when I linked the report I noticed something I missed when it was first issued. Did you see where the KHRC vet, Dr. Bentz, reported "a subtle abnormality in her gait" pre-race? Later, the group of pre-race examiners met and determined it was not necessary to re-examine her. Interesting, and definitely not Veitch's fault.

re: Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

Runfast159 — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 22:47:39 GMT

Even though I really believe that Velasquez should have voiced his concern with the track vets and had them make the call I'm not sure it would have changed the overall outcome. Even though Life At Ten wasn't acting like herself, and didn't warm up like normal, that wouldn't really have been grounds for a vet scratch without any obvious signs of illness or lameness.

In the end I believe the responsibility for this particular situation lies mostly with Velasquez and Pletcher, the two who knew she "wasn't right". You have to put the horses welfare as the number one priority regardless of everything else. No one scratches a perfectly fine animal out of a Grade I race so what really was the problem here?

I can only fault Veitch for not sending her to the test barn, but it doesn't sound like that is a punishable offense, just a lack of judgement.

These horses, and the betting public, deserve better than what LAT got on BC day last year.

re: Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

Slew — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 21:43:46 GMT

After watching what happened in the BC Ladies, my personal opinion was that the trainer, the jockey, the track vets, the stewards, and the lack of a post race drug test were all responsible. I considered it mis-management of the BC by CD.

Then it took a full commission how long to decide the same thing, and then turn around and say, "Let's just convict the jockey and the steward. It's just too confusing for us to do anything fair. Let's just pretend we care about the bettors by dragging this out."

Looks like a black eye for the BC, CD, and the KHRC.

re: Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

PipeDope — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 21:43:13 GMT

Why must we constantly deal with incompetent news reporting and incompetent comments here?

The Life at Ten incident DID NOT cost the public any money, no matter what "ezbreeze" said up above. Any idiot knows that wagering on horse races is pari-mutuel, and thus the net effect on the public was exactly zero dollars and zero cents.

(in fact, the public potentially gained money as the result of the incident, when considering breakage)

Nowthen, the only wrong in the whole picture was the ESPN talking heads (Gary Stevens in particular) having told a world-wide audience about his having "just gotten the word" from a jockey (Velazquez) who then appeared to that audience to go out and 'stiff' his mount.

Velazquez himself did no wrong in protecting an animal who was unwilling to perform to her abilities. Veitch certainly did no wrong in playing by the rules, and in improvising when and where those rules allowed.

Lets stop pussy-footing around and address the real issues in the Life At Ten incident. To not do so is to continue to allow horse racing to remain the mockery which it has become in modern times.

re: Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

Paula Higgins — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 21:43:10 GMT

Karen in Texas thanks for the link. Read the report and it is pretty clear where the responsibility lies. Pletcher, McCarthy (if Pletcher saw something amiss you can be sure he did too) and Velazquez. Really surprised they never did blood work until he next day (Pletcher's vet.) Unbelievable they are going after Veitch for anything.

re: Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

GKM — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 20:34:13 GMT

I don’t know all the facts and I’m not just talking about the horse facts, but the money facts, and/or something someone might not want to be exposed to the public. I don’t know what these things might be but I do know these things could be. The trainer is responsible unless there are underlying factors such as someone told them what to do and held something over their head so they had to do it. Paula Higgins, I agree with you except for your statement, quote “If I was on the jury the KHRC would be toast.” I have gotten out of jury duty several times by calling them after I received the letter to serve and asked to be taking off the list. When they asked me the reason why I told them I have already made up my mind and I think the denfent is guilty as hell. I hope that John fights, wins , cost them a lot of money, and exposes some of the practices that go on. I believe it’s all about the money and the secrets.

re: Scapegoat - By Lenny Shulman

Paula Higgins — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 18:50:26 GMT

@Jon, I understand your point and I agree with basically what you are saying. He should have pulled her up right away. My only point is that she didn't break down. But clearly she hasn't been the same horse since. As for the fine being tax deductable, it shouldn't be because it was techincally a fine and not a donation. I am not sure it is deductible. That is a good question for a tax attorney. I know some people are down on Todd Pletcher and I don't think he has taken ownership on this issue either. It makes him look bad. But in general, I believe he takes good care of his horses. I don't think this is a mistake he will make again. The grooms and hotwalkers are absolutely not responsible for scratching this horse. The trainer should ask for their input since they work most closely with the horse, and use that information to make his/her decision.

@sceptre, Veitch was not the first person aware there was something wrong. Pletcher and Velazquez were. They have the primary responsibility for their horse. The KHRC should not be going after people who are peripherally involved. But if they insist on the "shotgun" approach, they should be going after everyone, including the vets., Pletcher et. al, which they are not. So, they do the targeted approach and go after a few individuals. In that case, they should be looking at people with the primary responsibility for the horse's welfare. How Pletcher escaped responsibility, and Veitch doesn't, defies logic. Something about this smells bad. It should be dropped now. Here's what I would say to Linda Underwood: the majority of people here think this is wrong. Do you really want to go to a trial where people just like us will probably come to the same conclusion? I would think not.