Chief Stipe

By "here" do you mean Queensland? If so how come it didn't catch the Croc? How many horse's have been scratched due to "pre-race test" irregularity? Detect "countless drugs" - which ones do you count? You can't test them all. Some drugs if prescribed by a Vet for therapeutic reasons are OK. So not only will the tests for a predefined list of drugs need to be processed they may also need to be compared against each stables vet list. What about cross contamination and quality control errors? Who calibrates the machines? Who operates them? NZ cannot afford a Gold Standard "pre-race testing" regime. Sure take bloods BEFORE a race of all horses in Black Type races because some performance enhancing drugs have short half lives i.e. by the time a race is run and a swab has been taken levels may have dropped below threshold. TCO a case in point. There is a limit to how far you should take "pre-race testing." The eventual endpoint is a closed system (horses locked in security guarded stables and every movement recorded and measured) like Hong Kong with an expensive lab processing tests to an evidential level. Be careful what you wish for. If you have a spare 10 mins check out this video. The question that Mullis poses at the beginning is well worth posing for racing.

That's what worries me with the new "Super RIU" being formed. The Police and the Judiciary will be in the same tent. That will may lead to the only way to get justice is to go through the Court system. That will favour the big stables and hurt the small ones.

So only one jurisdiction? Hong Kong which operates a "closed system." I assume you mean "pre-race test" - at what stage do you "pre-race test" before a race? One hour, one day, two days, three days, a week? It takes time to process the tests particularly to a degree that would be evidential. The "event" that caused the positive in this latest case may have occurred any time after the "pre-race test".

Perhaps but which jurisdiction pre-tests every race?

I agree with your sentiment to a point. However you are assigning the tenor of a news article as if Te Akau wrote it. As for declarations of innocence "early on in the piece" I think it is accurate to say that most accused always attest to that. What did you want "no comment" or "yes we are guilty"? I agree about fairness and transparency. But isn't it up to the RIU as much as any of the parties to provide the detail and transparency? You know as well as I do that in this industry rumours abound and quickly grow their own legs! Considered by whom? The counter argument is would the industry be better off without Te Akau? Personally I think it would be. Just because they run an exemplar of an operation why should they be "levelled"?

Which should be recorded in their records. It isn't illegal to administer morphine for therapeutic reasons if prescribed by a Vet. I wish when they write these "news" articles they give us some facts. For example what was the level detected? Does anyone know how many positives Te Akau has returned over the years of their operation? I can't recall off hand any.

Equally premature to convict them.

I don't know how the testing protocol works but there are a number of morphine synthetic type analogues e.g. Tramadol. However personally I doubt that the contamination has come from feed because as you elude to there wouldn't be any feed additive that would have morphine in it. The "feed contamination" angle is not the only possible cross contamination source but is the one that everyone seems to be picking up on. It has happened before and will happen again where cross contamination occurs in the testing lab.

Or Vet. However these things can accumulate in people's medicine cabinets at home over time. Who knows. But I imagine Te Akau have impeccable records - afterall it isn't as if they are not under constant scrutiny.

Yep. All good points. Unless you put your horses under 24/7 Guard and in a Closed System then these types of things will happen. Quite frankly I'm surprised it doesn't happen more often.

Well that narrows it down to about 30! Which Nemesis?

Where did you hear that one from?

Certainly things have moved on Joe in terms of the science of feeding an elite athlete be it human or equine. Some stables regularly take blood samples and adjust feeds accordingly. I remember when I was in my teens and a keen athlete. Electrolyte supplements were the "new" thing to aid performance and recovery. I think one brand was Sustalyte. At about the same time we started adding it to our horse feeds. LOL it was cheaper for me to use the horse stuff than buy from the Chemist! Now you wouldn't dream of not putting electrolyte replacements into feeds.

Perhaps. But in my opinion this an issue the whole sporting world is grappling with. In my opinion you can no longer have a "zero tolerance" threshold. The testing systems are just way too sensitive that false positives and cross-contamination can become the norm. You need to look at thresholds that relate to outcomes - what level of substance x results in an advantage? You only have to look at what happened (still happening) with Cobalt. Peter Moody being the classic case. I was leaning towards him not being a cheat until recently but now I'm convinced. The reason for that is some research I did into the tests that are being used for Covid-19.

There you go Tesio - I assume you are inferring I have a bias. What does "ever having sat on a Jury" have to do with this Topic? Can you elucidate a bit better what you are actually trying to say?

Welcome Blackson. You raise a good question regarding the feed. No doubt a stable such as Te Akau will have quite customised feeds. Large stables that have the resources will use science to customise a feed regime on an individual horse basis. So it is conceivable (but unlikely) that while making up one horse's feed another was contaminated. It is possible that no other individual horse's feed was contaminated. The key thing here is "cross-contamination" - the source of that could be a number of factors and not just feed. It could be a Vet stuff up.

Why is it relevant in the context of this Topic? Blind Freddy can see the reason for your posting this "direct question"! If I say "Yes" then the inference will be that what I post is just protecting them. If I say "No" then the inference will be "oh he must be friends with Davo" (quote from Thomass). Either way it is an attempt to infer bias. The thing that really pisses me off about New Zealand is that we are really quick to cut down the Tall Poppy.

That is a debate worth having as is the whole testing regime and its associated protocols. That's not suggesting that the current system is being cheated but that it may no longer be fit for purpose especially in terms of Quality Assurance. Bear in mind also that we need to be aware of balancing the cost of running the industry. Anything that increases the costs will be detrimental.

You consider this a "constructive" comment? Whether I do or don't have shares in a Te Akau horse is irrelevant to this Topic or any other for that matter. Would I consider purchasing a share in a Te Akau yearling? If I could afford it of course I would. You would have to be daft not to consider it given their success year in year out. Having said that I would do so with my eyes open after years of experience with the industry.

I'm not making a personal attack however there is a definite slant to your posting which I'm sure others have noticed. For example you first post on this topic was this: Is that comment actually constructive? In terms of your criticism about being constructive you will note that I posted the NZ Herald article on this Topic. That was to provide a basis for informed debate rather than the piece of fiction written by our resident novelist. But be that as it may I can post on BOAY just like anyone else. I will admit from time to time I will post an alternative viewpoint in attempt to provide some balance. The rationale to that approach is to try and stop Topics descending down the rabbit hole of alleged conspiracies and cover ups.

Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.

That's it this Topic is closed. Thom-arse once again you take things to a new low level. No point in fictionalising or sensationalising something that is before the courts. The reality is that due to the scourge of P and other drugs that is burning through our society the industry has lost a very talented horseman. Sure he has made some wrong life choices but there is nothing to be gained by putting the boot in. In my opinion it doesn't help that we have an industry where it is getting harder and harder to make a living in through continuing mismanagement.

Hardly "standing in applause" - that was the fiction!

Huey you are going off half cocked. You regularly put the boot into Te Akau. From the rules:

There you go Huey - bought right into the NZHerald headline.