Masochistic Officially DQ’d From BC Sprint; Ineligible To Compete In 2017 Breeders’ Cup

by | 01.10.2017 | 11:41am
Masochistic, seen winning the G1 Triple Bend

The Breeders' Cup issued the following statement regarding the ruling to disqualify Masochistic from his second-place finish in the 2016 G1 Breeders' Cup Sprint:

Breeders' Cup Limited announced today that it has notified trainer Ron Ellis and the owners of Masochistic, Jay Em Ess Stable and Los Pollos Hermanos Racing, of action taken pursuant to its Prohibited Substance Rule and Convicted Trainer Rule. As a result of the issuance of a ruling by the Santa Anita Board of Stewards disqualifying Masochistic from a second-place finish in the Breeders' Cup Sprint and redistributing the purse based upon a positive test finding for the anabolic steroid stanozolol, the following actions have been taken.

As a first violation of the Prohibited Substance Rule in a Breeders' Cup World Championships race, the horse's trainer, Ron Ellis, and all horses directly or indirectly in his care will be ineligible to participate in the Breeders' Cup World Championships in 2017. Breeders' Cup rules prohibit the transfer of horses in Mr. Ellis's barn to any another person associated with Mr. Ellis for the purpose of competing in the Breeders' Cup.

Under the Convicted Trainer Rule, Masochistic will be ineligible to compete in the 2017 Breeders' Cup World Championships.

Breeders' Cup President and CEO Craig Fravel added that: “Today's actions affirm our determination to conduct the Breeders' Cup under the highest standards of integrity and in a fair competitive environment for all participants. Looking forward, we will be modifying our rules and protocols for out-of-competition testing to ensure that no horse testing positive for any anabolic steroid while in training or competition will be permitted to race in the Breeders' Cup. There is no place for the administration of steroids to horses in training and racing, and we will be working closely with regulatory authorities to give the full effect to that principle in the Breeders' Cup.”

The applicable Breeders' Cup rules can be found on the Breeders' Cup Members website on Pages 82-83 of the 2016 Breeders' Cup Horsemen's Information Guide.

Statement from James L. Gagliano, president and chief operating officer of The Jockey Club:

“The Jockey Club applauds Breeders' Cup Ltd. for its strong stance against anabolic steroids in Thoroughbred racing and training and fully supports measures that will help eliminate steroids from our sport.

“Until that happens, we ask that regulators in all 38 racing jurisdictions adopt the Racing Medication & Testing Consortium's model rule for out-of-competition testing. The rule mandates that horses treated with any anabolic steroid spend at least six months on a vet's list, therefore making them ineligible to race.

“We also hope that more racing jurisdictions make use of The Jockey Club's Graded Stakes Out-of-Competition Testing Grant Fund, which has been available since 2014 but has been severely underutilized.

“In addition, The Jockey Club, through the Coalition for Horse Racing Integrity, will continue to advocate for federal legislation that will lead to the adoption of a national, uniform standard for drugs and medication in American Thoroughbred racing.”

  • Regrettably this entire fiasco could have been avoided. Hopefully some good will come out of the mishegoss.

    • David Juffet

      I told Ron at the end of the line when the truth comes out he’ll be back on top where he belongs. We both know the truth Barry. This industry needs a major shakeup I hope this helps.

  • Victoria Doyle

    Well. They were stupid to run him in the first place considering he was testing positive just days before.

    • longtimehorsewoman

      Yes, Mr. Ellis knew he tested positive shortly before the BC and chose to gamble. He lost his gamble. And he should pay the price. Steroids are proven performance enhancers and should not be allowed. I don’t feel sorry for him, And perhaps this will help clean up racing.

      • storm

        I would presume that the owners forced Elis into running the horse.

        • Arrogate

          They say the opposite, they left it up to Ellis. Tossed his butt right under the bus. Now of course the BC won’t dare ban all their horses….

          • Lehane

            Of course they would say that.

  • Noelle

    I feel sorry for the horse. Why should his reputation and future be damaged because his connections broke the rules? That doesn’t make sense.

    • Ron

      The horse has no idea that he was banned.

      • Noelle

        Well of course he doesn’t, but the life of any racehorse is contingent to some degree on his success at the track. Why shouldn’t Masochistic be allowed to go to new owners, a new trainer, and have his chance to succeed fairly? The cloud should be over the connections, not the horse.

        • Eric

          They ban the horse so that owners are discouraged from employing chemists (I don’t think Ellis is a chemist – but that’s why the rule is in place). The owner of the horse shares in the punishment if the owner can’t run the horse.

          If Masochistic were to be sold, I actually agree with you that there is no reason to ban the horse. As long as the sale is legit, and not to someone like a family member of the original owner. That part could get sticky.

    • ctgreyhound

      At times I believe it’s a nonsensical world. In sports, like other venues, those that have nothing to do whatsoever with breaking the rules fall victim to the outcome. Witness college football where teams are ruled ineligible to participate in bowl games, etc for what seems like eons due to the sins of others.

    • ben

      Because the advanteous effects are incredably long, in humans up to two yrs

  • gregrobertson

    Unreal that you can play by the rules, follow directions and be hanged like this. Considering the multiple violation histories of some of the “premier trainers” out there running as we speak. If your going to get serious, then get serious.. Start with oh hmmm.. lets say any trainer with 10 med violations banned for life. You know who they are.. You see them wining triple crown and Breeders Cup races every year. Let’s lifetime ban the owners who intentionally run with these trainers and look the other way till it’s picture time.

    • Eric

      I agree, particularly with your first sentence. Meanwhile, the CHRB, which established the 60 day withdrawal period for horses that receive this treatment, does nothing. To protect the bettors and the horsemen, shouldn’t they see this example of a horse that needed more than 60 days to become clear of the steroid, and increase the 60 days to 75? The CHRB’s guidelines were faulty, but its the trainer that gets punished and hanged in the court of public opinion. And eventually this is going to happen again.

      The trainers that should be banned for life are the ones that have positives for medications that are completely banned, have no known therapeutic value, and have no business appearing in a horse. I think some of the medication positives that you see for run of the mill stuff like bute are similar to this Ellis case, where the trainer and the vet treated the horse with a legal medication based on CHRB guidelines, and the horse came up positive anyway.

      • togahombre

        other jurisdictions address this kind of thing by requiring a clean test to enter

    • ben

      Maybe towards the CHRB rules, but not to the BC rules. And entering the starting gates you ought to know the rules.

      The trainer took just the wrong route and lost.

    • Bein

      If Ron Ellis played by the rules, he wouldn’t have gotten a bad test. This isn’t a hanging. It’s called consequences.

      • Mr J

        Of course. you can’t mete out punishments by whether you like a guy or not

      • Eric

        Ellis DID play by the rules. I don’t think a lot of people are understanding this – treating a horse with stanozolol is LEGAL in California, and the CHRB is responsible for establishing guidelines for this treatment. The horse was legally treated by a vet, and the treatment was reported to the CHRB. The rules say you can’t run a horse back for 60 days after this treatment. The horse ran back 68 days later and still had traces of the steroid in his system. Clearly the CHRB did not establish a safe, accurate withdrawal period for Stanozolol, and its the owner/trainer that are paying the price for the CHRB’s failure. How, exactly, did Ellis not play by the rules?

    • Mr J

      Then you want Art Sherman banned for life. I disagree. Ellis didn’t play by the rules. he’s lucky he’s only banned for 1 year

    • Arrogate

      Agree on owners receiving the BC ban along with trainer and horse. That’ll never happen though.

  • Jack Frazier

    Again I will state that the true victim of this is Masochistic. He had no say, and there are most likely other horses in California that are being victimized. I looked on the CHRB Website and found a few on the medication vet’s list but it is nearly impossible to find the Confidential List with the names of those horses who are currently training on steroids. If someone knows how, please post it. Enough of this madness. Just do the right thing and eliminate all drugs except therapeutic and horses on those should be ineligible to compete for a lengthy time. It won’t happen. Look at how the virus outbreak in Louisiana decimated the fields. Imagine what would happen if this complete ban on drugs were implemented. Therein lies the rub. I know this is apples to oranges but metaphorically, it fits.

    • snazzygirl

      Masochistic was hardly a victim – he felt good enough to win the race. The horse only knows whether he feels good or not. There’s no ‘victimization’ of the horse here. Victimization only occurs when the entity knows he’s being victimized. Other people may label him a victim, but that’s their viewpoint only, not necessarily the viewpoint of the object (whether animal or human) in question. At any rate, I repeat myself – horse racing has never and will never be a level playing field IF everyone wants to ensure that the ‘bettors’ are betting on horses that all have an even chance of winning a race (as if that’s reality, which it isn’t). There are times, however much everyone will dispute this, that steroids are therapeutic drugs. The issue then becomes how much is circulating in the horse’s system at the time of a race. Withdrawal times of drugs in horses vary greatly – a trainer would be foolish not to figure out withdrawal times for a particular horse in his barn whether it’s clenbuterol or steroids or aspirin or penicillin. I say it’s far more dangerous for the physical well-being of a horse to run on cortisone injections over steroids. If you people really want to prevent breakdowns during a race, cortisone injections should be banned….and they are not.

      • Richard Holmes

        I agree with you 100%. The vast majority of breakdowns are caused by injecting ankles. Injecting ankles should be totally illegal. With regards to steroids, I am generally against them. For a while there (around 5-6 years ago), their use was getting way out of hand. There were some guys giving horses steroids weekly. It was insane. The current rules are much stricter but still are too lenient. If they are going to allow steroids at all, no horse should be allowed to get them more than once or twice a year, and it should be at least 6 months before a race. I’m not necessarily in favor of that, but if steroids are going to be allowed at all, they should be used extremely sparingly and at least 6 months before a race.

        • snazzygirl

          Injecting ankles and injecting knees, which (in my experience) was even more prevalent than injecting ankles. A slab fracture of the knee is far more deadly to the welfare of a horse than a chipped ankle. In general, I agree with your comments about steroids. Steroids should be cleared from the horse’s system prior to a start. I would also add that in no circumstance should steroids be used in preparing yearlings for auction. That has also been known to occur….hopefully now in the distant past.

        • longtimehorsewoman

          That is true. Joint injections have their place – on the farm for rehab only and not within 6 months of training/racing. The point of injections is to help heal, not to patch together. And steroids should be illegal as they are not good for the horse either. They are not good for people!! So many trainers and owners profess to love horses, but really they appear only to love them as they would love their knew truck or sports car. How many truly care about the horse’s welfare?

      • Bein

        Agree. Joint injections are widely misused.

        • Jack Frazier

          If you can now believe Dr. Arthur, he said that 90% of all horses that had catastrophic breakdowns had been injected.

          • Bein

            I haven’t seen Dr. Arthur’s comment to that effect, and I do wonder how he would know that. But…horses are injected when they’re sore, not sound. And they’re injected by many trainers that don’t get any diagnostics done to learn what is making them sore. Super stupid and akin to Russian Roulette in my opinion.

          • Jack Frazier

            It was in a study a few years ago and has been widely printed in racing magazines and online. I believe you can find it in a CTBA magazine story of a couple of years ago, if you google it. I have seen trainers inject horses as they said, “In a precautionary move.” Healthy horses synovial fluid is much better than hyaluronic acid or cortisone. I have also seen horses injected in spite of the vet saying he didn’t think it needed it but the trainer insisted, so the horse was injected. Many fools out there.

          • longtimehorsewoman

            I have no doubt that is true and it just points out the level of ignorance at the racetrack regarding the actual horse. You are absolutely correct, the horse’s own synovial fluid is far the best. Healthy joints should not be injected for “precautionary” reasons. No human doctor would recommend injecting healthy joints. The way to treat joints in a precautionary way is to condition the horse correctly, avoiding shortcuts. And avoid racing two-year-olds. When horse racing started horses were mature and unlike today’s unconditioned and drug filled horses, they were able to race three 4-mile heats in ONE day, and if necessary they raced another 3-mile heat. What horse on the track today (aside from ponies) could even gallop 12 miles in a day? Horses are natural born athletes and are being ruined by ignorance of the people charged with their care.

          • Jack Frazier

            You are correct. If ignorance were bliss, these folks would be in heaven believing the way they do.

      • Jack Frazier

        Masochistic had no say in the matter so how can he not be the victim? He did not stick the needle in himself. A veterinarian gave him the steroid and I doubt they asked him if he wanted it. How can he not be a victim as are all, ALL race horses that are drugged by unscrupulous trainers and veterinarians. I still believe the attending veterinarian should also be punished even if he were injecting the horse at the trainers request. At some point veterinarians have to be held accountable. There are a lot of vets at Santa Anita who will not join the circus of drug abuse. Not all veterinarians are complicit but there are some who definitely are.

        • longtimehorsewoman

          I agree vets should be held responsible. It is a fact that many do what the trainer “asks” them to do. Agree also that horses on “therapeutic” meds need to be ineligible to race.

        • Charles Smith

          Going from the Witch Doctor, A.C. Avila to a trainer who was willing to handle an animal in a way that resulted not only in a DQ from last year’s BC, but being banned from this year’s BC as well, truly victimized Masochistic. I’d love for program information to include the attending Vet, just like it shows the owner, trainer and jockey.

          • Jack Frazier

            It needs to be and the vet needs the same punishment as the trainer, in all instances.

          • Lehane

            Absolutely.

          • gus stewart

            That jack is something that will not happen. As many know, if you want to win, you ask for certain vets that know these horses in so cal and know what gets them to the winner circle. If the chrb and dr arthur wanted to keep it fair they would of done it many years ago. But some owners seemingly have alot of power to prevent it. This is why its so difficult to get and keep new smaller owners. As it has been said if your not cheating with ones that want to push the envelope, your not trying.

          • Jack Frazier

            The CHRB will do nothing because they are vested in the sport. Look who sits on the board. All of them either own horses, farms or are a jockey currently riding races. In some way all the members are involved and if they won’t do what needs to be done. The CHRB should have people sitting on the board who have no affiliation with racing other than regulating it. Looks to me as if the Feds will swoop in one day and the party will be over.

          • gus stewart

            That could be the case. And as much as nodody wants the feds involved if you dont police yourself, someone with power outside of racing, is going to suggest that its needed. Meds and the whip perception are the biggest problem in the biz. Most people would think gamblers are the ones that create a bad environment about this sport. Yes, that is always going to be perceived as such. But as we know the devil is in the inner functions of our sport.

          • Jack Frazier

            Agreed but then to think racing can police itself is ludicrous when people involved are on the CHRB board, and the head California vet is the last word. This is akin to catching your fifteen year-old son smoking pot in his room and he says, “Well, Dad, I won’t do it again, wink, wink, I promise and you can have my best friend, who you caught with me, check on me to make sure I am not smoking pot.” Kind of analogous.

          • gus stewart

            Pretty close to whats going on i must say. When i have time this year and im board, and of course when i feel i have too much hot air, i will attend a chrb meeting, i will then stand up for my five min and ask give me a time ur going to stop private vets meds and whips. If i then get any other answer besides a possible date, i will interrupt and continue to interrupt until i get an answer, or my 5 min are up. I am still going to try to meet with belinda stronach to see if she is going to promote some changes with this and santa anita. I have enough background in sports and entertainment that i hope she will entertain a meeting. Some in racing biz who know my background are going to assist in asking her to give me a few mins with her.,, we will see

          • Jack Frazier

            Good luck with that. You will not get an answer satisfactory to that question. It is going to take a mass exodus from the sport to get their attention because one person here and there quitting won’t make it happen. I have a pretty good background as well but was treated with disdain and condescension at Santa Anita. I don’t think much will change.

          • gus stewart

            Your probably right, but i would like to think the fact she is a female, that the power trip wont play a factor in doing whats right to improve the racing biz

          • Jack Frazier

            You would hope not but sometimes the power trip is more so.

          • gus stewart

            ouch, i hope not, i usually can get them to feel good about being a woman in a historically male role. At least till they tell me, can u please leave my office.. lol, have a good evening

          • Jack Frazier

            In my experience, and I worked as a teacher and as a Department Chair head, I found that some women who were given the job as a Department head or were in charge of say, curriculum development, revamping a department or other jobs, were as Machiavellian as any man I ever worked for. I hope you have success but don’t hold your breath. Power corrupts and absolute power, which she has, corrupts absolutely. She has the power to affect change, if and this is a big one, if she wants things to change. I am cynical about anyone currently in the CHRB, TOC, the Racing Office or any administrative position in any Stronach Group track wanting to change the status quo or tackle this obviously hot potato. As I said, good luck.

          • gus stewart

            Yes all of those veiws can happen,, power does corrupt even some of the best people, im just going to try to see if i can get a chance to see something in her eyes and demeanor that will give me and others hope for improvement in our sport, thanks

          • Jack Frazier

            I wish you well. I have become jaded, cynical and worse, about the state of racing in California. If a trainer who had been considered clean bends the rules to favor his chances, and he is very high profile, what about those who are hands off, as it seems they are? There is absolutely no chance for trainers trying to run a clean barn to win races. When I look at the list of top trainers, it is the usual suspects. Many have rumors floating around about their methods but you never see them being punished. I look on the CHRB Stewards Rulings and time after time the same people are being fined for overages of bute, Lasix, and mixing bute and banamine, which is illegal. Other than a fine, nothing is happening. At what point do these add up to something more than a fine, which they pay and just keep on their happy way? Check it out. It is there but you will never see the Confidential Report from the vets. This is not a national secret so in my mind, it should be out there so we can see for certain who is doing what. Maybe if it is published it might have an impact but it will not be made public because the vets don’t want it published nor do the trainers who have put horses on this confidential list. I will never train another horse in California, or at least until the playing field is leveled and the cheaters are either kicked out or are punished so severely that they are afraid to give an aspirin.

          • ben

            There is a diplomatic way out there, I know someone who speaks fluent the native language from Mr Stronach, but we have seen it in the past with the try on Lasix regulations.

            The TOC receives 4 % out of the pool, but threated to leave Cal. out of the scheme for the BC meetings if lasix would be banned.

            Maybe steroids are some easier to rule out.

          • longtimehorsewoman

            As a woman who has worked for both men and women in corporate environments as well as others, men are far less Machiavellian than women. Prefer to work for men by far. One can hope she is an idealist at heart – and I hope she is.

          • Jack Frazier

            Thanks and I am glad you said it. I found it to be that way as well. I also found that, regarding men and women elevated to a position of power, many are elevated above their intelligence quotient.

          • longtimehorsewoman

            Yes, that is true. The Peter Principle in action. I worked for an international highway and bridge construction company for several years. It was very enlightening – and not in a good way. Men who were not really performing (not smart enough) actually got promoted! This was done knowing they were basically incompetent for their current position, and to get them out of the way so to speak. It was quite shocking. The other thing I learned was that the smartest and hardest working people were not promoted but kept where they got the actual work done. People were expected to come in an hour early (I didn’t) and to stay late (I didn’t unless I actually had something important to do. I actually had a unique position, i was hired because I could create database applications that people did not have to have database knowledge to use, and understood the real world applications and goals of the end user. I did see that men actually have more compassion (for men not women) than I would have. Decisions were not necessarily made on what would be best for the company.

          • Jack Frazier

            Perfect. That is just the way it is.

    • Lehane

      As always so well said, Jack Frazier.

      • Jack Frazier

        Thank you. Remember when PETA tried to show the drug problem? They were castigated by everyone. There is no protection for the horses.

  • David Juffet

    So Ron Ellis becomes the fall guy. What a joke.

    • I think it is important to emphasize that Ron Ellis is not a cheater. He simply took advantage of rules that are on the books. He is guilty only of a lapse of judgment in opting to run the horse in spite of the evidence. When the CHRB allows horses to be treated with drugs like stanozolol and trainers like Ron Ellis choose to use them, they both are sliding down a slippery slope. Neither the CHRB nor Ron Ellis should subject themselves to this situation again in the future. Change the frigging rules!

      • Convene

        Exactly. Unfortunately, when they decide to put the foot down, someone has inevitably got to be the first one to bite the bullet. As others may be more deserving of punishment (and they are!), unhappily Ron Ellis is that first one. Now that it’s happened to a decent trainer, maybe the habitual offenders might think twice and not take the chance. And yeah – change the friggin’ rules!

        • Arrogate

          Many top trainers would not have taken the chance if their horse didn’t have a clean test….because the fall out would be a cluster. This is going to be painful for Ellis, but will improve the rules of the game.

        • Jack Frazier

          I can’t wait till this gets to the courts and a lawyer.

      • David Juffet

        I understand and agree Barry.

    • Peter Scarnati

      Sure, many opine that Mr. Ellis was “merely following the rules.” While that may be true, it is completely beside the point here.
      The simple fact is he went ahead and ran the horse KNOWING he was positive for stanozolol just eight days before the race with AT LEAST a one in ten chance he would test positive after the race. THAT, at best, is amazingly poor judgment. This disturbing lack of judgment is undoubtedly compounded by the fact this choice was made regarding running in a BREEDERS CUP race.
      It seems pretty clear that the notion of integrity must have little to no meaning to Mr. Ellis.

      • Lehane

        Agreed.

      • Naneki

        Absolutely agree. When one is in the public spotlight AND has the heavy morning line favorite in a BREEDERS CUO race INTEGRITY speaks volumes. All eyes were and are watching.

      • Olebobbowers

        ‘It seems pretty clear that the notion of integrity must have little to no meaning to Mr. Ellis.’ ~Amen~

      • David Juffet

        Dead wrong.

    • Jack Frazier

      Reminds me of a line Humphrey Bogart used in Maltese Falcon. “We need a fall guy and Wilmer is the fall guy.” Ron Ellis is the scapegoat for the Santa Anita, the BC, the CHRB and Dr. Arthur. So what happens to them? They all knew. Are they immaculately exonerated?

      • longtimehorsewoman

        He is not a scapegoat, he brought it on himself. He gambled and lost. And he admitted to giving the horse double the dose. Who knows how many times he’ls done that and gotten away with it?

        • Jack Frazier

          He is if he and the horse are the only ones punished. If others are punished as well, then he isn’t, but if not, he is.

      • David Juffet

        I’ll drink to that! As I asked before is this a joke?

        • Jack Frazier

          I think “they think” punishing him will quell the storm of outrage. Not so. It is a joke.

  • Mr. Blues

    You know what Mr Macky says- Drugs are bad mmmmmk……they certainly know who the trainers are that use drugs .get rid of the trainers and owners who are tied together at this .Its like anything else if you REALLY want to do something about it ,it would be done period….God help these horses….

  • Ida Lee

    This whole fiasco has bothered me from the very beginning…the punishment seems way out of proportion to the crime …. and I’m only addressing this particular situation ….

    • Scott Goddard

      I totally agree–the punishment is WAY too light…should have been at least a three year ban.

      • Ida Lee

        I respectfully disagree ….

    • Mimi Hunter

      You usually come down on the side of the horse. :-) Anabolic steroids are nasty drugs – sure they make breathing easier – sure they increase muscle mass – but it is generally at the expense of the rest of the horse. I don’t know of any specific studies on horses on things like spontaneous fractures, wobbles, and a whole list of possible problems. I’ve seen it first hand in people, so I’ve been down on steroids for 50 years or so. If the horse needs regular doses of steroids to be able to breath, I’m not really sure he/she should be racing. You don’t know if it’s the horse who is doing well, or the person adjusting the medications. I think the use should be stopped, and this looks like a good start. – I don’t think 3 years as suggested below is out of line.

      • Ida Lee

        I agree with you Mimi … what bothers me is that this was a small amount of the steroid and it was believed that the horse was clear of it. I’ve had medications that knock me out with one dose and other people take them like candy and no problem. Sometimes animals need medications and apparently it takes a longer time for this particular horse to process this medication from his system. I don’t think Ellis is stupid enough to say … oh well, he probably still has of that steroid in his system so I’m going to race so when he’s tested (and they all are)

  • J. Nasium

    Stupid is as stupid does…why penalize the horse? Why is it that the morons rise to the top to run things?

    • Arrogate

      As a way to penalize owners.

      • J. Nasium

        That’s ridiculous. I do not see them denying entries from the owner’s other horses. If they want to penalize owners do not take any entries, which is just as stupid. Under archane rules the trainer is responsible not the owners. The horse didn’t give himself the shot, let him run. And just as an aside in this particular instance Ellis should have gotten a slap on the wrist.Even the state vet knew the circumstances, the Cal Racing Board are a bunch of wimps.

        • Arrogate

          No, just the stakes winner who placed in the BC Sprint;-) Make owners responsible and trainers will think long and hard about it …and so will owners in an odd situation like this….and Masochistic cares the least out of everyone here. He knows nothing….;-)

          • J. Nasium

            I just don’t think it’s right to punish the horse….but our disagreeing…. that’s what makes horseracing..lolll

  • William justice

    No withdrawal times can be trusted, go to rmtc website. They openly admit that they take no responsibility for the withdrawal times that they set. It’s one of them things you read and go ” what the hell”.

    • ben

      Withdrawel times are very different than detection times. Withdrawel are just the times, that the meat from the horse is not for consuming within that specific times. Alas that,s how it is in the Netherlands.

    • ofmyownaccord

      Ellis admitted t the CHRB that Masochistic was given double the usual “therapeutic” dose….hence the much longer withdrawal time.

      • Eric

        OMOA – if this is true, that would considerably change my perspective on this issue. Is this something that you have seen in print somewhere that you can point to?

        • Jack Frazier

          To my knowledge you cannot see the “confidential vet list”. I looked at it and only saw a few horses marked as on the list for this. There should not be a separate list either. Every horse’s treatment should be available to the public otherwise it is baloney.

  • Bryan Langlois

    “Today’s actions affirm our determination to conduct the Breeders’ Cup under the highest standards of integrity and in a fair competitive environment for all participants. Looking forward, we will be modifying our rules and protocols for out-of-competition testing to ensure that no horse testing positive for any anabolic steroid while in training or competition will be permitted to race in the Breeders’ Cup. There is no place for the administration of steroids to horses in training and racing, and we will be working closely with regulatory authorities to give the full effect to that principle in the Breeders’ Cup.”

    Shouldn’t have been a need to modify a rule that was faulty or not used properly to begin with. It should have been…..oh what’s the point really….not worth the effort to type on these things anymore. Just finger pointing and plausible deniability as it has always been.

  • Richard C

    The Keystone Cops have spoken!

  • Condor

    Ouch thats going to hurt, if more racing authorities shut out cheats like the breeders crown has we would have a clean sport within 12 mths.

  • Leonard

    Ron Ellis is a fool entering B.C.Sprint knowing positive test out of competion. Rolling the dice is really going to cost him this yr B.C. wise & any owners that have horses good enough to run in B.C.races. Ellis should consider another profession after this fiasco & doesn’t deserve to be trusted to be hired as a trainer anymore. His decision making is that of someone who doesn’t know how to make proper decision especially when the whole world is watching on one of racing biggest days & all this attention this matter is receiving has hurt the sport even more & tarnished the name BREEDERS CUP as well. Imagine if he had won & then to get DQ’D for cheating later on & the owners of the runner up are declared the winner but they were denied a winners circle picture & all the celebration that goes with winning a B.C. race. Ron is a veteran of the game & his decision on that day was one of someone with little experience or that of one trying to cheat the game to get that elusive B.C. winner under his belt. Sorry Ron but you must go & owners need to take their business elsewhere.

    • Naneki

      Leonard…you have expressed my thoughts exactly. Not only did Ron singlehandedly gave racing another black eye it so didn’t need especially on one of its most public international stages but I feel his behavior was one of pure arrogance! To think he could still run even after being notified of a positive test! Really?? His actions make me think that he feels his ” medication record” and “integrity” make him better than everyone else he competes against. He got what he deserved coming to him.

  • Peter Scarnati

    When Mr. Fravel states, “Looking forward, we will be modifying our rules and protocols for out-of-competition testing to ensure that no horse testing positive for any anabolic steroid while in training or competition will be permitted to race in the Breeders’ Cup,” I wonder what he means.
    For example, does this mean that when Masochistic was given the juice earlier in the year training up to his first start, that would have disqualified him from running in the Breeders’ Cup? Or does it only pertain to an out-of-competition test immediately prior to the specific Breeders’ Cup race?
    The statement seems pretty vague to me. I guess one will have to wait until the specific “looking forward” language of the contemplated “modified rule” is published for all to see.

    • Arrogate

      Great question. He is partly referring to the California privacy regulation that meant CHRB (vet) couldn’t officially tell BC about pre competition test. They need to get around that before ’17 Del Mar BC. Why test if you are going to let them run anyway? But I think the idea is to have a six month vet list for using steroids, which would have meant Masochistic could not have received injection since May 1….

  • gregrobertson

    My understanding was he was out of the threshold?

  • J

    THIS IS VERY UNFORTUNATE.
    RON ELLIS IS A SUPERIOR TRAINER.
    DECLAN’S MOON & MANY OTHER GREAT HORSES HE HAS TRAINED.
    MASOCHISTIC CAN STILL WIN BIG RACES. JUST NOT A BREEDER’S CUP.
    GOOD LUCK RON.

  • we’re watching

    Again,what about the bettors who lose their wagering dollars on a tainted horse. Fine the owners about 500,000 bucks and donate it to a retired horse fund. That’s a just punishment which perhaps will keep them from endorsing bad judgement on and from their trainers.

  • Dusty Nathan

    Bravo! Do this with every horse who comes up positive and it won’t pay to pre-race or tube horses. In other words, if the test comes back “hot,” the horse cannot race for 180 days. If he comes back “hot” again, he can’t race for 365 days. If the same horse and trainer come back “hot” on a third offense neither can race again for 5 years.

  • JoeJoe

    Well done Ron.

  • Lost In The Fog – Robert Lee

    The Breeders Cup rules are clear and consistent with regard to this topic and every trainer is fully aware of them as well as the penalties for violating those unambiguous rules. The Breeders Cup has done nothing wrong here by enforcing their stated rules and therefore imposing a one-year ban on both Ron Ellis and Masochistic, prohibiting either from participating in the 2017 BC.

    Ron Ellis knew that Masochistic had tested positive for stanozol prior to the race and reportedly sought an opinion from Dr. Rick Arthur of the CHRB. Arthur reportedly advised Ellis that there was an 80-90% chance that the stanozol would clear Masochistic’s system by the day of the BC sprint. By default that means that Ellis was advised that there was a 10-20% chance that the stanozol would NOT clear Masochistic’s system prior to the BC sprint. Ellis then chose to roll the dice dice and risk it. That was his decision. He gambled and lost. Now he justifiably deserves to pay the price. He could have chosen to scratch the horse but didn’t. Ellis is not an innocent victim here and I’m mystified as to why so many are characterizing him as such.

    • Eric

      I am characterizing him as an innocent victim because he treated a horse 68 days out, when the mandated withdrawal time is 60 days or more. The trainer can’t control how quickly the medication clears the system, all the trainer can do is administer within the guidelines of the CHRB.
      The fact that Ellis “rolled the dice” gives me pause as to whether I can support his decision. Again, the pre race sample was taken 60 days after the administration – right on the edge of the CHRB rule – so its not unreasonable to imagine that Ellis figured that the positive prerace test for a minimal amount was plausible, but if the CHRB guidelines are right, the horse’s system should be clear after 68 days. I think you can argue that a lot of people failed here – Ellis, Jay Em Ess, Dr Arthur, and the CHRB (the Breeders Cup was not notified of the pre race test result – they are blameless). Frankly, I don’t know what the point of the pre pace test is, if it doesn’t prevent this from playing out the way it did. The prerace test should probably be closer to the race – maybe 4 days out (its the Breeders Cup, I’m sure they could find a way to expedite the testing of those pre-race samples, and the post race samples from the 6250 claimers at Golden Gate and Turf Paradise could be put on hold for a few extra days). If the horse came up positive 4 days before the scheduled race, I think all parties would realize that the horse had better be scratched.
      Ellis, Jay Em Ess, and the CHRB were all equally aware of the situation. Jay Em Ess had nothing to lose by running – if you skip the race, you earn nothing, and if you run, you either keep purse money, or worst case scenario you get DQed and earn nothing. Ellis had to make a tough decision, and you can imagine the pressure he was under, for him to opt to risk his reputation and a substantial penalty, in order to run his client’s horse in a spot where he was 8-5 in a $1.5M race. Very hard to turn away from that opportunity when you know you did nothing wrong, and the CHRB medication guru is telling you that you are probably OK. Maybe the decision should have been taken out of his hands by the CHRB.

      • longtimehorsewoman

        If Mr Ellis gave the horse a double dose – why would anyone expect it be out of his system in 60 days. The 60 days timetable is for a normal dose. He is far from innocent, he just has finally been caught and by his own gamble. Every horse’s (and human’s) system is different. One should not count on everything going one’s way.

        • Jack Frazier

          Puzzling. If he got steroids 60 days out, then another dose 30 days out, there is no way it would be out of his system, and they have proven in the case of Clenbuterol, that it can remain in their system upwards of six months. I would love to see the blind study done on this procedure. Otherwise it is BS to state it will be out of a horses system in sixty days.

          • ofmyownaccord

            Clenbuterol is a bronchodilator not an anabolic steroid. The two can’t be compared because they have entirely different pathways of action.

          • Jack Frazier

            Almost right. Clenbuterol is a bronchodilator but when it is used in the massive amounts that some trainers use it, it builds muscle mass, increases aggression and more. To say that it is not steroid like is a misnomer. It works much the same. A normal dose is 5cc over a four day period and then a nine day withdrawal time. Some trainers I knew gave 5 in morning, five at noon, another five at evening feeding and then another five last thing. That is twenty-five cc per day over a four day period is 100 cc’s. Not as it is designed to work but then trainers looking for an edge did that. To think not is to be naïve.

          • ben

            He got the same stuff already in May 2016, and earlier on in 2015. The body gets aquinted to the stuff and besides that how much more medications (others)did the horse got before entering the gates. I really would like to know what happend in the last two months before the start in the BC.

            The liver and the kidneys are not design to rush the medications out in time for recommended withdrawel times. Withdrawel time are guidelines and not an excact science.

            The RMTC test on just one single dose but not on a mixture from several other medications together with the steroids.

            Regretfully I will never know.

          • Jack Frazier

            Sad isn’t it?

        • ofmyownaccord

          The withdrawal time is 30 days. The 60 days number everyone keeps wrongly referring to was the date when the horse was tested before the race. 60 days after the initial treatment….8 days before the BC Sprint.

          68 days is more than DOUBLE the recommended withdrawal time. Like you said, far from innocent.

          • Eric

            That’s incorrect. 60 days is the withdrawal time in California (different states have different withdrawal times – probably based on the accepted dose level). When a California horse is treated with a steroid, he goes on the CHRB vet list for 60 days (you can see examples on the CHRB website). The 60 days is the time that the CHRB has established to allow the drug to clear the horse’s system, and if the horse was treated 68 days out and still tested positive, that is the CHRB’s fault for setting a faulty withdrawal time. Unless the horse received a double dose, or additional treatments after 8/29, and I have not seen documented evidence of that.

        • Eric

          Where are you getting the info that the horse received a double dose? If this is true, then I am 100% with you… but I have not seen that published anywhere, so until we have documentation of that, its hearsay.

          • longtimehorsewoman

            Got it from ofmyownaccord

            William justice

            2 days ago

            Ellis admitted t the CHRB that Masochistic was given double the usual
            “therapeutic” dose….hence the much longer withdrawal time.

            Reply

            Share ›

      • Lost In The Fog – Robert Lee

        At least we agree that the Breeders Cup is blameless here and that they are doing nothing wrong by enforcing their rules. The remainder of this episode is complicated and the actions or inactions of the CHRB are worth questioning but regardless Ellis knew that there was a 10-20% chance that Masochistic would test positive post race and he still took the risk of entering. When you gamble and lose you pay the price.

    • longtimehorsewoman

      I agree. I do not understand why everyone believes Ron Ellis is a saint. Clearly this whole incident proves that is not the case. I think people just WANT to believe someone they like is innocent. Facts aside.

  • California Flash

    Always held Ellis in high regard. Punishment seems a little excessive for a trainer with his record.

  • realfan

    Oh the humanity!

  • Southwest Dude

    Good move!! I would hate to see whats happening with quarterhorse racing in NM occur in the thoroughbred world. Tracks in the southwest are trying to eliminate Quarterhorse racing due to the huge numbers of bad tests coming back.

  • Arrogate

    Masochistic had a free paid entry to the BC Sprint as a Win and You’re In challenge race winner? That should be rescinded for a horse DQ’d from purse money for a med violation. There’s another rule for the BC to change….

Twitter Twitter
Paulick Report on Instagram