Biancone Returns to New York

[parsixfarms]

[quote=CSC]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

I don't think anyone who has trained at this level for as many years as Biancone would intentionally do what you are suggesting, if so why does this guy continue to get very good stock after so many years. Surely all of these owner's who turn over horses to him can't be this dumb. Whether it's cobra venom or not, horses run with injuries. It happens all the time in this game, to equate cobra venom to intentional trying to harm a horse is a stretch, I don't condone it's usage but I do think this is abit of a witchhunt we have here from what I have observed on this thread.

I don't think anyone said that he was intentionally trying to harm the horse. What has been said is, that by using cobra venom on his horses, he illustrated wanton disregard for the health and well-being of the riders and the horses.

Some owners care more about winning than winning honestly. That's why he got the horses. Just win, baby!

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

You don't care whether the sport is clean or not, or whether the lives of horses and riders are put in jeopardy, as long as you are able to cash your wager?

Why is it MY business, or that of any bettor, whether the game is clean or not?
When the different tracks figure out how to COMPLETELY clean up the game, then maybe some of this will have meaning to me. When there are so many cheating out there, I don't think it's very productive to focus on a single individual. There are worse things happening in the world than scumbags hurting horses.

And, while we're at it, why is NYRA any better than any of these cheats? Don't they put riders and horses in jeopardy when they allow HERDING in their races? How about all the times that a jock comes in on the turn, rather than keeping a straight path and pinches the jock to his inside on the rail? Is that dangerous? What exactly is NYRA (or any of the other tracks) doing about this? Clearly, SQUAT. I've watched Castellano be given carte blanche the past few years when it comes to herding. THIS is a much more dangerous issue than the Biancone thing, IMO. And NYRA, IMO, through its stewards is acting every bit a reprehensibly as Biancone ever did.

This is all BS. The game itself is based on CHEATING. All the trainers are looking for an edge. All the tracks are as well. When they soup their tracks up on big days so that they get fast times, is that cheating? Safety sacrificed for speed? How about all those BIASES they create? Is that cheating? How about when the allow their WHALES to past post or give them rebates? Is that fair?

What makes this game the challenge of a lifetime is the chance to win IN SPITE of all the unfairness going on in it.

[CSC]

[quote=parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by CSC

I don't think anyone said that he was intentionally trying to harm the horse. What has been said is, that by using cobra venom on his horses, he illustrated wanton disregard for the health and well-being of the riders and the horses.

Some owners care more about winning than winning honestly. That's why he got the horses. Just win, baby!

I think you said it, riders that rode for him and his kind(The Dutrow's and Asmussen's)know what they are riding, and they share the same responsibilty on what happens on the track. It's not like it's a dirty little secret what is going on in this game, however if one of these riders opts out there will be a lineup of others that want on this train. Only the horse has no say, however what is better being a claimer at CT or an allowance horse under the Evil empire. The answers are not as simple as they should be.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

Why is it MY business, or that of any bettor, whether the game is clean or not?
When the different tracks figure out how to COMPLETELY clean up the game, then maybe some of this will have meaning to me. When there are so many cheating out there, I don't think it's very productive to focus on a single individual. There are worse things happening in the world than scumbags hurting horses.

All change is incremental. Your point's like saying that, until we can round up all the criminals at once, we shouldn't enforce any laws. Or because someone is committing murder, we should no longer prosecute theft.

Aside from the inherent handicapping conundrums created by today's supertrainers (how do you quantify how much new trainer "X" will move a recent acquisition up), the perception problem created by having an unclean sport serves to keep away (or more importantly, drive away) potential owners and bettors. Of course, if you don't care about having five and six horse fields, I guess that's not a problem. For most of the rest of us, that is a problem.

[parsixfarms]

[quote=CSC]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

I think you said it, riders that rode for him and his kind(The Dutrow's and Asmussen's)know what they are riding, and they share the same responsibilty on what happens on the track. It's not like it's a dirty little secret what is going on in this game, however if one of these riders opts out there will be a lineup of others that want on this train. Only the horse has no say, however what is better being a claimer at CT or an allowance horse under the Evil empire. The answers are not as simple as they should be.

I don't fundamentally disagree with this statement, but what about the other riders in the race who are not on his horses?

[RockHardTen1985]

Fats, what exactly is herding?

[Bobby Fischer]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

I don't think anyone said that he was intentionally trying to harm the horse. What has been said is, that by using cobra venom on his horses, he illustrated wanton disregard for the health and well-being of the riders and the horses.

Some owners care more about winning than winning honestly. That's why he got the horses. Just win, baby!

"We are in an sporting era where if you aren't being ACCUSED of cheating, you really aren't doing all that good."

sure, if you want to be hyper-logical and fair beyond the standards of due diligence, Biancone has recieved extra attention because of the dramatic nature of the substance with which he was caught.

Still, a strong commissioning body would have done well to issue Biancone "the Black Spot", a lifetime ban from the sport, as much for the perception of his acts as for his transgressions. For it is the The perception here that makes the impact.

To continue reading this article you must be an Insider

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by Bobby Fischer

"We are in an sporting era where if you aren't being ACCUSED of cheating, you really aren't doing all that good."

sure, if you want to be hyper-logical and fair beyond the standards of due diligence, Biancone has recieved extra attention because of the dramatic nature of the substance with which he was caught.

Still, a strong commissioning body would have done well to issue Biancone "the Black Spot", a lifetime ban from the sport, as much for the perception of his acts as for his transgressions. For it is the The perception here that makes the impact.

To continue reading this article you must be an Insider

A lifetime ban is crazy. Simply unfair.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

A lifetime ban is crazy. Simply unfair.

Why? If a doctor committed malpractice on several occasions, he'd probably lose his license to practice medicine. If a lawyer committed several serious ethical violations, he'd probably lose his license to practice law. Given his long and sordid track record, why shouldn't Biancone (and there are others that fit in here, just so we're not accused of unfairly focusing on one guy) lose his license to train race horses?

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

Why? If a doctor committed malpractice on several occasions, he'd probably lose his license to practice medicine. If a lawyer committed several serious ethical violations, he'd probably lose his license to practice law. Given his long and sordid track record, why shouldn't Biancone (and there are others that fit in here, just so we're not accused of unfairly focusing on one guy) lose his license to train race horses?

You cant compare the examples your giving. I know a lot of people on this site wont like it, but like FatMan said, there are a alot worst things then treating horses bad. PB did his time, if they were going to keep him out of the game, they would have to keep Dutrow, Pletcher, Mullins and every other trainer who has ever had a positive. They gave him a year, he lost TONS of money and top top horses. I think he did his time.

[Bobby Fischer]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

A lifetime ban is crazy. Simply unfair.

fairness wasn't being debated, only the appropriate measure to quell an ugly perception by a fictional commissioning body.

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

Of course, if you don't care about having five and six horse fields, I guess that's not a problem. For most of the rest of us, that is a problem.

I only care about an edge. If there's a stickout in a race, chances are it has more of a chance in a smaller than a larger field. Most of the people here have bigger balls than me. You all want to take on bigger challenges. So, you FORCE action. You play difficult races, that I wouldn't touch, because they're part of a sequence you're playing. In most cases, the focus is on a single track and that day's card. I look at 6,7,8, whatever, tracks a day and try to get the best plays from them. This is races where I have an edge. I'm not looking to make scores that will make my year but rather to play (and win) consistently and to my strengths. Why, then, would I particularly care if the fields are small or large, as long as I'm winning?

Hope this clears up the small fields issue, once and for all.

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

I only care about an edge. If there's a stickout in a race, chances are it has more of a chance in a smaller than a larger field. Most of the people here have bigger balls than me. You all want to take on bigger challenges. So, you FORCE action. You play difficult races, that I wouldn't touch, because they're part of a sequence you're playing. In most cases, the focus is on a single track and that day's card. I look at 6,7,8, whatever, tracks a day and try to get the best plays from them. This is races where I have an edge. I'm not looking to make scores that will make my year but rather to play (and win) consistently and to my strengths. Why, then, would I particularly care if the fields are small or large, as long as I'm winning?

Hope this clears up the small fields issue, once and for all.

Will you please explain herding.

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

I only care about an edge. If there's a stickout in a race, chances are it has more of a chance in a smaller than a larger field. Most of the people here have bigger balls than me. You all want to take on bigger challenges. So, you FORCE action. You play difficult races, that I wouldn't touch, because they're part of a sequence you're playing. In most cases, the focus is on a single track and that day's card. I look at 6,7,8, whatever, tracks a day and try to get the best plays from them. This is races where I have an edge. I'm not looking to make scores that will make my year but rather to play (and win) consistently and to my strengths. Why, then, would I particularly care if the fields are small or large, as long as I'm winning?

Hope this clears up the small fields issue, once and for all.

I wish I had that type of restraint.

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

Will you please explain herding.

An intentional attempt to not run in a straight path in the lane in order to take the path of another horse and prevent it from challenging. In other words, gaining an UNFAIR advantage.

I was shocked that the NYRA stewards took a horse down for drifting the other day. It was so mild compared to some of the blatant and dangerous herding by Castellano over the past few years, that I had to do a double take and make sure I was watching NYRA racing.

Castellano on the east coast and Chantal on the west coast (when she rides there) are presently the top herders in the game. Interestingly, however, she does very little herding up at WO. It's all about the stewards, after all.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

The rules are the rules, law is the law. He was out of the game for 1 year. He lost a lot of money and top horses. The one's I can remember off the top of my head.... Lady Of Venice, Slews Tiznow, and Ball Four. There are many many more. He did the time for his crime, and I embrace him being back.

If someone can get a picture of that I'll have a new avatar.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

You cant compare the examples your giving. I know a lot of people on this site wont like it, but like FatMan said, there are a alot worst things then treating horses bad. PB did his time, if they were going to keep him out of the game, they would have to keep Dutrow, Pletcher, Mullins and every other trainer who has ever had a positive. They gave him a year, he lost TONS of money and top top horses. I think he did his time.

I fail to see how the privilege (not a right) to train horses is different from the privilege to practice other professions; and yes, when doctors and lawyers lose their licenses, they lose TONS of money, but that's part of the price paid for their wrongful conduct. The fear of losing that money is what deters others from engaging in such behavior. Let me ask this question, in your view, is there any conduct in which a trainer could engage that would justify losing his or her license?

I'm certainly not suggesting that every trainer that ever had a positive should lose his license; mistakes do happen. When penalties are adjuducated, there has to be a sense of context, perspective and progressive discipline. IMO, a serial cheater such as Biancone who has shown blatant disregard for the rules of the sport and the welfare of horse and rider has no business having a license to train horses. Based on their track records, you could reasonably argue that Dutrow, Asmussen and Mullins, each of whom has a long track record of failing to play by the rules, fall into the same category (but that's a conversation for another day). The individual with one relatively minor positive is not what we are talking about here.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

I fail to see how the privilege (not a right) to train horses is different from the privilege to practice other professions; and yes, when doctors and lawyers lose their licenses, they lose TONS of money, but that's part of the price paid for their wrongful conduct. The fear of losing that money is what deters others from engaging in such behavior. Let me ask this question, in your view, is there any conduct in which a trainer could engage that would justify losing his or her license?

I'm certainly not suggesting that every trainer that ever had a positive should lose his license; mistakes do happen. When penalties are adjuducated, there has to be a sense of context, perspective and progressive discipline. IMO, a serial cheater such as Biancone who has shown blatant disregard for the rules of the sport and the welfare of horse and rider has no business having a license to train horses. Based on their track records, you could reasonably argue that Dutrow, Asmussen and Mullins, each of whom has a long track record of failing to play by the rules, fall into the same category (but that's a conversation for another day). The individual with one relatively minor positive is not what we are talking about here.

[Left Bank]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

Fats, what exactly is herding?

It's when the horses get so close together that he can't read their numbers on the Trakus screen.

[Cannon Shell]

I dont understand why he was allowed a green card in the first place considering his troubled history before relocating here. You can bet your ass if I went to France after being ruled off here and got a years suspension I would have been rightful deported.