Claimboxx wrote:Out of curiosity, and it is hard to compare, Baffert, Frankel and Pletcher are already in or sure thing Hall of Famers. Baffert and Pletcher have had multiple positives and all three were under huge suspicion all the years drug use was rampant. What about trainers like Doug O'Neill or Richard Dutrow, whose whole training career have been under a huge cloud of bad tests? Soon enough, with all of their training titles, thousands of career wins, and victories in Triple Crown and Breeders Cup races, their resume' and accomplishments will appear Hall Of Fame worthy. Should they be allowed in racing's HOF with all their bad tests and times they were sequestered to a detention barn? What about the "clean" trainers already in there that have had records broken by these guys? Or the "clean" borderline HOF trainers who would have won many more prestigious races had they not run against these guys? Or is Horse Racing's HOF deemed less important than baseball's? It seems that every sport, in the modern era, have all time greats with bad positive tests. Should every sport keep these "suspicious" guys out, or just baseball because it is perceived differently?
Great question.
It's one thing for a trainer like Pletcher to get busted for 1/700,000,000 of a milligram of a substance that somehow got into one of the feed buckets of his horse but another when O'Neill and Dutrow knowingly use Steroids or Milkshakes to enhance performances in their horses.
I say ban trainers who knowingly used on purposes and let slide those who were fined for ridiculous miniscule amounts.
For the record, Vince votes that any baseball player who was busted for or lied about using performance enhancing drugs even just one, do not get into the HoF, specifically for the reason you mentioned -
"What about the "clean" trainers (or ball players) already in there that have had records broken by these guys? "
Vince P
