Dana666 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I was thinking along similar lines. If what he
> said in that press conference is accurate (if he's
> lying there, it's like a whole
> Michael-Corleone-Senate-hearing thing--and he'd be
> REALLY stupid, which we know he is not), it should
> be easy enough with time to get to the truth, esp.
> regarding the hair analysis. The whole thing seems
> like some kind of set up, or dare I use the "C"
> word. None of this makes any sense. I'm not
> defending him, but until the second split sample
> gets tested, this isn't official anyway. And labs
> do make mistakes by the way--any important tests
> for horses or humans should be repeated and
> double-checked. I'm not saying this is true, but
> there are enough elements who'd like to do away
> with racing and will take any chance they can get
> to take a free shot at the stumbling giant, like
> the Lilliputians harassing poor Gulliver. I can't
> remember the story, did Gulliver have it coming? I
> don't think so. Anyway, on to the Preakness, for
> now anyway. Poor Bob won't be able to show his
> face in Baltimore. Jimmy Barnes is all he needs
> anyway. I'm thinking a 1-2 finish will quell the
> critics.


I love how Baffert, who has skated through more drug violations and mysterious deaths while winning more races than 10 trainers put together, is somehow being persecuted. The argument for his innocence is that he's too smart to do something stupid, which if it worked as an argument would clear out the prisons in the country. Oh, and the split sample coming back negative, which happens about .00001% of the time, but of course should happen here.

This is typical horse racing---we whine endlessly about illegal drugs, then flip out when someone is actually punished because, what, we like him and he does good interviews? Just baffling why this sport is dying a 40-year slow death, isn't it? With fans like us, who needs enemies?