Certainly a well reasoned response, and it brings up many issues. I'd like to
work from the bottom. Because this is my nature, I will assume for the sense of
argument that each statement, especially the negative ones, are directed at me
personally.

1) "I would not be surprised in the least if some nice lawyers contacted TGJB,
got the names of some of the posters here, and hauled there moronic asses into
court".

This statement poses many fascinating issues about the Internet as it will be
treated under traditional evidence, libel and slander law. Maybe internet libel
will eventually be addressed through a uniform code, if it hasn't already. And
of course there are constitutional issues underlying the entire area of the
law...

I hate to discuss the law. Let me instead make three statements of opinion:

a)As hurtful as some of these accusatory statements aimed at these trainers may
be, I really do not believe that anything which was alleged or implied on the TG
Bulletin Board has resulted in any trainer suffering a pecuniary loss: I do
not think that any trainer has had horses taken away by an owner who heard
something negative from a TG poster on the TG Board. Nor have I seen TG Board
statements quoted or discussed in mainstream racing publications ie DRF or
BloodHorse.

b)I have not heard of any trainer saying something along the lines of "You
know, its bad enough the railbirds give us grief during the races, now we got
the loonies chirping all day in the chat rooms". Do you know, Sight, of a
trainer who has been affected fiscally or emotionally by this dialogue, or one
who's career has been impacted negatively?

c) I think TGJB is a smart enough businessman to have explored the limits of
his liability with regards to statements uttered on the TG Board (Jerry, if you
haven't maybe now would be a good time...).

Bottom line for me is (i) please show me a trainer or trainers who has (have)
been injured by chatting and blogging of the type heard on this board and (ii)
the law and the legal system are probably not ready to identify and process all
the "crimes and misdemeanors" being committed on the Internet.

2) "People say things on the internet that they would never state on radio,
television, or in the print media for fear of legal recourse."

Sight, this is because most of us would never be seen or heard in the print or
electronic media due to the fact that:

3)"It is painfully and increasingly obvious that many on this list have little
to no factual knowledge about what they are talking about" and "much of what is
posted here is simply absurd and illogical to the extreme". Ignorant, absurd and
illogical will usually only get you in the media if you are holding hostages.

4)"There are trainers out there with multiple drug positives of
significant,performance- altering drugs.I never see their names mentioned here"


Then you have only been reading my posts selectively. I am especially quick to
mention Richard Dutrow and Scott Lake, only because whatever attention I pay is
to the NY circuit and these 2 trainers were sanctioned most frequently, a
matter of public record. Usually when I mention Richard and Scott, I am not
attacking these men personally (I have taken shots at Richard for never seeming
to acknowledge his father), but rather I am pointing out what a travesty the
rules of racing are as they pertain to medication violations. Richard, Scott
and others just do not seem to be really penalized -- they never seem to lose
owners or horses, and they continue to conduct their daily operations through e-
mail and cell phone. It is especially galling to me that Richard continuously
waives right to appeal and takes a shortened suspension. How many times do they
let you play this card?

I personally have made some tough statements about Biancone, but he apparently
has been excluded from racing in Europe and Hong Kong, and now faces the music
here in the United States.

I'll rip Doc Harthill a new one any chance I get, but Billy Reed already did
this a few years back in the Louisville Courier Journal.

With regards to a lengthy suspension dealt to Assmussen and a shorter one given
to Todd Pletcher last year, my only comment is that the trainer responsibility
rule, applied strictly, is not a good fit in the case of trainers such as Steve
and Todd who are trainers of record for strings of horses that they sometimes
only see once a week.

And if you were reading carefully, you may have seen that I jumped to Bill
Mott's defense when his methods were called into question recently on this
board.


I think, Sighthound, what really has you in this confrontational state, is my
constant mention of the 3 Pletcher animals dying within a short time frame. I
would be fascinated to read any reports, whether generated by veterinarians,
insurance companies or the New York State Racing and Wagering Board. I would be
fascinated to know if these 3 deaths were considered to be somehow related at
the time of any investigation that was conducted. I am just curious that is all.

You do not hear me saying that anyone intentionally killed those animals; I
even pointed out in a post that Left Bank was colic prone, having colicked as
a 2Y0 and having undergone surgery to remove a portion of his intestine. I was
trying to view any available facts. Being ignorant, absurd and illogical should
not preclude me from trying to understand things better.

I hate to play this card, but:

5) "...My assessment is based upon years of personal experience... I think it
admirable that those that wager take an interest in the problem of drug abuse in
racing...those whose only contact and knowledge of horses and the TB industry
via wagering DO have a vested interest, and deserve to be heard, in my opinion".

With all due respect, between 1978- 1987 I was licensed by State Racing Boards
in Louisiana, Kentucky, Florida, Ohio,New Jersey and Pennsylania. I worked
basically 7 days a week at tracks and training farms in these states; I worked
in various capacities which gave me a fair knowledge of horses and trainers. I
held a trainers license for 3 years, and saddled maybe 90 runners (my win
percentage was somewhere between Jamie Sanders' and Bill Mott's)(to be quite
honest it was a lot closer to Jamie's).

My point of giving the above bio is not to call attention to a less than
distinguished career on the backside which ended 20 years ago; rather I am
trying to lay a foundation for stating my OPINION that these 3 deaths were
somehow related and thereby not coincidental or random. If someone will provide
documentation of the alleged "patch of grass" theory, I would certainly welcome
the opportunity to review it.

The 4 major team sports in the US are spectator sports, though none would be
naive enough to say that their popularity isn't at least partially driven to an
extent by people who wager on these sports; these 4 sports would survive the
absence of wagering.

Racing would not survive the absence of wagering. The vested interest that you
say horseplayers' have in Racing is something more. While the "insiders" may
resent the input of horseplayers, may scoff at the ignorant tone of their voice
when it comes to horses and issues involving racing, the truth is some of the
stupidest sumbitches I have ever met tend to be the ones who are "sending it in"
with abandon. Their opinion and their participation are both important to
racing.

Sight, you have rope- a -doped me and I am now exhausted on the entire issue
of 3 dead in '02. I will continue to sniff around, to see what record remains.
Since I work a 60 hour week and spend another 12 or so hours each week trying
to improve my golf game, I am resigned to coming not much closer to the truth.

One last comment. A student once walked to the wisest professor he knew bearing
a question:

"Professor" the student asked "What is more harmful, ignorance or apathy?"

To which the professor replied "I don't know, and I don't care".