view raw text
NARC NARC Airs Airs Controversial Controversial Issues; Issues; Oil Oil Capitol Capitol Annexes Annexes Lansing Lansing Stakes Stakes Chemists Address Third-Day Session Reveal Opposition to Split Samples and Pre-Race Tests; New Claiming Rule Adopted NEW YORK, N. Y., May 18.— Controversial matters occupied the attention of the delegates this morning as the fifteenth annual convention of the National Association of State Racing Commissioners held its third and semi-final business session at the Hotel Commodore. Stimulants and depressants, their detection and prevention, held the spotlight, with addresses by Gharles* Morgan, chief chemist for the New York State Racing Commission and retiring president of the Association of Official Racing Chemists; Y. T. Oester, chemist of the Illinois and Michigan commissions and newly elected president of the AORC, and Lou Harris, Nebraska Racing Commission chemist, producing spirited reactions from Alfred J. Luke, of the California Owners and Trainers Association, and Alexis Dumestre, Louisiana commissioner and general counsel for the Horsemens Benevolent and Protective Association. Morgans address was concerned primarily with pre-race tests, which the New Yorkers maintained are prohibitive in cost at the present time, a view which Luke later disputed. Oester spoke strongly against the practice, still current in six states, of splitting saliva and urine samples. Dumestre attempted to reply to this statement, obviously being in disagreement, but time ran out before his views could be presented at todays session. Urges Cooperation of Chemists and Vets Harris urged the need for greater cooperation -between the chemists and the track veterinarians, stressing the need for greater understanding of the other problems on both sides. This address provoked no disagreement. Earlier in the proceedings, matters of unfinished business were brought before the conclave by president Earl J. Moyer, of Nebraska. The report of the Uniformity of Rules Committee, which had been referred back to the executive committee when first read on Monday, was again brought before the convention. An amendment to the rule covering apprentice allowances which was adopted last year at New Orleans, was again returned to the executive committee for further discussion, as no agreement could be reached. This amendment which was adopted during the Hialeah meeting last year, would allow apprentices injured or incapacitated in the line of duty to be given credit for their Continued on Page Two BEVERLEY BROUN — Former NARC president, eulogized retiring president, Ashley T. Cole, at yesterdays session. ► — Controversial Topics Taken Up By NARC at Third -Day Session Chemists Group Announces Opposition to Pre-Race Tests and Split Samples Continued from Page One idle time in the form of an extension of their period of apprenticeship. The rule reading: "If a winning horse is claimed, it shall not start in a selling or claiming race for a period of 30 days from date of claim for less than 25 per cent more than the amount for which it was claimed. All other horses claimed shall not be penalized," was moved and adopted after the final sentence had been amended to read — "Nor shall any horse claimed be allowed to run at any other track until said meeting, where claimed, has closed or for a period of 30 days after said claim, whichever time is the shortest." No Allowance for Emergency Treatment Paragraph 3 of the committee report, relating to the rule on the possession of drugs, stimulants hypodermic syringes and similar instruments provoked considerable discussion. Several delegates, notably Dum-estre and W. E. Knott, Jr., of New Mexico, felt that the rule was too sweeping, in that it made no allowance for emergency treatment of sick horses by honest and scrupulous horsemen in areas, or at times, when veterinarians were not speedily available. Luke felt that the rule was poorly worded, pointing out that the California rule on this subject refers specifically to "depressants and stimulants" and not to drugs of therapeutic value. George H. Foster, of Colorado, on the other hand, stated that any modification of the rule opened the door to legalistic alibis by the unscrupulous. This paragraph was also returned to the executive committee. The final paragraph of this report recommended that in purse races and overnight handicaps, owners be allowed to scratch to eight without charge. Al Drew, of Louisiana, speaking for the executive committee, said that it was agreed that this was a matter for the stewards to decide in each instance and offered the following amended rule: "No horse in an overnight race shall be scratched without the approval of the stewards." This amended rule was passed unanimously after brief discussion, in which Dumestre and Walter Donovan, general manager of Garden State Park, engaged in an exchange of views. The Louisianan held that stewards often insisted on non-mud-ders going postward to the detriment of the animal, while Donovan maintained that the stewards normally abide by the unwritten law that changed track conditions are a legitimate reason for scratching. Pay Tribute to Cole President Moyer then delayed the appearance of the chemists, who were convening in an adjoining parlor, to render tribute to Ashley Trimble Cole, chairman of the New York commission and for the past year, president of NARC. After expressing his own and the associations appreciation of his predecessor, Moyer called upon Beverley Brpun, of West Virginia, a former NARC president. Broun in turn eulogized the "courtly, gracious gentleman from New York," calling upon the timeless phrases of Alexander Pope and other poets when his own words failed, concluding, "Sir, were grateful to you and will long bear in memory your service to this association." Broun then presented Cole with a large package, the gift of the association. As he rose to accept, Cole said: "Ill take a peek first, Ive been fooled before." Removal of the wrappings disclosed "a handsome set of julep cups from Tiffany. The retiring president expressed his appreciation of the honor in a voice choked with emotion. Cole concluded with the promise that "Every time I lift one of these with its appropriate contents, it will be with an unspoken toast to you gentlemen." Moyer then introduced chemist Morgan. In part; Morgan said: "Procedures presently in use throughout the world for collecting samples immediately after the end of a race and analyzing them for the purpose of determining whether or not drugs have been used, have been very effective in reducing doping to a minimum. The doping of race horses nowadays is an extremely risky business for those who would attempt Co. The patrons of the sport can be assured that the chances of the horse of their choice being nosed out of the winners circle by a prescription are very remote. "Several proposals have been made of different ways of applying biological, chemical, or physical tests to animals before the rac and it is in such proposals that the racing chemist is keenly interested and immediately concerned. Any pre-race test of this sort to be practicable must conform to certain requirements. In the first place, the test must be accurate and reliable. No innocent trainer will look kindly on having his horse scratched because of the possible presence of a drug, and he will quite properly resent the implicit slur oh his reputation and character. The test may be capable of detecting and identifying the drug beyond question/The test must likewise be able to detect and identify any drug which may have been administered to affect the result of a race. If illegal drugs can be administered of such nature, or in such way that they will escape detection, the test will have fallen short of its aim. This condition is a distinct possibility. Time Element Involved "Secondly, it must be possible to collect the necessary samples from all. the horses entered on a days program and to complete their analysis all within a matter of a few hours at most and probably in less than an hour if the procedure is to be completely effective. A drug cannot be detected in most cases until it has begun to exert its effect upon the animal. Common sense tells us that the administration of a doping drug will be timed so that its maximum effect will be exerted during the race. As the anal*-ysis of both types of sample — saliva and urine — has been shown to be necessary if all possible druggings are to be detected, the horsemen would be constrained to permit the collection of urine by means of the catheter.. It is easy to imagine the effects of this operation on high-strung thoroughbreds just before a race. "The third necessity is that the cost of Continued on Page Three . . — Controversial Items Discussed by NARC Chemists Group Announces Opposition to Pre-Race Tests and Split Samples Continued from Page Two collection of the samples and their analysis be within reasonable limits." Morgan arrived at an average daily cost of ,920 for the collection of samples alone, without considering the cost of laboratory equipment, maintenance and personnel for the analyses and asked "what state budget bureau or racing association board of directors would even contemplate expenditures for the purpose on such a scale." Morgan also spoke of the problem of guarding horses against the administration of a drug after the pre-race test has been taken, and said that post-race tests would have to be continued to guard against "carelessness or venality" on the part of the guards. The New Yorker said that the three systems considered thoroughly by the AORC fail to approach the requirements. System Not Impossible In conclusion, Morgan said— .-"This is not to say that a system which does meet them — the requirements — cannot be devised, nor can the desirability of a foolproof system be seriously questioned." As the morning session neared its close, Luke pointed dramatically to the dangers in such doping as still exists, and maintained that no cost would be too excessive that would prevent the destructive publicity that may result from a scandal. President Oester, of the chemists association, then read an address strongly opposing the practice still followed in six states of splitting the saliva and urine samples. There has been recent agitation for a widespread return to this practice, on the ground that it affords more protection to the innocent owner and trainer. Oester said, in part: "Dividing a sample into two roughly equal parts will do no great damage if the total sample contains a great amount of drug. However, in the usual drugging incident, the total sample does not contain much more than the minimal detectable quantity of drug. Splitting this sample, results in each of the two resulting portions — provided they are fairly equal — containing less than the minimal detectable quantity. Many of the positive tests obtained by racing chemists are on samples which do not contain much more than this detectable amount. Therefore, the number of possible positives would be •greatly reduced by this splitting sample procedure if it were applied generally." Oester went on to say that in practice it is impossible to split samples into identical halves, containing the same amount of drug, owing to the presence of gauze, other residues, variations in viscosity. Oester also said that deterioration of samples held for checking purposes often makes the detection of drugs difficult, if not impossible. In short, Oester said, "To say two samples are identical is really a misnomer and a myth." At the close of the meeting, Oester told a Daily Racing Form reporter that much of the objection to splitting samples could be eliminated if the retained half were in the care of the racing commission, kept under the same conditions as the tested half, and later tested by the same procedure. This, however, assumes an adequate sample, which is extremely difficult to obtain. Much of Harris later address was concerned with the inadequacy of samples of saliva obtained by veterinarians, who must work under great difficulty. Harris said that the swab — of correct size — must be kept in the horses mouth for four minutes, which seems like hours, and is often sharply cut. Safeguards Cant Be Too Rigid Oester said that the chemists are well aware of the horsemens desire for protection against erroneous accusations and include themselves among those who are concerned with the presence of reasonable safeguards. "These safeguards, however, must not be made so rigid," Oester said, "that the flagrantly guilty are given safe conduct in their illegal activities." Oester concluded by saying: "Officially, we, as a group, are opposed to any attempt to make use of the procedure. In our sincere interests of obtaining maximum efficiency in the control of drugging, we favor the absolute abolition of the practice of splitting samples. We feel confident that such a step will be of the utmost value not only to the individual horseman, but indeed, to the benefit of the entire racing industry." NARC president Moyer promised Du-mestre that he would be given an opportunity to present his views before the close of the convention tomorrow, if possible with representatives of the chemists present for further questioning and rebuttal. The chemists, however, have considerable unfinished business of their own to transact, and indicated that they might not be able to attend the NARC sessions. The delegates and their wives were guests of Daily Racing Form at a dinner-dance and floor show in the Wedgewood Room of the Waldorf-Astoria this evening. They were also invited to Roosevelt Raceway, where the officials of the Goshen mile track association are eager to entertain them tomorrow night.
