STUART S. JANNEY III: Thank you very much. We’re back in session. The Jockey Club is a strong supporter of the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority. Today, a year after implementation of HISA’s Racetrack Safety Program, and a few months after implementation of the Anti-Doping Medication Control Program, we are going to hear from HISA regulators and those affected by it, so welcome to this panel.
JAMES L. GAGLIANO: I’m James Gagliano with The Jockey Club. I’m going to moderate today’s program.
To my left is Ben Mosier, the executive director of the Horseracing Integrity and Welfare Unit. Thank you for being here today, Ben.
BEN MOSIER: Thank you.
JAMES L. GAGLIANO: Jena Antonucci, Belmont Stakes winning trainer. Let’s give her a hand.
JENA ANTONUCCI: Thank you.
JAMES L. GAGLIANO: Thanks for being here.
Ron Moquett, prominent Thoroughbred trainer in his own right, has joined us today.
And Lisa Lazarus of HISA.
We’re going to start off with some pretty general questions. Let’s go to the trainers first. Jena, I’ll ask you, as trainers, what’s it been like for you to work under HISA regulations? What’s changed? How has your life changed and how have you dealt with it?
JENA ANTONUCCI: How my life has changed with HISA would be very different than the racing, but for us we are very blessed and very fortunate. How I run my business has always been pretty detailed.
I think success is in the details, so from a recordkeeping perspective, we have been on the TLAR system for many, many years, and my team knows, my assistant knows, that anything we do with the horses has been documented.
And so I think that’s probably been the biggest shift for a lot of people, is having to put those details in and have it in black and white instead of just having it in your head or in your training charts.
And so for us, we have heard the struggles that others have had with implementing what some of that recordkeeping looks like, but our philosophies have always been a bit more preventive maintenance with horses and preventive healthcare for the horses and not last-minute things.
So really paying attention to, as things are implemented, with withdrawal times and days, and making sure we are adhering to that and paying a little extra attention to those details.
JAMES L. GAGLIANO: Thank you.
Ron, for you, how has it affected you in your business? You run a large stable in multiple states.
RON MOQUETT: Well, luckily the business has prepared me by constantly evolving. As a Thoroughbred trainer there is a new set of rules to follow, and we’re going to adapt to those rules.
Primarily it’s all the same. We keep the priority on the horse and try to do the very best and stay within the guidelines and to be aware of the changes that’s going on around us and the newer expectations.
JAMES L. GAGLIANO: Has it been a challenge for you, specifically since May 22 when the Anti-Doping and Medication Control regulations came into place?
RON MOQUETT: There are a few parts of that that have been very challenging. I would say that you’re dealing with a large group of people that are maybe just now getting introduced to technology. I may be on the younger scale of that, although I don’t feel that young, but I’m helping people that are sometimes my competitors understand what now is being expected and trying to help them kind of navigate the new system.
JAMES L. GAGLIANO: That’s great. Thank you.
Lisa, I’m going to turn to you. Can you explain for our audience the ADMC program’s appeals process and how it makes sure rule followers aren’t getting unfairly punished?
LISA LAZARUS: Sure. I think I probably want to start by saying one of the things that we heard a lot during the rule-making process was the public thinks if a trainer has a medication overage that we’re doping, that we’re a cheater, and they don’t understand the difference between true doping substances and medications that are allowed in racing but just not on race day.
So, one of the things that the program does is it very clearly delineates between controlled medications, which are those therapeutics allowed outside of race day, and the banned substances, theoretically the doping substances.
Under the controlled medication violations, it is quite similar to what previously would take place, in that there is an opportunity to essentially appeal to a panel. It’s called our IAP panel. It’s predominantly filled with stewards from different jurisdictions.
You would have your case heard by a steward in a jurisdiction outside of where that race took place; and then ultimately you have the right to appeal to the Federal Trade Commission and then a federal administrative law judge.
Under the banned doping, which is a different category of substances, there is a provisional suspension that is put in place — if you — either if you have more than one horse with the same banned substance. Otherwise, you have the right to request the B sample and wait for it to come back. If the B sample comes back and confirms the A, then the suspension goes into effect.
But from the get-go you have the opportunity to communicate with HIWU and provide any information that is exculpatory. You have the immediate right to a provisional suspension hearing, which would be limited to whether or not the suspension should be lifted during the pendency of the process.
The key thing is that the provisional suspensions are not in place as a finding of guilt. There is always the presumption of innocence. It’s sort of about risk aversion. So, if there is a serious substance that’s in a horse, the philosophy of the program is that we’re there to protect the 99% of trainers that are competing cleanly. We want to make sure they get a fair race, and we are there to protect the industry as a whole and the risk is too high to allow those horses to continue to race during this period.
JAMES L. GAGLIANO: Ben, tell us about the HIWU drug testing process. What do you want horsemen to know about the system that you put in place, you and your team.
BEN MOSIER: Yeah, I think we’ve built a great team of experts that come from a lot of different industries, including the horse racing industry, but also with science backgrounds, with investigations and FBI backgrounds, with human anti-doping and strategy backgrounds.
And so we’re using all the experience that we have as a team to apply these new rules into this industry. We learn a lot every day. We try to make sure that we’re listening to those who have challenges with the rules, educate those, inform those, and trying to make ourselves available for all these new processes.
In general, the process probably looks the same in a lot of ways for those of you looking from the outside in when it comes to catching a urine sample, collecting a blood sample, still conducting a strong amount of post-race testing.
But some new things that with a strong focus on now a nationwide out-of-competition testing, which is informed through now our nationwide intelligence gathering. So strong partnerships with racing commissions, tracks, and the horsemen to make sure all the information is filtered into one centralized location and apply that information on our testing plan.
That’s one of the biggest changes.
JAMES L. GAGLIANO: Couple follow-ups. Tell us about your team. You mentioned it’s a team that has some experience. Just describe for us — I’ve heard some comments about the team. Tell us about them, please.
BEN MOSIER: Sure, yeah. Many names that a lot of people know, such as Dr. Mary Scollay, Alexa Ravit, who is here with me today and our communications director. You probably received many things about what we’re doing from her.
Also, to carve out our executive team we have Michelle Pujals former assistant general counsel for the NBA and started the NBA drug testing program in the ’90s and managed that up until about 2018.
Then we have Kate Mittelstadt, who is our chief of operations. Many of those have met Kate. She was the second employer ever at USADA, the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, and helped form that entity from what it was when it started in 1999.
So, we’ve put together just a tremendous team. I’m so proud of what we’ve been able to accomplish in a short amount of time.
JAMES L. GAGLIANO: It’s fair to say it’s a pretty experienced team.
How about on the investigative side?
BEN MOSIER: Yes, investigations is very important, led by our two directors of investigations. We have Shaun Richards, formally with the FBI, and as many know, was part of the big cases on the east coast recently.
And then we have Shawn Loehr, who comes from the CHRB. Was their director of investigations for many years.
So, it brings a difference in strategy. You have the FBI, the law enforcement side, and then you have the individual who has worked with racing commissions and knows how to liaise with commissions.
The whole mindset here, the whole goal of the program is to utilize as much of the industry that already existed before, whether it’s investigations coming from racing commissions or even the sample collection personnel that conduct the testing at tracks across the nation.
JAMES L. GAGLIANO: That’s great. Thank you.
Jena, you were very positive about some of the early months here of HISA and how it’s impacted you. What advice would you give to HISA, to the board, to the management team of things you would like to see next?
JENA ANTONUCCI: I think the biggest thing — and actually Lisa and have I have had some great dialog about this — is you take an industry that has been an applied trade for decades and decades and has been passed on from generations, and people learn it by doing it.
We are now laying in this entire protocol that is very technical. It’s very overwhelming. Can be very intimidating. I think we need to continue to work on making it more understandable, more relatable, and I know the marketing team has done a great job.
JAMES L. GAGLIANO: Describe that further, understandable, relatable.
JENA ANTONUCCI: In the sense of people may not understand what due process means. People may not understand what provisional suspensions mean. I think media gets excited about putting a headline out, and now all of a sudden you have trainers, I mean, we are the ultimate insurer.
Everything that happens in our barn, it falls on us. Period. And it can be an innocent person walking into the barn and touching a horse, because they haven’t, and they have touched something that is a banned substance or a controlled substance, and now we are at risk.
And, so, we become a headline because that’s what sells, is people having clickbait. And now you worry about having your reputation that you have done everything you possibly can to do it the right way.
There will always be the outlier in any industry that is nefarious and makes bad decisions or is looking for an edge, but on the whole, every person that goes out onto the racetrack every single day wants the best for their team, for the horses, for the safety and long-term prosperity of this industry.
So, continuing to make this more understandable and more relatable on a simple term of — the Lasix explanation went out not long ago. How horses can still use Lasix and how they can’t use Lasix in terms that are more comfortable.
Continuing to be — I’m very, if there is a problem, come with me to a solution. Don’t just complain about it. I very clearly hear and understand how fellow trainers are very uncomfortable with it and want to talk about everything that’s wrong with it.
We all know there are shortcomings. There are shortcomings in any change. But with every possible complaint there is, continue to come forward with what you feel the solutions are.
Ron is available. I’m available. The entire teams are available and have been asking and jumping up and down for give us the solution to what your concern is, and as long as that accessibility is there, I think we’ll continue to evolve through this change productively.
JAMES L. GAGLIANO: Thank you.
Ron, same question for you.
RON MOQUETT: Well, my job, man of many hats. I train horses. I own horses. I am a member of the HBPA, and I am on the HISA advisory committee.
So, I’m constantly the sounding board. If there is a problem and someone from the industry doesn’t have the number to Lisa and they say this is unfair, this is impossible to do, then they tell me and I tell them.
I see that we’re in an evolution stage. There is no question. It’s new. It’s coming around. There are going to be problems and we’re going to have to listen to horsemen; understand that regulators regulate and horsemen have to follow through.
It doesn’t matter how good she is at her job or he is at his job, we need people like us. We need the Bill Motts and we need the Steve Asmussens. My job is to say, look, I understand what you’re trying to do, but this isn’t applicable or this goal isn’t reachable.
We need to manage expectations of things. We need to do a better job of explaining to people what the differences are between an accidental contamination, overage of a permissible medication and someone trying to gain a competitive edge.
They all shouldn’t be treated the same, so I am constantly a sounding board, look, you can’t do this; you have to do that. I’m basically representing 4,500 people that have to go through every regulation that HISA believes is okay.
Sometimes we don’t agree, so she and I will get together, we’ll battle, and usually come to a — I will say that HISA has got to outrun being the new bully in the room to the people that have to deal with it. It is increased workload with no more money, so they’re having to figure out, how do we make somebody happy and do our job?
I will say that Lisa has been very good about listening to my complaints. And we don’t get along that great all the time. (Laughter.) But I will say that she always hears me out. She understands I speak for a large group, not just me. We generally at least somewhat come to an understanding that there needs to be more work done.
JAMES L. GAGLIANO: Before I ask Lisa to respond to the trainer’s comments, what’s the best way for horsemen to be communicated with in your view? There is this massive amount of information that’s been conveyed by HISA and HIWU, and it’s come on to trainers. In your view, Ron, what is the best way for them to consume...
RON MOQUETT: We’ve had this discussion. One of the things that you’ve got to understand is that — raise a hand everybody here today that cleaned a stall. I don’t see a lot of hands.
We’re constantly in our realm. So get it to us. Not very many people are on Twitter, not very many people check their emails. You have to get it to them. Come to the barn, talk to them, hear what Bill Mott says, hear what Steve Asmussen says, concerns, a way to make it right.
I think if you go to the tracks and you understand that they are having to deal with a lot of stress, a lot of time constraints, and they will listen to you, and they’re very capable of learning.
JAMES L. GAGLIANO: Being a trainer is a 24 hour, 7 day a week job, so that is unusual in a lot of industries, so your point is taken.
Lisa, in response to Jena and Ron’s comments.
LISA LAZARUS: Yea, so first of all I want to say that I’m so grateful, and I think Ben would share the same sentiment, to any trainer, owner, any participant in the sport that reaches out to us and gives us feedback. That is always welcome and sort of part of what we have to do.
What we’re doing is taking international best-in-class standards around anti-doping and we’re trying to make them workable in a horse race setting. Every sport is unique and horse racing is certainly unique, and there are a lot of nuances that have to be considered, massaged, altered.
One of the things I always say is I am never ashamed about changing something or modifying something. I think that’s the ultimate in what we have to all do together.
It’s a brand new system. You can say there has always been anti-doping testing, there has always been safety rules. Of course there have been. But to make them national and to make them uniform and to try to decide whether or not something that works in Indiana is going to also work in Kentucky, also work in New York, Florida.
I mean, those are challenging questions, right? I think from where we sit, we very much want to get it right. We care about the industry. Our only goal is to do right by the majority of the industry. We’re not always going to get that right, but we need to kind of — what we’re going to do is sort of adjust and modify, and to some extent have to take in the information as things roll out.
One of the things I want to say quickly is that, the other thing about the program that I think is really important for people to know is that it is truly designed to weed out accidental contaminations and things trainers can’t control.
We may not always achieve that, but that’s the intention and the goal. We do have an atypical findings policy, where we have 27 substances and if a horse tests positive it goes through a different process. If it is in fact contamination — this is obviously under Ben’s supervision — then the case never comes to light.
Because of that, folks don’t know about them, but we’ve already had a number of those positives, I think like eight or so, that are being dealt with entirely separately. I think we also have through our chief of science and our science teams responsibility screening limits, et cetera.
The intention truly is not to catch somebody who made a silly mistake or somebody walked into the barn and touched a horse. Our program shouldn’t catch that stuff because we understand it. If it’s something you can’t possibly control, we don’t want to regulate it.
We’re there to try to get the elements of the sport that truly are hurting all of us out of the sport.
BEN MOSIER: If I can, I echo Lisa’s sentiments on what our goals are. Are goals aren’t to catch those that are just making unintentional errors. I’m so happy to hear you two talk about how we can continue to educate, outreach, inform the horsemen of these new rules and brainstorm different ideas to do that.
I hope my staff is listening because this is a constant discussion we have every week on how do we reach everyone to make sure that you’re not making unintentional errors. We need input in order to achieve that, and that’s so important to work together on that.
LISA LAZARUS: Productive input.
BEN MOSIER: Correct.
JAMES L. GAGLIANO: Ben, you come to us from other sports. What’s the biggest difference between other sports and this sport? Ron described how trainers, it’s 24/7. You worked in golf, you worked in other sports. Give us some thoughts on the difference that you experienced.
BEN MOSIER: Well, catching urine from a horse is a little different. I’m a good whistler, but I have not done that actual part of it yet.
To me I think about what a lot of the professional sports, and specifically the Olympic sports have gone through on the unification of rules, and it is very similar to what this industry is going through on unifying all the jurisdictions.
JAMES L. GAGLIANO: So, when those sports began a new regulatory scheme, a more rigid regulatory scheme, did you feel some similarities to today?
BEN MOSIER: Absolutely. I have had a lot of individuals looking from the outside in from the anti-doping community, the human anti-doping community, saying it’s like déjà vu listening to what is happening with HISA now being applied across the nation.
The World Anti-Doping Agency did the same thing with over 200 countries in 1999, and look where they are now. They, of course, had their bumps along the way, but trying to unify that many countries in a way is similar to what’s going on now.
JAMES L. GAGLIANO: So, 24 years later for WADA, how are those sports industries? Did they have the same questions and anxieties?
BEN MOSIER: Absolutely. Every year you hear about the same things we’re talking about now. Ensuring that the regulators and the athletes are working together to continue to evolve the rules and make sure that those rules apply realistically to each one of those sports.
I think that’s what we’re trying to achieve here as well.
JAMES L. GAGLIANO: Right.
So, I’m going to ask the trainers one last question and I’ll ask Lisa to close for us. The trainers, in your opinion, are there any specific rules or measures under HISA since the legislation was passed that appear to be having the greatest positive impact on Thoroughbred racing and yourselves?
Jena, I’ll ask you first.
JENA ANTONUCCI: I may be a minority in this thought, but I find it has been the great equalizer.
JAMES L. GAGLIANO: How so?
JENA ANTONUCCI: Let’s see. Let’s walk into this bee’s nest. It isn’t a secret that there is different availability at different levels, and so...
JAMES L. GAGLIANO: Availability?
JENA ANTONUCCI: Availability of different pharmaceuticals, different really smart chemists, people looking to gain edge that you guys have worked so hard to try and neutralize.
I feel the biggest benefit has been to probably the hardest hit of this industry, which is the middle and the smaller and middle size where I think it has allowed a level playing field.
Where that guy or gal that busts their butt seven days a week 24/7 can walk into a race and not feel like they’re going to watch another horse re-break at the head of the stretch.
That their applied trade and skillset will have the opportunity to shine. Where that 8% training historically, where it looks like I can’t train a racehorse, wow, all of a sudden she’s winning more or he’s winning more. It’s not because we’ve done anything different in our practice.
It’s just that we’ve been able to walk forward now and know that, you know what? What I do I do darn well. My opportunity and horse’s opportunity to come forward, whether it’s an amazing opportunity of a Grade 1 Belmont Stake or a $12,500 maiden is going to have the opportunity to march down that stretch and compete eye to eye with the horse that is next to them, and there is not a pharmaceutical in our way.
JAMES L. GAGLIANO: That’s powerful.
Ron, same question for you.
RON MOQUETT: I think that anything that puts focus on the horse is a positive. I don’t think that our industry was without regulation before HISA. I believe that we were always one of the most regulated sports in the world.
I think that the increase of scrutiny is obviously going to come into play positively for the animal. We hope that everyone is playing fair. We know that we have got some people at every level that are looking to weed out the very, very, very small percentage of those that may risk an animal and/or try to gain a competitive edge.
Now, what I want out of this is I want horsemanship to not be an afterthought. I want horsemanship to be applauded and not replaced with a regulation.
I want to continue to see the sport that I love and sacrificed my life for to grow and keep the horse first. I believe that regulations are necessary and I believe that it should be on everybody’s mind, but you’re not going to regulate your way out of this mess that we’re in with public perception.
We are going to have to use common sense horsemanship applied with smart regulations. I think that you’re going to see — you’re going to gradually see a big increase of people outside the industry respecting what we’re doing.
JAMES L. GAGLIANO: Lisa shared with me how productive your participation has been in that regard. Really admirable.
RON MOQUETT: Yeah, it’s never going to be perfect. I’m on the HISA committee and also an HBPA member. HBPA members, we are representation, and so my job is to add a little friction and just say, well, that’s goofy. Why are we doing that? Why can’t we do it this way?
For the most part I’m met with at least discussion. That’s all we want is a seat at the table.
JAMES L. GAGLIANO: Lisa, you’ve heard some great comments here. I’m going to ask you to wrap it up with thoughts that you have from this panel.
LISA LAZARUS: Sure. So, I think we all heard what Jena said, and that’s obviously the ideal, that’s the goal, that’s the mission, right? That’s the only thing that we’re in place to do, which is to protect the industry and make sure that those that are racing clean have a level playing field.
We have to marry that with the issues that Ron raised, which is not getting rid of horsemanship. The magic is in finding that balance. I think we’ve just started off on this journey. It’s not even three months. You said a few months. It was May 22 that we launched the Anti-Doping Medication Control program, so we’re learning from that experience.
We know what our goals are, and overtime, and especially with good dialog with trainers like Jena and Ron, we’re going to get the feedback I think that we need to fine tune and ultimately be able to have that perfect balance between the clear objectives of protecting the industry, of having a level playing field, but not forgetting the essence of horse racing and what trainers bring to the table.
I think that’s where we really have got to do better.
JAMES L. GAGLIANO: Thank you. I want to ask the audience to give a round of applause to this great panel. I think it was very productive. We will throw it back to chairman Janney for the rest of the program.
Thank you very much, panelists. It was great.
|
