GOSSIP AND SPECULATION

That book, The Coup by Ken Payne, one that every racing fan over a certain age must have read. Triumphs, tragedies, highs and lows, a fictional like existence from a real person but one who at the end of the day will chiefly be linked to doping moderate horses with anabolic steroids to land gambles.

Come to think of it, whenever doping in racing was openly discussed in those days it invariably revolved around anabolic steroids. Some suggested the practice was nothing new and that in the 1960's, these drugs were rife in the sport and that a trainer needed them as part of his armory to ensure it was a level playing field for himself.

Things then evolved. We had Francois Boutin's Trepan winning the Prince Of Wales Stakes and Eclipse Stakes in 1976, then losing both after testing positive for the cocoa based theobromine. People linked the reduction in French raiders soon after to an assumption that they were 'all at it', with rumours that all sorts of drugs and illegal practices were common in the Gallic racing community.

Moving into the 1980's we became accustomed to the frequent discussions centred around the permitted used of Lasix and Bute in the USA, whether the European trainers should do a 'when in Rome' when sending horses over for the derogatory termed 'Bleeders Cup', and the long term effect these drugs may have on masking defects and weakening the breed.

Paul Haigh has written some excellent pieces on the subject of drugs in racing down the years. But it is a testament to how drug and chemical use has branched out when you read his feature on the subject in the August 1987 issue of Pacemaker, concentrating on Lasix and Bute, and compare it with the startling series of articles he did on the subject for the Racing Post in May 2005.

We were now talking of 'milkshaking' and 'blood doping'. Haigh quoted Richard Bomze, the president of the New York Horsemans Association, saying, " Only in racing do guys become superstars at the snap of a finger. It's chemicals and painkillers and we all know who the bums are."

The article highlighted a trend whereby many high ranking trainers first started to perform at the top level exactly at the same time as they employed the same vet. 

'Milkshaking' which would involve administering a bicarbonate mix to an animal through tubes fed through the nose, delays the development of lactic acid and the process of becoming tired during a race. Evidently, in a series of unannounced tests at Del Mar racecourse, 39 % of horses had abnormally high levels of bicarbonate in their system.

With the use of this particular booster being ideal for national hunt racing, tongues wag, and any handler who builds up a pattern of drawing improvement from acquisitions from other yards will be subject to accusatory whispers.

Blood doping has a more sinister feel altogether. Images of Peter Cushing, laboratories and bubbling  blood-filled test tubes. In fact, referring back to French racing circles in the 1970's, allegations were made at the time that horses were being given blood transfusions. 

Monica Dickinson was once quoted saying words to the effect that she had heard a certain trainer was using disturbing procedures to enhance racehorse performance. It was believed she was referring to blood doping. It was rumored to be happening but a leading vet within racing was of the opinion that it would be ineffective as a performance enhancer for racehorses as they carry a natural reserve of oxygen producing red blood cells.

The image of this process became less gory after scientists developed a drug called Epogen (EPO) in the 1980's to treat anemia, and this is what cyclists and athletes have been caught using, tennis players have been accused of using, and is what is alleged to have been in use in horse racing.

Trainer and qualified vet Mark Johnston is another to doubt whether this practice enhances racehorse performance. In his opinion, expressed again recently, blood doping would not give trainers an edge. Like other sceptics, Johnston cited the natural reserves that horses carry.

If you want to be cynical, you could point to the fact that Johnston is racing political savvy, and is of the opinion that punters will turn away from the sport the more they believe sinister forces are at work. A sort of, 'keep mum for the image of the sport'.

When vets and scientists offer a completely opposite view what on earth are the great majority of racing fans who have scant veterinary knowledge expected to make of it all?

In 2001 Charlie Mann came out and stated that EPO is being regularly used in British racing. The common retort was that his training abilities were limited and he was tarring others who were able to do the job better than himself.

On a winter morning in 2002, Jockey Club investigators carried out simultaneous raids on the yards of  Martin Pipe, Paul Nicholls, Venetia Williams, Lenny Lungo and Alan Jones. Tests were carried out for EPO but all came up negative.

Since the advent of the internet world or should I say the Betfair Forum, the accusations against racing people have been more blatant, many libelous whether containing any truth or not as this is an area where you have no hope of backing up your allegations.

There are posters on that forum who are adamant that they know that unofficial warnings are dished out in the sport. And that practices are unveiled that are kept secret from the public for fear of damaging the reputation of the sport even further.

With the Betfair Forum you often have no idea if the person you are conversing with is genuine or a Walter Mitty. There used to be a character who if offended would write,' If you knew who you were addressing you would not be talking to me like that'. He claimed that if he found out who the offending persons were, they would first beware of him then they looked out their window and saw a black car parked outside with darkened window screens.

Another regular poster was shot in the legs a few years back when taking a radiator out of his car boot on waste ground. It's a forum where you treat most with an open mind. It would be foolish to believe that all of the accusations against racing people are made without foundation.

Whenever one reads those appeals put out by the Police when old unsolved murder cases are subject to fresh investigation, the statements always include the bit about, ' allegiances may have changed in the time that has since passed'; the subject of skulduggery in racing comes to mind.

Let's say a trainer was administering the 'magic carrots', twenty, thirty or even forty years ago. Staff employed by the trainer will very likely have moved on, some still within the sport, many leaving it all together.

Admittedly, many will have been kept in the dark about practices occurring, they may have heard rumours but will probably have forgotten most of the details and the names of the substances and procedures involved. But there would have had to have been a small inside circle perhaps involving the trainer, a few owners and a handful of senior staff. Racing is a sport where allegiances can be fickle, where irretrievable fall outs are common.

So with so many allegiances changing, why have we not had a single red top exclusive where we are told about how a certain, highly successful trainer, gained a massive advantage on his rivals through the use of illicit methods?

There is a fear within racing that inward scrutiny with none of the findings hidden would damage the sport and result in punters turning their backs on it for good. The converse is that emerging punters are not much interested in the sport anyway and in the Dick Francis spirit of things, there is nothing like a bit of cheating and fixing to get people curious.

Truth is, the majority of people indifferent to the sport believe it's fixed anyway.

image - the cover of the August 1987 edition of Pacemaker International