Jump to content

Talk:Bob Baffert

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

More sources

[edit]

Some sources for footnoting and expanding the article:

Another good one from the NYTimes

And don't forget the Equibase profile for sourcing stats. http://www.equibase.com/profiles/Results.cfm?type=People&searchType=T&eID=83 Jlvsclrk (talk) 05:47, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

One of these days/weeks/months/years, we really do have to get this article to GA status, if for no other reason than to dissuade the vandals… ;-) Montanabw(talk) 03:13, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Bob Baffert. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:47, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bob Baffert. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:09, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 29 March 2018

[edit]

Add to ==Accomplishments== section

In 2017, Baffert won the Pegasus World Cup with one of his trained horses, Arrogate. [1] Thecreativejanet (talk) 06:07, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Partly done: Claim is correct per this better source but does not require full sentence - added to lead sentence of paragraph. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:00, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.khaleejtimes.com/sport/horse-racing/honour-and-privilege-to-race-at-dubai-world-cup-baffert

request edit

[edit]

I am attempting to made edits and corrections to my article, but it keeps reverting back to the original text. I would like this to be rectified and the innacuracies corrected. I am not sure how this works, but I would prefer having control over my own article/page. Thank you, Bob BaffertDubaibob (talk) 01:55, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Update with Doping Allegations

[edit]

I have not yet, but a section titled "Controversies" should be considered as he has now had numerous horses test postive and subsequently disqualified from races for drug violations, including Grade One races as one of which famously is the recently crowned champion sprinter, Gamine. It is prudent on us as editors of Wikipedia to have all the information out there. It is not libelous or a mischaracterization, at this point it is simply facts. AfleetAlexsBalance (talk) 22:10, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. And particularly since Medina Spirit's death. Baffert has been banned from 2 Kentucky Derbies, and I think it's biased to not include this information. See Lance Armstrong's page to see that this is par for the course for drug allegations and athletes. Seeker095 (talk) 04:54, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Trump's junkie quote

[edit]

Read that post and see sarcasm sign in it. Dude is not telling that horse is a junkie. No point in adding that rant to this article as article is not about some election fraud claims.

Added a few things

[edit]

Hi all, I mentioned it a long time ago looks like but I added a controversies section. There's been enough lately that it seems valid. I have a whole list of stuff so added it all in there, and it I felt it was necessary to add since stuff is piling on especially with the NYRA lawsuit coming up later this month.

I also formatted the "Triple Crown In-The-Money Finishes" section to a table and added all Triple Crown finishes. Felt a table was easier to read than the three columns before, and all time finish is handy to have there. It might be too much, I am happy to edit it down to just in the money.

Cheers all! AfleetAlexsBalance (talk) 18:16, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The table was nicely done, and a controversy section is appropriate, but the huge laundry list of all Baffert’s past sanctions had undue weight (wasn’t WP:NPOV and so I had to chop it down and summarize. (Just like a few years ago I took a hatchet to someone else who added an endless string of all his victories. I kind of wonder if he’s got a reputation management firm patrolling this page, there’s been some odd edits from time to time…) We have to wait for actual rulings on the pending cases. Montanabw(talk) 04:39, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, looks way better! Though, I do feel the Gamine double positives and Charlatan positive in 2020 should be added to the list, as well since that is a huge aspect of Medina Spirit's situation, especially since Gamine was DQ'd for the same drug and was her second time failing. And, Charaltan's was in a G1 event. I see you mentioned it a bit but didn't include Charaltan's name. He has received heat for blaming his failed tests on his staff, so I think the morphine case (where he blamed poppy seed bagels) and the Lidocaine he blamed on Mr. Jimmy Barnes is worth including. But I thoroughly digress to your judgement, you're much more seasoned at this than me. AfleetAlexsBalance (talk) 05:50, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I added Gamine’s Oaks DQ, as that was a major race and the same drug, and I found a LA Times article that had useful info, but we really do have to not get into the weeds. Wikipedia has to be NPOV and while I don’t believe in the false equivalence thing like saying “both good and bad have to be equal”, we do have to balance that he’s in the Hall of Fame and one of the most successful Thoroughbred trainers in history. This could all blow over like Steve Asmussen’s PETA bust and Doug O'Neill’s medication troubles from a few years back, or it could go like Lance Armstrong and he goes down for good. Or something in between. We just don’t know. So, balance. Montanabw(talk) 06:26, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Introductory Paragraph

[edit]

Hi Everyone, I am very new to Wikipedia but have been following horse racing for years. I deleted the last sentence of the the into on Baffert. "He has been the subject of significant controversy regarding repeated incidents of his horses failing drug tests or dying under his care." The reasons I feel that it should be deleted is: 1. There are many reason according to many sources why Baffert is controversial. Everyone seems to have very strong opinions of him whether good or bad. This statement was not sourced but feels more like an opinion. 2. There is an entire section on controversies. People can go there and read both sides of the story and make up their own mind. 3. Adding this to the first paragraph feels inflammatory. I love Wikipedia because I believe everything on it. If I read that repeated incidents of horses failing drug tests and horses dying in his care on his intro page. I wouldn't want to read anymore. I would think he is evil and drugs and kills horses. Horses being mistreated, drugged, dying... they are noble animals, everyone would immediately be against him. When you go to the Controversies, we learn that Justify could have been from contamination and a groom could be the cause of another positive. 4. Churchill Downs just ended Baffert's suspension. I don't believe that they would have done that if they believe he drugged and killed horses. 5. In doing a lot of research, the other trainers don't speak out against him. In fact D. Wayne Lucas was on his side and Mike Repole, who is one of the biggest owners, and does not use him as a trainer, he uses Todd Pletcher, tweeted that Baffert should be allowed to run in the Derby. 6. Do people hate him because he wins so much, or does he really drug his horses. I can't be certain, and no one else can. But why would trainers and owners who have to complete against him take his side if he drugged and killed horses? Why would Churchill ever allow him to run again. It would ruin the Kentucky Derby, they would be blamed. 6. I don't know all the answers, neither does anyone. I feel Wikipedia should be held to the highest standard, because everyone works so hard to bring accurate information that why it is so respected. I am not suggested that Everything is taken off, but I 100% believe that this should be taken off the first page. @StefenTower: Stephen Tower put the edit back up noting: reduce hagiographic language from lead; mentioning a major controversy should stay as well. StphenTower has 169,377 and I have five hundred edits. He obviously knows a million times more than I do about Wikipedia. 7. I also created the chart for Records Held. I love charts. If anyone can make improvements please let me know. I was going to put purses as a column but it seemed to long. I would love to out this chart on all the trainers and jockeys who hold records. Please let me know your thoughts. I am happy to discuss... my user page is Anointed 777. Although I have just started everyone has been so kind and has really helped me. I can already tell what an amazing community this is and I hope I can add to it. Thank you... sorry for the long note, I just want everyone to know that I wouldn't delete something this important without feeling like it was justified? Thank you everybody!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Annointed777 (talk • contribs) 23:08, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We are not here to protect feelings nor are we here to write overly glowing things about these subjects. We are writing an encyclopedia. I rewrote the lead to get it closer to the facts based on reliable sources and what's in the body of the article. That's not to say it cannot be improved further, of course. At any rate, the lead as it is spends most of its time talking about the subject's accomplishments before briefly mentioning controversies. That seems balanced to me. Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 23:58, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introductory paragraph

[edit]

@StefenTower: Stefen Tower and the Community, do you agree with the way I feel people will view this? I didn't take this down again, I wanted to get your feedback. I do think those few lines at the end of first paragraph should be deleted. There could be a reference to the Controversies Section, then people can read and make up their own mind. What are your thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Annointed777 (talk • contribs) 23:18, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We are not here to protect anyone's feelings. We are here to write an encyclopedia. Having one sentence about the controversies this subject is embroiled in is more than fair. If the lead section was more expansive, it would probably get more than one sentence. There has been coverage of these controversies year after year after year, and we cannot just ignore them. Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 23:48, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, please start signing your comments. I had to add signatures after the fact. Also, I have no idea why two topics were started on essentially the same matter. Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 00:07, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Stephen Tower
I appreciate your dedication to maintaining a high standard for the encyclopedia. Your contributions are impressive, and I have a lot of respect for your work. As someone who is still learning, I'm eager to follow your lead.
I feel that the current wording appears biased, and my intention is only to address that. I believe it's important not to ignore the issue but to present it fairly. I like the other changes you've made to the paragraph. They are balanced and fair, which showed me you are a fair person. Probably why you have become such a star on here.
For the last sentence of the paragraph, what about rephrasing it to something like this: Baffert has been a controversial figure, which was only heightened by the disqualification of the 2021 Kentucky Derby winner, Medina Spirit. After being absent from the Derby for three years. Churchill Downs lifted the suspension from Baffert. For further information see Controversies. Do you feel something like this would work?
My thoughts on this is also that this suspension from Churchill was from a topical ointment. I agree that the trainer is ultimately responsible and Baffert did ultimately take responsibility for it. Please don't think I am defending all of his actions. I have read a lot about this and the main stream media seems so against the sport in general that it is hard to determine what is the truth. That is why this Wikipedia page is so important to get right. This page could be the only "real truth" on the internet. I don't think that an opinion about him should be included or be an influence in his bio and that is what the last sentence feels like. It seems like whoever wrote it doesn't like him. That is immediately how it hit me and I asked a few other people and they agreed. Personal feeling should not be part of this. I don't believe that Churchill Downs would have lifted the suspension or would have ever let him race again at their track if they felt that he could in anyway jeopardize the integrity of The Kentucky Derby. Jason Servis and Navarro drugged their horses, they are in prison. If Baffert was enemy number #1 why was he not part it. I don't have the answers, but through all the failed drug tests, the one that got Baffert suspended was from ointment. HIWU has reversed multiple suspensions because later they conceded it was contamination. I am not suggesting we paint him like a saint, but he has accomplished unbelievable things in this sport. He is the most recognizable figure. Please consider all the facts. I now you are fair. Is there a way we can re-write the last couple sentences.
I thought adding my signature was just adding my user name-UUUGh. Sorry I am a song writer, this is a completely different world for me. I love this and want to be great at it. I would also love to help you on projects you are working on and learn from you. Please let me know if I can be of assistance to you. I accidentally created a second topic. Sorry about that. Wikipedia is really intimidating when you start. I will learn all the rules.
Thank you for your Patience, consideration and guidance. Annointed777 @Stephen Tower:. (Annointed777 (talk)) Annointed777 (talk) 04:55, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is a lot of reliable source coverage of controversies/problems. Whatever we do, it should summarize this in the lead. If we were perfectly fair, we should say even more in a second lead paragraph given all the coverage. Currently, the article is being way more than fair. I don't think it is all bound up in the Churchill Downs suspension, but that the suspension is surely connected to the series of problems. I would support mentioning the suspension in addition to what is shown now, not in place of it. The bottom line is we sum up the article in the lead. We cannot brush away the reported controversies/problems of the subject. If you believe you cannot remove your positive bias, it may be best to no longer work on this article. I myself stay away from articles where my bias may affect my editing choices. Again, we are not here to guard feelings, but rather to describe facts. Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 05:32, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Stefen Tower for taking the time to work on this with me. I appreciate it so much. I don't think I have a positive bias. I know that a positive bias is as detrimental as a negative one. I am going to think about everything you said and work on some possibilities and get your feedback and hopefully your approval. It may take me a day or two. I am also going to go back through all the allegations. I do think this is a really important page. He is the face of racing. I think we will get it perfect.@StepenTower: (Annointed777 (talk))
Thank you again!!! Annointed777 Annointed777 (talk) 06:51, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Stefen Tower and Community,
I have conducted an extensive review, reading dozens of articles on Bob Baffert. I believe it is essential to go over each accusation (Horses dying and horses failing drug tests) separately. This is just addressing Horses dying under his care. I ensured that I approached these articles without any positive bias. I firmly believe that the statement regarding "dying horses under his care" should be removed, and I will explain why, hoping you will agree.
Firstly, there is a chart from the Washington Post with the headline "The Dark Side of Bob Baffert's Reign." The chart lists trainers and the deaths per 1,000 starts, showing Baffert with the highest at 8.3% - 74 deaths out of 8,913 starts. Another trainer, Jerry Hollendorfer, A trainer who was no longer allowed to run at Santa Anita. is listed at 6.25% - 122 deaths out of 19,516 races.
This presentation by the Washington Post is misleading. The horse racing industry uses deaths per thousand starts as a standard metric. According to ESPN in April 2024, the industry average was 1.32 deaths per 1,000 starts in 2023, and a recent report indicates that this number has decreased to 0.78 per 1,000 starts.
The headline on the Washington Post article, "The Dark Side of Bob Baffert's Reign" is obviously biased. If there were 74 or 75 horses that died under Baffert's care in the last 24 years (a figure contested by Baffert's attorney), it is crucial to define what "under his care" means. This could refer to horses bought at a sale, those being saddle-broken, or those in training. This information is not readily available.
Baffert manages a large stable with numerous horses annually. Ideally, no horse would die under any trainer's care, but this is not realistic. According to the Los Angeles Times, ( Titles: The Last stand of Bob Baffert, Horse Racings Most Successful and Embattled Trainer) Baffert has had 75 horse fatalities since 2000 due to racing, training, illness, or non-exercise accidents. Importantly, Baffert had only two fatalities in prior three years of when the articles was written,Oct 1.2021 They wrote that it's a low number of deaths for a barn of his size. One horse, Carson Valley, died in a freak accident, and another, Noodles, died from a non-exercise induced respiratory issue. During this period, there were 188 deaths involving racing or training in California, with at least 39 trainers having more fatalities than Baffert.
Jerry Hollendorfer, who had a higher percentage of horse deaths, was banned from racing at Santa Anita. Yer, this is what his introduction Wikipedia says:
Jerry Hollendorfer (born June 18, 1946, in Akron, Ohio) is an American Thoroughbred racehorse trainer whose notable horses include Eclipse Award winners Blind Luck, Shared Belief and Songbird. He has the most wins in the history of Northern California race horse trainers. In 2011, he was inducted into the US Racing Hall of Fame.
Wikipedia ends Jerry Hollendofers introduction with him being inducted into Racings Hall of Fame, Bob was not banned for horse death and his last sentence talks about drug violations and horse deaths. Jerry Hollendofer has had many more horse deaths.
Baffert's percentage does not reach 8.3%, and even Hollendorfer does not have a 6.25% death rate per 1,000 starts. The new media has not been fair to Baffert of the sport of horse racing.
Trainers of high-stakes horses generally do not have high percentages of horse deaths; these occur more frequently among trainers running many claiming horses.
Baffert is indeed a controversial figure, but the data does not support the claim that his horses die at a higher rate than those of other trainers. In fact, the evidence suggests otherwise. According to the LA Times article that I quoted above, Baffert had only two horse deaths in three years, both under exceptional circumstances.
I believe you are fair and I believe that what is going on with Baffert isn't. I believe the statement about dying horses under Baffert's care should be reconsidered. Would you please consider this and then I will present what I found about the medication violations. That is definitely not as black and white as the horse deaths. Thank you for taking the time to read this!!!@StefenTower:(Annointed777 (talk))Annointed777 Annointed777 (talk) 03:31, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Stefen Tower and Community,
I wanted to add one more thing regarding the into to Bob Baffert's into on Wikipedia. I found what Encyclopedia Britannica. They handled the controversies but not in paragraph one. I think they did a really professional job. This is what I am asking and suggesting that we do with Baffert's page. It leaves no room for bias, positive or negative and it is just a factual account of his career.
Britanica
Bob Baffert (born January 13, 1953, Nogales, Arizona, U.S.) is an American Thoroughbred racehorse trainer who is one of the most successful trainers in American horse-racing history. He notably trained American Pharoah and Justify, both of which won the Triple Crown (victories in the Kentucky Derby, the Preakness Stakes, and the Belmont Stakes), and he is tied for the most Kentucky Derby wins (six).
Baffert grew up on his parents’ cattle ranch in Arizona. In his teens he raced as a Quarter Horse jockey, began his training career, and studied animal sciences at the University of Arizona. He eventually moved to southern California and trained four champion Quarter Horses. He made his first Thoroughbred auction purchase with Thirty Slews in 1988. Thirty Slews went on to win the 1992 Breeders’ Cup Sprint.
2015 Belmont StakesAmerican Pharoah crossing the finish line to win the 147th Belmont Stakes and capture the American Triple Crown, June 6, 2015.
Britannica Quiz
All About Horse Racing Quiz
Baffert’s first Triple Crown race came in 1996, when Cavonnier finished second by a nose in the Kentucky Derby. Baffert became the first trainer ever to win the Kentucky Derby and the Preakness in consecutive years (1997 and 1998), with Silver Charm and Real Quiet, respectively. In 2001 his horse Point Given took the Preakness and the Belmont after a disappointing fifth-place finish in the Kentucky Derby. The following year he guided War Emblem to wins in the first two Triple Crown races before again facing disappointment at the Belmont. After he conditioned War Emblem, Baffert did not train another winning horse in any of the Triple Crown races until Lookin at Lucky captured the 2010 Preakness. In 2015 American Pharoah charged to solid victories in the Kentucky Derby (by a length), the Preakness Stakes (by 7 lengths in rain and mud), and the Belmont Stakes (by 5 1/2 lengths) in Baffert’s fourth attempt at the Triple Crown, becoming the 12th American Triple Crown winner and the first since Affirmed in 1978. In 2018 Baffert had another Triple Crown winner when Justify won the Kentucky Derby (by 2 1/2 lengths), the Preakness Stakes (by 1/2 length), and the Belmont Stakes (by 1 3/4 lengths); the first two races were run in rain and mud. Baffert became just the second trainer (after Sunny Jim Fitzsimmons) to win the Triple Crown twice. In addition, he surpassed D. Wayne Lukas for most Triple Crown race wins (15).
With Authentic’s win at the Kentucky Derby in 2020, Baffert registered his sixth victory in the race, tying the record held by Ben Jones. However, this came as Baffert faced growing allegations of cheating. Over the course of his career, nearly 50 of his horses had tested positive for banned substances, and, at the time of his record-tying win, he was serving a suspension by the Arkansas Racing Commission. He apologized and stated that he “want[ed] to have a positive influence on the sport of horse racing.” In 2021 Baffert made history as Medina Spirit took first place at the Kentucky Derby, giving him an unprecedented seventh victory. However, the horse later tested positive for a banned substance, and Baffert was barred from competing in the race for two years. The New York Racing Association also issued a temporary ban, causing him to miss the 2021 Belmont Stakes; a federal court later overturned the suspension. In February 2022 the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission disqualified Medina Spirit from the previous year’s Kentucky Derby and suspended Baffert for 90 days. Baffert said that he would appeal.
Baffert won the Eclipse Award for Outstanding Trainer for three straight years (1997–99) and helped 11 horses to the title of Horse of the Year in their respective divisions. He was inducted into the National Museum of Racing and Hall of Fame in 2009.
Paul DiGiacomo
The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica
Thank you Stefen Tower for taking the time to go through this.The more articles I read on Baffert the more I realize how a lot of the media wants horse racing to stop and Baffert is their number one target. Again, I am not asking or suggesting that the "Controversies" are not addresses, but I think they should be addressed in the proper place. I think Britannica did a very nice and professional job. What are your thoughts? @StefenTower: (Annointed777 (talk)) Annointed777 Annointed777 (talk) 23:07, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Stefen Tower,
I don't know if you have had time to read through everything I posted for you. I have a suggestion. Please let me know what you think.
He has been a subject of significant controversy due to his outspoken personality and recent events surrounding the Kentucky Derby. He was suspended and later reinstated following the use of the topical steroid cream betamethasone on his Kentucky Derby winner, Medina Spirit, who was subsequently disqualified. The media has a love-hate relationship with him, often amplifying both his successes and controversies.
I think this gives enough information in the intro paragraph. I also have articles from Washington Post and MSNBC that attack horse racing and give arguments that horse racing should no longer exist as a sport. MSNBC and Washington Post both site statistics on Baffert from the Washington Post that is inaccurate.
I think the above paragraph states the truth and does not have a bias one way or the other. Will you accept this change? @StefenTower: (Annointed777 (talk)) Annointed777 Annointed777 (talk) 23:45, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Like I said before, we are not here to edit in a way to try to defend a subject, and the lead should summarize the body of the article. The controversy around Medina Spirit should be added to what we have now - I selected your second sentence to add to the lead. Also, the idea that the subject has these issues due to his personality is rather POV and comes off as us editors making excuses for a defense. We do not evaluate why the media decides to report about anything. We just reflect them. Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 05:50, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, what Britannica says is generally irrelevant. We're just trying to write a good summary of the article body. That's the only thing being discussed here. Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 05:52, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Stefen Tower,
I am not trying to defend a subject. I am just trying to add facts. I have read in so many articles that it is Baffert's personality that causes controversy. I didn't make this up. I've read dozens or articles over the weekend. Most of the failed drug tests are bute... that is like basically aspirin. Justify, I didn't know a lot about his failed drug test until this weekend. I can show you an in-depth article that was really eye opening. It clearly shows it was contamination. Other horses with other trainers had the same positive in the same time period. I am happy to show you the article.
Baffert is not Jorge Navarro. Everyone thinks that he has some super drug that is why he wins so much. His horses do not test positive for illegal drugs just medication that is over by picograms. I LOVE horses, I have bred, owned and have shown Arabians. I got out of it because it was abusive to the horses. I rescue and save Chimpanzees. If Baffert was enemy number one I wouldn't be fighting for this.
I am just not sure since I am new to Wikipedia that I am presenting the facts to you the correct way. Could you please tell me the information that you would need to change your mind?
This is really ignorant to me because I believe this is giving a false narrative to the sport.
I find over and over again that the news is not reporting the numbers correctly. He doesn't have more horses dying than other trainers. I have been following this sport for years.
I am asking this with the highest respect for you. Is there any way that you have made up your mind about Baffert and believe that he is bad for the sport, that he drugs and kills his horses? This is the narrative that a lot of people believe. Would you consider having a neutral party review all the information and make a decision? Maybe I have a positive bias and I don't realize it, and again (I am saying this totally respectfully that maybe you have a negative bias) If I have a positive bias it's not for Baffert it's for horse racing, and yes I do think he is good for the sport. I think he has incredible talent and sadly he is very controversial and has created a lot of enemies. I don't blame you if you do have a negative bias towards him, a lot of people do.
I don't know if you have heard the tape when they told Baffert about the drug positive on Medina Spirit. Yes, they taped the conversation and it was put out. You can tell by Baffert voice, he did not know he was being taped. People in this sport want him to be this evil person. I don't believe he is, but my belief doesn't matter. I am backing everything up with news articles.
Just to clarify my position. I am not disagreeing with having a section on Controversies, although there are a lot of unsourced statements that need to be addressed in it. I am merely asking that a inflammatory statement that is very misleading is not on the first section of the bio page.
Would you please consider changing failing drug tests to medication violations.
Failing drug test implies that his horses are failing test because of illegal drugs. This is not the case, the drugs, besides the contaminated straw with Justify were all permitted. Baffert's horse just had overages. Dying under his care is just inflammatory. Where is the source that shows the horses who have died under his care? I could not find what even constitutes a "horse in his care", or the reasons that the horses died. We need this information before a statement this damaging is written as fact. Until this information is located, I think it is fair to add the word allegedly. Is this agreeable to you? I will contact Paulick, Horse Racing Nation, DRF, and Bloodhorse to see if they have this information available. I could not find it anywhere on the internet.
So if you are agreeable, the new sentence would read. Baffert has been the subject of significant controversy regarding medication violations and allegedly having a high number of horses die under his care. A high number of horses dying under his care cannot be confirmed.
If we can't come to any resolution then I do think it is fair to have a neutral party evaluate this situation. Are you okay with that? I am hoping that we can work together a lot in the future. I hope this request is not offending you in any way. Again I have nothing but respect for you. I just don't feel leaving this up is the correct thing to do. for Wikipedia or for horse racing.
Again thank you for taking the time to read this.
P.S. I just joined the WikiProject on Horse Racing. I would love to work with you on something fun, I also see you had a YouTube Channel. I am excited to see your show. I subscribed to your channel! We are both just passionate about this. Passion is a good thing.
@StefenTower: (Annointed777 (talk)) Annointed777 Annointed777 (talk) 07:28, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think what it says now is a good, short summary. Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 07:35, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I did not sign on to a discussion about additional material for the article. The only thing I'm here for is to discuss is how the lead best can reflect what is currently in the article. If you are wondering why I have ignored a lot of what you have presented, that is why. Since the only thing I did was copyedit the lead, that is all I am truly bound to discuss. If you think a third party is going to come up with something different, you are always free to pursue that. I write to summarize the contents, per WP:LEAD. And that's what other seasoned editors will say too. Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 09:44, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Stefen Tower for the clarification. I do think I have produced articles from the LA Times that refutes the statement "dying horses in his care". They came up with a totally different opinion based on the facts that they are going by. Numerous articles state that Baffert has had medication infractions, they all agree that the medications were not banned or prohibited substances. They were overages by of allowed substances by picograms. As I have said the only thing I would like a 3rd party to review is those two statements which I feel are inaccurate. Thank you for understanding and not taking it personal. I hope we can work together a lot in the future.
@StephenTower: (Annointed777 (talk)) Annointed777 Annointed777 (talk) 17:31, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bob_Baffert&oldid=1252197866"