Derby Trail Forums

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Paddock (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   CushionTrack: "We'll fix or replace SA surface" (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19120)

pgardn 01-04-2008 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
I believe that uninformed opinions that have no basis or evidence are much more dangerous than all the supposed drug use going on. Trying to tie 'drug use' and genetics is a stretch at best, rubbish at worst. The fact that people within the industry have made similar statements does not excuse the fact that they are wrong also.

You are too kind.
It is worse than rubbish.
Basically this says that
the use of drugs that enhance performance
or just allow a horse to run, changes
the DNA in sex cells of
thoroughbreds.

The poster will win a Nobel prize
in Biology and reverse the last 60 years
of research in Biochemistry if this is proven.

Or was the poster just saying that it does not
allow breeders, etc... to cull horses that have obvious
defects that MAY be genetic because the drugs mask it?

JJP 01-04-2008 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
I believe that uninformed opinions that have no basis or evidence are much more dangerous than all the supposed drug use going on. Trying to tie 'drug use' and genetics is a stretch at best, rubbish at worst. The fact that people within the industry have made similar statements does not excuse the fact that they are wrong also.

OK, then how else can one explain the increased brittleness of the breed? The average number of starts per horse per year keeps declining. Over the past 30-40 years, they've been huge declines. Change in training methods? Maybe but why the need? Obviously quite a few barns feel the need to rest their horses as much as possible, apparently because they feel their horses can't handle a heavier workload. Is everyone juicing? Of course not. But, lets face it; a lot of these so-called super trainers have had more than one post race positive.

hoovesupsideyourhead 01-04-2008 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJP
OK, then how else can one explain the increased brittleness of the breed? The average number of starts per horse per year keeps declining. Over the past 30-40 years, they've been huge declines. Change in training methods? Maybe but why the need? Obviously quite a few barns feel the need to rest their horses as much as possible, apparently because they feel their horses can't handle a heavier workload. Is everyone juicing? Of course not. But, lets face it; a lot of these so-called super trainers have had more than one post race positive.

global warming.......ask the nobel prize winner...and father of the internet

Stall Mucker 01-04-2008 07:53 PM

somebody help
 
I thought the following:

Polytrack race tracks-usually always listed as fast

Tapeta- usually listed as Tapeta

Cushion- usually listed as Cushion

Santa Anita lists their cushion as FAST

Cannon Shell 01-04-2008 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJP
OK, then how else can one explain the increased brittleness of the breed? The average number of starts per horse per year keeps declining. Over the past 30-40 years, they've been huge declines. Change in training methods? Maybe but why the need? Obviously quite a few barns feel the need to rest their horses as much as possible, apparently because they feel their horses can't handle a heavier workload. Is everyone juicing? Of course not. But, lets face it; a lot of these so-called super trainers have had more than one post race positive.

Since cmorioles thinks I am a know it all I will defer to Dr Larry Bramlage in his recent Bloodhorse chat.



Maple Shade, NJ:
Hi Dr. Bramlage, So glad you are chatting with us! My question is about the source of breakdowns. I have done some research on this and it does seem that horses started to breakdown more regularly and with lighter schedules in the late sixties. Now, it seems commonplace. Do you think it has more to do with steroid use, light training or inbreeding to a few sire lines. Also, how do you feel about horses that were not that sound themselves being hot property in the breeding world? Isn't this just passing along more unsoundness?

Bramlage:
Please refer to the earlier question on weakening of the breed. We don't place a premium on longevity or soundness in the market. Because the market does not pay a premium for it, horses are not selected for soundness, just extreme ability. Extreme ability comes at a price. A bigger engine with a lighter undercarriage is lighter and faster, if it is a car or a horse. Data shows that even though horses race fewer times, the training and the races are tougher, so the demand is higher than 50 years ago. So many factors weigh into this analysis we could discuss it for a long time, but it does not mean that we should accept anything that we can modify for the better as unchangeable. That is why the new nationwide documentation of injury is so vital, important and promising. It is time we critically assess each injury.



and...



Lexington, KY:
What in your opinion would happen to field sizes if U.S. racing were to go to absolutely no race-day medication?

Bramlage:
My opinion, nothing. The average field size has decreased less than one horse per field in the last 60 years. When we calculated the average field size it went from approximately 8.9 horses/field to 8.1 horses/field in 60 years. The leveling influence in the field size is that there is not a lot of demand to run 10th through 14th. If you enter and the field comes up very tough, the current mentality is to scratch and run the next opportunity. That is not how it is supposed to be, but it is the reality, partially driven by the cost of keeping a horse in training, and the need to be competitive when you run. We raise five times more horses each year than we did in each year in the1950’s. The number of racing opportunities is about equal. We have fewer tracks, but they have more dates. This means that if each horse was willing to run in about the equal proportion to what they ran in 1950, the average field would be 40 horses. Field size is most closely linked to the opportunity to be competitive.

hoovesupsideyourhead 01-04-2008 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
Since cmorioles thinks I am a know it all I will defer to Dr Larry Bramlage in his recent Bloodhorse chat.



Maple Shade, NJ:
Hi Dr. Bramlage, So glad you are chatting with us! My question is about the source of breakdowns. I have done some research on this and it does seem that horses started to breakdown more regularly and with lighter schedules in the late sixties. Now, it seems commonplace. Do you think it has more to do with steroid use, light training or inbreeding to a few sire lines. Also, how do you feel about horses that were not that sound themselves being hot property in the breeding world? Isn't this just passing along more unsoundness?

Bramlage:
Please refer to the earlier question on weakening of the breed. We don't place a premium on longevity or soundness in the market. Because the market does not pay a premium for it, horses are not selected for soundness, just extreme ability. Extreme ability comes at a price. A bigger engine with a lighter undercarriage is lighter and faster, if it is a car or a horse. Data shows that even though horses race fewer times, the training and the races are tougher, so the demand is higher than 50 years ago. So many factors weigh into this analysis we could discuss it for a long time, but it does not mean that we should accept anything that we can modify for the better as unchangeable. That is why the new nationwide documentation of injury is so vital, important and promising. It is time we critically assess each injury.



and...



Lexington, KY:
What in your opinion would happen to field sizes if U.S. racing were to go to absolutely no race-day medication?

Bramlage:
My opinion, nothing. The average field size has decreased less than one horse per field in the last 60 years. When we calculated the average field size it went from approximately 8.9 horses/field to 8.1 horses/field in 60 years. The leveling influence in the field size is that there is not a lot of demand to run 10th through 14th. If you enter and the field comes up very tough, the current mentality is to scratch and run the next opportunity. That is not how it is supposed to be, but it is the reality, partially driven by the cost of keeping a horse in training, and the need to be competitive when you run. We raise five times more horses each year than we did in each year in the1950’s. The number of racing opportunities is about equal. We have fewer tracks, but they have more dates. This means that if each horse was willing to run in about the equal proportion to what they ran in 1950, the average field would be 40 horses. Field size is most closely linked to the opportunity to be competitive.

yea chuck ya know it all....zip it mr....stop running your sewer...

Cannon Shell 01-04-2008 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead
yea chuck ya know it all....zip it mr....stop running your sewer...

Sorry for taking up your bandwidth

Riot 01-04-2008 08:41 PM

Chuck forgot my favorite Dr. Bramlage descriptor of the TB racehorse (and he did two days on Bloodhorse, it's still up if you guys want to read it, really good stuff)

Quote:

Shawnee, KS:
With the push for more tracks to go to a synthetic surface ... or are we just trying to gloss over problems within our breeding industry. I.E. too much inbreeding and or an over saturation of less than quality individuals being bred?

Bramlage:
The data is pretty strong that catastrophic injuries .... This is why we will never eliminate injuries totally. Success is predicated on the fact that our athletes carry the minimum skeleton necessary. They run right on the edge of their physiology.

hoovesupsideyourhead 01-04-2008 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
Sorry for taking up your bandwidth

lighten up eh..i was kidding.....yesh tough crowd!!

Cannon Shell 01-04-2008 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead
lighten up eh..i was kidding.....yesh tough crowd!!

I'll get over it


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:03 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.