BC to phase out raceday meds; No Lasix for '12 Juvenile events
 

As part of its efforts to bring the Breeders’ Cup World Championships in line with other major global racing events, Breeders’ Cup Limited moved today to develop protocols to eliminate race-day medications in its Championships over the next two years, Breeders’ Cup announced today.

The measure, adopted at today’s Board of Directors meeting, would be directed at prohibiting the race day administration of any medication to horses competing in the Breeders’ Cup World Championships. It was strongly supported by the Breeders’ Cup Members during their annual meeting on July 13. As an initial step, the Breeders’ Cup board directed that procedures be developed that would result in the prohibition of the administration of race day medication in two year-old races in the 2012 Championships. The next step would be the implementation of a new policy for all Championship races in the 2013 event and subsequent events.

http://www.breederscup.com/content.aspx?id=46333

Breeders' Cup to ban raceday medication in juvenile races
By Matt Hegarty

All horses who are entered in the five Breeders' Cup races for juveniles in 2012 will be prohibited from using the diuretic Lasix on race day to treat bleeding in the lungs under a policy adopted by the Breeders' Cup on Thursday that will lead to the ban of all raceday drugs at the organization's year-end event by 2013, the organization said.

The partial ban in 2012 is the strongest measure to be taken by any organization in North American racing since efforts began earlier this year to roll back the use of raceday drugs in U.S. racing. The rollback has been strongly supported by the Breeders' Cup and other influential industry organizations, including the Jockey Club and the Association of Racing Commissioners International, but horsemen in the United States have resisted.

In a release, the Breeders' Cup said the ban on raceday drugs in 2012 for the juvenile races was the first step in "the implementation of a new policy for all [Breeders' Cup] races in the 2013 event and subsequent events." The Breeders' Cup currently consists of 15 races run over two days with purses totaling $26 million.

Rumor has it they're going to burn the American flag in the winners circle.

Wait until the next big thing skips the BC because he/she is a known bleeder.

Better yet, watch the faces of the chalk eaters when the favorite pulls up at the top of the stretch.

why are they banning race day lasix?

Because they want to be European. They tend to despise their neighbors and feel they are superior to everyone around them. They attach themselves to people and places that are far away so they can one up the neighbors they despise.

Basically your dealing with morons. Morons with money and extreme emotional problems.

yeah, an absolute bullshit rule

Absolutely makes it unbettable in 2013. Guess I'll have to go this year and next year and be done with horse racing after that

As long as they don't make me give up my raceday meds.

Forget about say, the Del Cap being unbettable, Scav is saying 15 races almost 2.5 years from now are unbettable. Brilliant!

Amazing, another moronic knee jerk reaction much like synthetic racetracks. But I am sure Dr. Loonybin will come on here and tell us why I am wrong. This should do wonders for the raceday horse population. :wf

Or hopefully this will be the end of the Breeder's Cup and NYRA will reinstate the fall Championship series for those that want to run on real dirt with Lasix.

Yeah, those Arabs and Euros do everything better than we do in America. :rolleyes:

Now that was a non-sequitur.

So you are going to want to risk your hard earned money on a race where out of the say 14 starters, 10 of them are going to be Lasix Off and then you have to predict who is gonna handle that. No thank you.

That is why its unbettable to me now.

I was gonna mention this yesterday, they should just take over this thing, let the BC fart around with some BS horse from South Africa and India and do it the right way.

Who says they are going to be "Lasix off" in the BC only? If you know the BC races are Lasix off, maybe horses will be prepared without Lasix in advance of that knowledge...

Overall, I just think it was premature to say it will automatically be bad betting.

It's going to be an advantage to trainers that can get away with stuff that others cannot.

Same as it ever was.

Here is what I know. Out of the 6 race horses that we have in racing, 4 of them couldn't compete at the lowest levels of racing, say Beulah Park, if it wasn't for Lasix.

Meanwhile, because of Lasix, we compete at levels the horse is capable of because we prevent him from being in pain, while 1000% sound.

Lasix is the least of our problems, and enables thousands of horses to participate in American-style dirt speed racing. What a silly thing to go after.

Why not just make the damned purses in Euros? Oh yeah, the Euro will probably be non-existant by the 2012 running.

Please enlighten us on the positives of banning Lasix on a race day. Please don't make the nonsensical claims that it masks other drugs or that it has weakened the breed.

:tro:

I have made no comments in this thread on whether banning Lasix is good or not. I'm saying that it is foolishly premature to say it will be bad betting, and equally premature to assume all horses in the 2013 BC will be running "Lasix off."

Depending on the state in which the BC is held, they may not be able to ban Lasix. You can't just take your horse off when you want and then go back on when you want. The BC to my knowledge has no power to supersede the rules of racing in an individual state so I don't think this is a settled issue.

By the way here is an interesting article from years ago when everything ws supposedly wonderful

http://articles.latimes.com/1990-10-...1_horse-racing

Another one
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/199...orsemen-l-word


http://articles.latimes.com/1992-05-...le-crown-races

It's just more useless mouth flapping by the BC folks. I'm surprised anyone here pays it any credence.

Interesting thought. I wonder what legal standing the BC would have to force entrants to not be running with a raceday medication that is otherwise legal in a particular state.

I expect that it's legal to be more restrictive. The problem would be if they wanted to be less so. For instance, say the BC wanted to allow cobra venom, but the state forbids it, they're not gonna get that through. A state may have a 21 and older law on alcohol, but some counties are dry or limit when you can purchase it. Saying they're doing it in the public interest or whatever is probably all it takes if they really think that's what they're doing.

They can make whatever restrictive rules they want but in some states you HAVE to run on lasix if you have been running on it and need a vet reason to come off of it. Not to mention that there may be trouble for those who do go ahead and take off lasix as they will have to "re-qualify" for Lasix afterwards meaning 30 days and if they happen to be unfortunate to bleed after a race out of their nose again they would be subject to 90 days and with another incident be barred.

Can't imagine that'd be a problem for Euros,etc. making their first and only start of the year in the US. I'm sure if someone wants to run sans lasix in the BC, there are ways to get vet approval, although who wants the Life At Ten-esque drama of a horse bleeding badly who shouldn't have been allowed to try to race w/o lasix in the first place. This sounds like an absolute mess of an untangling of regulations, and then there's the prospect of many bloody noses.

Forgive me, but I'm not clear on the process and policies around going on/off lasix in the various jurisdictions. About the re-qualifying, what's involved? Do you mean they have to run again in 30 days on lasix or not run for 30 days before going back on, or what? If it's the latter, many of the BC horses are either leaving the country, retiring (well, hopefully not the juveniles), or are done for the year. I imagine whatever the drug policy situation, someone's gonna fall into the 'sucks to be you' group where the BC's decided it's just not a big enough problem to work around, and it's no skin off their nose.

It just occurs to me that the Breeders Cup would have to get state regulators buy-in to make this work. I want to know what track wants to deal with the headache of lasix being permissable on a Thursday, and even for a couple races on Friday morning, then not for the Breeders Cup races Friday through Saturday. The whole thing just seems like a massive logistical headache.

The Euros arent the issue, it is the US horses that intend on running in the US post BC. In order to "requalify" in some states you have to basically declare a bleeding incident which in effect makes you a 2 time bleeder and prevents you from running for 30 days post requalification.

I don't think the logistics are the issue though there would seem to be a certain double standard in allowing you to bet on some races with Lasix and other without. Again it seem naive on the part of the BC and opponents of Lasix in general to act like this is some huge performance enhancer 25 years after it has been introduced and NOT seem to the vaunted general public like they haven't been duped for those years. It seems to me that racing loses a lot more credibility to its customers (I really still could care less what the rest of the world supposedly thinks) with the criticism of horseman and exaggeration as to what Lasix is and does.

:tro: Everyone knows lasix slows a horse down a tad, and hasn't been able to hide anything via "urine dilution" in two decades.

It is a performance enhancer in that yes, it allows horses to run fast and hard while attenuating bleeding. In my mind it would be cruelty to try and run horses on dirt, fast, like we do in American racing, without lasix. Even in mild bleeders, it attenuates lung scarring and harm to performance.

Sure, you can say you want to eliminate lasix, and change the sport to encourage non-bleeder genetics, but I doubt the sport would be able to survive that. It's an awful big reach. That would take 20 years, at least.
An admirable goal, but not quick nor easy.

The idea that you can purge the "gene pool" of bleeders is so ridiculous even in a sport where most people are clueless.

You don't think restricting breeding to maybe one out of every 50 horses would work, huh? :D

I suppose we could start from cold scratch again via importing bloodstock.

The entire idea that the breed has somehow changed is completely unproven and immeasurable. The idea that a minute factor like Lasix affects the breed so negatively that its elimination will lead to some genetic revolution is pure folly.

Gulfstream Park owner Frank Stronach has asked Florida regulators to help him implement a program that would phase out all raceday medication, including Lasix, for 3-year-olds at the track, beginning with the 2011-12 meeting.
http://www.drf.com/news/stronach-ask...day-medication


Guess Frankie wants more 3 year olds to go to Tampa.:rolleyes: