Steve Byk quote of the day
 

"Lasix is the bane of American racing"

Way to call out Barry Irwin on his hypocrisy !!!!!

the "bane"? what's he Howard Cosell ? a little pedantic for the hossplayer types

Did you notice the Team Valor wonderhorse from Uruguay in the stake at Monmouth on Sunday makes his US debut with Lasix? More interesting is the fact that according to the DRF the horse was on lasix in Uruguay.

That was the reference..

Running without lasix would be pretty silly if your horse is the only one doing it. It is akin to giving the other horses a few lengths head start.

opinion or fact?

running with lasix while saying it's the bane of racing is the height of hypocrisy. zero respect for someone who talks out of both sides of his mouth. if you don't want it out there, and want to take a stand....how can you be taken seriously while still using it? you can't.

Especially when they have been running on lasix in a foreign jurisdiction

I thought you didn't care what they did in other countries.

I think it is a fact.

It isn't really hypocrisy. I'm sure there are American League managers that hate the DH, but do you think they are going to bat the pitcher to make the point?

I don't know how liberal the use is there. If it is like here, the same thing still applies.

Can you provide objective proof that shows your statement that giving lasix, "It is akin to giving the other horses a few lengths head start", to be a "fact", rather than just "opinion"?

Please provide.

Thanks :)

I admire Steve for always seeking the truth in this discussion, and letting the facts be known via his radio show :tro:

and i think it's an opinion. sorry. i've seen too many say it doesn't enhance to think otherwise. and you'll counter that you've seen others say it does-as have i. which is why it's still debated.

however, when you've got a big-time owner trying to make a change, not just play, i think it is absolutely hypocrisy. using your analogy, if american league team owners wanted rid of the dh, then yes, it would be wrong to continue following that rule. the best argument is proof that it isn't needed, and that you show that by not using it.

Yes, I've done so many times. Just compare the speed figures of each horse with and without lasix. Of course you have to go back a ways, because you won't find many now that don't debut without an injection. It is fact, but you can do the work as easily as I can, I'm not doing it for you.

That is ridiculous. You would put yourself at a competitive disadvantage and lose more often. You follow the rules in place and lobby to have them changed.

Here is another. The Mavericks owner was against the Thunder being allowed to move from Seattle. Should he have forfeited all games against them to prove his point? I'm sure the team's fans would have loved that in the Western Conference finals a few years ago.

but not everyone thinks that lasix use gives a competitive advantage. besides, if one didn't use it, and won, wouldn't that prove quite a point? i'm sure it's happened. you telling me that horses without lasix generally finish in the rear? i doubt it.
and no, the latter analogy you gave means nothing. that wasn't a rule change, it was a team move. it didn't put a team at any advantage or disadvantage.
if barry irwin wanted to prove a point, the best way to do it is to take his horses off it, and show it's not needed. than it's not his opinion at all. it would show he's serious, and that he's right. right now, it just shows he uses something that he says he shouldn't.

Christophe Clement routinely wins races with horses making their debut without Lasix. Did it the other day with a very impressive turf 2-year-old named Da Mi Basia Mille.

You completely are missing the point. I don't think many people are saying Lasix doesn't do what it purports to do. People just also believe it does other things to boot.

I'm not sure about when lasix in Uruguay racing started. Invasor didn't race with it.





He was 5-for-5 in America -- four times winning Grade 1 Handicap races -- and the other wearing down a pre-mature moving Bernardini in the BC Cup Classic.

Assigned 123lbs in the Donn Handicap? What a joke. He clipped heels in that race and won.

His Dubai World Cup win was the final start of his career.

2nd place finisher Premium Tap also won a race without lasix before. He won the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques as his prep:





Discreet Cat's glory days proved over forever in that race. He missed his prep race with a lung infection and he was last by double digits at every single call in the World Cup. Finished last beaten almost 30 lengths. He was never again relevant on the track.

no, i'm not missing the point at all. i know that some people think it does more than prevent bleeding, that some believe it also enhances performance. and i can find you just as many others who don't.
my point is that if one feels strongly about getting rid of something, they don't keep using it. that would be akin to the marlboro man saying don't smoke while puffing on a marlboro red.

thanks for that ateam and calzone, i figured as much.

you'd think that irwin would rather not use it, so that when his horses win, he could say 'aha! see, i told you!'. so why doesn't he???

The Dubai Duty Free was a neat race that year. $5 million purse with a 16 horse field.

Japan's Admire Moon (End Sweep out of Sunday Silence mare) won the race as the post time favorite.

However, here is a look at some of the horses that didn't fire at all in the race.

* 12th place finisher:




* 14th place finisher:




* 15th place finisher:




* 16th place finisher:




Another big day for Japan turf racing in Dubai. Not so for turf racing in America and India.

I'm curious, when is the last time a 3 or older horse won a G1 stake in the US without Lasix?

I don't remember you posting any objective data on this board. You have said here, "it's a fact". Prove it. It's not fair that we just believe it because you say it, right? Prove that horses improve lengths when they are given lasix. Can you link to that, please? Thanks.

I will have I have some free time. I can't imagine any seasoned horseplayer would even try to deny this is true.

Steve often mentions the book "Champions", or did in the past. Peruse that for a bit and just look at our top horses' Beyer figures before and after Lasix. I particularly find it interesting to see the jumps on horses coming off of good races, including wins.

i don't know, when? it's actually not something i've ever paid attention to, so i have no idea. perhaps invasor, who doug mentioned above?

Not in the US he didn't. I don't know, but I think the fact it will take quite a bit of research says a lot.

You say lasix is a performance enhancer that should be banned because you allege it improves horses performances by lengths, whether the horse is a bleeder or not.

I'm a veterinarian that agrees with the 99.99% of veterinary medical and scientific professionals that lasix is a necessary and good therapeutic medication whose use must be continued for the health and welfare of the race horse, and should not be considered a "performance enhancer".

I am listed on published scientific papers on the effect of lasix in race horses, and I have read the majority, if not all, of scientific information on the effect of lasix in race horses.

I've never read any studies that support your contention, that lasix is a strict performance enhancer. Only studies that contradict it.

So I'm really interested in your "facts", as your contention, unsupported by the veterinary medical community, is 100% of the argument against using this valuable therapeutic medication to help horses.

** The common way for "seasoned horse players" to bet horses is first or second use lasix. There's some interesting scientific data related to that. To bad horse players ignore science ;)

But that doesn't have anything to do with the odd allegation that "lasix is a performance enhancer in all horses that moves horses up lengths".

I'll be interested to see your "proof". Can't wait.

I think the better question is who was the last US-trained G1 winner in the US without Lasix. Have to think the overall question would be answered by a Euro shipping in...Shirocco, someone like that?

I said a few lengths.


I don't really care who you are.

I don't care if you are listed on craigslist.

Yes, I'm the first one to ever bring it up. Sure I am. I also never said it was only a performance enhancer.

The medical community has no idea how to measure thoroughbred performance under race conditions, including you. Oh, and it is "too", not "to".

I never said all horses. That would be silly.

Yes, I'm sure you are right. And now, for a shameless redboard, I bet Shirocco in the BC.

I don't. Just saw some irony.

I think Andre Fabre emptied his bank account too...

You are a member of a very small-in-quantity minority group, with your thoughts on lasix. You and like-minded folks have the responsibility to prove to people your allegations about lasix are true, before the sport gives them any credence.

As I thought. No proof. Thank you.

Me too.

Well, I told you I didn't have time today. Small in quantity minority group? You mean like everywhere but North and South America?

I'm not sure why we have to prove anything, but I will. Most horses are given Lasix with no proof of bleeding.

Invasor -- he's the best!

Sorry, I couldn't resist. :o

Awesome!

What is the typical average monthly vet bill of a horse in one of the large stables overseas?