Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PatCummings
Chuck - I agree, eliminating Lasix would do all those things you talk about, but I believe that is because of the fundamental differences in the general status of the American thoroughbred breed and the rest of the world. Same body, different internal processing mechanisms, as adapted by their human handlers. It is possible to run six times in six weeks and do it consistently well, without Lasix, in field sizes routinely between 12 and 14. While the Dubai model doesn't fit American racing, I don't think an expansive Wal Mart-like strategy is exactly helping racing in this country.
|
Pat
The general status of the American breed has nothing to do with Lasix or any other racetrack medication. That is simply a myth. The Euros have always bought american breds and still continue to do so. The greatest and most influential stallion in modern Euro racing, Sadlers Wells is American bred through and through, as is Danehill. Neither had long careers, neither raced often. The fundemental difference between American and other countries racing is dirt and training locations and sheer scope. Racing in a european country is much closer to racing in an individual state. It wasnt more than 20 years ago that European champions were often mocked in this country by the same writers who hate lasix so much because of thier often brief and seemingly highly scrpited schedules. Comparing racing in different locations and blaming Lasix or Bute for the differences seems like a misnomer yet somehow it has become something akin to settled science within the sport. Which is sad because it really is much ado about nothing and often overshadows some of the real issues that the breed faces.