View Single Post
  #3  
Old 04-17-2012, 03:04 PM
Rupert Pupkin Rupert Pupkin is offline
Del Mar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell View Post
Why not? Do you think that banning lasix is going to create larger fields? Smaller fields lead to smaller handle which leads to the possibility of more jurisdictions potentially looking to raise takeout (like in CA) in order to maintain the purse structure. Every action has a counter reaction. If you cant see that banning lasix will make it more expensive to own a horse and make it harder to keep them racing regularly (especially if Clembuterol which is a key component of cleaning up a horses lungs after a bleeding incident regardless of severity is banned as well) then you are kidding yourself.
In the short run, it may decrease field size. But it could conceivably increase field size in the long run.

There are plenty of smart people in the industry that think lasix knocks horses out and it causes them to need more time between races. Horses don't run nearly as often now as they did back in the 1970s. Some smart people think the advent of lasix in this country could be one of the main reasons for that. Nobody knows for sure but it is certainly a possibility.
Reply With Quote