![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#26
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
There is ample evidence if people bother to look. As a bettor, I can quantify it. Horses that don't bleed run faster with Lasix than without. It isn't even really debatable. Of course horses are individuals and the effect isn't the same on all of them, and a scant few run worse. But by and large, it improves performance. As for the preventative aspect, wasn't a study just released that purported to prove only a very few really need Lasix long term, and that bleeding doesn't hinder long term performance? http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...six-not-needed I take them all with a grain of salt because everyone has an agenda. My agenda is to make money betting. It may be selfish, but it isn't slanted to one cause or the other. I look at it objectively. Here is an example that won't happen because I think Goldencents is going in the BC Mile. If he met Rich Tapestry again, after his trip last time, I'd bet him in a second over Rich Tapestry. But, if Rich Tapestry were to add Lasix, I'd bet him. I've been doing this long enough to know Lasix makes a difference, and the difference is not heads or noses but lengths.
__________________
@TimeformUSfigs |