Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > Main Forum > The Paddock
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #19  
Old 05-28-2012, 09:42 PM
cmorioles's Avatar
cmorioles cmorioles is offline
Santa Anita
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 3,169
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig View Post
i think the fallout had to do with the fact that a lot of bettors lost out on betting a horse who should have been scratched. i know lasix was suggested as a possible reason for her lackluster performance.
now, when i read the other day that there was an 80% reduction in visible bleeding by horses in NY once the lasix ban was lifted....well, what else is there to say? do we really want an 80% increase in bleeders? we already have negative attention because of breakdowns, what will happen if horses start coming by the grandstand with blood coming out of their nostrils? or horses collapsing because of a bad enough hemorrage? and that does happen. i firmly believe that it's better to prevent something than to take a risk-that it's a lesser 'evil' if you will.
You realize if two horse visibly bleed in a week, an "80% reduction" means that now 1.6 do, right? In any case, the is certainly NOT the equivalent of an 80% increase in bleeders.
Reply With Quote
 


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:23 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.