Kentucky's ongoing attempt to end racing in state proceeds..

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The thing is that they argue that all those things occur and keep repeating the mantra until people believe it. In the end all you are doing is taking the L in the program away and telling people that everything is good now. Of course when a guy starts to go on one of his patented runs where every horse runs off the screen or an unknown trainer emerges as a 47% winner no one will believe a damn thing changed. If you are going to do something and tell everyone that this is a game changer (for the good) well you better be right or you will just become chicken little which is directly where we are headed. It is a good thing that the horseplayer in general has a short memory or they might have recalled all the wonderous things and changes that banning anabolic steroids was going to do...

I don't think anyone is saying that banning lasix is the cure-all. I think they are saying that it would be a good start. You can only do one thing at a time. Banning steroids was a good start. Banning lasix would be a good next step. There would still be an extremely long way to go. The sport needs comprehensive change. I do believe in the expression, "If it isn't broke, don't fix it." Unfortunately racing is broken in the U.S.

There needs to be major change. I don't know how you can support the status quo. Why would you want to continue to go do down the same broken path that has completely ruined racing in the U.S.?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I don't think anyone is saying that banning lasix is the cure-all. I think they are saying that it would be a good start. You can only do one thing at a time. Banning steroids was a good start. Banning lasix would be a good next step. There would still be an extremely long way to go. The sport needs comprehensive change. I do believe in the expression, "If it isn't broke, don't fix it." Unfortunately racing is broken in the U.S.

There needs to be major change. I don't know how you can support the status quo. Why would you want to continue to go do down the same broken path that has completely ruined racing in the U.S.?

A good start to what? Are you so delusional as to believe there is a real business plan that calls for the humiliation of the sport as to rid it of a simple duiretic? Banning lasix is the reddest of red herrings.

If you believe that banning lasix is going to have a positive effect on business I would love to know what evidence you base this misguided opinion on? The steroid ban was followed by a 2 year decline in handle and field size and obviously wasnt much of a positive PR move especially since Drape and company ignored it for the most part.

I find it odd that someone who doesnt agree with banning lasix is aways accused of maintaining the status quo? Like i said before if you polled players and gave them 2 choices, big competitive fields and reasonable takeout or getting rid of lasix I'm pretty sure that the poll would render a 99-1% vote for option A.

[Cannon Shell]

Most South American countries run on lasix but you never hear about that. The idea that getting rid of lasix will make horses stop bleeding is absurd but it is almost exactly what is said. The qualifications to become prime breeding stock in this country are laughably low and anyone who thinks that eliminating raceday lasix is going to shift the breed positively has a complete misunderstanding of the game. It isnt as though horses can't get away with bleeding as to win enough (one graded race or stakes placing in a mares case) that they become part to the vaunted "gene pool". Bleeding while racing get worse over time in the vast majority of cases and breeders here have already shown they have no aversion to breeding to lightly raced horses.

Anyone who has an issue with the game and where it is headed should place the blame exactly where it belongs, the people who are so adamant about getting rid of medication because for the most part they have been steering us in the wrong direction ever since they decided that they didnt want NYC OTB because no one will ever want to place bets on horse racing without being there...

The bluebloods with the power in this sport have crashed the ship into the reef and are blaming the reef. Keep buying what they are selling and you might wind up holding onto some valuable breeding shares to Funny Cide.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

A good start to what? Are you so delusional as to believe there is a real business plan that calls for the humiliation of the sport as to rid it of a simple duiretic? Banning lasix is the reddest of red herrings.

If you believe that banning lasix is going to have a positive effect on business I would love to know what evidence you base this misguided opinion on? The steroid ban was followed by a 2 year decline in handle and field size and obviously wasnt much of a positive PR move especially since Drape and company ignored it for the most part.

I find it odd that someone who doesnt agree with banning lasix is aways accused of maintaining the status quo? Like i said before if you polled players and gave them 2 choices, big competitive fields and reasonable takeout or getting rid of lasix I'm pretty sure that the poll would render a 99-1% vote for option A.

I certainly agree with you that most players would much rather have big fields and reasonable takeouts than a lasix ban. But I don't think those are the choices that we are facing.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I certainly agree with you that most players would much rather have big fields and reasonable takeouts than a lasix ban. But I don't think those are the choices that we are facing.

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.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

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.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

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.

What evidence do you have that it will increase field size? When you prune a shrub properly at least you know it is going to grow back. When you cut too much off, part of the shrub dies. When you shed owners like this sport is doing, adding more economic hardship and given the beating racing takes and will continue to in the mainstream-(you dont think PETA is going to forget all the ammo you people are giving them do you?) what makes you believe that owners will come running back? Especially with a shaky economy, potential tax increases and a real chance at losing much of the gains in purse money made via the racinos? This sport should be circling the wagons, beating back anyone saying anything negative and working together to solve issues in-house in order to maintain the business we have as well as make things better instead of grandstanding to Congress and the NY Times, villifying trainers and vets and making outlandish claims that have no basis in fact making us all look bad.

One of the biggest reasons why the average starts per year stat has continued to decrease is the modern theory of starting 2 year olds later in the year and hardly racing at 2. It is pretty hard for older horses to counter a horse making 1 or 2 starts and having them count the same as a horse that perhaps ran all year. But why waste time on facts?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

One of the biggest reasons why the average starts per year stat has continued to decrease is the modern theory of starting 2 year olds later in the year and hardly racing at 2. It is pretty hard for older horses to counter a horse making 1 or 2 starts and having them count the same as a horse that perhaps ran all year. But why waste time on facts?

We know that horses started at 2 and raced young have stronger bones, longer careers, and less likelihood of musculoskeletal injury over their lifetimes.

But PETA won't tell you that.

[pointman]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I don't think anyone is saying that banning lasix is the cure-all. I think they are saying that it would be a good start. You can only do one thing at a time. Banning steroids was a good start. Banning lasix would be a good next step. There would still be an extremely long way to go. The sport needs comprehensive change. I do believe in the expression, "If it isn't broke, don't fix it." Unfortunately racing is broken in the U.S.

There needs to be major change. I don't know how you can support the status quo. Why would you want to continue to go do down the same broken path that has completely ruined racing in the U.S.?

What has been the benefit of banning steriods? Making unsound decisions that ultimately hurts the health of horses in favor of a hope that creating a false perception to the public helps the sport is not a fix. Is is creating an even bigger problem.