NYTHA Lasix Primer & Letter to NYS RWB

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

I think you misunderstand. I'm asking why we can't seem to win any race that matters overseas? Sure, our turf horses aren't the greatest, but they do win a decent number of BC races. Overseas, without Lasix, well, it is getting embarrassing. I'd settle for a horse that could run 10th at this point.

When did we win a lot of races overseas outside of the Dubai races when they were on dirt? When did we even run overseas prior to the Dubai races and occasional foray for the Japan Cup?

Didnt Wes Ward run a clinic last year (or the year before) at Ascot with a bunch of mediorce types?

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

When did we win a lot of races overseas outside of the Dubai races when they were on dirt? When did we even run overseas prior to the Dubai races and occasional foray for the Japan Cup?

The Japan races are what I remember, and our horses at one time were competitive. Now they are just embarrassing.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

The Japan races are what I remember, and our horses at one time were competitive. Now they are just embarrassing.

In the early years of the Japan Cup American horses did well but dont forget that Japanese racing and breeding was nothing close to what it is now. It isnt as though other countries horses are doing much in the race now either as the Japanese have been pretty dominant the last decade.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

In the early years of the Japan Cup American horses did well but dont forget that Japanese racing and breeding was nothing close to what it is now. It isnt as though other countries horses are doing much in the race now either as the Japanese have been pretty dominant the last decade.

It still doesn't change the fact that if all this damage is done to horses racing without Lasix, how is it that the Euros are the better horses when they come here most years? Clearly this "damage" is being drummed up to be something worse than it is.

[pointman]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

It still doesn't change the fact that if all this damage is done to horses racing without Lasix, how is it that the Euros are the better horses when they come here most years? Clearly this "damage" is being drummed up to be something worse than it is.

Are they ever better horses here on dirt? What happened to Daddy Long Legs in the Derby against our 3 year old dirt lasix diluted horses?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

It still doesn't change the fact that if all this damage is done to horses racing without Lasix, how is it that the Euros are the better horses when they come here most years? Clearly this "damage" is being drummed up to be something worse than it is.

Using this argument as proof is silly. I recall a lot of Europeans coming over here and tharshing our best horses on turf prior to lasix being used.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Using this argument as proof is silly. I recall a lot of Europeans coming over here and tharshing our best horses on turf prior to lasix being used.

Our horses were much more competitive in the days before Lasix. We rarely see the best Euros here any longer for financial reasons. And still, their 2nd and 3rd stringers routinely beat us.

It still doesn't answer the question though. Why aren't our horses getting more competitive since they aren't suffering this permanent damage instead of getting less competitive?

There is only one real answer. This alleged damage caused by EIPH doesn't affect horses' future performances.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

It still doesn't change the fact that if all this damage is done to horses racing without Lasix, how is it that the Euros are the better horses when they come here most years? Clearly this "damage" is being drummed up to be something worse than it is.

the euros are better most years at what?
and since you brought it up, regarding euros. don't they train with lasix? and as soon as they get over here, they race them on it. seems hard for them to be holier than thou when they jump at the chance to use it asap. and they'd use it at home the moment it was legalized. many push for it-and with reason.

and in australia, they remove the better bleeders after an episode, because after a second there, they can't breed. so they send them here. why do you suppose they do that? because they can run on lasix to prevent further bleeding and it's potential consequences.

[pointman]

Originally Posted by Danzig

the euros are better most years at what?
and since you brought it up, regarding euros. don't they train with lasix? and as soon as they get over here, they race them on it. seems hard for them to be holier than thou when they jump at the chance to use it asap. and they'd use it at home the moment it was legalized. many push for it-and with reason.

and in australia, they remove the better bleeders after an episode, because after a second there, they can't breed. so they send them here. why do you suppose they do that? because they can run on lasix to prevent further bleeding and it's potential consequences.

Thank you for reminding me about this as it completely undercuts his entire argument and anyone's regarding the diluting of the breed. I guess Lasix only dilutes the breed when horses race on it, but not when they train on it.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by pointman

Thank you for reminding me about this as it completely undercuts his entire argument and anyone's regarding the diluting of the breed. I guess Lasix only dilutes the breed when horses race on it, but not when they train on it.

What is the source that asserts that European horses are trained on lasix? Even so, does supporting a ban of raceday medication mean that one also must support banning medication for training/therapeutic purposes?

Furthermore, a racehorse's reputation is (or should be) made on raceday, not during training sessions, so a "drug dependent" horse would still have to compete clean to have a shot at entering the breeding population.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Danzig

the euros are better most years at what?
and since you brought it up, regarding euros. don't they train with lasix? and as soon as they get over here, they race them on it. seems hard for them to be holier than thou when they jump at the chance to use it asap. and they'd use it at home the moment it was legalized. many push for it-and with reason.

and in australia, they remove the better bleeders after an episode, because after a second there, they can't breed. so they send them here. why do you suppose they do that? because they can run on lasix to prevent further bleeding and it's potential consequences.

This is more like an incoherent rant than an actual post. Who mentioned anything about them being holier than thou? Certainly not me. For the record, a lot of horses that ship here don't get Lasix, so they all don't jump at the chance to use it. Unfortunately, they probably should, because the performance of those not using Lasix is extremely weak, even when they don't bleed. Hmmm, wonder why that is?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

This is more like an incoherent rant than an actual post. Who mentioned anything about them being holier than thou? Certainly not me. For the record, a lot of horses that ship here don't get Lasix, so they all don't jump at the chance to use it. Unfortunately, they probably should, because the performance of those not using Lasix is extremely weak, even when they don't bleed. Hmmm, wonder why that is?

i mentioned them being holier than thou. any time it comes up with euro trainers they make their statements-without talking about using it themselves.

as for everything in your post from 'for the record' on, do you have stats to show all this, or is it your perception from events?

also, i guess you didn't notice the stat about new york racers and bleeding from the nostrils dropping by 80%?

at any rate, we will have to just agree to disagree. no point in continuing, the 'zealots' ( ) on either side won't change their minds i'm sure.