25 trainers urge Lasix-ban; THA says issue debated, decided
 

http://www.drf.com/news/high-profile...port-ban-lasix

High-profile trainers support ban on Lasix
By Matt Hegarty

A group of leading trainers, including D. Wayne Lukas and Todd Pletcher, said in a statement released on Friday that they would support the gradual phase-out of the legal race day use of the drug furosemide, the diuretic that is used by nearly every horse in the United States to mitigate bleeding in the lungs.

The statement is likely to reinvigorate a debate that has been going on in the U.S. racing industry for the past five years without any resolution. Many high-profile owners and breeders, along with the Jockey Club and other national racing organizations, have called for a ban on the race day use of furosemide, which is also known as Lasix, but those calls have been steadfastly resisted by rank-and-file horsemen.

The statement said the trainers would support a ban on the race day use of furosemide for all 2-year-olds beginning in 2015, with a complete ban following in 2016.

“We believe it’s time to take a proactive position regarding the administration of race-day medication,” said Lukas, who was recently appointed to the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission. “American racing has always been a global leader, and it’s time to restore confidence in our game and in our international standing.”

In addition to Lukas and Pletcher, the statement was signed by 23 other trainers, most of them based in New York, including Bill Mott, Shug McGaughey, Christophe Clement, Richard Mandella, Neil Drysdale, Kieran McLaughlin, and Graham Motion. Many of the trainers are employed by owners who have supported calls to ban the race day use of furosemide. Many of those owners also pledged two years ago to cease using furosemide on their 2-year-olds, pledges that have largely held up at the higher levels of the sport.

The statement was released nine days prior to the Jockey Club’s Round Table on Matters Pertaining to Racing, an annual two-hour conference in Saratoga Springs, N.Y., where, over the past five years, Jockey Club officials and other racing industry officials have called for bans on race-day furosemide use. The Jockey Club has also begun canvassing the industry for financial support for a study that would examine the efficacy of the drug when used 24 hours before a race.

Opponents of the race day use of furosemide have contended that the public perception of the sport is damaged by its widespread use. Breeders have also argued that buyers in international racing jurisdictions are put off by race-day furosemide use, depressing prices for American bloodstock. Race-day Lasix use is banned in nearly every major racing jurisdiction outside North America.

Supporters of the drug’s use point to scientific studies that have concluded that furosemide is effective in mitigating bleeding in the lungs, a common affliction for racehorses. A ban on the race day use of the drug would worsen the condition, the supporters argue.

Although some organizations have put in place policies intending to rollback race day use of the drug over the past four years, including the American Graded Stakes Committee and the Breeders’ Cup, those policies were rescinded when it became clear that racing states did not intend to pass rules restricting furosemide use.

Timed, obviously as Hegarty points out, to coincide with the upcoming Jockey Club Round Table..

Disappointing to see a number of heretofore staunchly pro-Lasix people suddenly turn up on this list.

What a great idea. There are too many horses running in the USA already, best to make them suffer and run less often. :rolleyes:

Glad to see William Van Meter got behind this plan.

I'm sure that during his vast experience of 9 starters during his career has given him an excellent view on the topic.

I'm sure when Lukas came up with this plan (he didnt, this is a Jockey Club blackmail job) he thought I better get William Van Meter on board. Then he probably said that Jose Corrales is next on the gotta get list....

The Breeders Cup managed to have a press release ready on a late Friday afternoon ready. No mention of the carnage at one of the upcoming BC host locations though...

Not one trainer that I talked to knew anything about this. Of course Paulick is already calling others out for not being on a list that most didnt know even existed.

It's not a horse shortage on the west coast, it's a owner shortage. Unless you are a rich owner with deep pockets, why would anyone want to be in the game and pay $100+ a day training and the trainers just keep the horse in the barn, to keep their win percentage high. Plus lasix justs adds days to how long before runs back. Without lasix it might mean more horses will bleed, but without it, would that off-set how quick horses come back? I don't know, but it has to be a consideration or a study made. Back in the 70's I don't remember it being an issue that much, there were full fields in Ca.

I guess this means that Rick Violette will be coming out of the woodwork next week and will be on Steve's show, which means I will mute that segment, so I don't puke.

The lasix ban of the Breeders Cup' Juvenile and Juvenile Fillies has been such a smashing success.

The whole lasix debate is an epic waste of time.

There is no bigger falsehood than lasix adds days to how long a horse can run back. While that excuse might be given by one of those guys wanting to keep their win percentage high but unless you are talking about running your horse back in less than a week for most horses it is bunk.

It is like the steroid ban...on steroids...

In a sport that's aces at focusing on minute immaterial bullshit and ignoring real issues, this takes the cake. Well done guys. Let's ban Lasix and still allow Rick Dutrow's girlfriend to move horses up 20+ points while he's on "suspension" without batting an eye.

I'm just so tired of the ridiculous facade that we give two dumps about drugging horses. Readthebyline ran a 108 Beyer under wraps off a 72 after being claimed, but Lasix is the scourge we have to get rid of. Give me a freaking break.

How many horses died under Nevin's care or tested positive? It's ridiculous many of you just don't understand how good a trainer Dutrow(all of them) really are.

You as an owner is exactly what is wrong with the sport. Being able to employ an alchemist to keep 1 step ahead of testing doesn't make a good trainer. As ATEAM said allowing Dutrow to train via proxy is an unbelievable slap in the face of the betting public. You want to ban drugs from the game? How about if a trainer is banned any horse's under his care at the time of the infraction are banned for the duration of the ban from the jurisdiction they are in. The only way we are going to get rid of the cheats is to hit them in their pocketbook. Owners instead of looking the other way would then have a reason to pressure these trainers to play it straight.

While horses not Dying under Nevin/Dutrow's care is certainly a good thing, Isn't it safe to say the lack of testing positive is borderline meaningless, considering what they do and don't test for? Not that too many people even know what exactly that might be?

If I had horses again I would love to have either Dutrow train my horse/s and I would have a shot to win at a tough game. It's very easy to sit behind your computer and throw darts. Its another thing to have facts that substantiate any of the things you suggest. IF a banned trainer is helping his paramour to become a thriving professional from abroad how the heck can anyone discourage or abbreviate that? Imagine a dis barred brilliant lawyer who was disbarred for the same BS type stuff Dutrow was banned for and then consulted other less talented lawyers who were members of the bar same thing right? What's a judge going to say "Freddymo you couldnt have thought of this defense because you are a newbie idiot so it must be Cannonshell's training of you and since he is barred from law you cant practice is craft?

I really find it amazing how people just assume they know these folks are cheating but CANT determine or suggest how, somehow i just dont think that is remotely OK

Its safe to say you are assuming a lot and have absolutely nothing to gauge your post on save good results by horses under Nevin's care. Is Motion or Matz cheating now that their stock is excelling or because they train for higher net worth owners and have "better stock" do we just say the horses are just fulfilling their genetic"sales ring" potential.

I think it's safe to say that you like coming on here to purposely be a prick-contrarian and ruffle people's feathers. Sure, trumpet the so called accomplishments of all the unsavory pieces of dung in racing. You're gonna mention to someone about sitting behind a keyboard with an opinion?? That's immensely hypocritical.

:tro:
Thanks. I couldn't possibly make MY point any better than you just did.

I have the highest regard for Richard Dutrow, I am positive he is regarded as a terrific horseman and perhaps the very best at determining what is hindering a horses ability to run well. I am quite sure he has very few equals in this capacity. Moreover why in the world would anyone not like the work of his paramour, what has she done wrong, maybe she is doing the same great job as Linda Rice and the other successful people who have claimed horses from other connections and improved their running? Palace just won a G1 he was a 20 claimer, Big macher, that Moonshine horse,etc etc. Where is all the outrage for those types? Bottom line its easy to throw stones when you have absolutely no evidence why not save it for when people truly are cheating vs. doing their job well. I dont know why Matz who couldnt get arrested for years is successful again do you, I assume he is training better horses or refined his craft which is his job. I dont assume he is cheating. Apparently people like to discriminate when it convenient I dont

Freddy, I'm guessing you either did or would have defended both Lance Armstrong, and say, Mark Mcgwire? No, I don't have the inside scoop, because as an unimportant, piss ant who simply BETS, I have no right to any of that information, as far as the industry is concerned. So I have NO CHOICE but to assume. And I will say this, if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, and looks like a duck, I don't need a ****ing PHD to make the educated guess it's a ****ing DUCK. Sure, I may be wrong every now and again, but I'm willing and have no other choice but to take that chance.

that's the thing, every trainer, good or bad has friends, family, associates, acquaintances. and they will defend the bad to the bitter end.
not enough to have scads of violations, suspensions, getting caught whilst on suspension having contact with their barns, etc.
the sport needs cleaning up, but it's impossible. you have trainers getting HOF nominations, spending a year on the sideline for cobra venom and hired right back...why? because they're 'good trainers'.
there are good trainers, who don't have all the repeated overages, positives, etc. but some people want to win at all costs, and they find plenty of trainers that will do that for them.
some of us want a level playing field-others don't give a rats behind about it. and that's how these trainers get or stay in business, they have fans.

everyone saying they want a clean sport might as well give up, it won't happen. all you can do is wager accordingly.

So I guess the ducks that were claimers toiling to run that were claimed like Sadlers two time G1 winner, Rice's Palace and 5 other claimers that went on recently to win graded stakes are all cheaters, because the horse are elite now...understood thanks for the update respectfully said

I belive you, but you always hear them talk about lasix dehydrating the horse and they can't run back as soon, so horses don't run as much in a year as they used to. I'm sure the day money plays a big factor in it also.

I am all for rooting cheaters out of the game, but I find it really comical how some trainers are considered absolute juicers and others 100% clean when there is no definitive evidence either way.

I love the false equivalence marathon going on here. So because Linda Rice made a smart claim that she eventually turned into a G1 horse, that's the same as Dutrow and his "paramour" ROUTINELY moving horses way up in their FIRST STARTS off the claim. It takes a serious bias or willful ignorance to explain all that away as nothing more than good horsemanship.

I was told that Eoin Harty did an experiment where he weighed every horse before they ran and after they ran. He did this with horses that ran on lasix and horses that didn't run on lasix. The horses that ran on lasix lost an average of about 80 pounds in the race. It took them about 2-3 weeks to put the weight back on. The horses that ran without lasix lost less than 10 pounds and they put the weight back on in 3 days.

I don't see how anyone can say that horses that run on lasix can run back as quick as horses that don't, when it takes horses that run on lasix 2-3 weeks just to put the weight back on that they lost.

He ran 2 horses at the Spa yesterday. Both had lasix. If this is the case, why is he running his horses on lasix?

I would assume the reason he still runs on lasix is because he believes the pros outweigh the cons. Most people believe that it moves horses up. In addition, most guys aren't looking to run their horses every 2-3 weeks. If your horses only run every 4-6 weeks, the weight loss is probably not a big issue.

I'm sorry Rupert, he did not run any at the Spa yesterday. I confused him with Eric Guillot, I guess the confusion stems from two trainers that consistently get high priced stock and consistently underperform with them.

Having said that, he ran one at Del Mar yesterday without lasix and is running one today with lasix.

If there is so much bad about lasix, I just don't get why every trainer runs their horses on it. It is clearly beneficial to the horses.

If it takes so much weight off horses why are Europeans training on it? How could they get the weight back on by race time?

I just don't buy the anti-lasix crap. What is going to happen to bleeders that can't race, there are already too many unwanted horses as it stands.

I think practically all trainers believe lasix is beneficial overall. Trainers look at the benefits compared to the cost and they think they are better off running on lasix. I think on practically every measure, lasix has been shown to move up most horses. But that doesn't mean that horses need it. It just means that if you don't use it while others are using it, you are at a disadvantage.

In terms of training on it, they usually get a much smaller dose than they get in a race. The reason some trainers will use it for workouts is because they would rather be safe than sorry. Lets say that you are going to work your horse tomorrow and he is scheduled to run in 8 days. Many trainers will give the horse lasix for the work because if they don't give it to him and he happens to bleed, then they are going to miss the race. If the horse bleeds you are going to have to put him on antibiotics and back off a little bit and it's going to set you back a week or two. Many trainers don't want to take that chance.

Dutrows biggest crime was pissing the wrong people off and being a loudmouth. Can anyone seriously doubt his acumen as a horseman though? He could win with any type of horse from a cheap claimer to g1 stake. You talk to anyone that actually owned horses that he trained and they love him. Even his cheaper horses shined like new pennies.

I agree with Freddy. Dutrows 10 years is ridiculous.

dutrow got a ten year ban as a warning to other trainers. that's how the powers that be do things, they use someone as an example, in hopes it scares the others into doing the right thing-or less of the wrong thing.

I am banned from practicing law?

****

Win % and the fact that there rarely are races back quickly for most classes of horses.

Harness horses run 3-4 times a month on lasix, with no hydration issues. Different breeds but in terms of hydration and mineral loss, physiologically the same.

Sure sometimes in the summer when it is consistently hot you might need a little more time. If you have a nervous horse that is prone to wash out even training, you might need a little more time. But those arent the norm.

I am often puzzled by who is considered a "good guy" and who is considered a "bad guy".

I don't believe that he was given a 10 year ban as a warning regardless of how they framed it. I believe they supported this extreme ban because they wanted to justify their own existence and remain in their jobs by answering the number 1 criticism of regulators, that they were too easy on repeat offenders.

Dutrow gave them plenty of ammunition to use against him.
Rick is a likable guy. People think that the "juice" trainers are all sinister douchbags when a lot of the supposed good guys are just that. However that confuses personality with wrongdoing.

What escapes most people is that many of the juice guy owners seem to do just fine when they move onto making the next juice guy. Now they have even smartened up and are changing the stable names every time the heat comes.

Who are some of the "nice juice" guys?

Mike Lerman

Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Associations: Lasix Issue Already Debated and Settled
by Press Release | 08.06.2014 | 2:01pm

We have been asked to comment on the Press Release issued on behalf of the group of trainers who propose the elimination of “race day medications” on January 1, 2016, but who support the adoption of the new uniform medication system of 26 controlled therapeutic medications being enacted throughout the racing industry.

It is quite obvious that the proposal and its timing are part of a thinly disguised and carefully orchestrated effort that is now playing out and will continue to do so over the next week by the opponents of the permitted use of lasix (furosemide). The industry can expect to be lectured once again by the opponents of lasix, who apparently will pursue federal intervention in our sport if we do not acquiesce to their view. It is designed to revive a divisive issue that the industry has already debated at great length and settled. It will polarize the industry, cripple the implementation of the uniform medication and drug testing program and put the industry at war with itself once again.

It appears, based on their Press Release and comments attributed to them in various media reports, that some of the trainers who were signatories are either uninformed or have been misled regarding the industry’s current uniform medication and drug testing program. First, there are not “multiple permitted race day medications”—the only medication permitted on race day is lasix. Second, those who suggest there has been an absence of a reasonable conversation on the subject are mistaken. Nothing could be further from the truth. We remind everyone that the industry engaged in an extensive and terribly divisive debate about lasix and race day medication several years ago under similar circumstances that culminated in an International Summit on Race Day Medication at Belmont Park in June 2011. Organized by the Jockey Club, NTRA and AAEP because the industry was consumed by the polarizing debate, the Summit brought together international scientists and experts, representatives of every industry organization and racetrack covering every constituency, individual breeders, and owners and trainers to facilitate an understanding of this complex issue, allow for discussion and debate and to hopefully bring an end to the polarizing debate.

We participated, as did other individuals and organizations representing every segment of the industry and every point of view on the issue. It was clear that there was neither support for the elimination of lasix nor a phased-in prohibition. To the contrary, there was broad-based consensus that the best approach was the to continue and further enhance the strict industry regulatory controls regarding the use and administration of lasix currently in place throughout the entire industry in North America. These protocols were deemed to be in the best interests of the health and safety of the horse, provided a level playing field for all participants, was voluntary, and was totally transparent and in the best interests of the betting public. Finally, while the signatories purport to give their support for the adoption of the new uniform system consisting of 26 controlled therapeutic medications, perhaps they are unaware that lasix is one of the 26 medications.

Our associations collectively, under the auspices of the THA umbrella, have consistently led the reforms in medication and drug testing that have been implemented in the past two decades. We have been and will always be committed to the welfare of the horse, the integrity of our sport, and providing a level playing field for all participants and our bettors. We collectively represent thousands of honest, hard working and dedicated horsemen (including the 25 trainers and their owners who are promoting the ban), backstretch workers and those in the many support businesses whose livelihoods depend on a strong industry at every level, not just the elite. We are their voice.

While we respect that there are, have been and will always be differing opinions on the use of medication in racing, in particular lasix, our memberships overwhelmingly support the current system, see nothing that has changed in the past 3 years to alter their view and have been quite vocal about it to us the past several days. We want them, and you, to know that we will continue to strongly and vigorously advocate on their behalf to oppose any change in current policy and practice, absent scientific evidence to the contrary or breakthroughs that allow for the horse to otherwise be protected.

Alan Foreman, Chairman, THA
Rick Violette, Pres., THA; NY THA
Richard Meyer, MD THA
John Forbes, NJ THA
Michael Gorham, DEL THA
Sal Debunda, PA THA
Michael Campbell, IL THA

You have a lot of highly skilled trainer at every track. As in any other walk of life success does not make you a good or a bad person, it just makes you successful at your trade, nothing more nothing less.

it's true that those who haven't ever been caught may not have been caught 'yet'.
but when you've got trainers who have rap sheets a mile long...well, i think it's pretty clear that they're cheaters.
take patrick biancone-a year out of the game. did that harm the game? the owners who had to hire other trainers? i doubt it.

:tro: