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

[Kasept]

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.

[pointman]

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

[Cannon Shell]

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.

[Aly-Sheba]

Originally Posted by pointman

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

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.

[Calzone Lord]

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.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

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.

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

[ateamstupid]

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.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

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.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Aly-Sheba

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.

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.

[Aly-Sheba]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

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.

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.

[pointman]

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.

[ateamstupid]

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.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by pointman

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

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by pointman

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.

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.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Aly-Sheba

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 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.

[pointman]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

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?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Aly-Sheba

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.

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.

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

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.

I went googling for sources to back this up (not that I doubted you; I just spent too many years working at a science organization) and came across this op-ed piece. It's about trotters, but looks at very similar arguments TB fans make, including the argument that it weakens the breed:

http://xwebapp.ustrotting.com/absolu...7932&zoneid=29