Steve Byk quote of the day

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Christophe Clement routinely wins races with horses making their debut without Lasix. Did it the other day with a very impressive turf 2-year-old named Da Mi Basia Mille.

thanks for that ateam and calzone, i figured as much.

you'd think that irwin would rather not use it, so that when his horses win, he could say 'aha! see, i told you!'. so why doesn't he???

[Calzone Lord]

The Dubai Duty Free was a neat race that year. $5 million purse with a 16 horse field.

Japan's Admire Moon (End Sweep out of Sunday Silence mare) won the race as the post time favorite.

However, here is a look at some of the horses that didn't fire at all in the race.

* 12th place finisher:




* 14th place finisher:




* 15th place finisher:




* 16th place finisher:




Another big day for Japan turf racing in Dubai. Not so for turf racing in America and India.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Danzig

no, i'm not missing the point at all. i know that some people think it does more than prevent bleeding, that some believe it also enhances performance. and i can find you just as many others who don't.
my point is that if one feels strongly about getting rid of something, they don't keep using it. that would be akin to the marlboro man saying don't smoke while puffing on a marlboro red.

I'm curious, when is the last time a 3 or older horse won a G1 stake in the US without Lasix?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Yes, I've done so many times. Just compare the speed figures of each horse with and without lasix.

I don't remember you posting any objective data on this board. You have said here, "it's a fact". Prove it. It's not fair that we just believe it because you say it, right? Prove that horses improve lengths when they are given lasix. Can you link to that, please? Thanks.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Riot

I don't remember you posting any objective data on this board. You have said here, "it's a fact". Prove it. It's not fair that we just believe it because you say it, right? Prove that horses improve lengths when they are given lasix. Can you link to that, please? Thanks.

I will have I have some free time. I can't imagine any seasoned horseplayer would even try to deny this is true.

Steve often mentions the book "Champions", or did in the past. Peruse that for a bit and just look at our top horses' Beyer figures before and after Lasix. I particularly find it interesting to see the jumps on horses coming off of good races, including wins.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

I'm curious, when is the last time a 3 or older horse won a G1 stake in the US without Lasix?

i don't know, when? it's actually not something i've ever paid attention to, so i have no idea. perhaps invasor, who doug mentioned above?

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i don't know, when? it's actually not something i've ever paid attention to, so i have no idea. perhaps invasor, who doug mentioned above?

Not in the US he didn't. I don't know, but I think the fact it will take quite a bit of research says a lot.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

I will have I have some free time. I can't imagine any seasoned horseplayer would even try to deny this is true.

Steve often mentions the book "Champions", or did in the past. Peruse that for a bit and just look at our top horses' Beyer figures before and after Lasix. I particularly find it interesting to see the jumps on horses coming off of good races, including wins.

You say lasix is a performance enhancer that should be banned because you allege it improves horses performances by lengths, whether the horse is a bleeder or not.

I'm a veterinarian that agrees with the 99.99% of veterinary medical and scientific professionals that lasix is a necessary and good therapeutic medication whose use must be continued for the health and welfare of the race horse, and should not be considered a "performance enhancer".

I am listed on published scientific papers on the effect of lasix in race horses, and I have read the majority, if not all, of scientific information on the effect of lasix in race horses.

I've never read any studies that support your contention, that lasix is a strict performance enhancer. Only studies that contradict it.

So I'm really interested in your "facts", as your contention, unsupported by the veterinary medical community, is 100% of the argument against using this valuable therapeutic medication to help horses.

** The common way for "seasoned horse players" to bet horses is first or second use lasix. There's some interesting scientific data related to that. To bad horse players ignore science

But that doesn't have anything to do with the odd allegation that "lasix is a performance enhancer in all horses that moves horses up lengths".

I'll be interested to see your "proof". Can't wait.

[PatCummings]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

I'm curious, when is the last time a 3 or older horse won a G1 stake in the US without Lasix?

I think the better question is who was the last US-trained G1 winner in the US without Lasix. Have to think the overall question would be answered by a Euro shipping in...Shirocco, someone like that?

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Riot

You say lasix is a performance enhancer that should be banned because you allege it improves horses performances by lengths, whether the horse is a bleeder or not.

I said a few lengths.

Originally Posted by Riot

I'm a veterinarian that agrees with the 99.99% of veterinary medical and scientific professionals that lasix is a necessary and good therapeutic medication whose use must be continued for the health and welfare of the race horse, and should not be considered a "performance enhancer".

I don't really care who you are.

Originally Posted by Riot

I am listed on published scientific papers on the effect of lasix in race horses, and I have read the majority, if not all, of scientific information on the effect of lasix in race horses.

I don't care if you are listed on craigslist.

Originally Posted by Riot

I've never read any studies that support your contention, that lasix is a strict performance enhancer. Only studies that contradict it.

Yes, I'm the first one to ever bring it up. Sure I am. I also never said it was only a performance enhancer.

Originally Posted by Riot

So I'm really interested in your "facts", as your contention, unsupported by the veterinary medical community, is 100% of the argument against using this valuable therapeutic medication to help horses.

** The common way for "seasoned horse players" to bet horses is first or second use lasix. There's some interesting scientific data related to that. To bad horse players ignore science

The medical community has no idea how to measure thoroughbred performance under race conditions, including you. Oh, and it is "too", not "to".

Originally Posted by Riot

But that doesn't have anything to do with the odd allegation that "lasix is a performance enhancer in all horses that moves horses up lengths".

I'll be interested to see your "proof". Can't wait.

I never said all horses. That would be silly.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by PatCummings

I think the better question is who was the last US-trained G1 winner in the US without Lasix. Have to think the overall question would be answered by a Euro shipping in...Shirocco, someone like that?

Yes, I'm sure you are right. And now, for a shameless redboard, I bet Shirocco in the BC.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

I thought you didn't care what they did in other countries.

I don't. Just saw some irony.

[PatCummings]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Yes, I'm sure you are right. And now, for a shameless redboard, I bet Shirocco in the BC.

I think Andre Fabre emptied his bank account too...

[Riot]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

I said a few lengths.

I don't really care who you are.

I don't care if you are listed on craigslist.

Yes, I'm the first one to ever bring it up. Sure I am. I also never said it was only a performance enhancer.

The medical community has no idea how to measure thoroughbred performance under race conditions, including you. Oh, and it is "too", not "to".

I never said all horses. That would be silly.

You are a member of a very small-in-quantity minority group, with your thoughts on lasix. You and like-minded folks have the responsibility to prove to people your allegations about lasix are true, before the sport gives them any credence.

As I thought. No proof. Thank you.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I don't. Just saw some irony.

Me too.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Riot

You are a member of a very small-in-quantity minority group, with your thoughts on lasix. You and like-minded folks have the responsibility to prove to people your allegations about lasix are true, before the sport gives them any credence.

As I thought. No proof. Thank you.

Well, I told you I didn't have time today. Small in quantity minority group? You mean like everywhere but North and South America?

I'm not sure why we have to prove anything, but I will. Most horses are given Lasix with no proof of bleeding.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

I'm not sure about when lasix in Uruguay racing started. Invasor didn't race with it.

Invasor -- he's the best!

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Me too.

Awesome!

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by PatCummings

I think the better question is who was the last US-trained G1 winner in the US without Lasix. Have to think the overall question would be answered by a Euro shipping in...Shirocco, someone like that?

What is the typical average monthly vet bill of a horse in one of the large stables overseas?

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Riot

I admire Steve for always seeking the truth in this discussion, and letting the facts be known via his radio show

Now THAT I agree with.

Steve's show is awesome.