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

[Danzig]

is that the tracy farmer that zito trained for?

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by Danzig

is that the tracy farmer that zito trained for?

Yes. He was a big owner once.. Now he's just big.

[parsixfarms]

I love how these guys like Seth Hancock show up for a meeting like this and stump for "hay, oats and water" (the misnomer that it is). Last time I checked, he was using Pletcher as his trainer. So let me see, he's opposed to giving a horse a $20 Lasix shot on race day, but he has no problem having his horses with a trainer whose horses average four figure vet bills on a monthly basis. Can you say hypocrite?

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

I love how these guys like Seth Hancock show up for a meeting like this and stump for "hay, oats and water" (the misnomer that it is). Last time I checked, he was using Pletcher as his trainer. So let me see, he's opposed to giving a horse a $20 Lasix shot on race day, but he has no problem having his horses with a trainer whose horses average four figure vet bills on a monthly basis. Can you say hypocrite?

In all fairness, the vast majority of his horses are with Al Stall.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

In all fairness, the vast majority of his horses are with Al Stall.

True, but Claiborne has had, and currently does have, horses with Pletcher.

The list of TOBA/Jockey Club/Breeders Cup members that have horses with guys like Pletcher and Asmussen, whose monthly vet bills dwarf those of smaller stables, is pretty long.

[Calzone Lord]

When Turfway Park decided to install a synthetic surface I thought it was a great idea for many reasons...and I liked the idea of a third racing surface because it would help bettors who weren't mindless find edge in some situations.

When I started watching Turfway's poly races ... I thought it would be a travesty if top class horse racing is ever conducted on a surface like that.

You don't have to go back very far to find a time when lasix wasn't allowed on a major circuit...New York in the early-to-mid 90's.

The issue of the day in horse racing always seems to be a completely worthless issue and much ado about nothing. I don't care either way about lasix. It's basically vets and horse trainers VS dopey handwringers and do-gooders from within the industry.

[Cannon Shell]

The idea that we should get rid of lasix for PR is a laughably amatuerish move. The idea that there will be some big reaction to us removing the letter L in the program/pp's is based on delusional reasoning partly because many of the backers of the anti-medication movement have no understanding of how the "drug problem" in our game is formulated by horseplayers. I haven't met or heard of anyone in more than 20 years complaining about lasix as an issue (of course until recently when our own people stained the sport by taking their opinions based on bs public) but go to any racetrack in America and you will hear all kinds of theories (right or wrong) after a 47% trainer wins a race (or runs poorly at 2-5) or there is some dramatic form reversal. Asking people if they are for or against drugs in racing in a internet poll with no context and trumpeting those results is asinine but this is the "evidence" that they use. Saying that "we are known as a chemical sport so lets get rid of lasix" is insane not only because it will cause all kinds of unintended consequences but because it isnt attacking the real drug issue or any of the other problems of the sport. When breeders cry about lasix or other legal medications "affect" on the breed yet have no trouble with the manipulation of a foals legs (ie their god given genetic makeup) how can you take them seriously? In order to "fix the game" you must first understand what the hell is going on and it is painfully obvious that so many of the people in charge simply don't. This is the only billion dollar business in existence that relies on the opinions of mostly uneducated on the topic people to make major business decisions without doing an economic impact study on the likely effects of the potential decisions.

[Danzig]

i remember when ny was lasix-free. kept some nice horses from running there.

ky is probably hoping to be the industry leader, and see other groups follow their lead. they'll probably be very lonely on their pedestal, which they'll ditch in a hurry when their cunning plan falls apart. ky has bigger issues, they obviously don't have their priorities in order.

on the other hand...is this a move that began behind the scenes-are they hoping for some sort of state help with this vote???

[cloud_break]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

I love how these guys like Seth Hancock show up for a meeting like this and stump for "hay, oats and water" (the misnomer that it is). Last time I checked, he was using Pletcher as his trainer. So let me see, he's opposed to giving a horse a $20 Lasix shot on race day, but he has no problem having his horses with a trainer whose horses average four figure vet bills on a monthly basis. Can you say hypocrite?

In a hypothetical defense of "Seth Hancock", the only logical support of race day medication reform is from the breeding side of things. Perhaps its just laziness, but having the racing side weed out stallion prospects that are entirely med dependent could make sense to a guy invested in such horses. Banning lasix however probably does not qualify under those criteria.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cloud_break

In a hypothetical defense of "Seth Hancock", the only logical support of race day medication reform is from the breeding side of things. Perhaps its just laziness, but having the racing side weed out stallion prospects that are entirely med dependent could make sense to a guy invested in such horses. Banning lasix however probably does not qualify under those criteria.

I know of no horses who are "med dependent". It is completely made up bs. There are no medications that alter the genetic makeup of a stallion or mare or thier progeny. Perhaps if these people weren't in such a big hurry to get the horses off the track to breed (and protect their investment) perhaps they could sort themselves out a little better on the racetrack.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I know of no horses who are "med dependent". It is completely made up bs. There are no medications that alter the genetic makeup of a stallion or mare or thier progeny. Perhaps if these people weren't in such a big hurry to get the horses off the track to breed (and protect their investment) perhaps they could sort themselves out a little better on the racetrack.

That sounds like a contradiction. You say that no horses are "med dependent". If the horses don't need meds, then why give them meds?

With regards to genetics, there is strong evidence that bleeding is genetic.

"According to data presented at the Summit, bleeding is to some degree an inherited trait, and the more horses whose bleeding was controlled by Lasix go to the breeding shed, the more that trait will tend to appear in subsequent generation."
http://businessofracing.blogspot.com...o-be-done.html

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

That sounds like a contradiction. You say that no horses are "med dependent". If the horses don't need meds, then why give them meds?

With regards to genetics, there is strong evidence that bleeding is genetic.

"According to data presented at the Summit, bleeding is to some degree an inherited trait, and the more horses whose bleeding was controlled by Lasix go to the breeding shed, the more that trait will tend to appear in subsequent generation."
http://businessofracing.blogspot.com...o-be-done.html

from the drf article:

In large part, those studies have concluded that horses suffer from bleeding as a result of genetic conditions that evolved in the species millions of years ago and because of the vast volumes of blood pumped at high pressure through a horse's lungs during exercise. Other studies have concluded that furosemide has been proven to mitigate those effects and prevent long-term damage to lung tissue.


as for your query-horses given lasix don't have to have it to run, it's something they can run without. in that regard, they aren't dependent. however, the issue is bleeding, in some horses it can be significant. lasix prevents that. and as romans pointed out, they would have allowed it throughout training, just not on race days which is when he said 'they would need it most'. and as was pointed out, lasix can prevent long-term lung damage.

if ky wants to lead the way on meds, perhaps they should do more to go after the ones that enhance performance, rather than worrying about a drug that prevents bleeding and tissue damage?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

That sounds like a contradiction. You say that no horses are "med dependent". If the horses don't need meds, then why give them meds?

With regards to genetics, there is strong evidence that bleeding is genetic.

"According to data presented at the Summit, bleeding is to some degree an inherited trait, and the more horses whose bleeding was controlled by Lasix go to the breeding shed, the more that trait will tend to appear in subsequent generation."
http://businessofracing.blogspot.com...o-be-done.html

Seriously? Horses are treated for issues just like any other flesh and blood being. That doesnt mean they are dependent on meds, just that they arent beyond the scope of illness or malady. Just as people who take a daily dose of aspirin as a preventative measure aren't dependent on aspirin, horses arent dependent on lasix or just about any other med.

The "evidence" that bleeding is to some degree an inherited trait is flimsy considering that pretty much all horses are known to bleed from time to time. What people just dont seem to understand is that often bleeding doesn't just happen out of thin air, there are a whole laundry list of things that can help cause a horse to bleed and none of them involve the horses sire or dam. Ignoring it wont make it better and if you or any other person thinks that lasix or any medication is the biggest mistake being made in the thoroughbred horse breeding arena then you have fallen for the bait, hook line and sinker.

[cloud_break]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I know of no horses who are "med dependent". It is completely made up bs. There are no medications that alter the genetic makeup of a stallion or mare or thier progeny. Perhaps if these people weren't in such a big hurry to get the horses off the track to breed (and protect their investment) perhaps they could sort themselves out a little better on the racetrack.

Bad choice of words on my part. Perhaps "enhanced"?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cloud_break

Bad choice of words on my part. Perhaps "enhanced"?

If you have a cold and take medicine do you feel that you are enhanced and are providing your employer with better than ordinary effort?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Kasept

Yes. He was a big owner once.. Now he's just big.

!!!!!



he ought to know better.

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

I love how these guys like Seth Hancock show up for a meeting like this and stump for "hay, oats and water" (the misnomer that it is). Last time I checked, he was using Pletcher as his trainer. So let me see, he's opposed to giving a horse a $20 Lasix shot on race day, but he has no problem having his horses with a trainer whose horses average four figure vet bills on a monthly basis. Can you say hypocrite?

maybe this is a ploy to get his vet bills down??

seriously, he ought to know better too.