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

[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.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by freddymo

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.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by jms62

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.

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

[golfer]

Originally Posted by freddymo

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.

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?

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by golfer

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?

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.

[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.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by 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.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Danzig

So smart claims are exclusive to people who "we" deem to be highly skilled professionals, that the peanut gallery is of the opinion are "clean". So people like Michele Nevin aren't capable of making successful claims that the "clean" trainers are privy to because we assume they are cheating.. #Gotcha.. Now its crystal clear, depending on your name we judge skill vs. chemicals. Proof is not necessary just the pronunciation of your last name in determining judgement.

[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?

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by pointman

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.