Raceday Medications USA

[dizzy]

VVV, Bill seems as if you were wrong on the publics opinion of therapeutic drugs in racing, and that opinion's ability to have things change.

On the 19th of July more then 40 of North America's most prominent thoroughbred owners announced they had signed a pledge to ban Lasix from being used on their 2yo's in 2012. If you know the permisive attitude to raceday medication in the US then you'll know how big a step this is, and it came about because of the publics attitude to the use of drugs in racing.

The details can be found here. www.cleanhorseracing.org (http://www.cleanhorseracing.org)
click on "supporters" to view the opinions of hall of fame trainer D Wayne Lucas and others on the effects of using legal therapeutic medications in racing.

VVV you have advocated the use of therapeutic medications in order to better look after the horses from the demands of racing and help them recover. The North American experience has been that it didn't work that way. But you may get the makings of your list as one of the proposals is a list of 25 permissable therapeutics only (and not on raceday) with withdrawal times.


The debate on this has been raging for the last 12 months or so over there, and in March the New York times ran a 4 part story on racing. In many states lasix,anabolic steroids, corticosteroids, bute and other anti inflamatories/painkillers have been legal on raceday but it is changing. I cant put up a link but if you google "mangled horses and maimed jockeys" you will find it. It contains a video as well and as a word of warning the images are graphic. Also bear in mind the fatality statistics do not include those horse who are "vanned" of the track and subsequently euthanised at a clinic or farm.

This is not harness racing but TB racing so some of you will say what has this got to do with us? Harness racing is conducted under the same medication rules as TB racing. Of course we don't look as bad as the TB's /quarter horses, we don't race in New Mexico for a start, and we do have a sounder breed but for how long?

The legends of harness racing such as Meadow Skipper, Bret Hanover, Albatross, Cam Fella all had lengthy racing careers in an era of heat and final racing on the same day and before race day meds were common. I'll leave you to make your own comparisons with the stallions of today. I think the LBJ is about the only same day heat and final race left.

If someone wants a more detailed read then I recommend this
www.horsefund.org/the-chemical-horse-part-1.php (http://www.horsefund.org/the-chemical-horse-part-1.php)

It is on a horse welfare site but is not at all "lunatic fringe" but well researched and referenced with stats from industry studies and quotes from many respected participants. It is lengthy so allow some time but it comes in parts so is not difficult to read.

[Thevoiceofreason]

VVV, Bill seems as if you were wrong on the publics opinion of therapeutic drugs in racing, and that opinion's ability to have things change.

On the 19th of July more then 40 of North America's most prominent thoroughbred owners announced they had signed a pledge to ban Lasix from being used on their 2yo's in 2012. If you know the permisive attitude to raceday medication in the US then you'll know how big a step this is, and it came about because of the publics attitude to the use of drugs in racing.

The details can be found here. www.cleanhorseracing.org (http://www.cleanhorseracing.org)
click on "supporters" to view the opinions of hall of fame trainer D Wayne Lucas and others on the effects of using legal therapeutic medications in racing.

VVV you have advocated the use of therapeutic medications in order to better look after the horses from the demands of racing and help them recover. The North American experience has been that it didn't work that way. But you may get the makings of your list as one of the proposals is a list of 25 permissable therapeutics only (and not on raceday) with withdrawal times.


The debate on this has been raging for the last 12 months or so over there, and in March the New York times ran a 4 part story on racing. In many states lasix,anabolic steroids, corticosteroids, bute and other anti inflamatories/painkillers have been legal on raceday but it is changing. I cant put up a link but if you google "mangled horses and maimed jockeys" you will find it. It contains a video as well and as a word of warning the images are graphic. Also bear in mind the fatality statistics do not include those horse who are "vanned" of the track and subsequently euthanised at a clinic or farm.

This is not harness racing but TB racing so some of you will say what has this got to do with us? Harness racing is conducted under the same medication rules as TB racing. Of course we don't look as bad as the TB's /quarter horses, we don't race in New Mexico for a start, and we do have a sounder breed but for how long?

The legends of harness racing such as Meadow Skipper, Bret Hanover, Albatross, Cam Fella all had lengthy racing careers in an era of heat and final racing on the same day and before race day meds were common. I'll leave you to make your own comparisons with the stallions of today. I think the LBJ is about the only same day heat and final race left.

If someone wants a more detailed read then I recommend this
www.horsefund.org/the-chemical-horse-part-1.php (http://www.horsefund.org/the-chemical-horse-part-1.php)

It is on a horse welfare site but is not at all "lunatic fringe" but well researched and referenced with stats from industry studies and quotes from many respected participants. It is lengthy so allow some time but it comes in parts so is not difficult to read.

Dot

I am not sure what planet you are on but I have never ever suggested Lasix as an accepted race day medication or even as an acceptable medication for EIPH.

In relation to this story in reality it is actually agreeing with what VVV has been saying, accepted therapeutic substances with withholding periods so that metabolites in the urine is not enough for a positive swab.

The drama is the USA system does not work neither does the Aussie one the answer lies somewhere in the middle.

[Triple V]

VVV, Bill seems as if you were wrong on the publics opinion of therapeutic drugs in racing, and that opinion's ability to have things change.

On the 19th of July more then 40 of North America's most prominent thoroughbred owners announced they had signed a pledge to ban Lasix from being used on their 2yo's in 2012. If you know the permisive attitude to raceday medication in the US then you'll know how big a step this is, and it came about because of the publics attitude to the use of drugs in racing.

The details can be found here. www.cleanhorseracing.org (http://www.cleanhorseracing.org)
click on "supporters" to view the opinions of hall of fame trainer D Wayne Lucas and others on the effects of using legal therapeutic medications in racing.

VVV you have advocated the use of therapeutic medications in order to better look after the horses from the demands of racing and help them recover. The North American experience has been that it didn't work that way. But you may get the makings of your list as one of the proposals is a list of 25 permissable therapeutics only (and not on raceday) with withdrawal times.


The debate on this has been raging for the last 12 months or so over there, and in March the New York times ran a 4 part story on racing. In many states lasix,anabolic steroids, corticosteroids, bute and other anti inflamatories/painkillers have been legal on raceday but it is changing. I cant put up a link but if you google "mangled horses and maimed jockeys" you will find it. It contains a video as well and as a word of warning the images are graphic. Also bear in mind the fatality statistics do not include those horse who are "vanned" of the track and subsequently euthanised at a clinic or farm.

This is not harness racing but TB racing so some of you will say what has this got to do with us? Harness racing is conducted under the same medication rules as TB racing. Of course we don't look as bad as the TB's /quarter horses, we don't race in New Mexico for a start, and we do have a sounder breed but for how long?

The legends of harness racing such as Meadow Skipper, Bret Hanover, Albatross, Cam Fella all had lengthy racing careers in an era of heat and final racing on the same day and before race day meds were common. I'll leave you to make your own comparisons with the stallions of today. I think the LBJ is about the only same day heat and final race left.

If someone wants a more detailed read then I recommend this
www.horsefund.org/the-chemical-horse-part-1.php (http://www.horsefund.org/the-chemical-horse-part-1.php)

It is on a horse welfare site but is not at all "lunatic fringe" but well researched and referenced with stats from industry studies and quotes from many respected participants. It is lengthy so allow some time but it comes in parts so is not difficult to read.


[VVV] Comprehension 101 there Dot. You've read it but because of a prior held view akin to a Limpet on a rock and so a pre-determined spin on the thrust of that piece, your summation/synopsis is so far off the runway as to have landed in the native plant regeneration area.
Go read it over again. That story is COMPLETELY in line with what I've been saying all along. VOR has raised a point ages ago that in his opinion EIPH is the single biggest animal welfare issue the Industry faces and that there are better anti-bleeder meds around than Lasix, two points with which I completely agree. To my knowledge nobody on this Forum has raised the need for a US style pre race Lasix program to be introduced here in Oz, not VOR nor me (and if I have done so then I was wrong)... and nor anyone else as far as I can recall but please, by all means, don't let that stand in the way of a good story.
Interestingly one of those much better anti-bleeder options around that VOR speaks of is the substance that Geoff Small was jammed up for, Amicar or versions thereof.

Incidentally Dot, you've invoked the names of some of the greats of the Breed there, Meadow Skipper, Bret Hanover, Albatross & Cam Fella to buttress your point by way of.... QUOTE [The legends of harness racing such as Meadow Skipper, Bret Hanover, Albatross, Cam Fella all had lengthy racing careers in an era of heat and final racing on the same day and before race day meds were common. I'll leave you to make your own comparisons with the stallions of today. I think the LBJ is about the only same day heat and final race left.]

Lengthy careers? Comparisons with the stallions of today? You need to do your homework Dot.
Insofar as the length of their respective race careers go...
Meadow Skipper had 86 starts lifetime incl. 27 as a 2yo and retired as a 3yo with a mark of 1:55.1.
Albatross had 71 starts lifetime and retired as a 4yo with a mark of 1:54.3
Bret Hanover had 68 starts lifetime and retired as a 4yo with a TT mark of 1:53.3
Cam Fella had 80 starts lifetime and retired as a 4yo with a mark of 1:53.1.

The 'before race day meds were common' piece makes me chuckle Dot, seriously.
That's one of the best 'passing of time serving to glorify history' efforts I've read in a long, long time.
Race day meds have been going around since back before Hannibal used to drench his War Elephants with a mixture of hot Mullberry juice & assorted goodies in order to encourage them to punch-on.
Rumours abounded for years that Billy Direct raced on Heroin and back then it was quite commonplace for horses to be drenched with Laudnum. It was often referred to as Texas Tea. I can remember certain people doing that here in Australia back when I was only a small child. They'd tube them on-course.
The late Laurie Moulds was a specialist at it. He had a Catholic Priest who used to act as his lookout. So please, let's not make out as though racing was somehow so much purer back then and the horses so much better and more noble then than they are now because that is simply delusional.

Additional. One of today's stallions, Rock N Roll Heaven, went 2 Heats to win the Jug and tossed down a pair of World Record 1:49.4 miles on a half mile track. Not bad.

[racefair]

EIPH can be a big problem. I think that some Aussie trainers have treatments for it which has been evidenced by known "bleeders" coming from the United States and competing here like Mr Feelgood.
“Australian medication rules are far more stringent than in North America. That includes no Lasix which Mr Feelgood had raced with since January 1 of last
year.” – Article published in March 2009 http://www.theharnessedge.com/pdf-columns/Downunder_HE_0309.pdf

[Lethal]

"What has happened in the downward spiral of horse racing in North America is that drugs inappropriately classified as therapeutic have superseded what once was accepted practice, and now substitute in great quantity what other more dangerous drugs accomplished in lesser concentration. Why? Because these are the accepted rules, and punishment is typically inconsequential. Play by the rules and reap the benefits with minor expenditure and penalty. The innocuous Class 4 drugs function most conveniently, as tokens of blamelessness."

This is quote from the site in America mentioned by Dot. If any fair minded person in Harness Racing were to think this is the right way, then our sport has noway to head but down, needlessly just like them

[Triple V]

Hey Lee, for the benefit of inquiring minds that would really like to know about such things, could you please list all the drugs that have, in your opinion, been inappropriately classified as therapeutics in the US/CAN?

Having listed them could you then please offer a reason or reasons as to why they are not in fact therapeutic substances?

I look forward to your reply.

[Thevoiceofreason]

Dot

When I first started in racing stables in the early seventies bute was able to be used up until three days before the race and not produce a positive swab, any tranier winning races was using anabolics.

Whilst I was not around Phar Lap died of arsenic poisoning, if you believe that anybody other the trainer was giving him arsenic then you are living on another planet, do not act like drug use on horses is something new.

[Lethal]

Hey Lee, for the benefit of inquiring minds that would really like to know about such things, could you please list all the drugs that have, in your opinion, been inappropriately classified as therapeutics in the US/CAN?

Having listed them could you then please offer a reason or reasons as to why they are not in fact therapeutic substances?

I look forward to your reply.

Jaimie,
When Cleopatra was told Antony had married another woman, her response was that she saw the storytellers eyes as 'Balls' (you know them, the ones Dot wanted). The response from him was *roughly translated as* 'DON'T SHOOT THE MESSENGER'

[Triple V]

Lee, you made the following statement.


What has happened in the downward spiral of horse racing in North America is that drugs inappropriately classified as therapeutic have superseded what once was accepted practice, and now substitute in great quantity what other more dangerous drugs accomplished in lesser concentration. Why? Because these are the accepted rules, and punishment is typically inconsequential. Play by the rules and reap the benefits with minor expenditure and penalty. The innocuous Class 4 drugs function most conveniently, as tokens of blamelessness.
This is quote from the site in America mentioned by Dot. If any fair minded person in Harness Racing were to think this is the right way, then our sport has noway to head but down, needlessly just like them

...and I'm simply asking you to qualify that statement by naming some or all of the drugs that were/have been/are, in your opinion, inappropriately classified as therapeutic. Call it a fleshing out of your agument if you like. So, what are the names of these inappropriately classified substances?

[Lethal]

Jaimie,
When Cleopatra was told Antony had married another woman, her response was that she saw the storytellers eyes as 'Balls' (you know them, the ones Dot wanted). The response from him was *roughly translated as* 'DON'T SHOOT THE MESSENGER'

Jaimie,
Read the post...............It's a quote...........self explanatory.....NO?

[Triple V]

Jaimie,
Read the post...............It's a quote...........self explanatory.....NO?


[VVV] No, it's not and that's the point Lee. Can't you see?
You're agreeing with and eagerly (re) posting something which you think backs up your argument.... BUT it didn't bother expand upon/back up its claims by way of offering up specific examples of the drugs which it claims have been inapropriately classified as therapeutic...and apparently nor are you able to do so.

[dizzy]

[VVV] Comprehension 101 there Dot. You've read it but because of a prior held view akin to a Limpet on a rock and so a pre-determined spin on the thrust of that piece, your summation/synopsis is so far off the runway as to have landed in the native plant regeneration area.
Go read it over again. That story is COMPLETELY in line with what I've been saying all along. VOR has raised a point ages ago that in his opinion EIPH is the single biggest animal welfare issue the Industry faces and that there are better anti-bleeder meds around than Lasix, two points with which I completely agree. To my knowledge nobody on this Forum has raised the need for a US style pre race Lasix program to be introduced here in Oz, not VOR nor me (and if I have done so then I was wrong)... and nor anyone else as far as I can recall but please, by all means, don't let that stand in the way of a good story.
Interestingly one of those much better anti-bleeder options around that VOR speaks of is the substance that Geoff Small was jammed up for, Amicar or versions thereof.

Incidentally Dot, you've invoked the names of some of the greats of the Breed there, Meadow Skipper, Bret Hanover, Albatross & Cam Fella to buttress your point by way of.... QUOTE [The legends of harness racing such as Meadow Skipper, Bret Hanover, Albatross, Cam Fella all had lengthy racing careers in an era of heat and final racing on the same day and before race day meds were common. I'll leave you to make your own comparisons with the stallions of today. I think the LBJ is about the only same day heat and final race left.]

Lengthy careers? Comparisons with the stallions of today? You need to do your homework Dot.
Insofar as the length of their respective race careers go...
Meadow Skipper had 86 starts lifetime incl. 27 as a 2yo and retired as a 3yo with a mark of 1:55.1.
Albatross had 71 starts lifetime and retired as a 4yo with a mark of 1:54.3
Bret Hanover had 68 starts lifetime and retired as a 4yo with a TT mark of 1:53.3
Cam Fella had 80 starts lifetime and retired as a 4yo with a mark of 1:53.1.

The 'before race day meds were common' piece makes me chuckle Dot, seriously.
That's one of the best 'passing of time serving to glorify history' efforts I've read in a long, long time.
Race day meds have been going around since back before Hannibal used to drench his War Elephants with a mixture of hot Mullberry juice & assorted goodies in order to encourage them to punch-on.
Rumours abounded for years that Billy Direct raced on Heroin and back then it was quite commonplace for horses to be drenched with Laudnum. It was often referred to as Texas Tea. I can remember certain people doing that here in Australia back when I was only a small child. They'd tube them on-course.
The late Laurie Moulds was a specialist at it. He had a Catholic Priest who used to act as his lookout. So please, let's not make out as though racing was somehow so much purer back then and the horses so much better and more noble then than they are now because that is simply delusional.

Additional. One of today's stallions, Rock N Roll Heaven, went 2 Heats to win the Jug and tossed down a pair of World Record 1:49.4 miles on a half mile track. Not bad.

Well I guess I should not be surprised Bill VVV both of you in your haste to shoot the messanger failed to read the message. This thread was not about your opinions on EIPH or the use of Lasix but regarding your opinion that team driving or whip use are bigger issues for racing/harness racing then the use of drugs, therapeutic or otherwise. Bill I do actually recall reading you write "not Lasix too complicated". I think neither of you appreciate just what a giant leap this is for US racing. You should note that the owners have not pledged to have their jockeys not use the whip or engage in team riding. They also pledged not to use adjunct anti bleeder medications either. The New York Times is not a Murdoch tabloid and after the CBS network evening news anchor threw to commercial with "after the break we will be talking about an event where all the competitors are on a performance enhancing drug" before the third leg of the galloping triple crown, I guess the message became loud and clear.

Geoff Smalls positive swab was to tranexamic acid which is about 10 times stronger then aminocaproic acid which is in Amicar. They sound good for controlling EIPH but you need to understand the fine print. These drugs prevent blood clots from breaking down, thus helping to seal off the capilliaries in the lungs when a horse bleeds but the formation and breakdown of clots is a constant process in the blood stream and these drugs also prevent these clots in the bloodstream from breaking down increasing the risk of pulmonary embolism, cardiac arrest or stroke if a clot travels to the lungs, heart or brain. Exactly what the risk is is for experts to decide but it does exist.

So VVV Meadow Skipper had 59 starts by your reckoning as a 3yo? Pretty amazing don't you think? Who needs to do their homework then, Meadow Skipper actually retired as a 5yo. Delete his 7 starts as a 5yo and he has a very comparable record to the other 3 at the completion of their 4yo season. I wasn't talking solely about careers in terms of years but in numbers of starts also, and in an era of heat and final racing. And if they were "treated" with illegal pre race medications then that just makes their durability even more remarkable.

Compare this to most of the stallions on offer today? Sure Four Starzz Shark, Mister Big and Mr Feelgood had similar numbers of starts but over more seasons. How about the 2008, 2009, 2010 USTA 2yo's of the year on offer now? Obviously talented and successfull but not as durable. I'm sure this is where you say but they are faster now, The TB's aren't faster now but their stats as a population has reduced from over 11 starts to just over 6 starts in the permissive medication era.

I know Rock N Roll Heaven went two sub 50 miles in the jug, also Bolt The Duer (which didn't rate a mention here) went 1:47.4 on a 1000m track in the Adios. Tell me again why we built 1400m at Menangle?

[aussiebreno]

I'm sure this is where you say but they are faster now, The TB's aren't faster now but their stats as a population has reduced from over 11 starts to just over 6 starts in the permissive medication era.

I know Rock N Roll Heaven went two sub 50 miles in the jug, also Bolt The Duer (which didn't rate a mention here) went 1:47.4 on a 1000m track in the Adios. Tell me again why we built 1400m at Menangle?
TBs reduced starts...higher population, less time fiddling with those that aren't good enough.

1400m track at Menangle. Consistently faster times.

[Thevoiceofreason]

Dot

I think you have missed the point the big push in the USA is not about banning therapeutic drugs in the way you are presenting it it is very much more about the banning of race day treatments of those drugs.

Lasix for instance is used in many jurisdictions as a non race day medication when horses are working fast personally I have an issue with this from an animal welfare issue because it will cause the horses to dehydrate when working ... however others will say it has a greater therapeutic value because they will not suffer EIPH.

The point is and be sure on this, the change in the USA is about race day treatments only, nothing more nothing less, it matters little what spin you want to put on it , the push is about bringing the USA in line with the majority of the racing world ...it is called harmonisation of the rules and trust me it has a long way to go and neither you or I will see it.

[Triple V]

G'day Dot,

Attempting to link that which you perceive to be a lack of durability in the breed & then suggesting it has been caused by the use of therapeutics and then pinning that on the nothing short of outstanding range of Sires available to Southern Hemisphere Breeders for this coming season...and further, doing so without even so much as a shread of evidence to support your agument....for mine is an argument holding as much water as past attempts by others to link a perceived lack of career longevity with juvenile racing.

Here in the Southern Hemisphere, the Standardbred Breed of today is an infinitely better conformed, better gaited, more precocious, faster & more durable animal now than it ever was 50-40-30-20 and even as recently as 10 years ago. In my mind there is absolutely no doubt about that whatsoever.

Futhermore, Official Figures reflect the same in that while foal numbers have dropped away considerably over the past 20 years or so...not only are the foals we are producing making it to the racetrack in greater numbers each season...they are having more starts at 2yrs & 3yrs and they are in fact also making considerably more total career starts than their predecessors ever did.
Here in Australia it is an inescapable fact, go have a look for yourself if you doubt me, that we are conducting more races per week Nationally than we ever did 20 years plus ago and hand in hand with that, we're doing so with considerably fewer horses being bred.
That is of course in turn a direct reflection of the ever increasing quality and quantity of outstanding Sires and Siring propsects becoming available to Breeders in the same period.
To suggest otherwsie simply flies in the face of Official stats, Official studies and a simple commonsense observation and assessment of same.
Nice try, but no Cigar.

[dizzy]

EIPH can be a big problem. I think that some Aussie trainers have treatments for it which has been evidenced by known "bleeders" coming from the United States and competing here like Mr Feelgood.
“Australian medication rules are far more stringent than in North America. That includes no Lasix which Mr Feelgood had raced with since January 1 of last
year.” – Article published in March 2009 http://www.theharnessedge.com/pdf-columns/Downunder_HE_0309.pdf

Jett I don't know if Mr Feelgood is a known bleeder, as racing in the US on lasix is not actually definative evidence that a horse is a bleeder. There were requirements previously that a horse had to be certified as a bleeder by a vet to race on lasix but in many jurisdictions these days trainers can race horses on lasix by choice. The stats are over 90% of TB's and 70% standardbreds in the US race on lasix. These include many having their first start in the TB's at least. Many trainers see it as not a level playing field if their horses aren't on lasix when others in the field are.

[dizzy]

Hey Lee, for the benefit of inquiring minds that would really like to know about such things, could you please list all the drugs that have, in your opinion, been inappropriately classified as therapeutics in the US/CAN?

Having listed them could you then please offer a reason or reasons as to why they are not in fact therapeutic substances?

I look forward to your reply.

VVV you really have taken things out of context here, you need to read/understand the whole quote, not just take a few words that you fancy out of it. The quote refers to all those therapeutic drugs classified as class four in the US, and the manner in which they are administered and regulated. Class four include muscle relaxants without CNS effects, NSAID's and corticosteroids.

Put simply what the quote means is you don't have to risk using a class 1 drug such as morphine (which would get you banned) when you can load them up with joint injections and bute with little fear of consequences if you get a "therapeutic overage" for these drugs.

It is a bigger picture then just listing names of drugs, but given you have repeatedly demonstrated that you cant see that Boldonone without a prescription is an illegal drug then perhaps this concept is also outside your grasp.

[Triple V]

That's the way Dot, whenever you get pinned down on something and you have to Pony up some facts to back up your assertions, just move the goal posts. Gimme a break. What an absolute joke.

[Lethal]

That's the way Dot, whenever you get pinned down on something and you have to Pony up some facts to back up your assertions, just move the goal posts. Gimme a break. What an absolute joke.
Jaimie, it must be assumed then that you haven't read the article from whence the quote was obtained, otherwise you wouldn't dispute it.

[dizzy]

That's the way Dot, whenever you get pinned down on something and you have to Pony up some facts to back up your assertions, just move the goal posts. Gimme a break. What an absolute joke.

VVV no doubt this will be beyond your comprehension

CLASS 4 This class includes therapeutic medications that would be expected to have less potential to affect performance then thosein CLASS 3. Drugs in this class include less potent diuretics, corticosteroids, antihitimines and skeletal muscle relaxants without prominent central nervous system effects; expectorants and mucolytics; hemostatics; cardiac glycosides and anti arrythmics; topical anestetics; anti diahiarreals and mild analgesics. This classification also includes non steroidal anti inflammatory drugs at concentrations greater then established limits.

Now VVV as you will no doubt have no idea what that means let me give you just one to sink your teeth into- Phenylbutozone, perhaps I should use the simple name though, give you half a chance to get it -BUTE

I don't know how to put it any simpler then I already have VVV, you do not have to risk a class one positive for morphine when you can go well over the therapeutic threshold allowed for bute and meerly get a slap on the wrist. VVV you keep the race and the prizemoney and in many instances pay nothing more then a fine of a few hundred dollars.

VVV you claim to have an enquiring mind, why don't you read the chemical horse article you may be surprised by what you learn

[dizzy]

TBs reduced starts...higher population, less time fiddling with those that aren't good enough.

1400m track at Menangle. Consistently faster times.

Brenno the higher population has been suggested as a cause but on its own is not enough. Some certainly are discarded but the claiming and conditioned racing in the states and the proliferation of tracks in the mid west give horse more opportunities then they would get in Oz, but the permisive medication rules have ruined claiming and conditioned racing by facilitating the rise of the chemists.

Commercial breeding has also been touted as a course but again doesn't invole enough numbers.

The two biggest causes are increasing unsoundness in the breed ( a lot as the result of linebreeding to Raise a Native) and the increased recovery time as a result of the effects of racing on lasixs which cause dehydration and electrolyte imbalances.


Brenno as a punter (thats you obviously not me!) what does consistently faster times on a track that is incompatable with all other really mean?

[Triple V]

Jaimie, it must be assumed then that you haven't read the article from whence the quote was obtained, otherwise you wouldn't dispute it.

[VVV] Hello there Little Sir Echo...we have you been hiding?

[Triple V]

VVV no doubt this will be beyond your comprehension

CLASS 4 This class includes therapeutic medications that would be expected to have less potential to affect performance then thosein CLASS 3. Drugs in this class include less potent diuretics, corticosteroids, antihitimines and skeletal muscle relaxants without prominent central nervous system effects; expectorants and mucolytics; hemostatics; cardiac glycosides and anti arrythmics; topical anestetics; anti diahiarreals and mild analgesics. This classification also includes non steroidal anti inflammatory drugs at concentrations greater then established limits.

Now VVV as you will no doubt have no idea what that means let me give you just one to sink your teeth into- Phenylbutozone, perhaps I should use the simple name though, give you half a chance to get it -BUTE

I don't know how to put it any simpler then I already have VVV, you do not have to risk a class one positive for morphine when you can go well over the therapeutic threshold allowed for bute and meerly get a slap on the wrist. VVV you keep the race and the prizemoney and in many instances pay nothing more then a fine of a few hundred dollars.

VVV you claim to have an enquiring mind, why don't you read the chemical horse article you may be surprised by what you learn

[VVV] Dot, both yourself and your mate Little Sir Echo (who rather notably wasn't able to answer any of the questions put to him with regard to his statements) need to get some sort of a grip on reality here.

As VOR has repeatedly told you both and as you have both repeatedly ignored, the fact is that the VAST majority of overages are of a therapeutic nature.

Despite VOR's good advice, undaunted you chose to line up on US Racing and then tied in with it a bagging of the durability of the resultant sires and siring prospects as a result of the use of drugs.

Well here's a jolt back into the real world for you.

Of ALL the tests taken from both racehorse codes in the USA in 2011, some 325,423 samples in total, less than one half of 1% (0.491%)..... or just short of 1600 of them....actually returned a positive test to anything.

Of those just short of 1600 that returned a positive test, 94.5% were overages of legal equine therapeutic medications.

On the flipside, genuine attempts at doping horses with Class 1 or Class 2 substances accounted for less than 0.012% of the tests conducted, some 39 instances in total from 325,423.

Clearly your position on this subject and that of Little Sir Echo...is simply not born out by the cold, hard facts.

[aussiebreno]

Brenno as a punter (thats you obviously not me!) what does consistently faster times on a track that is incompatable with all other really mean?
Your post (most of which I deleted from this quote) certaintly is truthful to my limited knowledge and opinion, but mentioned the increased population just to balance it out.

As for this last bit I've left quoted...not sure what you are getting at???

[Viv Strangman]

[QUOTE=dizzy;22795]Brenno the higher population has been suggested as a cause but on its own is not enough. Some certainly are discarded but the claiming and conditioned racing in the states and the proliferation of tracks in the mid west give horse more opportunities then they would get in Oz, but the permisive medication rules have ruined claiming and conditioned racing by facilitating the rise of the chemists.

Commercial breeding has also been touted as a course but again doesn't invole enough numbers.

The two biggest causes are increasing unsoundness in the breed ( a lot as the result of linebreeding to Raise a Native) and the increased recovery time as a result of the effects of racing on lasixs which cause dehydration and electrolyte imbalances.
What a load of rubbish. I travel to the US regularly and have done so for over 30 years.
I have yet to read anything in your numerous posts that is even close to being an accurate summation of the American situation. Please take the time to become better informed.At the present your posts are less than enlightening and more worthy of a place in the National Enquirer.

[dizzy]

[VVV] Dot, both yourself and your mate Little Sir Echo (who rather notably wasn't able to answer any of the questions put to him with regard to his statements) need to get some sort of a grip on reality here.

As VOR has repeatedly told you both and as you have both repeatedly ignored, the fact is that the VAST majority of overages are of a therapeutic nature.

Despite VOR's good advice, undaunted you chose to line up on US Racing and then tied in with it a bagging of the durability of the resultant sires and siring prospects as a result of the use of drugs.

Well here's a jolt back into the real world for you.

Of ALL the tests taken from both racehorse codes in the USA in 2011, some 325,423 samples in total, less than one half of 1% (0.491%)..... or just short of 1600 of them....actually returned a positive test to anything.

Of those just short of 1600 that returned a positive test, 94.5% were overages of legal equine therapeutic medications.

On the flipside, genuine attempts at doping horses with Class 1 or Class 2 substances accounted for less than 0.012% of the tests conducted, some 39 instances in total from 325,423.

Clearly your position on this subject and that of Little Sir Echo...is simply not born out by the cold, hard facts.

VVV I cant imagine why you would think that I'm not actually familiar with the testing data you have posted, and clearly you are off in your own little world of alternative reality because the data they contain, and from the 10 preceeding years, actually supports the quote that Lee posted here not refutes it.

But first lets recap a little. I commenced this thread because you and Bill were adamant that public opinion on the use of therapeutic drugs in racehorse counted for little if anything. The current happenings in the US regarding owners pledging to ban raceday lasix in their 2yos indicate that to be far from the case. I referred to an article printed in the NY times to indicate the kind of pressure being brough to bear. Though you may not like it VVV many of the catastrophic raceday breakdowns are linked to the raceday permitted use of corticosteroids and pain masking medications that are permitted in a horses system during a race in many jurisdictions in the US. These medications do not need to be present above the defined threshold applied to them to cause the problem. And despite your previous riddicule at my totally self confessed inability to write for you your precious list I steered you into where to find one. The American Jockey Club is looking at it, but believe me it is no way near as simple to produce as you obviously believe.

I also indicated that harness racing in the US is conducted under the same medication rules as TB and Quarter horse racing, and refered to some legends of our sport that raced prior to the era of permitted medications. I also referred to an article called the chemical horse as it is a thoroughly researched document that takes the reader through the evolution of drug use in US racing. I found it an interesting read, I'm sure Lee did to, and posted a quote from it, which you clearly do not understand and perhaps some others also found it an interesting read.

So far you and Bill have tried to turn it into an EIPH lasix thread, it isn't, you've tried to claim that I am misrepresenting what is happening in the states, I'm not nowhere have I said that the US is moving to drug free racing, they aren't, the changes are, at present, about raceday therapeutic medications. You tried to move it to illegal raceday meds in era I refered to, that just made them even more durable horses. Now you are moving onto the testing data from the US which you clearly aren't able to see supports both the quote posted by Lee and the push to reduce/eliminate LEGAL raceday medications.

VVV the data has been fairly static, and overall quite low for the last 10 years with regard to class 1 violations (but will spike this year because of the new test developed for Dermorphin-Frog Juice), and actually has reduced overall about 20% for total violations, and yes the vast majority of positives are for class 4 medications. This is exactly what the quote lee posted is referring to. Once again for VVV as he obviously missed it before is you don't need to risk a class 1 violation when you can get away with a class four one. They rarely lose a race for a class 4, but pay a fine and sometimes serve a few days of suspention.

And by the way VVV the US doesn't have "both racehorse codes" they actually have three. And as you have indicated the vast majority of tests are negative, yet their horses are breaking down at rate far greater then ours competing on legal raceday pain masking medications. Is there a bell ringing somewhere for you yet VVV? No you cant hear it? Believe me it is ringing loud and clear now in the US.

Now with regard to the stallions I mentioned previously, and it was remiss of me not to include Abercrombie for surely he is as worthy a candidate as the previous four, what stallions VVV say in the last decade or even two have retired to stud with the same type of acclaim and record as these 5? Names please VVV. Artsplace and Western Hanover did not have as many starts. Much as you may not like it VVV it is a simple fact that in this day and age many if not most siring prospects are retired to stud before exhibiting the same degree of durability on the track as the legends previously mentioned.

Another fact of public record that should concern breeders VVV even though you are obviously prepared to brush over it is the race records of the aforementioned 2008, 2009, 2010 USTA 2yo's of the year, who were obviously fast and acclaimed horses. Major In Art retired unsound at the end of 10 starts in his 2yo season, Sportswriter retired unsound after 14 starts midway through his 3yo season and Big Jim whilst he managed 20 starts, 10 each in his 2 and 3 year old seasons was unsound for the majority of his 3yo season. So where does soundness fit into your "form and function" breeding equation VVV?

Now VVV one your favourite topic of therapeutic medications, let me try and explain to you one more time that it is virtually impossible to pigeon hole most drugs into a single catagory as the manner in which they are used most definately comes into it. EPO is a therapeautic medication, did you get that VVV? Let me shout for you EPO IS A THERAPEUTIC MEDICATION, when it is being used with medical advice in a patient with chronic renal failure. It is NOT a therapeutic medication when used in either a human or equine athlete, in that circumstance it is an illegal performance enhancing drug.

Paracetomol is the active therapeutic ingredient in countless over the counter medications for pain relief, including panadol, sold and used in their thousands around the world everyday. But ask the relatives and friends of those who have died from acute liver failure from overdosing on paracetomol what they think of the drug I doubt any of them would tell you that it is very therapeutic

[dizzy]

[QUOTE=dizzy;22795]Brenno the higher population has been suggested as a cause but on its own is not enough. Some certainly are discarded but the claiming and conditioned racing in the states and the proliferation of tracks in the mid west give horse more opportunities then they would get in Oz, but the permisive medication rules have ruined claiming and conditioned racing by facilitating the rise of the chemists.

Commercial breeding has also been touted as a course but again doesn't invole enough numbers.

The two biggest causes are increasing unsoundness in the breed ( a lot as the result of linebreeding to Raise a Native) and the increased recovery time as a result of the effects of racing on lasixs which cause dehydration and electrolyte imbalances.
What a load of rubbish. I travel to the US regularly and have done so for over 30 years.
I have yet to read anything in your numerous posts that is even close to being an accurate summation of the American situation. Please take the time to become better informed.At the present your posts are less than enlightening and more worthy of a place in the National Enquirer.

Viv please feel free to share your better informed opinion



This is an excert taken from a statement entitled "Racing Medication Use" released by the American Quarter Horse Assosciation published July 1 2012


....."Lets talk about the big issue, which is the public's perception of our sport. I believe, very strongly, that we need massive fundamental changes to the way we race horses, and if we don't do something to convert the image that the public has of our sport now, it will go the way of the dodo, it will become extinct................We must reinvent the way we do our sport. We must make dramatic changes in public perception. One of the ways we do that is to erase the perception that all these horses are racing on performance enhancing drugs............................

I'm sure those who are interested can find the full release via google.

[dizzy]

Your post (most of which I deleted from this quote) certaintly is truthful to my limited knowledge and opinion, but mentioned the increased population just to balance it out.

As for this last bit I've left quoted...not sure what you are getting at???

Brenno I breed and train, I know what relevance the consistently faster times at Menangle have to me. Your interest, at present at least, would seem to be mostly with punting, or as the Americans say "handicapping". As a punter or handicapper what relevence does the consistently faster times at Menangle have to you?

[matrightyeh]

very true would luv to here more https://imageshackau.com/sports/131/b/happy.gifhttps://imageshackau.com/sports/133/b/happy.gifhttps://imageshackau.com/sports/138/b/happy.gif
https://imageshackau.com/sports/123/b/happy.gifhttps://imageshackau.com/sports/52/b/happy.gifhttps://imageshackau.com/sports/134/b/happy.gif

[teecee]

[QUOTE=Viv Strangman;22807]

Viv please feel free to share your better informed opinion



This is an excert taken from a statement entitled "Racing Medication Use" released by the American Quarter Horse Assosciation published July 1 2012


....."Lets talk about the big issue, which is the public's perception of our sport. I believe, very strongly, that we need massive fundamental changes to the way we race horses, and if we don't do something to convert the image that the public has of our sport now, it will go the way of the dodo, it will become extinct................We must reinvent the way we do our sport. We must make dramatic changes in public perception. One of the ways we do that is to erase the perception that all these horses are racing on performance enhancing drugs............................

I'm sure those who are interested can find the full release via google.

I take it this is the article to which you refer. If you wish to back up your argument / point of view by quote from others articles please supply the link. This is a requirement of the forum. Your posts may otherwise be deleted.
http://aqha.com/Racing/News-Articles/Racing-Medication-Use.aspx

[Thevoiceofreason]

Dot

I am not sure what planet you are on because you continue to spout rubbish and present it as fact.

Neither I or VVV have ever condoned the use of drugs of any kind on race day your post continue to present a case that we have and I for one am bloody sick of the inference.

I have and never will consider lasix as an acceptable race day drug for many reason so stop bringing the current policy change in the USA up as supporting your view it simply does not.

The short answer of what is actually happening in the USA if you really want to know is they are moving towards aligning themselves with the testing procedures for therapeutic drugs currently in use in most racing jurisdictions in the world. The reality of this fact is that it actually supports the argument put forward by VVV and myself that the correct use of therapeutic drugs is doing little harm to the industry.

As I have said before in relation to the use of therapeutic drugs in Australian Racing the rules between the gallops and the harness are now all but harmonised due in part to the work of HRNSW to get ulcer treatments and regu mate permitted in harness years after it was permitted in the gallops.

If your view that therapuitic drugs are damaging the sport was correct the gallops would have ground to a halt years ago.

All I and VVV have ever said and I think will continue to say, is that minute traces of genuine therapeutic drugs found in urine swabs as metabolites in many cases currently represent the fast majority of positive swabs in Australia in both codes. There is in many cases a strong argument to say the parent drug is no longer having any effect on the horse.

Your half smart comment about EPO being a therapeutic treatment toward the end of you last sermon is so stupid that it beggers belief, anyone with an IQ of 1 would know that throughout this and other threads both VVV and I have been referring to accepted genuine equine therapeutic substances you know it and so does everybody else who has read the posts, so stop your grandstanding.

If you want to debate with me feel free but at least debate on what I have said or put forward rather than your interpretation of what I have said.

[dizzy]

[QUOTE=dizzy;22809]

I take it this is the article to which you refer. If you wish to back up your argument / point of view by quote from others articles please supply the link. This is a requirement of the forum. Your posts may otherwise be deleted.
http://aqha.com/Racing/News-Articles/Racing-Medication-Use.aspx


Tee Cee understood, apologies and thank you for providing the link.

[aussiebreno]

Brenno I breed and train, I know what relevance the consistently faster times at Menangle have to me. Your interest, at present at least, would seem to be mostly with punting, or as the Americans say "handicapping". As a punter or handicapper what relevence does the consistently faster times at Menangle have to you?
Moreso a fan than a punter.
Figuring out the differences of times between tracks would be a big one. These opinions I am about to put forward aren't exact but are enough for you to get the picture.
I estimate 1.56 at Menangle = 2.00 at Wagga. But then the faster they go the bigger the gap, a 1.56 at Wagga could be a 1.50 at Menangle. This is because at both tracks they might go 62 first half and then at Wagga get home in 58 but get home at Menangle in 54. Sometimes a single quarter is more important than the race time.

Then you have the spectacle. Races are run different - and for the good. In traditionally run races they might go 30, 32, 29, 28 = 1.59. We are seeing a bit more of 30,30,30,29 = 1.59. I was looking at some of Somebeachsomewheres racing record yesterday. He would go 27,28,27,28...the last quarter wasn't necesarily the fastest. When the final quarter is the quickest you don't necesarily get to see every horse perform to 100% - there might be something in the tank that you don't get to know about as a punter (although of course you can take into account horses top speed and stamina etc to estimate what could have happened). If they've slowed up the last 400m you get to see every bit of what a horse can give. That is what Menangle can bring when drivers get confident with their horses capabilities. At the moment too many 27 flat final 400m quarters are occuring in 1.55/1.56 mile rates. Shouldnt happen. Eventually it will reduce.

As an aside, Luke McCarthy is the bet god damned driver to ever drive the track, closely followed by Darren Hancock. Any coincidence they've both spent time in America the last 5 years? If I was a driver at Menangle over the mile (taking into account specific horse) I would peel out 3 wide as they head into the back straight and go to the chair or the front. Drop out the first quarter, sustained speed for 1200m. Forget burning Smoken Up out of the gate...let him go 30,28,27,27 while the others have gone 28,30,27,27+. Can't catch him. Best horse wins. Thats a great thing about a track drivers can be confident of going fast.

[Triple V]

VOR's already said much less more eloquently than I could in reply to you Dot.
However, I just couldn't let this bit of your work go unchallenged...purely for it underlining that you haven't got a clue what you're on about when you choose to line up on the durability of US bred/peformed racehorse sires....inferring that therapeutics are to blame for those you name and US bred sires/sire prospects in general.
An old mate of mine used to say " Be patient son, the fools will deliever themselves into your arms if you wait long enough".



Another fact of public record that should concern breeders VVV even though you are obviously prepared to brush over it is the race records of the aforementioned 2008, 2009, 2010 USTA 2yo's of the year, who were obviously fast and acclaimed horses.

Major In Art retired unsound at the end of 10 starts in his 2yo season

[VVV] As a weanling his hock conformation was such that he was cut from the Southwind draft & sold for $3,000, I think at Frank Chick's sale in Harrington, Delaware.
Raced hard early, won the Woodrow Wilson and so on. Given the way that he was made behind, the surprise was not that he ultimately broke down before returning to the track at 3yrs but that he actually lasted for as long as he did.
He suffered an avulsion fracture above one of his hocks, the same ordinary hocks that Southwind cut him for. Imagine that huh? Can't bame that on therapeutics.

Sportswriter retired unsound after 14 starts midway through his 3yo season and

[VVV] Great looking horse, great gaited, fast 2yo, developed a bad quartercrack problem at 3yrs that they were unable to be overcome. Interested to see you try to pin that on therapeutics.

Big Jim whilst he managed 20 starts, 10 each in his 2 and 3 year old seasons was unsound for the majority of his 3yo season.

[VVV] Big horse, I thought raced hard as a 2yo for a horse of his overall stature, left from way out wide and paced a 1:49 & a piece mile at 2yrs, was the 2yo WRH for a piece. His hind fetlocks caused him issues on & off as a 3yo and in the end they proved his downfall. If you think you can pin that problem on therapeutics you're kidding yourself.


So where does soundness fit into your "form and function" breeding equation VVV?

[VVV] Soundness is it pertains to conformation was the downfall of Major In Art for the reasons I've mentioned above. I've seen him and wouldn't breed a mare to him because the guys at Southwind were right on the money, he has ordinary hocks and I THINK he will pass that on.... and unless he is another Tar Heel, his stock will more than likely not be able to live with it/overcome it.
Sportswriter is a superb looker, was great gaited & beautifully made, I'll not hold an unable to be fixed quartercrack against him & I expect that nor would any half reasonable person. Big Jim is a similarly lovely horse too, suffered the hind fetlock issues perhaps as result from being so big and maybe being raced a bit too early?... but like Sportwriter's quartercrack they are hardly cause for alarm. Sportswriter & Big Jim fit the Form & Function Bill very nicely Dot I would have thought.
We've got a Sportswriter foal due in the next three weeks or so btw. Have you?

NEXT!



VVV

[Lethal]

http://www.jockeyclub.com/roundtable_08.asp?section=9
This makes interesting reading for anyone that might like to take the time(to do it) it's not long and has quite a few Australian references.

[dizzy]

Gee VVV this must be what school teachers must feel like, always having to correct homework


MIA suffered an avulsion fracture of the suspensory ligament, that is BELOW the hock.

Sportswriter retired because of a torn suspensory. No I'm not expecting a foal by him.

Big Jim raced hard as a 2yo VVV? By what benchmark? Certainly not Meadow Skippers, remember him VVV, 27 starts as a 2yo travelled to California as well 1:59.4 mark, equal fastest of the season in 1962 for 2yo's with Overtrick, and then by your reckoning returned for an amazing 59 starts as a 3yo.

[Triple V]

Gee VVV this must be what school teachers must feel like, always having to correct homework


MIA suffered an avulsion fracture of the suspensory ligament, that is BELOW the hock.

Sportswriter retired because of a torn suspensory. No I'm not expecting a foal by him.

Big Jim raced hard as a 2yo VVV? By what benchmark? Certainly not Meadow Skippers, remember him VVV, 27 starts as a 2yo travelled to California as well 1:59.4 mark, equal fastest of the season in 1962 for 2yo's with Overtrick, and then by your reckoning returned for an amazing 59 starts as a 3yo.


[VVV] All of which immediately begs the question that if you knew whatever it is you think you actually knew about these and other horses in the first place...why on Earth would you go on to falsely, verging upon maliciously accuse these and other US horses of having retired from racing because of the use of therapeutic meds? Clearly you do not have both oars in the water Dot...seriously. Visit the Doctor and get some therapeutics of your own.

[dizzy]

Dot

I am not sure what planet you are on because you continue to spout rubbish and present it as fact.

Neither I or VVV have ever condoned the use of drugs of any kind on race day your post continue to present a case that we have and I for one am bloody sick of the inference.

I have and never will consider lasix as an acceptable race day drug for many reason so stop bringing the current policy change in the USA up as supporting your view it simply does not.

The short answer of what is actually happening in the USA if you really want to know is they are moving towards aligning themselves with the testing procedures for therapeutic drugs currently in use in most racing jurisdictions in the world. The reality of this fact is that it actually supports the argument put forward by VVV and myself that the correct use of therapeutic drugs is doing little harm to the industry.

As I have said before in relation to the use of therapeutic drugs in Australian Racing the rules between the gallops and the harness are now all but harmonised due in part to the work of HRNSW to get ulcer treatments and regu mate permitted in harness years after it was permitted in the gallops.

If your view that therapuitic drugs are damaging the sport was correct the gallops would have ground to a halt years ago.

All I and VVV have ever said and I think will continue to say, is that minute traces of genuine therapeutic drugs found in urine swabs as metabolites in many cases currently represent the fast majority of positive swabs in Australia in both codes. There is in many cases a strong argument to say the parent drug is no longer having any effect on the horse.

Your half smart comment about EPO being a therapeutic treatment toward the end of you last sermon is so stupid that it beggers belief, anyone with an IQ of 1 would know that throughout this and other threads both VVV and I have been referring to accepted genuine equine therapeutic substances you know it and so does everybody else who has read the posts, so stop your grandstanding.

If you want to debate with me feel free but at least debate on what I have said or put forward rather than your interpretation of what I have said.

Bill you seem to be exhibiting some paranoia here.

I am on earth, is there another planet with the internet? My very first line in this tread said very clearly that I was posting with regard to yours and VVV opinions about the publics opinion on the use of the use of therapeutic drugs in racing. Where did I say you endorsed the use of raceday lasix? I very clearly wrote that I knew you had replied on one occasion to VVV "not lasix too complicated".

And why Bill do you think the changes in the US are occuring? It wouldn't be because of it's own publics opinion would it? Most of the US doesn't know the rest of the world exists, those in the US that do fully expect the rest of the world to march to the beat of the US's drum.

I know harness racing was well behind the gallops and the FEI in regard to ulcer meds Bill, I clearly remember sending a submission to HRA on the subject.

Gallops have clearly not ground to a halt years ago because of my view but do you not think that one day in the future they just might because of the views of the public? Put simply without the continued support of the public then one day there will be no more racing.

Bill I am the one with the licence remember, of course the ability of laboratories to test to the picogram is of concern. When VVV first proposed his list here that I knew of I didn't dismiss it, but it is nowhere as simple a proposition as he believes. Go to Thomas Tobins web site and you will read what is involved. Bute may have only swabbed for three days in the seventies and everyone may have had their horses on anabolic steroids but what made those parameters right? Clearly we changed as far as anabolic steroids went, and yes bute tests for much longer now, well beyond its therapeutic effect.

But Bill who was it who said the rules is the rules is the rules and right now we are drug free racing. If you don't think the publics opinion of drugs and confidence in racing will come into any deliberation process in the future that may look at changing that then I think you are kidding yourself.

As for my comment on EPO previously yes absolutely it was grandstanding no doubt about it. I thought if I wrote in the same style as VVV then perhaps he might just be able to understand it, call me an optimist but I know I was probably just kidding myself.

[Thevoiceofreason]

Dot

Unfortunately Dot I am pretty sure the change in policy in the USA was brought about by pressure from an organisation called the IFHA they have been exerting pressure on the US authorities to move away from race day treatments for some time now and seem to be slowly wining the battle...... not as you suggest due to the chorus of public opinion.

In relation to Thomas Tobin I will not waste my time reading his website.

I am sure you have watched many US law shows on the TV where each side produces an expert witness to say what they need them to say to present a case, my understanding is Dr Tobin does a lot of this work in racing of both codes world wide at a fairly hefty fee.

The US are only moving from race day treatments to all but our current system, you know the one you want to change so much.

[Triple V]

also Bolt The Duer (which didn't rate a mention here) went 1:47.4 on a 1000m track in the Adios. Tell me again why we built 1400m at Menangle?

[VVV] Did you actually WATCH that race at all Dot?...or did you just read over the press release & seize on the final time & the dimensions of the track & then excitedly add them to your basket of crap to throw at Menangle? :confused:
It's called RACE TEMPO and when it's combined with top shelf horses, a tuned up track, and hot & humid & still air...the race set up like a 6 horse time trial.
They posted wicked early fractions, left in in 25 & a piece, front end pressure all the way to the 3/4's in 1:19 & something (I reckon that's very likely the fastest 3/4s ever seen in The Adios) & Mark McDonald had a very, very good horse in Bolt The Duer sitting fresh in behind them in a beautiful pocket trip, he duly burst through off cover up the passing lane & won it.
Something similar happened @ Harrah's PA in The Battle Of Brandywine when Hurrikane Kingcole rolled on the lead through 25.3, 52.3 & to the 3/4's in 1:20 & a piece, the 52.3 was fastest opening half that I think they've ever posted on that track. A Rocknroll Dance sat back 3rd on the pylons, pulled just after the half and blew by them with Pet Rock closing hard from way back to finish 2nd.
Just to further underline the above, Bolt The Duer led all the way to win a KYSS 3yo by 8+ at The Red Mile our time early Friday morning just gone in 1:50.2, there was nothing in that race that was even close to being capable of towing him into the lane in 1:19 & a bit, no Hurrikane Kingcole etc & in fact they made the 3/4's in 1:24.4. It's all about RACE TEMPO.

[Triple V]

As for my comment on EPO previously yes absolutely it was grandstanding no doubt about it. I thought if I wrote in the same style as VVV then perhaps he might just be able to understand it, call me an optimist but I know I was probably just kidding myself.


[VVV] Nah. What you did Dot was state something that was very bloody stupid trying to tie in a therapeutic use for EPO in racing with your anti therapeutics platform...and now you're trying to get yourself out of a hole of your own digging.
Not one to stand by and see a fellow human being suffer, here's a bit of musical assistance while you dig your way out again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJf4_hsVEXE Watch the first 30 seconds or so. Is that you in the grey hoodie & black baseball cap?

[dizzy]

[VVV] Nah. What you did Dot was state something that was very bloody stupid trying to tie in a therapeutic use for EPO in racing with your anti therapeutics platform...and now you're trying to get yourself out of a hole of your own digging.
Not one to stand by and see a fellow human being suffer, here's a bit of musical assistance while you dig your way out again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJf4_hsVEXE Watch the first 30 seconds or so. Is that you in the grey hoodie & black baseball cap?

Yep you didn't get it, I never mentioned EPO as a therapeutic in racing, only with medical advice in patients with renal failure. I said EPO wasn't a therapeutic drug in equine athletes

[dizzy]

[VVV] All of which immediately begs the question that if you knew whatever it is you think you actually knew about these and other horses in the first place...why on Earth would you go on to falsely, verging upon maliciously accuse these and other US horses of having retired from racing because of the use of therapeutic meds? Clearly you do not have both oars in the water Dot...seriously. Visit the Doctor and get some therapeutics of your own.

MIA and Big Jims histories with injury are both well documented including on harnesslink and public record VVV . Sportwriters suspensory injury was not so well known but the documentory proof is there if you look. www.meadowlandspace.com/pdf/bt_cheddar.pdf 11 paragraphs in. As to Meadow Skippers career and record I thoroughly recommend John Bradley's Modern Pacing Sire Lines as an excellant read.

And I did not accuse MIA, Sportswriter or Big Jim, or any other stallion as having retired because of the use of therapeutic meds. I did write that these three in particular had much shorter careers, and many other stallions shorter careers, all a matter of public record, in the era of permissive raceday meds then the "legends" of around 50 years ago.

VVV you saw what you wanted to see in what I wrote, not what was actually written. Do you not think Teecee would have deleted my posts if I had made false and malicious accusations?

[dizzy]

Dot

Unfortunately Dot I am pretty sure the change in policy in the USA was brought about by pressure from an organisation called the IFHA they have been exerting pressure on the US authorities to move away from race day treatments for some time now and seem to be slowly wining the battle...... not as you suggest due to the chorus of public opinion.

In relation to Thomas Tobin I will not waste my time reading his website.

I am sure you have watched many US law shows on the TV where each side produces an expert witness to say what they need them to say to present a case, my understanding is Dr Tobin does a lot of this work in racing of both codes world wide at a fairly hefty fee.

The US are only moving from race day treatments to all but our current system, you know the one you want to change so much.

Bill racing is a global industry, I have no difficulty believing that the International Federation of Horseracing Authorities is bringing pressure to bear on the US, nor that other global racing bodies may also be bringing pressure to bear, in fact I seriously hope they are. But why are you so resistant to the concept of public opinion and perception being involved? The articles I have quoted in this thread clearly indicate US industry bodies being concerned with public opinion and perception. I'm sure the IFHA would be too. Quite frankly I'd have no problem if it were actually aliens that got the US to change their raceday medication policies if it would reduce the deathrate amongst the horses.

Dr Tobin is indeed an expert witness and available worldwide. He has provided expert opinion just recently for both Tim Butt and Luke McCarthy, with regard to the arsenic and boldonone positive swabs returned by their respective horses. He stated that arsenic at the concentration found in Raglan had absolutely no possibility of being performance enhancing. He also challenged the validity of the Hong Kong laboratories threshold and test for arsenic.

Dr Tobin is very much in yours and VVV camps with regards to allowable medication thresholds for the inactive metabolites of the parent drugs. But as an expert he is under no illusion of what is required to create a list of allowable thresholds such as VVV wishes for, particularly with regard to absolutes about withdrawal times.

If the US is moving to drug free racing Bill then bring it on I say.

As for our system, you yourself have written of how far behind we were with regard to ulcer medications, but we caught up. If only we could catch up with how performance enhancing drugs are being used these days, instead of being stuck in an era of reliance on post race testing.

[teecee]

Dr Tobin is indeed an expert witness and available worldwide. He has provided expert opinion just recently for both Tim Butt and Luke McCarthy, with regard to the arsenic and boldonone positive swabs returned by their respective horses. He stated that each substance at the respective concentrations found in each horse had absolutely no possibility of being performance enhancing. He also challenged the validity of the Honk Kong laboratories threshold and test for arsenic.

.

Can you please tell me where you got this from. I'd like to read what Prof Tobin had to say re this case.

[dizzy]

Can you please tell me where you got this from. I'd like to read what Prof Tobin had to say re this case.

Harnesslink!

"Drugs expert backs disqualified Kiwi trainer" 15 May 2012

[dizzy]

Moreso a fan than a punter.
Figuring out the differences of times between tracks would be a big one. These opinions I am about to put forward aren't exact but are enough for you to get the picture.
I estimate 1.56 at Menangle = 2.00 at Wagga. But then the faster they go the bigger the gap, a 1.56 at Wagga could be a 1.50 at Menangle. This is because at both tracks they might go 62 first half and then at Wagga get home in 58 but get home at Menangle in 54. Sometimes a single quarter is more important than the race time.

Then you have the spectacle. Races are run different - and for the good. In traditionally run races they might go 30, 32, 29, 28 = 1.59. We are seeing a bit more of 30,30,30,29 = 1.59. I was looking at some of Somebeachsomewheres racing record yesterday. He would go 27,28,27,28...the last quarter wasn't necesarily the fastest. When the final quarter is the quickest you don't necesarily get to see every horse perform to 100% - there might be something in the tank that you don't get to know about as a punter (although of course you can take into account horses top speed and stamina etc to estimate what could have happened). If they've slowed up the last 400m you get to see every bit of what a horse can give. That is what Menangle can bring when drivers get confident with their horses capabilities. At the moment too many 27 flat final 400m quarters are occuring in 1.55/1.56 mile rates. Shouldnt happen. Eventually it will reduce.

As an aside, Luke McCarthy is the bet god damned driver to ever drive the track, closely followed by Darren Hancock. Any coincidence they've both spent time in America the last 5 years? If I was a driver at Menangle over the mile (taking into account specific horse) I would peel out 3 wide as they head into the back straight and go to the chair or the front. Drop out the first quarter, sustained speed for 1200m. Forget burning Smoken Up out of the gate...let him go 30,28,27,27 while the others have gone 28,30,27,27+. Can't catch him. Best horse wins. Thats a great thing about a track drivers can be confident of going fast.

Thanks Brenno

From my position I do the same. I average out the times differentials between tracks, I'm pretty sure everyone else would do the same so are we really better off because of the faster times run at Menangle or would we be better of if the times were just simply more comparable from one similar track to the next? In an earlier discussion Adam Fairley provided HRNSW's policy for maximising turnover, I don't recall "speed" being a factor in increasing our income from turnover.

I don't mean to be offensive Brenno have you actually been to Menangle or are you watching on the TV? Does your speed spectacle, run in reality for the most part in the distance at Menangle if you are on track, sufficiently compensate for the greater intimacy with the action that an amphitheatre style track as Harold Park had? If you are watching on TV and the commentry changed to a style like the gallops where they may describe the tempo sometimes rather then actual time run for quarters would you be as excited by what you watch from Menangle? In other words is it what you see or what you hear that makes it a better specatacle?

From your description you obviously prefer the American style racing pattern over the Australian one. I cant say I agree with you though but I look at it from a diffferent perspective. Your preferred pattern is hard on horses who are lesser animals then SBSW. At sustained higher rates of speed more horses cross from aerobic to anerobic energy pathways producing large amounts of lactic acid leading to muscle pain and fatigue. Thats why they slow down in the last quarter and the principle behind milkshaking. Fatigue also increases the risk of a decrease in neuromuscular coordination which may result in higher rates of injury.

A punter mighten like it Brenno but as a trainer and owner whilst I want my horse to win I'm actually happiest with those occasions they have been able to win without being tested to 100%

[aussiebreno]

Thanks Brenno

From my position I do the same. I average out the times differentials between tracks, I'm pretty sure everyone else would do the same so are we really better off because of the faster times run at Menangle or would we be better of if the times were just simply more comparable from one similar track to the next? In an earlier discussion Adam Fairley provided HRNSW's policy for maximising turnover, I don't recall "speed" being a factor in increasing our income from turnover.
How does my original post saying Menangle produces 'consistently' faster times have any relevance to this.


I don't mean to be offensive Brenno have you actually been to Menangle or are you watching on the TV? Does your speed spectacle, run in reality for the most part in the distance at Menangle if you are on track, sufficiently compensate for the greater intimacy with the action that an amphitheatre style track as Harold Park had? If you are watching on TV and the commentry changed to a style like the gallops where they may describe the tempo sometimes rather then actual time run for quarters would you be as excited by what you watch from Menangle? In other words is it what you see or what you hear that makes it a better specatacle?

Have been to Menangle a few times. If I can gloat for a minute I reckon I'm a pretty good judge of pace, very good when on course and sound when watching on TV. Of course I look to the sectional board for confirmation but I can tell if they're going fast, moderate or slow (This is at both Menangle and 1/2 mile tracks). Again I don't know what this has to do with my original point that Menangle has 'consistently' faster times. That point of course being in reply to you sprouting about fast time on smaller tracks.

From your description you obviously prefer the American style racing pattern over the Australian one. I cant say I agree with you though but I look at it from a diffferent perspective. Your preferred pattern is hard on horses who are lesser animals then SBSW. At sustained higher rates of speed more horses cross from aerobic to anerobic energy pathways producing large amounts of lactic acid leading to muscle pain and fatigue. Thats why they slow down in the last quarter and the principle behind milkshaking. Fatigue also increases the risk of a decrease in neuromuscular coordination which may result in higher rates of injury.
Thanks for the lesson. I am aware of that. I will give you a race over a distance of your choosing just to prove that I have put that theory into practice with my own body. The one big key thing you've missed which can't really be learnt from a textbook or from watching others train (just like you know more about handling horses than I do) is that you, I, Robert De Castella and everybody else feel the exact same lactic acid build up, muscle pain and fatigue. Once we hit the wall we all feel it the same. This is why under the racing pattern I described before it doesn't matter if you are SBSW or an R0. It might matter a bit if you hadn't exercised for 6 months, but certaintly not in a race fit animal who has been in training. The second thing is recovery. While SBSW might get his breathing back and his heart rate down a fair bit quicker than the R0 the bigger issue is muscle recovery. That relies on a) what you to aid it and b) the quality of the muscle tissue. Both SBSW and the R0 can both be treated to nice cold swims, massages (in fact right now I should be foam rolling my IT band its more fun then replying to this), top shelf feed...as for muscle quality it is every chance the R0 has better muscle quality and repairing ability. This means it isn't necesarily harder on lesser quality horses to have to use up their anerobic energy stores by running 29,30,29,30 etc than what it is for the top shelf horses to go 28,29,27,28.

A punter mighten like it Brenno but as a trainer and owner whilst I want my horse to win I'm actually happiest with those occasions they have been able to win without being tested to 100% I'm well aware of that but you did ask for my punters cap answer.
One more thing Dot, the skys blue.

[dizzy]

[VVV] Did you actually WATCH that race at all Dot?...or did you just read over the press release & seize on the final time & the dimensions of the track & then excitedly add them to your basket of crap to throw at Menangle? :confused:
It's called RACE TEMPO and when it's combined with top shelf horses, a tuned up track, and hot & humid & still air...the race set up like a 6 horse time trial.
They posted wicked early fractions, left in in 25 & a piece, front end pressure all the way to the 3/4's in 1:19 & something (I reckon that's very likely the fastest 3/4s ever seen in The Adios) & Mark McDonald had a very, very good horse in Bolt The Duer sitting fresh in behind them in a beautiful pocket trip, he duly burst through off cover up the passing lane & won it.
Something similar happened @ Harrah's PA in The Battle Of Brandywine when Hurrikane Kingcole rolled on the lead through 25.3, 52.3 & to the 3/4's in 1:20 & a piece, the 52.3 was fastest opening half that I think they've ever posted on that track. A Rocknroll Dance sat back 3rd on the pylons, pulled just after the half and blew by them with Pet Rock closing hard from way back to finish 2nd.
Just to further underline the above, Bolt The Duer led all the way to win a KYSS 3yo by 8+ at The Red Mile our time early Friday morning just gone in 1:50.2, there was nothing in that race that was even close to being capable of towing him into the lane in 1:19 & a bit, no Hurrikane Kingcole etc & in fact they made the 3/4's in 1:24.4. It's all about RACE TEMPO.

In a lot of instances you would be right VVV I wouldn't have seen the race but in the case of this one you are wrong I have seen it, and read the press releases. seems the connections of BTD had a plan involving a change of tactics to win the race, I'm sure they didn't actually expect to go into the history books as potentially anything else then as the winner. And speaking of crap can you tell us exactly where AGL's Coal Seam Gas Well is?

No question the fast time was set up by the race tempo but you still haven't told me why we built a 1400m track at Menangle? Does the TAB hold more on a fast race? Speed wasn't included in HRNSW's policy with regard to increasing turnover. Does the TAB return us a greater % of cash for a fast run race? That might be it, the faster we go the more greyhound races the TAB can fit in. That must be it.

Honestly VVV we are not going to be able to match the times they run in the US, Joey Muscara explained it very well if you cant figure it out for yourself. Todays cold hard economic reality for the industry is its not how fast we go, its how much turnover we generate. Can you explain to me how having a single 1400m track with a different racing pattern to the tracks across the state that are intended to feed into it improves turnover? You don't honestly believe the money from the sale of Harold Park will last forever do you? The gallops have a similar amount just to build a new grandstand and a few other improvements.

[aussiebreno]

[QUOTE=dizzy;22871]
No question the fast time was set up by the race tempo but you still haven't told me why we built a 1400m track at Menangle? Does the TAB hold more on a fast race? Speed wasn't included in HRNSW's policy with regard to increasing turnover. Does the TAB return us a greater % of cash for a fast run race? That might be it, the faster we go the more greyhound races the TAB can fit in. That must be it.
QUOTE]
The bigger track gets driven differently.
2.00 at Wagga = 1.56 Menangle
1.56 Wagga = 1.50 Menangle.
You can go harder. Opens the race up more. More horses get a chance. A punters bet will get some sort of crack.
Even if they sit up and go 30, 30, 30, 27 then in the run home the lone straight means you aren't 3 wide around a bend in the final 400m.

Either way all horses get a better chance.

End of story.

[dizzy]

Your the bean counter Brenno I thought you'd know that everything always comes down to the bottomline. I think you have misunderstood my question, it wasn't about your ability to judge pace. Brenno we may all feel the same lactic acid build up etc but are you saying that we all transition from the use of aerobic energy to anerobic energy at the same threshold? I'll have to decline your offer of a race though, I couldn't match VVV for 20m let alone you.

[aussiebreno]

Your the bean counter Brenno I thought you'd know that everything always comes down to the bottomline. I think you have misunderstood my question, it wasn't about your ability to judge pace. Brenno we may all feel the same lactic acid build up etc but are you saying that we all transition from the use of aerobic energy to anerobic energy at the same threshold? I'll have to decline your offer of a race though, I couldn't match VVV for 20m let alone you.
I do apologise for misunderstanding, its a bit hard to keep with the different tangents you go on.
Well yes, not sure if its the same in horses (couldnt be too much different) but in humans we all rely on our anaerobic fitness when we go over 80-85% of our max heart rate.
Again the R0s going 30,30,30,31 will get the same lactic acid build up as the SBSWs going 26,27,28,28. You have to remember the R0s wont be going 26,27,30,35.

[dizzy]

Brenno I think you look at the handicapping system as being based on ability, it isn't it's based on racetrack success. All horses comence as an R0 regardless of their ability, the more talented progress quickly, the least talented remain an R0. R0 fields may be evenly matched or they may have a superior horse/s engaged that is capable of taking the others out of their comfort zone.

But the major point is regardless of how fast they go once they have reached "the wall" and become fatigued the risk of injury increases. Whilst human athletes frequently train with a "no pain no gain" maxim and rebound to improve in strength, to train a horse the same way will just sour them up or break them down