Raceday Medications USA

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.

[QUOTE=teecee;22813]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dizzy

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...ation-Use.aspx

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by dizzy

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.

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".

Quote:

Originally Posted by dizzy

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

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.

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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.

[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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dizzy

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.