Ask The Experts

She ran a strong race.  Nice job by Motion.

First race as a 3 yr old was an experiment to see if he would rate.  It didn\'t work.  He ran 9f in 1:45 4/5 if I am not mistaken in one of his preps at GS.  Bled badly in the Haskell.  Came back to win the Monmouth Inv over older horses in stakes record time.  Retired with the discovery of more chips, I think.  Could be wrong there.  The horse was an impressive front runner.  If people want to slight him, they can.  But his two loses came with valid excuses.  And he ran a wicked first 6f in the Jersey Derby and when they came at him he held them off. Creme Fraiche then won the Belmont after losing to Spend A Buck.

I\'m not sure I agree that it was such a fruitless endeavor.  The horse has a stone bruise, if I read correctly.  It happens.  Would he have won?  I highly doubt it.  But he may have surprised and given a good account of himself and that would not have hurt his reputation at all.  I thought that if he could somehow crack the top 5 it would be a good run. He had two top jocks work him.  They both thought he was a quality horse and both said he was still a bit hesitant running uphill. But his last work, he finally changed leads like clockwork and was finally getting the hag of it.  Rae Guest said CC was a very tired horse when he came to his yard. He obviously did not respond to training as quickly as they would have liked hence missing his prep for the POW.  And now he is not starting in the POW.  But, the horse got plenty of rest and great care and a lot of turf work.  He certainly should be fit and rested and ready to run.  So, I wouldn\'t call it a waste as the horse got the R&R that he obviously needed. The shame is that he would get ground that would favor him as it is good to fast, which is firm to them.  It was a gamble and whether you appreciate the gamble or not, we need more people to take gambles in racing. Racing should be about challenges and not about playing it safe.  I would like to see more take that gamble.  There are a few horses I would love to see in Fabre\'s barn.

Ok.  So here is my question.  If it is healthier for the horse to run on Lasix and Bute, does that mean that the European horse is less healthy than the American horse?  It doesn\'t seem that way to me, but the way many on this site talk, it must be.  What is it about American racing that makes it so much more stressful for the horse than the racing in the countries that do not allow raceway meds?  Why do they not feel that it would be healthier for their horses to run on meds?  I\'m not trying to be a smart-ass, but I\'m trying to understand why it is only a necessity here.  It can\'t be the breeding, per se, because American breeds run all over the world without raceway meds.  So it can be done, but the prevalent attitude seems to be that it can\'t be done here.  Is there anyone that has experience with American racing and European racing who could comment on this?  Thanks.

made Excelebration look ordinary.

Thanks. I am assuming that there is no difference between bleeding with Lasix and without it as far as the damage the bleeding causes.  Lasix lessens the frequency of the incidents.

That was also part of my thought process.

Thanks for the response.  I\'m not that knowledgeable of Australian racing, and I do know that cheating and experimenting happens everywhere.  I do know that in Europe, according to the rule, any foreign substance found in the blood is grounds for a DQ.  Is it upheld everytime?  Probably not.  Thanks for breaking down the problem for the smaller outfits.  I can understand that.  I\'m not trying to be a purist.  But when I first started following racing, in the early 60\'s, I would always go to Arlington Park.  They still had cheap claimers running and no meds were supposedly allowed on raceday.  Did they just test the stakes races back then?