Lasix

[Wrongly]

DRF is reporting that all but 8 horse will be treated with Lasix.  They name Alpha as one of the eight.  Anyone know the other 7 horses or where that information can be found?  Seems silly that DRF didn\'t just name all eight.

http://www.drf.com/news/eight-horses-run-without-lasix-breeders-cup

[Rick B.]

Ten non-Lasix horses in total over the two days (two in non-BC races):

Friday:
R2: #5 Lion\'s Dub
R6: #10 Elusive Kate , #12 Dear Laviana
R9: #6 Announce

Saturday:
R2: #8 Salty Strike*
R3: #6 Brigantin
R4: #7 Caspar Netscher
R8: #2 Sarafina
R9: #9 Alpha
R10: #8 Byword

Source: http://www.drf.com/race-entries/CD/USA/2011-11-04/D (Friday), http://www.drf.com/race-entries/CD/USA/2011-11-04/D (Saturday)

* Interestingly (to me, anyway) is that Salty Strike is listed with an \"A\" for medication (\"Additional Junk\"), but NO \"L\". I don\'t see that much, and I can\'t quite fathom the significance of it, either...Vets? Owners? Could be just a case of strong lungs but sore bones, I suppose.

[Wrongly]

Thanks Rick!

[miff]

Re Lasix, laying odds the Clueless Clowns running the game f--k up the lasix thing and hurt the game.

Why leave such matters to the people with the expertise, Equine Vets!


Mike

[alm]

If Kentucky is still Kentucky...and I have not raced there in years, so I don\'t know...lasix is the least of the legal drug information you will need to make a selection in a race.  And there\'s no way anyone will ever tell you anything more valuable.  So you should just bet knowing that just about everyone is running on a full tank and take your chances.

[Rick B.]

alm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If Kentucky is still Kentucky...you should just bet
> knowing that just about everyone is running on a full
> tank and take your chances.

Wait a minute...I thought Kentucky was one of the first states to embrace the new raceday medication rules and \"super testing\".

If I have this wrong, or if I have over-simplified things, could TGJB or someone else in the know comment on this and clarify things? I\'ll be damn disappointed if I get the idea that Kentucky is still pretty much an \"anything goes\" racing jurisdiction.

[TGJB]

You used \"clarify\" in the same post as \"testing\"? No idea, and worse, still wouldn\'t if they told me.

Miff-- problem is the vets make a fortune giving Lasix shots, they have a serious conflict of interest.

[Rick B.]

Ugh. I don\'t know whether to feel better, or worse.

So, now what -- the old \"see how the Supertrainer\'s horses are running\", and adjust accordingly?

(And why do I feel like no matter what else does or does not happen, we are always going to be stuck with the above?)

I\'m so tired of this shit, and I\'m not even in the trenches fighting for change -- where do you get the energy to even bother, Jerry?

[miff]

Miff-- problem is the vets make a fortune giving Lasix shots, they have a serious conflict of interest

JB,

Understand the state vets giving lasix now in several venues, so don\'t know if the monetary prejudice is the same.

Sight

Mike

[sighthound]

\"A\" = adjunct medication for bleeding.  There is no scientific efficacy to show any of them work (such as aminocaproic acid, conjugated estrogens).  So that means nothing.  

Veterinarians do not give lasix just because they make money off an injection charge.  Believe me, most are happy the commission veterinarians will now be doing that, to ensure the legal dose and timing (vets were always open to accusations or fines if they were five minutes early or late, this saves them that)

Kentucky has one of the strictest drug testing formats in the country for Breeders Cup.

You guys make my head want to explode.

Edit:  here is the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission website:
http://khrc.ky.gov/Pages/EquineHealth.aspx

You can click on:

Medication and Testing Guidelines
Drug and Medication Classification Schedule
Naproxen Advisory

Thoroughbred, Standardbred, Quarter Horse
Withdrawal Guideline
Medication; testing procedures; prohibited practices.    
Disciplinary measures and penalties.
   
Veterinarian List
The Kentucky Horse Racing Commission’s veterinarian\'s list is a list of horses that are ineligible to enter in a race as a result of illness, injury, unsoundness or other medical condition. Horses are released from this list by authorization of the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission state veterinarian.

[alm]

Rick B. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> alm Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > If Kentucky is still Kentucky...you should just
> bet
> > knowing that just about everyone is running on a
> full
> > tank and take your chances.
>
> Wait a minute...I thought Kentucky was one of the
> first states to embrace the new raceday medication
> rules and \"super testing\".
>
> If I have this wrong, or if I have over-simplified
> things, could TGJB or someone else in the know
> comment on this and clarify things? I\'ll be damn
> disappointed if I get the idea that Kentucky is
> still pretty much an \"anything goes\" racing
> jurisdiction.


Pardon me...I wasn\'t referring to testing for illegal drugs...what always made Kentucky so special were the legal drugs a gambler could never know about...things may have changed, but it wasn\'t many years ago that you could load up on these in Kentucky, as opposed to other jurisdictions.

My point was: if you are handicapping and taking Lasix into account, that\'s just the tip of the legal drug iceberg.  You might as well just assume everyone is using everything legal on animals, which are coming from jurisdictions where the rules are different.

[TGJB]

Sight-- yes, Kentucky says they have very tough testing. They say that lots of places. And Kentucky said it back a few years ago when I know for a fact they buried a TCO2 positive (42).

I\'m working with two very serious organizations on this. Neither took convincng there was a serious problem with illegal drugs being used, they were on it already. The only argument is over the solutions. One of the groups has a lot of money, the other has a lot of leverage. This is the most serious attempt ever to deal with this. We\'ll see what happens.

[Rick B.]

Sight, thanks.

I knew what the \"A\" stood for, I just think \"additional junk\" is funnier...and now that you say the stuff doesn\'t do anything, perhaps my definition is more apt, too.
 
Sorry if I am one of the posters making your head explode, but I didn\'t even know where to look to see the current regulations; now I do, and I have bookmarked your post for future reference.

Of course, as TGJB said, regulations are one thing -- enforcement of same are quite another.

The nation\'s newest Supertrainer has one running in the Filly & Mare Sprint on Friday; perhaps a bit late for insight on that day\'s races, but worth examining how Golden Mystery performs nonetheless.

[sighthound]

\"Additional junk\" is funnier, and indeed true.

I\'m not worried about \"adjuncts\", legal or otherwise.

The most important thing I\'m considering, other than figures, for this Breeder\'s Cup will be how a particular horse gets over the Churchill dirt track (it\'s unique).  What do they look like in the morning, who\'s moving up physically, etc.  I handicap to the figures, then look at the horses themselves for the final week.  Most of these horses are top of division, but getting the horse to peak day of race is an art.  They are living creatures.  A good morning ground guy, or your own eye, is essential over the final two weeks.  You\'ll find live longshots this way, too.