Kentucky's ongoing attempt to end racing in state proceeds..

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by pointman

Maybe the supporters should lobby the NFL to ban all painkillers. After all, the sons of many NFL players become NFL players themselves, despite no medical evidence we don't want to create genetically inferior football players who are dependent on pain medication or create the appearance that the outcome of football games are altered by drugs.

The NFL is a perfect example belying the "perception" argument of the ban-Lasix crowd that people won't wager on an athletic contest if they suspect the participants are utilizing drugs to in order to be able to participate in the contest. There are many reasons why members of the general public won't wager or attend horse racing. That Lasix is given to the horses before they race (most people don't even know that occurs) is far down on that list of reasons.

Racing officials need to recognize that, like almost all sports today with the exception of football, baseball and basketball, it is a niche sport with a core group of passionate followers that is unlikely to be embraced widely by the general public. Industry leaders should address the concerns of the passionate followers the sport already has and stop worrying about broader public perception.

One other thing that really bothers me about the whole episode. To implement a rule that could so fundamentally alter the sport as we know it, they need to have broad industry consensus. To implement it on an 8-6 vote, or something like that, is a huge mistake.

[MichiganMattA]

Man, Romans was awesome today on ATR...

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by citycat

Obviously Cannon Shell has the most insightfull and logical thoughts on the subject. Why can't the people in charge be so thoughtful on the subject also?

Thanks. To answer your question because they don't want critical thinking on the issues, they want it their "way" because in their little minds they want to dial the clock back to a 1960'ish pollyanna version of racing. The anti-medication cartel has already changed course by trumpeting lasix as a performance enhancer despite the obvious major difference between what we think of with that label (EPO, sublimaize, etorphine) and something that is innocous, regulated and all in all a pretty tame and effective medication. That so many people now believe what they are saying shows that not only is the cartel willing to engage in a scorched earth policy, consequences be damned in order to get their way but that so many people within the industry don't know a damn thing about what is going on. The policy of labeling lasix as a performance enhancer is what emboldened the NY Times and anti-medication cartel lapdog Drape into this supposed expose they are doing. Rather than properly educating people (both inside and ouside) about the issues and managing the damage from any reform campaigns that are embarked about (there is no way to discuss breakdowns as an issue in a positive light, using stats showing a trend of fewer can also be tossed back into ones face if there is a bad run like the one in NY), the issue gets politicized and in the ensuing scramble to curry the publics favor, a political correctness comes about which dooms any hope of getting anything reasonably effective done. There is an element of class warfare here, a distinct effort by some who are simply looking to profit by keeping more of their partnerships money if in fact vet bills are lowered (that wont happen but it a whole different tangent), and a segment of owners who want to reshape horseracing into something more similar to steeplechase racing which will rid them of statebred programs, racino's and weekday or night cards.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cloud_break

Bad choice of words on my part. Perhaps "enhanced"?

If you have a cold and take medicine do you feel that you are enhanced and are providing your employer with better than ordinary effort?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by pointman

The logic of the supporters of the ban is twisted and warped, essentially they argue that a drug that helps the health of horses with no evidence that it masks other drugs, enhances performance or has negative genetic effects should be banned so that the sport does not have the appearance to the ignorant that horses performances are enhanced by drugs. Incredible.

The thing is that they argue that all those things occur and keep repeating the mantra until people believe it. In the end all you are doing is taking the L in the program away and telling people that everything is good now. Of course when a guy starts to go on one of his patented runs where every horse runs off the screen or an unknown trainer emerges as a 47% winner no one will believe a damn thing changed. If you are going to do something and tell everyone that this is a game changer (for the good) well you better be right or you will just become chicken little which is directly where we are headed. It is a good thing that the horseplayer in general has a short memory or they might have recalled all the wonderous things and changes that banning anabolic steroids was going to do...

[cloud_break]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

If you have a cold and take medicine do you feel that you are enhanced and are providing your employer with better than ordinary effort?

Point taken. My attempt was to point out the only partially plausible argument for medication reform. A lasix ban misses the mark entirely. The fact is, we need more horses in more races generating more revenue for the whole industry. As you correctly point out, there are certain forces that don't see it that way and are willing to go to great lengths to impose their will.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

The NFL is a perfect example belying the "perception" argument of the ban-Lasix crowd that people won't wager on an athletic contest if they suspect the participants are utilizing drugs to in order to be able to participate in the contest. There are many reasons why members of the general public won't wager or attend horse racing. That Lasix is given to the horses before they race (most people don't even know that occurs) is far down on that list of reasons.

Racing officials need to recognize that, like almost all sports today with the exception of football, baseball and basketball, it is a niche sport with a core group of passionate followers that is unlikely to be embraced widely by the general public. Industry leaders should address the concerns of the passionate followers the sport already has and stop worrying about broader public perception.

One other thing that really bothers me about the whole episode. To implement a rule that could so fundamentally alter the sport as we know it, they need to have broad industry consensus. To implement it on an 8-6 vote, or something like that, is a huge mistake.

So true. What I keep saying is that the negative public percetion about medication in the sport comes mostly from people within the sport. If they are worried about public perception than they need to change course 180 degrees and shut the hell up. When Peta is using your quotes in their propaganda that should be your hint that you may need to censor yourself.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cloud_break

Point taken. My attempt was to point out the only partially plausible argument for medication reform. A lasix ban misses the mark entirely. The fact is, we need more horses in more races generating more revenue for the whole industry. As you correctly point out, there are certain forces that don't see it that way and are willing to go to great lengths to impose their will.

What is worse than a lasix ban is the negative manner in which those who wish to ban it operate. It is hard to change public perception and making things seem much worse than they really are is hardly a way to make things better. Dividing the sport rather than bringing it together won't bring about positive change and is going to leave long lasting damage that won't easily go away. It isn't like we have all this surplus revenue and goodwill to throw away chasing ghosts.

[Travis Stone]

The most annoying part of this whole thing has been how people reference surveys of horseplayers and say how "x-out-of-y" want a ban of said drug or other raceday meds.

I don't know about anyone else, but I know, from a gambling perspective, I have no interest in handicapping a minefield where I have to guess which horses may or may not bleed or what have you.

I'll bet half of the "x" couldn't even say what the meds are, what they do and what affect they have on horses to begin with.

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

The most annoying part of this whole thing has been how people reference surveys of horseplayers and say how "x-out-of-y" want a ban of said drug or other raceday meds.

I don't know about anyone else, but I know, from a gambling perspective, I have no interest in handicapping a minefield where I have to guess which horses may or may not bleed or what have you.

I'll bet half of the "x" couldn't even say what the meds are, what they do and what affect they have on horses to begin with.

Exactly, it makes a hard game to play even harder from a gambling standpoint.

I'm very interested to see what happens this year at the BC with their lasix ban on the 2 year old races. Personally, I'm not going to play any race or multi-sequance that includes any of those races. I wonder if the handle is down enough on those races, if we will see a reversal of course by the BC.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

The most annoying part of this whole thing has been how people reference surveys of horseplayers and say how "x-out-of-y" want a ban of said drug or other raceday meds.

I don't know about anyone else, but I know, from a gambling perspective, I have no interest in handicapping a minefield where I have to guess which horses may or may not bleed or what have you.

I'll bet half of the "x" couldn't even say what the meds are, what they do and what affect they have on horses to begin with.

Put a poll up that says do you want full fields, reasonable takeout and quality racing or do you want to ban lasix and see what they vote for.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by pointman

The logic of the supporters of the ban is twisted and warped, essentially they argue that a drug that helps the health of horses with no evidence that it masks other drugs, enhances performance or has negative genetic effects should be banned so that the sport does not have the appearance to the ignorant that horses performances are enhanced by drugs. Incredible.

I think the logic of people who think we should use lasix is twisted. They race all over the world without lasix. How can you say that we need lasix here when they don't use it anywhere else? Do you think they should start using it in England, Dubai, and Hong Kong? Is our racing the model for the world? I don't think so. It's the exact opposite. We are the laughing stock of the world. To say we need lasix here, when it is not used anywhere else, is a losing argument.

By the way, there of plenty of trainers out there that will tell you lasix is a performance enhancing drug that does mask other drugs. In addition, it totally knocks horses out. Lasix completely dehydrates you. Do you think it a good idea to do any type of rigorous physical task while you are totally dehydrated? It's terrible for a person and it's terrible for a horse.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

We are the laughing stock of the world. To say we need lasix here, when it is not used anywhere else, is a losing argument.

Speak for yourself.

If we are the laughing stock of the world, why are our stallions and bloodlines so desirable the world over? And, furthermore, if lasix is such a problem for overseas outfits, why do they always use it when they race in the US?

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The thing is that they argue that all those things occur and keep repeating the mantra until people believe it. In the end all you are doing is taking the L in the program away and telling people that everything is good now. Of course when a guy starts to go on one of his patented runs where every horse runs off the screen or an unknown trainer emerges as a 47% winner no one will believe a damn thing changed. If you are going to do something and tell everyone that this is a game changer (for the good) well you better be right or you will just become chicken little which is directly where we are headed. It is a good thing that the horseplayer in general has a short memory or they might have recalled all the wonderous things and changes that banning anabolic steroids was going to do...

I don't think anyone is saying that banning lasix is the cure-all. I think they are saying that it would be a good start. You can only do one thing at a time. Banning steroids was a good start. Banning lasix would be a good next step. There would still be an extremely long way to go. The sport needs comprehensive change. I do believe in the expression, "If it isn't broke, don't fix it." Unfortunately racing is broken in the U.S.

There needs to be major change. I don't know how you can support the status quo. Why would you want to continue to go do down the same broken path that has completely ruined racing in the U.S.?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I think the logic of people who think we should use lasix is twisted. They race all over the world without lasix. How can you say that we need lasix here when they don;t use it anywhere else? Do you think they should start using it in England, Dubai, and Hong Kong? Is our racing the model fro the world? I don't think so. It's the exact opposite. We are the laughing stock of the world. To say we need lasix here, when it is not used anywhere else, is a losing argument.

By the way, there of plenty of trainers out there that will tell you lasix is a performance enhancing drug that does mask other drugs. In addition, it totally knocks horses out. Lasix completely dehydrates you. Do you think it a good idea to do any type of rigorous physical task while you are totally dehydrated? It's terrible for a person and it's terrible for a horse.

We are the laughingstock of the world? Yeah ok so when all those buyers come to Keeneland every year they are snickering as they write those checks?

Who gives a damn what they do elsewhere? I like basketball but don't follow the WNBA so don't give a **** what happens there just like I dont care about what is going on in Singapore or Ireland. If you knew enough about racing in other countries to know that the average racehorse in Ireland makes 3 starts a year and the average horse in France makes 4 starts a year perhaps you wouldnt be in such a hurry to emulate them. The idea that we should care what people who represent one tenth of one percent of our customers think is beyond stupid.

Plenty of trainers are f cking morons too. When the chemists at the labs say that when following the 4 hour protocols that Lasix doesn't mask any known medications I tend to believe them.

Funny that the millions of people that take lasix daily aren't all sitting home drinking water because they are so knocked out that they couldnt possibly go out and work.

[pointman]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I think the logic of people who think we should use lasix is twisted. They race all over the world without lasix. How can you say that we need lasix here when they don;t use it anywhere else? Do you think they should start using it in England, Dubai, and Hong Kong? Is our racing the model fro the world? I don't think so. It's the exact opposite. We are the laughing stock of the world. To say we need lasix here, when it is not used anywhere else, is a losing argument.

By the way, there of plenty of trainers out there that will tell you lasix is a performance enhancing drug that does mask other drugs. In addition, it totally knocks horses out. Lasix completely dehydrates you. Do you think it a good idea to do any type of rigorous physical task while you are totally dehydrated? It's terrible for a person and it's terrible for a horse.

You are taking the extemely myopic view that the supporters of the ban dispense. While Lasix may be banned outside of North Amercia, it is used in training of horses and banned on raceday when horses need it most. Please explain to me why it is ok to train on it but not race on it.

What do owners in jurisdictions that ban Lasix do when their horses can't compete because of bleeding? They either ship their horses to North America and race them here or sell them to North American owners. They are laughing alright, all the way to the bank. The vast majority who ship here for one or two races run their horses on Lasix when they do.

I would love to see those trainers who say that Lasix is a performance enhancing drug come up with any credible scientific study to support that position. It won't happen because it does not exist.

If Lasix is such a drain on horses, than why are 99% of horses racing in North America racing with it? There is no rule against trainers running their horses without Lasix, so why are many more not doing that? Just because someone says something is true does not make it so, and that is the type of slippery slope BS that Chuck is talking about that divides the industry. Then again, Obama won an election and will run for a second term with the same type of if we say it enough people will believe it nonsense which is proven to work.

I am sure as a horseplayer you look forward to horses being taken out of training more often, retired earlier in their careers, less incentive for people to own a horse which will have a more limited racing career, more unwanted horses in need of a home, smaller fields and being duped by betting a horse that will bleed and burn money. Sounds like a great idea.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Speak for yourself.

If we are the laughing stock of the world, why are our stallions and bloodlines so desirable the world over? And, furthermore, if lasix is such a problem for overseas outfits, why do they always use it when they race in the US?

We do have some good stallions here. I'm not saying that anyone thinks all of our stallions are bad.

With regards to the Europeans using lasix in the US, they use it because they thing it's performance enhancing and they think they would be at a disadvantage by not using it.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I don't think anyone is saying that banning lasix is the cure-all. I think they are saying that it would be a good start. You can only do one thing at a time. Banning steroids was a good start. Banning lasix would be a good next step. There would still be an extremely long way to go. The sport needs comprehensive change. I do believe in the expression, "If it isn't broke, don't fix it." Unfortunately racing is broken in the U.S.

There needs to be major change. I don't know how you can support the status quo. Why would you want to continue to go do down the same broken path that has completely ruined racing in the U.S.?

A good start to what? Are you so delusional as to believe there is a real business plan that calls for the humiliation of the sport as to rid it of a simple duiretic? Banning lasix is the reddest of red herrings.

If you believe that banning lasix is going to have a positive effect on business I would love to know what evidence you base this misguided opinion on? The steroid ban was followed by a 2 year decline in handle and field size and obviously wasnt much of a positive PR move especially since Drape and company ignored it for the most part.

I find it odd that someone who doesnt agree with banning lasix is aways accused of maintaining the status quo? Like i said before if you polled players and gave them 2 choices, big competitive fields and reasonable takeout or getting rid of lasix I'm pretty sure that the poll would render a 99-1% vote for option A.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

We do have some good stallions here. I'm not saying that anyone thinks all of our stallions are bad.

With regards to the Europeans using lasix in the US, they use it because they thing it's performance enhancing and they think they would be at a disadvantage by not using it.

So they are laughing at us but are also willing to make fools out of themselves as well.....at least according to you.

If it reads like BS it usually is BS.

[pointman]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I don't think anyone is saying that banning lasix is the cure-all. I think they are saying that it would be a good start. You can only do one thing at a time. Banning steroids was a good start. Banning lasix would be a good next step. There would still be an extremely long way to go. The sport needs comprehensive change. I do believe in the expression, "If it isn't broke, don't fix it." Unfortunately racing is broken in the U.S.

There needs to be major change. I don't know how you can support the status quo. Why would you want to continue to go do down the same broken path that has completely ruined racing in the U.S.?

What has been the benefit of banning steriods? Making unsound decisions that ultimately hurts the health of horses in favor of a hope that creating a false perception to the public helps the sport is not a fix. Is is creating an even bigger problem.