Serengeti Empress & lasix

[SG4]

Obviously the events of the Derby have fully dominated the discussion from this weekend, but I thought the results of the Oaks would certainly stir up some debate around here & cannot believe to see no comments on it.


So a few weeks after a severe bleeding incident led to an eased up finish, Serengeti Empress comes back with a vengeance to take the Oaks. So if lasix wasn't legal any more would this horse even have been in the Oaks? Would she have any kind of noteworthy career at all? There was a widely disseminated article on here a few weeks ago which I believe called for horses to get several weeks of rest after a bleeding incident to treat the problem for the best, and then this race comes and spits all over that recommendation. But does this mean the connections put the longer-term health of the horse in jeopardy by not taking a more measured approach in correcting her bleeding issues?

[clicknow]

Hundreds of horses the world over have noteworthy careers w/out lasix.

I think that should answer the question pretty simply.

Plenty of race day drug-free horses like Winx, winning big races. She also returns to run big races in 3 weeks, many many times.
Ulysses. Mongolian Saturday. Decorated Knight, etc.

When they win it's because of the horse and their conditioning....seems like an honorable way to race to me?

Maybe somebody can ask the trainers in Hong Kong, or Sir Michael Stoute
John Gosden or Chris Waller how to do it. I think the answer (they put the horse first) might upset people

[Thomas Roulston]

There should definitely be some restrictions on Lasix.

Some states do not allow Lasix to be administered to 2-year-olds - and I would extend that ban to any first-time starter, regardless of age.

[classhandicapper]

There's isn't a silver bullet solution that's going to get the exact result we want in every case. There's going to be a trade-off regardless of whether we race with or without Lasix. We have to decide what we value more.