2nd -3rd lasix in 3yo filly's.

[Suff]

I've been hearing more and more that the 2nd and 3rd time lasix on 3Yo Filly's is an angle thats producing. Similiar or outperforming the 1st time lasix in 3YO colts.

I've heard this before but never put much stock in it. But Lately Its showing up in alot Horse banter I see.

Is it hocus pocus that a Fillys metabolism responds slower to lasix than a colts?

I have'nt used the angle yet , but I was thinking of tracking it and throwing it in my bag of tricks if it showed any promise.

[Fastracehorse]

Definitely an interesting study your doing.

My favorite lasix angle is sprint to route and FTL.

Metabolism?? Who told you that?? Interesting??

fffastt

[Suff]

I have a lot of e-mail chatter about specific Horses.

People know I like opening them up....and they drop me alot of horses to look at or tell me what they see.

IN the back and forth discussion I've had it mentioned to me 3 times this month. By 3 different people. People are using it. Not dummies either. maybe its nothing. Maybe it's something.

Figured I'd throw it up on the board and see if it has Legs.

[Fastracehorse]

It probably does have legs.

Personally, I still find the use of Lasix intrigueing.

Sometimes it's a great angle, sometimes it isn't.

That's the intrigue - it's not always that simple.

I think you have the right idea.

fffastt

[BillW]

Suff,

I get the feeling that prophylactic use of lasix is so wide spread that unless you could cull out the individuals that really needed it, the angle would be useless.

As an exercise, I looked at 2nd time lasix of the whole population of my database vs. just 3YO fillie races and saw miniscule difference.


Whole population:
Strt Wins Pct. IV ROI
2nd Time Lasix
Yes 16422 1959 11.93 1.01 -0.26
No 442293 52479 11.87 1.00 -0.24

3YO fillie races:
Strt Wins Pct. IV ROI
2nd Time Lasix
Yes 2127 262 12.32 1.00 -0.22
No 25987 3208 12.34 1.00 -0.24



Possibly looking at specific trainers, to isolate trainers that only use it when needed would be a productive angle to pursue.

Data on 3rd time use not as easy to get.

Bill

[Suff]

Bill Good points.. Can I give you a couple of "What If's"

What if you looked at Just 3yo Fillys who made up more than 5 lengths over previous PAR or had a 15% or greater beyer improvent going 2nd Lasix.



What if you looked Just at Kentucky and NYRA with the same parameters you used.


What if you did just 2YO Fillys Routing 2nd Lasix. Short sample I'm sure. I'd just like to look at it from a few different ways before I totally disregard.

First Lasix at New York is a "always be aware"... because it has produced some big winners regularly. You have to pay attention to Lasix in NY... its not an option to discount ANY form going First Lasix at NY.

The trend was small but it was UPWARD when you did a wide parameter. I'm curious if the parameters were tightened or manipulated , if the TREND would'nt continue upward at a more Distinct seperation.

I do very much appreciatte you taking time to go into your DB and answer the first question. And if your too busy to go any further, maybe someone else will come along and add something.

Please don't go to far out of your way for me. But I do appreciatte it.

[BillW]

I can do a few of those fairly easily. Don't have Beyer in database (Bris/Tsn data). I'll post the others in a few minutes.

[Tom]

My best lasic angle is a horse who showed good form, then last 2-3 races it tailed off or looked out of form. Today is FTL and shows a good work since last race.
Same situation, but 2nd time lasix if FTL was an improved race, going back towards previous good races.

[BillW]

I really need to get my query software in shape (some day! :))

Here is Ky/NYRA every entry:

Strt Wins Pct. IV ROI
2nd Time Lasix
Yes 1768 223 12.61 1.06 -0.30
No 31580 3734 11.82 1.00 -0.22

And every 3YO fillie race:

Strt Wins Pct. IV ROI
2nd Time Lasix
Yes 194 21 10.82 0.86 -0.19
No 2092 268 12.81 1.01 -0.25


Interesting move (-$0.30 to -$0.19 ... not going to pay for a Sar. trip though)

Now Ky/Ny routes only:

Every entry:

Strt Wins Pct. IV ROI
2nd Time Lasix
Yes 761 97 12.75 1.07 -0.24
No 15273 1822 11.93 1.00 -0.22

And every Ky/Ny 3YO fillie route:

Strt Wins Pct. IV ROI
2nd Time Lasix
Yes 66 8 12.12 0.94 0.42
No 1029 133 12.93 1.00 -0.24

Now that's better, +$0.42. (-$0.07 across all tracks in my database) Small sample but you may be on to something. The payouts for those 8 wins follow:

$17.00
$54.50
$35.00
$9.10
$5.10
$47.60
$4.20
$14.60

Didn't have enough 2YO data to post.

Tom: That was what I was getting at. If you dope out the horse that needs it, then you are onto something.

suff: Dave Shwartz could get a better picture of this (he has a big database). You'll probably have to e-mail him though, he's on vacation from reading the forums.

Anyone else with different/more data? Please post.

Bill

[Suff]

Thanks a Bunch bill. I have a network of guys I can ship this out to. Some of them might bump into the post and do something or drop me an e-mail with some numbers to view.

Felt like going to a wider audience on this. It smells like something to me..

Not simply the .42 you got on that small sample. I just have a gut feeling there's something here. I'm sure its not uncharted waters. Just wondering if anyones been down this road lately.

[BillW]

Originally posted by Sufferindowns
Thanks a Bunch bill. I have a network of guys I can ship this out to. Some of them might bump into the post and do something or drop me an e-mail with some numbers to view.

Felt like going to a wider audience on this. It smells like something to me..

Not simply the .42 you got on that small sample. I just have a gut feeling there's something here. I'm sure its not uncharted waters. Just wondering if anyones been down this road lately.

Let me know what you find out.

[Fastracehorse]

But when is the adminestration of Lasix??

I thought it was the day of the race.

So, that would mean the work is not really a good gauge of how the horse will run - or, are they allowed to work on the stuff too.

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

This is what forums should be like.

fffastt

[JustRalph]

This is why this board is so damn good. The rest of this shit that I have been participating in is going to stop right now.

This is one damn find thread. Suff and Billw, toss in Tom and I think that is some damn good info. Very nice. Billw, maybe a thread on the other board might be in order.

Let me see if I get it right......

The addition of Lasix seems to pay dividends in the routes much more so than the sprints?

[BillW]

That's really sparse data, only 66 races across 6 tracks in the last year. It does make sense that lasix would be more effective for routes (sprint -> route FTL :)) I would think horses are more apt to rely on stored oxygen in sprints with little time to replenish (via breathing) as in a route (think of running a 100 yd. dash ).

Ralph,

The data is specifically looking at 3 YO fillies at a route at the 3 NYRA and 3 Ky tracks. I hope someone shows up with some more data.

Also Trainers/Owners?? ... what about lasix application.? Fffast, I've heard the opposite, that lasix is used to train up to the L1 race (a horse that truely needs lasix needs to get used to what it is like to breathe freely?). Of course that's just my foggy memory.

Bill

[VetScratch]

BillW,I get the feeling that prophylactic use of lasix is so wide spread that unless you could cull out the individuals that really needed it, the angle would be useless.
IMHO, you have isolated the most important facet of the lasix riddle because it has become so easy in most jurisdictions to qualify a horse for lasix.

For first-time maidens on lasix, have they really experienced bleeding distress on the training track, is it the trainer's add-on prophylactic hedge when he expects good results, or in some barns hasn't prophylactic lasix become SOP?

Maybe someone has scientific data about sex differences with respect to how-fast, how-much, and how-long lasix promotes a diuretic effect in horses, but my own observations lend some credence to Sufferindowns's angle.

Here is the plausible foundation argument to support Sufferindown's angle for fillies/mares showing improvement on 2nd or 3rd lasix as opposed to 1st lasix. When fillies/mares bleed on the training track, the become more wary of stress than your average colt or gelding. The same is true for other bad experiences. Of course, knowing me, you might already guess that I think fillies/mares are just a little smarter than colts/geldings. :)

Humor aside, this difference does exist between the horse sexes. After a rail bump/accident, you have to work much harder with fillies/mares than with colts/geldings to overcome fear of the rail. Thus, when lasix is needed, the first 1st or 2nd races on lasix may be needed to rebuild confidence in fillies/mares. They need more proof than colts/geldings in order to trust that peak stress will not lead to another very distressful bleeding experience.

==============================================
Don't you guys agree that when testosterone tempts the brain to leave the skull and visit other locations, for some reason, 100% of it never quite makes it back to the skull? :D :D :D

[andicap]

Fast,
I think Tom was saying that you want FTL or 2nd Lasix on improving horses -- a fast work is possibly an indication of such. I like Tom's theory -- horses circling back to form plus Lasix.

Also on 2 and 3rd Lasix, I've also heard (tho I'm no expert) that its sometimes takes a few times to get the proper dosage. that's why 2nd and 3rd lasix do well sometimes.
Is there something about fillies and mares that makes it more difficult to gauge the proper dose?

[Fastracehorse]

That would make sense then - there was a horse at Hastings Park that won with first Lasix yesterday ( 3 yo g. ).

Had a quick work but that is irrelevant isn't it - I don't understand why they couldn't work on the drug.

fffastt

[LurkingBettor]

Has anyone read "Run Baby Run...What Every Owner, Breeder and Handicapper Should Know about Lasix in Racehorses" by Bill Heller?

If so, would appreciate any feedback on this topic and the book in general.

If anyone has a used copy of the book they want to dump, please p.m. me.

Thanks,
LB

[Show Me the Wire]

BillW:

Confusion about training on lasix

Racing sound horses are trained, exercised, every day. Training does not necessarily mean you are asking the horse to exert itself to the point of bleeding. Most likely when you hear about a horse training on lasix it is referring to an actual official or timed work out. During a work out the horse is asked for physical exertion that would cause bleeding and lasix is administered to prevent bleeding.

It is believed if a horse had a bad experience with bleeding during exertion, especially female ones, it takes a few "works" to condition them to forget they had a bad experience while exerting themselves.

I hope the above answers your question.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

[Suff]

If I'm not mistaken.... Bleeding is the Medical reason given and frequently used for Lasix.

but also it allows the horses blood to carry more Oxegyn.

I've seen many skeletal and Muscular examples of why horses can fast for long distances.

The primary reason is the HUGE amount of oxygen it distributes very quickly to its lungs and Muscles. It's Nostrils widen and it consumes more oxegyn than most animals.



If you increase the amount of Oxegyn being carried in a horses Blood it can dramatically improve .

[Show Me the Wire]

Suff:

I am not familiar with any study showing lasix allows the horse to carry more oxygen. Lasix is a diuretic and it prevents bleeding by lowering blood pressure. Maybe the lower blood pressure may make the horse more comfortable and let it breath easier which would allow more oxygen to enter the blood stream, however that is purely a guess on my part.

Meds and substances that allow blood to carry more oxygen is clenbuteral (aslo effects muscle mass), ephedra, etc.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

[VetScratch]

Lasix -> diuretic -> dehydration -> lowers capillary blood pressure in air passages and lungs.

[Suff]

I think That means I'm wrong..

Its probably mis-information I picked up at the track from another einstein like me... But Let me rephrase it in the way I think I heard it.....after thinking.

The irration that can cause bleeding also causes inflamation that constricts the expansion of the lungs in some Horses. Thereby limiting oxegyn flow.

Lasix resolves this.

I still could be wrong here as I can't recall ever reading this but i definatley recall hearing it so it must true.....right?

[VetScratch]

You wern't wrong at all about the eventual consequence. Getting more oxygen into the blood stream is a byproduct of stopping or reducing pulmonary bleeding. I think a lot of observers see a bad bleeder gushing blood without imagining how much unseen blood is trying to shut down the lungs, sort of like a drowning victim where a little water trickles from the mouth and nose whereas what killed them was the water that shut down the lungs.

Lasix usually reduces bleeding to tolerable limits, but it isn't like a spigot that shuts it down completely (we just don't see it and the horse is relieved of major distress). When this happens, you bet that better pulmonary efficiency puts more oxygen in the blood!

[VetScratch]

Looking back at the last several posts:

Lasix has an effect on supply by minimizing obstruction while Clenbuteral and others raise loading limits. Better supply with higher load limits means more oxygen. At least, that's my layperson's understanding of what veterinarians say, which is also what I understood SMTW to mean.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally posted by VetScratch
Looking back at the last several posts:

At least, that's my layperson's understanding of what veterinarians say, which is also what I understood SMTW to mean.

Beep, beep.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire (oops, he does not post here any more)

Perception is reality

[Storm Cadet]

SMTW and Vet:

My sports med info regarding clenbuterol is not keen as we have not seen athletes use it in a long time: It is a Beta-2 agonist, still banned in the US for humans and livestock.

A: Becasue it is similar to a Fat soluable anabolic steroid, it stays in the body too long to beat drug testing (as compared to water soluable).

When I was in Barcelona in '92 for the Olympics, we had 2 athletes come up positive and stripped of their medals and banned for life for it's use!

B. Very expensive along with alot of bad side effects on athletes.

The same side effects (nervousness, shaking, elevated BP and pulse) are shown in both athletes and the animals who are given the product as well as recent studies in Europe of people who eat large amounts of the type of animals that are given steroid supplements for growth (Veal and cattle).

Regarding giving it to a race horse, I think that the only benefit would be the obvious muscle building mass properties along with the associated increase in heart rate (which brings more blood flow).

I have not seen too many studies on thoroughbreds that have tested positive for clenbuterol lately.

Hoping the rain stops for all that are heading to Saratoga!!:D

[VetScratch]

Storm Cadet,

http://opinions.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=16735

What do you make of this Bloodhorse article?

It provoked quite a bit of discussion here, and Clenbuterol has swept the nation as the latest backside human drug fad, even to the point of being sanctioned in some jurisdictions.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally posted by Storm Cadet
SMTW and Vet:

My sports med info regarding clenbuterol is not keen as we have not seen athletes use it in a long time: It is a Beta-2 agonist, still banned in the US for humans and livestock.

A: Becasue it is similar to a Fat soluable anabolic steroid, it stays in the body too long to beat drug testing (as compared to water soluable).



Okay, I decided to return to the board.

Upside of clenbuteral use ....

should stop the French and other like-minded cultures from eating U.S. race horses.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

[Storm Cadet]

VS:

That's why Barry is such a great owner and selector of horses and why his barn is winning at 31% this year!

Irwin is a former track and field coach and he views and treats and trains his stock just like high level athletes are, rest and training & nutrition regimes..(he still comes to NYC for the Millrose Track & Field Championships each year) He chooses his new aqusitions like athletes. He looks for certain things that others don't in a new horse or maybe has a better trained eye (read some info on his new recent acquisitions on the Team Valor site). He is also dead set against drug use like this Clenbuterol. He puts his $$$into the BEST feed and vitamins and gets results.

I read the article when it came out as some of my other co-owners called me about it. It's a topic that we all discussed last summer at Saratoga, co-owners and our 2 trainers.

:)

[Fastracehorse]

One thing is for sure I like bug riders on my horses - partly because the horse gets a weight break - mostly because I think there is intent with the bug.

But I read that horse can lose as much as 40 lbs. of fluid on Lasix - now that's a weight break!

And maybe why horses do so well with it - other than the obvious fact that they have stopped bleeding.

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

I still believe that trainers winning at that clip are doing so because they are using something.

Believe me, every trainer has a repertoire of reasons why there horses are doing really well, or really bad.

The vitamins and good feed are just one of them.

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

Michael Gill had the ultimate blood test reasoning for his successes at the past GP meet - his super-trainer just got busted again.

fffastt

[Tom]

Originally posted by Show Me the Wire
Okay, I decided to return to the board.

Upside of clenbuteral use ....

should stop the French and other like-minded cultures from eating U.S. race horses.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality


Have you heard of Clenbuteral aus jus?????

[VetScratch]

Storm Cadet,

RE: Barry Irwin's article & drug testing.

I guess what I should have asked, based upon your experience with humans, is why keeping up with the drug industry seems so much harder for horseracing than for track & field associations?

[gino]

Vettie-

becuz almost nobody bets on hurdlers or javelin throwers?

...follodemooney, mon

gino

[Storm Cadet]

Vet:

I for years as a fan and as a owner can't figure out why the horse racing regulators can't get the drug question under better control.

One reason is STATE organizations, not national. Example, in New York we have NYRA doing the testing of horses. They make up the list of banned meds and it's their decision on who and where the test samples are sent. And I'm sure that's the case state by state! There is no NATIONAL organization who CONTROLS testing for the industry.

As opposed to the NCAA which regulated everything down to the minute seal and chain of custody labels we can use. The same goes for the US Olympic Committee. They have national and worldwide pressure to keep it clean. They only use 2 labs NATIONALLY-and they are the best. UCLA, Indianapolis and there is one other national recognized testing lab in Nashville which most NCAA teams use as their test lab... That's it!

Worldwide, I think only the labs in Barcelona and Switzerland are the only labs that the IOC uses for quality control.

Also, with athlete's, we find out and hear from the athletes what crooked teams, physicians and dirty athletes are doing to beat testing! The horses can't talk...Our labs spend as much time and effort trying to find out the masking agents that cover up true positives, drugs that are new and are not detectable yet as well as always fine tuning the techniques because their job is dependant on that being done by their main clients. The lab that NYRA uses, Cornell University,has NO vested interest in trying to clean up the sport! Most states use the State University Vetinary facility to test...do they really care who comes up positive? They are in the business of EDUCATING students at the college. At our level, as soon as something has come on the market to beat testing, we will find out about it quicker and will look to close the loophole either by testing or legislation. Not to bring up a point which we killed to death here about Gary Contessa, but where does he goto help his cause when he got bagged back in the winter. The LSU Vet school of medicine!!! You can always find a lab that will support dirty trainers or vets...but not with the NCAA or USOC or IOC. They rule with an IRON FIST baby! I've been on both sides of the war with them. (Won both times)

In horse racing, if a certain state does do stricter testing with rigid controls, the money is so good out there that they can take their horses and race at a easier site and make the same money.

Also, the NCAA and USOC put HUGE amounts of $$$ into their testing programs for education of athletes, coaches. That will never be done in racing. When we attend our medical meetings, we try to find out what the athletes are taking and why and what the dangers are to them and how to recognize the drug abuser or athletic enhancement user! Can you imagine horse trainers there? If we ever ran a seminar to them, most of them would try to find out what the illegal guys were doing to get the same advantage, not try to stop it! Have you EVER heard of a trainer with the same sentiments that Barry Irwin had about having a level drug free playing field?Most of them don't really care about the horses health, only his/her 10% of the purse.

The same pitfalls are there for both equine and humans in many cases...I'm sure that there are horse trainers that give supplements to their barn with out the knowledge that the product is either banned or has inert ingredients that are banned...well those dumb bunnies should test ALL products prior to giving it to their barn to prevent the positives! We tell our athletes that they are responsible for whatever they ingest. We will take a product that they are unsure about and test it BEFORE they use it. This whole thing with EPHEDRA , we tested all those GNC and Twin Labs products like Xenodrine when they first came out, found out the high and illegal levels they contained, and told our athletes about the dangers and possible drug positives. That ended the use at our University quickly. But at other places that either don't test (becasue each University has a choice to test or not) or don't care, the same stuff goes on like horse racing. Major league baseball looks real bad today becasue they were so passive about ephedra use until that Baltimore Oriole player died on the field in spring training. Same with the NFL with that Viking player. All their heads are in the sand looking the other way untill some kid croaks!

And let's talk here about testing the jockeys like all the sport leagues do. For all the talk about how they are athletes, then say why don't we test them. They can control so much of a race result, but we let them go without testing unless something huge happens (Chris Antley). I say test them too to make sure they are clean and straight.

Enough for now...untill the NTRA testing commences for all graded stakes races and they make it mandatory to have one unified drug lab where no funny business can occur, then we're just running in sand here! Wait till the NTRA tests for EPO in the fall at the Breeders Cup, can't wait for that!!!! Some boys are already running scared of that one...;)

[VetScratch]

Storm Cadet,

Fantastic post... thanks for giving us your expert knowledge and time.

You asked, almost rhetorically, whether any trainers besides Irwin were advocates of drug enforcement. I emphatically say YES for several reasons:
(1) The small barns quite rightly believe they are at a distinct disadvantage and will be the ones selectively punished to set an example rather than the high-profile outfits who have more clout. I won't tell tales out of school, but I know this is true not only for drugs, but also for the way track maintenance works on a track when the Baffert-, Lucas-, or Frankel-level outfits complain and threaten to stop shipping in for graded stakes. It's funny how what they want is always a track that ideally suits their current shipper! Furthermore, almost every track is rife with stories of bad test-barn results that get squelched in proportion to their public relations consequences (i.e., risks decrease as the potential for scandalous publicity increase).
(2) The add-on cost of using EPO, Clenbuterol, and other human drugs is far too high for most trainers to absorb. Many owners may be willing to pay, but each one becomes a potential source of trouble. When owners pay thousands in cash under the table, they demand results, but there is still only one winner per race.
(3) Like kinds of birds flock together. Every track has a flock of trainers who know they would be the ones to prosper if the playing field was clean and level. While they may have to compromise their principles to compete, no one applauds Irwin louder than these trainers whose sentiments do not command media attention.

What is unclear to me about the Graded Stakes testing proposed by NTRA is who will actually collect the test samples, perform the analysis, and receive the results.
(1) For some illegal drugs, samples taken before the banned substances are administered have been known to "find their way" from the test barn to the current testing laboratories.
(2) Will one reputable national lab be used for all stakes?
(3) Will all bad tests be reported directly back to the NTRA?

With respect to EPO, I imagine that most trainers will dramatically slack off before graded stake races until they see how porous or rigid the new system is. Let's hope the end result is not business as usual!

[Storm Cadet]

Just like with the athlete who is getting ready for their biggest event where they need the most benefit from performance drugs, the question that always comes up is:

How long does the drug stay in my system and how far back will the lab pick it up in testing! How quickly can I flush it out?

Thats the problem for these trainers who have their horses on "stuff", be it EPO, masking agents, phosphate buffers etc.

They don't know what lab will be used, and what type of testing they will perform and at what level. Example:

Most colleges (and many pro teams) set their radar gun level for testing marajuana at 100 ng. They also only use immuno assay for tests(simple strips which the urine or blood is placed and the strips turn differnt colors). This is the least effective test because only athletes who still have 100 or more ng of MJA left in their urine will become positive. That usually only catches someone who did it within 3-4 days.

We set ours at 0-ZERO tolerance and we use GC-mass spectromter testing (sophisticated computer analylsis) which will find levels as low as 1 ng per ml. Thats what you use if your serious about catching the drug user. We find our athletes stopped months before the test (maybe did it in the summer between high school and college but stopped because of upcoming testing upon entrance to college sports) but still have trace amounts in their system (becasue it's stored in the fatty tissue) and under extreme athletic performance training (like horses train and race) those last few drops are the most concentrated after a race, when we test.

NTRA has not announced at WHAT levels they will test at as well as what lab ond type of test they propose to use and that's what has got the track community scared.;)

[Storm Cadet]

Go to Aegislabs.com
and then to their zero tolerance testing area for a wide choice of testing answers like how long do drugs stay in system and how long DT test can detect...

[VetScratch]

Storm Cadet,

http://www.Aegislabs.com/ was a good link, and their ZT program sounds like one of the best for law enforcement, corporations, and human sports associations.

My contention with horses has always been that the industry will never seriously confront drug abuse because frequent controversies after wagers have been paid is feared more than occasional drug scandals. If Frankel can personally veto quarantine barns and run the Belmont in unsanctioned shoes, why should any of the marquee trainers fear post-race tests? The bigger the race, the less likely the testing will be fair and objective.

Are we light years away from effective pre-race screening?

What about periodic immune-assay type tests, like the human hair tests that decide many child-custody cases? Such tests are said to cover periods up to a year. For horses, a confirmed positive on such a test could be grounds to void ownership/money transfers after a claim. Perhaps such tests could also void auction sales and inhibit steroid abuse with young horses.

For horses that are racing, a periodic testing schedule could be implemented to qualify horses for entering any type of race. The penalty for a confirmed failure could be ineligibility for six months with reinstatement dependent on passing a six-month test.

Most barns can't afford to universally train and race on the expensive drugs used by the deep-pocket barns. Instead of paying $500-800 per month to treat each horse, is there any hope that $800-$1000 could be spent twice a year to certify that each horse was drug-free?

Most racing families are now discouraging their kids from entering the industry because drug technology has tipped the scales too far in favor of wealthy crooks while the industry looks the other way.

[Storm Cadet]

Vet:

As per your questions regarding National Testing look at the following site:

http://www.rmtcnet.com/

They are the control group of TOBA that will be doing the testing at this years Breeders Cup and also at Belmont this fall meet in a test project!

Lots of great stuff they would like to do to clean up the sport!

Have a great day!:D

[Fastracehorse]

A 3yo filly won a stakes race at Wdb tonight Suff..

She was 2nd-time Lasix and it looked like she won by the 1/16th pole.

She beat a very good favorite and interestingly, the horse was on turf last start. Not her surface but she was FTL - as if the trainer knew she needed one start on Lasix.

fffastt