National horse racing oversight authority

[Nitro]

This article was written in 2003 about a prominent NY horse trainer who basically gave up his successful career because of the influx and legalization of Lasix. A sad yet very relevant commentary then and still today about how Lasix impacts stateside racing on many levels.

Gasper Moschera departure shows flaws
The retirement of trainer Gasper Moschera illustrates how racing continues to stumble on the issue of medication. Moschera, who won the New York Racing Association training title consecutively from 1993 through 1998, walked away from 25 years on the backstretch in late December. Moschera told Daily Racing Form on Jan. 2 that he left because of the permissive use of Lasix. He brought up something that makes racing leaders uncomfortable -- his belief that Lasix can mask illegal medications. He said there are trainers who take advantage of that.

Moschera is not alone in his belief, but almost nobody wants to discuss it today. We have fallen so far that Lasix, permitted almost everywhere in the United States, is simply considered a condition of the game. Moschera, who made his reputation as a premier claiming trainer, said he can no longer justify buying horses for his clients. He said that up to 45 of 50 horses he claims today are simply no good, whereas before the introduction of Lasix the ratio was one in ten.

Moschera claimed Videogenic for $100,000 and sent her out to win the Grade I Ladies Handicap and Grade I Santa Ana Handicap. She earned $1.5 million for him. His other stakes winners include Moro, Iron Gavel, Royal Haven, Mr. Sinatra, Divulge, May I Inquire and Fabersham. Moschera, who has never had a drug positive, objected to the introduction of Lasix in New York in 1995.

Proponents said New York needed Lasix to increase field size, and lure top horses from other states. They pointed to a variety of conditions, such as air pollution and extreme summer heat, as reasons for allowing horses to get relief from this diuretic. Horses will void gallons of water when treated with Lasix. Does it sound humane to send a thirsty horse to the post on a hot summer day?

Since this trend began, horses are making fewer career starts than before. It has dropped quite sharply since 1990; before that it had been consistent for the previous 50 years. And, despite fewer total races in the last ten years, field size has also declined, although part of this can be attributed to smaller foal crops. On my backstretch rounds during the annual summer meet at Saratoga, I frequently ask trainers their opinion on the condition of the breed as they look back over their careers.

I have kept no formal statistics, but I can tell you that a majority say that horses are becoming increasingly fragile. Moschera has walked away from the game he loves. He stated his case in Daily Racing Form, and I suspect that very few racing leaders listened to his point of view. But the horses are, and what they're telling us in return isn't pretty.

.
.

[clicknow]

Originally Posted by AndyC

Could it be that there just isn't a consensus on what needs to be done regarding drugs?

There is a consensus.

The rest of the world don't use raceday meds.

We are the outliers.

What's the question again?

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by clicknow

There is a consensus.

The rest of the world don't use raceday meds.

We are the outliers.

What's the question again?

Nice try. There is no consensus in the US.

[Nitro]

Originally Posted by AndyC

Nice try. There is no consensus in the US.

If I'm not mistaken I believe he's referring to a general consensus by the horse racing world OUTSIDE the U.S.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by Nitro

If I'm not mistaken I believe he's referring to a general consensus by the horse racing world OUTSIDE the U.S.

My comment he was responding to made no mention of OUTSIDE the US.

[Nitro]

Originally Posted by AndyC

My comment he was responding to made no mention of OUTSIDE the US.

Oh Really?!! What do you suppose "The rest of the world" means?

Originally Posted by clicknow

There is a consensus.

The rest of the world don't use raceday meds.

We are the outliers.

What's the question again?

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by Nitro

Oh Really?!! What do you suppose "The rest of the world" means?

Again, he was responding to my comment about there not being a consensus in the US. We are discussing a "national horse racing oversight authority" not a world authority. He brought in "the rest of the world" which really doesn't speak to what the opinions are in the US. I am neither pro-drug or anti-drug, just against more bureaucrats telling people how to run their business.

[Nitro]

Originally Posted by AndyC

Again, he was responding to my comment about there not being a consensus in the US. We are discussing a "national horse racing oversight authority" not a world authority. He brought in "the rest of the world" which really doesn't speak to what the opinions are in the US. I am neither pro-drug or anti-drug, just against more bureaucrats telling people how to run their business.

Well perhaps he felt that a U.S. horse racing oversight authority should consider what the positive affects of a “0-drug” tolerance policy would have for both the race horses and the players themselves. In other words: Taking some real affirmative action to improve the state-side game.

If you don’t think the rest of the world has a valid opinion or concern about this extensive drug use in the U.S. then perhaps you should read the Moschera article (above) again. I would personally take those credible and persuasive comments from a trainer like that much more seriously than I would from any opinion coming from someone here who has nothing more to lose than a bet.

Unfortunately, its apparent that you don’t know how to distinguish the difference between running a legitimate business or one without the integrity and veracity necessary to draw patrons (rather than turning them off). If these same businessmen would do the right thing (on their own) they wouldn’t need any bureaucrat’s involvement.

You might want to also ask yourself why the horse racing game in the U.S. has been declining over the very same period of time that drug use for race horses was approved nationwide. It’s no doubt that the game has been tarnished by the continuous gossip and details about the lack of honesty among those involved. Yeah you know, those same businessmen you’re reluctant to characterize as needing some outsider’s directive.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by Nitro

Well perhaps he felt that a U.S. horse racing oversight authority should consider what the positive affects of a “0-drug” tolerance policy would have for both the race horses and the players themselves. In other words: Taking some real affirmative action to improve the state-side game.

If you don’t think the rest of the world has a valid opinion or concern about this extensive drug use in the U.S. then perhaps you should read the Moschera article (above) again. I would personally take those credible and persuasive comments from a trainer like that much more seriously than I would from any opinion coming from someone here who has nothing more to lose than a bet.

Unfortunately, its apparent that you don’t know how to distinguish the difference between running a legitimate business or one without the integrity and veracity necessary to draw patrons (rather than turning them off). If these same businessmen would do the right thing (on their own) they wouldn’t need any bureaucrat’s involvement.

You might want to also ask yourself why the horse racing game in the U.S. has been declining over the very same period of time that drug use for race horses was approved nationwide. It’s no doubt that the game has been tarnished by the continuous gossip and details about the lack of honesty among those involved. Yeah you know, those same businessmen you’re reluctant to characterize as needing some outsider’s directive.

Thanks for the rant and the lecture. Gosh, who knew that there were no honest businessmen in racing and that the only way to save things was to turn to the only people who always act in the best interest of everybody, the US Government.

[mountainman]

Originally Posted by jay68802

Passes House.

http://wtop.com/animals-pets/2020/09...-horse-racing/

A somewhat vague concept completely dependent on the quality and specifics of its execution. Tons of work loom ahead.

[jay68802]

Originally Posted by mountainman

A somewhat vague concept completely dependent on the quality and specifics of its execution. Tons of work loom ahead.

Agree, this is a wait and see deal. Glad where it can go. The reaction can be good, that said, this is horse racing

Be healthy,

J.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by AndyC

Thanks for the rant and the lecture. Gosh, who knew that there were no honest businessmen in racing and that the only way to save things was to turn to the only people who always act in the best interest of everybody, the US Government.

This sort of rhetoric isn't helpful. There are tons of problems the federal government does a better job on than the private sector: Social Security, the EPA, Medicare, OSHA, the SEC, etc.

Horse racing has shown it can't regulate itself, and the states get captured. Chanting reflexive anti-government slogans won't change that. The US government has many problems, but it is also in many cases the only effective regulator.

[Tom]

If there is no third party oversight, there is no control
End of story.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

This sort of rhetoric isn't helpful. There are tons of problems the federal government does a better job on than the private sector: Social Security, the EPA, Medicare, OSHA, the SEC, etc.

Horse racing has shown it can't regulate itself, and the states get captured. Chanting reflexive anti-government slogans won't change that. The US government has many problems, but it is also in many cases the only effective regulator.

Certainly not helpful to your point of view. We don't know how the private sector would do versus the government managing SS, EPA, Medicare,etc.

Horse racing doesn't regulate itself, it is regulated by the states. There is no national issue that requires Federal oversight. I am anti-federal government for local issues. There is no national need to have racing rules be the same in California and Florida. You may not like the inconsistencies but inconsistencies between states exists for many things on many levels.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by Tom

If there is no third party oversight, there is no control
End of story.

Am I missing something? Did the state governments disband their horse racing oversight?