Non-Lasix Users Get Weight Break In The Pegasus

[sammy the sage]

Originally Posted by chadk66

Here is what equibase has for my last two years. The previous four years (I trained six years) was really a roller coaster ride because such a large percentage of my horses were two year olds those years. The last two years were the most consistent in regards to even distribution of all ages. The last year I was actually training privately for an individual in MN. I started training at age 20. So I was pretty young lol. But I was very involved in many things race horse. I was involved in a major study with the University of MN regarding breakdowns. I was also doing R&D with the 3M corporation for the last few years I trained. So I guess what I'm trying to say is I probably wasn't your run of the mill trainer. We also had a breeding farm down the road and had a dozen broodmares and stood a stallion. So a lot of these horses were home breds. My early years it was a struggle because my dad was one of those that wanted to breed any horse with a heart beat to our stallion because it was free lol. So the quality sucked. Took me several years to knock some sense into him and get him to understand that costs way more money. Once he understood that then things took off. You have to have a certain level of quality to win races aside from doing all the other things for them. Can't squeeze blood from a turnip so to speak.



1991 33 8 4 5 $90,289 $2,736 24% 52% View 1990 82 12 13 13 $98,966 $1,207 15% 46% View

That's a pretty decent record.......like the fact that you were a drug free trainer........too bad the game has changed much...

you're wrong about the lasix debate tho....so we'll agree to disagree on that topic...there's plenty of facts vs opinion already posted in this thread...

[chadk66]

Originally Posted by sammy the sage

That's a pretty decent record.......like the fact that you were a drug free trainer........too bad the game has changed much...

you're wrong about the lasix debate tho....so we'll agree to disagree on that topic...there's plenty of facts vs opinion already posted in this thread...

well there is major disagreement between a lot of people regarding lasix. One thing they did in MN in the old days to prevent masking with lasix was force you to go to a secured detention barn four hours before post time. Any real beneficial drug lasix could mask would have to be given within four hours before post time. There were only a few states that did this. I think as more horses become bleeders they started having issues with enough space and manpower to run detention barns. I think the big push for total lasix use came from those that thought it was the fair thing to do for bettors. A large amount of push for lasix use now days comes from owners if you can believe that. If I had any inclination that any of my horses ever showed any signs of performance enhancement I would be the first to claim that. Not a single one exhibited any. And like I said I ran horses on and off lasix a lot over those years due to having to ship to other jurisdictions to run.

[castaway01]

Originally Posted by chadk66

well there is major disagreement between a lot of people regarding lasix. One thing they did in MN in the old days to prevent masking with lasix was force you to go to a secured detention barn four hours before post time. Any real beneficial drug lasix could mask would have to be given within four hours before post time. There were only a few states that did this. I think as more horses become bleeders they started having issues with enough space and manpower to run detention barns. I think the big push for total lasix use came from those that thought it was the fair thing to do for bettors. A large amount of push for lasix use now days comes from owners if you can believe that. If I had any inclination that any of my horses ever showed any signs of performance enhancement I would be the first to claim that. Not a single one exhibited any. And like I said I ran horses on and off lasix a lot over those years due to having to ship to other jurisdictions to run.

Chad, I appreciate your contributions. I agree there's some stuff here when those of us who think we know something about horses are way off and it must make you shake your head. Still, those of us who've been around a while know that in the 1990s 1st Lasix was a big angle that saw a lot of horses jump up and run much better than ever (and that was when you were training). I read what you wrote and maybe you didn't use Lasix to mask other drugs and that's to be commended, but obviously some barns did. Maybe it's something that's tested for now or it's useless as angle since virtually every horse is on it, but saying Lasix had no impact doesn't feel correct to any bettor who watched thousands of contrary examples at tracks around the country.

[chadk66]

Originally Posted by castaway01

Chad, I appreciate your contributions. I agree there's some stuff here when those of us who think we know something about horses are way off and it must make you shake your head. Still, those of us who've been around a while know that in the 1990s 1st Lasix was a big angle that saw a lot of horses jump up and run much better than ever (and that was when you were training). I read what you wrote and maybe you didn't use Lasix to mask other drugs and that's to be commended, but obviously some barns did. Maybe it's something that's tested for now or it's useless as angle since virtually every horse is on it, but saying Lasix had no impact doesn't feel correct to any bettor who watched thousands of contrary examples at tracks around the country.

I'm obviously not explaining the first lasix thing very well. If a true bleeder runs on lasix first time there are really good odds he's going to run quite well. Why? Because he isn't bleeding anymore. Maybe people here don't understand that lasix stops a horse from bleeding probably 98% of the time. So yes a horse will be able to perform back to it's normal performance level. I call that performing to his god given ability. If a horse has been bleeding for the past eight to ten races and is given lasix and he jumps up and wins people think that's performance enhancing. It's not, it's simply eliminating an issue a horse has and allows it to run to it's full potential again. Nothing more. Honestly it's no different than if I claim a horse that I know has foot problems and I take him back to the barn and check him out and say yep it's exactly what I suspected and turn him out for two weeks while doctoring his feet. Then bring that horse back, stick another blacksmith under him and lead him back up there and he kicks their ass, that's no different. I eliminated a problem that horse had and him winning is the result. Was that new blacksmith a performance enhancing blacksmith? I guess you could look at it that way but I look at it like this. That blacksmith made corrections to that horse along with my help to make that horse run to his god given ability. There was another angle mentioned earlier regarding second time lasix. Depending on the situation that is even more of a eye opener. Like my story above, if you have a horse that has been bleeding for a long time and is accustom to stopping at the quarter pole during a race due to bleeding, first time on lasix you will probably see a similar thing. They will start backing off about the quarter pole expecting to bleed. When they don't bleed they are a little confused and throughout the stretch run they are just kind of confused. So the next time they run they have somewhat forgot about the bleeding and run on like they should be able to do. You do get some horses that never get over that fear and no amount of lasix will cure that. Like I've mentioned before horses have a memory for bad things that happened to them like you can't believe. That is rare but happens occasionally. Some never get over that , some it takes quite awhile.



It's really easy to see when you give a horse a bad van ride somewhere. Normally thoroughbreds walk right in a trailer. But you give them a bad right one time and they will not want to load very well for quite some time. It's really amazing what these animals tell you if your conscience enough to watch for it. I could tell you stories for a long time some of the crazy things horses have done or do.



In the 80's,90's I have no doubt lasix could mask other drugs. But they didn't have near the drugs they have today. And today's testing is so superior it's crazy. It isn't just urine they collect. Now days, the stuff that you could only find in a urine test they can find in a blood test too. My personal opinion on WADA's big deal on lasix is a carry over from the past when lasix certainly could wreak havoc with drug testing. Not so much anymore. In regards to lasix being a benefit by simple fluid weight elimination that is simply a stretch at best. A super nervous horse that sweats profusely pre-post time can loose far more fluid weight than lasix could ever knock out of it's system. I've had horses that could literally fill a five gallon pail full of sweat in the paddock alone. I'll let you chew on this example for awhile. I claimed a horse that at one time was a grade 1 stakes winner in argentina. Claimed him for 5K because I knew he was sound and he absolutely destroyed himself in the paddock. I don't think a five gallon pail could have held all the fluid. But I knew how to eliminate the problem. He would loose 40 lbs easy in the paddock. five gallon pail of sweat is 40 lbs. Anyway, the horse barely wins for 5K. I claim him, give him 30 days and start him back under a completely new regimen. This horse doesn't sweat an ounce in the paddock first time I ran him. He wins for fun for 8K. Then works his way on up and is competitive up to 20K claiming. And he was carrying 40 lbs more to post every single time after I claimed him. He ran one tick off the track record going 7.5 on the turf and he was a sprinter. And that was all he got was his problem with nerves taken care of. There is a super long story associated with this particular situation but that is it in a nutshell. The point to all this is that there are so many things in the horse industry that are out and out bullshit, old wives tales, etc etc. that it's actually rather comical. So many things I was told before I started training turned out to be absolute BS that I look back on it now and am rather amused by it. I used to hear owner, fans, gamblers say things while in a group in the grandstand that just made me shake my head in disbelief. So just really, take a lot of that with a grain of salt.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by chadk66

well there is major disagreement between a lot of people regarding lasix. One thing they did in MN in the old days to prevent masking with lasix was force you to go to a secured detention barn four hours before post time. Any real beneficial drug lasix could mask would have to be given within four hours before post time. There were only a few states that did this. I think as more horses become bleeders they started having issues with enough space and manpower to run detention barns. I think the big push for total lasix use came from those that thought it was the fair thing to do for bettors. A large amount of push for lasix use now days comes from owners if you can believe that. If I had any inclination that any of my horses ever showed any signs of performance enhancement I would be the first to claim that. Not a single one exhibited any. And like I said I ran horses on and off lasix a lot over those years due to having to ship to other jurisdictions to run.

I remember not allowing lasix in NY was a big deal for horses shipping in for stakes races.

[chadk66]

Originally Posted by Tom

I remember not allowing lasix in NY was a big deal for horses shipping in for stakes races.

It was. It was a huge deal for sure.

[Jeff P]

Originally Posted by chadk66

you just made the perfect analogy. Your example of the motor putting out identical horsepower is the constant in your study. You can adjust weight and whatever else aside from anything that alters hp and increase your performance. It’s not that way with horses because there is no constant involved. Things change with horses on a near hourly basis. If what you guys claim was true a third grader could make a living off gambling on horses. But I’ll tell you this as a mechanic for many many years given your exact analogy your not gonna make a significant enough performance gain in the quarter mile to hardly recognize it. Hp and weight is only two factors involved in a wide array of things that are involved in laying down good times.

I agree with you that a horse's condition is subject to change.

I learned this the hard way at Turf Paradise when I as a 20-something year old bettor back in the early 1980's.

One afternoon, just as the starter sent the field on their way in a route race, the engine of the tractor hooked up to the starting gate stalled out and the driver couldn't get it started again.

At first, I didn't realize there was an issue with the starting gate.

I was watching the race unfold through a pair of binoculars. The horse I had bet broke on top, secured the rail entering the clubhouse turn, led pretty much unchallenged down the backstretch, and looked to have plenty left about midway through the far turn.

Then as the field was approaching the top of the stretch I watched as - first my rider, and then a second rider - pulled up. Confused, I lowered my binoculars and saw outriders waving the horses off.

It was at that point I realized the starting gate hadn't moved and was blocking the stretch in front of the finish line.

I recall people around me saying the words "no race" and "that has to be a no race" over and over. And after several minutes of waiting, the stewards declared it a no contest.

In those days I was attending the races live pretty much daily. I made it a point to arrive early. I wanted to get there before they ran out of Daily Racing Forms - which actually happened to me the handful of times I wasn't there early enough. I also wanted to make sure I could get a good seat near the finish line.

About a week later, with maybe an hour to post time for R1, I was standing on the track apron listening to the track handicapper Chuck Badone go through the races. I perked up when Chuck mentioned one of today's races had been recarded with the exact same conditions as last week's race that had been declared a no contest because of the starting gate issue. He also mentioned that, with the exception of one horse, today's race had the same runners in it as last week's race.

I felt like I had died and gone to heaven.

I was about 99 percent certain the horse I had bet last week, the one that had opened up a commanding lead only to be waved off would do so again. The only thing I needed to happen was for the tractor engine not to stall out this time.

You can probably guess what happened.

I made a larger than normal bet on a claimer that had given his best effort a week ago. This time, he finished several lengths up the track.



-jp

.

[Jeff P]

Originally Posted by chadk66

you just made the perfect analogy. Your example of the motor putting out identical horsepower is the constant in your study. You can adjust weight and whatever else aside from anything that alters hp and increase your performance. It’s not that way with horses because there is no constant involved. Things change with horses on a near hourly basis. If what you guys claim was true a third grader could make a living off gambling on horses. But I’ll tell you this as a mechanic for many many years given your exact analogy your not gonna make a significant enough performance gain in the quarter mile to hardly recognize it. Hp and weight is only two factors involved in a wide array of things that are involved in laying down good times.

The constant for the horse is subject to its current condition on race day.

It's the max output in foot-pounds of torque the horse is capable of delivering to its hooves when the rider asks for its best at key points during the running of the race.

Yes, it's true that unlike a pickup truck:

A horse's max output might not be known beforehand on race day.

And a horse's max output varies from one race to the next based on its current condition.

But that does not mean the laws of physics do not apply to horses!

Let's revisit the pickup truck example --

I can buy a 2019 Ford F150 4x4 pickup truck that has an 8 foot bed, a curb weight of 5016 lbs, a high output Eco Boost V6 engine that generates 450 horsepower, and a drive train that delivers 510 foot-pounds of torque at the rear wheels.

If were to buy that truck and do custom work on it to get the curb weight down 3% to 4866 lbs:

The engine would still generate the same 450 horsepower, the drive train would still deliver the same 510 foot-pounds of torque at the rear wheels and THE TRUCK WOULD BE ABLE TO ACCELERATE FASTER BECAUSE IT IS LIGHTER.

Likewise, if you reduce the weight of a horse by 3% (whether through Lasix or some other means) while doing nothing to impair the capabilities of its engine, drive train, muscle mass, and energy reserves:

No matter what its max output happens to be on race day because of its current condition:

A HORSE THAT IS 3% LIGHTER WILL BE ABLE TO ACCELERATE FASTER THAN IT OTHERWISE WOULD IF IT WERE 3% HEAVIER.

Does that make sense?


-jp

.

[Robert Fischer]

Fact of the matter is; it's legal, and it's considered a 'must use'.

[Jeff P]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

Fact of the matter is; it's legal, and it's considered a 'must use'.

Absolutely.

But please don't tell me more than 95% of North American thoroughbred starters were treated with it last year because they are bleeders.


-jp

.

[cj]

Two fillies took the Lasix break in the turf race, none in the Pegasus.

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

please don't tell me more than 95% of North American thoroughbred starters were treated with it last year because they are bleeders.

no... The majority use it because it's the considered the norm. It's commonly accepted as an advantage. Unless your horse doesn't tolerate lasix(Runhappy ?), the thing to do is to use it.

We can go in circles, but we have that reality. Even data is tough to read, given that 'intent' is a significant factor that muddies the water.

We keep coming back to the reality that Lasix is standard operating procedure.

Originally Posted by cj

Two fillies took the Lasix break in the turf race, none in the Pegasus.

that is interesting.

[Jeff P]

Agreed.

On all counts...

That the majority use it because it's considered the norm, it's commonly accepted as an advantage, and we have that reality because the thing to do is to use it.

I also agree that intent muddies the waters when you look at the data. (Why waste money on a Lasix shot if you're entering with no real intent to compete?)

I also agree it's interesting that two fillies took the Lasix break in the turf race. But nobody in the Pegasus did.




-jp

.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

Agreed.

On all counts...

That the majority use it because it's considered the norm, it's commonly accepted as an advantage, and we have that reality because the thing to do is to use it.

I also agree that intent muddies the waters when you look at the data. (Why waste money on a Lasix shot if you're entering with no real intent to compete?)

I also agree it's interesting that two fillies took the Lasix break in the turf race. But nobody in the Pegasus did.




-jp

.

It became the norm because it provided a very real edge in my opinion. Obviously that this point with so many using it that is tough to substantiate numerically, but back when that wasn't the case the data was real. Horses didn't "return to their best" after bleeding, they often far exceeded it. Horses that didn't bleed and added it were suddenly running new lifetime tops, often big ones.

The "Champions" book from DRF is a good tool to look up some of these horses. Just check out the 90s era as Lasix became more and more popular. Lasix was definitely providing an edge, and not just a "back to normal, non-bleeding" type of edge. There is a reason trainers started digging deeper and deeper to get horses put on it.

[cj]

Missed it the first time, Channel Maker also taking the weight break in the Pegasus Turf, carrying 117 for Mott.