Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Thoroughbred Horse Racing Discussion > General Racing Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 01-22-2019, 12:44 PM   #76
chadk66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 5,414
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj View Post
I've never said the weight change is the same as a jockey weight. I actually already said the same thing early in the thread, they aren't the same. But to pretend that Lasix doesn't give an advantage over horses that aren't using it goes against every study I've ever seen or done myself.
somebody posted they’re stats earlier in the thread. There was such a small number of non lasix users that it was really not even a big enough sample to draw a conclusion from. Have any of those studies used a horse running on lasix and off lasix on the same track with same track variable with the same temperature and humidity?
chadk66 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-22-2019, 12:50 PM   #77
chadk66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 5,414
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spalding No! View Post
Horses receiving lasix and have feed and water withheld afterward lose anywhere from 3 to 4% body weight. This has been documented in scientific studies.

A 3 to 4% reduction in load carriage means that there is also a 3 to 4% reduction in the energy requirement for the horse to reach a given speed (as compared to horses not receiving lasix). Some would say that is a significant advantage.


This is a non-starter (no pun intended). While additional "dead" weight in the saddle might be considered worse than added body weight, horses that receive lasix are not asked to carry more weight than their non-lasix counterparts.
Do you realize horses body weight can fluctuate 3-4% on a near daily basis? Your making claims with not knowing what the horses weight was prior to every race. And the amount of weight a horse can shed from lasix will vary each time they administer it. A horse has to have adequate fluid to even a given amount. You don’t have any idea what that is from one time to the next. I’ve read numerous studies on this and can find holes in every one of them because you cannot have a controlled variable involving this. From first hand experience with quite a few bleeders I had their performance did not change on or off lasix. Hard to argue with that. And I’ll add several ran their best races off of it.
chadk66 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-22-2019, 01:14 PM   #78
thaskalos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,388
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadk66 View Post
From first hand experience with quite a few bleeders I had their performance did not change on or off lasix. Hard to argue with that. And I’ll add several ran their best races off of it.
Weren't you still training when even more thorough experiments were conducted which proved that first and second-time lasix was indeed a wake up factor...and a significant handicapping concern? How is it that you missed that noteworthy bit of research?
__________________
Live to play another day.
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-22-2019, 01:17 PM   #79
chadk66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 5,414
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos View Post
Weren't you still training when even more thorough experiments were conducted which proved that first and second-time lasix was indeed a wake up factor...and a significant handicapping concern? How is it that you missed that noteworthy bit of research?
first time lasix was a huge bet because horses quit bleeding when given lasix. Not sure what your getting at. Yes lasix prevents bleeding in the vast majority of horses. That’s a known fact.
chadk66 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-22-2019, 01:21 PM   #80
chadk66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 5,414
Let me expand on that further. In those days you couldn’t use lasix without proof of bleeding. I had many horses that were winning at a given level and then one day bled. Got put on lasix. And guess what? Not a single one of them performed any better after getting lasix than they did prior to their bleeding episode. Not one went up in class on lasix. And I don’t even recall if any won first time out on lasix. Probably did but it wasn’t something I recall. Has anybody done a study on the number of horses that have moved up in class significantly once given lasix?
chadk66 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-22-2019, 03:41 PM   #81
dilanesp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadk66 View Post
Let me expand on that further. In those days you couldn’t use lasix without proof of bleeding. I had many horses that were winning at a given level and then one day bled. Got put on lasix. And guess what? Not a single one of them performed any better after getting lasix than they did prior to their bleeding episode. Not one went up in class on lasix. And I don’t even recall if any won first time out on lasix. Probably did but it wasn’t something I recall. Has anybody done a study on the number of horses that have moved up in class significantly once given lasix?

There was a point, at least in California, where Lasix was definitely being used as an anti-bleeding medication. You had to get your horse scoped, and yes, first time Lasix after a bad start could result in the horse waking up.


I have NEVER contended that Lasix can't work as a bleeding treatment. It obviously could, and did.


But at some point, Lasix's performance enhancing capabilities (and masking capabilities) became clear enough that it became important to horsemen to administer the drug to horses who had never established themselves as bleeders. And what did they do? They got the rules changed so that they could dope their horses.


If you are going to have legal Lasix as a bleeding treatment, all you have to do is treat it the same way WADA treats potentially performance enhancing health treatments in other sports. You get to take it, but the treatment is disclosed to and handled under the protocol dictated by the drug-testing agency, with their own doctors involved.


The fact that this was unacceptable to horsemen and they insisted on just putting almost every horse on it shows the bleeding rationale is, at this point, complete BS.
dilanesp is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-22-2019, 03:44 PM   #82
dilanesp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadk66 View Post
so what drugs does it supposedly mask?

Anything that could potentially be detected in a urine test.


Look, I am not a pharmacologist. This is why we have experts like WADA. I think I am allowed to trust them, especially compared to a group of people (horsemen) who often get caught doping their horses even under current protocols, as well as manipulating form for betting coups, getting decrepit horses claimed, etc.


One group is extremely trustworthy. The other is slightly above used car salesman (and operates in a realm where they are surrounded by dishonest people as well). I'll believe WADA.
dilanesp is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-22-2019, 04:04 PM   #83
Saratoga_Mike
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 9,893
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp View Post

One group is extremely trustworthy. The other is slightly above used car salesman (and operates in a realm where they are surrounded by dishonest people as well). I'll believe WADA.
Diuretics are drugs that increase the rate of urine flow and sodium excretion to adjust the volume and composition of body fluids. There are several major categories of this drug class and the compounds vary greatly in structure, physicochemical properties, effects on urinary composition and renal haemodynamics, and site and mechanism of action. Diuretics are often abused by athletes to excrete water for rapid weight loss and to mask the presence of other banned substances. Because of their abuse by athletes, diuretics have been included on The World Anti-Doping Agency's (WADA) list of prohibited substances; the use of diuretics is banned both in competition and out of competition and diuretics are routinely screened for by anti-doping laboratories. This review provides an overview of the pharmacology and toxicology of diuretics and discusses their application in sports. The most common analytical strategies currently followed by the anti-doping laboratories accredited by the WADA are discussed along with the challenges laboratories face for the analysis of this diverse class of drugs.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2962812/
Saratoga_Mike is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-22-2019, 04:28 PM   #84
chadk66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 5,414
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp View Post
There was a point, at least in California, where Lasix was definitely being used as an anti-bleeding medication. You had to get your horse scoped, and yes, first time Lasix after a bad start could result in the horse waking up.


I have NEVER contended that Lasix can't work as a bleeding treatment. It obviously could, and did.


But at some point, Lasix's performance enhancing capabilities (and masking capabilities) became clear enough that it became important to horsemen to administer the drug to horses who had never established themselves as bleeders. And what did they do? They got the rules changed so that they could dope their horses.


If you are going to have legal Lasix as a bleeding treatment, all you have to do is treat it the same way WADA treats potentially performance enhancing health treatments in other sports. You get to take it, but the treatment is disclosed to and handled under the protocol dictated by the drug-testing agency, with their own doctors involved.


The fact that this was unacceptable to horsemen and they insisted on just putting almost every horse on it shows the bleeding rationale is, at this point, complete BS.
it wasn’t performance enhancing capabilities that got trainers/owners to start using it. It was horses that were bleeding but bleeding too deeply to detect with a scope. And then that fostered into using it as a precautionary measure. The general public just took it to a place for all intents and purposes it’s not. If you think dropping a horses weight that minuscule amount, considering the daily fluctuations in horses weight already, is going to somehow enhance their performance I have a bridge I want to sell you. Think about this. You go to the races and see some of these skinny ass horses in the paddock obviously 200 lbs lighter than they should be. If you think 20lbs is magic for horses why the hell aren’t these 200 lb too light horses not kicking the shit out of everybody lol.
chadk66 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-22-2019, 05:19 PM   #85
Saratoga_Mike
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 9,893
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadk66 View Post
it wasn’t performance enhancing capabilities that got trainers/owners to start using it. It was horses that were bleeding but bleeding too deeply to detect with a scope. And then that fostered into using it as a precautionary measure. The general public just took it to a place for all intents and purposes it’s not. If you think dropping a horses weight that minuscule amount, considering the daily fluctuations in horses weight already, is going to somehow enhance their performance I have a bridge I want to sell you. Think about this. You go to the races and see some of these skinny ass horses in the paddock obviously 200 lbs lighter than they should be. If you think 20lbs is magic for horses why the hell aren’t these 200 lb too light horses not kicking the shit out of everybody lol.
You could be right, but I'd guess 95%+ of trainers would disagree with most of what you've said.

From what I've read in the past, you ran a small hands on stable where I'm sure the horses received the best of care. It could be that your sample size is just too small and not statistically telling.
Saratoga_Mike is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-22-2019, 05:27 PM   #86
ultracapper
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadk66 View Post
Let me expand on that further. In those days you couldn’t use lasix without proof of bleeding. I had many horses that were winning at a given level and then one day bled. Got put on lasix. And guess what? Not a single one of them performed any better after getting lasix than they did prior to their bleeding episode. Not one went up in class on lasix. And I don’t even recall if any won first time out on lasix. Probably did but it wasn’t something I recall. Has anybody done a study on the number of horses that have moved up in class significantly once given lasix?
It's only logical that a happy, healthy horse that isn't getting needles stuck in it would be at it's best and happiest just receiving quality daily care.
ultracapper is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-22-2019, 05:33 PM   #87
Jeff P
Registered User
 
Jeff P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: JCapper Platinum: Kind of like Deep Blue... but for horses.
Posts: 5,257
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadk66 View Post
...Think about this. You go to the races and see some of these skinny ass horses in the paddock obviously 200 lbs lighter than they should be. If you think 20lbs is magic for horses why the hell aren’t these 200 lb too light horses not kicking the shit out of everybody lol.
Re: the bolded part of the above quote --

Because a high percentage of the time the difference in weight between those skinny horses and the ones that dust them is muscle mass.

According to an article published in June 29, 2015 on The Paulick Report, the average thoroughbred sheds 28 pounds of water weight (not muscle mass) after being treated with Lasix.

New Furosemide Research Reveals Unexpected Impacts Of The Medication:
https://www.paulickreport.com/horse-...he-medication/

Suppose a 180 pound human athlete takes a diuretic prior to competing in a race, be it cycling or be it track and field, and the diuretic helps him to shed 5.4 pounds of water weight (or 3% of total body weight) and his muscle mass remains unchanged.

Purely from a physics standpoint:

All else being equal, said athlete's final time in said event will be faster as a result of having taken said diuretic.

The Equibase chart data I posted back on page 4, post 50 clearly shows that thoroughbreds treated with Lasix win a higher percentage of their races than those not treated with Lasix.

The difference in win percent between those treated with Lasix and those not treated with Lasix isn't glaring or obscene. But it is noticeable and has been present in the data every single year dating back to the 1980's when I first began compiling horse racing databases.




-jp

.
__________________
Team JCapper: 2011 PAIHL Regular Season ROI Leader after 15 weeks
www.JCapper.com

Last edited by Jeff P; 01-22-2019 at 05:43 PM.
Jeff P is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-22-2019, 07:18 PM   #88
chadk66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 5,414
Quote:
Originally Posted by ultracapper View Post
It's only logical that a happy, healthy horse that isn't getting needles stuck in it would be at it's best and happiest just receiving quality daily care.
I can assure you bleeding during a race is far more traumatic than any needle. You must be one that cant handle shots lol. And believe me getting scoped is far more uncomfortable than a shot by a large margin. But I know what your saying, you think they shouldn't even be vaccinated in fear of inflicting pain.
chadk66 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-22-2019, 07:20 PM   #89
chadk66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 5,414
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff P View Post
Re: the bolded part of the above quote --

Because a high percentage of the time the difference in weight between those skinny horses and the ones that dust them is muscle mass.

According to an article published in June 29, 2015 on The Paulick Report, the average thoroughbred sheds 28 pounds of water weight (not muscle mass) after being treated with Lasix.

New Furosemide Research Reveals Unexpected Impacts Of The Medication:
https://www.paulickreport.com/horse-...he-medication/

Suppose a 180 pound human athlete takes a diuretic prior to competing in a race, be it cycling or be it track and field, and the diuretic helps him to shed 5.4 pounds of water weight (or 3% of total body weight) and his muscle mass remains unchanged.

Purely from a physics standpoint:

All else being equal, said athlete's final time in said event will be faster as a result of having taken said diuretic.

The Equibase chart data I posted back on page 4, post 50 clearly shows that thoroughbreds treated with Lasix win a higher percentage of their races than those not treated with Lasix.

The difference in win percent between those treated with Lasix and those not treated with Lasix isn't glaring or obscene. But it is noticeable and has been present in the data every single year dating back to the 1980's when I first began compiling horse racing databases.




-jp

.
oh so there's good weight and bad weight lol. you guys are too much. I've stated my opinion you guys keep driving yourself nuts if that's what you enjoy
chadk66 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-22-2019, 07:42 PM   #90
Jeff P
Registered User
 
Jeff P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: JCapper Platinum: Kind of like Deep Blue... but for horses.
Posts: 5,257
Yes. I strongly believe that muscle mass - or more specifically - mass of quality muscle relative to body weight standpoint matters in athletic competition. Imo, that includes horse racing.

Imo, most of the ones I see in the paddock matching your description "skinny ass horses in the paddock obviously 200 lbs lighter than they should be" have really low win rates because they are up against it from a lack of mass of quality muscle relative to body weight standpoint. Just as I'd be if I were sprinting against an NFL safety or linebacker.



-jp

.
__________________
Team JCapper: 2011 PAIHL Regular Season ROI Leader after 15 weeks
www.JCapper.com

Last edited by Jeff P; 01-22-2019 at 07:55 PM.
Jeff P is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.