Ask a Trainer.

[Cannon shell]

Originally Posted by jpren37

Quick thanks to the trainers in this tread for being so forthcoming with your comments. That said I have a question for all of you:

Can you give us your perspective on when a handicapper might be able to spot a horse that's not "well meant" for today's race. Is there something we might look for in the paddock, something stated in the condition book, something about owner/trainer/jockey connections, the past performances etc.

thanks

I would think that studying trainer patterns would be as effective as anything though many trainers don't have enough starts to have a valid statistical summary. If you are at the track just ask the trainer what he thinks. Yeah some can't help but lie but a lot of guys will give you an honest answer.

I ran a horse off of a long layoff at MTH in the Grade 3 this past weekend mostly because the allowance races I entered didn't fill and when I entered MTO the rain suddenly stopped. The we drew a lousy post which forced us to take back in order to not be 5 wide on the 1st turn and if you haven't been following MTH, taking back to last in dirt races is generally a horrible idea. However the horse hadn't run since November and I couldn't see how he could get a decent trip from the outside so taking back, trying to get to the semi-golden rail and getting a race under his belt while hoping for a crazy speed duel was about the best I could do. Technically I didn't tell the jockey not to win but because of the hand we were dealt the tactics employed didn't exactly give us a great chance to win. Had we drawn post 2 we would have surely tried to grab the rail and be up close if not on the lead because of the dynamics of the track and the tactical speed the horse has.

[Magister Ludi]

Originally Posted by Cannon shell

This is nonsense

The idea that 5cc's of lasix before a race will prevent a horse from having the proper amount of calcium for skelatal growth and repair is ludicrous.

EIPH can't be "controlled" in any way, shape or fashion. It is like saying that wearing a seat belt will help control the chance of getting in an car accident. Lasix is given in hope of preventing or lessening the occurrence of EIPH but there is no way to control EIPH through any means. The fact is that a horse can bleed for any number of reasons, many beyond the control of anything other than fate.

Furosemide was formulated to reduce blood calcium which is inherently dangerous in kidney disease. Increased calcium excretion is cause by the useage of furosemide.

A horse needs to build up dense capillary beds in its muscles through aerobic development. That is done only through regular relatively long gallops of from two to five miles throughout his career. With that type of conditioning, there will be little or no EIPH. 4F breezes are not going to "condition" him.

[chadk66]

Originally Posted by OCF

True or False: There's less chicanery at tracks with higher purses. (Or maybe a better way to say it would be there's an inverse relationship between chicanery and purse amount.)

The central rationale would be that if there is a sufficient amount of money to be made from competing in good faith, the temptation to "game the system" in order to also derive income from also cashing big tickets is minimized. By sufficient I mean enough to at least cover expenses and maybe even show a small profit.

I'm guessing True, but I'm much more interested in what trainers think.

Note that I'm not proposing no chicanery, just less.

True

[chadk66]

Originally Posted by jpren37

Quick thanks to the trainers in this tread for being so forthcoming with your comments. That said I have a question for all of you:

Can you give us your perspective on when a handicapper might be able to spot a horse that's not "well meant" for today's race. Is there something we might look for in the paddock, something stated in the condition book, something about owner/trainer/jockey connections, the past performances etc.

thanks

you know that's a very hard question to answer because I never participated in that type of thing. To me the best way would be through the rumor mill. If there's talk that a certain owner/trainer does this type of thing you can look through the pp's and see where the horse ran poorly for four or five straight out's and then suddenly jumped up and won. Seeing this a couple times would turn on a light for me. But man you could wade through alot of pp's looking for this.

[chadk66]

Originally Posted by Cannon shell

This is nonsense

The idea that 5cc's of lasix before a race will prevent a horse from having the proper amount of calcium for skelatal growth and repair is ludicrous.

EIPH can't be "controlled" in any way, shape or fashion. It is like saying that wearing a seat belt will help control the chance of getting in an car accident. Lasix is given in hope of preventing or lessening the occurrence of EIPH but there is no way to control EIPH through any means. The fact is that a horse can bleed for any number of reasons, many beyond the control of anything other than fate.

you are 100% correct. lasix has been proven in my barn to work so many times it's ridiculous. Now that being said, I never ran horses on lasix unless they needed it. we have a hard enough time keeping fluids in these horses without helping to cause the problem unless needed.

[OCF]

Originally Posted by chadk66

True

. Thanks so much

[magwell]

Originally Posted by chadk66

you are 100% correct. lasix has been proven in my barn to work so many times it's ridiculous. Now that being said, I never ran horses on lasix unless they needed it. we have a hard enough time keeping fluids in these horses without helping to cause the problem unless needed.

So your saying you waited for the horses to bleed before you put them on lasix ? when its legal to use it to prevent bleeding ?

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by chadk66

you are 100% correct. lasix has been proven in my barn to work so many times it's ridiculous. Now that being said, I never ran horses on lasix unless they needed it. we have a hard enough time keeping fluids in these horses without helping to cause the problem unless needed.

I've noticed, just from afar as a handicapper, that almost all horses eventually get lasix...and most seem to get it sooner rather than later. Some say that lasix 'masks' other drugs but it seems to still work even if the trainer doesnt do anything else, what's your theory on why lasix might work, my guess would be that it completely clears up all the mucous and junk in the breathing passages and thus, a better breather will perform better.

[lamboguy]

i have a horse that ran 5 times with 5 cc's of lasix and never bled. she bled her last start, maybe because it was humid, or maybe because she went from route to sprint. after she bled, she had to be treated with sulfur to clean out the blood left in her lungs. its really not a pretty sight when a horse bleeds. they could possibly choke on the blood in their lungs. i never liked lasix, but if you are going to allow bleeders to run, you have to have them on something that helps them.

[Cannon shell]

Originally Posted by Magister Ludi

Furosemide was formulated to reduce blood calcium which is inherently dangerous in kidney disease. Increased calcium excretion is cause by the useage of furosemide.

A horse needs to build up dense capillary beds in its muscles through aerobic development. That is done only through regular relatively long gallops of from two to five miles throughout his career. With that type of conditioning, there will be little or no EIPH. 4F breezes are not going to "condition" him.

Horses unlike humans who take lasix daily rarely get treated. Calcium excretion is not an issue.

The idea that a thoroughbred should gallop 5 miles a day is a joke as is the idea that EIPH stems from "undertraining" of less than 20+ miles of training a week.

[Magister Ludi]

Originally Posted by Cannon shell

Horses unlike humans who take lasix daily rarely get treated. Calcium excretion is not an issue.

The idea that a thoroughbred should gallop 5 miles a day is a joke as is the idea that EIPH stems from "undertraining" of less than 20+ miles of training a week.

Lasix causes calcium imbalance:

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...cium-imbalance

In my post, I neither said "5 miles a day" nor "20+ miles of training a week".

[taxicab]

Originally Posted by Magister Ludi

Furosemide was formulated to reduce blood calcium which is inherently dangerous in kidney disease. Increased calcium excretion is cause by the useage of furosemide.

A horse needs to build up dense capillary beds in its muscles through aerobic development. That is done only through regular relatively long gallops of from two to five miles throughout his career. With that type of conditioning, there will be little or no EIPH. 4F breezes are not going to "condition" him.

Wayne Burson......
Going back about 30 years.
If you had a "bad bleeder" in No.Cal you sent your horse to Wayne Burson.
He was a freaking miracle worker with the bad bleeders.
He fixed them.
He had 2 golden rules to getting the bleeders right.
A special diet for the bleeders.
The key to that diet was the removal of alfalfa.
Too much alfalfa equaled bleeding.
And long slow gallops upwards to 5 miles.....
Magister knows of what he speaks.

[chadk66]

Originally Posted by Magister Ludi

Furosemide was formulated to reduce blood calcium which is inherently dangerous in kidney disease. Increased calcium excretion is cause by the useage of furosemide.

A horse needs to build up dense capillary beds in its muscles through aerobic development. That is done only through regular relatively long gallops of from two to five miles throughout his career. With that type of conditioning, there will be little or no EIPH. 4F breezes are not going to "condition" him.

your theory isn't supported by actual fact. here's something for you to ponder. In 1986 I started training. The first horse I received was a horse that was owned by my father. They had given up on the horse because he wasn't getting the job done. The horse was named Night Rover (1982 I believe). He was by Grey Dawn II out of a Buckpasser mare. Bred to the hilt. He was unraced at two probably due to his size. The year before I started training he broke his maiden going 4.5 furlongs. He was so tired after the race he could hardly hold his head up. The trainer then took him to thistledown and ran him four times for 5k. He was beaten by fifteen to twenty lengths every race. So they gave up on him. I acquired him in feb. of 86. I had just finished reading Tom Ivers book "The Fit Race Horse". I was extremely intrigued to say the least. My life was nothing but athletics growing up so I could relate to what Tom was saying. Made perfect sense to me. So I started interval training this horse. Worked him up to five or six miles a day galloping. Once I had a solid foundation in him I started breezing him multiple times in a trip to the track. Just walked and jogged between breezes until his heart rate was where it needed to be. Needless to say this training wasn't very well received at the track. I was scoffed at and ridiculed. But I kept on with him. I had four other horses that I trained what you would consider normally. Wanted to focus and concentrate on just the one horse for starters. After some time I had him built up to working two 6 furlongs works in a row with time to lower heart rate between. To make a long story short The horse won for 12K before the meet ended. I then took him to thistledown one year after his dismal trip there. I won three in a row with him there at 11,500, 15K and wide open allowance. He went on to win well over 100k and won allowance races at cby and was a solid 20K claimer there for a few years. The horse just gave me 110% every time. However, he was still a bleeder and required lasix, even after being trained harder than any horse I've ever seen. Is interval training the best possible way to train a race horse? absolutely. But the problem lies with the economics of it. It is far too costly and way too tough of a sell to owners and your help. And not all horses will hold up to it physically or mentally. I've also done some hybrid interval training with some other horses I received later on that were not performing to their potential. And it worked very well for them also. I could go on and on with stories similar to this but the bottom line is, I do not know of another trainer that puts the miles on their horses that I did. And I still had a fair number of bleeders. I firmly believe that a large percentage of bleeders isn't necessarily due to lack of training but mere hereditary influence.

[chadk66]

Originally Posted by magwell

So your saying you waited for the horses to bleed before you put them on lasix ? when its legal to use it to prevent bleeding ?

when I trained the rules did not allow free use of lasix if you just wanted to use it. Most states required an endoscopic exam witnessed by the state vet to verify the bleeding. Some states even required visible bleeding from the nostrils before you could use lasix. Times have changed greatly in regards to lasix use.

[chadk66]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

I've noticed, just from afar as a handicapper, that almost all horses eventually get lasix...and most seem to get it sooner rather than later. Some say that lasix 'masks' other drugs but it seems to still work even if the trainer doesnt do anything else, what's your theory on why lasix might work, my guess would be that it completely clears up all the mucous and junk in the breathing passages and thus, a better breather will perform better.

I've heard that argument regarding cleaning up mucous and such but I have never seen anything clinical to support it. Lasix simply reduces blood pressure via dehydration. twenty years ago lasix was believed to mask other drugs but todays testings methods have pretty much eliminated that from what I've been able to decipher. I think the lasix use rules of today were put in place for uniformity for the most part.