|
|
09-06-2020, 12:50 PM
|
#46
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC
I would say that would defy all probabilities with 34 states siding with drug using owners and trainers.
I assume that state regulators act in the best interests of the state.
|
That's the race to the bottom point. All it actually takes is a couple to side with the horsemen. Then everyone else follows suit because they can't lose horses to the other states.
The most obvious example of where this happened was Lasix. Once a few states decided to allow Lasix and that they weren't going to require proof of bleeding, detention barns, etc., the floodgates opened and other states were forced to go along. New York held out for as long as it could, but in the end, even they had to cave.
|
|
|
09-06-2020, 01:01 PM
|
#47
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,285
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp
That's the race to the bottom point. All it actually takes is a couple to side with the horsemen. Then everyone else follows suit because they can't lose horses to the other states.
The most obvious example of where this happened was Lasix. Once a few states decided to allow Lasix and that they weren't going to require proof of bleeding, detention barns, etc., the floodgates opened and other states were forced to go along. New York held out for as long as it could, but in the end, even they had to cave.
|
Could it be that there just isn't a consensus on what needs to be done regarding drugs?
__________________
Best writing advice ever received: Never use a long word when a diminutive one will suffice.
|
|
|
09-06-2020, 01:56 PM
|
#48
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC
Could it be that there just isn't a consensus on what needs to be done regarding drugs?
|
No, because even now plenty of people in the sport oppose raceday furosemide and many countries ban it.
|
|
|
09-06-2020, 02:23 PM
|
#49
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,285
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp
No, because even now plenty of people in the sport oppose raceday furosemide and many countries ban it.
|
Apparently plenty of people also support race day furosemide. If not, please list the people that are standing in the way banning race day use. You can start in California.
__________________
Best writing advice ever received: Never use a long word when a diminutive one will suffice.
|
|
|
09-07-2020, 12:47 PM
|
#50
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,943
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by airford1
Mine too
Name one thing the Government managed well?
|
TVA, National Interstate system. It's a couple things anyway. Old things.
|
|
|
09-07-2020, 01:43 PM
|
#51
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC
Apparently plenty of people also support race day furosemide. If not, please list the people that are standing in the way banning race day use. You can start in California.
|
I don't doubt that plenty of people support race day Lasix. The thing is, they are horsemen.
One of the reasons the World Anti-Doping Agency exists is because you have to separate your regulation of a sport from the participants. If you put coaches and athletes in charge of doping policy, or people who are close to coaches and athletes, they won't do anything about doping. If you put the player's union in charge of doping policy in baseball, well, they have members who like hitting 60 home runs.
So what you do is you put people in charge who are distant and have no personal relationship with anyone in the sport. All they care about is the doping issue.
We have a situation where a bunch of powerful horsemen are making a lot of money with their big win percentages produced by doping. And states have to cater to them. To stop doping, we need to curb their influence. Federalizing is one way to do that.
|
|
|
09-07-2020, 04:38 PM
|
#52
|
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 16,921
|
Dilanesp,
The problem is that with such a high percentage of horses who really need lasix (or similar), if it was removed now there would be about 60% less horses.
Simply put, there would be no horses to run races.
IMHO, it would need to be a gradual process of removal, and the incentive would need to be extra purse money for horses running without lasix.
|
|
|
09-07-2020, 08:26 PM
|
#53
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,285
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp
I don't doubt that plenty of people support race day Lasix. The thing is, they are horsemen.
One of the reasons the World Anti-Doping Agency exists is because you have to separate your regulation of a sport from the participants. If you put coaches and athletes in charge of doping policy, or people who are close to coaches and athletes, they won't do anything about doping. If you put the player's union in charge of doping policy in baseball, well, they have members who like hitting 60 home runs.
So what you do is you put people in charge who are distant and have no personal relationship with anyone in the sport. All they care about is the doping issue.
We have a situation where a bunch of powerful horsemen are making a lot of money with their big win percentages produced by doping. And states have to cater to them. To stop doping, we need to curb their influence. Federalizing is one way to do that.
|
Many people believe Lasix is medication and not doping. I guess you can't trust those people who work with horses everyday to make good decisions about their horses.
Using Lasix isn't doping. Everybody knows who is using and who isn't. Do you really believe that Lasix is what makes these "powerful horsemen" win races?
__________________
Best writing advice ever received: Never use a long word when a diminutive one will suffice.
|
|
|
09-08-2020, 02:25 AM
|
#54
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 3,641
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz
The problem is that with such a high percentage of horses who really need lasix (or similar), if it was removed now there would be about 60% less horses.
Simply put, there would be no horses to run races.
|
Breeding bleeders for careers on the track probably isn't a good idea, then.
If the rest of the horses in the world don't need it to race and can still fill cards, then I tend to think of our use of it as an aberration.
aberration: "a departure from what is normal, usual, or expected, typically one that is unwelcome. "
I've read a lot of interviews with trainers the world over who don't use drugs and apparently, they adapt their horse training methods to that model. Maybe they can give seminars.
Last edited by clicknow; 09-08-2020 at 02:26 AM.
|
|
|
09-16-2020, 07:16 PM
|
#55
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 20,625
|
Here's an update
https://www.drf.com/news/near-certai...host-questions
Quote:
A fear among horseplayers is that states, under the lobbying of tracks and horsemen who are already operating on thin margins, will look to the takeout to raise their shares of the authority’s budget. There’s nothing in the bill to stop this, according to officials. Lear said that he, “personally, would not like to see that.”
|
__________________
"Unlearning is the highest form of learning"
Last edited by classhandicapper; 09-16-2020 at 07:21 PM.
|
|
|
09-24-2020, 05:50 PM
|
#56
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 15,125
|
|
|
|
09-25-2020, 09:58 AM
|
#57
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC
Many people believe Lasix is medication and not doping. I guess you can't trust those people who work with horses everyday to make good decisions about their horses.
Using Lasix isn't doping. Everybody knows who is using and who isn't. Do you really believe that Lasix is what makes these "powerful horsemen" win races?
|
Using Lasix is doping. And horsemen aren't trustworthy for the same reason the baseball players weren't trustworthy during the steroid era.
|
|
|
09-25-2020, 12:00 PM
|
#58
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,285
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp
Using Lasix is doping. And horsemen aren't trustworthy for the same reason the baseball players weren't trustworthy during the steroid era.
|
Doping is a pejorative term. In that Lasix is a legal medication in most jurisdictions I would disagree with your declaration.
__________________
Best writing advice ever received: Never use a long word when a diminutive one will suffice.
|
|
|
09-29-2020, 09:41 PM
|
#59
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 15,125
|
|
|
|
09-29-2020, 10:05 PM
|
#60
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC
Doping is a pejorative term. In that Lasix is a legal medication in most jurisdictions I would disagree with your declaration.
|
Doping is an appropriately pejorative term. "Legal medication" is spin.
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|