Taking horses off lasix in certain races IS ANIMAL CRUELTY

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by cj

How could they know if a horse raced on Lasix every time out and didn't bleed through it?

They don't

[classhandicapper]

You could make it requirement that if the track vet suspected a horse bled without Lasix the horse would be checked out and if it did the information recorded in some national database along with the severity. Then you'd have the ability to compile some reasonable national stats on the percentage of horses in the US that bleed without Lasix, degree of bleed, probability of recurrence etc...

You could put Nitro in charge of getting the same stats from Hong Kong (which I'm sure they already have because they are perfect) and compare them.

You could also do things like break it down by direct offspring of each sire, 2nd generation of that sire etc... to see if some lines were worse than others. Professional statisticians could evaluate sample sizes, standard deviations etc.. looking for statistically significant outcomes.

"If" any of the data proved significant, that should in turn impact the market for breeding and buying horses and lead to better outcomes long term.

Even if that's not a good or viable solution, there have to be ways to figure out what's going on, but there will be costs involved. And again, some people will resist because they don't want to know the answers.

I remember reading a rumor that a certain recent Derby winner bled in a couple of his races and that accounted for a couple of his dud performances, but they were trying to keep it quiet. It was probably BS, but we should all know that, including horse players. If you knew a horse bled 2 races back would you take the same price today?

[Andy Asaro]

Twitter

[davew]

Originally Posted by The_Turf_Monster

There are horses at the highest levels that train on lasix, I think they know which of those are inherent bleeders and which ones are just taking it for the weight loss benefit

please explain 'weight loss benefit' - is being dehydrated an advantage for racing?

[cj]

Originally Posted by davew

please explain 'weight loss benefit' - is being dehydrated an advantage for racing?

For sure, because dehydrated equals loss of actual weight.

[The_Turf_Monster]

Originally Posted by davew

please explain 'weight loss benefit' - is being dehydrated an advantage for racing?

Running 30+ pounds lighter with the same muscle mass is the reason nearly every horse runs on lasix. There will be conspiracy theorists that will argue that it masks drugs but it’s a mass x acceleration issue

[foregoforever]

Originally Posted by davew

please explain 'weight loss benefit' - is being dehydrated an advantage for racing?

https://www.paulickreport.com/horse-...he-medication/

This study measured an average 28-pound weight loss from a lasix injection ... along with losses of calcium and other electrolytes. That's between 3 and 4 gallons of urine. The study found that it took 3 days for the horse to recover the lost weight.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by The_Turf_Monster

Running 30+ pounds lighter with the same muscle mass is the reason nearly every horse runs on lasix. There will be conspiracy theorists that will argue that it masks drugs but it’s a mass x acceleration issue

I was just wondering how this applies to boxing.

Boxers dry out to make weight. Then they drink fluids after the weigh-in to get back to their true weight.

According to this theory they would have the same muscle mass and power but be quicker in the ring if they stayed lighter.

Why don't they stay lighter?

There must be a point at which losing a little too much fluid as a percentage of your body weight goes from positive to negative (that point must be well before extreme). I guess the dosage of Lasix controls the amount of water loss and vets have optimized that over time to maximize performance. Otherwise, maybe some horses occasionally throw in clunkers because they are too dehydrated.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by The_Turf_Monster

Running 30+ pounds lighter with the same muscle mass is the reason nearly every horse runs on lasix. There will be conspiracy theorists that will argue that it masks drugs but it’s a mass x acceleration issue

It's not a "conspiracy theory". Lasix is banned AS A MASKING AGENT by international anti-doping authorities. The conspiracy would be an allegation that these folks have some anti-Lasix bias rather than the solid evidence they have.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I was just wondering how this applies to boxing.

Boxers dry out to make weight. Then they drink fluids after the weigh-in to get back to their true weight.

According to this theory they would have the same muscle mass and power but be quicker in the ring if they stayed lighter.

Why don't they stay lighter?

There must be a point at which losing a little too much fluid as a percentage of your body weight goes from positive to negative (that point must be well before extreme). I guess the dosage of Lasix controls the amount of water loss and vets have optimized that over time to maximize performance. Otherwise, maybe some horses occasionally throw in clunkers because they are too dehydrated.

One big difference is your chin is more important than your speed in boxing. The heavier you are the harder it is to knock you down.

[Jeff P]

I'm thinking (other than 100 meter or 200 meter sprinters) boxers and football players have more fast-twitch muscle mass than runners do.

If you are an athlete with a lot of fast-twitch muscle mass you need enough electrolytes (potassium, sodium, calcium, and magnesium) in your system.

Otherwise you risk cramping up.

Once you step into the ring - the last thing on Earth you want is to start cramping up in the middle of a round.

Imo, that's why boxers rehydrate and stay hydrated after the weigh-in.

Hint: They aren't drinking just water.


-jp

.

[classhandicapper]

Related to what you guys are saying, it could have something to do with the stamina component of the sport also.

[classhandicapper]

Well, here you go! I'm not sure I agree with the implied band-aid solution of just running with Lasix again instead of trying to fix the problem long term, but collecting data is an encouraging start to me. We need lots more data and then good long term policy. No band-aids. Band-aid solutions are for politicians, which is why we are always in a mess in this country.

https://www.thoroughbreddailynews.co...ding-incident/

“I am on the board of the Florida HBPA. We are scoping stakes horses–which must run without Lasix at Gulfstream Park–and we're paying for it so we hopefully can all learn something and together make informed and intelligent policy decisions from transparent data going forward. I'd say overall that the overwhelming majority of these horses are bleeding to some degree. The numbers aren't good. Do we really want to do this to our horses? I sure don't.”

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

I'm thinking (other than 100 meter or 200 meter sprinters) boxers and football players have more fast-twitch muscle mass than runners do.

If you are an athlete with a lot of fast-twitch muscle mass you need enough electrolytes (potassium, sodium, calcium, and magnesium) in your system.

Otherwise you risk cramping up.

Once you step into the ring - the last thing on Earth you want is to start cramping up in the middle of a round.

Imo, that's why boxers rehydrate and stay hydrated after the weigh-in.

Hint: They aren't drinking just water.


-jp

.

One other thing to remember is that the boxing thing is kind of a scam anyway. If you go back 80 years ago, the boxers weighed in on the day of the fight. The weigh-in was required by the state for safety reasons (to ensure someone didn't get so big he might seriously injure or kill his opponents) and by promoters for fairness reasons (to ensure both fighters were in the same weight class).

At some point in the latter half of the 20th Century, promoters asked for permission to hold weigh-ins a day before the fight. This WASN'T because it was a better procedure; it was just because they liked the idea of the weigh-in as a separate news hook used to promote the fight. Thus was born the modern weigh-in, with the two fighters staring each other down. It makes for great television.

It was only after that happened that fighters started dehydrating for the weigh-in and rehydrating after. The point was to cheat on the weight limit, not any specific thing about hydration. Because they now have more than 24 hours after the weigh-in before the fight, they can basically train heavier and with more muscle mass for their fight, come down to make weight, and then rehydrate to the weight they were actually training at.

Notably, heavyweight fighters DO NOT do this. Because there's no limit on heavyweights, they just weigh in at whatever weight they are going to fight at anyway. There's no advantage to dehydrating and rehydrating.

[cj]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

Well, here you go! I'm not sure I agree with the implied band-aid solution of just running with Lasix again instead of trying to fix the problem long term, but collecting data is an encouraging start to me. We need lots more data and then good long term policy. No band-aids. Band-aid solutions are for politicians, which is why we are always in a mess in this country.

https://www.thoroughbreddailynews.co...ding-incident/

Certainly not unbiased. Need a truly independent group to do the research.