[Easy-Rider 66]

Lasix is a potent diuretic that when administered before a race results in a horse losing on average between 25-30 pounds of weight by race time. A lighter horse can run faster and longer.

In addition, Lasix also masks the use of other performance-enhancing drugs by making it more difficult to catch cheaters through urine and blood testing, which begs the question: Why would almost 100% of horses run on Lasix when only around 5% bleed?

STR: This is a couple of statements from a article on the Paulick Report. If you have any comments on these sentiments would appreciate it. And in your experience would you agree that only about 5% of horses bleed? Thx in advance.

[Easy-Rider 66]

In a move it hopes will provide an added handicapping tool for horseplayers, the Stronach Group, working with Equibase, hopes to provide weight information for horses starting at most of its tracks by the end of summer.
"I saw people using it as a tool; I actually used it myself. (In Hong Kong) it's more perfected, and it's where we want to get to, with the help of Equibase," Ritvo said. "It gives you plus and minus weights—how much did the horse weigh the last time he ran and how much is he today? When you're looking at a horse who has been off three or four months, you'll be able to look back through the program to find what his best performing weight was and what his weight is today. That should be a contributing factor to (whether) he'll run his best race or not."


STR: One last question for now. If you were capping how much credence would you put into the weight of the horse?

[JBEX]

hey str..I realized I have one waiting to be answered so feel a little guilty asking another..but I will anyway and no rush to answer


the clm n3l levels at saratoga...

50,35,20 and 14

the clm n2l levels at saratoga..

40,25 and 16

the open claiming levels..

50,40,32,25,20 and 12

now I don't have pars but I would think an avg 12k open claiming race would be tougher than a clm 50k n3l and 20k open would beat them easy..have a hunch you might disagree with the clm 12k's being better but like to hear what you think off the top of your head..just would like to gage what's next for the horses that get through clm n3l

understand these types of races are made for horses who break their maidens in mdn claiming races..but how about the horse who can run an avg race vs allowance company (midpack all the way or speed and fade to midpack)..I would think these types would be much more dangerous
in these beaten claiming races than horses who just came out of a mdn claiming race..whether they run at the highest level or have to drop a notch or two (vs beaten claimers)..what do you think?

[str]

hey str


in the 60's and 70's did tracks (or just md circuit which you know) get a pretty good turnout on a weekday ?? my involvement didn't begin till the latter part of the 70's (I'm 55) so I missed most of that.
dad wasn't a horse player so I didn't get the real early exposure although he was at the belmont stakes in 73..in the 50's and maybe into the 60's was the track a dress up event for a lot of the attendees ?? when I see pictures it sure looks that way..how times have changed !

My first trip to the track was 1967. My dad, 2 friends of his and me. They all wore sport coats and pretty sure they all wore ties. No tie for me but well dressed. That was Pimlico in the clubhouse. So yes, clubhouse dress was expected to be nice. It was pretty well packed.Or so it seemed when I was 13.
First trip to the grandstand was in 69. Not many ties there.
I think that it had become more casual in the late 60's in the grandstand. We have all seen the pics of the 40's +/- with everyone wearing a hat and well dressed.
I started going a lot in 70,71 and 72 from school ( skipping school that is). My school was coat and tie so we were all dressed well but we were in the grandstand. We would find 3 or 4 seats together at Laurel or Bowie waaay up top in the grandstand. It was about 4/5ths full on a weekday. The outside would be packed while the race was run. Saturdays were very crowded.Sitting together in 3 -4 seats in a row was almost impossible. The old newspaper on the seat trick to save it. Lol.
I think most of the tracks were about the same as far as attendance. Whatever their capacity, they were 3/4's full to full a lot. Even CharlesTown and Shenandoah Downs. The dress in the grandstand was worse there than Md. but the clubhouse was well dressed.
My 1st full year working we went to Monmouth. The clubhouse was coat and tie only.

That was 73 and that did not change as far as I know for a long time. Don't know about today. Probably not.

[str]

Lasix is a potent diuretic that when administered before a race results in a horse losing on average between 25-30 pounds of weight by race time. A lighter horse can run faster and longer.

In addition, Lasix also masks the use of other performance-enhancing drugs by making it more difficult to catch cheaters through urine and blood testing, which begs the question: Why would almost 100% of horses run on Lasix when only around 5% bleed?

STR: This is a couple of statements from a article on the Paulick Report. If you have any comments on these sentiments would appreciate it. And in your experience would you agree that only about 5% of horses bleed? Thx in advance.

Great question Easy and what a hotbed topic that is loaded with opinion on both sides of the debate.

Before I get started , it seems to me that one of the really disturbing things I see in today's world is when parties disagree they are more often than not extremists on both sides. It seems like darn near every statement is to an extreme with as many misleading phrases or half truths as can possibly be thrown in to a discussion as possible.

That said, a lighter horse can NOT necessarily run longer and faster as evidenced by results everyday. So the wording of the statement is terrible. I get what they are TRYING to say . If what they wrote was correct who needs a form? Just bet on the small skinny horse each race right? Lol.
We know that doesn't work.

There was a time in the late 80's and 90's when lasix WAS helping to mask other newer drugs that people were using illegally. Either they were not allowed and going undetected or they were being given after the window of time ( 24 hours for bute and 48 hours for others) before a race when only Lasix is allowed to be administered. Either one was a rule violation.

Testing finally caught up by about 90-95 % of those drugs in the mid to late 90's when a lot more money was committed to testing and new equipment was purchased. Of course, new drugs continued to emerge. But by then , much more money was being put into testing so it helped to offset the new stuff.

One thing that never gets discussed is the testing lab itself. First off, you have to test for a drug for it to show up in almost all cases. Typical testing was for bute, lasix, and if I am not mistaken, about 15+/= other drugs. Some of these were random choices and some were for illegal drugs that had been detected before. Cost only allowed for so much in the way of testing. Most of these tests were for commonly used drugs that every trainer needed to use for sickness, acute lameness from stepping on a pin or something like that ( not getting a limper over to the paddock), etc. Basically drugs that were carried by all vets but only given in emergencies. And there was testing for the obvious against all laws drugs that were forbidden.
For the most part it is my opinion that most positives but certainly not all were simply mistakes and very few were a deliberate attempt to cheat. However some absolutely were for cheating purposes only.
But all that changed in the late 80's when instead of getting a positive and hoping that owners did not leave you, which was what had possibly happened in the past, hell , owners starting seeing multiple positives and wanting to GIVE those trainers their horses. It was incredible. It seemed like very few owners had respect for the game anymore, it was all about winning and if it took cheating, what the hell. Go for it !

I have to tell you Easy, it rocked my world. It really did. I had so much respect for the game and here I am listening to some dumbass say " if you ain't cheatin , you ain't tryin". I wanted to punch that jerk right in his mouth but I had already done that before for something else and taken to the Stewards and had I done it a 2nd time I would have been it deep crap. Not sure if I ever told that story in here. It's actually pretty funny. And I was a lot younger back then. That ship sailed long time ago.
Let me know if I haven't and if you care, it might be worth a read.

Anyway, let's get to the last part of this question. And let me remind everyone that reads this that I am no advocate for horse racing, trainers, lasix or any of that. I am an advocate of the truth and to better understand a game I loved and played as hard as I could within the rules. Period. And I do my very best to try and relay that to all that read this. Please keep that in mind.

Q. 100% run on Lasix, and 5% actually bleed?

A. False. Totally false. If you scoped every horse that ran on lasix today after the race, my guess is that roughly 1/2 would show some signs of bleeding. It can be clearly seen in their lungs with a flexible scope that while feeling uncomfortable or weird for the horse, it does not hurt to do. What is seen is tiny or larger specs of blood on the walls of the lungs or in the nostril area. Many of that roughly 1/2 will only show a minimum amount or a trace as it is referred to of bleeding, but it IS there.
Then we have to ask ourselves how many more would have bled to some degree without lasix? My guess, about 30% more. That makes it about 70-80% IMO.
So the question begs WHY are so many bleeding?
Sad but simple. The breeding industry, both sire and dam, is now diluted with bleeders. And it was not like that in the 60's or much of the 70's before lasix. I clearly remember nice mares that ran but were never bred to for racing purposes because they bled bad enough for it to show without a scope. As for the future sires, the rumor mill would call out who sired bleeders and/or winded horses ( they can't breathe much past 6 furlongs and sometimes less). Lack of oxygen will trigger bleeding about 90% of the time IMO. Most would get only a few mares if any back in that time period.

For a conclusion to this really important topic, let me opine for a minute.

Fans want a clean game. A game that does not run on lasix. I get that. And it is fine with me. BUT... it will take just as long to undo lasix as it has taken lasix to dilute the breeding shed. If it is force fed too quickly, IMO it will result in some ugly results. It IMO should start with G1 and G2 races with no lasix. Rules will need to be altered so horses can go on and off lasix without penalty of time( currently 3rd change is a year I think). Amount of lasix given will need to be in print for customers and all to see. Full transparency can be the only way away from lasix.
After a year or two, include G3 races, then after more time which will be more obvious by then, all Stakes races.
Leave the claimers for last or there will be no horses to fill cards. Leave maidens alone for as many years as it takes to get non lasix using sires and dams back into the breeding shed exclusively or at least in the large majority. That will take 15-20 years at least. Probably twice that, but it has taken 40 years to get where we are WITH lasix.
Now I am sure that I have left plenty out but let's face it, anything involving this can be solved if you try hard enough. Someone can pick this apart if they choose but that is the direction I would recommend going in if I was in the game.

And yes, they can speed up the process by decades if they simply ban lasix but allow a bunch of other drugs to help prevent bleeding. But if the point is to actually clean up the game, doing this would only give off the perception that the game is cleaning up wouldn't it?

Sadly, my idea would cost many millions of dollars to many owners and syndicates but would truly fix the problem. IMO it would be what is best for the PUBLIC as well as the GAME in the long term.

But at what cost? With all the monetary damage it would undoubtedly cause my guess is that racing will take the latter version of outlawing lasix. That being banning lasix but allowing a bunch of bleeding medications that the public will not see or understand.

Either way somebody losses.

It is a really tough problem to try and deal with.

Hope that helps.

[Easy-Rider 66]

Great read STR. Yeah I agree with you about the extreme views that are disseminated on both sides of an issue. A lot of times it is Propaganda imo. Anyway, I only quoted a couple of the authors statements, but I did read the whole article. The synopsis of it was that American racing will be as he called it a "Lone Wolf" because of the use of Lasix. I guess In Europe it is not used? Anyway Thx for the take. And yeah I do not remember you writing about that incident. When you have the time would like to read the story.

[str]

Great read STR. Yeah I agree with you about the extreme views that are disseminated on both sides of an issue. A lot of times it is Propaganda imo. Anyway, I only quoted a couple of the authors statements, but I did read the whole article. The synopsis of it was that American racing will be as he called it a "Lone Wolf" because of the use of Lasix. I guess In Europe it is not used? Anyway Thx for the take. And yeah I do not remember you writing about that incident. When you have the time would like to read the story.

That is true about Europe. It is not used.

Meets are shorter, the climate is better, and their breeding shed was never diluted like ours was and is.

I had read that somewhere so I knew it was from the author.

I will get to the other questions of yours and JBEX's asap.

And I will tell you about that story mentioned as well.

Thanks Easy !

[Easy-Rider 66]

That is true about Europe. It is not used.

Meets are shorter, the climate is better, and their breeding shed was never diluted like ours was and is.

I had read that somewhere so I knew it was from the author.

I will get to the other questions of yours and JBEX's asap.

And I will tell you about that story mentioned as well.

Thanks Easy !

Sounds good. No rush.

[Easy-Rider 66]

Someday those like yourself will come to the realization that if you’re not among the connections, you’re an Outsider playing an Insider’s game. Anyone that can’t rationalize or come to grips with that simple fact will never acquire a inclusive handle on what this game is all about. I believe that this denial may also be one of the root causes for the majority players losing.

Hey STR: No rush on this as I know you have a couple of questions still to answer. But let me ask you this. Do you think that people involved in the game should be allowed to bet? Jockey's/trainers etc. I guess it would be tough to stop it, but do you think it compromises the integrity of the game? And secondly I remember you saying that if you were to handicap and play tournaments your inside connections would have no factor on any possible success. So I would assume you might not agree with the sentiment expressed here on pace adv that most of the public are Outsiders playing an Insiders game? Thx.

[MadTiger]

str:

I just admitted that one of my least favorite race setups (turf) is my most profitable as far as WIN/PLACE.

Here's one for today:

Belmont RACE #8:
#6 Team of Teams CASTELLANO JERKENS

[MadTiger]

Do you think that people involved in the game should be allowed to bet?

If they bet, then you get what I'll call the Pete Rose situation. Some days, Pete didn't bet on the team he was managing. That was a signal that he didn't like their chances that day. He didn't bet against them directly, but he kept his money away from them. Say a horse is at 2/1 as a morning line favorite, but it got out that the connections and their cronies did NOT bet dollar one on him. That situation would be troubling.

[str]

In a move it hopes will provide an added handicapping tool for horseplayers, the Stronach Group, working with Equibase, hopes to provide weight information for horses starting at most of its tracks by the end of summer.
"I saw people using it as a tool; I actually used it myself. (In Hong Kong) it's more perfected, and it's where we want to get to, with the help of Equibase," Ritvo said. "It gives you plus and minus weights—how much did the horse weigh the last time he ran and how much is he today? When you're looking at a horse who has been off three or four months, you'll be able to look back through the program to find what his best performing weight was and what his weight is today. That should be a contributing factor to (whether) he'll run his best race or not."


STR: One last question for now. If you were capping how much credence would you put into the weight of the horse?

I have 2 things to say about this.

First, I want to get this out of the way:

Tim knows what he is talking about. I knew him when I was there and bought a horse or two off of him site unseen when he was training in Florida and I was training in Md. That is just about unheard of on the backside. He came highly recommended from a very close mutual friend. I had no problems or surprises with any horse I ever bought off of him and I consider him a stand up guy. Don't think I actually ever met him. Everything was done over the phone I'm pretty sure. But to me, he is rare air in the racing business.

That said, I have every reason to believe that what he is doing will benefit customers down the road. One key statement and one key word are very important for you to make sure you see and understand. Within his statement what stands out and should be heard loudly by players is the first phrase I highlighted in your quote.

When this starts I think players will over react by trying to implement basic logic within current weight too early without learning about it first and screw themselves out of plays. And because they will probably do this early on many will become bitter. Once that occurs they will get away from it , not want to trust it, and say it's irrelevant. Some people will come up with a theory that the trainer is somehow scheming to cash a big bet or the scales are not right or the groom was standing on the scale or some other excuse.( I've seen this happen time and again when new information is made available). And because of that, they will open the door for people like hopefully you and others that read this and can be patient and willing to try and find an edge within it, who have watched, charted or acknowledged the results, and have a nice understanding of how important it is or not and what tendencies a particular horse or trainer might or might not have.
It will take time for the track to perfect this and that is when you should also try and perfect how you will approach it.

The second highlighted area is the word "should". It SHOULD be a contributing factor. But will it? Well, we don't actually know. Most people will assume that a horse that is 100 pounds lighter than it's last race will be in decline. That would seem to make some basic sense. But does it? Or does the horse simply carry more weight in the winter than the summer or the scales are calibrated differently from track to track or something like that. More weight between seasons will happen when they grow their winter coats and sweat right? IMO horses and trainers will need to be monitored to get the best understanding of this new information.
And for a real Lol, while most might bet against that 100 lb. less horse, maybe the person who wrote that inflammatory sentence about a horse with lasix in the last question from the Paulick report will bet a ton because it is lighter and therefore can run faster and longer. ( Yep Easy, now I am being a dik.) But I couldn't resist. That was a fat pitch right down the middle.

So if it was me, I would NOT use it at all early on for betting purposes. But I definitely would watch it and find a way to understand it. I think it will be well worth a few minutes a race to review it and make some notes to compare after a few months.
In doing so, it has a good chance to make those that test it out on paper be a better handicapper and hopefully it can be a tool to raise a players ROI over time. But let the track and you perfect it as Tim suggests and lets hope "should" be a contributing factor turns into "is" a contributing factor over time.
That is my opinion on it and that is how I would approach it.
Great question !
Hope that helps Easy.

[Easy-Rider 66]

Thx STR. Will take your advice. If the Brisnets one day have the weight info will monitor it and not put too much into the weights intially.

[str]

hey str..I realized I have one waiting to be answered so feel a little guilty asking another..but I will anyway and no rush to answer


the clm n3l levels at saratoga...

50,35,20 and 14

the clm n2l levels at saratoga..

40,25 and 16

the open claiming levels..

50,40,32,25,20 and 12

now I don't have pars but I would think an avg 12k open claiming race would be tougher than a clm 50k n3l and 20k open would beat them easy..have a hunch you might disagree with the clm 12k's being better but like to hear what you think off the top of your head..just would like to gage what's next for the horses that get through clm n3l

understand these types of races are made for horses who break their maidens in mdn claiming races..but how about the horse who can run an avg race vs allowance company (midpack all the way or speed and fade to midpack)..I would think these types would be much more dangerous
in these beaten claiming races than horses who just came out of a mdn claiming race..whether they run at the highest level or have to drop a notch or two (vs beaten claimers)..what do you think?

With all you said I would tend to agree with everything. Maybe, just maybe, a certain 50k nw3 could beat the 12k claimers but I would be shocked if they could complete against open 20's unless the trainer was stealing . And because it is Saratoga, those open 12's are going to be really salty. Of course the nw3 for 50k will be a more solid group than usual as well in theory.

As you know, EVERYBODY wants to win a race at Saratoga. As a result, the fields are much tougher and with that, more competitive and because of that, plenty of juicy prices. For my money it is hands down the best meet in the USA.

I think you will have to adjust these pars for the winter months as winter racing in NY is much easier as you know but for Saratoga, I think you have it pretty well pinned down.

Sorry for the delay and please never feel bad about asking a question. I still enjoy thinking and talking about the track and want to pass things along to those that want to ask. It's always a pleasure JBEX.

[str]

Someday those like yourself will come to the realization that if you’re not among the connections, you’re an Outsider playing an Insider’s game. Anyone that can’t rationalize or come to grips with that simple fact will never acquire a inclusive handle on what this game is all about. I believe that this denial may also be one of the root causes for the majority players losing.

Hey STR: No rush on this as I know you have a couple of questions still to answer. But let me ask you this. Do you think that people involved in the game should be allowed to bet? Jockey's/trainers etc. I guess it would be tough to stop it, but do you think it compromises the integrity of the game? And secondly I remember you saying that if you were to handicap and play tournaments your inside connections would have no factor on any possible success. So I would assume you might not agree with the sentiment expressed here on pace adv that most of the public are Outsiders playing an Insiders game? Thx.

Q. Do you think that people involved in the game should be allowed to bet? Jockey's/trainers etc.

A. The rules say that a jockey can NOT bet on a race they are riding in. Period. They can however be allowed to accept a promissory bet from the owner. What that means is that I and others used to have an owner now and then that thought they would get a stronger ride from a jock if while in the paddock saddling the horse and just before they went out to warm up, the owner would say to the jock something like, I am betting 50.00 across the board for you. ( always wondered why they didn't do that for me, Lol.) I watched that happen several times. I distinctly remember the look on Sandy Hawley's face when the owner said it. He said thank you sir and looked at me and said " like that would matter". I just said something like, sorry Sandy . The entire thing made Sandy feel weird. Me too honestly.

The bottom line is a jock cannot be held liable for a gesture from an owner but in my barn and in my day, no rider ready for a leg up in a race wants to talk about that stuff. It is completely out of place and it breaks the focus and concentration going on moments before the rider leaves the paddock.


A trainer is allowed to bet in a race they are running in but only on their own horse. That is the letter of the rule. So according to the rules if I was training I could bet on my horse to win, place , show or on top of exotics but I could not box an exacta, etc. IMO that would never be enforced because the spirit of the bet is that I feel my horse is going to run real well today. Maybe a horse or two could still beat it but it should run very well.
A trainer is NOT allowed to run a horse and only bet other horses in the race. That would be terrible for obvious reasons.

Q. I guess it would be tough to stop it, but do you think it compromises the integrity of the game?

A. Under the rules , no. Why?
Because just because my horse is the favorite and I don't bet does not at all mean I do not think the horse will win. I would guess that of over 7000 + horses I saddled, with probably at least half and probably two thirds of those under 6-1, and many times the favorite, I probably bet on about 250 +/-, if that. How can that be? Because I had so damn much to do with the owner, watching my horse warm up, watching potential future claims warm up, watching a horse I might have claimed out of the race warm up, watching a horse that was claimed from me a race or two back warm up, talking to the owner before the race, or other owners , trying to find out if my horse got claimed or not, making sure they were fine around the gate and around the pony, or needed a pony next time, etc., etc., etc.
I was running a business while the betting was going on. I couldn't go stand at the window and bet 100.00 on some horse and not watch the field warm up. Had I done so, I might win 500.00 bucks on a bet and lose 15,000 on a claim that had I watched it warm up last race while I was in line, I would have seen something that would have gotten me off that horse.

Over the years I have explained that to people that I know trust what I am telling them and they hear me and believe me. But I have explained it to others that don't know me as well and I can see in their face that they don't believe a word of it. And if I explained this to the crowd at Pace adv. they would go ballistic. Why? Because it is every bettors fantasy to get tomorrow's results today and cash every race. And the next best thing would be to have the ability to pull horses or let them run. The ones that post alot over there are so cynical and so sure that the whole game is fixed that they can't or won't even try to see the truth. They are sure that people fix races whenever possible because that is the 1st thing THEY would try and do if they had the chance. And if that is the way they see it, it must be the way everybody sees it. And therein lies the flaw in the logic.
Having tomorrows results today was my fantasy as well when I was a bettor and before I turned the races into a full time business. But reality is that you just cannot do both and be very good at both. So you go with what supports your family and career and realize that you just don't have time to properly bet , so you don't or at least I didn't. And those few times I did, it was almost always a win bet. There was no time to figure out exotics.
It was not like I wasn't making any money if my horse won and I did not bet. I was doing fine. But every now and them a circumstance arose where I decided to bet some money. Like a blinkers ON horse that was a second time starter and was 50-1. He seemed to come alive with them working and while the work was published fair and square, the way he did what was reported was so much easier and better than previous works, so I bet 20.00 to win. But there was no time as explained earlier for seeing what the exacta was going to pay with all, or the double or whatever. The time was lacking and so was the drive to do all the work. Not at the detriment of my job, which had to come first.

Q. And secondly I remember you saying that if you were to handicap and play tournaments your inside connections would have no factor on any possible success. So I would assume you might not agree with the sentiment expressed here on pace adv that most of the public are Outsiders playing an Insiders game?

A. Well Easy, I think you can think like an insider and understand like an insider but no longer BE an insider. I know that I would not call up a few trainers I know to try and find a winner. Heck, I like money too much to do that. Lol.

But you can certainly think like an insider. And by that I mean , the things to be seen on tape, the understanding of what a jockey or equipment change might be all about or a drop in class or a raise in class when judging the importance of each by who is doing what and when. Identifying patterns the I see maybe because I know the old trainer or if not, what I see by remembering other horses that the same trainer managed the same way.
And just to put your mind at ease, probably 95% of all trainers with a license are not nearly as good a capper as you, JBEX, Mr. GandT and most everyone else in here. They just are not. Plain and simple. Most are terrible. It's not even close. And while I was there, many more trainers did NOT bet at all than did and most of the ones that did, did so in small fashion and were not very good at understanding value.
I was a bit unique in that, I was a bettor before I started walking horses. Very few trainers can say that. And it shows in their betting skills or lack thereof. So while I would think like and possibly analyze a trainer from my training experience, any actual connections would be of no value to me.
While I think I might actually agree with the exact statement said, the public can become an insider if they try. Maybe not as much as spending actual time working but having an understanding of how trainers think can be accomplished by understanding trainers patterns and results of same situation actions by the trainer. It's all about the effort to do so IMO. And being able to ask me anything you want would have to help out as well as far as how to go about doing something or seeing something or what to look for.

I do understand what frustrated bettors are trying to say. Some are thinking certain trainers bet thousands a day and jocks let each other win and they all bet and blah, blah, blah. It's quite a fantasy and 99.9% is all in their head. Think about it. I was one of the top 2,3,4 or 5 trainers in Md. for a good stretch of time. And top 10 for decades. Why would I leave if we were all cutting up all this money every day ?

[str]

str:

I just admitted that one of my least favorite race setups (turf) is my most profitable as far as WIN/PLACE.

Here's one for today:

Belmont RACE #8:
#6 Team of Teams CASTELLANO JERKENS

Great to see you are documenting plays and looking for strengths and weaknesses.

From time to time , I have been really fooled by a hidden strength or weakness in my plays.

Keep up the good work.

[Easy-Rider 66]

Thx Str for the detailed take. Yeah Have to agree that there are plenty of cynical posters across the street. And having your experience as a trainer and your willingness to explain what you see is a great resource. Remember that Poster that said a couple of years ago he did not like your thread because you did not give out winners. BS. This thread has produced plenty of winners for anyone willing to read and understand what you are trying to convey.

[Easy-Rider 66]

Stuart Janney, chairman of The Jockey Club, and Breeders' Cup president and CEO Craig Fravel have written to the Congressional committee that recently held a hearing on the Horseracing Integrity Act of 2017 (H.R. 2651) in rebuttal to the testimony of several witnesses who spoke against the legislation.The Jockey Club and Breeders' Cup are members of the Coalition for Horse Racing Integrity that supports the bill, co-sponsored by Reps Andy Barr (R-KY) and Paul Tonko (D-NY). The Horseracing Integrity Act would create a private, independent regulatory board in association with the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) to oversee all medication regulations, testing and enforcement on a national basis. The bill would also eliminate the race-day administration of the anti-bleeding diuretic furosemide (Lasix).

[str]

Stuart Janney, chairman of The Jockey Club, and Breeders' Cup president and CEO Craig Fravel have written to the Congressional committee that recently held a hearing on the Horseracing Integrity Act of 2017 (H.R. 2651) in rebuttal to the testimony of several witnesses who spoke against the legislation.The Jockey Club and Breeders' Cup are members of the Coalition for Horse Racing Integrity that supports the bill, co-sponsored by Reps Andy Barr (R-KY) and Paul Tonko (D-NY). The Horseracing Integrity Act would create a private, independent regulatory board in association with the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) to oversee all medication regulations, testing and enforcement on a national basis. The bill would also eliminate the race-day administration of the anti-bleeding diuretic furosemide (Lasix).

Here are excerpts from post 2910 that I wrote a few days ago.

"And yes, they can speed up the process by decades if they simply ban lasix but allow a bunch of other drugs to help prevent bleeding. But if the point is to actually clean up the game, doing this would only give off the perception that the game is cleaning up wouldn't it?"

" my guess is that racing will take the latter version of outlawing lasix. That being banning lasix but allowing a bunch of bleeding medications that the public will not see or understand."


As far as a board to regulate what drugs can be given , I think that is fine. But if this is simply a PR game to fool customers, I find that sad .

As far as testing, the state that the races are in already does that and as I explained, it's all about the amount of money provided for testing as to how on top of things the testing will or won't be. If more money is provided for ALL jurisdictions and they are one big independent entity that is well funded, I think that would be great.

As for the enforcement, each state already has it's rules that the Stewards work within. I would say that having one uniform set of rules for every state to have in place would probably be better than having to try and know what each states rules are. That IMO would be great as well.

[JBEX]

hey str

if you don't get to this in time like your opinion anyway..graham motion 2yof first time starter going 7.5f turf msw @ delaware today.. bred and owned by augustin stable,george strawbridge and I'm sure you're familiar with those names..feels like
I've been seeing them forever as breeders...think johnathan sheppard trained a lot for them when he was still involved ..steady fair hill works 3-5f going back to mid may ..nice distance turf pedigree and you beat the sire's sire's sire at mth the week after secretariat won the belmont lol..there's actually not many of that line going forward but the one bigee he did have was monster sire sunday silence who's this one's grand sire

anyway back to the question..graham motion overall is terrible with first time starters on the turf checking in at 5/96..but with the start of saratoga friday i wonder if he fares better starting a horse vs much lesser at delaware
..obviously the dropoff in competition is huge and can see this is a much weaker field then he'd find up north..do you think he wants to win these types more
because he in general has a big edge with what he's coming in with vs going to ny? this horse is not by a major sire (hat trick $5k) but out of a stakes placed street cry mare which is pretty good on the bottom..first foal to race..this would be a below avg pedigree at saratoga

R5 #8 tula (5-1)

[JBEX]

I understand with the numbers he has he can't be too much better at the smaller venues anyway..would have to think though overall he'd like to win a few of these first out vs taking on the wolves up north

[JBEX]

indiana downs has a state bred mdn turf sprint for 2yo in R5..I noticed a 1st time starter out of an affirmed dam..just as an aside the connections are frequent breeder owner trainer's there..I was amazed to see affirmed's name considering he'd was foaled 43 years ago..turns out he passed away in jan 2001 and the dam was foaled march of that year..maybe why she was named (dam) miramar miracle...her foal obviously was in 2016 so guessing this will be her last and appropriately named "beentheredonethat" lol

dam was unraced but has produced 6 winners from as many starters including 3 turf winners..this is the first by this sire tizdejavue who tends to get sprinters and is average turf

it's R5 #10 (10-1)

[JBEX]

indiana downs has a state bred mdn turf sprint for 2yo in R5..I noticed a 1st time starter out of an affirmed dam..just as an aside the connections are frequent breeder owner trainer's there..I was amazed to see affirmed's name considering he'd was foaled 43 years ago..turns out he passed away in jan 2001 and the dam was foaled march of that year..maybe why she was named (dam) miramar miracle...her foal obviously was in 2016 so guessing this will be her last and appropriately named "beentheredonethat" lol




dam was unraced but has produced 6 winners from as many starters including 3 turf winners..this is the first by this sire tizdejavue who tends to get sprinters and is average turf

it's R5 #10 (10-1)

her half sister running in a 3yo filly state bred stakes at a mile on the turf.. R7
#4 miracles take time (8-1)

in R8 same as above except for the boys they have another horse also bred, owned and trained by them
#4 redyornothereicome (8-1)..dam also double m's but this time because dam sire's mizzen mast more than likely lol


both #4 and 8-1... geez


my 4th post in your thread today just so you don't miss the first one

[BIGDAY]

Heading to Canterbury Park tonight.

Rain in forecast and could be heavy at times. Going to see some good mudders possibly.

[str]

hey str

if you don't get to this in time like your opinion anyway..graham motion 2yof first time starter going 7.5f turf msw @ delaware today.. bred and owned by augustin stable,george strawbridge and I'm sure you're familiar with those names..feels like
I've been seeing them forever as breeders...think johnathan sheppard trained a lot for them when he was still involved ..steady fair hill works 3-5f going back to mid may ..nice distance turf pedigree and you beat the sire's sire's sire at mth the week after secretariat won the belmont lol..there's actually not many of that line going forward but the one bigee he did have was monster sire sunday silence who's this one's grand sire

anyway back to the question..graham motion overall is terrible with first time starters on the turf checking in at 5/96..but with the start of saratoga friday i wonder if he fares better starting a horse vs much lesser at delaware
..obviously the dropoff in competition is huge and can see this is a much weaker field then he'd find up north..do you think he wants to win these types more
because he in general has a big edge with what he's coming in with vs going to ny? this horse is not by a major sire (hat trick $5k) but out of a stakes placed street cry mare which is pretty good on the bottom..first foal to race..this would be a below avg pedigree at saratoga

R5 #8 tula (5-1)

He might hope to win 1st out because he knows of a possible class edge but he trains firsters pretty much all the same.

I would lean more towards him feeling that this horse was a cut below his others and thus the start at Delaware was in order. If he felt the horse could win in NY, he would have started it out there.

Knowing trainer stats like that, and if you use my rationale of why he ran whichever horse where, while he won't always be right, he will be right much more than he isn't as horses can fool a trainer before there 1st race sometimes.

All that said, he would be a toss in yesterday's race which is a huge edge going in if you are correct which I think you were. Always nice to toss a favorite which I assume he was. Think I saw the results but not the chart.

When you think Graham you think relax which usually becomes closer.
When you think Wes Ward you think speed.
When you think Salzman in Md. you think speed.
And if you think L. Gaudet you think speed or position.

Knowing this stuff going in is a real solid edge IMO.

Nice job JBEX.

[str]

I understand with the numbers he has he can't be too much better at the smaller venues anyway..would have to think though overall he'd like to win a few of these first out vs taking on the wolves up north

Like to win, sure.

Train them differently, no.

All his babies gallop and work in sets of 2,3,4.

He has all of them work slower early , relax and finish.

That is his style and I doubt he will ever change.

[str]

her half sister running in a 3yo filly state bred stakes at a mile on the turf.. R7
#4 miracles take time (8-1)

in R8 same as above except for the boys they have another horse also bred, owned and trained by them
#4 redyornothereicome (8-1)..dam also double m's but this time because dam sire's mizzen mast more than likely lol


both #4 and 8-1... geez


my 4th post in your thread today just so you don't miss the first one

Gotta be a pattern of how they run early on somewhere. Sounds like they do this every year there.

Might find a hidden gem in a certain situation like blks. on or 1st time lasix or 1st on the stretch. Gotta be something there I would think. Keep digging. You are liable to find something with that outfit.

[JBEX]

He might hope to win 1st out because he knows of a possible class edge but he trains firsters pretty much all the same.

I would lean more towards him feeling that this horse was a cut below his others and thus the start at Delaware was in order. If he felt the horse could win in NY, he would have started it out there.

Knowing trainer stats like that, and if you use my rationale of why he ran whichever horse where, while he won't always be right, he will be right much more than he isn't as horses can fool a trainer before there 1st race sometimes.

All that said, he would be a toss in yesterday's race which is a huge edge going in if you are correct which I think you were. Always nice to toss a favorite which I assume he was. Think I saw the results but not the chart.

When you think Graham you think relax which usually becomes closer.
When you think Wes Ward you think speed.
When you think Salzman in Md. you think speed.
And if you think L. Gaudet you think speed or position.

Knowing this stuff going in is a real solid edge IMO.

Nice job JBEX.

watch the race when get a chance str .. you can only appreciate his effort that way

[str]

Heading to Canterbury Park tonight.

Rain in forecast and could be heavy at times. Going to see some good mudders possibly.

You probably know but speed usually does very well in the mud. Grey horses typically run well. Their softer than normal feet really enjoy a mud as well as grass surfaces. Any horse with a white foot ( actually flesh colored) will typically move up on an off track.

If they graded in anticipation of the rain, the rail should be nice. Look just under the rail towards the infield about a foot or two where it bends in and hoof prints can not hit. If it looks smooth all the way down the stretch and past the wire towards the clubhouse turn, they very recently scraped the track as the road grader blade starts about a foot or two under the rail on the first swipe around.
If it is all messed up, the rail could be deader than the outside due to the cushion sliding towards the rail over time due to the pitch or angle of the surface.
Keep an eye on that Bigday.

Good luck !

[mrginandtonic]

You probably know but speed usually does very well in the mud. Grey horses typically run well. Their softer than normal feet really enjoy a mud as well as grass surfaces. Any horse with a white foot ( actually flesh colored) will typically move up on an off track.

If they graded in anticipation of the rain, the rail should be nice. Look just under the rail towards the infield about a foot or two where it bends in and hoof prints can not hit. If it looks smooth all the way down the stretch and past the wire towards the clubhouse turn, they very recently scraped the track as the road grader blade starts about a foot or two under the rail on the first swipe around.
If it is all messed up, the rail could be deader than the outside due to the cushion sliding towards the rail over time due to the pitch or angle of the surface.
Keep an eye on that Bigday.

Good luck !

Good day Sir, speaking of “white foot”, I once heard that a horse that “4 white feet” are rare and very special. It is a must bet if you see one. Any truth to that?

[str]

watch the race when get a chance str .. you can only appreciate his effort that way

Just saw it.

Certainly did get all the worst of it into the 1st turn.

That was brutal.

[str]

Good day Sir, speaking of “white foot”, I once heard that a horse that “4 white feet” are rare and very special. It is a must bet if you see one. Any truth to that?

They are somewhat rare. Not sure about a must bet but maybe in the mud or on turf.

I saw my first one at CharlesTown way back when I was a pup.

Think his name was Daddy Rabbit. Pretty cool name under the circumstances.

[mrginandtonic]

They are somewhat rare. Not sure about a must bet but maybe in the mud or on turf.

I saw my first one at CharlesTown way back when I was a pup.

Think his name was Daddy Rabbit. Pretty cool name under the circumstances.

Thank you sir, I think that he was referring to turf races.

[str]

Thank you sir, I think that he was referring to turf races.

For the turf, I would tend to agree with that MrGandT.

[JBEX]

hey str

I handicap a msw and I like a first time starter..the horse is 5-1 ml
and I feel the public will probably
bet him down to around 7-2..the horse winds up going off at 7-1..assuming the person who's capping the race has at least an educated opinion how much does it bother you that this horse is going off seemingly too high ? do you feel over time the fact that you're getting the higher odds even out
the cold on the board ? I mean i'm not going to lose in all these situations and when I do cash I'll be doing it at a good price..i want to keep this example at big tracks so it takes more money to get the horse bet down