Horse Racing questions and answers

[str]

saw she was pulled up at the 5/16 but said in the chart she was walked off..hopefully nothing too serious

I started to say something about her in the response after her 1st race but thought better of it. I probably should have but better late than never.
When we see a horse that is supposed to be a speed horse, and not as much so for a firster although it can be, but certainly a horse with some previous form, that breaks poorly and more importantly, shows little life after that poor break, it is a huge red flag. Now not if the horse is rated hard and fighting the rider but what I mean is very willing to not extend itself and seems to have little interest. When you see that, often times the horse is trying to tell you something.
In her first start, I saw that the comments said she was rated hard after flipping her head at the break . I could not see it up close as the camera was far away, but it sure did not look like that to me. Maybe it was. With that camera distance, binoculars were needed.
I limited my initial thought comments basically because I could not see everything well enough to make a harsh judgement. Basically, I cleaned up what I first wrote and kept it kind of bland. As a result, I thought one of two things were going to happen yesterday. She was going to break much better and be involved early or she was going to run another lackluster race. So not seeing the race this time, I rely on the charts. Looks like she ran a disinterested race again until she took a bad step. The 5/16ths pole is an odd place to take a bad step unless something is starting to unravel. It was not time to switch leads. So without seeing it, or her action early, I'm left to guess .
My guess is she has had a problem that maybe it showed and they missed it, or maybe it did not show, but either way, she knew about it. I also feel that the problem was there in her first race as well. Why?

Horses that are bred like her just don't decide to not be interested early in debut races. And while it could have been the dirt spray, it was not that for the 1st 10 seconds. She showed no interest in her first start. There has to be a reason for that.

Sometimes trainers look and look but just cannot find what is on the horses mind. The problem just doesn't show heat or filling, they jog sound on pavement, but it exists. I hate to second guess as that is really unfair from where I sit. So I have to think it is that.
I sure hope so. I want to give the trainer the benefit of the doubt just as I would hope someone else would have given me. But either way, she was not right for either race in hindsight. They might even know of the potential problem area but Xrays just do not show anything. That can happen. But after yesterday, it will probably show now. If not, she needs to go to Rod and Riddle or somewhere where they can do a full body scan scan and get to the bottom of what the problem is. They have enough money in her at this point that all parties deserve to know what is going on. I'm pretty sure the horse has known for awhile now.

[JBEX]

I started to say something about her in the response after her 1st race but thought better of it. I probably should have but better late than never.
When we see a horse that is supposed to be a speed horse, and not as much so for a firster although it can be, but certainly a horse with some previous form, that breaks poorly and more importantly, shows little life after that poor break, it is a huge red flag. Now not if the horse is rated hard and fighting the rider but what I mean is very willing to not extend itself and seems to have little interest. When you see that, often times the horse is trying to tell you something.
In her first start, I saw that the comments said she was rated hard after flipping her head at the break . I could not see it up close as the camera was far away, but it sure did not look like that to me. Maybe it was. With that camera distance, binoculars were needed.
I limited my initial thought comments basically because I could not see everything well enough to make a harsh judgement. Basically, I cleaned up what I first wrote and kept it kind of bland. As a result, I thought one of two things were going to happen yesterday. She was going to break much better and be involved early or she was going to run another lackluster race. So not seeing the race this time, I rely on the charts. Looks like she ran a disinterested race again until she took a bad step. The 5/16ths pole is an odd place to take a bad step unless something is starting to unravel. It was not time to switch leads. So without seeing it, or her action early, I'm left to guess .
My guess is she has had a problem that maybe it showed and they missed it, or maybe it did not show, but either way, she knew about it. I also feel that the problem was there in her first race as well. Why?

Horses that are bred like her just don't decide to not be interested early in debut races. And while it could have been the dirt spray, it was not that for the 1st 10 seconds. She showed no interest in her first start. There has to be a reason for that.

Sometimes trainers look and look but just cannot find what is on the horses mind. The problem just doesn't show heat or filling, they jog sound on pavement, but it exists. I hate to second guess as that is really unfair from where I sit. So I have to think it is that.
I sure hope so. I want to give the trainer the benefit of the doubt just as I would hope someone else would have given me. But either way, she was not right for either race in hindsight. They might even know of the potential problem area but Xrays just do not show anything. That can happen. But after yesterday, it will probably show now. If not, she needs to go to Rod and Riddle or somewhere where they can do a full body scan scan and get to the bottom of what the problem is. They have enough money in her at this point that all parties deserve to know what is going on. I'm pretty sure the horse has known for awhile now.

guess it goes to show that not all problems can be spotted by the trainer before the race..it makes sense also that a horse who cost a lot relative to the pedigree and worked a 21 and change at the sales is not able to show some early lick out of the gate is a bad sign..seems like she'll be on a break for a while now and hopefully they'll figure it out..guess if they don't she might be a good broodmare prospect down the road ..thanks str

[JBEX]

hey str


in R2 at gulfstream (if you have time) want to see what you think of #2 uncle pip (10-1)..my choice

[Easy-Rider 66]

Hey STR: not sure if anyone has asked you this question but do you have a favorite or two race caller that you like? I posted a call on the Arlington Million won by John Henry by a caller that I am not sure of his name. before my time following the game. will google now and see if I can find out who he was. thx.

[Easy-Rider 66]

Phil GeorgeffPhil Georgeff (/ˌdʒɔːrˈdʒɛf/) (January 1, 1931 – November 7, 2016) was a racetrack announcer from the Chicago area. Known as "the voice of Chicago racing," he called races at venues including Arlington Park, Hawthorne Race Course, and Sportsman's Park from 1959 to 1992.

[str]

hey str


in R2 at gulfstream (if you have time) want to see what you think of #2 uncle pip (10-1)..my choice

I think if you get 10-1 you would be very happy with that. I would assume it would be less. The race is cheap babies and reading between the lines is about all you can do with limited form and many horses just figuring things out. The upside of added distance and drop is good. The 4 horse came out of Uncle Pip's race to win next out. That's good. Also, he came home in 13 3/5ths going 7/8ths which is fine for these types. But in that race, the pace must have collapsed going from 45 3/5ths to 1:12 3/5ths. Thats 27 seconds. Did they really run that race with the last 3/8's in 40 4/5ths?
So how much of that race was him and how much was the pace? A replay would help a lot with that. The other thing that's ok I guess but would prefer not to see is 4 riders in 4 races including today. That's me having a trainer thing I guess. Always trying to make an imperfect storm a perfect one. Lol.
I also see the 2 turf duds he ran and the only dirt race was a winner. Have to think the quality of the fields had a lot to do with that. A replay would confirm that as well. If the replay showed he did not trust the turf at all, that would make a very solid case for your horse no doubt.
As for the others, some of the speeds look ok but none are really bred to want to go this far.
All in all, the pace should come back to this horse unless someone Edgar can walk the dog early. The outside horse could show something but if it does not switch leads again like it didn't last time, that one should be slow late as well. The 3 horse ran kind of like your pick last time, that is, jumping up off poor form to figure it out. And it's 1st time gelding which I like but 12 days after it's last race?? That makes no sense at all. Typically, you would wait 2-3 days after a race to geld one, at least that was how I was taught, which would mean 9 days ago??
That sounds crazy to me. The tranquilizer might not have cleared the horses system yet. Certainly plenty of swelling still . Something seems wrong with that.

Good luck if you play. I'll try and watch the race if possible.

[JBEX]

wow lot's of great insight..mine was much simpler lol just turf to dirt and a drop did it in his win ..also liked the way he handled 7f and now gets a 1turn mile (which they don't have at gpw)..think the even run back of the pack on the turf last out a good conditioner..I'm not viewing that as a negative since he's back on dirt again ..I mean his dirt race was so impressive i question how serious they were about the turf..about 20 mins away and thanks for the feedback str

[str]

wow lot's of great insight..mine was much simpler lol just turf to dirt and a drop did it in his win ..also liked the way he handled 7f and now gets a 1turn mile (which they don't have at gpw)..think the even run back of the pack on the turf last out a good conditioner..I'm not viewing that as a negative since he's back on dirt again ..I mean his dirt race was so impressive i question how serious they were about the turf..about 20 mins away and thanks for the feedback str

Did not get to see the race but it looks like the 2 speeds dueled early, neither had anything left in the tank which made perfect sense and your horse ran his race. Paid 15 or so. Great pick JBEX ! Sure seems easy when it all works out like you figured it might doesn't it? Lol.

[str]

Hey STR: not sure if anyone has asked you this question but do you have a favorite or two race caller that you like? I posted a call on the Arlington Million won by John Henry by a caller that I am not sure of his name. before my time following the game. will google now and see if I can find out who he was. thx.

Loved the old Charlestown announcer Costy Caras from when I was a kid and I know there are alot of famous, callers that we can choose from but for me it was Robin Burns. He was a legend calling harness and tried the thoroughbreds in Maryland back in the day. He really struggled with it for about a month but once he got the hang of it, he was GREAT. Extremely entertaining with his calls. Really nice guy as well.

[JBEX]

Did not get to see the race but it looks like the 2 speeds dueled early, neither had anything left in the tank which made perfect sense and your horse ran his race. Paid 15 or so. Great pick JBEX ! Sure seems easy when it all works out like you figured it might doesn't it? Lol.

thanks str..yeah you definitely feel like you've figured it out sometimes after a nice winner ..I'm pretty grounded about this stuff though..not as good as your good days or as bad as your bad ones..truth lies somewhere in the middle

[str]

thanks str..yeah you definitely feel like you've figured it out sometimes after a nice winner ..I'm pretty grounded about this stuff though..not as good as your good days or as bad as your bad ones..truth lies somewhere in the middle

It sure does JBEX !

[Easy-Rider 66]

Loved the old Charlestown announcer Costy Caras from when I was a kid and I know there are alot of famous, callers that we can choose from but for me it was Robin Burns. He was a legend calling harness and tried the thoroughbreds in Maryland back in the day. He really struggled with it for about a month but once he got the hang of it, he was GREAT. Extremely entertaining with his calls. Really nice guy as well.

ok thx STR not familiar with those gentlemen as way before my time following the game. some of the harness callers are pretty good though. Interesting that Mr. Burns made the transition to the t-breds.

[JBEX]

hey str

mahoning valley

R8 #6 unckejackamo (20-1)

wanted your opinion on this horse ..2yo msw first time starter..homebred with a dam whose been very productive including winning with 2yo's..freshman sire i believe who's a son of uncle mo ,a way above avg debut sire of high class..the trainer is awful (understatement) with debut horses..on the others

1 ..don't think should be here showing enough flashes of talent in ny

5,8..they've both run well but I'm willing to get beat by these types in these races..want something not obvious at a price

the crux of my question is at a price do you think this trainer might be thinking;hey I've got something to work with here..lets have him ready to go as he might have a shot first out..his bad stats will help bring a good price


I understand of course that even with decent pedigree info relative to this field that he may not be a runner anyway

[JBEX]

hey str

mahoning valley

R8 #6 unckejackamo (20-1)

wanted your opinion on this horse ..2yo msw first time starter..homebred with a dam whose been very productive including winning with 2yo's..freshman sire i believe who's a son of uncle mo ,a way above avg debut sire of high class..the trainer is awful (understatement) with debut horses..on the others

1 ..don't think should be here showing enough flashes of talent in ny

5,8..they've both run well but I'm willing to get beat by these types in these races..want something not obvious at a price

the crux of my question is at a price do you think this trainer might be thinking;hey I've got something to work with here..lets have him ready to go as he might have a shot first out..his bad stats will help bring a good price


I understand of course that even with decent pedigree info relative to this field that he may not be a runner anyway

sire broke his maiden vs specials in May at Belmont as a 2yo..won by 4+ lengths @ paid $2.30.lost the Tremont next start but then won the sanford at saratoga in start 3..his figure breaking his maiden was significantly faster then what he ran in the sanford

[str]

hey str

mahoning valley

R8 #6 unckejackamo (20-1)

wanted your opinion on this horse ..2yo msw first time starter..homebred with a dam whose been very productive including winning with 2yo's..freshman sire i believe who's a son of uncle mo ,a way above avg debut sire of high class..the trainer is awful (understatement) with debut horses..on the others

1 ..don't think should be here showing enough flashes of talent in ny

5,8..they've both run well but I'm willing to get beat by these types in these races..want something not obvious at a price

the crux of my question is at a price do you think this trainer might be thinking;hey I've got something to work with here..lets have him ready to go as he might have a shot first out..his bad stats will help bring a good price


I understand of course that even with decent pedigree info relative to this field that he may not be a runner anyway

I remember that back when I first started training I was at Pimlico. I was stabled with a Hall of Fame trainer in Henry Clark. Next door was a future Breeders Cup trainer, Frank Alexander. Two barns down was Bud Delp, and in the other direction Sonny Hine. Another barn or two down was Dickie Dutrow, Dickie Small, and the list goes on and on. So , because of all these accomplished horsemen all around me, I assumed that every trainer had detailed plans, thought of all the little things, and were basically " all over" their stock with a fine toothed comb all the time. I mean, that is how I was taught and that is all I saw. So everybody must be like this.

Then, I went to Bowie. And having been there often as an employee, it was my first time there as a trainer. What I saw was totally different from Pimlico. Yes, some of the big names were there but there were a lot of lesser known trainers. Some with a few horses, and some with many horses. But they were lesser known because, well, they just didn't win that much. And watching those people train was a real eye opener for me.

I don't want to sound judgemental but it will be hard not to. Simply put, they were not even in the same league with what I understood to be " trainers". JBEX, it wasn't even close. Filth, clutter, their horses looked like crap, etc., etc. You get my point.

That's when I learned that for some training was a profession and for others it was, I'm not even sure what to call it, but it was nothing close to what I had been around. It was gross and in some cases, disgusting.

That was the physical side of training. What I soon learned was, the mental side of training had just as wide a gap.

So we fast forward to this horse today. This trainer is just terrible with babies. Period. So the question is: can the horse overcome it? On the surface you would have to think no. Most horses just will not be prepared enough to be able to use something they were born with which is a bloodline that leans heavily on winning 1st out.

I would find it hard to believe that the trainer had thoughts that you suggested. Maybe I'm wrong, but the vast majority of those I was around just did not. But... as bad as some of those trainers were with firsters, sometimes but not very often, a horse could overcome their trainers inabilities and run to their true first time starting ability.

So I see 20-1 morning line. My best guess is, that about 1 in 15-20 could overcome what I just talked about. So from a price perspective, at least you are getting a fair shake if that is the final price.

But because there is always hope for a trainer to realize what you know all about, when you look at the workouts the horse works very slow. And the time in between works was 8, 16, 31, 10 and 11 days. That makes no sense at all. But let's try and find ANY evidence that this could work. The times were 14 out of 16, 15 out of 20 and 17 out of 17 and 30 out of 49. But the last two works were 8 out of 32 and from the gate, and 11 out of 24. Those last two works were much faster than the previous four workouts. So maybe the horse IS trying to get competitive and be ready to run mentally.

I think that it is worth a swing at a price because it makes sense. Hopefully the horses ability to run well 1st out will overcome the other things. I just don't think a trainer can turn on and off the ability to get a firster ready. They mostly have a system and in this case, the record shows that whatever the system is, it is not firster friendly. If this horse wins, the credit has to go to the horse more so than anyone else.

Very nice find JBEX. Very nice.

[JBEX]

I remember that back when I first started training I was at Pimlico. I was stabled with a Hall of Fame trainer in Henry Clark. Next door was a future Breeders Cup trainer, Frank Alexander. Two barns down was Bud Delp, and in the other direction Sonny Hine. Another barn or two down was Dickie Dutrow, Dickie Small, and the list goes on and on. So , because of all these accomplished horsemen all around me, I assumed that every trainer had detailed plans, thought of all the little things, and were basically " all over" their stock with a fine toothed comb all the time. I mean, that is how I was taught and that is all I saw. So everybody must be like this.

Then, I went to Bowie. And having been there often as an employee, it was my first time there as a trainer. What I saw was totally different from Pimlico. Yes, some of the big names were there but there were a lot of lesser known trainers. Some with a few horses, and some with many horses. But they were lesser known because, well, they just didn't win that much. And watching those people train was a real eye opener for me.

I don't want to sound judgemental but it will be hard not to. Simply put, they were not even in the same league with what I understood to be " trainers". JBEX, it wasn't even close. Filth, clutter, their horses looked like crap, etc., etc. You get my point.

That's when I learned that for some training was a profession and for others it was, I'm not even sure what to call it, but it was nothing close to what I had been around. It was gross and in some cases, disgusting.

That was the physical side of training. What I soon learned was, the mental side of training had just as wide a gap.

So we fast forward to this horse today. This trainer is just terrible with babies. Period. So the question is: can the horse overcome it? On the surface you would have to think no. Most horses just will not be prepared enough to be able to use something they were born with which is a bloodline that leans heavily on winning 1st out.

I would find it hard to believe that the trainer had thoughts that you suggested. Maybe I'm wrong, but the vast majority of those I was around just did not. But... as bad as some of those trainers were with firsters, sometimes but not very often, a horse could overcome their trainers inabilities and run to their true first time starting ability.

So I see 20-1 morning line. My best guess is, that about 1 in 15-20 could overcome what I just talked about. So from a price perspective, at least you are getting a fair shake if that is the final price.

But because there is always hope for a trainer to realize what you know all about, when you look at the workouts the horse works very slow. And the time in between works was 8, 16, 31, 10 and 11 days. That makes no sense at all. But let's try and find ANY evidence that this could work. The times were 14 out of 16, 15 out of 20 and 17 out of 17 and 30 out of 49. But the last two works were 8 out of 32 and from the gate, and 11 out of 24. Those last two works were much faster than the previous four workouts. So maybe the horse IS trying to get competitive and be ready to run mentally.

I think that it is worth a swing at a price because it makes sense. Hopefully the horses ability to run well 1st out will overcome the other things. I just don't think a trainer can turn on and off the ability to get a firster ready. They mostly have a system and in this case, the record shows that whatever the system is, it is not firster friendly. If this horse wins, the credit has to go to the horse more so than anyone else.

Very nice find JBEX. Very nice.

quite a bunch of big names you mentioned there and heard of them all except henry clark..guess he was a bit older than all of them..remember you mentioning you were close to frank alexander as he helped you out a lot in your early days..reason you brought it up was he had just passed away..cherokee run bc sprint winner was his horse..don't remember ig you told me that or I just remembered but I didn't look it up..probably the former


yeah we've discussed this type of situation before .. if the horse can win within the scope of the trainers methods
is more the case rather than the trainer changing to the needs of a particular horse..these are the horses I like to give a shot as the obvious thing (the trainer) is very bad with these types..but the pedigree info very good and that might be a bit overlooked by the public..also like that he's a homebred and not a horse that costs less than a 20 year old used car lol..only have to be right about these things every once in a while to make it worth it

appreciate the feedback str

[JBEX]

hey str

no good yesterday but was 70-1


how about a tuesday horse lol..not a ? but thought maybe you'd find a little interesting..mark reid shipping a 2yo firster from pim to penn national..it's a pa bred so makes sense..she's got a decent pedigree relative to the competition ..above avg sire (in general, not first out) and out of a winning unbridled song mare who hasn't produced a winner from limited starters..I always pay attention to un song broodmare as his daughters overall are big producers..workouts look decent although there is a 5 week gap along the way..rail horse will probably be odds-on

#3 cause I said (8-1) post 6pm

[str]

hey str

no good yesterday but was 70-1


how about a tuesday horse lol..not a ? but thought maybe you'd find a little interesting..mark reid shipping a 2yo firster from pim to penn national..it's a pa bred so makes sense..she's got a decent pedigree relative to the competition ..above avg sire (in general, not first out) and out of a winning unbridled song mare who hasn't produced a winner from limited starters..I always pay attention to un song broodmare as his daughters overall are big producers..workouts look decent although there is a 5 week gap along the way..rail horse will probably be odds-on

#3 cause I said (8-1) post 6pm

My man Mark "Heavy" Reid. What a gentle giant of a guy he is. As good as they come.

So from a handicappers point of view and without seeing the form, here is my take. He comes from the Dick Dutrow school of higher learning . As a result, he is probably an 8-10% lifetime winner with firsters. Most employees that graduated from there to become trainers, and there are plenty of very successful ones, put more emphasis on longer careers and development than they do immediate results with possible long term damage.
He probably hits the board at about 33% with firsters. Just a guess but I know Marks body of work from way back.
I am as sure as I can be without knowing that what is leading him to Penn is the breeders purse program. Is the horse a homebred from PA?It would make even more sense if it is but still makes sense with the enlarged purses for PA. Breds. Mark probably figures he will see if he can compete in that type of race and run in it until he wins it. Typically, for his schools logic, is in his 3rd try +/-.Not saying he isn't trying. Of course he is. But most of these types will learn as they go and if the ability is there, the education will be as well in the next couple of races.
Can it win? Sure. But unless this horse has a lot of natural ability, it in all probability will take a few starts to run it's best. That barn (school) taught employees to have the firster improve with each start for the first several races.

As for the pedigree angles you make, you are all over it JBEX. Your reasoning sounds perfect to me.

[JBEX]

My man Mark "Heavy" Reid. What a gentle giant of a guy he is. As good as they come.

So from a handicappers point of view and without seeing the form, here is my take. He comes from the Dick Dutrow school of higher learning . As a result, he is probably an 8-10% lifetime winner with firsters. Most employees that graduated from there to become trainers, and there are plenty of very successful ones, put more emphasis on longer careers and development than they do immediate results with possible long term damage.
He probably hits the board at about 33% with firsters. Just a guess but I know Marks body of work from way back.
I am as sure as I can be without knowing that what is leading him to Penn is the breeders purse program. Is the horse a homebred from PA?It would make even more sense if it is but still makes sense with the enlarged purses for PA. Breds. Mark probably figures he will see if he can compete in that type of race and run in it until he wins it. Typically, for his schools logic, is in his 3rd try +/-.Not saying he isn't trying. Of course he is. But most of these types will learn as they go and if the ability is there, the education will be as well in the next couple of races.
Can it win? Sure. But unless this horse has a lot of natural ability, it in all probability will take a few starts to run it's best. That barn (school) taught employees to have the firster improve with each start for the first several races.

As for the pedigree angles you make, you are all over it JBEX. Your reasoning sounds perfect to me.

yes she is a pa homebred and it's a statebred race with a $27k purse..plus up to 40% pabf bonus..not sure i get that as I'd figure that would be incentive to win an open msw


his debut numbers hint at what you said although it'sa small sample..solid 18% first out in specials but 65% itm..


outside of #1 not too scary a field and as I said like her pedigree for this level..at parx no doubt she'd face better


something to watch tonight..thanks again str

[JBEX]

know I mentioned unbridled song(us) as a elite broodmare sire and here is a list of the top ones..I think to put it in perspective sunday silence (japan) galileo (europe) and ap indy (here) were all top stallions in their regions..their stud fees on avg were 3-5x that of us and look how favorably he stacks up against them (stakes winner this year,sw overall,earnings)..really is great production considering us was not an elite sire ($60-100k range i believe)

understand that how long they've been around must be considered for cumulative..still he compares well factoring that in

https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/thoroughbred-breeding/sire-lists/archive?seoName=broodmare

[JBEX]

just read he was sold as a yearling for $200k and pinhooked as a 2yo for $1.4M..but they gave him back because vet found a bone chip..have to think he earned at least $70M in stud fees over the course of his career..that's gotta hurt pretty bad

[JBEX]

yes she is a pa homebred and it's a statebred race with a $27k purse..plus up to 40% pabf bonus..not sure i get that as I'd figure that would be incentive to win an open msw


his debut numbers hint at what you said although it'sa small sample..solid 18% first out in specials but 65% itm..


outside of #1 not too scary a field and as I said like her pedigree for this level..at parx no doubt she'd face better


something to watch tonight..thanks again str

not a bad effort..sure mark was happy with that

[Louisvillekid1]

I’m worried about the states taking away lasix ... dirt horses need that for bleeding imo ... merry Christmas bro

[str]

I’m worried about the states taking away lasix ... dirt horses need that for bleeding imo ... merry Christmas bro

Hope you and everyone had a Merry Christmas !

As for the Lasix question, I am not sure where it is in here but I definitely spelled out exactly what I thought was the only way to eventually get rid of lasix. Maybe someone can find that and I will break it down even further. In the meantime I will address you exact comment Kid.

First things first, Baffert said that crap about dirt horses need lasix more than turf horses for one reason and one reason only IMO. It is because Chad Brown has kicked his ass in the last four Eclipse awards for outstanding trainer. While the chosen one probably leads the standings in positives, he can't seem to beat Chad in trainer of the year honors. So he mentioned that turf horses might not need lasix as much as dirt horses do. How transparent can you get?
That is one of the biggest crocks of crap I have ever heard. Now I'm sure someone will have a statistic that might try and show this but it's all B.S. Kid. Don't let anyone tell you differently. Either you are a bleeder or you are not. Period. I don't care if they run down the interstate. You bleed or you don't. The surface is nonsense and for the close to three decades that I was there, I was sure of that.

It has taken a little over 40 years to screw up the breeding shed with stallions and mares that might otherwise have not been bred had it not been for lasix. It will probably take just about as long a time to get it back to where it was.

And will they tell the public the real story once lasix is gone for any division of class of race? That story being, if not lasix, what IS allowed to be given?

Back in the hay and oats days of NY racing , no lasix was allowed. However, what was not disclosed was there was a laundry list of anti bleeding medications that WERE allowed. More than a few of those allowed in NY were NOT allowed in other states. The public just was not privy to that.

So careful what you read and believe about lasix and banning it. For the most part, it is a publicity stunt to have people believe what they want them to believe.

It's not what people that make decisions say that matters as much as what they don't say.

On a lighter note, it's great to see you back again. All the best to you LKID.

[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.




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.

Here is one of your Takes on Lasix STR. Hope you had a good Hoilday. Stay safe.

[JBEX]

ok str Monday question lol



fairgrounds R2 #4 fur meo (6-1)

exits a fast race of state bred specials and drops (think this is top level) to maiden claimers..cheap homebred and 127-1 so not concerned with drop..that race was 8-10 lengths faster than par for this race.. feel not a terrible effort considering out slow and wide trip from the 11 post in debut..obviously the slow start will have to be improved upon but everything can't be perfect to get a price including bad (understatement lol)jockey..not worked since then but have to think they have done some work in between ..what do you think ?

[str]

ok str Monday question lol



fairgrounds R2 #4 fur meo (6-1)

exits a fast race of state bred specials and drops (think this is top level) to maiden claimers..cheap homebred and 127-1 so not concerned with drop..that race was 8-10 lengths faster than par for this race.. feel not a terrible effort considering out slow and wide trip from the 11 post in debut..obviously the slow start will have to be improved upon but everything can't be perfect to get a price including bad (understatement lol)jockey..not worked since then but have to think they have done some work in between ..what do you think ?

Sorry I couldn't get to this in time . I agree with all you said. The horse is in a much more competitive spot today. I mean yesterday. Did show some flashes for a 127-1 shot. I do wonder about 5 1/2 or very short races and how far horses can lose by. seems they can sometimes run faster just because the race does. I mean, it's hard to lose by 25 lengths going 5 1/2. Kinda weird but it's true.
Only lost by 5 lengths for 2nd and that is pretty good. Trainer/breeder combo. Usually skeptical of that unless I know the outfit.

[JBEX]

Sorry I couldn't get to this in time . I agree with all you said. The horse is in a much more competitive spot today. I mean yesterday. Did show some flashes for a 127-1 shot. I do wonder about 5 1/2 or very short races and how far horses can lose by. seems they can sometimes run faster just because the race does. I mean, it's hard to lose by 25 lengths going 5 1/2. Kinda weird but it's true.
Only lost by 5 lengths for 2nd and that is pretty good. Trainer/breeder combo. Usually skeptical of that unless I know the outfit.

no problem str.. i realize you can't get to them all and a lot of times there's something to be gleaned even after the race has been run.. thought I might have been in business when he got out quickly and pressed the leader but ultimately gave it up badly.. connections are obscure but think you get a lot of that with cheap homebreds down there.. doesn't make it any more reassuring though lol.. thanks again str

[JBEX]

hey str

charlestown R3 #6 swing your sword (3-1) ..understand no great value with mine although am trying to beat the ml favorite #5 big k (9-5)

considering he's a 3k yearling purchase ran pretty well at lrl vs mdn claimers which are certainly better than msw at CT in general..trainer off the charts with mdn droppers and excellent with shippers also..first blinkers last out and pace figures were very were well above avg in that race..violence one of the better early sires and out of a not for love mare who's also speedy and one I know your familiar with being he was a long time maryland sire..he was protected in the 40k mdn last out which has to be a good sign..guessing that might be because he was eligible for it stepping up in class ?



figure shorter distance can only help also..probably a jockey gate skills thing which we've discussed before at these
short distances

[JBEX]

hey str

charlestown R3 #6 swing your sword (3-1) ..understand no great value with mine although am trying to beat the ml favorite #5 big k (9-5)

considering he's a 3k yearling purchase ran pretty well at lrl vs mdn claimers which are certainly better than msw at CT in general..trainer off the charts with mdn droppers and excellent with shippers also..first blinkers last out and pace figures were very were well above avg in that race..violence one of the better early sires and out of a not for love mare who's also speedy and one I know your familiar with being he was a long time maryland sire..he was protected in the 40k mdn last out which has to be a good sign..guessing that might be because he was eligible for it stepping up in class ?



figure shorter distance can only help also..probably a jockey gate skills thing which we've discussed before at these
short distances

one other important thing is he's positioned outside the favorite who's also a speedy horse..a hook up which is not out of the question could cost them both

[str]

one other important thing is he's positioned outside the favorite who's also a speedy horse..a hook up which is not out of the question could cost them both

When these 6F horses cut back to 4 1/2 it is sometimes difficult to see who actually makes the lead. The break is huge as you know but the other can be tricky. It looks like the 5 would be a bit faster, all things being equal, early. But typically, if a horse or horses coming off of 6F is much better, by the wire they are in front. I can see the 6(your horse) winning but the 5 is no slouch as you noted. This would be a pass for me if I was playing up there mainly because not much reward in being right and this race has a few potential players in it. You can usually find races there where it is much easier to foresee the trip and predict the outcome at a higher rate. I mean, we were always able to pick that place apart if you were even a little patient back in the day. Playing those races on line where the money does not get into the pool was and I'm sure still is, the way to go at CT. Plus rebates, it's all there if you want to put forth the time.
But just for the fun of it, sure why not with the 6. There is also the Patterson horse 1st off the claim and he is notorious for,well, nuff said . That owner loves to bet as well.
Play money go for it. Real money, no value IMO.Good luck JBEX !

[JBEX]

When these 6F horses cut back to 4 1/2 it is sometimes difficult to see who actually makes the lead. The break is huge as you know but the other can be tricky. It looks like the 5 would be a bit faster, all things being equal, early. But typically, if a horse or horses coming off of 6F is much better, by the wire they are in front. I can see the 6(your horse) winning but the 5 is no slouch as you noted. This would be a pass for me if I was playing up there mainly because not much reward in being right and this race has a few potential players in it. You can usually find races there where it is much easier to foresee the trip and predict the outcome at a higher rate. I mean, we were always able to pick that place apart if you were even a little patient back in the day. Playing those races on line where the money does not get into the pool was and I'm sure still is, the way to go at CT. Plus rebates, it's all there if you want to put forth the time.
But just for the fun of it, sure why not with the 6. There is also the Patterson horse 1st off the claim and he is notorious for,well, nuff said . That owner loves to bet as well.
Play money go for it. Real money, no value IMO.Good luck JBEX !

yes as you said ,not a great betting race and also on paper 5 probably a bit better speed..so focused on top two I missed kevin patterson which ain't easy to do ..see what you mean about him and the race 2 back would put him in the hunt..hey at least his horse (wasn't actually his yet ) finished the race...only 89 lengths behind the winner..might be the biggest turnaround ever if he wins for a horse that actually finished his last race.. only worth a few bucks for sure..thanks str

[JBEX]

just realized won with a horse at aqueduct today called swinging sticks..maybe a good omen

[JBEX]

well the 5 sure folded up quick as soon as the 1 looked him in the eye from the inside..mine sat the perfect trip and finished a decent 3rd @ 7-1..really no excuse though..the winner #1 was bet well in his debut and ran a decent 2nd that time..bet well again @ 5-2 from an 8-1 ml. the owner/trainer averaged about 7 starts a year from 1991-1999 (every year) and had some moderate success..interesting he's back 22 years later with what appears to be a talented young horse (at least at this level of competition)..maybe worth keeping an eye on him..jerry campbell

[str]

well the 5 sure folded up quick as soon as the 1 looked him in the eye from the inside..mine sat the perfect trip and finished a decent 3rd @ 7-1..really no excuse though..the winner #1 was bet well in his debut and ran a decent 2nd that time..bet well again @ 5-2 from an 8-1 ml. the owner/trainer averaged about 7 starts a year from 1991-1999 (every year) and had some moderate success..interesting he's back 22 years later with what appears to be a talented young horse (at least at this level of competition)..maybe worth keeping an eye on him..jerry campbell

The local 4 1/2 speed more often than not, does outrun the 6F speed down the backside. That's what I was referring to when I said the 6F speed if they don't make the lead, usually does by the wire if they are best. Guess I should have been more direct in my thoughts.
4 1/2 speed is just typically quicker early up there. But, usually they are outclassed if paper says they probably will be. Kinda weird that you fold up when a horse runs by you on the inside. Blks. on probably in that horses future. And the Patterson horse took no money. Probably will on a stretch out and drop next time. Like I said, that owner loves to bet.
Thanks JBEX.