- DRF Bets
- Handicapping & PPsThoroughbred Past Performances
ReportsPremium NewsDigital PapersHorsemen's Products
- DRF Classic PDF PPs
- DRF Formulator PPs
- DRF EasyForm PPs
- Daily Racing Program PPs
- Equibase PPs
- TrackMaster PPs
- Using Timeform Ratings
- NewsCategoriesTrack Notes
- Learn to Play
- History of Horseracing
- How to read PPs
- How to use EasyForm
- How to use Formulator
- How to use TicketMaker
- Beyer Speed Figures
- Moss Pace Figures
- Using Race Shape Symbols
- Using Timeform Ratings
- BreezeFigs Handicapping
- Wagering and Winning
- Harness Night School
- Point of Call Index
- 3-Year Best Time Chart
- DRF TV
- StorePast Performances
- Compare all DRF PPs
- DRF Formulator PPs
- DRF Classic PPs
- DRF EasyForm PPs
- Daily Racing Program PPs
- Expanded Closer Looks
- Equibase & Trackmaster PPs - Thoroughbred
Hovdey: Instead of usual dive, California dips toe into Lasix rule change pool
The guinea pig, as every schoolchild knows, is not really a pig. It’s a rodent, and like many rodents throughout history the guinea pig has ended up on the wrong end of scientific experiments. No one is sure where the “guinea” in guinea pig came from, since they seem to be native to South America, but that didn’t keep them out of the lab.
For decades, as horse racing has evolved in these United States, the California wing of the industry has found itself in the role of guinea pig. The photo-finish strip camera was first used at Del Mar in 1937. That worked. The pick six made its debut at Hollywood Park in 1980. That really worked. In 1989 Santa Anita Park introduced plastic “turf grids” to a rebuilt, sand-based grass course with the idea of strengthening the roots. That took several years and a couple more tries before it worked out okay. Then, when the idea was proposed in 2006 that the state’s major tracks be required to install synthetic surfaces, the guinea pig in California said “why not?” The mandate is no longer in force.
Now the golden rodent is braced for another experiment. Another step toward exchange wagering was taken at the California Horse Racing Board meeting this week to keep the clock ticking toward what could be a considerable windfall for the companies providing such a service. The horizon is still relatively distant before wholesale exchange betting is in place, but an initial set of rules its working its way toward implementation, awaiting the blessings of horsemen’s organizations and unified acceptance among tracks.
Lou Raffetto, president of the Thoroughbred Owners of California, was heard on Steve Byk’s “At the Races” radio show Friday morning worrying that the existing model for sharing revenue from exchange betting put his constituency in a position of “getting a small percent of a small percent,” which would not be worth the trouble.
Raffetto also took pains on several occasions to describe the exchange betting revenue formulas involved as “very complicated,” and didn’t sound happy they were. This brought to mind the Paul Ryan interview on Fox News during which, when asked to explain the tax plan offered by Republican running-mate Mitt Romney, the vice presidential nominee replied, “It would take me too long to go through all the math.” In the end, 59.1 million voters had no problem with that, but 62.6 million did.
Hold still guinea pig. This won’t hurt at all.
It gives this reporter great pleasure, however, to report that on one hot issue California officials have allowed others to forge ahead into uncharted territory. Implementation of new rules regarding the administration of race-day Lasix at California tracks is still at least a couple months off, while such major jurisdictions as New York, Kentucky and Ontario, Canada, already have been restricting the administration of Lasix injections to veterinarians under the control of commissions and tracks, rather than being given by private practicing vets employed by owners and trainers.
Kentucky just began the new procedures in September. To date, there have been four instances reported of a horse being scratched either because it did not receive Lasix from the official vet as prescribed, or it was administered two injections by mistake. Rick Arthur, the CHRB’s equine medical director, as asked what safeguards would be in place to prevent such occurrences when California makes the change-over.
“They happen all the time anyway with private veterinarians,” Arthur said. “Sometimes we hear about it, sometimes we don’t. When we do, when the horse has missed a shot or been double-dosed, that horse would be a late scratch. But I’d be surprised if it happens more than once a month.”
Well, that’s comforting.
“There’s going to be 40,000 Lasix shots given in California in any given year,” Arthur noted. “Anything you do 40,000 times, there’s going to be an error. What you have to do is develop a system where you avoid that as much as possible.”
More than 30 years ago Arthur was among the pioneers in the study of exercise induced pulmonary hemorrhage in racehorses, or EIPH.
“We gave it the name,” Arthur said. “But that was a long time ago. I actually had a young vet explain to me the other day just what bleeding was.”
What it is right now is a hot topic among an influential group of owners and breeders who would like to see American racing in line with other racing nations, where there are no medications allowed to be administered on the day a horse competes. Arthur is not on that bandwagon.
“There is reasonable justification to administer Lasix on race day,” he said. “There’s no question Lasix reduces EIPH. It doesn’t eliminate it, since 60 percent of horses still bleed after being administered Lasix. But it does reduce the amount of hemorrhage.
“With the new rules you won’t have the adjunct medications we have in California, such as premarin, which we don’t tell the public about,” Arthur continued. “About 50 percent of horses get that, even though there’s no scientific evidence that it has been shown to be efficacious in reducing EIPH, as Lasix has.
“The goal is to avoid the perception that something other than Lasix is being administered on race day, to get race-day medication down to one issue – Lasix,” Arthur added. “You take away all question of nefarious activity, which I believe is very rare, but we want to take the opportunity away and we want to take any suspicion away.”
The California rules, when implemented, will allow for Lasix to be given by a veterinarian either hired by the racing board, employed by the racetrack, or working for a company outsourced for the job. Arthur envisions that four or five vets at the major meets would be needed to cover the ground on a daily basis.
“In the end what you want is someone administering that Lasix shot who is disinterested in the outcome of the race,” he said. “I think it’s just a lot cleaner system for everybody, and it’s my hope that it will help quiet the debate on whether to use Lasix or not.”
Finally..a spot on analysis from Arthur about the truth behind lasix, bleeding, and adjunct meds. GREAT ARTICLE!!!
I disagree on many points with Mr Arthur. But the end point he makes is of the highest disagreement. The public as a whole does not even realize or think about who is paying the Vet, if the Vet is giving a larger or smaller dosage to help or hinder a horse. The public is only aware that a horse is receiving a drug, a drug named Lasix. A drug we still want to call by the old German pharma's brand name, rather than the name on the bottle today, Salix. The public knows the horses are being drugged. That is the bottom line to the public, not whether it is a private practitioner or an employee of the State administering the injection. End result, the public still things the horses are "juiced". THAT is the problem. And what about FLAIR? The nasal strip proved in multiple university studies to be equally effective in reducing bleeding and an increased recovery time as well. It also lowered VO2 readings in tested horses which means less lactic acid buildup, less fatigue which is know to lead to injuries of the greatest concern and even death. Stop the piddle patch work of rules and get it right. The rest of the world runs without furosemide on race day. We need to get off the need and back to racing horses.
Like to see the big stables move out of southern california. Let the CHRB deal with 2K claimers.
Overhere we do not have them, raceday medications, and mostly big fields.
With small fields already eliminating race day meds will make the fields even smaller. All it will tak is one horse to collapse during a race from a major bleeding incident and th lemmings. Sorry I mean racing fans.. Will clamor to bring the med back
Just get rid of all the raceday med,s, than there will be no mistakes anymore.
This game has turned into a BUNCH of CROOKS and a TON of DRUG USERS..SO DAMN SAD.....................
I think it's insulting to the veterinarian profession to rule that only "state" vets can give raceday shots instead of the professionals who work with the horses day in and day out. Who did a study and found that veterinarians routinely "cheat" and that state "vets" are immune to such actions?
by the time they ban raceday lasix the bettors will be long gone or betting european races instead.who cares who administers the lasix on raceday.its a masking agent that expells the remenants of any drugs that where given too close to the race,that is the problem.when the horse pisses away the drugs in his system before the test.the problem for betttors is they dont know when the money aand the drugs are on.
My only comment on this issue is that all jurisdictions looking to apply this model should mirror that of Ontario (ORC) as to my knowledge there has not,since 1981, been any of these "frigups"