My first reaction would be that it is perfectly sensible to own an animal that
has been purchased to generate revenue and to take a stand that will prevent
the horse from making a single dollar. Trainers are not going to support an
initiative which will see horses being turned out and/or sold and the trainers
receiving no income from day money or purse cut.


I guess my question would be: "Do YOU feel strongly enough about this issue
that YOU would "buycott" races run without Lasix?" Would you make an effort to
get thousands of horseplayers to "Buycott" lasix free races?

My second reaction is that Churchill would somehow round up 20 3YOs to run
without Lasix in the Derby. CD would probably not even enhance the purse. They
would still draw a huge crowd on Derby Day, would still have network TV
coverage. I would imagine the handle on a 20 horse Derby field containing maybe
not the best 3YOs in training would not significantly be affected.

"The derby prep races, run the horses with lasix and just say fine then we
still collect our winnings, we just won't run in the Derby".

No, if you run a horse on lasix in a race where lasix is banned all you will
get as a trainer will be days for a medication violation (unless maybe your
initials are BB). There will be no purse money.

Further on the Lasix. Saturday I was for the first time in many years at
SportsHaven in New Haven, a facility that I always thought should have been the
model for NYC OTBs; there should have been one or two upscale teletheater-like
facilities in each borough rather than multiple seedy neighborhood facilities.

In Saturday's Top Flight at Aqueduct, the 1-2 finishers were running (as best I
can surmise) without Lasix for the first time in their careers (37 races
combined). I will circle back and check the numbers they ran at one point or
another to see if they regressed or progressed.

Also from the Top Flight you have Thankful from TAP. Victorious in her first
race without Lasix, she has now run two stinkers since. Of course it is
possible that she prefers two turns to a one turn mile, but her apparent
regression after her first race off Lasix is something I will have in mind when
the 1-2 finishers from the Top Flight race again.

I am absolutely convinced, without having any evidence, that a Lasix
substitute, undetectable, is probably being deployed by some vets/trainers
already. The labs and chemists have had plenty of time to develop this; like
the end of LIBOR, the end of Lasix has been discussed for many years. The
notion of Lasix free racing in some form or other did not sneak up on anybody.
(Others will be using home remedies, like the Louisiana trainer I worked for
who wrapped thick rubber bands at the base of a horse's tail to prevent the
horse from bleeding...)

Johnny if you're going to stay in the game I would not obsess over drugs and
cheating; cheating is as old as the game itself. Doc Harthill changed the
course of racing in the latter half of the 20th Century by standing guard while
a colleague gave Northern Dancer a dose of Lasix before the Kentucky Derby.
Without the Lasix, Northern Dancer might not win the Derby and might not have
become (ND was both unsound and undersized) the dominant stallion of the second
part of the century.

Cheating has not always involved drugs and medication. One of my favorite
cheating stories involves a 3YO running in (and dominating) a race limited to
2YOs in England. On Derby Day in 1988 Dale Romans' father Jerry won a maiden
race with a "first time starter" who actually had started twice before. Google
"Lebon Horse" to read about a prominent NYRA scandal involving a "ringer" and a
large mutuel.

I would never expect Racing to be conducted without performance enhancing
medications for two reasons: (a)the cheaters always seem to be one step ahead
of the enforcers and (b) the punishment for medication violations is a total
joke, or has been up to this point. Hopefully NBC camera crews will focus on
Bob Baffert's wrist, which is black and blue from being repeatedly slapped.

My primary concern for Racing would be the state of the wagering pools. The
timing of wagers or batch wagering, "the Bots", etc. and the fact that stakes
racing at the top levels is dominated by a handful of elite trainers.

Johnny if you are really concerned, do something I have advocated for years.
Write a letter, get hundreds of horseplayers to sign it. Send it to Stronach or
NYRA or the Jockey Club. Say that the hundreds of horseplayers who signed wager
millions of dollars, but will wager no more unless....(lay out your agenda).

Because racing really needs individual horseplayers now. When we are gone all
that will be left is the Bots and Bot v Bot will probably lower ROI until the
game is no longer a worthwhile investment.