I’m with those who want to ban all the drugs. Several of the more credible witnesses agreed that whatever is currently wrong with the breed would right itself over several generations as undrugged horses competed and won (or lost). The drug-free winners would make it to the breeding shed - the drug-free losers would not be bred and would not pass their genetic flaws on to their offspring.

If a drug free regime means that breeders will have fewer offspring to sell, that’s just an added bonus. Fewer offspring would mean that we wouldn’t have so many unsuccessful, unwanted and damaged Thoroughbreds being trucked to Mexico or Canada for slaughter.

Finally, the fans ARE being heard - do any of you think for one moment that Congress or anybody else would be paying attention to these issues if there were no pressure coming from the fans?

P.S. Great blog you have here.

There’s a flaw in that argument though. Raceday meds such as bute and lasix were introduced with the belief that they would help horses cope with minor problems and make MORE starts per year. Unfortunately, the opposite has happened and horses race even less. The latest published average is approximately 6.3 starts per year. Taking away the raceday medications doesn’t not ensure that horses will run less, and doing so might actually SAVE owners money in the long run by reducing their vet bills.

I can’t tell you how much I wish I could even be in the financial position to even consider purchasing a Thoroughbred for $200,000. Such a purchase is an investment. Like I said, investment assumes risk. If you’re not fortunate or talented enough to own horses among the 10% that make a profit, find another business. That’s capitalism, welcome to America. You would make more profit if the industry was more efficiently run. Fewer tracks, fewer races, larger fields, larger purses. Unfortunately, owners and trainers fight this effort tooth and nail at every opportunity.

The problem with Lasix is that pretty much every horse in the country is now running with it, and the vast majority of them have no bleeding problems and don’t need it. Owner expenses would be considerably reduced if all drugs were banned. Imagine no vet bills littered with drugs! America has become a laughing stock to the rest of the world for its acceptance of both legal and illegal drugs. I’m actually jealous and in awe watching the Brits at Royal Ascot this week. They’ve really got this sport figured out on the other side of the pond.

Right now, owners and trainers are running drugged horses and then expressing surprise and remorse when they break down. That insanity needs to stop. Support or root for the owners? That’ll happen the same time I pity the oil companies…

Do the math real quick - total purses paid out don’t equal expenses of the the owners. Then add into the equation acquisition price for the aggregate of the horses. On average about 10% of all horses raced make a profit each year. Victori is correct in that gamblers and owners are the life blood of racing. I also bet on races as do most owners in some degree or fashion. I am not sure you would respond the same way with “survival of the fittest” if you had just purchased a horse for $200,000 and was told it bled drastically and it can no longer have the use of lasix to help it from bleeding again and just give it away if it has no breeding value. As far as risk we have total risk every day they step on th etrack to train or race that it might be their last.

The owners are not the company. The tracks are the company. The owners merely supply the products (horses) for the company (track). I am a customer of the track, not the owners.

Great idea! Risk and survival of the fittest, just like every other business or investment in America. Horse owners and breeders have relied on handouts and entitlements for far too long. Contrary to what their egos lead them to believe, they are not entitled to profit merely for participating.

Horseplayers are the fuel and lifeblood of this sport, not the (w)horsemen.