Ask the people that work at Ashford, if John Mangier “marginally participates” in American racing. The Breeders’ Cup is trying hard to run Darley out of American racing. Very foolish. If American racing and those drinking the Lasix kook-aid run Coolmore and Darley out of American racing it’s game over.

And the #1 (stupid) reason to sue the Breeders Cup – “everybody’s doin’ it”

I love to hear your ideas, Ray, and of course your writing is superb. The BC last year at SA was a joke and I heard nothing but complaining about how it was organized both days. No access to the saddling area, and very little to the paddock, and my view was blocked almost completely by the fat a***d photographers who were standing directly in the line of sight elbow to elbow. It was an all out disappointment. However, I go to see the horses and some friends, and I caught a glimpse of both, but did I get my money’s worth? NO! I wrote a letter of complaint which I’m sure went into the shredder.

Where is BC siphoning funds from to pay for all that shipping, less entry fees? Not like they have a new revenue stream. Maybe nominators have a lawsuit!

THERAPEUTIC medications, first and foremost, benefit horses in all facets of competition.The ‘hay oats and water’ mantra tossed around by these hollier than thou self serving do gooders most certainly do not benefit the horse and consequently racing. THERAPEUTIC medications such as lasix, bute, banamine, dexamethasone, solu-delta, aspirin, venti-pulmin and (yes, OMG!) anabolic steroids, administered responsibly, aid in a healthier horse with a longer career in competition.I abhor cheating and narcotics, barbituates, stimulants and blocks; they have NO place in training or racing or any equine competition. The end effect of EXTREME use of medication closely parallels the end effect of EXTREME absence of therapeutic medications further compounded by North American training and racing facilities which are the complete antithesis of their European counterpart. The ability to treat and medicate these majestic and mighty -yet fragile- athletes responsibly is all but lost. I applaud the West’s. They are great breeder’s who champion the thoroughbred and thoroughbred racing. I hope they win their battle because it will be a victory for our horses.

It’s never too early to discuss the BC. the Fans need to have their input known, thanks Ray. The racing paper won’t run controversial stories or opinions any more unless they are in agreement.
Rotate the BC to other tracks. Except for weather, the BC was fantastic at Monmouth and other facilities. not so much at its current anchorbase. Anyone with a sign in front of me would have had their sign ripped up. Where’s the equity there. Try going to the Preakness with all the junk in the infield and try seeing the race. Corporate involvement is necessary, but not at the denigration of fan participation and sightlines. more input into the old outline of the BC day, progress is not necessarily good.

This is starting to get real nasty, If I were Coolmore or Godolphin I would pack up and go home. these two stables pour millions upon millions of dollars in American racing year after year and this is the thanks they get ? they don’t need America, America needs them.

The hell with Fallon succeeding Leno. Ray, you’re up. Where to broadcast from, LA or New York?

Good. But what’s with THE HANDS? They distract the viewer.

That wasn’t a seagull. It was R. Dutrow. He was full of crap, even then.

You missed the one lawsuit that would put the BC execs in the electric chair:

— The 3rd World BC held in New Jersey.

how could the breeders cup committee allow horses to be tortured by running without lasix (oh, thats right, i have two horses running in the juvenile) ? how can the breeders cup committee allow horses a head start by allowing different weights being assigned to horses in our national championship ? how can our national championship encourage the use of performance enhancing meds in our national championship ? dont performance enhancing meds create an uneven playing field ? if the breeders cup classic is our world series, how come the horse of the year award isnt given to the winner ? how come the racing fans money isnt returned when a horse like life at ten is held back by the jockey ? if a winning horse is found out to be racing with illegal drugs, how come the racing fans who had the second place horse are not rewarded ?

Can I sue the Maryland Jockey Club for not DQing Codex in the 1980 Preakness? ;)

The movement to ban Lasix from American racing, which looked like an odds-on favorite only a year ago, seems to have pulled up at the top of the stretch with the announcement last week that the Breeders’ Cup has scrapped its plan to enforce a ban in this year’s races.

Lasix will again be banned in only the four juvenile races while the treatment will be permitted in the 10 others, and insiders expect even the juvenile ban to be gone in another year or two. So, if there are 30,000 races in North America in 2013, Lasix will be permitted in 29,996 of them and prohibited in just four.

Regardless of which side of the thorny and divisive debate you are on, this is a stunning reversal. A year ago, Kentucky regulators were on the verge of phasing out Lasix completely but now are likelier to phase in a retreat from those rules. Efforts to enact similar legislation stalled in New York and never got off the ground in California. Numerous industry organizations have retreated from strong anti-Lasix stances.

What happened? Zealots on each side of the issue will call it a triumph of good or evil by forces of enlightenment or darkness, but it may be more valuable to examine why a movement that seemed inevitable suddenly lost its momentum. There probably are dozens of other factors, but here are five that contributed to the sputter:

◗ The willful attempt to blur the clear lines between administering a legal and regulated medication and the nefarious use of illegal and dangerous drugs to fix the outcome of races was a tactical error that alienated potential supporters who have an open mind on the topic.

Proponents of a ban consistently overstated their case and lost hearts and minds by trying to make Lasix sound inherently dangerous and linking its usage – with little veterinary evidence or support – to a supposed decline in the health and durability of the breed.

◗ The claim by proponents of a ban that Lasix use was harming the sport’s popularity was unfounded and unconvincing. After more than two decades of widespread Lasix usage, a span in which the sport had periods of both growth and decline, the argument that it had suddenly begun alienating potential customers lacked credibility. This was borne out when in 2012, a year in which racing probably received an unprecedented amount of negative coverage for medication and animal-welfare issues, American betting handle actually increased for the first time in six years.

◗ The lack of support for a Lasix ban from virtually any successful trainer left the anti-Lasix proponents not only without an influential spokesman but also with the weak and nasty rebuttal that trainers are either incompetent or shady. Even trainers who ban proponents thought shared their views said they found Lasix a useful and humane treatment.

◗ While it may be intellectually defensible (through the “playing by the existing rules” and “level playing field” arguments) to rail against the use of Lasix while continuing to race one’s own horses on it, people both inside and outside the industry found this to be a mixed message at best. Telling people to do what you say, not what you do, never goes over well in general and took the wind from the sails of the position that Lasix was so detrimental to racing that it must be banned.

◗ The argument that the United States is out of step with the rest of the world by uniquely permitting Lasix is both true and sobering, but a lack of conformity is not in and of itself a reason to change. What was needed to make that a more compelling argument was some illustration of how the United States could implement foreign procedures to replace Lasix instead of an assumption that we must be wrong.

There also continues to be a lot of misinformation surrounding comparisons between American and, in particular, European racing. It has become gospel that horses in Europe make more starts per year than American runners, and that Lasix might be to blame, when, in fact, the statistics are almost identical.

Whatever the reasons, the impetus to change Lasix policy has evaporated, but that should not mean the topic is permanently closed. Even those who have come to accept and defend its use would be hard-pressed to argue that it is commendable that American racing has gone down a path where virtually every horse is treated with it. Perhaps the next time the issue rears its head – and it will – there can be a more constructive, civilized, and informed discussion.

When you are gooiing to google on loop diuretics any one will finds intersting stuff. Like lower bloodpreesure, losses from potassium and calcium up to 20%. This will harm horses in the long run no doubt about that.

By training the way they do, the big trainers are creating the problems themselves and not the other way around