That’s half the first step. They need to require pledges from their trainers not to medicate two year olds on raceday. And if the trainer won’t make the pledge they need to give their horses to someone who will.

 It’s Roberto Bafferto’s world…we just live in it…well said Roberto!

Great point, Bob. I believe reform and integrity needs to occur at all levels in the chain (including the end user). If you start a petition to the sales companies, I will sign it.

 Wa, wa wa Bob Baffert, one of the original “Super Trainers”
What’s in your secret wall box??
Everyone of your horses look alike (body types) as well, Duh…….
Clean racing is best for the horse. Physical manipulations should not be performed, and the insane times that cripple babies at sales must be stopped as well.
I see that many of these breeders, breed to run their homebreds, whom they don’t want to drug or mistreat , so your point holds little validity.

Please, I can hear the crying now from the owners on this list complaining it’s not a level playing field after their (way to) expensive 2 y/o’s keep getting beat.
These owners may have the money and soap box to stand on but the FACT is that MOST owners disagree with them.

FACT: the first three days at Saratoga have five 2 y/o races carded.
87% – 41 out of 47 horses will run with lasix.
The Sanford (feature) has 8 out of 9 horses with lasix.

I’m guessing this list will diminish with time ! 
 

 Yikes !  You don’t think anyone in TOBA or anyone who signed the TOBA letter would engage in such “nefarious” practices as Mr. Baffert describes, do you?  Perish the thought.   But at a minimum, it ought to be disclosed to us degenerate gamblers on the PP’s that the horses have had such surgery.  At least we can evaluate the presence/absence of bute/lasix.  It should also be disclosed on the illustrious Jockey Club’s “at risk database.”

First, there isn’t the slightest trace of evidence that connects bleeding with conformational traits.

Secondly, while it would obviously be beneficial to the industry to address ALL problems, those with personal agendas should refrain from pointing to other problems in an effort to deflect attention from the issue at hand (hence: “misdirection”).

Bob , you had the chance to be a leader and
You just spit the bit!

Changing the subject is so obvious a ploy
as is his bait n switch topic about corrective surgery;
Who does corrective surgery?
Breeders
Who is acting as an agent for change with raceday meds?
Breeders
Baffert attacking breeders?
(you be the judge)

Mission accomplished

For Baffert (ahorsetrainer) to summarize how the sport should introduce reform
By making the suggestion to TOBA (owners) that

“… Real change isn’t goin to happen until everyone…

“…. puts their money where your mouth is”
(obviously talking about trainers right, bob?)

is just totally
Ludicrous (amusing absurd)

Love the Game,
Buck’s Boy had 2 crooked legs, a club foot, and was barely 15 hands in shoes and he DID win the BC Turf sans any conformation corrections or interventions.
There will always be an exception…

Forty TOBA owners, duplications noted, reducing the actual number in support of what ? based upon its total number of actual members.  What a phony organization that has no standing and less clout!! Shame upon a sham organization.  

Well this should give you a lot of pleasure and entertainment Big Red.

Or maybe he doesn’t want to be left holding the bag after breeders have cashed their checks.. 

Bob,
Go to Cleanhorseracing.org and read the study on Lasix. You might be more concerned about Lasix and the contraindications of that medication then stripping…. an old procedure that is rarely used anymore although it is done with injections these days with the same results. I agree with you on that one.

are you still listing forged letters on your website?

Last line should read;
… I like Baffert and admire and respect him for his horsemanship and training abilities;
He just missed a golden opportunity to take the high road and complement toba members, (even though he disagrees)
for “putting their money where their mouth is…”

 Bob, when you say “I haven’t heard any talk or outrage about how most breeders strip and wire knees or do whatever it takes to straighten crooked foals so they bring as much money as possible in the sales ring…” it shows that you have not been paying attention.
There has been plenty penned for years about leg maipulations to make babies look pretty for the sales ring. Please do not think you are the first to bring up this subject.

Barry, what will an owner that paid $500k for a yearling at Keeneland do when the trainer says he is a bleeder and can’t win a bottom maiden claimer without Lasix, but, because of you, the Jockey Club, TOBA, etc, he can’t have Lasix?  I know.  He will quit buying yearlings.  The positive for you is that you and the blue bloods will have less competition (is that what you are looking for here?) and can win more races.  I guess the Russian winning the La. Derby with a $2,000 horse really got to you.  

Tbower (that’s the best you could come up with?), you are quite the nifty scrivener, as you have that rare ability to ask and answer your questions simultaneously. I cannot tell if you are looking for any answers or if you just want to stick with your opinions and assume that you know me well enough to understand how I think. I would like to thank you for not singling me out as a blue blood. In case nobody told you, I have upset as many big races as any man racing today and I did it with horses that had even more humble beginnings than the Louisiana Derby winner. Nobody that supports the Lasix-free initiative is looking for less competition. What we have in common is that we prize sport above all. In sport, there is no room for drugs. We are in this for the sport of it. I understand that this concept might be hard for you to believe, but I believe it to be true. There is no reason to suspect or expect that me and my cohorts will have any less horses prone to bleeding than anybody else. And, finally, are you suggesting that a $500,000 Keeneland bought yearling is any different than any horse that was bought or bred or claimed? Or are you worried that Keeneland is going to cease being able to present yearling sales because nobody will buy another yearling once one of them has turned out to be a bad bleeder? I guess what you are really trying to say, in your unique manner, is that me and my cohorts are a bunch of selfish pricks that want to put the little guys out of business so that we can win all of the races for ourselves. I can see that you know a lot about human nature.

Bob, while the issue you mention has little to do with medication per se, it is a valid point. 

With the high percentage, at least in commercial terms, of yearlings or two-year-olds being offered at sale (rather than retained by breed to race owners), the sale ring has in effect become the ‘guardian of the breed’ and what we allow to have pass through the sale ring over the past 20 years looks to have impacted on the breeds soundness and performance.

It is however a two way street that should hold both breeders and racehorse owners accountable.Take Laryngeal paralysis. A complex but very heritable trait that can pass down from sire or dam to offspring. As a yearling/two-year-old buyer you, and other racehorse owners, have the right to scope a horse prior to purchase and make sure that you are satisfied of its throat morphology. Yet, if a race mare had a tieback surgery on the racetrack, racehorse owners can shuffle her through the sale ring without having to disclose that this surgery took place and breeders have to deal with the potential of her foals failing a scope as a yearling. As a heritable trait, racehorse owners should be required to disclose (or if we used microchips it should be logged at the time of surgery and a central database provided) this surgery so that breeders can make informed decisions when they come to purchase future breeding stock.  Laryngeal paralysis is just one issue, a mare could have had all types of surgeries that are not required to be disclosed. 

Medication is one part of the problem. If we are truly interested in improving the integrity of the game and the breed we also need to tackle the commercial aspect of the sale ring – from both sides of the fence.

Now Mim you know I have no website. As far as Barry and others not purchasing horses because they have had a few bleeders makes me question your logic. Something a researcher like yourself should try to preserve.

How many of those big race upsets came without lasix? How many came with horses you purchased then put on lasix?

You sound like a nice person, but I get the feeling you’re painfully naive or in denial.  You can bet breeders know who the bleeders and unsound sires and broodmares are long before they mate them.  

How can a trainer be to blame when a breeder makes the choice to do corrective surgery on a crooked leg or give a horse steroids or induce a mare into labor so she’ll deliver an early foal or give them medications at sale time to open their airways?  They know every trick in the book.  Is this as nature intended?  Is this the hay, oats, and water strategy they are advocating?  They take edge by fooling around with nature for their own personal gain, cash their checks, wash their hands of any responsibility, then sit back and shake their heads as trainers (convenient scapegoats) are left to manage the mess they’ve largely created.  It’s like giving a banged up Volkswagon a great wax job, a bigger engine and some shiny new whitewalls, handing it to a race car driver and telling him to win the Indy 500.
 
I would also disagree with you these issues are not deterring owners.  The rise in popularity of two-year-old in training sales is evidence that buyers (especially those with restrained budgets) are shying away from buying at the weanling and yearling sales.  They get a somewhat better, though still skewed, idea of what they’re buying. 

 Not sure of your point,  are you saying that you do and will use Lasix on a 2 year old that is bleeding  and is that best for the youngster or should it be stopped and allowed to mature or is that too much of a financial risk?   Do you even have any youngsters that bleed?  It seems that as you have such a vast stable of top quality horses, the bleeders in the group would automatically be culled and replaced with uncompromised horses.    I am not judging but I am curious.  I presume it comes back to what the owners allow to be done with their horses.

I

Roger,
Difference of opinion is what makes a horserace
(and why paulick report is so much fun.)

Let’s find some common ground
that might shed light on the respective strengths and weaknesses of our claims.

Let’s look at definitions of sportsmanship;
Shaking hands after the game
Following the rules
Treating others with respect
Respecting judgement of officials
Which brings us to raceday meds;
The rules have changed
The breeders cup and kentucky have decided
No more raceday meds for 2 yr. Olds.
Take my quiz please;

1. An owner, who recognizes running without lasix leaves them at a competitive disadvantage yet still runs without lasix, because”it’s the right thing to do” for the horse and by extension the sport.

Whinier?
Sportsman?

2. A trainer who doesn’t want to stop using lasix, even though his owner (who pays his wage and all training costs) believes and suggests they should run without raceday meds.

Sportsman?
Whinier?

First, if you are going to respond to someone, please do it on the appropriate thread so that readers have context.

Secondly, what on earth are you talking about? I made the clear point that Lasix – a drug that Baffert supports the use of – masks bad bleeders so that breeders are unable to make informed decisions. You respond with this:

“You can bet breeders know who the bleeders…are long before they mate them.”

Really?

Do breeders read about the bad bleeders in sales supplements?

Do they ask the consignors and get an honest response?

Do they contact the trainers and get an honest response?

The fact is that with Lasix being used as promiscuously as it has been in this country for decades, there is virtually no way for breeders to distinguish the bad bleeders from the rest.

With regard to this:

“How can a trainer be to blame when a breeder makes the choice to…”

I never suggested anything of the sort.

Mr. or Ms. Purplesky … I have been well trained as a researcher and evidence based thinker, and have chaired over 170 doctoral dissertations. Please forward the research and evidence you refer to so that I can examine it. liberationfarm@yahoo.com. Thank you very much.

Bob Baffet makes a great point. As breeders ( i am one ) we feel it our job to get every horse to the sale and take advantage of all legitimate, ethical veterinary and healing therapy to make this happen. His point seems to be that once a trainer has bought the horse the standard is now different. Legal theraputic medication cannot be administered even if it helps the horse because all of that stops at time of purchase. He is right, a double standard exists when a breeder can maximize the value of his yearling but a trainer cannot maximize the natural potential of his racehorse with medication that has been proven effective. You  have interchanged the                                      
 terms theraputic medication and illegal  drugs so long you are convinced they are the same. Even worse, our own industry purposefully confuses the two in an attemmpt advance their agenda to the detriment of public opinion.  Testifying to Congress and acting as if you own the majority opinion. I am not winning anyomre so everyone must be using a magic drug that no one can find.
  The gamest particiant in the business is the racehorse owner. Be careful when trying to make it even tougher for him to survive. You want to run without lasix when your horse bleeds and stops go ahead. Seems like racing is best served when in a pari mutual contest ( yes people bet ) horses run to form. Good for the owner, trainer, breeder and betting public. jgs    

Big red,
I love your question;
I am an owner
and would not join any partnership or syndicate unless all partners agree not to run the two year old without raceday meds.

For the life of me I don’t understand why you think others would not do the same.

Your more interesting observation
about the 40 who pled
we won’t drug two year olds on raceday.

They ARE THE LEADERS you couldn’t find,
Had they been on a “Top ten list”
I presume you would have put a check mark beside their name;
Confirming your complete knucklehead notions of what constitutes a leader.

(You got to retire your pen name;
Makes me want to cry when I associate that handle with my fond recollections of the horse-what’s a pen name you probably have a dozen-
I know I have no right to make such a request,
Just trying to do my part to help the sport.)

Nice jeremiad, Barry.  But you conveniently did not answer the question.  What will happen to the guys that buy untested horses for lot of money and then have nothing because they are prone to bleed?  They will 1-either quit buying untested horses, 2-quit buying horses completely or 3-buy only proven horses like you do and drive your price up. What do they do………Barry?
And by the way it is “my cohorts and I” not “me and my chohorts”.

And to which group do you think most of the people on this list belong?

Lasix became an all-consuming “ethical decision” when it became perceived as bad for business.  It really is that simple.

Throw in concerned observers who can be duped into believing that Lasix is made from discarded battery acid (or other horrible chemicals) and you have the current climate of this ‘debate’.

Yap those business decision is bankrupting this business……this sorry industry is breeding itself out of existance…..

Lasix are given to these sorry azzz inferior bred horses who cannot run without drugs…..there is nothing ethical about giving an animal a drug to make it run…..I cannot wait for the last racetrack to close….about 15 or so years…..

When does the pledge start? Both Phipps and Stonestreet ran 2year olds on lasix at Saratoga opening day? According to the DRF

“In your extensive research have you reached the conclusion that the equine population does or does not pass genetic traits to its offspring?”

This was not your point, Mr. Purple … so it is difficult to respond when you change the focus away from what you were saying.

Before I bred/co-bred about 200 stakes horses including 20 Grade 1 winners (last year’s Belmont winner among them) and lived 40 years in the business … I was lucky enough to have a research professor who said, “We are lucky to live in a country where anyone can have an opinion and freely voice it. The problem is, however, that an opinion is only as good as the evidence that supports it.”

In all matters, academic and hands-on equine, I am always interested in getting at the truth. Therefore, I was only asking for your evidence so that I could assess whether you are speaking from fact or simply from anonymous biased opinion.

I am not familiar with any studies that have shown a meaningful or even suggestive correlation between genes and bleeding.

Based on my time around horses at the farm and at the track, I think it much more likely that American training methods and the way we hot-house horses 23+ hours a day in closed in stalls with continuous inhalation of hay and straw dust and ammonia is the main culprit.

But I am open and eager to learn about evidence related to other factors. Therefore, I welcome you forwarding any factual data that you might have as a reference.