Whitney contender Endorsement: ‘The true cost of giving up Lasix’

by | 08.03.2012 | 1:31pm
  • click above & share!
    X
  • click above & share!
    X


  • click above & share!
    X
  • click above & share!
    X

Saturday’s Whitney Handicap (gr. I) is set to be one of the highlights of the 2012 Saratoga race meeting. A strong field of nine, led by the Bill Mott-trained tandem of Ron the Greek and Flat Out will go to the post.

Trainer Eoin Harty will saddle Endorsement, winner of the Texas Mile (gr. III) in April. The 5-year-old son of Distorted Humor has overcome quite a bit during his career, which has been limited due to a non-displaced condylar fracture in his right foreleg that occurred the week before the 2010 Kentucky Derby (gr. I).

One possible obstacle that Endorsement may have to overcome in the Whitney is that he will be the only horse in the field that will not be running on Lasix. Owner Bill Casner is one of several owners in the industry that have pledged not to let their 2-year-olds run on the diuretic starting this fall.

Since he has returned to the races from his injury, Endorsement has not run on Lasix. He has made six starts, and notched two victories, two seconds, and a third.

At the ThoroEdge Equine Performance website, they discuss exactly what Endorsement will be giving up without the use of Lasix…in particular, how much ‘heavier’ Endorsement will be than his rivals.

» Read more at
New to the Paulick Report? Click here to sign up for our daily email newsletter to keep up on this and other stories happening in the Thoroughbred industry
  • May Flower

    I hope he wins big.

  • LindleyPaxtonBarden

     According to all the advocates of giving Lasix, it is to prevent
    bleeding during the race. Are they now acknowledging that the true
    reason is a weight loss benefit?

    I disagree with giving Lasix to bleeders because as they win and
    subsequently breed, they are passing on the bleeding propensity to their
    offspring. I DEFINITELY disagree with the use of Lasix just for weight
    loss and racing advantage!

  • Convene

    Go Endorsement!

  • Tbower

    When the horse business shrinks by 40-50% after they eliminate Lasix and year round racing leaves Kentucky you and Bob Beck and the blue bloods can celebrate your hobby business.

  • Sandra

    Since when is dehydrating a body beneficial to the athletic performance of a thoroughbred. Lasix is so over used and it is sad to see the amount of horses on it. We all know that 90% of the horses on lasix do not need to be on lasix. So why dehydrate the horse, especially in the heat and then ask them to run to the best of their ability.  Its no wonder we have so many body sore horses after races. Trainers are quick to blame the track etc. How about blame lasix that is dehydrating muscles and causing cramps . We as trainers should be hydrating the body going into a race, not dehydrating the body going into a race. How did this get so backwards? I am a 3rd generation horsetrainer, and have trained thoroughbreds for 30 years. I do not use lasix.

  • Jon Cohen

    Casner can lament the use of Lasix all he wants, however the reality of the situation is that Endorsement is totally overmatched and outclassed in this race.  A lifetime supply of Lasix wouldn’t provide enough “performance enhancement” to give this horse any chance here.   The lack of Lasix isn’t what will defeat Endorsement Saturday, it is the lack of sound management. 

  • FourCats

    It seems to have become “common knowledge” that the weight loss that a horse incurs from lasix is a racing advantage.  But is it true?  While an advantage may exist for less weight in general, it seems highly dubious to me that losing weight through dehydration would give any advantage at all; more likely the opposite.  Dehydration in most animals is a cause for weariness and fatigue; not vigor.

    Does lasix give a horse a performance advantage?  I don’t know (and don’t believe that anyone really knows).  Nor have I seen anyone produce a scientific study proving that advantage.  But, even if such an advantage exists, it seems a real stretch to say that the advantage would be from the weight loss of body water.

  • May Flower

    Racing must be done right. The worst half should go. Protecting the horses and their riders is a must: the industry needs to earn respect and trust to be popular. Owning and/or training horses is not vital or a right. If it is an addiction, owning a piece of a well-managed horse instead of several poor ones at no tell tracks would be better than painful mediocrity.

  • McGov

    I disagree with the weight loss difference once the horse leaves the stall.  To my knowledge, a horse on lasix loses more weight by urinating more prior to the race than a horse not on lasix.  But once they leave the stall, the urinating is done.  It is very rare to see a thoroughbred urinate outside their stall, unless they live outside.

  • Aunt Bea

    Enter a horse and name a 250lb. rider and figure it out for yourself.

  • Five2__three

    If he wins  (and I hope he does) this will blow the roof off of the lasix debate.
    How long has it been since a horse won a grade 1 in the U.S. without the use of drugs ?

  • fb0252

     i think u utterly miss one of the main attractions and strength of our sport, which is that almost any can participate  on the horse side.  What u consider worthless  mediocrity, we consider as our sport. And, I believe if u knew anything about horses u’d also want to use anything u could to prevent EIPH.

  • fb0252

     Let’s hope for Endorsment’s sake that it’s a cooler, dry, non-humid, high pressure day instead of the type of muggy, hot and humid low pressure day that  almost  guarantees on a dirt  degrees of  EIPH without lasix.

  • Hossracergp

    By your logic, we should just weigh all the horses in a race and the lightest one would win. Or to take it further, the horse that loses the most water weight will win. It’s a great theory but it fails in reality. 

  • May Flower

     Like in Hong Kong (minus smog), where all horses race off Lasix and so few bleed?

  • fb0252

     racing on grass produces 1/3 the concussion as racing on dirt.  EIPH primarily has physcial causes.  you knew that already, right?  besides, who is saying they never bleed in Hong Kong?

  • LongTimeEconomist

    No one said “never”. I believe I have seen stats in recent years that horses bleed less in Hong Kong than America.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/BDKYUYWMEERUBMBKFYGPJQY64E Nathan

    the harness guys and the euros have meds that are much better at stopping bleeding and masking drugs. ban lasix and it won’t change anything.
    a smart man remarked, “give every trainer, groom, and vet, a lie detector test”.
    problem solved.

  • Mlmartin

    one problem we’re having is we’re exporting stallions that are not passing on bleeding. lion heart, trippi, etc. the germans won’t allow a stallion to breed if it throws bleeders. so we are really creating our own problem. lets keep the ones contributing to the problem and sell the ones that aren’t makes no sense to me.

  • Cass

     in that case maybe we should change our racing surfaces.  Dirt tracks must be the cause of bleeding and breakdowns

  • fb0252

     do they “bleed less” because they race on  grass (instead of dirt?)

  • fb0252

     four  thoughts for ur consideration:
    1.  do u have any scientific evidence that EIPH is genetic,  as there’s plenty of evidence otherwise.
    2.  if u breed 2 non EIPH animals, what guarantee that the progeny would be EIPH free.  race ‘em in Louisiana, they’ll bleed. (climate). how do we  know this?  personal experience.
    3.  if u race in a 10 horse field and they’re all on lasix, where  is the weight advantage (assuming there is one)–non lasix horses urinate pre-race also.
    4.  As Jack Van Berg notes in his vid–when I give ‘em  lasix, at least I know they’ve p_ssed.  Ever try running hard with even a small bag of urine?

  • Cass

    Endorsement has done well without Lasix but this is a tough spot for him.  I am concerned that Lasix promoters will use the fact that he is running without this drug  in order to promote their cause if he does not run well.
      If the fact that he will be racing ‘heavier’ than the lasix users is coming into play then the drug is being used for more than bleeding. 
     I am not entirely sure whether racehorses should be allowed Lasix or not, it is an enormous question with positives and negatives for each side but obviously there are a lot of reasons the drug is being used for other purposes than bleeding and the general betting public should be informed

  • LongTimeEconomist

    That’s a question that probably can’t be answered, as the countries that don’t allow lasix (i.e, everywhere but North America) virtually all race only on grass.

  • Shotawad

    Why not start with a clean slate & don’t allow a horse to race with lasix until that horse is a proven bleeder. I have charts of races from CA from year 1998-2012 & 99% of the horses ran with lasix. Are you telling me that 99% are legitimate bleeders? That’s BS! IMO I don’t know if they should ban lasix……..If the medication will stop a horse from bleeding why not use it then, as long as it’s not being administrated to the non-bleeders. Or are the side effects & risks not worth using it at all? Most equine organizations still prohibit the use of “Lasix”……..

  • Now What?

     One has to wonder if Endorsement scoped clean after the Whitney. And if he didn’t and he needs Lasix, now what? Retire him?
     

  • Thelibrarian

    I like this horse…..post surgical & still out there tryin’. An easier spot than the last 2-3 races is where he should be….does not seem like a real solid grade 2 or grade 1 competitor.

  • Dc

    The weight loss might be an advantage if all the horses were the same weight, which they are not, so that is a real big stretch.

Twitter

follow us on twitter »