Some trainers have said it takes a horse longer to recover from a race if he\'s on lasix. Presumably that would be even more true for one making his third start in five weeks, like one going for the Triple Crown.
There\'s never been a TC winner who raced on lasix, at least that we know of. Just sayin\'...
Does this relate to your ROTW stat you will be revealing? I\'m intrigued...
Not directly, but the stat started me doing some abstract thinking. (It\'s actually two stats compared to each other).
I don\'t want to scoop myself. Should be up tomorrow night after the draw.
At least one person who\'s been posting about the race won\'t like the stat.
JERRY if you believe your numbers and i know you do,you can\'t pick ORB (forget the odds).I t goes against what numbers are about,timing and development.He is supposed to back up,he doesn\'t have to but he is supposed to.
My lips are sealed.
That\'s fine,mine are not.
vito, I am with you betting against orb, but as others have stated, its been expensive to toss derby winners....I think the last preakness I cashed was due to the barbaro tragedy. It was a nice exacta however. If youre right and land on the winner you will get paid.
Trainers at this level are better at managing their clients, than they are their horses. Lasix requires 18 to 21 days recuperation for optimum effect.
Vito and Jellish are both correct in their respective positions; one mostly positive, one very negative.
Personally, i think Orb will run well and may get up late.
Using Lasix as a barometer for this heat brings the Claiborne gelding into play. On one hand they are big time anti medication and on the other Stall has positives from their talented filly that will not train without medication.
Anxious for the ROTW and the resulting posts. bbb
I just can\'t agree that he is \"supposed\" to back up. Timing and development are obvious factors but you seem to be completely disregarding all of the factors that go into the development side of that equation. He was an awful gate horse last year and if you look at his debut it was actually a very impressive race where he spotted the field, including Violence about 10 lengths and closed to miss by a little over a length. He broke through the gate in the next race and spotted lengths again in his next start. The numbers are what they are but he showed ability with lots of trouble which isn\'t reflected in the number. We then come to the 3yr old numbers which show one big jump second Lasix. The fact that he wasn\'t one of theses cranked Pletcher two year olds also has to be factored in. Shug and trainers like him do not normally get their horses this good, this early. If any number of the win early trainers were involved i would be much more apt to agree that he would be heading in the other direction now.
He ran 4 times last year.How many excuses do you want to give him?Are you saying the beginning of his development is 2nd lasix?
One more thing are you saying that the 6-1/2 move he made 2nd lasix is not part of his development and that we start counting from the 1 he ran?
Take a look at the races. I certainly feel that he has responded to Lasix and I think his trainer and owner have both said as much. That aside, I feel Orb has been allowed to grow into himself and has not had the screws put to him like some other trainers would have done. Orb and Violence are the perfect counterpoints. You may not agree but in my opinion the manner in which the trainers get these horses to run their numbers plays a huge part in whether they can sustain them or bounce or worse as in the case of Violence.
it\'s a hard call though since northern dancer\'s team were way-early adopters of lasix back in the 60s...though i tend to agree with you that it seems pretty unlikely that horses that raced as frequently as secretariat and seattle slew were doing so on lasix. actually, i don\'t know how any horse can run on it--it\'s an incredibly debilitating drug.
i guess it would depend on how many horses ran in all three races on lasix and their relative perfomances, since fresh entries on lasix would create statistical noise. if all horses are runing on lasix in each race, it seems like you might still get a TC now and then even if lasix makes it that much harder for a horse to do it (we\'ve had a lot of lasix runners win two, and still place or show for example--even mind that bird ran in the money in all three).
it\'s hard to judge since you don\'t seem to get as many also-rans trying in all three races like you used to. were sunday silence and easy goer on lasix for the first 2 legs? they both did well in belmont (but that would have been lasix free i think, before NY lifted the ban, but the lasix drain should still have had an effect...)
but the drought could be breeding after all, since only one triple crown winner was sold at auction; all others have been homebreds.
\"were sunday silence and easy goer on lasix for the first 2 legs?\"
If memory serves, I don\'t think it was disclosed back then. When The Racing Times came on the scene in 1991 they made a big point of adding designations for medications. I\'m not sure when the Form started to add the Ls and the Bs, but I think it was 1991 or later.
I do remember Summer Squall skipping the 1990 Belmont due to no lasix, and Hansel winning the 1991 off lasix, but I just don\'t recall it being an issue in 1989.
relized my wording was a little obtuse:
to try to determine the lasix effect on the triple crown, you could take all of the horse that ran all three legs from the first triple crown to the present, excluding all horses that didn\'t run in all three races, divide them into the pre-lasix group and the lasix group (i guess starting with alysheba?), and compare the performances of the two groups.
completely off topic:
does anyone know if the nick nolte horse in luck, the one he talked about being killed for the insurance, was inspired by the circumstances surrounding alysheba\'s death and calumet\'s bankruptcy?
thanks!
You mean Alydar. And I have no idea.
It\'s a waste of $ to try and bet against Orb. If you truly believe he\'s not going to win, it\'s eight piles of dung behind him and you have to pick one of the steamers. No thanks.
The better, more rested, field with a higher chance of beating Orb awaits in 18 days at Big Sandy.
\"don\'t know how any horse can run on it--it\'s an incredibly debilitating drug.\"
HUH? Since ORB is the topic i don\'t remember reading/hearing about him laid out
in his stall for days and not having the energy to eat. In fact, quite the contrary. Believe it or not i\'m trying to be less confrontational, but incredible and debilitating is very strong language in the face of athleticism.