curious

Is there a pre-requisite to Punting 101 that we could refer Thommo to complete before he comes back on here?

If you know Joe, why don't you give him a ring or flick him an email pagan@ker.com . He can probably straighten you out on this. And you might serve him the respect of spelling his name correctly. Which Kentucky Fried did you work for there? Was Joe a regular customer?

I notice that Chatauqua ran 90 lengths from the winner in his trial yesterday. You might also say he was unlucky in that he was a bit slow away. I'm not quite sure how I'm supposed to relate either of those facts to my assessment of his ability or fitness Thommo. Please help.

I'm actually not that interested in their margin from the winner if they were unlucky Thommo.

Have you just worked that out - that horses aren't robots? That's exactly what I don't treat them as! Isn't that why you need to assess the percentage chance of a horse actually running up to it's fitness and ability and back it if the market has underestimated that?

OH..... nice shot of the princess being rescued. Has Thommo drifted out beyond reach or have the rescuers just given up on him?

No, I don't consider luck in the running at all sorry. If you have a reliable way of quantifying that the I'm all ears.

Haven't done that for about 4 years because I no longer have the necessary data sorry.

nah, he hasn't actioned anything. In line with the rest of this lot, who seem to have initiated 100 such reviews and reports and done nothing else but raise taxes.

Curious only runs 900 simulations, probably because of smaller field sizes in the US than the UK and Oz and wherever else mardigras bets that provides sufficient statistical rigour. That's probably more robust than the two that you run, one with blinkers on and one with them off.

The only simulating he does is with the deflatable princess from what I can see.

I'm a bit worried that this thread is turning into an intelligent conversation with constructive questions and answers. Please cease and desist. I'm not sure I can cope.

Yes, I'd tolerate it because they are not likely to be having any effect and as you should know it takes time and compromise to get positive changes in this game. I know nothing about any particular effect of Lasix on fillies. Please enlighten me. I'm aware that some horses can have an allergic reaction but rarely. I've taken it. I well know it makes you pee. That seems somewhere between relatively harmless and quite useful if reducing body fluid might be beneficial in some way. All drugs have risks, benefits and side effects. Have you never taken an NSAID despite the risks? If a trainer switches a horse from regular oats, chaff and hay type feed to an extruded feed mix that reduces gut weight by 20kgs, I suppose you'd want that reported too.

Sorry, not sure what you mean Ashoka. Putting what forward?

You obviously not only need to go back and pass primary school maths, but primary school reading as well. See if you can find some sort of remedial assistance What does that say? I'll try this one more time even though half of it is off topic and you have brought it in to distract from the stupidity of your still unproven statement about HK punters. I DO NOT support horses racing with ANY prohibited substance in their system. I DO support internationally accepted withdrawal times for those. I DO support the Australian rule of no medication for one clear day prior to racing and think we should have the same here. I DO support the current Racing Integrity Act bill under way in the US which proposes a 24 hour prior to racetime ban on all medication I DO support the use of medication including furosemide for training purposes. I was an active supporter of the campaign in the US to prohibit the legal use of phenylbutazone on race day. I am also party to a current submission supporting the US Racing Integrity Act bill. That said, given its half life of about six hours, 24 hours for Bute is ok if it must be, though I'd prefer it and other NSAID use were subject to accepted international withdrawal times, such as those of the FEI. Is that clear?

I don't have a problem with that and I support the 'one clear day' rule for all medication. However, I think trainers, under veterinary advice, should be able to use medication (including Lasix) at their discretion for training purposes subject to withdrawal times of course.

Where did I say I liked racing with drugs? You made that up. We are talking about training with a particular drug here in case you've forgotten and gone off on a tangent after making a stupid comment about HK punters for which you have provided no evidence when asked.

Only for raceday isn't it? Not for their use in training which is what we are talking about here.

So Thommo, if Lasix is banned for use in racehorses in training and Waller then uses nasal strips instead, I suppose you'd expect that to be reported to punters as well?

Yes, it's progressive. That's the point. If you reduce the magnitude of the bleed (using Lasix) then you obviously slow the progression and prolong the usefulness of the horse. Chris Waller knows this but Thommo is too thick to understand. I imagine punters would also approve of that idea.

Yeahh, and what about standardbreds, polo ponies, eventers, show jumpers, barrel horses etc? That's going to be a hell of a lot of horses not breeding along with a few human athletes, quite a few greyhounds and maybe a few camels. And I don't think many of those have much Northern Dancer blood.

I think you'll find that the bill proposes a 24 hour ban (on all medication) prior to racing, similar to Australasia. The question of whether that should be applied to Lasix is still being debated I think.

Each code entirely separately makes its own rules including penalties in accord with the Racing Act. The RIU and JCA are then responsible for enforcing those. 29 Racing rules (1) Every racing code must make, and maintain in force, rules regulating the conduct of racing by that code. (2) Without limiting subsection (1), any racing rules of a racing code may provide for— (a) the appointment, functions, and duties of stipendiary stewards and racecourse inspectors; and (b) the licensing of trainers, jockeys, drivers, and apprentices, and related matters; and (c) the registration of horses, greyhounds, owners, partnerships, syndicates, and colours; and (d) the conduct and control of race meetings, including safety requirements; and (e) prize money and other stakes, programmes, entries, withdrawals, weights, penalties, handicapping, allowances, weighing, starting, and running; and (f) punishments for breaches of the rules; and (g) determinations and appeals; and (h) disqualifications and suspensions; and (i) any other matters relating to the conduct of races and racing that the racing code thinks fit.

Bloody hell. I was hoping you guys wouldn't discover that. I'm going to be in the poor house for a few weeks until I find another edge. I'm working on a theory about Lasix first time in the US which looks promising though. At this stage it appears to only work at certain tracks however, which complicates matters.

No. The analogy is that if I notice a problem AFTER I've completed the transaction and taken delivery of the car, it's a bit late. If I then contact the vendor and ask about it and they tell me it's been checked out and was ok 3 months ago because it got a warrant, then it's incumbent on me to decide whether I get it further checked out or drive it for 3 months and it either falls off or fails its next warrant. By then, I wouldn't consider I had any recourse or right to cancel the sale. As I said, I don't exactly know what was said but we only have one side of that story. From my experience of online horse auctions, vendors sometimes post vet reports, especially where there is a noted problem, say a tendon injury, or x-rays, scopes etc. I'd still get a second opinion BEFORE the purchase if in relation to a known issue. I'd also have at least been asking if there were any vet exams or reports that might be relevant to the purchase and asking for them beforehand.