Kentucky Derby: Did the best drugged horse win?

I have always enjoyed horse racing and consequently have lost money at race tracks all around the world. I have failed to back the winner when present at either of Britain’s and Australia’s two biggest races, The Epsom Derby and the Melbourne Cup.

I didn’t care that I didn’t back a winner at Ireland’s Galway Races because I was fascinated that the bar employed three or four staff just to pour Guinness non-stop. They didn’t serve anyone; they just stood before the taps and filled glassed with the dark nectar. I sampled plenty.

In America I have ripped up betting stubs in New York, California and of course my local Tampa Bay Downs.

My most embarrassing visit to a course was in Singapore one Sunday afternoon. My wife Geraldine and I joined thousands who thronged to the event and when we heard the “off” we were red-faced to discover there wasn’t a horse in sight and it was really unnecessary to have pushed our way to get a good view of the track.
"Impossible win" by 50/1 horse no doubt on Lasix

Some 20,000 people had come to watch a simulcast of a meeting in Hong Kong and as long as we could see the big screen we had as good a view as anyone. Oops.

I mention all this to show I am not anti-racing but I am anti the racing of doped up horses, which happens every day in the US. Since the death last year of Eight Belles in the Kentucky Derby and then the deaths of 21 polo horses last month I have learned that every competitive horse in the US is doped up.

The New York Times reported just before this weekend’s Kentucky Derby that a drug called Lasix is “is given to nearly every horse that goes to post in the United States, although the practice is prohibited in Europe and Hong Kong. Most regulators and veterinarians say Lasix enhances performance because it is a diuretic that flushes 20 to 30 pounds of water out of a horse.”

Where is the outrage?

Certainly not in Kentucky where 153,563 showed up to watch a 50/1 outsider Mind That Bird and where on-track and off-track wagers across the US, was $104,563,501, an 8.7% decrease from the $114,557,364 all-sources total in 2008.

That decrease can be easily attributed to the economy and not the fact that punters suddenly came to their senses and realized that they are betting on, not the best horse but on which horse reacts best to its drug cocktail.

In the same New York Times article I referenced above a famous trainer told a government hearing that training horses had become “chemical warfare.”

It’s tragic and it’s the horses that suffer as more of them die per start in the US than elsewhere such as the UK and Australia.

Punters should show some common sense and stop betting on horses as there are lots of other alternatives for their wagers. Until racing cleans up its act there will be more 50/1 winners and the bookies will be laughing … as they definitely do when they see me coming.