It would be fair to say that the turf racing community tends to look down on dirt racing as inferior, or at best, a slightly alien concept. Opinions change slowly, even though racing on artificial surfaces in the UK, and to a lesser extent in France and Ireland, has been mainstream for over 30 years. Top flight dirt racing has now been broadly accepted, but more ordinary cards rather less so. They are still perceived as the country cousin.
Part of this hesitancy has been due to a drug regime among US tracks that allows Lasix, a diuretic, to be administered to horses in all races other than 2yo and Stakes (Pattern) races. Lasix manages bleeding among Thoroughbreds, and, according to leading trainers, is lot so much a doping agent as a medication.
Lasix: Under Scrutiny
But now the Lasix debate has been brought into sharp focus once again. HISA, the Horse Racing Integrity and Safety Authority, the governance body created by Congress to oversee the regulation of horse racing in the United States, was established in 2020 in response to growing concerns over safety, integrity, and fairness in the sport, and to standardize regulations for horse racing across all U.S. states.
In 2023, HISA convened a Furosemide Advisory Committee to commission and oversee independent scientific research on the use of furosemide (Lasix) in horses. Scientific studies funded by HISA on furosemide’s effects have been completed and are in the process of being reviewed by the Committee, which oversaw the development of the research framework and evaluated proposals. The Committee reports on May 22, and it is anticipated it will recommend the banning of Lasix altogether.
You might consider this a step forward for US dirt racing, yet a backlash from training professionals is underway. Thoroughbred Daily News spoke to Maryland trainer Graham Motion, who commented, “I think we’re protecting the breed by not allowing 2-year-olds to race on it. We’re protecting the stud book by not allowing the best fillies and colts in the country to run on Lasix in stakes races. So we’re protecting the breeding program. As for the bread-and-butter daily racing, I think Lasix is something that only helps the horses. I think it’s working, and I don’t really see the reason to take it away.”
Motion is far from alone in this view.
Bill Thomason, the former President and CEO of Keeneland, and a current Director of HISA, said he is keeping an open mind regarding the Lasix issue.
“Everyone on the board, I promise you, has an open mind about what our research will show,” Thomason told TDN. “It’s too early for me to comment on anything because nothing is there, nothing has been considered by the Board. This is still being evaluated by the committee that was established to study Lasix. Once again, anything I would say right now would be just speculation.”
Implications Of A Ban
A by-product of banning Lasix would likely be smaller field sizes as the horse population diminishes by default, exacerbated by a reducing foal crop. Field sizes are already an issue that has compounded existing business frailty among racetracks in California, and this is a nationwide problem. Hawthorne Racetrack in Illinois has just filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy to enable it to re-mortgage its debt and find new investment. For all that prize money appears on a different planet to the UK, the profitability of racecourses is hard to find.
Owners and Trainers in other jurisdictions would broadly welcome the move, which brings the US into line with other jurisdictions. European racing operates under the most stringent medication rules, as does Japan, Hong Kong and Australasia, the other leading turf and dirt racing jurisdictions. Trainers here feel their US contemporaries are operating at an unfair advantage.
Yet the consistency of approach HISA brings to US racing must be broadly welcome. HISA’s impact on improving integrity, safety at tracks, and quality of horse care and jockeyship is marked, and removes inconsistencies between states that did nothing for the sport’s nationwide reputation.
While HISA’s creation 6 years ago has been a significant step forward, it’s not been without controversy. Critics argue that it gives too much power to a single governing body, potentially infringing on state rights. Others worry about the costs of implementing these regulations, particularly for smaller race tracks and owners. But as British racing is finding presently, unifying around a single objective is an elusive goal with so many conflicting parties. Lasix only adds to the complications.
