Talking Horses: Santa Anita action resumes, with raceday meds debate

The attention of most European racing fans was understandably focused on Cheltenham last week, which meant that some unexpected – and potentially highly significant – news from California went largely unnoticed.

Santa Anita, which had been closed since 6 March to allow officials to conduct investigations on its dirt track after the death of 21 horses either training or racing in a little over two months, announced that it will resume racing on 29 March (another date when European attention will probably be elsewhere). But as it did so, it also announced that when racing returns to one of its most famous venues, it would do so without the raceday medication Furosemide, commonly known as Lasix or Salix, which has been endemic in American racing since the 1960s.

Related: Death on the track: why are so many horses dying at Santa Anita?

This news came out of the blue in what was described as an “open letter about the future of thoroughbred racing in California” issued by the Stronach Group, which operates Santa Anita.

It stated that the Group was “taking a stand” against race-day medication, which would make Santa Anita (and SG’s other Californian track, Golden Gate Fields near San Francisco) the “first in North America to follow the strict International Federation of Horseracing Authorities (IFHA) standards”– the same rules, in other words, which apply in the other 100 or so countries around the world which stage organised racing.

Since the only members of the Californian racing community who could remember a time before Lasix are approaching their 70th birthday, the reaction to the ban from many trainers and owners mixed shock with anger. Following several days of negotiations, the initial proposal for an immediate ban was watered down and the first Lasix-free generation of racehorses at Santa Anita will now be those foaled in 2018, and due to begin their careers next year. In the meantime, the dose of Lasix, an anti-bleeding medication, which is allowed on a race day has also been cut from 10cc to 5cc.

The Breeders’ Cup is due to be staged at Santa Anita in early November but that is staged separately from the rest of the track’s programme and there is no indication as yet that a Lasix ban will apply either for this year’s Cup or indeed any Breeders’ Cup at Santa Anita or elsewhere. But there had to be a first step somewhere if the US was ever going to wean itself off the raceday meds and this, potentially at least, could be it.

For this outsider looking in, however, there are also grounds for concern. Not the least of these is the perennial problem of distinguishing correlation from cause, because while there are plenty of reasons to oppose the use of medication on race day, its possible effect on the rate of fatal injuries while training and racing is far from the most convincing.

While any move to take the race-day drugs out of American racing is welcome, the worry is that doing so to address a very specific problem – a sudden spate of fatal injuries – may not work. The use of Lasix is arguably bound up with the use of more attritional dirt for racing and training in the first place. If so, banning it may have benefits elsewhere but it is unlikely to do much to reduce the fatality rate – and could conceivably cause it to rise.

The danger is that America’s racing industry – still the world’s largest by some way – will fall into the trap that our own British Horseracing Authority can often face on the same issue.

Because fatal injuries to racehorses, even at the levels at Santa Anita this year, are both rare and, to a considerable extent, random events. Their distribution will inevitably include clusters which are every bit as random as the individual events, but since those events are essentially rare, the clusters are far more obvious. It is easy to imagine that there must be some underlying issue and, by extension, that something can – or must – be done to address it.

It is possible to make a bad choice for a good reason, or a good choice for a poor one. If it sticks, Santa Anita’s ban on raceday Lasix will hopefully turn out to be the latter.

Monday’s best bets, by Chris Cook

It’s mid-March, temperatures are rising and the ground is drying out, and so I conclude that Venetia Williams is going to stop having winners at some point in the fairly near future. But we are not there yet, I hope, and I’m backing her to have a productive day at Exeter, where the going is soft.

In the opener, there are still bits of 5-4 about Arqalina (2.10). This mare has a younger brother who reached a rating of 124 after three runs over hurdles, so Venetia may have done pretty well to get her into handicaps on 79, for all that it took Arqalina a couple of goes to actually win. Significantly, she did so when stepped up to three miles last month and in such style that I don’t think 10lbs extra will stop her.

Excuses can be made for a poor effort on chasing debut by Snuff Box (5.15) and he could fare better at 6-1.

Southwell 2.00 Briac 2.30 Savello 3.05 Bold Reason 3.35 Accordingtogino 4.05 The Dawn Man 4.35 Destinys Choice

Exeter 2.10 Arqalina (nap) 2.40 Geordie B 3.15 Haldon Hill (nb) 3.45 Dostal Phil 4.15 Grey Atlantic Way 4.45 Hands Of Stone 5.15 Snuff Box 5.45 Diplomate Sivola

Plumpton 2.20 Dream Machine 2.50 The Cull Bank 3.25 Graasten 3.55 Good Impression 4.25 Le Capricieux 4.55 Get Up Them Steps

Tips by Chris Cook