The Grand National :D

I normally do enjoy racing but this years GN was sad to watch. But I can't believe the people who say horses do not run for the love of it
Have you ever taken your horse to the beach & turned him at the headland & let him gallop flat out all the way back? Do it more than once and most horses are so excited in anticipating the run in a big open space, even better if with their friends. I know people who won't take their horses to the beach because they can't control them as the horses are so pleased to get an opportuntiy to gallop in an open space with others.
Or sat on a plunging horse who is desperate to start a XC or PtoP
How often do leisure horses get the chance to gallop as a herd in an open space? My horses live out 24/7 I never see them galloping in fear - they gallop together for the sheer enjoyment of it including the two ex racers I have. I am rambling a bit but what I am trying to say is racehorses maybe get more chance to express themselves as horses than those say stuck in a school doing dressage.

Both my ex racers were well cared for racing and have had great second careers.
 
Ive been reading the comments on the Racing Post site and some of them are quite good.

Here are my favourites.

1 Move fence 1 & 2 nearer the start. This would slow up the runners before the fence.

2 Make Bechers Brook wider as in widen the course. This would give horses room to manouvere and stop them being unsighted. This is 1 fence where there was a horse fatality.

3 Make it a qualifying requirement that horses must have won or been placed up to 3rd in a 3mile chase. The idea being steadier horses rather than speed merchants.

The general consensus of opinions is that they set off too fast and speed kills this was the 2nd fastest time in its running.

One unusual comment which I had to laugh at was to have a speed car go round and horses are not allowed to overtake until the second circuit.

As a NH fanatic I do not like to see horses die but Im sure the authorities will look at every aspect of the race and try to make it safer without losing the spectacle of the Grand National.
 
At the end of the day if you dont like it dont watch it. Everyone has opinions on everything i had a friend that thought mounted games was cruel but that was her opinion. Accidents happen in racing and all equine sports am sure that the grooms , trainers etc are very sad at this moment whose horses died. They have been left with empty stables and having to take their tack of a dead horse. I have been to some of the big racing studs in Ireland and these animals are pampered beyond belief.

Anyway well done to Ballabriggs what a cracking horse and to Don't Push it from coming from the back.
 
To those who say the horses run the race for the love of it - please :rolleyes: horses have no concept of risk. That aspect is put entirely in the hands of the humans that own ride or train them. We have the ability to determine and predict what situation we place those animals in. They may enjoy running, they may enjoy jumping, but do not try and suggest they have any idea of what they are being asked to do in terms of the danger of that course. They are not willing participants. If you are happy to place an animal in a situation like the grand national fine, on your conscience be it - but don't pretend for a moment that the horse has any choice in the matter.
 
Would you have them not even exist to begin with then? Without racing, you have no racehorses. If the national was banned it would only come down to the next worst fatality meeting to get a bashing.

Then if racing was banned what would be the next? Eventing? Then what?
 
The `Chasing owner is a completely different person to those owning flat horses.There is very little to be earned,the horses are greatly loved characters, many of them go on to be hunters ..often out on permanent loan from the "evil" trainer,who keeps a friendly eye out for his old horse throughout his life.
The horses light up when in work ,you can see that fantastic "look of eagles" as their adrenalin starts up,they are not for a demoralising life in a muddy field with a novice well meaning keeper. If a trainer chooses to end a horses life humanely to avoid some numpty owning the horse and giving it less than it demands and deserves..well that is his business,his alone,and a sad but responsible decision.
Many of these `chasers are in fact ex flat racers given the chance of a good life for some more years,and beyond that another job ,if suitable,as a hunter.If they are not suitable,by temperament or unsoundness ,then a quick humane end is far better than being mismanaged by some fluffy numpty.
 
I watched the race. I knew when the horses paraded that some of them would not be coming home. Anyone who has watched the race over the years knows the same. The problem is exactly that.... we know before the race that there almost certainly will be equine fatalities which does sugest that for whatever reason it is statisticly a risky business.
Personally as a sentimental horse lover I think the risk for this race is too high but then again as a sentimental horse lover and someone who once worked at the very edge of the raccing industry i feel the whole industry leaves a lot to be desired.
I think the whole would you rather the horses didnt exist argument is laughable as i cant imagine anyone would loose sleep worrying about a horse that doesnt exist.
 
these 2 pieces in the racing post today say it all to me. As usual, a brilliantly written report by Alistair Down. A man who knows what he's talking about.


By Alastair Down 11:05AM 12 APR 2011

IT IS simple to attack jump racing, infinitely more complex and challenging to defend it.

Saturday’s Grand National has provoked a veritable storm of protest. Some of the outrage has been from the usual suspects marching under the banner of ‘animal rights’ – whatever they may be. But a large chunk of the disgust has come from the everyday man and woman in the street, and their legitimate concerns have to be taken seriously by the racing industry, because in the final analysis we continue to ply our trade with the consent and tolerance of the general public.

And it is no use jump racing holding its nose and ducking the stark realities. Since 1988the Grand National has killed 20 horses and the spectacle of two of them quite literally laid out for eight million people to see on Saturday has stuck broadside in the craw of many people, not least certain newspaper editors or TV and radio stations hungry for controversy.

Every single argument about the legitimacy and morality of jump racing can be boiled down to one extremely uncomfortable, even disturbing, question and that is: Are you prepared to accept the death of horses as part of your sport?

We will take as read all the usual caveats and qualifications about constantly doing our damnedest to prevent horses being killed, and please let’s dispense with our customary refuge in expressions such as ‘casualties’ or horses ‘paying the ultimate
price’.

I can play with fancy words better than most but this is not the time – on Saturday some people were revolted by the sight of dead horses and they are levelling the potentially fatal charge that the Grand National in particular and, therefore, jump racing in general is cruel past the point of acceptability.

Nor is it any use to rail against the cheap sensationalism of the coverage or the twisted logic of critics for whom regard for the truth is an easily avoided inconvenience. There is no point trying to have a sane debate with someone who compares jump racing with bullfighting except to make the small point that on the racecourse everything humanly possible is done to avoid death whereas in the bullring it is fully intended to bring it about.

So we must address the burning question. If your answer is, “No, I am not prepared toaccept the death of horses as part of my sport”, then jump racing is not for you because it is a high-risk, physically dangerous activity in which fatalities are inevitable.

A lot of the problemis that jump racing’s deaths are extremely high profile. As a society we hide death away. We kill hundreds of millions of animals every year and I could show you certain modern farming methods, or the most scrupulously run abattoir, and have you puking in revulsion within minutes.

But such horrors are all hidden from view with the result that someone apparently outraged by Aintree would make no connection with their own contribution to animal carnage on a colossal scale whensitting down later with a chicken sandwich or a juicy steak.

And of course I am as upset as the next man by confronting death. A stricken animal up close is a terrible sight to behold and I couldn’t put my hand on my heart and say that if I had to face it time and again there might not come a tipping point when I could take it no more.

But I am prepared to accept the death of horses as part of my sport. The worst part for sure and the one that serves up jumping’s vilest moments. And is my conscience clear?
Yes. Is it untroubled? Most assuredly not.

Everybody loathes the death of a horse. But fatalities are just a fraction of what jump racing is about and I would behonest enough to argue that, in an increasingly sanitised, risk-denuded society, the omnipresence of danger lies at the very kernel of its appeal.

I have no argument with those who disapprove of jump racing. But with those who seek toemasculate it beyond recognition or ban it entirely I am implacably at odds.

Those who love jump racing hail from every geographical corner and inhabit all social strata of these islands. They are Everyman and they are legion.

When they make their way to Cheltenham or to Aintree it is not without trepidation of what they may see. But, taken in the round, they find something about the sight, sound and spectacle of jump racing that is spiritually uplifting and nourishing to the soul in a way that no other sport comes close to providing.

And, of course, ‘a little learning is a dangerous thing’. How many of those currently howling at jumping’s gate have ever set foot ona racecourse or tried even to begin to understand it before condemning it? There is no tyranny as great as ignorance.

I know many folk, the young in particular, who despite not being ardent racing fans try never to miss the festival because as a feast of very human joy they have found no other occasion in their year to match it.

And that joy is nurtured, raised and rammed tumultuously home into the human breast by an almost primal passion for the jumps horse in full cry. And when one is killed, is it merely marked by some flitting note of regret, or an uncaring shoulder shrug?

Not a bit of it, it is the stuff of genuine remorse, yet still a price worth the paying. The truth is that jump racing gives ordinary people avenues into zones of emotional experience that are increasingly hard to replicate elsewhere. That may render it unfashionable and sometimes uncomfortable, but it doesn’t erode my conviction that it is utterly defensible andalmost wholly admirable.




AND


THE BHA on Monday hit back at critics of Saturday's John Smith's Grand National, in which two horses died, launching a staunch defence of the showpiece race and its safety measures.


Ornais and Dooneys Gate were the two horses fatally injured, meaning two of the contest's 30 famous fences were bypassed, while the winner, Ballabriggs, was immediately dismounted by jockey Jason Maguire - in accordance with a pre-race directive from the BHA.

The scenes sparked an outbreak of criticism from animal rights groups and the national press, but Tim Morris, the BHA's director of equine science and welfare, said Saturday's events demonstrated the welfare improvements.

"The Grand National is a difficult race and was run this year on an unseasonably warm day," Morris said in a statement on Monday night.

"Because of that, all the jockeys had been instructed prior to the race to dismount from their horses as soon as the race was over in order to allow the team of handlers and vets to get water to the horses so as to prevent overheating [which is a main cause of collapse], as it is when people run and race over long distances.

"This preventative action happened to all the horses, not just the winner, and shows welfare improvements in action. No horse collapsed.


Tim Morris: BHA measures are "welfare in action"

"The introduction of the run-outs, which were used for the first time this year, were introduced in 2009, the year after the horse McKelvey died.

"They were introduced after much discussion, which included the RSPCA, as a welfare measure to allow loose horses to be able to go round the obstacles, and not, as has beenreported, to prevent the race from being voided. Again this is welfare in action."

Morris singled out animal rights pressure group Animal Aid for criticism, saying: "They are not an animal welfare group, as many newspapers and news channels have been misinformed.

"They are an animal rights organisation against the use of animals for sport and leisure. As such their clearly stated agenda is to ban racing.

“If racing didn’t exist, this would have a huge impact on tens of thousands of thoroughbreds across the UK; it would effectively mean that owners and trainers wouldn’t be able to look after their horses and the breed would disappear, as would a large part of British life."
 
A well balanced take, KautoStar1.

One small point, would others consider that as Beechers Brook was bypassed on the second circuit, and a second fence, as well, that had they not been, then the injuries or fatalities may have been so much worse?

I'm a focused fan of jump racing, but we have to consider the ethics of it. When the ground conditions, and the weather are clearly against the horses, then should we perhaps consider reduced course sizes? Would it be so difficult to by-pass some of the lesser, but also draining fences, when conditions are less than ideal?

I suppose that it comes down to the question "Do we care"? Harsh, I'll accept, but it was the conditions which killed two horses, in my view.

I'm not "On a campaign", I assure you, but as our world evolves, so we need to question what we do, and convince ourselves that we can live with the consequences.

Alec.
 
Alec I agree.
I said in an earlier post that I thought field size, number of fences and ground conditions should be constantly reviewed. with modern watering systems it should be easy enough to ensure ground that is always on the easy side of good. Being able to by-pass fences must be a given at all courses. Am amazed that it has taken Aintree so long to sort that. But is is an excellent idea.
What I don't understand though is why the BHA didn't think it was in the public interest to let people know of these new measures. Its all very well releasing a statement after the event via the racing press but they had the forum over 3 days of BBC coverage, not to mention race cards and press releases to publicise these new measures. Maybe if they had then the man and women in the street would have had a better understanding of how hard racing works to ensure the safety of horses and jockeys.
 
Kiribati_uk said:
Will you ever Kop on to yourselves, Peter Toole is in a critical condition in hospital tonight after a terrible fall in the previous chase, I wish him a speedy recovery.
Yes its very sad that two horses died in the national but after all they are ANIMALS!!!
QUOTE]

Firsty I wish Peter Toole well and hope he recovers very soon.

However, jockeys have the choice whether to ride in any race - horses don't. As previously stated we are all animals. For the majority of people horses are part of their family and are equally thought of as much as humans. (call me 'fluffy' if you like but I love my animals just as much as my OH and grieve for them when they die)

I am no longer a fan of the National and no longer bet on it but if it was banned it would be replaced by something else equally as demanding. There is still probably scope to make the race safer as outlined somewhere in this thread and I'm sure things will be put in motion before next years' race.

As regards the media, I think it has been hypocritical. Last Wed, Thurs, Fri and Saturday's editons of the papers were all about the Aintree meeting and the Grand National build up, cut out Sweeps etc. but the following days papers the meeting and the race has been slammed - were these the journalists doing the pre and post write-ups?
Click to expand...
 
Love it or hate it everyone should remember that the racing industry pours hundreds od thousands pounds into veterinary research and equipment at the state of the art veterinary clinics about the country. These are continually pushing the boundries on diagnosis ' and treatments for horses from all walks of life.
We ordinary horse owners are benefitting from the amazing advancements in lameness diagnosis and treatment and the availability of some of the world's top equestrian surgeons and veterinary specialists, who would have no place without this funding.
If it wasn't for the continual funding and support by the racing industry I am sure it would be true to say that we would be no way as far advanced as we are today.

I don't condone animal cruelty, but open your eyes and look how common the Mr Grays of this country are - starving horses, abusing them. There are hundreds of 'shoestring' owners who don't even worm their horses regularly let alone vaccinate them or get a vet to them when they are in need - to me that is far more basically cruel than racing.
 
I must initially say that I am in no way knowledgeable in the sport of jump racing. as a layperson I do have some views, Firstly, I feel that running conditions should be evaluated pre-race, if the groubd is 'fast' could runners be balloted to get a decent number of runners? Having ridden for 50+ years I can say that I believe that horses perform for us, such is their nature to trust. I recall many years ago I took a horse XC in unseasonably warm early season - poor chap ended very distressed much to my (then) dismay. Buckets of water later he was fine but in hindsight I would most certainly have pulled up at the first indication of the stress the poor chap was prepared to go through because 'mum' was keen to keep going. Only a small personal view but the generous nature of horses is easily passed by.

Having said that, the GN is a super race, imho reducing the height of fences is a wrong steer, speed and smaller fences will engender a 'careless' approach from horse and rider and that seems to predispose to classic rotational falls and other catastrophic errors.

Phew... and I'm planning to go Xc at the weekend? Must be mad....
 
well done yasandcrystal, agree with your comment, re the "mr grays" of this world...if animal aid and the rest of them poured as much concern and strength into looking out for their (mr grays and his ilk) equines, maybe our horses and ponies, on the whole would have a better life.
But....the "mr grays" of this world are quite a different proposition. ie: go into their yard or land and give off....and you would probably get a bloody nose or worse.

Also thank you KautoStar for putting on here Alastair Downes brillliant piece in todays Racing Post.
 
With regards to people saying horses are heard animals and will follow wether they enjoy it or not is a load of *******s. Was it last year that either Davy Russell or Paul Carberrys horse wouldn't start? They don't go if they do not want to. Perhaps all theses idiots who want to ban racing should concentrate on the horses in this country who are neglected. I work in a national hunt yard and i can assure you they are treated like kings and couldn't want for anything!
 
This is also my first post - I have felt compelled to join in because what I've been reading from some people has made my blood boil!

What a shame the tabloids have acted true to type. Apparently, neither Andy Stewart, the owner of Ornais, nor Paul Nicholls, the horse's trainer, were contacted to give their views to the Mail on Sunday, which devoted some pages, usually reserved for scaremongering about the threat posed by asylum seekers, to vent its vitriol on the Sport of Kings.

What a shame that racing only seems to hit the headlines when something horrid happens. The last time racing as a sport got this much coverage was over the sad events in the paddock at Newbury.

I love horseracing. As an industry, it is still flawed and there are many things that could be done better. But the overwhelming majority of owners, trainers and racegoers care genuinely for the animals on which the whole pack of cards rests. And, frankly, anyone involved in horse sport, who attends Badminton or Olympia or Grand Prix dressage competitions as a spectator, shows their tacit support for horses to be maintained at the highest level with the help of joint injections to stave off the inevitable osteoarthritis, in order that we may marvel at their brilliance. How is this any different from horses racing with bowed tendons? It's not just about the fatalities.

We are hypocrites if we single out one equestrian activity to be more 'cruel' than any other. I have a thoroughbred in utero at the moment which will, hopefully, go on to race over hurdles and, maybe, over fences. No horse of mine would ever run in the National, but that's my choice. Let's all grow up a bit and accept that we all 'use' horses to one degree or another. We should be sticking together, not allowing the tabloids to drive a wedge into the equine community.
 
Cocobeans said:
As I understand it, it's the loose horses who cause the most danger so maybe this is what should be addressed?

Official comment from the RSPCA: http://www.horseandcountry.tv/news/2011/04/13/rspca-respond-grand-national-deaths
Click to expand...

That anyone could consider the thoughts of the RSPCA, or worse still, heed their advice is beyond me. As a charity, the RSPCA are run and managed by a collection of very well meaning, but completely inept, imbeciles.

Cocobeans, the problem of loose horses has been very well addressed over the last few years. To the best of my knowledge, most of the jumping tracks now have highly efficient "drafting" systems in place, and they seem to work very well. Horses are encouraged by course design to take a different path, from the main body of the race.

You would be entirely correct in saying that historically, loose horses were responsible for some appalling falls. It is now something of a rarity to see loose horses, which are still racing, and so posing a threat, thankfully.

Alec.
 
Over2You said:
The amazing McCain family? A family that ritualistically sends its discards to Potters? Nothing amazing about them!!
Click to expand...

Where did you get that 'info' from? :confused:

The McCains train at Cholmondeley, Cheshire. Why would they bypass Turners in Cheshire and take their 'discards' all the way down to Somerset? The simple answer is, they wouldn't, as it wouldn't be cost effective... :rolleyes:

As for rehoming, opposed to slaughter, TB's aren't generally for novices, but they end up with eejits through the sales because they are so cheap, then get passed from one sale ring to another when the owners can't cope. Very few have a happy ever after.
There are fates worth than death....
 
AMH said:
This is also my first post - I have felt compelled to join in because what I've been reading from some people has made my blood boil!

What a shame the tabloids have acted true to type. Apparently, neither Andy Stewart, the owner of Ornais, nor Paul Nicholls, the horse's trainer, were contacted to give their views to the Mail on Sunday, which devoted some pages, usually reserved for scaremongering about the threat posed by asylum seekers, to vent its vitriol on the Sport of Kings.

What a shame that racing only seems to hit the headlines when something horrid happens. The last time racing as a sport got this much coverage was over the sad events in the paddock at Newbury.

I love horseracing. As an industry, it is still flawed and there are many things that could be done better. But the overwhelming majority of owners, trainers and racegoers care genuinely for the animals on which the whole pack of cards rests. And, frankly, anyone involved in horse sport, who attends Badminton or Olympia or Grand Prix dressage competitions as a spectator, shows their tacit support for horses to be maintained at the highest level with the help of joint injections to stave off the inevitable osteoarthritis, in order that we may marvel at their brilliance. How is this any different from horses racing with bowed tendons? It's not just about the fatalities.

We are hypocrites if we single out one equestrian activity to be more 'cruel' than any other. I have a thoroughbred in utero at the moment which will, hopefully, go on to race over hurdles and, maybe, over fences. No horse of mine would ever run in the National, but that's my choice. Let's all grow up a bit and accept that we all 'use' horses to one degree or another. We should be sticking together, not allowing the tabloids to drive a wedge into the equine community.
Click to expand...

Welcome to the forum! Excellent first post :)
 
AMH said:
This is also my first post - I have felt compelled to join in because what I've been reading from some people has made my blood boil!

What a shame the tabloids have acted true to type. Apparently, neither Andy Stewart, the owner of Ornais, nor Paul Nicholls, the horse's trainer, were contacted to give their views to the Mail on Sunday, which devoted some pages, usually reserved for scaremongering about the threat posed by asylum seekers, to vent its vitriol on the Sport of Kings.

What a shame that racing only seems to hit the headlines when something horrid happens. The last time racing as a sport got this much coverage was over the sad events in the paddock at Newbury.

I love horseracing. As an industry, it is still flawed and there are many things that could be done better. But the overwhelming majority of owners, trainers and racegoers care genuinely for the animals on which the whole pack of cards rests. And, frankly, anyone involved in horse sport, who attends Badminton or Olympia or Grand Prix dressage competitions as a spectator, shows their tacit support for horses to be maintained at the highest level with the help of joint injections to stave off the inevitable osteoarthritis, in order that we may marvel at their brilliance. How is this any different from horses racing with bowed tendons? It's not just about the fatalities.

We are hypocrites if we single out one equestrian activity to be more 'cruel' than any other. I have a thoroughbred in utero at the moment which will, hopefully, go on to race over hurdles and, maybe, over fences. No horse of mine would ever run in the National, but that's my choice. Let's all grow up a bit and accept that we all 'use' horses to one degree or another. We should be sticking together, not allowing the tabloids to drive a wedge into the equine community.
Click to expand...


Very eloquent first post, and highlights perfectly, the hypocrisy of some people, who enjoy their days out at 'Badders', HOYS, etc, yet condemn racing.

Horse racing is far more accountable and up front than any other sport I can think of, so it is an easy target, rather than the hidden twilight worlds of eventing, SJing, and showing, where cruelty can easily be hidden away.
 
Dubs said:
Very eloquent first post, and highlights perfectly, the hypocrisy of some people, who enjoy their days out at 'Badders', HOYS, etc, yet condemn racing.

Horse racing is far more accountable and up front than any other sport I can think of, so it is an easy target, rather than the hidden twilight worlds of eventing, SJing, and showing, where cruelty can easily be hidden away.
Click to expand...

Absolutely, Dubs. Just this morning, I've been doing research to respond to an article written about 'jumps' racing in Australia, which is under serious threat from the animal welfare groups out there. I was able to go on the BHA's website and find stats for all sorts of things, including racecourse fatalities as percentages of starters for flat, AW flat and jumps. I admit I haven't checked, but I'll guess I wouldn't find the same on the BE website. Racing is accountable to its audience in a way that no other equine discipline needs to be.

Another thing to consider is the amount of money that is spent on veterinary research related to racing from which other disciplines ultimately benefit. The HBLB (Horseracing Betting Levy Board) funds veterinary research - I attended a conference at Cheltenham the year before last, sponsored in part by the HBLB, at which vets shared some of their findings. Racing is one of the biggest contributary factors to the UK's veterinary excellence. And given that we have less than half the thoroughbreds in training that Australia does, yet as a nation are continually called on for veterinary expertise, would it be wrong to surmise that jump racing plays an integral part in instigating much of the research?
 
Yup, the advances sponsored by the racing industry mean that horses with crap feet (Big Brown - remember him?) and fragile bones (going right back to Mill Reef for old timers like me) can race, breed and pass their fantastic genes on to a whole new generation of fragile, high-maintenance horses with little or no chance of an alternative career if they don't run fast enough.

I accept that all equestrian sports are exploitative to an extent, but any person with a moral bone in their body will draw the line at a point where they believe the exploitation has gone too far. It seems that general public are getting uncomfortable with the equine death toll that the Grand National causes each year. Maybe it'll get banned, personally I doubt it because too much money is at stake. I certainly won't be watching it and thinking to myself 'that horse has just died' again.
 
Spinal Tap said:
Yup, the advances sponsored by the racing industry mean that horses with crap feet (Big Brown - remember him?) and fragile bones (going right back to Mill Reef for old timers like me) can race, breed and pass their fantastic genes on to a whole new generation of fragile, high-maintenance horses with little or no chance of an alternative career if they don't run fast enough.

I accept that all equestrian sports are exploitative to an extent, but any person with a moral bone in their body will draw the line at a point where they believe the exploitation has gone too far. It seems that general public are getting uncomfortable with the equine death toll that the Grand National causes each year. Maybe it'll get banned, personally I doubt it because too much money is at stake. I certainly won't be watching it and thinking to myself 'that horse has just died' again.
Click to expand...

But horses do not exclusively die in the Grand National. I've seen 2 horses die in any old race, or several horses die over several races on one day. The National is not the only race to kill horses, nor does it do so every year. So what's the next step? Ban racing? That doesn't work.
 
Spinal Tap said:
Yup, the advances sponsored by the racing industry mean that horses with crap feet (Big Brown - remember him?) and fragile bones (going right back to Mill Reef for old timers like me) can race, breed and pass their fantastic genes on to a whole new generation of fragile, high-maintenance horses with little or no chance of an alternative career if they don't run fast enough.

I accept that all equestrian sports are exploitative to an extent, but any person with a moral bone in their body will draw the line at a point where they believe the exploitation has gone too far. It seems that general public are getting uncomfortable with the equine death toll that the Grand National causes each year. Maybe it'll get banned, personally I doubt it because too much money is at stake. I certainly won't be watching it and thinking to myself 'that horse has just died' again.
Click to expand...

Isn't it interesting - Springalong died during an event a couple of weeks ago, and the front page of the H&H carried a tribute to a life well lived and a brilliant career. There is an assumption that it's OK for horses to die eventing because, to paraphrase another post on here, they've died doing something they 'love'. Well, maybe racehorses love racing - or maybe they don't. Maybe eventers hate eventing...

There aren't fatalities in the Grand National every year, that's a blantant exaggeration. There aren't fatalities at Badminton every year. But there are thirty odd fences and 4 and a bit miles of going... Any similarities? And I've been at Badmintion when more than one horse was destroyed and they all just carried on. And I've watched certain well known event riders chase home very tired horses to make the time. Dress it up how you like, jump racing and eventing aren't so different.
 
For the most part most of you talk sense. I work in racing so I will address a few of the things I can remember from the previous posts.

Drugs in racing - no chance! Nearly every winner, unduly beaten favourite or well running outsider gets dope tested at the end of each race. You can't even feed too many apples, carrots or polo's to these horses incase a high sugar content shows up in a blood test. In this country drugs in racing are a complete waste of time, effort and money. If a horse is found to have a prohibited substance in its blood then the trainer has to pay a large fine - that's if it was a minor infringment. Trainers have been fine in excess of £12k, banned from racing any horses for 3 months and have had said horses banned from racing for 30days in the most extreme cases. It's just not worth the risk. Yes in America drugs are used. The main ones used are to prevent bleeding and for faster dispersal of amino acids. In the long run they are detrimental to the horses health.

Qualifications for the Grand National - The race is for horses 6years old and upwards. They have to have raced in at least 3 chases to gain a handicap mark. No horse with a rating of less than 110 can be entered. Normally only horses rated 135 and above make the cut into the race ensuring that you do truly get the best horses. To acheive a rating sufficient to get a run these horses usually have to have won a few decent races or been placed at the highest level. The Cheif Handicapper never hands out undue praise to naff horses. For a jockey to ride in the National they must have won 15 hurdle or chase races under the Rule Of Racing. So they are no beginners.

As for Racehorse Death Watch - that site makes my blood boil! It has so many facts wrong about how the horses died. And plus which saddistic person trawls through all of the racing results every day just to see if any died?

The picture of Dooney's Gate in the Daily Flail is totally inappropriate. He was already dead at the point. He knew nothing of hitting the ground.

As for the race being run in the second fastest time in history I would just like to point out that never before have fences been by-passed. If jumped you would add on approximately 3-4seconds for jumping the normal fence and a further 5-6seconds for jumping Becher's Brook. So if you add that on to the time of the race you will find it about average.

As for horses running and being trained through fear - utter twoddle! Trust me, if they don't want to do it they wouldn't! What can a small human (and jockeys are pretty darned small for the most part) do against half a tonne of horse? Angry, scared or just plain stubborn? Racehorses are treated as royalty. If they don't want to do it they are found other jobs to do. They aren't treated as just another machine, they are well loved, well looked after and very much respected by anyone who has anything ot do with them.

If racing is cruel and should be banned then what about eventing? You ask your horses to jump over huge solid fences for a long period of time. Dressage - the training method of Rol Kur caused a HUGE debate. Endurance - running horses to the limits of their stamina. Showing - "show condition" means obesely fat whilst many are put onto steroids to bulk up quickly.

To be honest I think racehorses get the far better deal out of it all.
 
AMH said:
Isn't it interesting - Springalong died during an event a couple of weeks ago, and the front page of the H&H carried a tribute to a life well lived and a brilliant career. There is an assumption that it's OK for horses to die eventing because, to paraphrase another post on here, they've died doing something they 'love'. Well, maybe racehorses love racing - or maybe they don't. Maybe eventers hate eventing...

There aren't fatalities in the Grand National every year, that's a blantant exaggeration. There aren't fatalities at Badminton every year. But there are thirty odd fences and 4 and a bit miles of going... Any similarities? And I've been at Badmintion when more than one horse was destroyed and they all just carried on. And I've watched certain well known event riders chase home very tired horses to make the time. Dress it up how you like, jump racing and eventing aren't so different.
Click to expand...

Spring Along was a highly successful eventer and there are far fewer deaths in eventing as there are in racing. The combination of both makes it more likely that his death would make headlines. However, I have never seen front page/memorials/headlines in pro-racing media for no hope racehorses who died while doing something they 'loved'. At least in eventing, more and more fences are being built with frangible pins and most horses legs are greased to help them over the fences. As pointed out previously, they go one-at-a-time making pile-ups (that regularly occur in racing) an impossibility. I am not saying I completely agree with eventing, but it is a damned site safer for the horse.
 
I would also like to point out that the top 1.5-2ft of each National fence can be brushed through and knocked off by the horses. Regulation Chase fences you can go through the top of, aprox only 1.5ft at the bottom is actually solid. And Hurdles can be totally flattened quite easily. They might look big stiff fences but in reality they don't take a lot of jumping.
 
EKW said:
For the most part most of you talk sense. I work in racing so I will address a few of the things I can remember from the previous posts.

Drugs in racing - no chance! Nearly every winner, unduly beaten favourite or well running outsider gets dope tested at the end of each race. You can't even feed too many apples, carrots or polo's to these horses incase a high sugar content shows up in a blood test. In this country drugs in racing are a complete waste of time, effort and money. If a horse is found to have a prohibited substance in its blood then the trainer has to pay a large fine - that's if it was a minor infringment. Trainers have been fine in excess of £12k, banned from racing any horses for 3 months and have had said horses banned from racing for 30days in the most extreme cases. It's just not worth the risk. Yes in America drugs are used. The main ones used are to prevent bleeding and for faster dispersal of amino acids. In the long run they are detrimental to the horses health.

Qualifications for the Grand National - The race is for horses 6years old and upwards. They have to have raced in at least 3 chases to gain a handicap mark. No horse with a rating of less than 110 can be entered. Normally only horses rated 135 and above make the cut into the race ensuring that you do truly get the best horses. To acheive a rating sufficient to get a run these horses usually have to have won a few decent races or been placed at the highest level. The Cheif Handicapper never hands out undue praise to naff horses. For a jockey to ride in the National they must have won 15 hurdle or chase races under the Rule Of Racing. So they are no beginners.

As for Racehorse Death Watch - that site makes my blood boil! It has so many facts wrong about how the horses died. And plus which saddistic person trawls through all of the racing results every day just to see if any died?

The picture of Dooney's Gate in the Daily Flail is totally inappropriate. He was already dead at the point. He knew nothing of hitting the ground.

As for the race being run in the second fastest time in history I would just like to point out that never before have fences been by-passed. If jumped you would add on approximately 3-4seconds for jumping the normal fence and a further 5-6seconds for jumping Becher's Brook. So if you add that on to the time of the race you will find it about average.

As for horses running and being trained through fear - utter twoddle! Trust me, if they don't want to do it they wouldn't! What can a small human (and jockeys are pretty darned small for the most part) do against half a tonne of horse? Angry, scared or just plain stubborn? Racehorses are treated as royalty. If they don't want to do it they are found other jobs to do. They aren't treated as just another machine, they are well loved, well looked after and very much respected by anyone who has anything ot do with them.

If racing is cruel and should be banned then what about eventing? You ask your horses to jump over huge solid fences for a long period of time. Dressage - the training method of Rol Kur caused a HUGE debate. Endurance - running horses to the limits of their stamina. Showing - "show condition" means obesely fat whilst many are put onto steroids to bulk up quickly.

To be honest I think racehorses get the far better deal out of it all.
Click to expand...

At least someone cares enough to publish their deaths, so their names will not be forgotten. Would you rather they never be remembered?


So that makes his death acceptable does it?

That is what I call utter twaddle (not twoddle - if you want to try and make an intelligent post, then at least get your spelling right!). Many top trainers have said they utilize the flight instinct of the horse. At the start of a race, when a group of horse start running, the rest will surely follow. Those that refuse to start (of which I have seen very few) could very easily be spooking/fixating on something else. Anytime I've seen a flat horse refuse to go into a start gate it is because they are afraid of the start gate. I have never seen a horse refuse to go after being released from the gate.

Do you regularly see horses breaking legs/necks/backs in dressage? Do you often see them dropping dead of heart attacks or ridden to the point of collapse? As for endurance. Deaths from heart attacks are rare. This is because they are given plenty of breathers and pass through multiple vet inspections. Racing provides neither of those things.

In racing, the horse is always the loser. Even many of the top ones end their lives in slaughterhouses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top