What would you consider an Ex-racehorse to be?

E

Elf On A Shelf

...
Joined
28 February 2011
Messages
16,446
Visit site
Random musings on my day off.

What would you class as an Ex-racehorse?

One thatbhas raced on the track under rules?

One that has only Pointed but never actually ran on a rules track?

One that has been in training but has never made it a race for some reason or another?

Personally I think they should have run under rules on a track proper as nothing else gives you buzz, the fanfare and the drunken idiots wearing silly hats screaming on your race whilst you are still walking round the paddock!

Whilst Pointers see a lot it's more stallworts that go pointing and so it's a more social get together than rules racing.

Just being in training they never get all the hustle and bustle of race days, all the prep that goes into it and most importantly they are never truly pitted against another horse in a battle to the line. Yes they work at home but you still never push them.to that degree.

What do you think?
 
Strictly speaking, I agree with you. However, if I am sourcing a horse, I class anything that has been in training as an ex racehorse.
 
I refer to mine as a failed racehorse he was in training but was too naughty to make it too the track , I think in my mind they have TI make it to the track tobe ex racehorses because you really be ex something you never have done.
 
I guess it depends why you are asking.

From the point of view of organisations that promote ex racehorses, I think it can be helpful to include all the above as it shows that horses bred for racing can go on to have an alternative career regardless of whether they are retiring after a successful career, they failed right at the start or anything inbetween

All the cases you describe are different and the horses will have been through different experience but there are also similarities in their upbringing which will affect them.

I sometimes refer to mine as an failed or ex racer but will usually elaborate that though he was in training he was too slow and lazy to waste an entry fee on, he's french so I don't think pointing was an option. I preferred the fact he hadn't jumped (his lines are NH) so he was a blank canvas.

He was started earlier than he would have been if he'd been destined to be a sportshorse (in training before his second birthday) and there will be ways he will have been trained and handled that he has in common with his more successful counterparts.
 
Criso - I agree with you that all of the basic elements are the same to start with. They are all bred specifially - not mismatched. They are all raised in pretty much the same way. Flat horses go into training in Sept/Oct of their yearling year, NH horses usually June/July of their 3/4yo year depending on maturity. They work to their codes.

But I personally think it's the track that makes the difference. I rode a lovely wee 4yo filly who was a bus. You granny could have ridden her. She shouldn't have raced as she was hopeless at home but her owner insisted and so she went for a bumper. Well dope in a rope no more! After that day she was a joggy, prancy madam who would pull yor arms out and fight every step of the way - she was still bloomin useless though lol!

Different aspects cause different reactions and life experiences.
 
Someone got a thoroughbred she's forever posting about on facebook and calling him 'so and so the ex racehorse'. Literally always puts 'the ex racehorse' after his name. Not only does it drive me potty but he's also NOT an ex racer, he was a stringer and took the other horses out hacking... so he was in training for a bit but...

Personally unless a horse has actually been and raced its not an ex-racer. Daisy at work is a real ex-racehorse and she was good at it too!
 
Bred for racing and broken as a two year old is what I would consider an ex racer. For me it is the long term potential damage caused by the young breaking and training as well as anything done by the racing.
 
I would agree, They should have run under rules. Ex pointers are ex-pointers and a horse who never made it is a TB who trained but I wouldn't really class as ex racer.
That's my opinion!
 
Def should have raced not just been in training. Not sure about pointing but think probably should be that have raced under rules.
 
EKW said:
One that has raced on the track under rules?
Click to expand...

This. The second one is an ex-pointer not an ex-racer and the third a TB.

However I wouldn't be surprised to see ponies who have participated in Pony Club racing rallies be advertised as ex-racers in the future... :rolleyes::D
 
Related question... Does anyone know roughly how many thoroughbreds there are that have not gone into training or even not bred to race? Do they exist at all?
 
Fb - some people breed them as sports horses with no intention of racing them but they are few and far between.

A couple of racehorses that well on the track then retired to stud found their neich in sports horses, not racehorses. Primitive Rising and Master Imp are 2 such horses.
 
I personally would only consider them to be an ex racer if they raced under rules, horses in training absolutely not, IMO.
 
Nicnac said:
This. The second one is an ex-pointer not an ex-racer and the third a TB.

However I wouldn't be surprised to see ponies who have participated in Pony Club racing rallies be advertised as ex-racers in the future... :rolleyes::D
Click to expand...

Already been done on here ;)

An ex-racer is one that has raced, under rules.

Reg is a proper ex-racer, he raced on the flat and over hurdles, as well as P2Ps. He tried it all and showed no aptitude for it, bless him- he was fast so often did ok, but he doesn't have the need to be in the lead!

Bee raced once, in a bumper. She was technically an ex-racer. But really, she wasn't- one race and one season in training doesn't really count!

Smokey was in training (at Venetia Williams- high hopes for him!) but was too small and slow for it. He's technically an ex-polo pony, as that's what he spent 2 years doing I think. But meh.

I refer to Smokey and Reg as the ex-racers because it's easy and I'm lazy. But he's not one, and in proper stuff we make sure that's clear.

It annoys me when people talk about 'not bad for an ex-racer!' on FB and things, and the horse never raced... Although we do call Reg 'Reggie the Racehorse' a lot, to make ourselves laugh :D And if he's done v. well at something, we often say he's not bad for a cronk old ex-racer ;)
 
Lolo said:
It annoys me when people talk about 'not bad for an ex-racer!' on FB and things, and the horse never raced...
Click to expand...

This is what sparked this thread off! There is someone on my FB feed (shortly to be removed before I say something unpleasant!) Who has been banging on and on and putting up picture after picture of her 'ex-racer'. Yes he is a lovely horse and yes he does well at dressage BUT he spent less than 6 months in training and never even got given a registered name! And that was 11 years ago that he was trained!
 
EKW said:
This is what sparked this thread off! There is someone on my FB feed (shortly to be removed before I say something unpleasant!) Who has been banging on and on and putting up picture after picture of her 'ex-racer'. Yes he is a lovely horse and yes he does well at dressage BUT he spent less than 6 months in training and never even got given a registered name! And that was 11 years ago that he was trained!
Click to expand...

I thought I was being unreasonable! If it's not RoR eligible, it's not an ex-racer :D

Although the horses who've raced like twice, should they be RoR eligible? Because IMO they're barely scraping in. Bee was not an ex-racer. She was a TB who'd run once. It had no bearing on her at at all. She'd have trounced Reg in RoR classes because she doesn't have 8 years of racing on her legs...

But that's slightly more controversial!
 
My ex racer ran many times (and won) - she came out of racing in October last year - she had a few months off to chill and she's now being reschooled - she walks down really busy main roads with tractors, cars, buses, lorries alone or in company, she's extremely chilled out and a happy hacker at the moment - I'd trust a child to hack her out ... she's just turned 5 :eek::D
 
Victoria25 said:
My ex racer ran many times (and won) - she came out of racing in October last year - she had a few months off to chill and she's now being reschooled - she walks down really busy main roads with tractors, cars, buses, lorries alone or in company, she's extremely chilled out and a happy hacker at the moment - I'd trust a child to hack her out ... she's just turned 5 :eek::D
Click to expand...

That's the bonus of racehorses - 95% of them are completely bombproof in all traffic! They have been there, seen it, got the t-shirt before they turn 4yo usually.
 
Lolo said:
I thought I was being unreasonable! If it's not RoR eligible, it's not an ex-racer :D
Click to expand...


Ah now! That's my gripe with the ROR! They only allow UK raced horses. So you could go and buy yourself Zarkander or Pour Moi, or Seabiscuit even and still not be able to register it with the ROR! I did find a minor loophole so that Irish horses that only raced over there could be classed as running in the UK if they ran at either Down Royal or Downpatrick - these tracks are in Northern Ireland and thus part of the UK. If the horse raced exclusively in Southern Ireland then it is not eligble.
 
Lol, my old boy - 10 year old ex racer was a complete nut job in traffic and in general life - so nice having a safe relaxing hack :D

My arab on the other hand ... :rolleyes::eek:
 
Alphamare said:
Bred for racing and broken as a two year old is what I would consider an ex racer. For me it is the long term potential damage caused by the young breaking and training as well as anything done by the racing.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I've always bought ex-racers with as few starts as possible, as I'm congnicent of the damage a long term racing career has on soundness. That being said they have always presented in training as ex-racers, and you have to oversome the usual re-training issues as they have typically been fed and ridden as a racehorse even to only have had a couple of starts.

Actually, in Aus we call them 'off the track' horses, rather than 'ex-racers' but I think thats probably getting bogged down in semantics.

ETA: the length of their racing career typically doesn't impact on their re-trainability either. Some horses may have only had a start or even a barrier trial and still find re-education difficult, whereas some horses that raced for years are incredibly quiet and take to it like a duck to water.
 
Last edited:
I like the phrase "off the track", it more or less says what they are. I also think owning an OTT ex-racer is somethhing to be proud of (yes, I am biased!)
 
I do sometimes feel ex-racehorse classes should be split into how long they actually raced for!
they could be in training and race one race, too slow and retired, at 4 years old. or race for years. I always like to say how I have a 'proper' ex-racehorse as he raced until he was 7- 5 years of flat racing, and won his last 4. so had a proper career before injury cause retirement. they are more like just thoroughbred classes when it only needs to have raced once.
but I understand you cant say oh must have raced at least x amount of times to be eligible! I'm just proud my boy change his career so easily after years of racing lifestyle, he learned to jump, school and hack calmly. but can see why people goes for those who raced less or were too slow, as he joints are showing arthritis from all the strain in his early years.

glad all these ROR classes exist though as making ex-racers more popular and rehome able, not nice to be written off at 3 for being too slow!
 
We have one who came from Ireland, we assume he raced but no papers so will never know, one who was in training as a pointer but was too slow so never actually raced, and one who raced successfully from 2.5-10yrs old with 67 starts - that one's the ex-racer, the other 2 are TB's :)
 
F burton i have a tb that was never aimed for the track. Mad as the day is long! Give me my (ex) sane ex-racer any day of the week!
 
If you are talking about ROR show classes then they have to have raced under rules in the UK. You can usually tell if they have been raced because they have a given name but that is not always the case.
 
Major raced as a 2-3yo and had 7 starts, I would consider him an ex racehorse. I had a mare that was nine and had one start when she was 3, I didn't really consider her an ex racehorse although she was more loopy than Major!
 
Hmmm I agree with you to an extent, but I do think that ex-pointers should also be considered. There are many that never make it to a rules track but they race week in week out for many seasons, often more regularly than rules horses. I often find the stables and paddock a lot quieter at a racecourse, than the hustle and bustle of a late season point to point with its fun fair and children running around. I think it's hard to really define them as we have had horses that have been in training for a couple of seasons and only made it to the track on a handful of time. They still have to deal with the high intensity training.

What about ones who raced once in a 6 F maiden as a 2yo and are still competing as exracehorses at the age of 15?

I have had my boy out of training for 6 years now (he's 16) and still do RoR classes and do very well...I am beginning to feel like a bit of a fraud!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top