Is 10 a better mandatory retirement age for racehorses?

[Stillriledup]

It saddens my heart to think that grizzled old warhorses who have worked so hard over the years are going to die on the track, i think 15 is pretty extreme and i don't think that's the right age, maybe its not 10 either, maybe 11? 12? i would suggest that if the game wants to start doing right by the horses, they need to revisit this retirement age, cheapies who are racing at 10, 11 and older don't usually retire sound (enough) it usually ends badly.

Any thought on this, or is 15 the exact right age in your opinion?

[Elliott Sidewater]

I would leave it as is. As sad as it is to see older horses end their careers on down or even tragic notes, there are many examples of horses who carry above average soundness and back class to exemplary lifetime race records. Why deny those horses a chance to compete and shorten today's short fields even more?

Also, knowing the end was near, almost no one would claim an in form 9 year old if there was mandatory retirement at age 10, and this would lead to some people taking huge edges in claiming races, circumventing the whole idea behind claiming races.

[Stillriledup]

I would leave it as is. As sad as it is to see older horses end their careers on down or even tragic notes, there are many examples of horses who carry above average soundness and back class to exemplary lifetime race records. Why deny those horses a chance to compete and shorten today's short fields even more?

Also, knowing the end was near, almost no one would claim an in form 9 year old if there was mandatory retirement at age 10, and this would lead to some people taking huge edges in claiming races, circumventing the whole idea behind claiming races.

Horsemen can't seem to be trusted to do the right thing and put the horse first. Look at the case of Royal FJ, he's 9 now I think and he's being tortured by moron connections, he ran back yesterday in a quick turnaround only to finish last again as a no hoper in his field.

You do make solid points though, thanks for the feedback.

[tucker6]

It saddens my heart to think that grizzled old warhorses who have worked so hard over the years are going to die on the track, i think 15 is pretty extreme and i don't think that's the right age, maybe its not 10 either, maybe 11? 12? i would suggest that if the game wants to start doing right by the horses, they need to revisit this retirement age, cheapies who are racing at 10, 11 and older don't usually retire sound (enough) it usually ends badly.

Any thought on this, or is 15 the exact right age in your opinion?
What are the stats to back up the claim (asking as I don't know) that 15 may be too old? Do horses at 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 have higher breakdown rates than 8, 9, and 10 year olds? Hard to have a conversation without numbers backing up the position.

[Track Collector]

I would leave it as is. As sad as it is to see older horses end their careers on down or even tragic notes, there are many examples of horses who carry above average soundness and back class to exemplary lifetime race records. Why deny those horses a chance to compete and shorten today's short fields even more?

Also, knowing the end was near, almost no one would claim an in form 9 year old if there was mandatory retirement at age 10, and this would lead to some people taking huge edges in claiming races, circumventing the whole idea behind claiming races.

I agree with the above, and would add to it that sound horses who are forced to retire might be put down anyway because the lack of any racing income will likely make it too costly to keep the horse. A sad state, but reality nonetheless.

[Stillriledup]

What are the stats to back up the claim (asking as I don't know) that 15 may be too old? Do horses at 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 have higher breakdown rates than 8, 9, and 10 year olds? Hard to have a conversation without numbers backing up the position.

The claim is that under my plan there would be 0 breakdowns of 10-15. So however many breakdowns happen from 10 to 15 it's one more than my plan so by definition, my plan saves horses from dying in training from injury.

Now TC raises a good point about general euthanasia being administered to horses people don't want on their 10th birthday, that's not what we want to see either.

[cj]

The claim is that under my plan there would be 0 breakdowns of 10-15. So however many breakdowns happen from 10 to 15 it's one more than my plan so by definition, my plan saves lives.

Now TC raises a good point about general euthanasia being administered to horses people don't want on their 10th birthday, that's not what we want to see either.

Going too far IMO. Want to eliminate breakdowns, get rid of racing. If a horse is still racing at 10 there is a very good chance it is a sound race horse. This doesn't mean, of course, that some horsemen don't push the limits to make a few bucks. But I'm not sure how you can possibly regulate that.

[Stillriledup]

Going too far IMO. Want to eliminate breakdowns, get rid of racing. If a horse is still racing at 10 there is a very good chance it is a sound race horse. This doesn't mean, of course, that some horsemen don't push the limits to make a few bucks. But I'm not sure how you can possibly regulate that.

I'm sure if the powers that be cared, they could find a way to make things better. Pretty obvious they don't care though

[cj]

I'm sure if the powers that be cared, they could find a way to make things better. Pretty obvious they don't care though

There has to be a balance. The sport is struggling to fill fields, can't afford to eliminate horses that can still run and are sound. Maybe strict, mandatory vet exams after a certain age could help. But no way horses that can race are going to be forced into retirement, and they shouldn't be either.

[castaway01]

Reality is that those horses have a much, much better chance of being in a better situation ("better" in this case meaning "alive") by continuing to race than they do the minute they retire from racing. As many great retirement efforts as there are, there aren't nearly enough to take care of every 8-year-old infirm gelding in need of a home. That's reality.

[cj]

Reality is that those horses have a much, much better chance of being in a better situation ("better" in this case meaning "alive") by continuing to race than they do the minute they retire from racing. As many great retirement efforts as there are, there aren't nearly enough to take care of every 8-year-old infirm gelding in need of a home. That's reality.

Well said.

[Stillriledup]

Reality is that those horses have a much, much better chance of being in a better situation ("better" in this case meaning "alive") by continuing to race than they do the minute they retire from racing. As many great retirement efforts as there are, there aren't nearly enough to take care of every 8-year-old infirm gelding in need of a home. That's reality.

Solid points, maybe different 'rules' for the older racers should apply, maybe that would be better than retirement at 10.

[EMD4ME]

I say all horses turning 10 be sent over to the David Jacobsen barn and only DJ be allowed to train them and run them going forward :bang: :bang: :rolleyes:

[Stillriledup]

I say all horses turning 10 be sent over to the David Jacobsen barn and only DJ be allowed to train them and run them going forward :bang: :bang: :rolleyes:

Dj always does right by his horses, one of the most soft hearted guys in the biz ;)

[proximity]

i think it's probably better to focus more on when a horse starts racing rather than when it stops as well as how frequently it races. jmo though. :)

[kinznk]

What if new conditions were put in like a senior division? 8yo and above.

How about a race like-

For Colts and Geldings 8 Years Old And Upward Which Have Never Won Ten Races. Ten plus Year Olds, 119 Lbs.; Younger, 123 Lbs. Non-winners Of A Race In 2016 Allowed 3 Lbs. Claiming Price $2,500. Six Furlongs.

[EMD4ME]

What if new conditions were put in like a senior division? 8yo and above.

How about a race like-

For Colts and Geldings 8 Years Old And Upward Which Have Never Won Ten Races. Ten plus Year Olds, 119 Lbs.; Younger, 123 Lbs. Non-winners Of A Race In 2016 Allowed 3 Lbs. Claiming Price $2,500. Six Furlongs.

I like that idea. I'd also add make it a starter race, where the horse can't be claimed OR maybe the purse being $20,000 plus a $5,000 reward for retiring the horse when necessary.

[Appy]

Another approach might be to set a lifetime limit on days in training for racing, along with a minimum number of training days required before a start, but most importantly including a minimum number of consecutive days of at leisure layoff per year.
It isn't age that determines the soundness of a horse.
Endurance horses often don't even begin actual competition until 10-12 years of age. However, safe to say vet supervision in endurance racing is far more intense and honestly pointed to what is best for the horse than in track racing. I think a lot of the vet checks to determine soundness for a horse to run at the track is more just going through the motions for technicality sake than anything else.

[craigbraddick]

Veteran races are a great idea and I think would make for competitive racing too

[barahona44]

If this is an issue, it seems to at least for today,to be limited to Mountaineer.They have a 12 YO, three 11 YO, and 3 10 YO running today Parx has a single ten year old and the other four TB tracks don't have any horses that old starting today.

Aging horses seem to be limited to the smaller, regional tracks, many of them are having trouble filling their fields.With 10 straight years of declining foals, this problem is only going to get worse.

[chadk66]

I don't think a specific age is the solution. It needs to be on a horse by horse basis. I have a broodmare I retired from racing at age 10. could have easily raced another couple years. Didn't have a pimple on her and never had a lameness issue her whole career. Was still winning/hitting the board nearly ever race at age 10. Just decided at that point I'd rather have babies from her than have her racing. Just a personal decision.

[Fager Fan]

I agree that age has zero to do with the safety and welfare of the horse. If you want horses to be safe, then the horses should be looked at individually. This should be the track vets job. They can look at the horses' records and see that horse in an exam and determine if it's at great risk. I'd like their tool box opened though and require more than passing a visual exam. I'd like them to be able to demand xrays, bone scans, the vet records, or other testing if they suspect the horse may have issues.

[Stillriledup]

I agree that age has zero to do with the safety and welfare of the horse. If you want horses to be safe, then the horses should be looked at individually. This should be the track vets job. They can look at the horses' records and see that horse in an exam and determine if it's at great risk. I'd like their tool box opened though and require more than passing a visual exam. I'd like them to be able to demand xrays, bone scans, the vet records, or other testing if they suspect the horse may have issues.

This is true, however, they don't do that, horses are not really scrutinized enough and trainers enter and tracks accept the entry no matter how bad the entry is, how overmatched the horse is or how many times the horse has raced in the last month or season. The early retirement would put an end to that and protect our games veterans. If more horsemen did the right thing and put the horse first, I wouldn't have to be making suggestions like this.

[Fager Fan]

This is true, however, they don't do that, horses are not really scrutinized enough and trainers enter and tracks accept the entry no matter how bad the entry is, how overmatched the horse is or how many times the horse has raced in the last month or season. The early retirement would put an end to that and protect our games veterans. If more horsemen did the right thing and put the horse first, I wouldn't have to be making suggestions like this.

Better to require horses be xrayed or scanned or vet records turned over though. I'd guess that horses at greater risk are younger and these old warriors are very sound (and why they're able to run so long).

[thespaah]

It saddens my heart to think that grizzled old warhorses who have worked so hard over the years are going to die on the track, i think 15 is pretty extreme and i don't think that's the right age, maybe its not 10 either, maybe 11? 12? i would suggest that if the game wants to start doing right by the horses, they need to revisit this retirement age, cheapies who are racing at 10, 11 and older don't usually retire sound (enough) it usually ends badly.

Any thought on this, or is 15 the exact right age in your opinion?
Before issuing government-esque knee jerk mandates, perhaps a study should be performed on the issue?

[Stillriledup]

Before issuing government-esque knee jerk mandates, perhaps a study should be performed on the issue?

Why would you need a study if you can put a rule in play that prevents any horse older than 10 to be injured on the racetrack. Why do you need a study for that?

[castaway01]

Again, if your view is that forcing a 10-year-old horse to race is cruel, then just end the sport altogether. Why is it any crueler for a 10-year-old horse to race than a 3-year-old? A 10-year-old horse is equivalent to a 43-year-old human. It's not an 80-year-old. But regardless, horses of any age can break down. If you feel that this risk is too much and we need to get the government involved to protect the horses (dear lord), just ban horse racing and be done with it.

[SuperPickle]

i think it's probably better to focus more on when a horse starts racing rather than when it stops as well as how frequently it races. jmo though. :)

Exactly. I can only speak for my opinion I'm much more appalled to see young horses raced into the ground than seeing older horses raced 100 times.

I'll even take it a step further. I see a lot more outfits who churn and burn young horses early than I do outfits that race older horses into the ground. A lot of these older war horses are sturdy, tough, honest horses who the guys who claim generally value them and take care of them. Meanwhile I think there's a lot of guys who see young horses have a quick, useful shelf life and push them way too hard.

[fiznow]

I just love these 10yo veterans with records like 100 starts, 20 wins and 30 places who still win and give their best every race. Theyre the real heroes of horse racing. I think horses enjoy racing more than breeding business, so somehow geldings are lucky. ;)

[MonmouthParkJoe]

Reality is that those horses have a much, much better chance of being in a better situation ("better" in this case meaning "alive") by continuing to race than they do the minute they retire from racing. As many great retirement efforts as there are, there aren't nearly enough to take care of every 8-year-old infirm gelding in need of a home. That's reality.

I agree completely. There is also plenty of information out there, the jockey club website is one of them, that shows injury rate by age. Horses that race as older horses do have more breakdowns, but at the same time i doubt that age is the only factor for the breakdowns as they get older.

[thespaah]

Why would you need a study if you can put a rule in play that prevents any horse older than 10 to be injured on the racetrack. Why do you need a study for that?
Honest response is this....
I am SICK AND TIRED of these one size fits all dumb down to the lowest common denominator knee jerk applications of law and regulation.
These things usually have two things in common.
1. They violate the laws of unintended consequences
2. They defy all logic.
The purpose of a study is to construct a statistical abstract which would conclude whether or not such a rule is needed...
We as Americans do far too many things based solely on emotion.....

[Tom]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup
Why would you need a study if you can put a rule in play that prevents any horse older than 10 to be injured on the racetrack. Why do you need a study for that?
Because you assume you know what you are talking about but have idea if you do.

[Stillriledup]

Because you assume you know what you are talking about but have idea if you do.

I'm not suggesting I 'know what I'm talking about' the only thing I'm saying is that if you retire them at 10 you won't have any horses 10 and older die or be injured on racetracks.

[Stillriledup]

Honest response is this....
I am SICK AND TIRED of these one size fits all dumb down to the lowest common denominator knee jerk applications of law and regulation.
These things usually have two things in common.
1. They violate the laws of unintended consequences
2. They defy all logic.
The purpose of a study is to construct a statistical abstract which would conclude whether or not such a rule is needed...
We as Americans do far too many things based solely on emotion.....

The problem is that horsemen haven't shown they can do the right things so the ones that do have to suffer because of the ones who don't. Life's unfair sometimes but I'd rather put the horse safety first than worry about some trainers getting their feelings hurt,

[thespaah]

The problem is that horsemen haven't shown they can do the right things so the ones that do have to suffer because of the ones who don't. Life's unfair sometimes but I'd rather put the horse safety first than worry about some trainers getting their feelings hurt,
My interest IS the horse.
Here.....If a horse is healthy at an advanced age for an equine athlete, but is happy in its surroundings. does its work and demonstrates its ability to compete, it is better for the well being of the animal to keep it in an environment where it shows that it is comfortable.
Horses are odd creatures. If their environment is changed ( race track to permanent turn out) some horses go into rapid decline.
My angle is this. If the horse is sound, eats normally and appears to enjoy competition, let the horse race until it "tells" us it no longer can or wants to race.

[tucker6]

I'm not suggesting I 'know what I'm talking about' the only thing I'm saying is that if you retire them at 10 you won't have any horses 10 and older die or be injured on racetracks.
Which of the following two scenarios would be a worse black eye for the sport?

1. An occasional ten year old horse dies on the track. 3 out of a 1,000.

2. 10 year old horses are taken to a slaughterhouse, proving once and for all that horses have no value after racing is done and that this is a cruel, inhuman sport.


Do you actually think these things through, or are you one of those stream-of-consciousness types who never backtracks when the idea is panned?

[rastajenk]

I'm not suggesting I 'know what I'm talking about' the only thing I'm saying is that if you retire them at 10 you won't have any horses 10 and older die or be injured on racetracks.Then retire them at :8: . Who wants to see a nine-year-old go down in catastrophic fashion?

[Ruffian1]

My interest IS the horse.
Here.....If a horse is healthy at an advanced age for an equine athlete, but is happy in its surroundings. does its work and demonstrates its ability to compete, it is better for the well being of the animal to keep it in an environment where it shows that it is comfortable.
Horses are odd creatures. If their environment is changed ( race track to permanent turn out) some horses go into rapid decline.
My angle is this. If the horse is sound, eats normally and appears to enjoy competition, let the horse race until it "tells" us it no longer can or wants to race.

This is spot on.:ThmbUp:

[Tom]

Then retire them at :8: . Who wants to see a nine-year-old go down in catastrophic fashion?

I got :8: , I got :8: here,
Can I get :7: , who can give me :7: .......

[Fager Fan]

My interest IS the horse.
Here.....If a horse is healthy at an advanced age for an equine athlete, but is happy in its surroundings. does its work and demonstrates its ability to compete, it is better for the well being of the animal to keep it in an environment where it shows that it is comfortable.
Horses are odd creatures. If their environment is changed ( race track to permanent turn out) some horses go into rapid decline.
My angle is this. If the horse is sound, eats normally and appears to enjoy competition, let the horse race until it "tells" us it no longer can or wants to race.

I agree with the overall premise, but would point out that horses are just fine with being retired. They may want a new job instead of just being thrown out in a field, but it doesn't have to be racing.

[classhandicapper]

IMO, a study should be done (probably already has been, but I haven't seen it) to determine the relationship between age, injuries, and breaking down. If there's a statistically significant difference at certain ages and/or with certain injury histories, we'd at least have the data required to discuss the issue publicly and make sensible rules.

IMO, once a horse's form starts declining noticeably and seemingly permanently, he should probably be retired. Either he doesn't want to race anymore or the accumulation of injuries is serious enough to prevent him from competing at the same level. I don't think horses like that should be dropped and dropped in class trying to squeeze the last drop of out a declining animal. I'm not sure what kind of rules you could put in place to measure and enforce that, but the industry should be able to come up with something reasonable.

IMO, we should err on the side of caution with the super popular old warrior horses. Whenever any horse breaks down it's tragic. But when it's some horse that's very popular on a circuit because of years of winning and game efforts, it's outright painful and not good for the fans or the sport. I'd way rather retire too soon than too late.

We need more places like Old Friends and others with resources to not only care for these horses after retirement, but also to purchase them from owners with different views and retire them.

I don't expect much of anything to be done.

[Fager Fan]

Which of the following two scenarios would be a worse black eye for the sport?

1. An occasional ten year old horse dies on the track. 3 out of a 1,000.

2. 10 year old horses are taken to a slaughterhouse, proving once and for all that horses have no value after racing is done and that this is a cruel, inhuman sport.


Do you actually think these things through, or are you one of those stream-of-consciousness types who never backtracks when the idea is panned?

That's a false argument. Those aren't the only two choices.

As for thinking things through, every retirement organization will tell you the most important thing for the horse to be adoptable is to retire them before they're seriously injured or too arthritic to have another career. There is wear and tear to the joints that comes with racing and arthritis shows up at a surprisingly young age in racehorses.

[AlBundy33]

I got :8: , I got :8: here,
Can I get :7: , who can give me :7: .......

I'd say :6: , but then Beholder would be forced to retire. :D

[tucker6]

That's a false argument. Those aren't the only two choices.

As for thinking things through, every retirement organization will tell you the most important thing for the horse to be adoptable is to retire them before they're seriously injured or too arthritic to have another career. There is wear and tear to the joints that comes with racing and arthritis shows up at a surprisingly young age in racehorses.
I never said those were the only two choices. SRU's purpose in starting the thread was to prevent deaths and the bad publicity that would follow. I was simply attempting to show him that an alternative choice was much worse if we were to stop sound horses from racing.

[Saratoga_Mike]

I never said those were the only two choices. SRU's purpose in starting the thread was to prevent deaths and the bad publicity that would follow. I was simply attempting to show him that an alternative choice was much worse if we were to stop sound horses from racing.

This was rhetorical, right?

Do you actually think these things through, or are you one of those stream-of-consciousness types who never backtracks when the idea is panned?

[tucker6]

This was rhetorical, right?

Do you actually think these things through, or are you one of those stream-of-consciousness types who never backtracks when the idea is panned?
Just because you can't understand compare and contrast isn't my problem. If you have a view on the subject, then give it.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Just because you can't understand compare and contrast isn't my problem.

I think you took that wrong ... I was agreeing with you.

[tucker6]

I think you took that wrong ... I was agreeing with you.
Sorry! I guess I did take it wrong. Apologies.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Always safe to assume I disagree with SRU

[Stillriledup]

Which of the following two scenarios would be a worse black eye for the sport?

1. An occasional ten year old horse dies on the track. 3 out of a 1,000.

2. 10 year old horses are taken to a slaughterhouse, proving once and for all that horses have no value after racing is done and that this is a cruel, inhuman sport.


Do you actually think these things through, or are you one of those stream-of-consciousness types who never backtracks when the idea is panned?

im not talking about slaughterhouses, im pretty sure if the industry wanted, they could assure that if a retired racer ends up in a bad place, those connections could have their owners and or trainers licenses revoked..which would mean people would be more desirous to do the right thing.

this is about doing the right thing, we wouldn't have to retire anyone if we didnt have bozos and butchers ruining it for everyone.

[thespaah]

I agree with the overall premise, but would point out that horses are just fine with being retired. They may want a new job instead of just being thrown out in a field, but it doesn't have to be racing.
"New Job"...Correct. Many former thoroughbred race horses are repurposed to become Hunters and Jumpers.
My Friend's finacee has two retired race horses. One 11 the other is 13. She competes in those meets where the horses have to jump over obstacles.

[rastajenk]

So, running on a flat surface after age 10 is a serious threat to be dealt with, but after that age they can jump fences safely. Got it. :ThmbUp:

:p

[Hambletonian]

there should be no set age. every horse is different, some have won races at 15, 16, etc.

on the other hand, there are 5 year olds that are completely shot physically who should be banned from the track.

i agree it is a bad visual when an old warrior goes down, but practically none are taken off the track and pampered as a pasture pet. most move on to something, which could also end up in life threatening injuries.

the funny thing is that in this age of the juice the number of horses that could be affected by an earlier retirement age that are not jumping fences or pulling a sulky is so small as to be leave this topic almost completely moot.

[Tom]

Two Words for you.......

Ben's Cat!

[Grits]

Tom, that rascal is a MACHINE!!! He splits horses, and man, he comes flying. I was yelling at the TV :lol:

[fiznow]

Yes he is unbelieveable! :jump: