Maybe PETA has a point ...

[cj]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Now we have jurisdictions moving entire meets to another locale (CD -> ELP) because a perfectly rational statistical probability occurred.

Did they ever find out the REASON for the cluster of breakdowns at CD?

I don't recall seeing any...so it's going to happen again someday...for no reason at all.

Of course it is, and the industry needs to stop having knee jerk reactions and try educating people. Teach them how often horses actually break down and how much better it has gotten in the past decade and how there are continued efforts to reduce that number even more.

There is nothing wrong with doing things to limit breakdowns as much as possible even if that number will never be zero. And that is where education comes in. If people can't accept that some horses will die, no matter how small the number, there is nothing we can do to win them over and we shouldn't try to appease them. It is impossible.

[wisconsin]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

I wish we could go back to the age when people didn't freak out so much when a horse broke down. I know that's cold to say...but...look where it's lead us...

Trainers rarely work their horses hard (there are still some who do, but it's now very much the exception)...and they certainly don't race their horses hard like they did back when I was getting into the game (30+ years now)...

Does this "babying" of racehorses (especially the superstars) lead to more fragile racehorses? Well it's certainly not leading to more stout racehorse, that's for sure.

It's also lead to smaller fields...fewer horses being raced because trainers now space them out in terms of weeks instead of days...

None of this has been beneficial to racing...and I dare say it hasn't been beneficial to the horses either.

Plus, when you face reality, the only way to prevent another racehorse from breaking down on the track is to eliminate racing in its entirety. That's another cold thing to say, but it's brutally honest.

So where does that leave us?

Nowhere good.

Spot on, Mike.

[Geno_Gino]

Originally Posted by cj

Of course it is, and the industry needs to stop having knee jerk reactions and try educating people. Teach them how often horses actually break down and how much better it has gotten in the past decade and how there are continued efforts to reduce that number even more.

There is nothing wrong with doing things to limit breakdowns as much as possible even if that number will never be zero. And that is where education comes in. If people can't accept that some horses will die, no matter how small the number, there is nothing we can do to win them over and we shouldn't try to appease them. It is impossible.

What would happen if people tried to use that same analogy to police shootings of African American men? "Statistically, it is very rare. But when it does occur, you should just accept it."

Not trying to be argumentative. Just showcasing the view that people outside of racing have. That is, that we beat horses with whips and run them until some drop dead just so that old men can wager on the outcome and boast to our friends how "smart" we are.

[Robert Fischer]

PETA is a dirty racket. Fuck PETA.

[bisket]

I just read the jocks refused to ride if the last 3 race’s weren’t moved to dirt

[cj]

Originally Posted by Geno_Gino

What would happen if people tried to use that same analogy to police shootings of African American men? "Statistically, it is very rare. But when it does occur, you should just accept it."

Not trying to be argumentative. Just showcasing the view that people outside of racing have. That is, that we beat horses with whips and run them until some drop dead just so that old men can wager on the outcome and boast to our friends how "smart" we are.

I think this is a bad comparison. The two things have nothing in common that can be compared.

As for the people outside of racing, that is why you educate them, exactly what I said. You teach them the economic benefits to the community in addition to how well horses are treated and how much safer racing is than even 10 years ago. Some won't listen, but if they don't there is nothing you can do anyway.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by cj

Of course it is, and the industry needs to stop having knee jerk reactions and try educating people. Teach them how often horses actually break down and how much better it has gotten in the past decade and how there are continued efforts to reduce that number even more.

There is nothing wrong with doing things to limit breakdowns as much as possible even if that number will never be zero. And that is where education comes in. If people can't accept that some horses will die, no matter how small the number, there is nothing we can do to win them over and we shouldn't try to appease them. It is impossible.

It's a no win situation, IMO. The horseplayers already know that the horse breakdowns are a regrettable but unavoidable part of the game...so the only people who need to be "educated" are those who have little or no knowledge of this game, and its variables. And to those people...even a few racing fatalities are too many to tolerate. We live in a pet-loving country, and this love for our pets has made us ultra-sensitive to the plight of ALL animals. When the average person starts complaining about the sting of the whip that the jockeys use, you can imagine the horror that a fatal breakdown causes to the average sports fan...especially when the horse is euthanized right on the track.

I think peoples' disgust with horse racing originated when it was revealed that the vast majority of the racehorses end up in slaughterhouses once their racing careers are over. This is a horrifying thing to discover...and it horrifies even a grizzled gambling veteran like me. Add the on-track breakdowns to the reprehensible slaughterhouse practice, and it's easy to see why PETA finds so many receptive ears whenever they start spewing their propaganda. It's very hard to defend this sport to the people who have not participated in it for years and years.

[bisket]

If a tapeta surface were offered as an alternative to off the turf races that horse would be alive today… 10 years ago a lot of people tried to make this happen. Kentucky and California put man made surfaces on their tracks. Kentucky still has one. New York fought it tooth and nail. Lol they’re remodeling Belmont that has plenty of room for a tapeta track… not in the plans… maybe just maybe it should be in the plans. Or New York can keep going down the road they’ve chosen because now it’s going to cost them big money.

[bisket]

https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-rac...s-air-concerns

[The_Turf_Monster]

I don't ascribe to the idea that horses take bad steps or that a surface is at fault for breakdowns in some cases yet other races go off fine.

The American thoroughbred bloodstock went down the toilet for a couple generations due to drugs, legal and otherwise, as we encouraged speed and fragility over stamina and strength. It's been a vicious circle that owners, trainers, breeders, and racing jurisdictions have created for themselves.

American bloodstock was the best in the world but we've bred the best out, I can't even begin to think of how to fix that outside of importing bloodstock from Europe and Australia and restricting races only to those offspring they produce. Good luck with that.

[MJC922]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

I wish we could go back to the age when people didn't freak out so much when a horse broke down. I know that's cold to say...but...look where it's lead us...

Trainers rarely work their horses hard (there are still some who do, but it's now very much the exception)...and they certainly don't race their horses hard like they did back when I was getting into the game (30+ years now)...

Does this "babying" of racehorses (especially the superstars) lead to more fragile racehorses? Well it's certainly not leading to more stout racehorse, that's for sure.

It's also lead to smaller fields...fewer horses being raced because trainers now space them out in terms of weeks instead of days...

None of this has been beneficial to racing...and I dare say it hasn't been beneficial to the horses either.

Plus, when you face reality, the only way to prevent another racehorse from breaking down on the track is to eliminate racing in its entirety. That's another cold thing to say, but it's brutally honest.

So where does that leave us?

Nowhere good.

I agree with your notion that there may well be something to them not running often enough anymore. However they don't run them right back because they can't, too many of them don't hold up when they do. That's the big question IMO, the why of that. Honestly the only way to get to the bottom of why they seem to need so much more recovery time is to remove the meds from the game and add them back one by one until we figure out what the root cause is. It isn't surfaces and it isn't breeding IMO. Breakdowns can be tied in with side effects from medication, could even be as simple as NSAID use which hampers the bones from remodeling properly. This has already been proven to have an impact https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...56328219301371 It's critical that nothing interfere with these natural processes of the bone strengthening. It could also be some other meds or combination of them. The game is jam packed with this stuff today and the HBPA will swear back forth and sideways how necessary it is, everything is therapeutic. Well sorry but I don't buy it.

[Someday Silent]

Originally Posted by Sheffwed

okay but what about the horses?

the idea that racing is bad, no racing is good does not consider at all the actual future for the horses themselves

What purpose for the horse in the modern world? If we don't answer that question, then where are we on helping truly make things better?

Mankind and horses had a symbiotic relationship since horses first emerged from Arabia. Horses were the means of transportation and agriculture, and now we just discard them?

Its amazing to me how little so many people actually think about the (global) outcome of what they suggest - it is human nature to become uncomfortable about the status quo - the same is true with climate change, and what about other countries? The best case scenario resolutions are always more complicated and need more thought

What do you think the horses would want?

To be raised and treated well in places like Fair Hill and the English countryside for starters, and some are born wanting to run

This isn't boxing - if we really care about horses, then maybe think about the actual resultant outcome of your actions if they were to be successful

Dude. I might’ve fallen in love with you a tiny bit for this post.

Humans need animals in their lives. Most species don’t need us and would he better off without us….maybe.

I’m resisting the urge to write an emotional epistle. I’ll just say that Maple Leaf Mel’s death is one of those stark reminders how there are consequences to our actions, good intentions and feel-good stories be damned.

Like I said before, we need animals. We need horses. We need to take better care of them. But we don’t need to get rid of them to soothe our own collective guilty conscience.

[affirmedny]

Originally Posted by bisket

New York fought it tooth and nail. Lol they’re remodeling Belmont that has plenty of room for a tapeta track… not in the plans… .

Board Approves Plan for Synthetic Track at Belmont

https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-rac...ack-at-belmont

[bisket]

Originally Posted by affirmedny

Board Approves Plan for Synthetic Track at Belmont

https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-rac...ack-at-belmont

Problem is they need it in Saratoga even more. The weather in upstate New York and the magnitude of the meet amplifies the need for it. Turf racing has become increasingly more important than dirt for everyday racing. Lol the funny thing is the reason the other states went to man made surfaces was that there were to many breakdowns on the dirt, and poly track was safer. Everyone went to turf instead, which has more of a downside to bad weather than dirt.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by MJC922

However they don't run them right back because they can't, too many of them don't hold up when they do.

Can you cite where these stats can be found? I don't recall seeing such evidence, although I'm sure it exists somewhere...I'd like to know the period of time that triggered the shift in training....and how excessive the death rate was and how it was attributed to how quickly a horse is run back.

In the meantime, I don't know if this was posted on this website earlier...I don't recall seeing it...another smashing PR success....

https://www.nj.com/sports/2023/07/de...racetrack.html

non-paywall link: https://archive.ph/Ynbfk