Monzante

[Mineshaft]

I mean what can the La Racing Commission do? The horse was competitive last year and even won a race. Had 2 workouts before the race one which was 48 and change. How real are those works who knows? The horse did have to pass a pre race vet exam before running. The horse made a move to the leaders which would indicate he was traveling decent.


Im not going to crucify Thacker just yet but I can tell you one thing that track at EVD is terrible and I mean terrible. Ive heard too many complaints this year about the track being bad.

[nijinski]

Originally Posted by Mineshaft

I mean what can the La Racing Commission do? The horse was competitive last year and even won a race. Had 2 workouts before the race one which was 48 and change. How real are those works who knows? The horse did have to pass a pre race vet exam before running. The horse made a move to the leaders which would indicate he was traveling decent.


Im not going to crucify Thacker just yet but I can tell you one thing that track at EVD is terrible and I mean terrible. Ive heard too many complaints this year about the track being bad.

I see one wo and he was a Vet scratch 6/8 , the sirens were blaring .
EVD is forced to investigate , they have to and I understand they are .
They may want to try to get accredited . They will then have to conform
to regulations and the Vets will have tougher guidelines to follow ..

[Stillriledup]

The unfortunate part of the game is that its dictated by finances and owners are not treating racehorses as pets. Most owners are not as rich as "kings" (hence, sport of kings) and they have to watch their nickels and dimes, many owners are a few losses away from being out of the sport altogether, what kind of expense would an average owner incur if that owner felt obligated to retire all his ex racehorses and spend money on their feed and care for the rest of their lives?

Its a vicious cycle, trainers can't tell owners of a 5k claimer "lets give him 6 months R and R" it just makes no financial sense, owners don't want to pay that expense, the 6 months upkeep is probably more than the horse is even worth.

There are just too many horses who can't run anymore and nobody wants to foot the bills. I know there's an outcry for Monzante, but is anyone in this thread willing to take the next Monzante, retire him and pay for his feed and care for the rest of his life?

Its very easy to spend someone else's money. This is a very rough and unforgiving game, its just currently set up where many of these horses won't retire and live happily ever after. There's just not enough people out there who want to adopt a really large pet, they just don't have the room in their backyards to accomodate this situation.

Its a shame, nobody wants to see horses meet their brutal end, but is there really any way to stop it? What do you all suggest?

[Pine Tree Lane]

Originally Posted by nijinski

You don't see a title like this much from Steve Haskin . I'm glad Bloodhorse
let him run with it .

Monzante’s Death a Disgrace

The death of this old warrior has brought out a lot of outpouring from many in the industry .. Everyone hoping that the racing commission in Louisiana
wakes up and makes stiff change .

And just as quickly, they pulled it.

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by Pine Tree Lane

And just as quickly, they pulled it.

so much for journalistic integrity

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

The unfortunate part of the game is that its dictated by finances and owners are not treating racehorses as pets. Most owners are not as rich as "kings" (hence, sport of kings) and they have to watch their nickels and dimes, many owners are a few losses away from being out of the sport altogether, what kind of expense would an average owner incur if that owner felt obligated to retire all his ex racehorses and spend money on their feed and care for the rest of their lives?

Its a vicious cycle, trainers can't tell owners of a 5k claimer "lets give him 6 months R and R" it just makes no financial sense, owners don't want to pay that expense, the 6 months upkeep is probably more than the horse is even worth.

There are just too many horses who can't run anymore and nobody wants to foot the bills. I know there's an outcry for Monzante, but is anyone in this thread willing to take the next Monzante, retire him and pay for his feed and care for the rest of his life?

Its very easy to spend someone else's money. This is a very rough and unforgiving game, its just currently set up where many of these horses won't retire and live happily ever after. There's just not enough people out there who want to adopt a really large pet, they just don't have the room in their backyards to accomodate this situation.

Its a shame, nobody wants to see horses meet their brutal end, but is there really any way to stop it? What do you all suggest?

my response would be that if you can't handle the pension payments, then don't get into the game in the first place.

[burnsy]

Originally Posted by tucker6

my response would be that if you can't handle the pension payments, then don't get into the game in the first place.

I agree so much with this statement...That being said. I am a gambler not an owner. So i never feel the pressure of owning a race horse. One of the reasons i love horse racing is the horses themselves. I grew up in Saratoga, have worked with horses and love being around animals. I am the type person that feels guilty when i run over a squirel by accident. I don't see how you can be around these animals and not feel anything for them but a dollar sign. The animals can sense if you give a shit about them too. I am one of those people that can walk up to almost any animal and it will trust me. My friends call me a dog whisperer. This is the ugliest part of this game. Accidents are one thing, but every race horse deserves a "retirement" after the cheers have died down and the tickets have been cashed or torn. Besides the ethical reasons, the sport gets a black eye everytime one of these stories comes out. A horse like that should never be running in a cheap claimer at that age or ANY age. Once there is a decline like that, give the poor horse a break.........it hasn't worked hard enough for you yet? And we are the breed thats supposed to be able to think.

[letswastemoney]

Originally Posted by tucker6

so much for journalistic integrity

Most of Haskin's articles are very positive and happy feeling. I would have liked to read whatever they pulled.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by letswastemoney

Most of Haskin's articles are very positive and happy feeling. I would have liked to read whatever they pulled.

is this it?

http://cs.bloodhorse.com/blogs/horse...-Disgrace.aspx

[FantasticDan]

Update.. horse was deemed "salvageable" on track after the injury, trainer then ordered private vet to euthanize back at his barn:

http://www.drf.com/news/monzante-dee...regulator-says

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by FantasticDan

Update.. horse was deemed "salvageable" on track after the injury, trainer then ordered private vet to euthanize back at his barn:

http://www.drf.com/news/monzante-dee...regulator-says

ut oh.

I know the trainer is going to get tons of blame here, as well he/she should, but isnt the vet also to blame? Euthanizing a horse who didnt need to be euthanized?

Is it a crime to murder an animal?

[menifee]

Originally Posted by FantasticDan

Update.. horse was deemed "salvageable" on track after the injury, trainer then ordered private vet to euthanize back at his barn:

http://www.drf.com/news/monzante-dee...regulator-says

This story is going to get a lot worse for Thacker if this is true.

[PhantomOnTour]

Shouldn't someone stop this guy from riding at age 70?
He is on the even money chalk at FP in race 2...why is this guy allowed to ride at that age?

EDIT: he ran 2nd...but man does he look horrible

[nearco]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

ut oh.

I know the trainer is going to get tons of blame here, as well he/she should, but isnt the vet also to blame? Euthanizing a horse who didnt need to be euthanized?

Is it a crime to murder an animal?

The descision to Euthanise a horse is not as black and white as you seem to think. We have no idea what "salvagable" means in this instance. Among the factors that would be considered are a) is it worth it to the horse's future quality of life to keep it alive... you can save a horse, but if it means the rest of his days would be spent in pain in stall, it might the humane thing to euthanise.
b) the cost involved in "salvaging" the horse. Was it a few hundred bucks and some time off? Or was it $10k+ in vet bills/surgery/rehab?

I've seen people keep alive horses (both race horses and horses in other sports and pleasure horses) that imo would have been kinder to the horse to have it put to sleep,as they had no quality of life afterwards.
I have also seen many people euthanise horses because the cost to keeping the horse alive was prohibitive. I personally have had to do that. It wasn't fun descision, but I didn't have the tens of thousands of dollars it would have cost to try to save a horse whose only value was sentimental value to me.

We don't know the specifics of this particular case. Could be the trainer is a cheap ass scumbag with no heart, or it could be something entirely different.

[Cannon shell]

The person to blame for this is Thacker, plain and simple. The irony is that his decision to put the horse down is probably the best one that he made during this entire process. The idea that a track vet based on a 30 second evaluation on the racetrack can deem a horse "salvageable" without xrays or any diagnostic tools is a joke. Many "salvageable" horses wind up dying slow deaths from any number of causes such as infection, founder, etc. In the end the LA racing commission based on their statement seemed to have taken extra steps to examine the horse prior to his race. The previous vet scratch was for a minor colic though that is not always the case but is what is often put down when a horse is scratched.

Paulick is using this sad case to take potshots at pretty much anyone who was ever associated with the horse (disclaimer-I have trained for one of the previous owners though no longer do so) including the LA racing commission. Naturally he is just stirring the pot trying to drive traffic to his site but the idea that any of his previous owners could have done "something" is pie in the sky, after the fact, monday morning quarterbacking. The only reason this case has any attention is the horse was at one time pretty good. There are lots of examples of these types of horses hitting the bottom and winding up in bad shape or dead and most are ignored. The responsibility unfortunately lies with those at the bottom of the food chain who are usually least able to afford to make calls without regard to finances. We can wring our hands, start committees, cry to Joe Drape, start petitions to do "something", ect but until the onus is placed on those who are making the call as to when and where they are willing to race these types of horses, nothing will change.

Horses eat alot, they require a lot of care and space. The monthly upkeep on a racehorse in training is going to cost you way more than the typical American family spends on a mortgage payment. Even when they are retired they still require far more care than a dog or cat or other type of pet. They can live for a longtime, I have a 29 year old pony who is still working. Finding a place to retire these horses (Not this one because he probably could have gotten into a higher profile retirement place) isnt as easy as you'd think.