New York Times article - USEF and Humble

[QUOTE=Salome;6763498]

How many of you have received a horse with their “prep directions”? When hearing of the huge money sales have any layed wagers on how many shows until that horse decided not to participate any longer? How many of the most winning horses ever go on to continue winning the same way with new riders or actually get new riders? Don Stewart’s horse Lyle is one of the few I can think of that actually gets a new rider almost every year and continues to win at indoors. [/QUOTE]

This is true. I can think of one West Coast trainer in particular whose lovely horses never seem to do much after they’ve left his program/prep routine.

(Lyle is a machine though, and his history goes way beyond 2008. But the problem? There aren’t many like him, at any price. It all comes down to our judging expectations—we’re trying to fit “round” horses into square pegs through chemistry.)

[QUOTE=leyla25;6763304]
Has anyone noticed how well horses go for potential buyers? First horse show is always a success but give a couple of weeks and things start to deteriorate. It is so fun to watch and, predictable.[/QUOTE]

I fail to see why find this is fun to watch. A buyer, perhaps naive but definitely excited and hopeful about their new, perhaps $$$ horse, finds that they can’t get the same level of performance as the previous riders. Maybe they blame themselves and start doubting their own abilities and quit showing, or maybe they blame their trainer who is less than savvy about the new horse’s “program” and so they switch to another trainer who is more adept at the “prep” needed to get the horse back to its previous level. Or maybe they blame the horse, whose fate is now at risk. Perhaps too the horse is now in pain, and this is why his performance has suffered.

I was trying to go back further in his career but Google was not cooperating this a.m. and it was getting tiresome. But his consistency is what really shines. And granted, he was mostly shown in the older juniors and there are others whom always win in the youngers but those have never had any other riders and have historically been in the same program.

[QUOTE=Salome;6763498]
When hearing of the huge money sales have any layed wagers on how many shows until that horse decided not to participate any longer? How many of the most winning horses ever go on to continue winning the same way with new riders or actually get new riders? [/QUOTE]

You don’t seem to see too many top hunters with long careers. One high profile buyer in particular seems to have purchased a number of horses that then dropped out of sight.

Waaaaiit a sec… they are saying a groom did it, but EM just said herself in one of her posts here that she was so relieved when the necropsy showed that SHE did not hit the wrong spot. So why is she saying that now? But is implying a groom actually did the injection? She just made it pretty clear that the reason she packed up and left immediately was out of guilt that she may have nicked him.

On the number of top level Hunters and their longevity? I honestly don’t think there are that many horses who can really get to the top level and stay there. Not really anything nefarious in that. Or in a horse not doing as well in a new home, there is a possibility it’s that actual riding/training ability thing and not just the drugs wearing off as so many assume. Not EVERYbody is corrupt.

Remember the top dawgs get picked off by Ammies and Juniors to dwell in 3’6" land…or even 3’ land. You never see them again but they are still out there at those lower levels out of the HOTY spotlight. The whole point of the business is to aquire, train and sell top horses, not keep them forever and ever even if they can and do reach the top.

Those that dwell in the lower levels with kid and ammie riders are the ones generating most of the whispers and rolling eyes when they stumble around a warm up ring and those owners the least likely to have a clue.

And then the question remains: So how do those of us not “in the loop” know which trainers to avoid? SS is the only trainer who has been outed, while there are plenty of vague references I’m just not “getting” at all.

I really hate to say it but Ratemyhorsepro does have actual public records of suits and violations fairly easy to find…and alot of gossip, rumors and unchecked accusations. So be careful not to take every single word at face value if you go there-even the lawsuits have two sides. Disgruntled ex employees, clients with a sale gone bad and ex domestic partners or spouses can be vindictive hiding behind screen names.

You can also Google if you have the patience. If you do have a basic time frame, you can go back in USEF records and find details of hearing findings and penalties. But there is NO index, you have to know when the USEF hearing was held. No idea about now that it’s online but used to take 3 to 4 months between the hearing and the publication in the back of the magazine.

Had another thought…how if the USEF indexes those results so we could actually look up the disciplinary record of any member? It IS public once it got in the magazine and now goes online. Not just to identify the worst of the bunch, it would also dispell rumours about those that turn out never to have had any kind of penalty or had a simple one 16 years ago and no repeats.

USHJA is always advising owners to carefully check any trainer they are considering, how about recommending USEF make that possible? Not just meds are actioned by that hearing committee- financial irresponsibilty, being found guilty of animal abuse, unsportsmanlike conduct (hitting another exhibitor, screaming profanity at a judge, berating a child), cheating with Pony height, Green status or training while showing as an ammy. Prospective clients would want to know these things instead of finding out “everybody knows” the hard way.

How about it? Low cost. No rule change needed. Supposed to be public.

[QUOTE=findeight;6763350]
Matter of public record (although a little hard to dig up). Summer of 2011, 2 horses, 2 shows, 2 positives, a few weeks apart. He did a sort of mea culpa and blamed a newish road barn employee who was fired. But it really got everybody’s attention.

Hard to remember anybody else of that stature coming up with two positives in that time frame and, IMO, somewhat unfortunate timing he has two magazine covers the same year as he served the suspension (IIRC he was off spring 2012 on on the covers fall 2012).

Part of the problem is USEF moves glacially slow for whatever reason (time off real job, leaving the barn, buying stagecoach tickets etc). The positive comes in pretty quick but the hearing takes at least 6 months to schedual, sometimes gets postponed and any diciplinary action like a suspension is not immediate to give them time to make arrangements for their clients. Typically be nearly a year between the violation and the actual time off.

Anyway, it’s kind of hard for the rank and file to follow sometimes. Or even be aware of.[/QUOTE]

I agree with your post, except for the phrase, “time off”. That indicates that the trainer is taking a vacation. Let’s call it what it really is (or should be): punishment for breaking the drug rules.

[QUOTE=findeight;6763718]

You can also Google if you have the patience. If you do have a basic time frame, you can go back in USEF records and find details of hearing findings and penalties. But there is NO index, you have to know when the USEF hearing was held. No idea about now that it’s online but used to take 3 to 4 months between the hearing and the publication in the back of the magazine.[/QUOTE]

In an effort to suggest contributions to a solution:

Yes, the USEF ought to choose the “make it possible/easy to find D&M rules infringers” strategy. If they changed nothing else, this bit alone would help it appear to stand by it’s mission.

This might be a bone thrown to the Powers That Be who currently exploit the light punishments imposed. They can bet on clients not caring or bothering to do their research. IMO, this is what trainers do now. But they can know, too, that the GOB supports the smarter potential client who wants that information. Since no one knows how much any of we HOs wants or seeks out that information currently, it might work as a proposal that makes its supporters look like advocates of clean sport without actually risking anything, should they believe their clients don’t know/care about the drugging they do.

It’s a win for the clean; it’s a win for the dirty. You need both.

[QUOTE=findeight;6763622]
On the number of top level Hunters and their longevity? I honestly don’t think there are that many horses who can really get to the top level and stay there. Not really anything nefarious in that. Or in a horse not doing as well in a new home, there is a possibility it’s that actual riding/training ability thing and not just the drugs wearing off as so many assume. Not EVERYbody is corrupt.

Remember the top dawgs get picked off by Ammies and Juniors to dwell in 3’6" land…or even 3’ land.[/QUOTE]

I think showing in the A/Os or the Juniors would still qualify a hunter as showing at an upper level of their discipline. Lyle was brought up as an example of such a horse. It does seem like Grand Prix jumpers often have longer careers than the top hunters and they are doing something way more physically taxing.

Add me to the list who thinks that the USEF should keep drug infraction/rule infraction records in a manner that is searchable and easy to find. MyssMyst is correct, right now there is no good way to find out the details about any particular trainer unless you are already “in the loop” and know people you can quietly ask for recommendations and information, unless the trainer has been blatant in their behavior.

I also think that the USEF could find a way to help educate owners and riders about the issue. As an owner or rider, you have the right to ask your trainer EXACTLY what your horse or the horse you are riding is being given. And I mean exactly, not “something to relax his muscles after the long trailer ride, a special nutritional supplement, and some vitamins and minerals.” Nutritional supplements and vitamins and minerals" sounds so innocuous, but that could encompass a wide variety of substances including GABA and magnesium. Owners and riders need to know that.

I think the reason the GP horses may have a longer career is, at least, two fold. One is their pre show exercise it based in dressage/warm up/loosen up not exercise until exhausted. The goal with a high level jumper is rideability and relaxation, not fatique.
At most shows they jump three classes, maximum - not the usual hunter fare of a warm up and double division. The exception being Olympic and World Games where they may jump several more rounds.
Not to appear arrogant but at the GP level there is generally a higher skill level in terms of the rider which in turn is easier on the horse.
This is not to say that those who jump the GP are squeaky clean either.
I wish there were an easy answer. I’m afraid returning to the “run and jump” style of yore might send many riders to the tennis court.

I’d like to propose not just the D&M violations be made available in an easier to use format, I want to see ALL administrative actions and penalties.

Really, if I am looking to use a trainer for my 12 year old DD who, turns out, stormed into the judges booth and threw a chair at them? And several years earlier took a swing at a steward? Might influence my decision, ya think?

Or maybe I am looking to buy a 6 year old Green Hunter and find out the seller has multiple penalties over the last 10 years for misrepresentation?

Or, my favorite, that smooth talking trainer trying to take my horse on the circuit has a stack of violations and has been kicked out for several years. Which is why nobody seems to know him now that he is back and on the opposite coast from where he was previously.

On the other hand, if somebody has a single D&M violation for a legal substance (in proper amounts and time frame) with no further occurances? Probably keep them in consideration. Mistakes do happen and timing can be screwed up.

All of this can be a total surprise to both newbies to our sport and even veterans who just were not aware. All it would take is a software modification to let USEF and USHJA members actually do the research USEF and USHJA suggest when selecting a horse professional. Research of records long made public.

The marketer in me can see an entire scare campaign:

  • A kid in jods holding the reins of a dropped pony with the trainer standing dumbfounded, needle in hand, ribbons in back pocket.
  • An ammie’s splayed out body in the dirt after the horse dropped mid-jump with others waving their ribbons by the in-gate.
  • USEF drug testers slapping trainers on the wrist, post-positive test (wait, that one might not work)
  • Of course, once the campaign has nearly run its course, the last images would show a severely broken down horse in a stall with some ridiculously low number of candles in a birthday cake, his ribbon quilt displayed behind him…

Yeah, that’d be a fun campaign. :frowning:

While I’m not saying they deserve any less of our frustrations, it must be remembered that USHJA & USEF are not one and the same. USEF suspended SS, USHJA put him on the magazine’s cover. The oversight is not as egregious as it initially sounds, nor is it particularly excusable.

USHJA is our tool to influence USEF. And while I know it’s not perfect, there are several committee members that recognize these problems and are working to fix them. I don’t know what kind of D&M authority we could wrestle from USEF but it looks as though perhaps we should try and gain some. Maybe USHJA can slap further fines & penalties on the offenders so USEF doesn’t have to deal with rewriting the rules for our special circumstances, but USEF would have to agree to recognize the bans.

In re: GP horses mysteriously going strong in their late teens while the 13 y.o. 3’ hunter is practically shunned from the show ring: I recently presented several seminars at EAP Finals to the Finalists of the USHJA Horsemanship Quiz Challenge, who were also in attendance. My talk focused on exactly this subject - responsibility for the horse’s welfare beyond the prime show years of 8-12, and why, perhaps, hunters don’t hold up as long. We discussed what the judges are looking for and how that affects “prep”. We discussed alternatives to LTDing, and we talked about being proactive in getting your horse ready to show; ie, not just showing up and riding your class. We talked about the breeders, starters & trainers that worked hard to get the horse to show age, and the generous people that will eventually take the retired show horse on.

My aim was to impress upon these kids that the way they manage their horse now is key to a safe future once it ages. The longer the horse is sound and useful, the more likely it will have a safe place in society. And what it endures during those “prime show years” greatly impacts its long term soundness.

Much to my surprise, though I had kids from 2’6" hunters to 1.40m jumpers, I don’t think I had one “hunter princess” that only showed up and rode. They all managed their own horses at the shows and they were all able to discuss their horse’s quirks and how they went about preparing them. Given that this is a non-riding opportunity from USHJA, making it one of the more affordable programs to pursue, I hypothesize that we didn’t have the upper-echelons of the A Circuit in attendance, where it has apparently become mandatory your horse resemble a robot. But nonetheless, it was inspiring to see these kids give the discussion a great deal of thought, and then get excited about new ideas to get their horse’s brains ready to show without running their legs off… or worse.

I have previously suggested a full-blown Clean Sport promotion campaign… it didn’t get much wind back then, but the eagerness of these young kids to learn has really inspired me to believe that if we act now there might be a chance to save the next generation of horsemen.

I did not mean it was fun to watch the fate of the horse or buyer but the whole process, as it is very common repeat practice. We have all made tons of mistakes and ignore the signals. Many buyers come to WEF to buy the winners and they go home to find a different horse. It is not always the training as someone else suggested.

[QUOTE=CBoylen;6754658]
Very. Especially for an important show like Devon. Most people keep a regular adequan schedule and use legend show-by-show, but for a show like that you would adjust your adequan schedule if necessary to get the peak effect. And some of those that don’t usually double their legend for regular shows do so for Devon.[/QUOTE]

And no one thinks that this might be a problem?

Gah - I’m only on page 26!

Could the USEF ban as doping and not therapeutic any off label use of a drug? They won’t, but would that be feasible? One would have to either pre-file a medication use statement (per FEI) or show a pre-existing vet diagnosis for any substance found in testing. This would mean “guilty until proven innocent.”

[QUOTE=Ambitious Kate;6757901]
I know I am not the only one who would like an explaination from the mods as to why a poster is allowed to continue posting lawsuit threats to other posters on this board. She’s been banned before. Why is she allowed to threaten people on this board in subsequent usernames?

While she is, confusingly, allowed to post, frankly, I think EM should keep right on digging herself into a pit, rather than heed other’s advice to stop digging and posting, not only because watching her self destruct is just so highly entertaining, but that she deserves everything she heaps upon herself. I think the more of a spectacle she creates, the more attention will come to the matter, and the more USEF will be (should be, will have to be)embarrased to have not held her responsible for her behaviour and what happened. I think if her acting out publicly makes the rest of the horse world insist USEF be held accountable for their part in the mess of drugging and injecting and using inappropriate meds during competition, then EM digging herself into a hole plays an important part in that, and should be encouraged to post online and lie as much as possible.[/QUOTE]

Might have something to do with the rumors about a lawsuit against COTH? Letting her post here is giving her enough rope to hang herself with.