coloredcowhorse I responding to 3 of your posts, to some extent. I don’t mean to pick on you, rather I appreciate that you are willing to discuss this through with people who aren’t agreeing. And that you are so rational and not taking anything personally - thanks!
I grew up riding “english,” but around more western and ranch horses. I had to learn 2 ways of horsemanship - western and TB - for all practical purposes. My experience is that western breeding is a completely different temperament from TB’s. I learned that it was not possible to hold TB’s to the same level of compliance as horses with little if any TB in them.
TB’s will comply with discipline more than many people ask. But it was impossible to draw a hard line with the TB’s, they just fell apart and nothing was accomplished. Were TB’s ethically, morally inferior? No. They are what we humans bred them to be. We wanted the speed, we got the fire that produces it. That’s how we’ve bred them for centuries.
However, a fair amount of tolerance, a very different TB-friendly approach, got amazing performance from the TB’s. And interestingly I personally find TB;s more attuned to the rider than other breedings, but that can be a personal thing.
So I’m wondering what kind of horses your experience is with? From my experience, only those who have spent significant time with TB’s can fully appreciate what they will offer with a more relaxed behavior standard. And they aren’t awful or hard to deal with at all, if one learns how to get them on your side.
I recently had a wonderful conversation with a lifetime cowboy of the old-ish school, a lot of rodeo, roping and steer wrestling. This semi-retired cowboy (not so retired actually, he still trains) switched from quarter to mostly-TB to pick up the step. He readily said that he had to change his attitude toward training to get what he wanted from the TB temperament. He had to put up with things he would never have tolerated with QH’s. He said with a big smile “it’s more than worth it.”
The way “suicidal” is expressed as a life-and-death decision disturbs me. It could be read as “tie or die,” and I don’t know if that’s what you meant. I know that horses don’t have the intellect to form a thought that they will commit suicide, or allow themselves to die.
Horses don’t decide “I’ll pull until I die before I’ll give up.” What is going on is a fear reaction that is so deep and profound that the animal can’t make a judgment in their own best interests. A “spook” reaction magnified by biological factors, not judgment or thought. A human that pushes into this area is not dealing with a suicidal horse - the human must be a better horseperson than that. IMO
The judgment on battling to the death is the solely that of the humans, not the horse. The horse does not know what the outcomes might be, and is not capable of understanding the concepts we have in our heads. They are merely animals doing what all animals do every day - responding to the stimuli around them, based on instinct, biology, training and individual history.
When I’m past all patience with an animal’s behavior, I remind myself that they are what we made them, through breeding, training and experience. They are not the ones making decisions, they are merely reacting. IMO
[quote=coloredcowhorse;5344884]I truly believe that if you break things down into small enough steps and go through each one thoroughly you can fix almost everything.
…
With all that a big competition horse has to learn and in the limited time period in which to do that learning some trainers may opt to work around a habit rather than take the time to “fix” it at that point. …
[/quote]
I agree with both these points. And I got to that decision point with my horse, although we are not in big time competition. I ask myself “how many things am I expecting this horse to learn right now?” I try to keep that load reasonable so that he can be successful at what is most important to me. And I make my “importance” based on what works for my life, not what others expect. (And he’s a lifetime horse, that most certainly makes a difference.)
I also have a training caveat that studies of learning show that inconsistently tolerated behavior becomes impossible to eliminate in animals. The example is the bears that come into Aspen, CO to raid trash cans. If the bear has ever gotten something from a trash can, it is impossible to fully condition it to never return. Given my horse at age 8, when I acquired him, had pitched his panic attacks many dozens of times without anything telling him “this doesn’t work,” no matter how much improvement he shows, I don’t believe he can ever be trustworthy. And he’s so dangerous when he panics that means simply never tying. Even if in a controlled training situation he’s been perfect for years.
I completely understand that in some situations there is no option to have a horse that doesn’t tie. If a horse shows that humans just don’t have the knowledge to reform this one, to me that means moving that horse to another career that can work around it. Not going to a tie-or-die session to make that decision forever, or euthanizing, etc. Even if it’s someone taking him as a Pasture Ornament. The horse did not make an ethical/moral decision “if I hold out I’ll get a sweet early retirement.” The horse had no idea. This is a decision humans can make without encouraging all horses to become slackers. 
That’s my perspective. It has evolved over the years, with experience of more than one horse. Some can be reformed. I won’t say some can’t be reformed, I’ll just say that humans haven’t yet found the training method that they’ll understand. And the inconsistent reward principal is contaminating possibilities in many mature horses. I am not an expert by any means - just thinking through some things in this thread. 
(All of that trainer’s horses are bad bridling, girthing, techy about brushes, and so on. This is considered normal by the trainer.)