Say it isn't so....Inclusive on USEF Drug List

[RugBug]

[QUOTE=SnicklefritzG;8270186]
+100

The letters and explanations from the Serio’s sound exactly like what you said. Just like spoiled kids who backpedal when they get caught doing something they shouldn’t have been doing.[/QUOTE]

I think they do, too, but because they went too broad with the argument. They should have focused their argument and left out the excuses (the company said it was fine) and the part about being picked on (all the courtroom stuff…who did they think was going to be there other than lawyers?), etc. There are some valid points contained in the letter and they should have stuck with those.

[SnicklefritzG]

[QUOTE=RugBug;8270197]
I think they do, too, but because they went too broad with the argument. They should have focused their argument and left out the excuses (the company said it was fine) and the part about being picked on (all the courtroom stuff…who did they think was going to be there other than lawyers?), etc. There are some valid points contained in the letter and they should have stuck with those.[/QUOTE]

Yes. Sometimes less is more.

[caballogurl]

@poltroon;8270048

Tying back to the earlier comment about dressage horses, one thing to note is that because individual movements are scored in dressage, there’s no supposition about what did or didn’t cause a loss of points. For example, it may be that the judge didn’t mind an expressive change but felt the jump was flat. On a dressage score sheet, this would be clearly laid out.

Word! Furthermore, if one movement was sub par but the rest of the movements were flawless a horse and rider combo can still end up with a very high score. When I watched the World Cup, one of the German riders completely butchered her piaffe but the rest of her test was flawless and she ended up with a 79%.

Hunters receive no score sheets and all start out with 100s with major points deducted for “exuberance” that is out of line. So while you might have had an other wise flawless round you could end up with a 70 because your horse played one time in a corner.

[Lynnwood]

[QUOTE=ShoulderIn;8268684]
The medicine I know of with GABA is Gabapentin which is used for dogs with seizures. It slows down the neurological activity of brain so that those neuro cells won’t become over excitatory, causing a seizure. Most of these dogs are very mellow and it takes the right dosage to make sure they aren’t completely doped up and can still maintain their personalities.

Now I haven’t had a chance to look at the link, but does USEF look at all those involved with the horse or just the trainer and owner? I can’t imagine that a rider wouldn’t know the immediate difference in disposition in their horse.[/QUOTE]

You are correct SI my fathers dog takes Gabapentin for her epilepsy. At higher doses it also reduces nerve pain.

[caballogurl]

[QUOTE=2LaZ2race;8270158]
Wow… I think you need to log off for a while. Are you CWI (COTHing while intoxicated) ??

Horses shouldn’t be drugged and neither should people. {the end}[/QUOTE]

You have me rolling on the floor… because our grooms and trainers are addicts (as said in earlier posts), we should also turn our horses into junkies??? :lol:

[ynl063w]

[QUOTE=caballogurl;8270212]
Word! Furthermore, if one movement was sub par but the rest of the movements were flawless a horse and rider combo can still end up with a very high score. When I watched the World Cup, one of the German riders completely butchered her piaffe but the rest of her test was flawless and she ended up with a 79%.

Hunters receive no score sheets and all start out with 100s with major points deducted for “exuberance” that is out of line. So while you might have had an other wise flawless round you could end up with a 70 because your horse played one time in a corner.[/QUOTE]

Every horse does NOT start a hunter round with an automatic 100. I’m not a judge, but I suspect that more don’t than do. Perhaps you should consider that you might not understand that there is more to scoring a hunter round than whether or not the horses toss their head or flip their tails in the corners.

[RugBug]

[QUOTE=caballogurl;8270212]
Word! Furthermore, if one movement was sub par but the rest of the movements were flawless a horse and rider combo can still end up with a very high score. When I watched the World Cup, one of the German riders completely butchered her piaffe but the rest of her test was flawless and she ended up with a 79%.

Hunters receive no score sheets and all start out with 100s with major points deducted for “exuberance” that is out of line. So while you might have had an other wise flawless round you could end up with a 70 because your horse played one time in a corner.[/QUOTE]

bolding mine. Not all hunters enter the ring with 100 and it’s theirs to lose. Many walk in with a 60 and have to work up from there. A well known hunter from a well known trainer with a well known rider (or some combination of these) might walk in with 100. If you don’t have any of those, you probably have to prove yourself and earn the points, rather than not lose them.

[Janet]

[QUOTE=poltroon;8270048]
Tying back to the earlier comment about dressage horses, one thing to note is that because individual movements are scored in dressage, there’s no supposition about what did or didn’t cause a loss of points. For example, it may be that the judge didn’t mind an expressive change but felt the jump was flat. On a dressage score sheet, this would be clearly laid out.

It is also true that energy, exuberance, and brilliance is rewarded in dressage, and that “needs more forward” or “needs more energy” is a very common comment on a lower level test.[/QUOTE]
So is “lack of submission” (very common on lower level tests). But it only affects THAT movement, and the horse can redeem itelf in other movements.

[mvp]

[QUOTE=busylady;8270100]
Regarding Brigid’s “I had nothing to do with it” statement. Wasn’t there an article about Tori nursing Inclusive back to health? IIRC, the horse was even at her home stable. I find it hard to believe Brigid, who signed as trainer and had been the barn manager, had nothing to do with it. Interesting to note she didn’t deny the horse was medicated. Wonder who she will throw under the bus??[/QUOTE]

Everyone that deep into showing knows what responsibilities they are accepting for themselves by signing the trainer’s line in an entry form. The argument that she didn’t know what the horse was getting has been tried. (Legitimate) trainer says he doesn’t know that his grooms mix up buckets or do cocaine or handle paper money and don’t wash up before feeding or whatever?

[Peggy]

[QUOTE=findeight;8270185]
Yeah, that’s weird, same offense, same show, same hearing…different start and end dates for the suspensions. By a couple of months. Explain that please, somebody???[/QUOTE]In the replies to the Chronicle’s FB post someone suggested that it might have been because BC was contesting the charge, so the suspension started later. I ready that after my original post here.

[caballogurl]

[QUOTE=RugBug;8270229]
bolding mine. Not all hunters enter the ring with 100 and it’s theirs to lose. Many walk in with a 60 and have to work up from there. A well known hunter from a well known trainer with a well known rider (or some combination of these) might walk in with 100. If you don’t have any of those, you probably have to prove yourself and earn the points, rather than not lose them.[/QUOTE]

I have no idea how hunter courses are judged… But I do know there are no score sheets published and in 90% of the classes no score is even announced. So then know how you did other than your place in the class? How do you know what you need to improve? Why don’t they always announce scores at least?

This is the exact reason why I have no desire to participate in hunters as whole. Sometimes there is no rhyme or reason. It is completely up to the judges discretion. At least in dressage there is more transparency.

I also have been told that there are certain standard deductions for errors although that is highly variable upon the judge. But the last hunter class I showed in was short stirrup as a five year old kid.

I have two friends who both show in the A/0 hunter division and have even showed for the past five years at indoors, neither one can explain to me how their rounds are scored other than the obvious.

[findeight]

[QUOTE=caballogurl;8270212]
Word! Furthermore, if one movement was sub par but the rest of the movements were flawless a horse and rider combo can still end up with a very high score. When I watched the World Cup, one of the German riders completely butchered her piaffe but the rest of her test was flawless and she ended up with a 79%.

Hunters receive no score sheets and all start out with 100s with major points deducted for “exuberance” that is out of line. So while you might have had an other wise flawless round you could end up with a 70 because your horse played one time in a corner.[/QUOTE]

Where did you get the idea Hunters all walk in the gate with 100 and receive deductions for mistakes? In reality Hunters are judged on a curve compared only with others in that class on that day. They walk in the gate with nothing and are scored in comparison to the other trips based on movement, jump, overall quality etc. A spectacular mover and jumper sitting on an 85 or better can buck in the corner and still rank above 80.

Your hypothetical 70 did more then play in the corner to score that low in comparison to others in the class. Generally, trainer or experienced observer can tell where it went wrong without needing a score sheet, so can most experienced riders.

[caballogurl]

[QUOTE=ynl063w;8270227]
Every horse does NOT start a hunter round with an automatic 100. I’m not a judge, but I suspect that more don’t than do. Perhaps you should consider that you might not understand that there is more to scoring a hunter round than whether or not the horses toss their head or flip their tails in the corners.[/QUOTE]

I have made no claims about knowing the details about the specifics of how hunters are scored. But frankly even my friends who show actively on the hunter circuit cannot explain to me how their rounds are scored.

What I do know is that clearly it is rewarded to have a loopy doped up horse in the hunter ring or the trainers wouldn’t do it… That is what disgusts me. The most important thing to all of us should be our horse’s welfare.

[caballogurl]

[QUOTE=RugBug;8270229]
A well known hunter from a well known trainer with a well known rider (or some combination of these) might walk in with 100.[/QUOTE]

Why on earth should the fact that your trainer is well known positively impact your score? Someone please explain this to me…

I know it does positively impact your score, but why? I mean does no one else see an issue with that??

[gumshoe]

[QUOTE=Dinah-do;8268460]
I live in Canada where the drug of choice is ACTH. One BNT is very free about " all hunters are medicated". Medicated sounding better than drugged I guess. I have asked various trainers how ACTH works and they all say something different; which is even scarier. Along with ACTH there is dex, calcium. a bit of iv mg and tryptophan. And then braiders pull the water and lights left on. Still, I really thought great horses like Inclusive would be clean.[/QUOTE]

I’m also in Canada and I’ve never even heard of ACTH. It’s not because I haven’t been exposed to the BNTs at A shows either. Because I have spent a good deal of time “back in the barn area”…

[RugBug]

[QUOTE=caballogurl;8270259]
I have made no claims about knowing the details about the specifics of how hunters are scored. But frankly even my friends who show actively on the hunter circuit cannot explain to me how their rounds are scored. [/QUOTE]

You made no claims but you spouted off opinions like you knew what you were talking about. Your posts told a different story, however.

If your friends can’t tell you how a round is scored, they don’t really care to learn. The hard part about knowing how your round would score isn’t knowing what constitutes a 70 or an 80 or what have you. It’s sitting and watching every single round to know how you stacked up against the competition in that class.

What I do know is that clearly it is rewarded to have a loopy doped up horse in the hunter ring or the trainers wouldn’t do it… That is what disgusts me. The most important thing to all of us should be our horse’s welfare.

No, doped horses is not what is rewarded. The very quiet horse that doesn’t put a foot wrong is what is rewarded. Unfortunately, there are some people that go about getting that horse the wrong way.

@caballogurl;8270247

I have no idea how hunter courses are judged… But I do know there are no score sheets published and in 90% of the classes no score is even announced. So then know how you did other than your place in the class? How do you know what you need to improve?

If you think showing is about learning what you need to improve, you are dead wrong again. You are testing what you’ve learned. If you have a crappy trainer that can’t tell you what you are doing wrong (and doesn’t do so every lesson (I’m pretty sure I hear “more LEG” in my dreams), they don’t deserve your money.

I’m glad all classes aren’t numerically scored. Winning a class with a 65 isn’t that great of a feeling. Losing with a 40 isn’t either. I prefer to end my humiliation as I leave the ring. Why prolong it until my score is called?

This is the exact reason why I have no desire to participate in hunters as whole. Sometimes there is no rhyme or reason. It is completely up to the judges discretion. At least in dressage there is more transparency.

Subjective judging isn’t for everyone. But it’s kind of the way of the world. That cute boy in high school that you (royal you…not you, you) had a huge crush on that wouldn’t look your way? Yeah, he was subjectively judging you and you didn’t get any feedback from him. The job interview you thought you did great on and you didn’t get the call back? Yeah, you were being subjectively judged on that as well and they most likely didn’t give you feedback.

I also have been told that there are certain standard deductions for errors although that is highly variable upon the judge. But the last hunter class I showed in was short stirrup as a five year old kid.

There are a few things that can give you an automatic score. A refusal = 40 usually. missed lead change = 50 usually. But the rest is pretty nuanced and you need to educate your eye. I’m pretty good at scoring close to the judges, but man, I still miss swaps in front of jumps, etc on a regular basis. The person that doesn’t care that much, really isn’t going to learn. It takes quite a bit of effort…

[caballogurl]

@findeight;8270253

A spectacular mover and jumper sitting on an 85 or better can buck in the corner and still rank above 80.

Then why do trainers drug? Why is the use of mood altering drugs so much more prevalent in hunters than dressage or the jumper ring? Not saying dressage and/or jumper trainers don’t drug but it far less common.

Honestly I don’t care about how hunters are scored…that is not the point of this thread. All I care about is that the horses are not treated as pin cushions. Like I said earlier if we don’t self police our sport, outsiders will gladly come and do so. If I secretly took photographs of the groom boxes full of syringes at most barns around 6pm and then leaked the photos online…the public at large would be outraged. I just left the show and saw a groom box for one barn filled with over 30+ syringes. They have around 10 horses at the show…

[RugBug]

[QUOTE=caballogurl;8270263]
Why on earth should the fact that your trainer is well known positively impact your score? Someone please explain this to me…

I know it does positively impact your score, but why? I mean does no one else see an issue with that??[/QUOTE]

Because they are known entities, know how to train a horse to meet the standards, know how to present the horse, etc. It has less to do with them as a person than the skills they bring to the table.

This also happens in the real world: go back to job interviews: Referrals have an easier time getting a job because they’ve already proven themselves to someone. The unknown has no base to start from.

[RugBug]

@caballogurl;8270283

Then why do trainers drug? Why is the use of mood altering drugs so much more prevalent in hunters than dressage or the jumper ring? Not saying dressage and/or jumper trainers don’t drug but it far less common.

Drugs are prevalent in the jumper ring.

For dressage, there are different standards and goals and equipment. Honestly, if we slapped a double bridle on our hunters and rode with a lot of contact, there would probably be a lot less drugging. Instead, we go on a light, light rein in bits with no leverage (granted the mouth pieces of the bits can get pretty significant). It’s not an apples to apples comparison. Even lower level dressage without doubles allows for more contact and control than hunters want to see. Brilliance is desired in dressage, hunters want a brilliant jump and everything else quiet. Wringing tails and pinned ears are just fine in dressage (at least from what I see) but it won’t get you far in the hunter ring.

[mvp]

[QUOTE=DMK;8270016]
You should, but with a horse competing while transitioning between two trainers/barns with a junior rider and owner who is not the parent of the rider… I can see how things are a touch more complicated. That’s not to condone the test “result”, but to acknowledge it was a tad more complex than when I showed up at the in gate with my “trainer” and the horse was in my care, custody and control 100% of the time.[/QUOTE]

Don’t you think Brigid Colvin knew she could be acting as the fall guy, should the horse test?