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

[Ghazzu]

[QUOTE=Lord Helpus;8270538]

USEF needs to enact rules that tell the owner “What you don’t know CAN hurt you. [So it would behoove you to ask and to only train with trainers who take your horse to the ring clean of all banned substances].”

Trainers do what they do because their customers want results. I am certainly not exonerating cheaters, but I am also laying a large % of blame on owners who foster this “I want to win more than I want to win fairly. If my trainer gets caught, that is his problem, not mine” attitude.[/QUOTE]

Amen.

[mvp]

[QUOTE=findeight;8270650]
Actually, the wording on that entry blank we all sign already establishes that. People don’t read it or just lie. They are trying to establish consequences for that, she got nailed for signing as responsible-she lied by signing if she was not responsible for the horses care or she’s falling on the proverbial sword.

If the actual trainer at the tine, who was not there, had been there and signed? This conversation would have considerably more…interesting.[/QUOTE]

I have read the entry blank form before I signed it. I’m like that, lol. So I can’t see why Colvin would announce to the press that she’ll be making such a lame argument in her defense. It’s not a defense, IMO. But somehow hasn’t it worked before via the old “Yeah, I’m the pro but the grooms do the actual medicating….”?

Or, to look to a solution and your last paragraph, f8: Let’s make the penalty so bad that no one is willing to sign on the dotted line that makes them the designated scapegoat for the whole pack of people involved in getting a horse drugged.

[foursocks]

[QUOTE=RolexReady;8270542]
If the rider and horse are that nervous at that show… then neither of them should be there in the first place. Take it down a notch, go to lower key shows until the pair gets both of their confidence and are prepared for the bigger show. Or if the rider is that much of an “amateur”… she shouldnt be on such a green horse.[/QUOTE]

Not to sidetrack too much, but sometimes nervousness appears a lot more randomly. I have a six year old jumper who has shown a good amount, but there are some venues that psych him out more than others, and I never know until I am there. We were at a three ring circus last month that I was convinced was going to end up with me being forked into a ditch, especially given the fact that he had gotten super nervy a couple of weeks before at a much smaller venue, but he was 100% fine.

And perhaps even more importantly, there is a huge difference between schooling or smaller shows and the bigger rated shows- lots more noise, more competitors, more rings going, more schooling rings, golf carts, scooters, dogs, etc. etc. etc. It’s just more, for both the rider and the horse. So yeah, if the horse isn’t used to showing at all then a low-key show or three is a good idea, but there is nothing like a big rated show to get them used to a big rated show. Schooling shows or small local rateds simply aren’t going to cut it with some horses and riders.

Whoops- I posted thinking this was the last entry. I see supershorty has already addressed this, but I’ll let mine stand.

[vineyridge]

One huge difference between dressage and hunters is that in hunters it’s all about winning and how you place relative to other horses and riders. In dressage, it’s more about how you do next to the absolute. Dressage emphasizes improvement and moving up the levels far more than winning. All or nothing seems to be the foundation mindset throughout hunters.

[Dinah-do]

Caballogurl – well said.

[foursocks]

I will also add that I’d much rather see a pro riding a horse to get it less fizzy and more confident than a nervous ammy trying to do the same thing- especially if I have to share a schooling ring with them!

The drugging issue has always been around; the new thing is that there are more sophisticated tests and (some) more serious ramifications. The industry isn’t getting worse, in terms of people training via needle, but I don’t think it is getting better.

I think they should test more, personally, and I think the penalties should all be hardcore. At the last very large show I went to my horse was selected for a pee sample. Of all the people to pick I was not a good one if they wanted to find anything- I have the laziest jumper possible. Giving him calming anything would probably induce a coma.

[busylady]

Any chance we can refocus this thread? The issue here isn’t the difference between dressage and hunters, it is that one of the top horses, ridden by the winningest (is that a word??) juniors and owned by the top owner in the sport was medicated at one of the top events!!!

I’m curious how people feel about the players involved knowing what we know now. I’m also curious if people are talking about this with their barnmates and trainer. It seems like the topic is off limits and it also seems like the industry is okay with it. Drugging is part of the culture and if someone gets caught it is okay because we are all doing it. I’m frankly shocked that COTH did an article on it (great job COTH). What about the sponsors? Will they still support the owner/rider/trainer? Will we still see the rider on the cover of magazines (al la Scott Stewart after his set down)? Will you still be in awe when you see Tori lay down a 90, or 100, point round?

[MoonLadyIsis]

I’m saying this as someone who has done the hunters/jumpers and now primarily does eventing but has also done some of the bigger dressage shows. NONE of the disciplines are immune. There are plenty of riders in eventing who use perfect prep. Perfect prep is so common in dressage land that the trash cans look like those at the h/j shows. Full of empty tubes. these weren’t just the local dressage shows either, these had 5/6 rings going throughout the day.

If BC signed the entry without really being responsible, then she is just plain stupid. Why take that risk? I would never sign the entry blank for a horse that I wasn’t sure would test cleanly. Sounds to me like she got caught and is using the legal means to try to get USEF to back down.

[bjd2013]

Like the OP said, this is a huge deal. One of the top horses in the country, owned by a top owner, ridden by a top rider came up positive for GABA at a HUGE horse show, winning the classic round and placing 3rd overall.

It kind of makes you wonder. Not taking anything away from Tori, but in my time I’ve ridden some doped up horses (was a kid and didn’t really know what was going on, and now I do), and it’s a lot easier to lay down a consistent round when the horse is knocked down a little (or a lot).

Interesting point, is that Brigid never denied that the horse was given anything, simply she didn’t have anything to do with it.

By signing that entry blank, you’re taking full responsibility. That’s why trainers don’t sign for horses out of their care anymore, even if it’s a long time customer. My trainer won’t sign unless it’s in barn and she’s the only one touching it.

[findeight]

[QUOTE=scrbear11;8270652]

My argument is simply this: The USEF needs to define the allowable level of GABA beyond he current definition of “in excess of naturally occurring levels.” What is the naturally occurring level, and what research has been done to rule out the fact that some horses naturally occurring levels vary from one to the next.

The USEF, with their going concern issues, needs to watch what deep pockets they piss off.

Off the soap box now.[/QUOTE]

I have had that conversation with the D&M folks trying to determine a withdrawal time frame so I know their theory in keeping silent on specifics. If they published the allowable limits, the cheaters would devise a way to keep a horse continually on the stuff at just below the allowable limits while others would reformulate or recalculate and sell the “guaranteed not to test above the limit”. Whether you agree or not, that’s their reasoning-they are trying to encourage horses off the stuff, not full of it at just below the allowable levels 100% of the time.

Also, when I was in the Boston area, my vet was a former head of the AHSA D&M operation as well as an US Eventing team consultant. Talking with him was a real eye opener, they know exactly what goes on, the cheaters are always one step ahead of the tests. When the testing catches up, they move on to the latest substance. It’s a real cesspool.

BTW, I called D&M to discuss this because the owners of my lease horse wanted a surgical procedure performed mid show season. Ended up waiting until fall instead of guessing on withdrawal-which was better and easier for the horse anyway. Which is the oft forgotten point of having these rules.

I agree with the poster who pointed out drugging to keep (sort of) sound is a far worse problem then calmatives and far worse for the horse. One is a short cut or way to make unsuitable horses more suitable. The other masks pain and gets given regularly to keep the horse in work, usually at ever increasing dosages causing more physical damage on those who should not be in work at all, let alone jumping around.

They are both cheating, of course, but turning one into a pin cushion to keep it going despite physical deterioration and pain for years? Needs to be addressed more actively in this environment of glossy ads touting this or that unregulated, untested method to keep old Dobbin going or get an injured horse back in full work ASAP.

[Calling_Duck]

Somehow we wandered off into the weeds with the discussions. Ammy scoring, pro scoring, dressage, etc. Perhaps you would like to start separate threads to discuss / debate the merits of How We Score Our Sports, 'kay?

THIS thread is about yet more BN trainers getting nailed for professional barns/professional care/professional supervision. A random ride down the memory lane of past USEF suspensions shows that in 2004, Reserpine and Fluphenazine were the drugs of choice, and some very big names got the exact same dollar amount suspensions as were awarded in 2015. McCormick ($9,000/10 mnths), Fenny ($6,000/6 mnths) , Ayers ($6,000/6 mnths), Deslaurier ($5,000/ 3 mnths) …and event rider Morani ($4,000/4 mnths).
In 2010 event rider Ryan Wood got a 4 month suspension and a $2,500 fine for Fluphenazine
2014 hunter rider Rene Kidd (8 month suspension/$6,000 fine). She just showed local for the duration of the suspension. Clients kept paying her, she kept the local show industry in business, it all worked out for everyone.
So the fines have not increased in amount, the list of Big Names Who Get Caught gets longer. And…and event people get busted, too.

[Sticky_Situation]

[QUOTE=huntersgonewild;8270317]
According to the maker’s website, it still contains glutamic acid from which the body produces GABA.
http://www.depaoloequineconcepts.com/products/tranquility[/QUOTE]

Glutamic acid/glutamate is just an amino acid, and is naturally occurring in foods and can also be synthesized by the body. Its use as a precursor to GABA is only one of many potential uses in the body … In other words, just because you ingest glutamate doesn’t necessarily mean your body will automatically convert it to GABA, so it’s quite likely that horses receiving this supplement will still have GABA levels within the normal physiologic range so that the supplement “doesn’t test.”

As has already been stated on here, both the previous formulation and the current one are clearly marketed as calming supplements, not treatments for gastric upset, so even if it “doesn’t test” it still violates the spirit of the rule.

I can believe that it’s possible the Serio’s did not realize that the prior formulation contained GABA and would therefore cause a positive test, but I’m sure no one was under the delusion that it wasn’t intended as a calmative agent.

[2LaZ2race]

[QUOTE=Lord Helpus;8270659]
Awww, c’mon people. Don’t feed the trolls. Rolex
ready is 1. a troll, 2. an eventer who has come over from the darkside to tell us what is wrong with out sport, 3. both.

Ignore her. Maybe she will go away or else start posting under her real screen name.

And, it seems to me, arguing over whether it is a good or bad thing for a pro to warm up a horse for a nervous ammi has gotten a long way from discussing the suspension of certain BNT’s.[/QUOTE]

Wow Lord Helpus, I usually really respect your posts by why so hostile? Isn’t the point of these discussion board to discuss ? How long does a new member have to quietly agree with older member’s posts before they can voice their own opinion? Is there like a hazing period?

I think it would be really boring if everyone agreed, COTH wouldn’t make any ad money!

I do want to comment on someone’s post about riders using Rx anxiety meds/ calming etc. I think that’s a very valid point and while I was kidding about the “COTHing while intoxicated”, there does have to be a line between “everyone does it so it’s ok” and “this is crossing the point where horse welfare comes into question”.

[vineyridge]

Wonder if Mrs. Parker is paying for Mrs. Colvin’s legal challenge?

[bjd2013]

[QUOTE=vineyridge;8270776]
Wonder if Mrs. Parker is paying for Mrs. Colvin’s legal challenge?[/QUOTE]

Of course, she’s their scapegoat. I’m sure she got a pay off too.

[DMK]

[QUOTE=RolexReady;8270568]
If the professional is just warming the horse up for the rider… thats what is wrong. It teaches the rider nothing but that its ok to just go for the ribbon and skip out on the work.[/QUOTE]

And we care, why?

I mean seriously, someone wants/needs the full princess program or some variation thereof, why do we care? Maybe that horse has a bit of a spook, and needs a ride down. Maybe that owner perceives the horse has a spook and needs a ride with a pro. Maybe that owner is the sole breadwinner in the family and feels like a little extra caution is justified. Maybe that horse comes with baggage. Maybe that rider comes with baggage. WHY WOULD WE CARE? Unless that person is finishing up a junior/ammie career on the full princess program and planning to hang out a shingle and setting themselves up as capable to be a trainer (and unfortunately, that DOES happen), how does it affect you, me or supershorty?

And where do you draw the line? Why should it just be shows where these shortcuts are so offensive to you? I mean just this AM, I had someone get on my horse for the first time in weeks after mucho $$$ in back treatments. Hey, I broke him, I started him, but damn, I just. did. not. want to be a lawn dart, and I really didn’t want to get hurt. I’m pretty sure I learned it’s OK to go for the catch rider and skip out on the work. And if you can’t do the work at home, aren’t you even more pathetic? <— me, signing up, first in line to receive my Pathetic badge!

[Lord_Helpus]

It was posted on FB that the penalty for refusing a drug test was 1 month and $1500, with the comment that people should just start refusing to have their horses tested.

But, in the Notice of Hearing that is the focus of this thread, a trainer was set down for 6 months and a fine of $6000 for refusing to have the horse tested.

If the former was the standard punishment, I am glad that it has been raised so that anyone who refuses to let their horse be tested will regret their choice, unless the outcome of the horse’s test would have resulted in an even more severe punishment.

Having just gone back to reread the Notice of Hearing — I see that the Colvin positive test was from the Derby finals last year. In response to an pearlier post of mine, I was told that the test came from a Lake Placid show which Tori attended without a trainer or owner present and that was why Brigit signed the entry blank…

Hey, I know that SS was at the Derby Finals. Wasn’t he Inclusive’s trainer? Did the horse really not have a trainer, so Tori’s mom had to sign as the trainer? Did her mom warm her up and sent jumps?

I am very confused. Can someone point me to the portion of this thread which discusses this?

ALSO Interesting – In this week’s COTH, Bill Moroney has several pages of picks and commentary. One topic was “What Makes A Derby Horse?” He chose 5 “Derby Winners” to answer. Tori was one of the people chosen to respond. Moroney, as Pres for Life of USHJA must have known, at the time of writing this ariticle, that Inclusive had tested positive, and was drugged for his rounds in the Derby Finals…

WTF, Mr Morony? You knowingly asked a rider of a drugged horse “What makes a Derby horse?”

[longtimelurker]

[QUOTE=busylady;8270692]
Will you still be in awe when you see Tori lay down a 90, or 100, point round?[/QUOTE]

Will I always be in awe of Tori’s riding? Yes. She has laid down thousands of beautiful trips – and drugs can’t produce that kind of consistency. It’s not as though I could get on a drugged Inclusive and have the type of trips Tori does. And, I’ve seen Tori ride tons of horses who were either not drugged or drugged poorly (AKA, horses acting up), that this does not make me doubt her riding ability in the least.

[findeight]

[QUOTE=busylady;8270692]
Any chance we can refocus this thread? The issue here isn’t the difference between dressage and hunters, it is that one of the top horses, ridden by the winningest (is that a word??) juniors and owned by the top owner in the sport was medicated at one of the top events!!!

I’m curious how people feel about the players involved knowing what we know now. I’m also curious if people are talking about this with their barnmates and trainer. It seems like the topic is off limits and it also seems like the industry is okay with it. Drugging is part of the culture and if someone gets caught it is okay because we are all doing it. I’m frankly shocked that COTH did an article on it (great job COTH). What about the sponsors? Will they still support the owner/rider/trainer? Will we still see the rider on the cover of magazines (al la Scott Stewart after his set down)? Will you still be in awe when you see Tori lay down a 90, or 100, point round?[/QUOTE]

Unfortunately, or maybe fortunately, TC will be very much affected by this in the eyes of many. It casts a pall on her high scoring rounds (didn’t she get a 100 in the last year?), it tarnishes the reputation of some amazingly good horses and it is obviously the inspiration for the new rule including riders even if they are Juniors in future enforcement actions, we discussed that with much argument in here not realizing USEF was inspired by something we did not know.

I’m torn on this one. On one hand she is still young and guided by the adults around her who have proven they make bad choices. On the other, 18 is no baby and the barn she came out has had much publicity for violations. I am surprised it has not cost him more clients and quality staff.

IMO she has a choice here. Join the regulars who know you can’t win without “help”, complain about the unfairness of it all, complain that “outsiders” just don’t understand how it really is, blame everybody else and continue playing a role in what has turned out to be pretty much a fairy tale instead of actual inspiration for young riders.

Or she can make a difference, up to her. I hope she realizes it might be an uncomfortable fall season for as her young fan base is facing harsh reality. Wouldn’t be surprised to hear silence after her trips and maybe a few boos. Maybe from parents of competitors too

This will blow over for her, I know she does have a thick skin and will move on. But which way? Business as usual? Or change?

[longtimelurker]

[QUOTE=vineyridge;8270776]
Wonder if Mrs. Parker is paying for Mrs. Colvin’s legal challenge?[/QUOTE]
bjd2013
Of course, she’s their scapegoat. I’m sure she got a pay off too.

(sorry - double-quoting went awry).

Why does it matter? What do the intricacies of their relationship (which I’m quite sure no one on this board knows about) have to do with this issue? Both Brigid Colvin and Betsee Parker are free-thinking adults who are totally capable of making their own decisions. And really, you’re SURE? I’m so tired of the rampant and vicious speculation about their relationship in particular. Oy.