THE suspension list

[mbp]

I had a yearling on layup following tendon surgery. He was becoming a menace to everyone, including himself, and the day was soon to come when I was supposed to start handwalking (oh joy). We put him on Reserpine. Oral - not injectable (which I believe is getting harder to come by). This was about 4 years ago.

The vet was very specific with me that there were side effects (diarrhea, depression, etc.) and that the drug was not approved for competition use (I have a barn full of horses so maybe he thought I might try?) etc. The yearling had to be on the oral for 3-4 days before there would be a noticeable effect (BTW - the little sweetheart ended up being totally resistant to any calming effects although he did get the runs - he also blew through Ace and dormosedan).

In any event - I would wonder if they couldn’t tell from the bloodwork whether it was likely that the horse had only received a single oral dose (which would not have been likely to do much according to both my pharmacist and mmy vet)or had repeated doses. A single oral dose would not have been much.

I will say that it is easy to mix up supplements sometimes and to double dose too. But I don’t think I have ever given actual MEDS to any horse that was not supposed to get them. I’m not perfect by any means - but medications are medications - not supplements. THey are not a day in day out thing and they have side effects. It is usually an “out of the ordinary” thing for a horse to get meds, and an “ordinary” thing for a horse to get supplements.

I might screw up and miss a dosing of meds but I never gave them to the wrong horse. If they were meds that had side effects too, and I was showing, well those are things that make you pretty careful. I mean, how many parents give actual medicine to the wrong child? THe insulin to the kid who is not diabetic? It does seem odd that so many riders seem to be having this problem. NOT giving the prescribed horse it’s meds and giving restricted meds to a horse that is not supposed to have them.

OTOH, I think a large number of people get sick or die in the hospitals every year for the same reason - so I am not casting stones.

BTW - I think routine sampling of all winners - followed by random testing, would be a great idea.

[Blinky]

batgirl,
How horrid. Maybe I’m naive but I truly believe more trainers are honest than not.

[CBoylen]

Alright, I’ll bite. I’ve been trying to restrain myself, but I just can’t help it
Here it is: I don’t think the judging standards can be changed. Why? Because of the exact reason that everyone keeps stating as a plus. There ARE horses out there that are pretty, quiet, jump and move beautifully, without drugs or lunging. Now, sure, there aren’t very many of them. But as long as there is ONE that is out there showing, there will be people trying to reproduce it artificially. I don’t care what you write into the standards, the round without the buck, or the spook, or the overt pace, or whatever you deam acceptable, is still going to win. It still SHOULD win; this is a sport that is about PERFECTION. And the point to all this is that NO ONE saddles up to come in second. You can’t legislate that.

http://community.webshots.com/user/anallie

[radio_talk_Aefvue_Fa]

Trolling are we?

If you had been reading these upteen pages, you would know that many posters personally know these trainers.

As for whining, guess its all in the perspective. Think there are many suggestions that have merit. But thanks for your input!!

[Lord_Helpus]

I am also curious to know if USA Eq will post WHICH horses tested positive. Not that I am looking to buy, but it would be interesting to know what horses cannot perform at their best without drugs. I am sure that potential buyers of horses at this level would like to know.

And, until certain horses are named, it puts ALL the horses in these trainers’ barns under suspicion.

If you can't say something nice, then don't say anything at all. [img]http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/winkgrin.gif[/img]

[Sing_Mia_Song]

FWIW, cocaine is considered (medically speaking here) to be an excellent analgesic. That is why it was used in so many “tonics” of the 19th century.

Some horsemen (and women) still believe that it is “good for man and beast.”

Nevertheless, would anyone care for some whiskey before breakfast?

---

Heaven goes by favor. If it went by merit, you would stay out and your dog would go in.
-Mark Twain

[findeight]

Owner and trainer have physical control of the horse and what does or does not go into it…a catch rider may only take up the reins at ringside.

The trainer is held most liable for any animal in their control, followed by the owner-who may be in the dark but bears some responsibility to moniter what goes on with their own animal.
Outside riders have little or no say or control depending on the circumstances.

This whole thing is disgusting…How many times can the same “mistake” be claimed…and Jane Clark/Robert Dover???
Damn.

The Horse World. 2 people, 3 opinions. That’s the way it is.

[Heather]

Sorry poltroon, you are right of course.

[J_Turner]

Amen - Silver Bells. Good for you for talking with you pocketbook! God forbid and owner should be too “involved” or “hands on.” Not that there isn’t a polite way to do it.

My Photo Albums

“When I bestride him, I soar, I am a hawk: he trots the air; the earth sings when he touches it; the basest horn of his hoof is more musical than the pipe of Hermes.”
– Shakespeare, Henry V

[poltroon]

I’ve been reading the Notices of Penalty for two decades.

The Hearing Committee has a lot of latitude. I don’t know anything about any particular cases, but for the same drug, you will see in some instances a small fine ($250, $500), return of prizes, and “censured” - ie, no suspension; in other cases (this latest set in particular) you will see larger fines ($2000, $5000), and suspensions. I have to say, you hardly ever see a suspension longer than a month - when I see them giving 4 months or more, that says to me that the Committee (who does have all the facts) didn’t believe that there was an inadvertent error or an innocent explanation.

[sesroh]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Very few people are going to sell a horse with the warning “by the way, he only goes well on insert highly-illegal-substance here”. If you buy a high six-figure, winning horse for a client, and it turns out it doesn’t win on your program (or leaves your client hanging from the rafters), are you going to say, “darn, we made a mistake, oh well, let’s go buy another one”? Or are you going to try to figure out whatever the hell it was that the previous trainer did to get it to the ring? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If I were to recommend a six figure horse to a client, you can bet there would be drug testing done. Additionally, trainers dig themselves into these holes by telling the clients, “This one will win everything. Buy this horse and we can’t lose.” This is just plain wrong. Past performance is not indicative of future performance. Just because the horse does not prove to be up to the standards promised, does not make it okay to drug the horse. I understand the motivation behind it, but get a backbone, admit this wasn’t the best purchase and try to make the best out of the situation without cheating and drugging up the horse. It takes a much bigger and better person to handle something in this way. Drugging the horse is just the cowardly way out. And if it comes down to losing a client or drugging the horse to make it perform, I would rather lose the client. At least I could sleep with myself at night knowing I did the right thing. What goes around, comes around.

[nycjumper]

I think the point of many of these posters is that this happens too often to be an accident.
I’ve been a big fan of Todd’s & I hope that it really was an accident. If it was, its unfortunate that he’s getting tarred with the same brush.
However, I think this illustrates that many of us are fairly jaded & cynical b/c of the number of times this comes up over & over.

I for one am in full support of testing EVERY WINNER, EVERY TIME. Sure seems like it would be a detriment to those that take alternate methods to winning. And maybe it will level the playing field again so that those naturaly brilliant horses & riders get the respect that they should have.

Just my two cents…

[mwalshe]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Silk:
<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Eq is a much more level playing field, it rewards those who can trult ride and train and it is more equitable horse-price wise. You can train most anything to be adecent eq mount if you put in the time and effort. It’s more of a sport.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are joking, right? Because paying 100,000 to lease a horse for the finals makes the Big Eq division EQUITABLE? You can train almost anything to be a decent eq mount??? I have to disagree.

>>It’s not bragging if you can back it up!<<<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I’m not talking about the big eq, I’m talking about amateur medals and eq classes. Hugely popular on the West Coast, fun, variable courses, and they actually judge the rider. You know, like a s.p.o.r.t.

Amateurs who may not have $25,000 for a horse can buy a cheap, unfancy horse and by dint of hard work and good training do very very well in the eq. And for the record I know plenty of juniors who did the big eq extremely successfully on horses that cost about 1/10th of what you’re quoting. There may be 5 eq horses in the country that go for that much.

IMHO hunter competition should be a best of the best kind of thing. Frankly, it’s always going to reward investment b/c you can ALWAYS buy a fancier horse. So lets celebrate beautiful horses that are beautifully ridden riders rather than try to fit the square peg into the round hole. Unsutiability of horse and rider for the hunters and an inability to make them sutiable is what leads to drugging etc. for the most part IMHO. Nervous Nellie riding Turbo Tim are a problem in a sport that rewards lethargy. You can’t train an animal to be sluggish, you can train it to be keen but obedient and to respond precisely.

To be honest with the popularity of the adult eq and jumpers on the West Coast I think this will happen anyway, sooner or later.

[Won2Keep]

Thank you, Karin. Well said.

Poltoon, no one said sweep it under the rug. A lot of good discussion has come from this thread, but to say that Jeff’s article now becomes obsolete because he was suspended is taking things to extreme.

I have not been commenting on this thread because it does effect me on a very personal level, but I have been reading it and thinking maybe a much needed change will come to the hunter show world when the dust settles.

And as a side note, one of the posters who claimed to be horrified by all the drugging and said she would never do anything like that…well, I held her horse as our trainer gave it something so she could ride it because she was so afraid to do the 3’ adults.

How quickly we forget!

[Tiramit]

But Laurie, don’t 3-day riders do that? Isn’t there a forced break between certain levels of events? I’m thinking a forced break because if a horse can only show 9 shows a year (for example), then he will receive a break simply because his little hooves can’t enter the ring.

And if EVERYONE is held to a limit, then that won’t impact the year-end because the point chasers will just max out their shows each year and that will be that…

Yea Joe and Ruby!

…
“Whether you think you can or think you can’t - you are right.” -Henry Ford

[Madeline]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>

I also think that the innuendos in many of these postings is disgusting. As I am intimately familar with the names, and the facts, of several that will be on the next suspension list, I can assure you that the number of people who were/will be suspended is probably less that .05 percent of the people who would consider to be BNTs.

Not all BNTs use illicit drugs on their horses!

Why don’t we let this die until everyone has the facts.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

OK. So you’re cooler than the rest of us. Wow.

madeline

[MsHunter]

Rocky LOL!!!

A few comments again. From an honest trainers perspective. I have found over the years that a horse that can be competitive on the “AA” circuit is costly whether it is green or made.
That is the first point. You can get a deal on a well started green horse that may have far less problems in the long run and far more potential and for those of you on the anti drug BNT trainer bandwagon, HEY it doesn’t need drug X,Y, or Z to perform as it is sound and not ruined by a bad ride yet!!! That young horse if you sit on it enough and your trainer sits on it enough WILL learn to grow with you and adjust to how you ride. A made up one may NEVER get used to how you ride. Selecting horses for customers is an art form, and nothing about it is simple. Now, just when you have found the made up one to tote you around garnish you with prizes if you ride effectively fails the vet. Most times these are the ones that cost a little less. WHy not take the stance to buy a horse that is sound and fails the vet? This is the choice in my barn. We bought a flunker for $3500 and “FIXED” it legally, joint injections, corrective shoeing, good feed and turnout program and took it back to square 1. We had 3 solid show years out of said horse with a winning record. He earned his $3500 10 fold and is now toting a 13 yr old S/S kid around the ring at and still functioning.
You do get what you pay for and you can either pay less up front and take your time with your trainer to get him in the ring and spend your money ( I am not sure how it is more on the green vs made horse) since you already pay for rides and lessons and shows.
This to me is a personal decision made with the help of your trainer to go over $$ and GOALS!
If you don’t mind sitting out of the ring for a year and having the potential WINNER later, the green horse can be an option. Bear in mind, the horse that goes drug free, wins the hacks and the jumps at the best shows isn’t a 5 figure horse.
It can be if you were willing to buy a 3 year old or even 2 year old when you can get an idea of potential. At least you know you bought one that is sound and not in need of X meds or Y type of ride.

Personally, I still think it goes back to patience. Patience to wait on a greenie, patience to learn how to ride the horse to win that you just bought, patience to realize it may take you a year to be competitive and patience with your trainer.

I have to be the most impatient person on the planet with people but I have unlimited patience with horses. I have no idea why, but, I am sure that is why my calling is with the babies.

Also, education about drugs and there purpose is important to understand. I can not and will not speak about the suspension list. I ask each of you, if it is not your trainer why does it even matter? I try to focus on what is positive about people not negative. Some horses are prescribed medication from their vet. That is all I will say on that subject.

Some programs are not for all of us. We are not to judge. We need to evaluate our goals and then our choices to obtain those goals. I agree that money has alot to do with the decisions made by trainers and by customers. Again, first decide what your goals are with your riding, then decide what your budget is, then go in search of a trainer that can provide you with the tools necessary to allow you to obtain these goals within your budget. It is also ALWAYS easier to get the horse after you find the trainer, rather than bringing us a horse we need to fix or sell or make competitive when it wasn’t going to be our first choice to begin with.

Owner/Trainer of http://www.geocities.com/plumstedequestrianctr/

[MHM]

I know there are already mobile stewards in Florida- my point was, how many would it take to cover all the farms within hacking distance of the showgrounds? Maybe USEF could borrow some helicopters from the DEA…

[Flash44]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by radio talk:
Maybe what some of us are trying to say is that it isn’t black or white. That our society itself has achieved a complete lack of morals.(now that statement alone should fire up someone) Look at all the huge corporations that have succumbed. The pressures put upon everyone, in sports as well as other businesses, is terrific. Yes, it is easy to say no. But if that means you don’t eat your client walks off with your living, you have no place to go what then? …<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep, many of those in the corporate world are now facing criminal charges and huge fines.

A client who is pressuring you to do something that is against the rule, or unethical, is probably not a good client to have. And how many trainers are totally dependent on one client? With the frequency that many people change trainers (for a multitude of reasons), I would imagine that most trainers live with the expectancy that their client base will change on a regular basis.

[Madeline]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RioTex:
<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by madeline:
Now if we could only combine Weatherford’s scoring system with some more interesting and varied course design…

madeline<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Madeline, what kind of “interesting and varied” course design are you interested in seeing?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Bending lines. Variable distances that require adjustment. Fences in the corners or on the ends. Skinnies. Pens. Anything but side/diagonal side , diagonal with 12’strides.

madeline