THE suspension list

[CBoylen]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Flash44:
I’ve put 7 years of riding and training and showing into my horse, and he has reached the point where he is extremely reliable and he does not buck and play in the corners. Why is it OK for someone else to give their horse a DRUG to give him the same appearance I spent 7 years of hard work and thousands of dollars in lessons and showing to achieve? You call that leveling the playing field? I call it taking a whopping big shortcut.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
If you put a horse on a steady logical training program, you will get results.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

While I appreciate and admire your perseverance with your horse, I’m not sure you understand what an unusual situation you’re presenting. If I owned your horse I would, after seven years, have $105,000 in him in board alone. Not including training, lesson, or show fees. That, is not logical. I seriously doubt I, or anyone else in a position similar to mine, would find that situation satisfactory if the horse was not producing some results for the majority of that time. The horse would have been, in my case, donated or sold on the cheap, and in many other cases, made productive by any means possible. I’m not claiming it’s right, but thats the way that it works, and I doubt it is going to change. It’s really a matter of economics.

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

[Lord_Helpus]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by buryinghill1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by sopha:
Valerie Brodsky had some paper issues if I remember correctly. Her daughter was Jill and I can’t for the life of me remember the pony (Martini Mouse comes to mind but I think that is just because that was a pony at that time) I think the daughter quit riding and there was little regard as to who may or may not have received proper paper. Nice quiz! (and who was their pony??)
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well done! “Paper” is so politically correct. The pony was a large named “Jacob” but the prefix escapes me right now. A really fancy large. He didn’t get on the list because he croaked before the owner got suspended

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

“Paper” may be PC, but it is also ambiguous. What the heck are you all talking about? It is hardly the A/O division, so “paper” probably does not mean a bill of sale. Are we talking abut a measurement card? AHSA membership? Money?

This inquiring (but unimaginative) mind wants to know…

[KJoy]

For heavens sake, why is this an argument at all? Those who drugged their horses are WRONG and should be punished! Period! And yes, let’s be realistic please - most of the people that have been suspended for the few months this winter have violated the drug rule.

I personally don’t really care if it is an accident or not - there are plenty of people out there who haven’t had these so-called “accidents.” If their feeding system is so complicated, well then, fix it! I don’t have a lot of sympathy for the mega-wealthy in this sport who place blame on their oh so complicated feeding systems! Geez, give me a break! Okay, hire an engineer to redesign your feeidng system, if need be. Yes, mistakes can happen occasionally, but we cannot all be so naive as to think this is all just about the occasional mistake, can we? It’s about time for this cr*p to stop.

Can we please stop making excuse after excuse for those who have CLEARLY violated the rules?

[MellowM]

poltroon - You made a good point about the fine prices and suspension lengths.
I am schocked to see all these supposedly top trainers on the list. It makes you wonder about horses in the past who have won top prizes under these trainers. Did they REALLY win those prizes fair and square or were they just drugged?
I think that all winners at the big indoor shows should be tested.

[cbv]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DMK:
cbv, actually I think the reason they don’t test winners is that that very good proposal was shot down in committee at least once if not more often. It is with no surprise that we note trainers dominate committees…

But while I think a little random testing is always a good thing and should be part of any program, quite frankly I am less concerned about the drugged animal that doesn’t jog as opposed to the one that wins. If you are drugging well enough to win, then you should be the primary focus. And let’s face it, that is the philosophy of many major sports (olympics, racing, etc.)

“I used to care, but things have changed…” Bob Dylan<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No argument from me about the reasons you cite to test winners. As I said, there are a number of good reasons to test all winners…not the least of which is good public relations.

And I have no knowledge at all about how the testing program was developed, I was really just responding to what the previous poster said about not knowing the extent of illegal drug usage in show horses unless we test all individuals. As I said, I was just making assumptions, always something to avoid!

[Janet]

What about the ones about Iraq- not exactly “on topic”, but definitely not “fun” (like “question for Merry”)

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

[CBoylen]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dab:
I’m horrified by the Mg-Ca story – It also concerns me because my mare is on a cushing’s supplement that includes Mg – Is it the Ca or the Mg or the combination of the 2 that could cause such a reaction? --<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Supplements are not the issue.
I’ve heard of horror stories with the IV injection of either or, but it is only the injectable that is dangerous. It is a matter of the amount that is given and the way the shot is given that determines the degree of danger, although obviously it is a great risk on any terms.

However, and maybe someone else could offer some imput here, I was recently warned against using any form of supplemental Mg. Apparently it is going to start testing? I don’t feed any kind of Mg or Ca supplement or supplement containing levels thereof, and obviously would never inject either, but I’m mildly curious.

I had thought there were going to be some legal ramifications over the CC incident, but I guess that is just far too difficult to prosecute.
Incidents like these are what enable my dismissive attitude toward drug rule reform. Who here cannot say that they would rather see the above horse given a cc of ace, rather than dropped to the ground with a Ca injection? I hate to be the cynic here, but I’ll be very frank with you about my opinion. Whatever is done to make drug rules more stringent will be detrimental to the horses themselves. People will go to more and more dangerous ends to avoid getting caught. The more drugs that are outlawed or restricted, the more dangerous the drugs and practices that will replace them.

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

[DMK]

I think people are losing sight of the Rx involved in these suspensions. This isn’t Rx for lame horses. I mean sure, I know a lot of horses that would be better off if their owners didn’t point chase, but if you restricted the number of shows that counted or that they could go to (assuming we have such a technology), it wouldn’t do a damn thing about this problem. Let’s just say that if anything, the well rested horses might be fresher…

Again, I am not saying it is a bad idea (it isn’t), it’s just that it isn’t really related to the problem at hand.

“I used to care, but things have changed…” Bob Dylan

[ClemsonGraduateRider]

You said it much better than me Laurie!!

---

“We learn from history that we do not learn from history.” ~ George Bernard Shaw

[the_eleven]

there were a lot of people on there from everywhere… and these are not just h/j people.

Sometimes we live no particular way but our own -Grateful Dead

[Ghazzu]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lauriep:
I just ask the black and whiters to at least CONSIDER the gray areas, and that every situation deserves to be evaluated on its merit, not just painted with the broad brush of “all the trainers drug their horses=all the trainers are bad.” Just isn’t so.

Laurie<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I’ll settle for “all trainers who drug their horses are bad”.
And I’ll exclude “legal” drugs and levels.

Unashamed member of the Arab clique…just settin’ on the Group W bench.

[SGray]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Heather:
Related to Court’s question . . . why are Ranier’s trainer (Robert Dover) and owner (Jane Clark) suspended, but not the person who was actually riding him in the competition?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

if that is the case (I don’t have my copy yet) then it wasn’t prosecuted under FEI (zero tolerance) rules (as some have speculated) as they state that the rider/driver is held responsible (http://www.horsesport.org/fei/pdfs/reference/03_02/VR2002Eng.PDF Article 1006.1)

“That lowdown scoundrel deserves to be kicked to death by a jackass, and I’m just the one to do it,” --Texas congressional candidate John F. Parker.

[CBoylen]

Well, personally I think it’s way too easy for someone not connected to the horse, or even someone connected to it, to ‘accidentally’ compromise it for drug testing. Sure, mistakes are made, more than I would like to think, but there is also the opportunity for sabotage. No one surrounds their horses 24 hours a day. There are unscrupulous people, and it’s a competitive sport.

I’m not saying that’s the case in any of these convictions, but I do see the threat, and I wanted to address it, since it was brought up. I was especially conscious of the threat of accidental positives during the rash of cocaine convictions. There are just so many people that surround these horses that have access to this drug, and not all of them are going to be careful enough to prevent the horse from being tainted. That knowledge, combined with the extreme sensitivity of the testing for this drug, definitely concerned me.

And Betsy, nice post. There are a lot of distinctions not being made, and I dislike name-damaging gossip. I’ve heard the stories, just like everyone else, but I don’t fully credit anything until I see it in print. I’m all for general discussion and debate, but until the facts are published I don’t like seeing that discussion linked with names.

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

[Pocket_Pony]

flshgordon, that is just the reality of trainers in this area. With the exception of one, none of them want the ammys to control their horse’s care. The BNT wants control. The only other option would be if you were able to keep horses at home and trailer to lessons and/or shows. The cost of that in this area is astronomical. So I have to board, which I like because I like my barn and the people there. But I just find that trainers around here don’t want to make “horsemen” out of their clients. They want riders, and people who show, and who will hand over the reins.

Anyways, I’m just so dissolusioned with the whole h/j world. Even if I were to find a trainer who I liked who would let me have control, then there’s the issue of competing with and against those who drug/bleed/hang/LTD. On the whole, it just isn’t something that I want to be involved in.

“Both rider and horse must enjoy the work. This is the essence of success” - Reiner Klimke

[Portia]

DarkerHorse, I’m wondering why you think Dex is a drug for lameness or soreness? It does have very legitimate therapeutic purposes and effects, and is a strong anti-inflammatory, but I’ve never heard of using it as a regular, long-term treatment for lameness or soreness.

If you had been at the D&M open forum at the Annual Meeting last year and heard Dr. Allen’s and Dr. Lengel’s reports on what their studies of Dex usage revealed, and the myriad problems overuse can cause – systemic failures going far beyond founder – I don’t think you would be as cavalier about injecting it into your horse regularly as you seem to be from your comments here. (At least, I hope you wouldn’t be.)

[This message was edited by Portia on Dec. 30, 2003 at 11:30 AM.]

[MaYbEitsMaybelline]

wow this list must be horribly embaressing for people who truly made a mistake unitentionaly

<<Megan>>
(((((Maybelline)))))

[poltroon]

The story with Rusty and Ulla is being extensively discussed over on the dressage board. The FEI found that Ulla’s vet had given Rusty a testosterone injection without her permission or knowledge, that it did not affect her performance, but that per the rules she was responsible and her performance was ineligible for an award.

[lms]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tackpud:
I’ll go out on a limb - let’s get rid of the whole HOTY program - let’s go back to showing for the fun of it and not worry about points! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I’ll second that! Can you imagine riding and showing to have fun…that would be revolutionary!

“Some people need to buy the winners, others make them.”

[Dinah-do]

I was in university during the Devon bust and only heard bits of it. Would anyone care to tell the story. I heard horses were scratched on mass and sent home asap. True???

[lucky2day99]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Per Sandstone----But there were some trainers who were recently led to believe something would not test when it actually would. I don’t think that means they did anything wrong. Of course they should have been more aware of what was in it. That is their bad but I don’t think that makes them cheaters.

Marion
Amalia<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You have got to be kidding me! LOL Woe deary me to the poor trainer(s) who were led to believe a drug/supplement/whatever cocktail would not test and it did. Bless their sweet little innocent hearts that as RockinHorse said really means to me that the said trainer(s) were thinking they had a one up on the rest of the world with a drug they had hoped would not test and show-- this does not mean that they are innocent or that they were not trying to modify the horses behaviour.

Blame the vet? Please… I am sure there are some human athletes now out there that want to blame someone for the performance drug they were taking that had a test pretty much developed in secrecy to detect the usage. Of course they were not cheating until a test was created to find out about this “nontestable drug.”

I was willing to let go your comment Sandstone about how us non-A circuit types being the only ones that are more upset versus the posters involved in big shows and nice horses. Personally, if this blanket generalistic statement were fact it makes me quite happy and proud that I am not part of the said group and have not checked my morals and ethics at the door.

Regardless of a trainer(s) pleading innocent to not knowing that the drugs given to the said animals in question were not testable… hey crap happens and as another poster said if you are commanding such high training fees in the obvious upper echelon the hunter jumper world… one would hope that the trainer would be extremely sure that the said drug was not illegal.

Christina