THE suspension list

[Beezer]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Molly99:
Personally,

I would be in favor of pulling blood and urine on all ribbon winners, but picking at random from those the ones to test.

This way you know if you get a ribbon you will have the means to be tested, but you don’t really know if they test your sample or not.

A little more expensive, and an increase in the drug fee would be OK, but you wouldn’t have to really test anymore than are tested now. Nothing to say that you need to test any from a given show, but the exhibitor would not know that.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ooooooohh! I really like this idea! It has many, many things going for it. I wonder how many chocolate chips would be added to rounds when the tester was spotted on the grounds.

***** Dear Santa: All I want for Christmas is two good knees. *****

[poltroon]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Molly99:
2 thoughts on some of the suggestions:

If you want to make a change to judging hunters against a “perfect” score like in dressage, then who would you propose set the “perfect” standard.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
You already have judge training now that does just this. An older example of what is done might be the “Judging Hunters and Hunter Seat Equitation” book by Anna Jane White-Mullin.
<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
One of the things I like best about the hunters is that different judges like different styles of jumping, thus giving the middle of the road horse opportunities to shine. Most would agree on the top group, but after those FEW, judges often disagree.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
You will see this in dressage as well. Some judges care mostly about gait quality in a circle. Some judges won’t give it a great score without great bend. Some judges are sticklers for perfect accuracy in the shape. Again, they all agree on what is perfect, but they disagree on which imperfections are the most important. That’s why we call 'em judges.
<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
And I must say, that I don’t see judges rewarding the bad horses, it just happens that those bad horses are still the best of the bunch that day. Just because they won over a better jumper, most likely means that the better jumper did something REALLY bad, not just a head toss in the corner.

I have sat through many hunter judging clinics and the majority of those judging WANT the best horse to win that day and I doubt that many would EVER be able to agree on a PERFECT standard to compare against. Many have “their own” standard as a basis for comparison for the trips that day, but that is only to give them a starting point regarding if the first trip was good or bad or somewhere in the middle.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Using a point system where each aspect of the trip gets a certain number of points does not have to change how the judge compares various faults. What it can do (whether you feel this is good or bad) is make minor, one time faults less significant, like a head toss, and have the consistent elements (like flat jump, or lack of straightness) be more of a factor. Whether this gives a better result would need to be evaluated and discussed.
<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
I think the one thing that people are missing is that changing the judging standards will not stop people from drugging their horses. It will still happen. If you want to lessen the drug use then the best and quite possibly the only way to make that happen is to raise the fines in relation to getting caught and to increase the number of horses tested.

I really don’t believe that the judging standards are what cause people to drug for the purpose of trying to win. They do it because it is easy, the client wants to stay one but doesn’t have the time, money, to learn or buy a proper horse, and because the penalty is not that severe in the long term.

Think of it this way:

Back in school, if a student was caught cheating, would the student get in trouble or would the teacher change their grading methods?

Cheating is cheating, plain and simple.

Increase the penalty and it will lessen, change the standards and people will just have a “new” standard to cheat for.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Here I basically agree with you - the perceived penalties must be commensurate with the perceived benefit. But, it is important to recognize that the system and the way it rewards people will always be vulnerable to certain “gaming” strategies. It is sometimes sufficient to alter the system so that gaming is minimized. For example, if you give a school a bonus based on its percentage of improvement on a certain standardized test, the optimal strategy is to do very poorly the first year, then very well the next year, then very poorly the next year, etc, ensuring an every-other-year bonus. A school that is already performing to the best of its ability may not have any room for improvement, and will never be recognized with bonuses under such a system.

[MsHunter]

Richard I am not sure how “trainers” make $$. I think one way is for them not to own any of their own horses. Herein lies my dilemma. I breed and raise my own as well as board and train for others. When I go to the accountant each year, they tell me I do not charge enough board. They tell me I have to figure out my hard costs (shavings, hay, grain, supplements not drugs, wormers) then the electric for the barn monthly, then the insurance divided by X stalls, then the paid labor and the taxes on the land (everyone wants turnout). Without factoring in a DIME for my time with the horses
this costs in NJ where I live (south which is cheaper) $450 a month. I charge $550 a month board. The accountant said to be profitable you need to charge 2x cost. Well, that will never happen. No one will pay that without an indoor arena. However, I can say that we pay as we go and our board rate can always be less than someone elses as we do not have any outstanding loans for anything. It is simple, we only buy what we can afford and we don’t try to impress anyone. My husband bought me a paddock for XMAS. He hasn’t built it yet, but I have 75 acres of land, and only 8 are being utilized. One paddock hard cost is $3500. Each stall in the barn (tongue and groove) cost us $2000. He is a builder, our costs are less.
The point being anytime my barn is full each stall commands $550 a month. This is what is aggravating when you take a horse in to help someone on consignment. They think you have no costs as they only want to think about the feed.
What about the care? What about your liability insurance on the farm and the equipment in a case of a problem? What about me holding the horse for the vet and farrier? I don’t charge extra for that either. I’d be HAPPY to charge LESS for lessons and training if I could charge MORE for board. I can’t make improvements very quickly, yet, customers want amenities. Does anyone understand HOW you can make money or break even on board?

As an aside. I have a totally ethical totally incredible veterinarian. They have 24 hour service. I am given bare minimum amounts of medications for the in case of emergency situation. The clinic also bills the owners directly for the visit and the dispensing of any meds. My veterinarian would NEVER give me
a bottle of anything to use on a customers horse. He said he is protecting me and the owner, I think he is right. When I bodyclip and have a bad one (babies you know) I call him and he will come and mix a nice cocktail, administer it and I can do my job and then he will bill the owner. Not expensive, normally a $20 fee. Since he does so much at our farm, we don’t get a call charge except in an emergency situation. I wonder about the legalities of a trainer having meds and administering them to a customers horse? I thought by insurance standards that was a no-no? OK, so I am not as educated as I should be either am I?

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

[SydneyS]

LH - If I’m thinking of the right trainer, he doesn’t regularly give dex, does he?

It also helps that he’s a fabulous rider that thinks like a horse! With that kind of talent, you know exactly how much to push the horse to keep them interested in their job and sound!

[radio_talk_Aefvue_Fa]

I am a firm believer in the “buck stops here” analogy. We all need to take responsibility when it comes to our investments, equine that is. Why should the trainer be the only one making the call? Thats not fair to them or to yourself as an owner. Yes, there are trainers who will do it their way, no matter what. Do you want to win that badly? Move on then. No it’s not easy, and yes you might find it hard to leave. So, your point is? As black and white as the drugging problem is to many, it is also that black and white to leave a potentially harmful environment for your horse.

We can’t keep pointing to this or that as the problem. We need to stand up for what WE personally think is right. Not hand it off.

[poltroon]

LH’s idea of stored samples has recent precedent, too: in the news recently has been the case of a new drug discovered among Olympic level runners (I think) - and they are currently testing the last 4 years of samples to see who’s been using this previously untestable drug.

On the calcium/mag thing: shudder! But I’m not sure that it truly is untestable. I was very sick once with potassium levels quite out of whack, and that certainly showed in a blood test. It might be a challenge to prove that it was deliberately induced to change performance, as opposed to a genuine illness, but it might be possible to test for it.

[arnika]

To C. Boylen- I don’t blame absentee owners for unknowingly picking the wrong trainer to take care of their animal. However the main word is unknowingly. If all the owners of these cheating trainers pack up and move to unsuspended trainers permanently, then I will take back my assumptions. If they show under another stable’s name for the Florida circuit and then show back up with the former BNT as soon as the suspension is over, well then I guess we’ll know what their priorities are, won’t we? Considering what has been posted here by some people who follow the circuit, that’s what I expect to see.

I also am of the opinion that if your BNT buys a six-figure horse and finds out it’s been drugged that they should sue for fraud and get their money back. Not run the animal through a gamut of anti-psychotic-drug-of-the-month to be able to pass that horse along.

I know some clients that have won serious shows with Don Stewart. Does this news make me look at them and their acomplishments in a different way? You bet your boots it does. Did they do anything wrong? Perhaps no one will ever know. But the next time I see their name in the COTH I won’t be showing it to my 14 yo saying “Hey, look how so-and-so is doing at the finals”.

[Tiramit]

(insert sarcasm here) I’ve heard rumors of horses who were bled in other show scenes to calm them down. One’s left with a nice quiet horse after that a good bleeding. Maybe that’s a viable alternative as it doesn’t a) test, and b) put undo wear and tear on legs?

Seriously though, I don’t fault the owners of the horses who just want to ride and not know about the details of what their horses intake. (I really don’t have the time or desire to learn what makes my car work, but I sure enjoy driving it.) As long as someone is properly taking care of the horse, than that’s all that matters. I believe ignorance can be a defense in this area and it seems that USAEq sort of recognizes that.

HOWEVER, I DO find fault with the trainers themselves for pushing horses because they don’t have the guts to stand up to demanding clients! Yes, it’s a business, but ethics are necessary in all walks of life! Should my company cheat the government to make more of its profits so that our employees can have a better holiday bonus? No. Therefore, it is clearly the trainer’s fault for not adequately preparing a fully conscious and sound athlete for the rigors of competition, both mentally and physically! And for appropriately matching a client to a horse in the first place!

Perhaps what we should really argue is the need for a change in our competition structure that could prohibit much of the seedier practices. Maybe a cap on the number of classes a horse can compete in each year or give a certain time between certain levels of competition? 3-day riders do it, why not h/j folks? Those with excess money can afford more than one horse and alternate and if everyone is held to it, end of the year points won’t be affected. Regular working ammies probably won’t be affected because they don’t show as often anyway.

Or maybe show organizers can make more of an effort to find locations that encourage turnout / trails or general relaxation rather than constant longing? When I show mine I take the time to clear their brains everyday. That’s MY responsibility, and in the abscence of an owner, that burden falls squarely on the shoulders of the trainers.

But the bottom line is that tougher enforcement needs to occur and it should be a stigma to have a drug / cruelty charge attached to one’s name! So much so that unsuspecting clients won’t be lured into a “convicted” trainer’s program!!

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

[This message was edited by Tiramit on Nov. 05, 2003 at 05:36 PM.]

[CBoylen]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Flash44:
So what, compare horse showing to the NFL or baseball? Where are all the spectators? The vast majority of the participants are amateurs, and many many of those are of average talent or accomplishment (3 footers). Just because it costs a lot of money to participate in the sport does not elevate it beyond recreation. When spectators are paying to watch, and riders are earning big fat paychecks, it moves out of the recreational level.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Okay, our sport is structured differently, but I still think it compares on this level. As you noted, we have no spectator base. However, as they have professional players and coaches, we have professional riders and trainers, as well as other professional athletes, ie the horses. Our good horses cost into the millions of dollars, as do their good players. Our good riders and trainers gain contracts with barns and owners, and are paid salaries or paid per instance for rated services. Same for their players and coaches. People who own horses may be amateurs, but I don’t know of any football team owners who get down on the field either.

Not only is it a business on the level of the sport, but you must also consider the sales level, both as in horse sales and in merchandise, feed, ect. Think of how few things there are that sell as high as horses. Some houses, some jewelry, and some cars. That’s pretty much it. There are also the related services and positions, such as shipping, vet care, braiding, grooming, jump crew, and officials, ect. As a commercial business it carries a lot of weight and envolves a lot of money.
Add also the real estate issue, evident most in Wellington where horse people have transformed former swampland into properties worth over 100k an acre.
On a local level, the communities (such as wellington, lake placid, ocala, ect.) of the horse shows benefit immensely. WEF is reported to boost FL’s economy by an annual $21 million.
I just don’t think it’s accurate to refer to an industry with such widespread consequences and influences as lightly as you do.

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

[Peggy]

Some semi-random comments from one who has done both dressage and hunters:

The ride itself takes longer for dressage. So a lot of the longer time alloted for dressage rides has to do with the length of the test, not the extra time needed for scoring.

Dressage judges are not required to provide a comment unless the score is below, uh, some number that I can’t remember off the top of my head. It’s better now, but I’ve gotten score sheets back with almost no comments except for the collective marks. So, not all dressage judges are giving a riding lesson.

Dressage also has the problem with respect to variety of training of horses. Your typical AA Training Level class could include everything from a good rider on a legit greenie to a not-so-experienced rider on a horse that’s trained to Prix St George to a good rider on a Steady Eddie type that they want to have fun showing but can’t move up for some reason. In other words, pretty much what you’d find in the Mortified AA division. Sometimes I wonder how the judges manage to sort it all out. While the experienced horses don’t get points for manners and AA suitability in the amateur division, per say, their overall steadiness often produces a cleaner test.

[Erin]

I haven’t been following this thread for the last couple of days, but in scanning the last few pages, I’ve seen a few comments regarding whether or not all samples ARE actually tested.

I do believe that every horse selected for testing IS tested. Because of the split-sample rule, which requires that two blood/urine samples be taken from each horse, not every sample is tested.

I did an article for COTH earlier this year about the USAEq drug lab, which is considered one of the best in the world… you can read the whole article in PDF format at http://www.erinharty.com/clips/drugsarticle.pdf, but I’ll quote the part about the split sample here:

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>The life cycle of a sample

When a horse or pony is selected to be drug tested at a USAEquestrian competition, the testing veterinarian will take two samples of blood and two samples of urine, if possible, in accordance with the split sample policy USAEq adopted in 2001. The samples are labeled “A” and “B” and stored separately.

The samples are securely stored over the weekend, and then shipped FedEx overnight to the USAEq drug-testing laboratory in Ithaca, N.Y., on Monday, arriving on Tuesday. Employees at the lab unpack the samples, which are shipped in ice coolers, and carefully log them in.

Wednesday is screening day. All of the “A” samples are subjected to 90 different enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) tests, which are the laboratory’s primary screening technique. Thin layer chromatography (TLC) tests are also performed to detect drugs for which no ELISA test exists (such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs).

If any sample comes up with a suspicious result, it’s subjected to further quantitative or confirmatory analysis. Quantitative analysis, through the use of high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS), determines the exact amount of a drug that is present in a sample. These results tell USAEq officials if the amount of a particular legal drug present in a horse’s system is below the threshold established by USAEq rules.

Confirmatory analysis by HLPC/GC/MS and HLPC/MS/MS identifies the exact molecular structure of a drug or its metabolite, confirming without a doubt that the drug in question was in fact in a particular horse’s system. “The chance of a false positive happening is zero,” Dr. John Lengel, administrator of the drugs and medications program, said emphatically. “In every instance, [confirmation is] one hundred percent.”

The goal of lab technicians is to be able to determine whether a sample is negative within a week of its arrival at the lab. For positive samples, the goal is to have concluded the confirmatory analysis within one month.

If an “A” sample is negative for forbidden substances, the corresponding “B” sample is destroyed. If a horse’s “A” sample is positive for a forbidden substance, the owner or trainer can request that the “B” sample be sent to another independent laboratory for analysis.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

[nycjumper]

I’ve read several times that these trainers “were not giving the drug with the intent to enhance performance.”

Can someone in the know clarify what exactly what the drug is & why they were giving it to the horses then? I find it hard to believe you would put something in a top horse & show on it unless you thought it WOULD help you in some way or another…

[hb]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by M. O’Connor:

One reason such a system works well in the dressage ring is that the rides are scheduled, and the day is tightly scripted. Not the case at a busy multi-ring hunter show, with back to back rides. When horses enter the ring at the rate of 2 min per trip, the trip itself lasts only about a minute or so…an experienced judge evaluates each jumping effort, transcribes what occurs, asseses each trip in comparison to the rest, ranks each trip and is ready to begin the process again–all within that two minute window.

Using a numerical scoring system that requires a communication with the announcer (who may be busy with results at another ring, or announcing these) slows this process a little…(one reason why numerical scoring is presently popular only at larger shows and mostly for “Classics” with a dedicated announcer). Weatherford’s system would require even more communication, and as she points out, more personnel to carry out.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

At events, there are usually 3 or 4 dressage rings going at the same time, and if the event is run on a two-day schedule there could also be two stadium jumping rings going also. It’s probably just as busy as a multi-ring h/j show, and the dressage judges are able to use the score sheets. The scribe writes down the score and brief comments for each movement, the judge takes a minute or so at the end for collective marks, and they move on to the next horse.

The scoring method could work without scheduled times also.

[clearound]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hopeful Hunter:

There is a WORLD of difference between the (in total proportion of horse owners of all disciplines) VERY FEW people who campaign (by which I mean regularly show to place for year end) at the top shows/circuits (be it WEF, or QH Congress) and the huge pool of people who compete less frequently or even not at all and who are “in” horses for their love of the animal.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

HOPEFUL HUNTER - I resent your implication that those of us who choose to show at places like WEF are not into horse for their love of the animal. You have no idea what you are talking about. Your generalization clearly demonstrates that you have that “poor poor pitiful me” attitude. Don’t make statements about people that you know nothing about. Didn’t we just go through this with the G. Bloomburg and Foxwoode Farm posts?

[DarkerHorse]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ghazzu:
<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DarkerHorse:
[Bute is not strong enough. If you were giving 100cc of it, maybe (10 pills). Of course, I bet the horse would colic if you did that, and that would be illegial at a show.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Injectable phenylbutazone is a 20% solution–100 cc would be 20 grams. That would be the equivalent of 20 one gram tablets.

The horse might colic, but that would be en route to dying of acute renal failure.

And no, giving more wouldn’t result in killing more pain.
Once you’ve reached the maximum therapeutic level, you don’t get a bigger effect.

Unashamed member of the Arab clique…just settin’ on the Group W bench.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Good point, I hadn’t thought of that. Ew that would be like those girls who try to kill themselves by taking a whole bottle of tylenol. It sounds like the worst possible way to die in the entire world. Yikes.

---

Horsey E-bay! Check it out. (Still in beta stage, but it works)
http://classified.catchride.com

[Flash44]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by clearound:
FLASH 44 - As one who just sold a made 3ft horse and purchased a green 3ft horse, I can tell you that a made 3ft horse who can win at the big AA shows is an enormous amount of money. I know of certain horses that are know showing in the A/A that were sold for mid 6 figures. As a result, the pressure on the trainers for these horses to win is in fact tremendous. I am not, and want to repeat that I am not, for one second, condoning the use of illegal drugs.

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>

I’ll repeat - I’m not insinuating BNTs use drugs on horses. All of my posts have been responses to comments made by other posters.

Also, just because someone paid a lot of money for a horse (or company, or whatever) does not guarantee success. And bending/breaking the rules to be successful because there is a lot of money involved is not an excuse. See article on Richard Strong (Strong Financial Corp and Strong Capital Management) in yesterday’s Balto Sun p. 2D (Business section).

[ClemsonGraduateRider]

Chanda I’m with you on this one.

War Admiral - what happens when the industry can no longer survive? As stereotypical as it is, and I am in NO WAY saying that the top eschelon of $$$$$ hunters are bad people, but the people who keep this business IN business are the ones who shell out the most money, and who are the majority of the people Chanda is refering too. I am not saying it’s 100% the case but for the most part I believe it is.

So if/when those people dissappear, and if/when the industry dissapears, and you have less choices of shows to go to I don’t want to hear any complaints.

---

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

[poltroon]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tiramit:
OK, I understand Laurie and Portia. Well then, let’s look at the other disciplines. I haven’t heard of too many dressage trainers getting caught (maybe I’m just naive?) and the 3-day riders seem to have a handle on their competitors, so what are hunter / jumper folks doing differently? Obviously over-showing. How do the dr/3-day managers sort it all out?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

My guess is that dressage trainers get caught less mostly because there are fewer of them than h/j trainers. Also, I think the pressures are a little different - dressage tends to select more for riders who are interested in the intellectual challenge of the training than competition, and the awards in dressage are based on averages rather than point accumulation. Finally, scoring in dressage is per movement - so if your horse is a goof for one movement - kicks out, or is otherwise disobedient, you can still get a high overall score and win the class.

Calmness per se is not rewarded in dressage. You really need a horse who is on the razor edge ready to burst his buttons with brilliance at the upper levels. The abuse I would expect in dressage would be more along the line of steroids and soundness meds.

Eventing is a whole other kettle of fish. First, there’s just no money in it unless you win Rolex, and even then, you spend so much to get there it’s just gravy. No one goes to events thinking that they might win their entry fees back, even. Further, a horse can only the big three-days twice a year - and bad luck can mean that you don’t even get to run. Because of that, it doesn’t attract a lot of absentee owners, and I think there is less pressure for a rider to WIN any one competition.

The danger aspects also come into play - I ain’t drugging any animal that I’m riding at 600 mpm at telephone poles.

And, both dressage and eventing trainers are accustomed to riding under FEI rules, which allow no foreign substances.

[LimoWrek]

Yep, its vacation time… And i’m going to enjoy the time off personally

---

Limo Wrek.

[cgn38]

One either has integrity, or one does not.