Thank you. It’s very hard to find a good home for an OTTB. It’s not a simple act of picking up the phone. Thankfully we have, as an industry, come together through TAA and state/track programs to establish a pipeline to new homes for horses that need to retire. We, as an industry, are supporting this by have a fee assessed with every start and by additional donations of both time and money. Finding a home for a horse that needs extensive rehab and retraining is not an easy task. It’s not a simple “gee, be more responsible.” Many of us already go to great lengths to do right by our horses and don’t need preachy pants lecturing us.
And those, both trainers but mostly owners, who don’t go to great lengths to do right don’t read COTH and already have shown they are not interested in “doing the right thing” so it would take extensive work to change that behavior.
For example, trainers/owners have learned how to work around things like track mandated no sales to kill buyers… preaching here won’t fix those who don’t want to be fixed.
There are so many good, responsible programs where retired race horses can go. Maybe won’t stop a horse from getting used up at the track but at least helping to ensure those retired horses end up in the best place possible.
1 Like
I sure try to! I’m eyeball to eyeball with the lower class tracks a lot of the time and I’ve found a lot of the trainers there do want to do right by their horses but don’t know where to go with them and that’s often why they get neglected.
I agree; earlier this year I contacted a coth user who is a trainer regarding a horse she had available. It was soon after I got Maya and I told her how frustrated I was over the sick state a lot of my horses are in when I get them. I was burned out and wanted a horse in good shape for a change. She agreed (shocker) that there is a big problem and I was so impressed by how she seemed to care about the wellbeing of her horses. I have a sneaking suspicion that there are a couple here who were trying to lead me to believe they were trainers, but aren’t actually. But hey, now that I know they are the ultimate authority in all things racing, I will be sure to come to them with all my questions.
Well then, if we all agree, what were we arguing about all this time?
No one is arguing with you per se but acting like you’re the only one here (as in COTH) working to help horses that are coming off the track is just ignorant.
Seriously what is with the rash of posters here lately getting up on soap boxes about horse racing? I come here to learn and this just makes it harder.
3 Likes
No. I never once implied I’m the only one doing that. I know I’m not, and I have no idea who the other posters are or what they do. I’d say if you want to learn, try a different place. Here all people do is make unfounded statements about each other.
I have learned a lot in 10 years on this board. As far as unfounded statements, pot meet kettle. You have no clue about the other posters (I do) so your statements again are preaching to the choir. I’m trying to educate you on the experience these posters have. You have officially derailed this thread with your sweeping generalizations. Please stop and start a thread on this topic.
1 Like
There’s another one. I never made any sweeping generalizations. I was objective, I often said I know this is not how the whole racing industry is, and I talked about several good experiences I have had, as well as some of the bad. You are just seeing what you want to see in what I wrote. I also did not derail the thread. It was already far off topic by the time I came on board. I stated my opinion about racing as 2 year olds (and it was opinion, as is all the other poster’s opinions; there is no fact at this point) and got attacked for it.
What do you mean there is no fact? There are a crap ton of facts regarding this issue, perhaps you may want to start by googling what is commonly known as the MD shin study for starters. And if Justify and Arrogate had been up to the task physically and mentally to run at 2 they would have. Any good trainer lets the horse dictate the schedule but the goal is always to get a race or two in before they turn 3 when possible.
3 Likes
Thank you. I wasn’t going to touch that because I’ve read the research from all the threads people like yourself post on with regards to these studies and racing in general.
1 Like
Horses race at 2 because people in the industry don’t want to have them sitting around for a year, when they could be making money off of them, plain and simple. I think it is impossible to say whether starting them later increases injuries or not, because of the fact that by and large, the best physical specimens are going to be racing earlier so theres a big bias there. You would have to do an experiment in which you would randomly bin a statistically signficant # of horses into groups of starting age, and also keep variables such as training methods, drugs used, etc. the same to draw any conclusions
1 Like
They did do an experiment. It’s called the MD shin study.
2 Likes
Bull. There is SO much data on this. When I am sitting at my computer, I will link study after study.
They have been keeping data on this for decades. And while I understand you want a controlled, blind study, that is all but impossible. But the statistics still speak loud and clear.
A laid up horse makes no one money.
3 Likes
I know that there are studies about building bone density in very young horses, but I dont think ive seen any studies that could prove that horses that start racing at 2 stay sounder longer because they started racing at 2. that wouldnt hold up in biostats court but whatever someone wants to do, fine. I dont have racehorses, but Im all for taking my time with horses, whether its endurance or jumpers or whatever. to each their own.
2 Likes
All I can say for this thread is that apparently there are a lot of people who think, “I haven’t read the studies, I don’t own the horses, I have no skin in the game. But if I make something up about it, I’m sure I must be right.”
Bless your hearts.
8 Likes
The statistics indicate that on average, horses who race at two make more starts in their careers and race into older ages than their counterparts who did not race until three or older. Two year olds themselves also have the lowest incidents of catastrophic breakdowns per start. And horses who began their careers at two years of age are less likely to experience a catastrophic breakdown than horses who did not start until three years of age or later. These statistics are all over the place. I promise I will cite them.
As far as I’m aware, every single country in the world who partakes in thoroughbred racing has races for two year olds. Even countries where there is no money in thoroughbreds. Even in countries that favor stamina and longer races. Even Germany has two year old races for cripes sake! People didn’t all independently decide to do this because they were all impatient and greedy.
5 Likes
this is just silly…statistics may show that horses that race at two have more starts / lower rate of catastrophic breakdown, but that doesn’t prove causality. It seems too obvious to mention that the horses that started later could very well have physical issues/ behavior issues / delayed development/some sort of unsuitability for racing to start with which prevented them from starting at 2. and showed up in the form of lameness/breakdown/retirement quickly down the road. Can you really not see that? not trying to be snarky. (you guys get so defensive!)
2 Likes
Um, no, it’s silly to ignore data from over 1 million races. You can google the average number of starters per race, but let’s go with a very conservative number of 6. So you think 6 million bits of data is “silly?” You have to use FACTS. You should read Dr. Nunamaker’s shin study - it’s quite comprehensive. Combining the information from his study with the FACTS of the Equine Injury Database supports racing 2 yos.
If a horse has physical issues that keep him from being a sound race horse, he will have them no matter what age he first races. Why would you keep him in a field for a whole year only to find out he won’t make it as a race horse? Training and conditioning is beneficial to 2 yos. It does not retard, delay, or compromise growth and development at all. They are not more injury prone. We are not defensive, we are aware of the facts and the results of scientific studies done by people with more medical and equine knowledge than all of us combined. Dr. Nunamaker lived this stuff for decades. The Equine Injury database has millions of bits of data.
3 Likes
I am trying to be kind, and failing, because it’s really frustrating when someone who has admittedly no experience in the sport and has not read the literature says things like, “you guys get so defensive,” as they argue for causes they do not fully understand.
Maybe it hits me harder because I was once like you-- I came into racing as a lifelong show horse person. I thought I knew it all. I knew that racing people were greedy monsters who didn’t know anything about horses. It seemed so obvious that if the whole industry just did things the show horse way, all of their problems would vanish. Guess what? I quickly learned I didn’t know what I didn’t know.
Racing horsemen can be slow to embrace change, yet racing horsemen also have to watch their bottom line like no other members of the horse industry. It’s not because they are greedy, it’s because racing is a multi-billion dollar industry that is expensive to partake in. Trainers manage the livelihoods of a small army of people all while trying to provide quality care to suicidal animals that can be worth millions of dollars (and cost just as much to train even if they aren’t). They may be slow to embrace change, but they are quick to embrace anything that will improve their financial situation. Keeping horses running longer with less injury does just that.
Two year old racing has come under fire around the globe in the last 30 years because it inherently seems like it should be detrimental to the horse. Yet careful scrutiny of the data has suggested otherwise. Since the beginning of racing’s history, we have raced two year olds. Now that we have the technology to analyze the reasoning, we can see that the science supports the trend. Human models also support the equine statistics. Bone responds to stress, and you need to begin (and continue) that stress at an early age to develop appropriate levels of bone density to withstand racing rigors.
As promised, I wanted to link some articles to support my claims. Now, some of the journal articles I can’t access and am not going to purchase, so I’m posting some summaries published in industry media outlets. But the citations are there if you would like to purchase the original literature:
https://thehorse.com/14193/young-hor…njury-risks-2/
http://jockeyclub.com/default.asp?se…=10&story=1039
http://www.ctbaforum.com/weekly/arch…klysep2408.pdf
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/254…3ed76b0682.pdf
http://www.ava.com.au/policy/78-raci…-thoroughbreds
No one is trying to bury their head in the sand and say that racing is perfect. There are many issues that need to be addressed and welfare of the horse can always be improved. But it’s not as simple as stating that racing people are greedy and don’t want to give their horses another year when they could be earning money.
11 Likes
Texarkana, what a beautiful post. I have pressed “like”. I was in a similar situation as you describe here too. It’s an eye opener to find out that things you have been told were true as a child perhaps have other aspects of truth that need consideration.
I always think that the thing that non racing people have a problem with is the assumption of “risk”. Breaking and training and racing horses when they are immature is not “risk free”. Non racing people seem to think that to reduce risk, withholding training is the answer. They don’t realize that there is risk of injury, no matter what the trainer decides to do in terms of training, early, or wait until maturity. There is no way to eliminate risk of injury or death, and especially in a discipline that involves high speed, highly competitive, intense competition. You choose your risk, and your horse pays the price of your decision, whatever that may be.
IMO, two year old horses race because they CAN. They CAN do so without incurring injury, if correctly prepared, and lucky. It is true that some people are greedy, and not only people in the racing industry. When greed influences decisions, risk to the horse is increased. But the prime directive of many people involved in racing is to produce a good, competitive sound racehorse who can continue in the industry as an economic competitor over a long period of time. It seems to me that this is “the goal”. The push for the Triple Crown races, and for early Futurities, can be counter to that, encourage owners and trainers to “push”, and there is carnage from that. It has never much appealed to me, personally, when training racehorses. But if I happened to have one, who was ready to run when such a race was available, then yes, I would enter if I could. Let the horse determine his readiness.
Racing is harsh, it is the hardest job a horse can do. There is risk involved, to both horses and riders. But the pay off is really not the prize money, it is the selection of breeding stock that makes for the best breed of horses there is… the Thoroughbred horse. The breed that has “racing” as it’s selection process, proving which horses are sound, which horses are athletic, which horses are brave, which horses are honest. No “inspectors” involved, no one judging them on how they look, which one is the nicest colour, which one has the prettiest eyes or the longest tail. Each one proves their worth, their value, and earns the right to reproduce in the eyes of their owner. And racing decides if those decisions were right or wrong.
If someone thinks that “their” horse is a “better” breed than a TB, let them prove it by preparing them for a race, at two, at three, at five, at seven, at ten years old. However long it would take them. I suggest that they would fail, unless the horse has a large percentage of TB blood in them, and should they be successful in getting the horse ready to compete against a field of TBs, that horse would be outclassed, outrun in this race, again, unless it is mostly TB. Because they can’t do what TBs can do, with 400 years of selective breeding behind them to make the breed what it is. Other breeds are not as strong, not as sound, not capable of withstanding the training necessary at the age it is necessary to do it, do not have the coordination and muscle development at an early age.
Yes, for a horse to have an active and long and successful racing career, he must have good care, good trainers, good owners, and good luck. But if you find a racehorse available for sale, and you are looking for a truly sound horse, this is where you find one. Buyers of such a horse reap the rewards of early training and bone density training, joint surface development that have been done, which they, themselves, do not know how to do if they are not racing people. I think that people who do not know how to successfully do early training with young horses should not be attempting it without guidance, mentorship, from someone who does know. Mistakes can be made, injuries result. Less so with experienced race trainers. Risk is NEVER eliminated, by anyone.
4 Likes
