Tori is champion at talent search finals

[Horseperson112]

[QUOTE=Sticky Situation;8349349]
But I do think that there is a problem with the current USEF drug enforcement program when one of a horse’s connections has admitted to knowledge of the horse’s illegal drug regimen (even if they weren’t the one to actually administer it) right down to the NINE tubes of Perfect Prep, said person has told the drug testers that they are the trainer/responsible person for the horse … And the USEF is unable to even uphold the temporary suspension.

We aren’t talking about possible contamination, or someone accidentally messing up withdrawal times for a drug that was administered for a legitimate purpose. The horse was intentionally given an illegal substance shortly before showing for the purpose of keeping him calmer in the show ring. I have not read the court documents, but it’s my understanding that this is essentially spelled out in them.[/QUOTE]

I thought the punishable behavior was the shot of GABA, which, as far as I know, no one has admitted to have given the horse, and solely is presumed to have happened based on elevated GABA levels. My understanding is the perfect prep and lactonase pastes were allowable, and likely why they were admitted to so explicitly. Can someone who understands the USEF procedure/rules more fully clarify? (I do not want to start a debate about what anyone thinks should have been punished - I know many people on here are scandalized by the pastes and think they violated the spirit of the law, but my understanding is that they were legal substances administered in a legal manner, i.e. not injected.)

[Horseperson112]

[QUOTE=Mardi;8349385]
Actually I’d rather see her talent used to start a young horse, bring him up through the ranks, and earn championships that way.[/QUOTE]

She’s done this, actually, especially when she was younger and didn’t have an established string she rode. (She’s particularly attached to the pony Ballou.) You should watch her rounds on the lovely, and clearly very green, horse Style in the future hunters at Cap Challenge. She also won the 7YO young jumper championship at the Hampton Classic this summer on a new jumper prospect Austria.

[lauriep]

[QUOTE=justathought;8349436]
This post makes me SO SAD. While Ace might be less harmful… what about if we just identified suitable horses and trained them appropriately.

Willing to accept that might be fewer “spectacular” performers in exchange for having a clean sport. Unlike fox hunting, which involves multiple horses “chasing” a fox or scent in company, the show world is a fairly controlled environment[/QUOTE]

I don’t like the drugging, but I REALLY HATE the other things that are done to get the horses “quiet enough.” In my world, knowing all the options, a paste, given orally, which as far as I know has never harmed a horse, is vastly preferable to hours on the longe line, withholding feed and water, riding them in shifts…the list goes on. So much is set up to make the horse NOT quiet: little to no turn out, enough work to get them pretty fit, fed well to achieve “the look,” boredom, that for you all to say such things as they should have another job if they can’t be quiet is just ridiculous.

All the training in the world, and these horses are VERY well trained, won’t overcome the things I mention above that make them fresh and set them up for the physical abuse to get them quiet.

[KandC]

I’m sure this sentiment has already been said, but I think it needs to be reiterated. I have no doubt Tori is an incredibly talented rider; her technique and style are quite impeccable. I just feel like her image has been tainted by the scandal; having a talented, natural rider like Tori riding drugged horses just prevents amateurs (and even less talented professionals) from meeting that impossible standard. It also won’t help diminish drugging; I can see the logic being “If she needs it, I must need it too.”

My respect for Tori as a horsewoman has diminished, but my admiration for her riding ability has not.

[HorseLuvr]

The kid rides freaking amazing, no one can deny that. I have seen her get on rank pony after rank pony when she was young and win class after class on them. Horses just like her, she is such a soft but effective rider. She really is extraordinarily talented and I don’t look down on her after this whole deal. Hunter people drug all the time, I have seen it going on for years in numerous big barns. It is sad but true. Because Tori is so well known and such a consistent winner, this is gaining so much attention.

[Soaponarope]

[QUOTE=KandC;8349469]
I’m sure this sentiment has already been said, but I think it needs to be reiterated. I have no doubt Tori is an incredibly talented rider; her technique and style are quite impeccable. I just feel like her image has been tainted by the scandal; having a talented, natural rider like Tori riding drugged horses just prevents amateurs (and even less talented professionals) from meeting that impossible standard. It also won’t help diminish drugging; I can see the logic being “If she needs it, I must need it too.”

My respect for Tori as a horsewoman has diminished, but my admiration for her riding ability has not.[/QUOTE]

Well said KandC.

[Peggy]

Even based off watching video it is obvious she is an incredible rider. I imagine she is amazing to watch in person.

Clearly she doesn’t need to have her horses drugged in order to ride them.

She would definitely win on a consistent basis on un-doped horses, if she was competing against others on un-doped horses.

I doubt she would win on a consistent basis on un-doped horses competing against others on doped horses. And therein, along with an unrealistic judging standard, lies a lot of the problem, at least IMHO.

I realize there was drugging back in the day. I honestly don’t know if it’s better or worse or just different now. IMHO the judging standard is harder to meet now. And there are probably more people who want the instant gratification of winning without putting in the time and work. As well as more people who are worried and feel that they need to have their horse drugged so they can ride safely. The latter is most definitely not an issue with Tori.

Kind of amused that my autocorrect kept trying to change undrugged to underaged…

[leyla25]

This just proves what an ugly, nasty world is the horseshow world when you don’t have the money. It pushes people to do anything in order to win. It is an addiction, that can turn very unhealthy. Of course everyone forgets with time and I’m sure we will read the rags to riches stories of her life in a couple of years if she makes it to an Olympic team in the Chronicle with no mention of this incident, and her mother will still be clapping or whatever she does on the sidelines.

[Flash44]

[QUOTE=lauriep;8349451]
I don’t like the drugging, but I REALLY HATE the other things that are done to get the horses “quiet enough.” In my world, knowing all the options, a paste, given orally, which as far as I know has never harmed a horse, is vastly preferable to hours on the longe line, withholding feed and water, riding them in shifts…the list goes on. So much is set up to make the horse NOT quiet: little to no turn out, enough work to get them pretty fit, fed well to achieve “the look,” boredom, that for you all to say such things as they should have another job if they can’t be quiet is just ridiculous.

All the training in the world, and these horses are VERY well trained, won’t overcome the things I mention above that make them fresh and set them up for the physical abuse to get them quiet.[/QUOTE]

Wow, just wow. So the choices are -

1. to cheat via drugs, or
2. to physically abuse the horse
   to get them quiet enough to win?
   I guess I do live in a different world. Not the rarefied world that lauriep lives in, but one where I work hard, give an honest effort, and am satisified with the results. I have absolutely no respect for anyone who lives in lauriep’s world, that’s for sure.

[Tackpud]

[QUOTE=Horseperson112;8349449]
I thought the punishable behavior was the shot of GABA, which, as far as I know, no one has admitted to have given the horse, and solely is presumed to have happened based on elevated GABA levels. My understanding is the perfect prep and lactonase pastes were allowable, and likely why they were admitted to so explicitly. Can someone who understands the USEF procedure/rules more fully clarify? (I do not want to start a debate about what anyone thinks should have been punished - I know many people on here are scandalized by the pastes and think they violated the spirit of the law, but my understanding is that they were legal substances administered in a legal manner, i.e. not injected.)[/QUOTE]

You are correct.

[vxf111]

[QUOTE=Tackpud;8349589]
You are correct.[/QUOTE]

Well, two minor clarifications.

No one argued that the GABA was accidentally administered, was naturally occurring, the bloodwork was wrong/contaminated, or that the GABA was the product of sabotage. Each of the two parties claimed the other intentionally gave the GABA for calming purposes.

AND both parties admitted the horse was given GABA to show. It’s just that each claimed the other was the one giving it-- while admitting their own awareness of it happening.

[busylady]

Tori just rode Canadian Blue at Harrisburg and the horse was not quiet. He spooked quite a bit, but she rode him beautifully. Even with the spooking, her round was significantly better than many others. She scored a 70. Compared to the other rounds, her score was too low. She was accurate to the jumps, the horse never lost forward motion and of course he jumped in great style. A round that has chips, uneven pace and poor form over the jumps should not score higher than a round that has some spooking. When the standard is dead quiet, you are going to get drugged horses.

[SnicklefritzG]

[QUOTE=busylady;8349817]
Tori just rode Canadian Blue at Harrisburg and the horse was not quiet. He spooked quite a bit, but she rode him beautifully. Even with the spooking, her round was significantly better than many others. She scored a 70. Compared to the other rounds, her score was too low. She was accurate to the jumps, the horse never lost forward motion and of course he jumped in great style. A round that has chips, uneven pace and poor form over the jumps should not score higher than a round that has some spooking. When the standard is dead quiet, you are going to get drugged horses.[/QUOTE]

If everything you are saying is true, then that would serve to emphasize some of the issues with the judging criteria.

Where exactly did the spooks happen? In the corners, between jumps, or …?
It would be interesting to hear from the judges why they score certain horses higher than others. If a horse spooks, but has great form and consistent rhythm (other than the spook) why would they place it above a horse that chips and had poor form?

[bjd2013]

[QUOTE=busylady;8349817]
Tori just rode Canadian Blue at Harrisburg and the horse was not quiet. He spooked quite a bit, but she rode him beautifully. Even with the spooking, her round was significantly better than many others. She scored a 70. Compared to the other rounds, her score was too low. She was accurate to the jumps, the horse never lost forward motion and of course he jumped in great style. A round that has chips, uneven pace and poor form over the jumps should not score higher than a round that has some spooking. When the standard is dead quiet, you are going to get drugged horses.[/QUOTE]

I disagree, I thought the score was appropriate. The horse wasn’t paying attention jumping into the bending, and the distance looked deep. He also looked unhappy shaking his head the whole time. All of that combined with the spookiness would make the score what it was. He also didn’t jump each jump quite the same.

[busylady]

BJD, most people would probably agree with you because the current standard, the one we accept, is that the horse has to be dead quiet without a foot or ear out of place (he did seem unhappy about what I’d guess are ear plugs). That standard needs to change. Tori rode that horse beautifully.

[jhg140]

[QUOTE=SnicklefritzG;8349887]
If everything you are saying is true, then that would serve to emphasize some of the issues with the judging criteria.

Where exactly did the spooks happen? In the corners, between jumps, or …?
It would be interesting to hear from the judges why they score certain horses higher than others. If a horse spooks, but has great form and consistent rhythm (other than the spook) why would they place it above a horse that chips and had poor form?[/QUOTE]

The horse basically took off after the trot jump, and looked like it had a bee in its bonnet the rest of the course. It jumped way up over the jumps. A 70 was appropriate. The scoring today has been generally on point

[busylady]

Trot jump? I must be losing my mind…I don’t remember a trot jump. The class I was referring to was the first round, not the handy. I believe he scored a 50 in the handy (I didn’t see that round).

[bjd2013]

[QUOTE=busylady;8349906]
BJD, most people would probably agree with you because the current standard, the one we accept, is that the horse has to be dead quiet without a foot or ear out of place (he did seem unhappy about what I’d guess are ear plugs). That standard needs to change. Tori rode that horse beautifully.[/QUOTE]

Just to play devils advocate - so that round was to you, what a 80-85? I know many horses who are NATURALLY quiet, who jump great and go great. Why award freshness when there are horses who can go around naturally and be beautiful without anything? As a judge you can’t assume that a horse is drugged each time one goes in dead. We have one who requires ZERO prep, goes around with a loop in the rein around a 3’3" course. It’s not fair to award a horse that’s fresh, when there are horses who don’t require anything. Maybe instead of changing the judging standards we need to find horses who are appropriate for the job.

[SLW]

[QUOTE=justathought;8349436]
This post makes me SO SAD. While Ace might be less harmful… what about if we just identified suitable horses and trained them appropriately.

Willing to accept that might be fewer “spectacular” performers in exchange for having a clean sport. Unlike fox hunting, which involves multiple horses “chasing” a fox or scent in company, the show world is a fairly controlled environment[/QUOTE]

Agree with you Justathought. The biggest difference is fox hunting is not a judged event, it is a riding activity. A small amount of ace can make a fresh and fit horse suitable for it’s amateur owner to hunt once or twice a week. No fox hunter I know would keep hunting a horse that required 3cc of ace to hunt- at that dose you have a round peg in a square hole. There are probably some out there dosed that high and I feel sorry for a horse stuck with that sort of owner.

Fox hunters aren’t riding for money or year end awards so it doesn’t matter to the other members if a horse is aced or not.

[lauriep]

My comment about fox hunting was first, in answer to an earlier post, and then to illustrate how it then entered the show ring.