It’s definitely NOT random. Not in Wellington.
Thinking back on some of the times I’ve had a horse tested.
- Horse came out of a jumper class prancing sideways (and did win the class). I still wonder if they thought I was giving him uppers. I asked for time to cool him out and by then the horse was back to his usual mellow self. Tester then asked me if it was the same horse! This was a California, not USEF, tester.
- Horse came out of ring after getting eliminated for stops. I asked the tester and she said she got to the show, had a cup of coffee, and I walked out of the ring as she was finishing the coffee. That's pretty random.
- USEF ester who was my trainer's vet tested about five horses in our barn. She said it was because she knew us. I think she meant that she knew the horses would be OK with the testing? Or she felt comfortable being around us?
I don’t think it can get anymore random than the testers just picking someone for their own reasons. Also the testers and the testing vet have no idea what the results will be-their job is to test and send the samples on.
One time my horse was tested after she won a very big and important class. I told the tester she would need to wait until after photos were taken and the horse was bathed and given her well earned treats. Tester was fine with that and just followed us around as we took care of the horse. Testers can not interfere with the horse’s care or going into a class.
I went 30 years without ever getting drug tested once - then got tested 5 shows in a row a couple of years ago. It was the same team so I finally asked “why me” and was told it was because my horse had pink spit. Now I use apple instead of peppermint flavored cookies and no more tests…
I’ve only had a horse tested once…it was a big black horse.
[QUOTE=copper1;7534280]
I don’t think it can get anymore random than the testers just picking someone for their own reasons. Also the testers and the testing vet have no idea what the results will be-their job is to test and send the samples on.[/QUOTE]
The problem is that people have biases (often unconsciously) and so picking horses for their own reasons can in fact result in a testing pattern that ISN’T random. So then some horses get tested all the time and others not very often at all, etc. (I mean, I totally appreciate why you’d prefer to test a well behaved cooperative looking horse, but if that becomes a pattern amongst testers then anyone with a horse who acts up knows they have a better than average chance of not getting tested.)
I don’t see how it’d be so hard to come up with some kind of random selection method that was less at risk of being influenced by horse appearance, behavior, or owners/trainer, etc. The computer stands the best chance of being properly random, but the suggestion of making choice rules beforehand (day before, tester one takes the third horse in the second class, tester two takes the first horse in the third class, whatever) at least removes some possibility of choice being influenced by factors that shouldn’t be involved.
