You are correct.

What about shoving everything back a year? When the horses have developed. Run the TC races at 4... Cool no? And better for the animals.

But there would be a cost, to start with. The title of the thread is crazy ideas. I dont think this is actually that crazy. Just thinking about the animals at the expense of money for a year.

The "2-year-old" conflict, specifically, however, seems to stem from those that do have experience training 2-year-old horses (in any sport - cutting, reining, racing, jumping, etc); and those that do not.

There are many published studies regarding development of the immature athlete (try google) - it's not rocket science, nor all that new. Bone remodels appropriately to needed stress/strain in a positive way; cardiovascular and pulmonary changes must occur; metabolically enzyme systems adapt to streamline physiology based upon requirements ...

The most dangerous thing you could do, for a potential racehorse that you wanted to run at 3-4-5 years of age, would be NOT to run it at 2-3 years of age. Those are the horses that never develop the physical characteristics that make them athletes, as their bodies are never asked to develop what it takes.

"Good" horsemen bring animals along at their own rate, in a positive way, as their physical and mental abilities mature into increased athleticism. Bad horsemen don't. Watch every year as the new 2-year-olds come out, see how they are trained, where they are placed, etc.

I can't see painting all 2-year-old racing with the broad brush of "bad". It hasn't proven out. In fact, it's been proven opposite - a good, appropriate athletic foundation is the best insurance for a longer, healthier career.

Read again.

I said two year olds need to run. They will run on their own for gosh sakes.

RACES... Where they cant stop when they should be stopped.

Because every professional that has responded in this thread, and the few I have spoken to privately, has stated clearly that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.


I do, however, enjoy your stuff on rock and roll message boards.

The fact is that with horses making fewer starts per season, racing is just far less competitive than it once was. From the fans point of view, it's great to see good horses knocking heads over and over but those days are GONE.

I'm not sure if monetary incentives are enough because they cannot compete with the extraordinary values of colts as breeding prospects. Protection of the investment has become the watchword. When horses races 10-15 times a year, losing 5 or more times per season was not unexpected or a tragedy. Now it seems that one loss is cause for retirement to "protect the investment" from losing any more value.

The exceptions are horses like Tiznow or Albert the Great, very talented colts with moderate pedigrees for which the breeders are not screaming.

Where did people post that I have absolutely no idea what I am typing about? I missed that post.

I just know some large animal vets, some trainers from a small track, and the equisterian types of riders that dont understand the chances taken with two year olds.

So I pose this as a question that is way too radical apparently and never discussed... ? that in itself is interesting.

Your thought is reactionary, and while obviously there are some threads of truth within it, taken as a whole it is pretty much a perversion of the truth. Personally I find a naive selectivity about what is wrong with racing, while ignoring the similar supposed wrongs, to be hypocritical. But, hey, that's just me.

Never said dont run them. I said run them in a controlled manner. Where they could be pulled up. Like in training when they go wobbly. When an animal is exhausted and the legs go, you are required to drive them through in a race in which they have a chance to make themselves and people money.

And of course trainers of two year olds that run them are going to say go with it. Thats how they make money. Im talking about weighing this against the health of the animal. And BTW apparently thinks the discussion is completely absurd.

Pile on. Its easy to go with the majority. Anyone care to take my side? Or its just completey absurd to think running two year olds in competitive races might not benefit the animals as much as hurting them.

horses already have the longest generation interval of any domesticated breed of animal...like it or not horseracing is a business first and foremost...pushing things back a year is not good for business. and there are plenty of other breeds and disciplines that train and show 2YO's competitively...

Pgardn, you may find this interesting. Highlights mine:

Bone. December 2006;39(6):1322-30. Kristien Verheyen1, Joanna Price, Lance Lanyon, James Wood 1 Epidemiology Unit, Animal Health Trust, Newmarket, United Kingdom. kverheyen@rvc.ac.uk

Abstract
In order to gain insight into those training regimens that can minimise the risk of fracture in athletic populations, we conducted a large epidemiological study in racehorses. Thoroughbred racehorses provide a suitable model for studying fracture development and exercise-related risk factors in physically active populations. They represent a homogeneous population, undertaking intensive exercise programmes that are sufficiently heterogeneous to determine those factors that influence injury risk.

Daily exercise information was recorded for a cohort of 1178 thoroughbreds that were monitored for up to 2 years. A total of 148 exercise-induced fractures occurred in the study population. Results from a nested case-control study showed a strong interactive effect of exercise distances at different speeds on fracture risk.

Horses that exceeded 44 km at canter (< or =14 m/s) and 6 km at gallop (>14 m/s) in a 30-day period were at particularly increased risk of fracture. These distances equate to ca. 7700 bone loading cycles at canter and 880 loading cycles at gallop. Fifty-six fractures occurred in the subset of study horses that were followed since entering training as yearlings, when skeletally immature (n = 335).

Cohort analysis of this data set showed that, in previously untrained bones, accumulation of canter exercise increased the risk of fracture (P < or = 0.01), whereas accumulation of high-speed gallop exercise had a protective effect (P < 0.01). However, increasing distances at canter and gallop in short time periods (up to one month) were associated with an increasing fracture risk.

All training exercise involves a balance between the risk of fracture inherent in exposure to loading and the beneficial effect that loading has by stimulating bone cells to produce a more robust architecture. Results from our study provide important epidemiological evidence of the effects of physical exercise on bone adaptation and injury risk and can be used to inform the design of safer exercise regimens in physically active populations.

A perversion of what truth?

And this is not a thread about what is wrong with racing as a whole. Just one little aspect that has been brought to light to me by others that are around horses. And are interested in their longterm health in their "profession".

I actually think its neat how incredibly fast some two year olds can run. It is amazing.

There are a lot of things sacrificed for a year, in hopes that profits will be larger later. Its not like racing is operating beautifully as a business currently.

I love this stuff by the way.

Pile on.

I love the posters that post factually inaccurate information, and then when professionals expose its flaws, play the martyr act.

That's the stuff I love!

I understand the concept that as racing (greyhounds, horses) is a public gambling sport, and thus the public must be protected from fraud, I think it absolutely not true that two-year-olds that are put on the track for their first races are always, "driven through" just because it's a race. Watch the maiden races. Plenty of horses in there just for "training", and to try and have positive racing experiences.

"To race or not to race" two-year-old TB horses is not a black and white, "take my side or not" concept, clearly it is grey, and that is supported by much scientific evidence quantitating both risk and necessary benefit.

Cool. So training them appropriately at two years old is benificial given the right amount of rest, etc... In fact it is better for them which was already obvious. You must use muscles and bones so they develop properly. Part of why living in zero gravity would really screw up a young horse, just like old John Glenn.

So we dont necessarily have to race them competitively, and still keep them healthy.

you refuse to listen to the very sound data that riot has presented and you don't like the idea that as a business model it won't happen....what exactly are you looking for?
Obviously there are limits to what a 2 YO can do but if you look around you will see them competing in reining competions and barrel racing, they cut cows, saddlebreds and morgans will be shown in harness and under saddle, standardbreds and racing quarters are running...about the only thing people don't do with a very young horse is jumping because that IS bad for them.

pgardn
 

Out of curiousity, when you buy yearlings or 2YOs, does the cost of training them for a year or two, without racing them competitively, ever seem like too much? Don't get me wrong, I think your real life actions are admirable, but I just wonder if you ever have second thoughts? Believe me, I am most appreciative of the money you put into this game as an owner, and how you coordinate it with your immense care for the animals, but I'm wondering if at least sometimes you don't consider approaching it as more of a business.

I agree with the maidens. But two year olds that show promise and have big money on them... I have seen them driven through. But thank you for a reasonable well thought out response instead of just totally dismissing everything I have said as reactionary.

Your sacrcasm is endearing and so exquisitely executed in a subtle manner.

And I too am appreciative of your thoughts as a owner of large stocks of two year olds.

I of course greatly appreciate owners putting on the show at their expense. If they did not, I would not get to see the animals run which I enjoy a great deal. I think owners that really love the animals have already questioned themselves about my reactionary ideas. Making them, reactionaries in thought only. There has never been any discussion about this.

I wanted to requote the study, above, I posted. I want folks - anyone who rides or trains any horse that's reading this - to catch the marked significance and importance of that last sentence, regarding daily training patterns of young horses.

The take-home being: you need to give young horse bone the appropriate time to remodel and repair.

Doing so builds stronger, safer bone. Not doing so, does not.

with all due respect, read my response. Where did you get the refuse to "listen" read what he had posted?

I think they should start racing yearlings.

Anything to help make the cards fill better!

No you dont. Read your own posts.

The martyr act... Just a bit of an exaggeration.

3 year olds are still developing and 4 year olds too. The only thing that I may think that you are correct about is that they stretch the races out for 2 year olds too soon. I have asked every racing secretary that I know why they dont offer more opportunities going short in the fall for the horses that were behind schedule. Why shouldn't a horse that starts off in October be able to get some racing experience at 5 furlongs like the precocious one do. I must admit that this idea was someone elses who is much more qualified than me to have ideas about racehorses.

I think that racing two year olds in shorter distance races is probably beneficial to them. I used to be under the same thinking as Pgardn (because I'm from a hunter/jumper background), but after seeing the studies done in regards to young thoroughbreds and what is needed for proper bone development, I changed my mind. I am concerned about racing two year olds in races like the BC Juvy (for example.) I'm not sure that it's good for them to be under a hard gallop for that long...

Didn't someone post on here (maybe Pais?) that they didn't start a young horse until their knees were closed? That was always my main concern.

A wise man told me about a rich guy who tried this idea back in the 60's. The guy bred and raised his own horses, left them in the field until the summer of their 3 year old year before they were broke. He then waited until 4 to run them. Guess what happened? They all popped splints and bucked shins like 2 year olds!

cept they don't heal as fast, or as sound as if it had happened at 2!

You do understand that horses are not peple and we cant train them forever without them getting hurt. It is just not practical to train horses for a year or 6 months and not run them. They dont have an off button that we can push when we want to shut them off. Plus racing experience helps horseslearn the game. Anyone who has trained horses knows that the older a horse gets the harder it is to get them out of bad habits.

Good question. Ever get any answers?

Nah Im a reactionary with no knowlege because I dont own a two year old from afar.

Two year olds go through some much more significant changes. Only reason this is even brought up. Yearlings undergo even greater changes. But they are clearly not physically mature to the naked eye so of course they are not on the track. And I think if people did try to race horses as yearlings their would be an outcry. But for a horse that looks physically mature but has a lot of critical development going on... I think this has weighed upon owners and trainers that care. And I realize some two year olds mature a lot faster. Its individual. I personally dont like the BC two year old races which is where this whole thing started.

Just the usual mumbling you get from racing secretaries. Not that I am knocking them because that is an impossible job.

I understand this. But has there ever been a thought of running two year olds in races that are not bet on? My problem is a good many two year olds are pushed in a race after their form has completely broken down because there is money on them and the finish line approaches. I have watched this.

pretty sure the baby races that are held in Aiken every year are a non-betting affair but I could be wrong.

This is true for horses of all ages.

Betting creates money for purses, purses help pay people's expenses, without one you don't get the other.

I am not saying not to run them. I have typed this numerous times. Competitively... with money... after they are fried because they are in the money not far from the finish.

But it is not more detrimental for two year olds?

The truth is that when racing 2 year olds, financially it is more important to cull your horses that cant run instead of actually earning any money by racing them. Something like 11% of the purse money is for 2 year olds. It just makes the process too long and costly to be holding onto horses for 3 years before they have any chance to earn. The training expense will kill you.

According to the experts in this thread it is not.

I don't, not for "caring" owners. Just say no.

Racing used to be considered sport, now it's considered business, no escaping that.

Anybody who gets into it (and I hope to, to a greater extent over the next 10 years) simply has to decide where they stand regarding such issues ... how much money are you prepared to lose by owning race horses? How long will you last in the sport at that rate of loss?

I think one key to betterment of racing for the horses, lays in involving people with less money in the sport, through fun, racing partnerships - not prospectus-laden, low-cost "investment" deals.

If my current racing stable, consisting of three tail hairs on a filly named Sumwonlovesyou :D , goes belly up, I'm out nothing, I'm still in the sport, and there is no overriding financial incentive for me to do anything not in the best interests of the horse, all the time.

Not true if I have the attitude that the money I have invested is not disposable. Successful people, who have made millions at their business, and who now get into the horse business, fully expect this business to be profitable for them, too.

Surprise! Racing is still a sport!

So there is a study or clear statement I have missed that states: when two year olds are pushed hard after losing form in competitive races (not training), completely exhausted, have no more risk of injury than 3 or 4 year olds that are undergoing the same scenario.