Poor Rollo ... no, Havre de Grace is not lame. She is not limping. There is no "lameness" when a lameness exam is rated 1/5. As you found out, when you quickly googled "horse lameness" to find out what I was talking about when I said 1/5 isn't visibly lame or limping.

I'm sorry that you are ignorant of veterinary medical charting, and you have confused the exam findings of " 1/5 lame" to mean she's lame, rather than a score of 1/5 on her lameness exam (you know, rather than "1/5 card ausc" for example)

Because you'll note that the diagnosis section doesn't include any lameness. Just a small technicality.

Good thing we have your internet expertise to correct the professionals! Even though you've made a fool of yourself. Perhaps you should have just gone away when I noted mildly to you that "1/5 isn't visibly limping"? Rather than you doubling down on something you now absolutely nothing about?

No, Rollo. The mare was not limping. I'm glad her trainer found this injury during routine inspection, before she went out on the track again. Some would not.

Now - at this point you started telling me that I was wrong and the mare was lame. If I were you, after all this, I'd just either apologize for being an azz, not being familiar with either lameness scales and what they mean or how to read the "examination" section of a medical report, or just possibly fade away in embarrassment.

I don't care that you don't like me. But when you attack me with your ignorance it's just ... sad. For you.

And I know Dr. Bramlage, I'll be sure and tell him you said hello next time I'm at R & R

riot. next time u are at r n r tell them they charged me too much for a semen viability.

Your own, or a horses?

:eek:

Sorry, couldn't resist ...

A horse.

I'm like War Emblem

TMI, thanks, I deserved that :tro:

You had it coming

no pun

Pure insanity. What you are saying is that there is no lameness when the lameness is difficult to observe.

Actually, sounds like denial. And more talking in circles.

Is a detectable lameness considered a "diagnosis" or a "clinical sign"? Maybe you can rally some 3rd year vet students to come to your aid on this one.

Just a small technicality.

Do they receive mental patients at Rood and Riddle?

Groan :D

Yes, imagine that! Sometimes way of going, stride length, leg weighting, arc of limb movement, etc. changes, and there are positive signs on various movement or flexion tests, and yet the horse isn't "lame".

But you knew that ;)

If a horse gets a 1/5 on a lameness exam in the middle of a forest, do we still argue about it? :zz:

Naw :D We thank HDG barn manager for finding the heat in her ankle, and regret we don't get to see her run any more. And wonder what's her reserve, and who she'll be bred to to next year.

"several good ones" - If you have money you can buy "several good ones" all you want. Once you put them on the track in a race, try and keep them happy and healthy, well, that takes "several good ones" to another place.

I think it was the owner of Lava Man that said something about why he would not take any of the offers he was getting for LM. Something like, what was he going to do with the money? Try and purchase "several good ones" and come up with another Lava Man?

Same concept with HDG. Just saying, If that were my filly I would hold on to her.

I know Dr Riot is a Vet it just seems Rollo is a better one and he is an internet nobody.

as rick porter explained, it's part of his business plan to sell his horses when they're done racing. that money he gets out of them at sales makes up for money he spends at sales. that he can't afford a large broodmare band. he named two horses that he kept because he became attached to them. yeah, hdg gets a lot of press, but rick has other horses that maybe don't do so well at the track-but still cost him money. he's not the only one who does this, and i can understand why. as chuck said a few years ago, whether a horse is fast or slow, it costs tens of thousands to keep just one in training-and that's just for basic upkeep. i doubt most of porters buys get what HDG potentially can earn when he sells them.
he's in racing, not breeding. HDG is no longer a racer...he'll sell her to enable him to remain in the racing game. makes perfect sense.

Who is she?

I dont know about this one.. 1 / 5 isnt really lame.

It all about the money, not the horse. I get it. For some it would be all about the horse. That's my point.

I'm no fan of Riot but she explained what 1 / 5 lame is and she is correct.

I agree she is a fine Vet. I bet she has neutered at least 100 cats.

i'm not sure what you mean that it's not all about the horse. she'll get the best of care and mates that money can buy, regardless of who ends up with her. for him, it's all about owning racehorses. she's not one anymore.

If you don't get it don't worry about it. Just drop it.

Ok, fine. But is it at least "sort of lame"?

not noticable, I wouldnt even consider 1 / 5 to be lame... but if something showed up during diagnostics then its best if the horse isnt in training.

Really so the scale of lameness starts at 2..Gotcha

She actually only played a semantics game in order to cover up her embarrassment.

What she is attempting to do, is use two different scales for grading lameness, one superimposed on another. The AAEP scale ranges from 0 to 5. "0" being no perceptable lameness, "5" being non-weight bearing lame. So clearly, any horse exhibiting signs of lameness higher than "0", indeed can be classified as lame--hence the fucl<ing notation on the vet report that the horse was "1/5 lame". In fact, a grade 1 score is defined as "lameness that is difficult to observe...". The AAEP is calling it a "lameness". What more do you need? Keep in mind, the issue is not the severity of the lameness, which is what Riot is attempting to use to in order to avoid admitting she was in error.

Over the AAEP scale, Riot is trying to use some sort of laymen's concept of lameness. If the horse isn't clearly head nodding, then it isn't lame. She's basically saying that horses with lameness grades 0, 1, 2, or 3 are not in fact lame. Only those with grades 4 or 5. Think about that for a minute.

Finally, look at her last post to me, where she basically said, ridiculously, that a lame horse is not lame if the lameness is difficult to see. She lists all sorts of changes to a horses way of going. These are all alterations in gait. The very definition of lameness.

the vet isnt even recommending treatment like shock wave. Just 60 days stall rest and hand walking.

It is something that could have become a problem with more training and racing.

Dont worry about Havre de Grace.

Nothing Riot said in this thread was incorrect.

Freddy, congratulations. You just jumped straight into 3rd year vet student status. No need to attend the first two years. They are not really about veterinary medicine.

you guys should both pat yourselves on the back.

Grade 1: Difficult to observe; not consistently apparent regardless of circumstances (weight carrying, circling, inclines, hard surfaces, etc.)

Grade 2: Difficult to observe at the walk or trotting a straight line; consistently apparent under certain circumstances (weight carrying, circling, inclines, hard surfaces, etc.)

Grade 3: Consistently observable at a trot under all circumstances

Grade 4: Obvious lameness; marked nodding, hitching or shortened stride

Grade 5: Minimal weight bearing in motion and/or at rest; inability to move




I put 3, 4, and 5 in the "lets get worried" category

Hey, we get it. You're an insider who visits the barn area now and again. But please, as Freddy would say, "have a heart".

Even Riot would not be on board with this post. Actually, that might be a point in your favor.

Again, nothing is being said about severity. You're now evading the issue, too. If Havre De Grace was not exhibiting lameness, she would not have been given a grade 1.

I dont even understand what point you are trying to make.

I'm not an insider who visits barns now and again. Though I do view vet reports 5 days per week, mostly for show horses.

Well, you didn't review this one very well, did you?

wow that was a good one.

listen here smart guy.

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. I dont even know 1 /20th of what Riot does when it comes lameness evaluations. If you think you are a better judge of lameness than the professional (Riot), than have at it. But you are not.

This is like a political discussion only in the paddock. Awesome.

I know zero about lameness, but I know one thing, I'll take Rollo's opinion, expertise and general knowledge over about 99% of the people here. Plus he referenced Weekend at Bernie's and Office Space in the same post. Conversation should have ended there.

Just because someone doesn't line their posts with their professional achievements and resume does NOT mean they are clueless or have no idea what they are talking about.

This is ridiculous that I have to defend my arch enemy.

I'll give her crap all day long when she says things like her vet degree makes her an expert on climate change.

But when she talks about things like lameness exams and lasix use, she's not just pulling stuff out of her butt.

yay now dahoss is here to type words yet say nothing relevant to anything!

you showed up later than i thought you would

Interesting response. Especially considering I wasn't responding to you at all. Hopefully one day my contributions here will be able to match yours.

I doubt it though. I actually follow racing instead of just pretending to.

Again, evasion.

Let's clean this up nice and neat so you can be on your way.

You:
"the vet isnt even recommending treatment like shock wave. Just 60 days stall rest and hand walking."

The vet:
"In a lesser horse we would rehabilitate, probably using stem cell therapy, but it takes a year to fully resolve, and it usually reduces a horses quality...we should stop her racing career."

Yeah, he's not recommending any special treatment...just retirement.

As far evaluating lameness, again, you have been completely turned around and bent over a barrel by Riot.

Neither Riot nor anyone else in this thread was involved in the examination of Havre De Grace, so any purported skill in lameness evaulation is irrelevent. What is relevant is that the examining veterinarian noted that Havre De Grace was "1/5 lame" on his written report. Non-examining veterinarian Riot noted that Havre De Grace was "not lame" on her DT post.

Who exactly is trying to be a better judge than whom here?