Crazy Ideas

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by pgardn

To people that understand its like asking a teenage pitcher to throw 90 curveballs in a little league game.

I like watching them run also. But ultimately, its just not good for the animals. They are too young to be run this hard. It is apparent to me.

Asking any pitcher on any level at any age to throw 90 curveballs in a given game is a bad idea but I have yet to understand what we are supposed to do with 2 year olds if we cant race them? Send them to prep school for a year?

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Asking any pitcher on any level at any age to throw 90 curveballs in a given game is a bad idea but I have yet to understand what we are supposed to do with 2 year olds if we cant race them? Send them to prep school for a year?

Train them.
Because you know most of the animals, if trained properly, will give you everything they have in a race. Enough to hurt themselves at this age. And the rider cant slow them down when there is money on them.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Train them.
Because you know most of the animals, if trained properly, will give you everything they have in a race. Enough to hurt themselves at this age. And the rider cant slow them down when there is money on them.

There is this falicy that horses only get hurt when they are giving all they have. Horses get hurt in most cases because they have conformational defects that dont allow them to strike the ground on an even, consistent basis. Eventually the problems that crop up as either primary lameness in the defect area or secondary lameness somewhere else due to the original defect. Younger horses are more apt to get sore shins but the thing about young horses is that they recover and heal quicker also.

Of course having a year's worth of training expenses in a 2 year old with no chance of recovering anything is not going to make the owning horses any more economically viable.

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

There is this falicy that horses only get hurt when they are giving all they have. Horses get hurt in most cases because they have conformational defects that dont allow them to strike the ground on an even, consistent basis. Eventually the problems that crop up as either primary lameness in the defect area or secondary lameness somewhere else due to the original defect. Younger horses are more apt to get sore shins but the thing about young horses is that they recover and heal quicker also.

Of course having a year's worth of training expenses in a 2 year old with no chance of recovering anything is not going to make the owning horses any more economically viable.

Never said this is how they only get hurt.

I said two year olds are still developing and to run them in races increases the probability of injury. And yes they do recover quicker, for the same reason they get injured, they are still growing. Same in humans.

ANd the money is the main reason why they are on the track at this age. It aint for their health and longevity.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by pgardn

ANd the money is the main reason why they are on the track at this age. It aint for their health and longevity.

And the main reason people race horses at 3? At 4? At 5? Or don't race them at 4? Or 5?

It's all about money for God's sakes.

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

And the main reason people race horses at 3? At 4? At 5? Or don't race them at 4? Or 5?

It's all about money for God's sakes.

Thank you for the obvious.

Are there ever attempts to weigh the money against what is over the line cruel to the animal? Seems to me there has been a long history of this conflict. With the two year olds...

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Thank you for the obvious.

Are there ever attempts to weigh the money against what is over the line cruel to the animal? Seems to me there has been a long history of this conflict. With the two year olds...

I'll stick to the opinions of professionals, like Chuck, and pass on your false concerns.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Are there ever attempts to weigh the money against what is over the line cruel to the animal? Seems to me there has been a long history of this conflict. With the two year olds...

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.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Never said this is how they only get hurt.

I said two year olds are still developing and to run them in races increases the probability of injury. And yes they do recover quicker, for the same reason they get injured, they are still growing. Same in humans.

ANd the money is the main reason why they are on the track at this age. It aint for their health and longevity.

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.

[Riot]

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.

Good question. Ever get any answers?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

Good question. Ever get any answers?

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

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

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.

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.

[Riot]

But for a horse that looks physically mature but has a lot of critical development going on... I think its a tough call for caring owners.

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 , 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!

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Train them.
Because you know most of the animals, if trained properly, will give you everything they have in a race. Enough to hurt themselves at this age. And the rider cant slow them down when there is money on them.

I believe Phalaris has collected data that strongly supports the idea that the MORE you race 2-yr-olds, the longer their racing careers will be. This was on the ESPN board awhile back. There may have been constraints on how long the races should be. I don't remember the details, but Phalaris has posted here occasionally, too. Maybe he/she will check in.

--Dunbar

Originally Posted by Dunbar

I believe Phalaris has collected data that strongly supports the idea that the MORE you race 2-yr-olds, the longer their racing careers will be. This was on the ESPN board awhile back. There may have been constraints on how long the races should be. I don't remember the details, but Phalaris has posted here occasionally, too. Maybe he/she will check in.

--Dunbar

Love to see the study. I would love to see the data on the two year olds that failed to run after two that was certainly taken into account (and why they failed to run; good luck with that injury report).

I just dont see breeders advertising longevity on the track as heavily as who their mommy and daddy were/are. So I cant believe horses are currently being bred for longevity on the track.

Two year olds need to run. Just not in races where they have a chance of getting totally exhausted, having their young immature bones and muscles go wobbly on them, and then taking that bad step. Or running them when they are already sore, which is going to happen more often in youngsters with developing muscles, having them go wobbly, and having to continue to the finish line under pressure from the jockey.

[Left Bank]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Love to see the study. I would love to see the data on the two year olds that failed to run after two that was certainly taken into account (and why they failed to run; good luck with that injury report).

I just dont see breeders advertising longevity on the track as heavily as who their mommy and daddy were/are. So I cant believe horses are currently being bred for longevity on the track.

Two year olds need to run. Just not in races where they have a chance of getting totally exhausted, having their young immature bones and muscles go wobbly on them, and then taking that bad step. Or running them when they are already sore, which is going to happen more often in youngsters with developing muscles, having them go wobbly, and having to continue to the finish line under pressure from the jockey.

I thought you said they shouldn't be running two year olds.Now you say they should be running.WHich is it?

Originally Posted by Kimmeastar

I thought you said they shouldn't be running two year olds.Now you say they should be running.WHich is it?

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.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by pgardn

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.

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.