- This topic has 86 replies, 52 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
I think horses know exactly whats going on, the same way a dog knows how to fetch a ball. Racehorses are bred to run.
I think they’re all individual, some will really try, some will do it when they want to, some will take the mick and some just won’t give a damn, bit like human beings.
You get horses like Desert Orchid, Giants Causeway etc that will scrap for their lives and will give every last drop to win then you get others that have their own ideas, complete fruitcakes like Harwell Lad, Vodkatini etc. Green Green Desert for me was another one that did exactly what he liked.
Dessie knew when he’d won alright. If he did then so do the rest.
I’d suggest getting in touch with the Vet Science dept at Liverpool University – they are world leaders in horse welfare knowledge etc. They’ll tell you that "racehorse psychology" is poorly understood, and would probably be glad of some prompting to look into it. I know they looked at the horse psychology of the Grand National fences, I’ll try to dig up the BBC online article where they comment on it. Winning on the flat could be difficult to tell horse-by-horse, remembering the "winning" feeling can be bloody hard when you’re knackered, getting a crack of the stick and being asked to stretch further. I imagine breathing is their biggest concern and the rest is a bonus which they may enjoy. Can horses remember winning after a spell of defeats? Jumping mentality could be easier to tell, there’s no doubting they’re clever animals…
- Total Posts 438
Quote: from Interested Academic on 11:18 pm on April 14, 2006[br]Can horses remember winning after a spell of defeats?
<br>A few years ago, the Racing Post had its "send a question in" section once a week and a friend of mine asked if anyone knew the length of a horse’s memory. He didn’t receive any form of satisfactory answer and it’s something which has had me thinking ever since. One is always reading that horses remember a fall or some other incident, but for how long ?
I honestly believe a horse knows when he has won. A confident horse is one that has accomplished winning with the least exertion, thus the reason why some trainers drop a horse in class when they need a confidence booster. Horses know when they have had a very hard race and have had to endure the pain barrier. And they remember it well. Some horses will tolerate that pain better than others and continue trying their guts out….such as Giant’s Causeway, so I do believe it’s a case of pain threshold more so than stupidity. Riyadh was a perfect example of a horse that refused to put it in at the business end because he knew the pain was forthcoming when the jock finally asked for his effort, and would do everything he could to make his jockey fail. These horses need to be found a race where they can do everything on the bridle….ie find a race so bad they can’t help winning it in spite of themselves. When this ”confidence booster’ is achieved some will realise they endured no pain and may be willing to try harder next time.
I remember people calling Don’t Dili Dali several unpleasant names but once it got his head in front it seems to have grown in stature. They must have some idea
I think if a horse has started to associate going to the races with getting the head scrubbed off him and their backside whacked, then an unextended easy win could possibly change their attitude.
However, two horses in a ding dong up the run in, one beats the other a short head, I couldnt possibly imagine that the winner would ‘know’ or ‘gain’ confidence from it. Both would possibly remember having a hard race though.
IMO a racehorses natural character plus their experiences at home and at the racecourse determine how they progress mentally, and also how they trust the people that look after them.
Whenever you see A O’Brien being interviewed he always seems as much concerned with the mental state of his horses as the physical.
Quote: from cormack15 on 6:55 pm on April 15, 2006[br]Whenever you see A O’Brien being interviewed he always seems as much concerned with the mental state of his horses as the physical. <br>
Agree yquem21, that’s what I’d be especially interested in, for how long do horses retain and associate experiences with a race performance? You could look at races after a fall or terrible mistake to see what percentage run "to form" subsequently – maybe then we could tell if their form is affected by experience in this way? Hmmm, but I suppose plenty win after that "F" in the form figures though?
That leads to cormack15’s observation: maybe we should have more information about a horse’s general mental approach to life (at home) before it hits the paddock…If a horse is "a bit down", it would be useful to know!
Interesting topic this one.
I have endurance horses, they race between 40 and 100 miles. (and you guys think the grand national is a long slog!!)
One is a VERY dominant mare, (she’ll kick 10 barells out of me as good as look at me) but is so competitive I can barely hold her when racing. She HAS to be infront of everything and would run until she died to get her head infront.<br>she knows when she’s done well, or when she wins , she grows about 2hands taller, prances around and looks down her nose at everything! She is a very arrogant horse.
Another is the complete opposite, very quiet, subdued and happy to follow everything around. However, when riding out on the gallops if ASKED to go infront she does and gets a spring in her step. She always looks dead proud of herself if she beats something!
So back on topic, I do think horses are competitive and the majority of them do aim to please and do enjoy getting their head infront… although there is always the exception!!
Re the how long is a horses memory? I don’t know, but one of my horses as a yearling had a bad trip in the trailer. at 8years old she is still a terrible loader, and appears to have the memory of an elephant!
Liz
"Perhaps it is the attention and praise after their first win that perks them up. "
After all that is how animals are trained. A little reward each time he does something properly. If they didn’t they’d make lousy pets, without an ounce of empathy.
We had a Siamese cat who must have bonded immediately with his orignal human owners, because he was, as they say, "almost human". On the other hand, his brothers and sisters – one of whom we also took for a friend who wanted one from the litter – were just feral, hated the sight of humans.
I think maybe the cat we have now may be part Siamese, because he’s such a character, and so human-oriented. The other kittens weren’t interested when we were shown them, but his Nibs couldn’t have been more friendly. It’s got to be the same with horses, from what I’ve read. Like us, they prefer warm approval to disapproval or indifference.
So, I love to see a jockey making a fuss of his horse at the end of a race, when he’s tried his heart out
I suspect psychos may be less amenable to praise, but then maybe it satisfies their arrogance.
On the other, hand, the intelligence thing worries me a bit. I mean when I was at school, I’d have preferred to lie in the long grass reading Proust (as Jonathon Miller once put it)  than play an energetic sport.
But the older I get, the more I regret not at least trying to be the world champion indoor carpet bowls champion or snooker champion. Doubtless, on morphological grounds, alone, I’d never have cut it as a darts player.
But imagine making a living playing a sport. Jockeying would be too arduous. Say… golf or even togger, though that’s energetic enough. But when asked, you don’t hear many jockeys saying they missed the jockeying. Particularly when they’ve become trainers.
I did once know an Aussie lad who had been West Australian junior tennis champion, but absolutely hated the game, because as he said, he knew he’d never become world champion!
The other funny thing about him was that when told that he was looking pretty worn out, he told us the sexual demands his girl friend was making on him were killing him.
(Edited by Grimes at 10:44 pm on April 17, 2006)
(Edited by Grimes at 10:55 pm on April 17, 2006)
<br>(Edited by Grimes at 10:58 pm on April 17, 2006)<br>
(Edited by Grimes at 11:27 pm on April 17, 2006)
"With regards to horse psychology, another interesting working example could be George Washington. Aidan has said George is a very arrogant horse, who looks down on others (horses and humans alike). Surely this must have something to do with confidence in his own abilities (built up by winning gallops/races)… ÂÂÂ
I expect some of those arrogant types are indeed "animals"! But some who might appear arrogant, may have genuine humility, but just know their limitations and that they are relative insignificant…
I’m thinking of Brigadier Gerard, who, the first time any jockey sat on him, apparently threw him off, but if it was an apprenctice he took pity on him and wouldn’t buck him off, doubtless considering him too low in the pecking order to bully! A Christian with a methodical and coherent world view. When God made the Brig, He threw away the mould!
There’s one Irish trainer who tickles me to death with the way he’s tickled by the foibles of his horse. I think it might be Noel Chance. I remember him saying with a wistful chuckle how one of his horse absolutely HATED the rain!<br>(Edited by Grimes at 11:12 pm on April 17, 2006)<br>
(Edited by Grimes at 11:26 pm on April 17, 2006)
Interesting question and I wouldn’t know the answer but there is certainly a school of thought that says that they do.
Talk of confidence coming from winning and the opposite happening when a horse is constantly beaten suggests that the horse must be aware of the difference.
Colin
I have always been amazed how horses know to run faster when the money is down.
If you go to back a certainty always buy a return ticket.
I’m not sure about that the abstract idea of ‘winning’ is understood by horses, but as a species they have a hierarchy. The head of the herd is the stallion who can lead the pack for longest, chase away all challengers and generally cope with the survival of the fittest.
For a horse to win a race, to lead his peers until told to stop, I’m sure must inspire a natural ‘king of the herd’ instinct. This would then be reinforced by the extra fuss and attention given to a winner – human approval and reward can be a very strong incentive for horses to act in a certain way. They also generally sensitive and instinctive animals, and as such might pick on positive moods and signals from their trusted humans.
So, no, they probably don’t know where the winning post is – but they know that their jockey does.
I don’t believe horses have any concept of winning races or understanding of winning lines, distance poles, or anything else about race conditions.
There is natural competition and a pecking order.
Imo, they run because of four basic drives:
hunger
sex
fear
pleasure in movement.A relation of mine, who is a trainer, doesn’t agree with this at all, so, if you’re one of those who has clear memories of your selection "reaching for the line" at the crucial time, then, don’t mind me.
as you suggest corm, its surely a prepostorous notion, and as such i’m more inclined to think they recognise they are in ‘front’ or ‘leading’ rather than having any notion of having won a race.
like many animals though i’m sure they are capable of gaining certain conditioned behaviours.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.