- This topic has 71 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 9 months ago by
.
- Posts
Thanks for your balanced response conundrum.
I thought that the beauty of this forum was to have a healthy discussion about the issues, not to merely dismiss others views without reasoned argument. I have no problem with others disagreeing with my views, but many of the responses are merely contradiction backed by no reasoning as to my view about the training methods of the master craftsmen of the training artI am not even stating that my view is that running 16 times in 6 months is necessarily cruel, merely that if the top trainers give more time to rest between races, it is done for a reason. These top stables are not run as charities, but as businesses. They thrive and succeed because they produce the best results from the bloodstock that they are sent to train.
I cannot see how if this modus operandi gets the best results in better yards, then why on earth do the lesser stables not model themselves on the master trainers – they may even rise through the training ranks themselves if they did as surely their performance would improve.
I don’t think that falls within the remit of a "flat earther" as I am at least using examples to back my case. Lol !
Horses are exactly like humans, except they can’t talk and tell us how they are feeling. Because of this, blood tests are taken by trainers, and if those tests come back fine then the horse is fine.
Blood tests are taken everyday from humans by GPs, because they tell a GP how healthy a person is and what is wrong if indeed something is wrong. It’s exactly the same in horses.
What I’m trying to say is that if a horse runs 20 times in six months then this is because a trainer/vet or whoever has carried out a blood test and initial indications are that everything is fine. Therefore it’s not cruel to run a horse endlessly providing that everything indicates that the horse is fine beforehand. It really is that simple.
I’ll use a human example again. Paula Radcliffe – in her prime – ran four or five marathons a season (competitons marathos that is). But in training she would run 20 miles per day five or six days a week. This is the equivelant of a horse running a race 20 times in six months perhaps, if not more. If Radcliffe was feeling ill she wouldn’t run, if she was up to it, she would run – simple as that. It’s exactly the same in horses, the blood test results tells the trainer if a horse if fine to run or not.
I’m not really sure why this debate is going on. Some horses might only stand four or five runs a season, some might stand 30 runs a season. Surely the trainer knows best.
I concur OneEye about the merits of blood tests. I also agree that different horses can stand different amounts of racing.
What no-one seems to be able to provide a reason for however is why top trainers don’t tend to run their charges as often as 16 times in 6 months.
A race certainly isn’t the same as a training spin, as they are ridden harder in the finish, not to mention all the travelling etc
Running horses very often may not harm their welfare ( I am not a veterinary specialist or animal physiologist ), but that does not equate to them being at their absolute healthy best on a racedayThere are many reasons why they don’t – one of which is that Coolmore do not need prize money. Neither do Chevely Park or Prince Khalid Abdullah. Etc etc. Smaller yards do not have this luxury. Horses don’t pay their training fee’s in a horse box i’m afraid. I think i’d be a happier human being jacking work and stopping at home every day. Sorry, thats not how the harsh world works.
No offence but i’m leaving this now – you are living in a bit of fantasy world if you think Richard Guest should suddenly start copying Coolmores Group 1 modus operandi with his sub-70 rated sprinters.
My final word is that i maintain you are right out of order with your insinuations regarding Dickie’s connections.
Perhaps best that we agree to disagree mate.
If I was an owner of more limited means I would prefer to get maximum value for money by having a horse that was appearing on the track in its optimum condition rather than spending all the extra entry fees, travelling costs etc going all over the country when not at its best.
I have always found my horses to be better when healthy and happyPerhaps best that we agree to disagree mate.
If I was an owner of more limited means I would prefer to get maximum value for money by having a horse that was appearing on the track in its optimum condition rather than spending all the extra entry fees, travelling costs etc going all over the country when not at its best.
I have always found my horses to be better when healthy and happyCoggy, with the best will in the world mate, I really don’t think you’re helping by persisting with unsubstantiated generalisations …
Please tell me how you’re qualified to question a professional racehorse trainer that a horse running on multiple occasions in a relatively short space of time (whatever that is) is neither in it’s "optimum condition" or "not at it’s best" … I know I wouldn’t care to stand in front of Richard Guest, Dandy Nicholls or any of the other trainers quoted in this debate that use similar techniques and suggest to them that … a) they don’t know what the hell they’re doing and, b) that they are potentially mistreating their charges by over-racing them.
If you’re saying you would then you’re a braver man than I !!!
Hi Burrough Hill Lad
I am not making unsubstantiated allegations. All I am asking, despite taking a welter of criticism, is for anyone to explain to me, why the stellar trainers previously highlighted do not use the same tactics.
Regardless of the negative postings in reply, nobody has come up with a credible explanation.
Let me explain further.
If we take a football analogy, if teams didn’t learn from the successful teams re training, diet, exercise etc. They would, generally be doomed to stay in teir perceived level.
I know that finance plays a part but without learning from the best you will never break into that model for success.
I have succeeded personally from learning from others and incorporating it into my own business profile.
Surely the same applies to getting the best from a racehorse as in any other business with your assets.
By the way, as some posters have erroneously posted earlier , I do have a background in horses etc.
Lets learn from and applaud excellenceHi Burrough Hill Lad
I am not making unsubstantiated allegations. All I am asking, despite taking a welter of criticism, is for anyone to explain to me, whythe stellar trainers previously highlighted do not use the same tactics.
Because as previously explained, these trainers have ‘higher grade’ horses who will only race five or six times a year – those five or six times being for the best prize money on offer.
Surely you’ve noticed how two and three year-old-sprinters only run five or six times a season whilst they are racing for top honours, but once their form deteriorates and they become ‘selling platers’ they run 20+ times a season.
I feel as though I keep repeating myself on this thread, and I feel as though everyone else seems to be repeating theirselves on this thread, but do you honestly think a trainer would run a horse if it wasn’t up to it?
A horse running five or six lengths below its best doesnt mean that horse is distressed or over the top, it could simply mean the horse put in a poor run (surely we’re all allowed off days). Believe me, a distressed horse, a horse that is ill and hasn’t been blood tested etc will not just finish five or six lengths below its best, it would probably have an heart attack before it even reaches the start.
Like I say, and like I keep saying, if a horse is at the starting gates then you can rest assured that the trainer has done everything in his/hers powers to makes sure that hores is healthy and fit to race, whether it’s the horse’s first run of the season or 50th run of the season
I, among others, have answered your question. You just appear to ignore answers and repeat it.
- Total Posts 17716
I, among others, have answered your question. You just appear to ignore answers and repeat it.
The Coggy Flat Earthers are like that, I’m afraid. They make assertion after assertion, convince themselves that these are reasonable, whilst showing a titanium-plated incapacity to take in logical arguments from the other side, or even to acknowledge that such arguments might exist.
In the end they’d be best ignored, if it weren’t for one unfortunate factor: "agreeing to differ" with their mental candy floss, or leaving it unchallenged on a public forum, has the sad side effect of leaving a perception that the Flat Earther somehow "has a point".
In this instance the Flat Earther is as ignorant of fact as he is of equine physiology, but there’s not a Plater in Nunthorpe’s chance he’ll be able to perceive this, let alone acknowledge his prejudice. As St Paul might have put it, poor Coggy can only see through a glass darkly.
I absolutely despair when I read posts similar to the above from Pinza. I gave him credit, thinking he had brains and a capacity to not believe everything he reads in newspapers or sees on the television. Instead, he is as gullible as the rest of you, taken in by the men in grey suits who just want to manipulate us into believing that Planet Earth is round. For all these years, the likes of Pinza and Co. have been leading this vicious campaign against those of us who know that the Earth is flat.
Ask yourselves, why did they invent the round-Earth theory? It’s simple and not just a coincidence that …. footballs are ’round’ and about the same time as the Great Game came into existence so did the marketing men with their subtle plan to get us all thinking ’round’ …what better advertisement than to get ‘spherical’ into the human psyche.
I know some of you will point to satellite images but surely you realise that these were taken in a large bunker at Area 51 in America.
How can I be so confident of my facts? Simple…once I walked the length of our street and and just as I was getting to the end I nearly fell over the edge. Luckily, I landed in the gutter.
Fight back, join the Flat Earth Racing Forum, only open to Flat Race believers.Ken
No problem running horses numerous times per season provided they are fit, healthy, and willing to do so. They love racing as much as we enjoy watching them.
What is worrying is when medication is used to alleviate or mask pain/injury enabling the horse to run.
Top class horses are usually rested if suffering an injury. I’m not sure the same could be said about some of the others.- Total Posts 17716
I absolutely despair when I read posts similar to the above from Pinza. I gave him credit, thinking he had brains and a capacity to not believe everything he reads in newspapers or sees on the television. Instead, he is as gullible as the rest of you, taken in by the men in grey suits who just want to manipulate us into believing that Planet Earth is round. For all these years, the likes of Pinza and Co. have been leading this vicious campaign against those of us who know that the Earth is flat.
Foiled again! You’ve rumbled me. I’m also an honorary vice-president of a Society set up to prove that the moon is
not
made of green cheese; and a fully paid-up member of the
Paco Boy Can Stay a Mile
minority fringe.
May I ask you to be the first contributor to my
Tartan Blankets for Racehorses
levy? A mere 1p in the betting £, and any loose change to go to David (Dandy) Nicholls, to fund his much-needed
sabbatical with Sir Michael Stoute
, so that one misguided Northern Lad at least can learn how they train sprinters properly in the Top Yards.
Go on, Ken – you know it makes sense!
Hi Pinza
I would obviously be willing to contribute to your levy on behalf of the (supposedly) Flat Earth Society, lol.
The other mistake you made in your earlier post was to accuse me of ignorance of equine physiology when , in fact, part of my degree was in that area of science.
Still why let the facts get in the way mate.
Perhaps we agree to disagree, as I find it a tad futile to keep receiving answers to a question that I am not asking, or worse, facetious responses that provide no answer at all- Total Posts 17716
The other mistake you made in your earlier post was to accuse me of ignorance of equine physiology when , in fact, part of my degree was in that area of science.
My apologies, Coggy, not least for my "facetious" tone. I have done you an injustice.
Indeed, I think I can guess which part of the horse’s anatomy is your area of special interest.
Lol. And there’s me thinking that informed, constructive debate, and respect for differing views, was a thing of the past.
Glad to be proved wrong on that one !Thought about posting a new thread but I know you guys are sticklers for etiquette so I decided to "bump" this back to the top
Yes, he’s back today … after a revitalising 2 days of rest and relaxation, Dickie is sent back into the fray in the 3.00 at Carlisle.
Ridden today by 5lb claimer, Mark Coumbe, who has already been successful twice on the old dodgepot.
Can I suggest to Mark that if he is any way sensitive or of a nervous disposition to stay away from this board from 3.05 onwards … clearly his trainer, Richard Guest, is not a subscriber.
How much is anyone willing to bet that the word "dwelt" does not appear in the old boy’s race summary today ?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.