- This topic has 13 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Just incredible that such horses are allowed to race at all. 0 from 24 over hurdles and in NHFs with one 2nd and three 3rd places and a hurdle rating in the mid 70s. On the go from 2014, not really overraced, but simply not an equine athlete at all and never competitive even in low grade races. I hope the horse that was brought down is okay, that looked a pretty nasty fall as well.
May she rest in peace
I think you are being a bit harsh here Ruby. Time For Champers finished 3rd of 11 beaten only 1 and a quarter lengths as recently as November 2020. Should the 8 horses that she beat that day not be allowed to race either? Where do we draw the line at which horses are and aren’t allowed to race? As you say, she was not overraced, and she had never fallen before. I can’t see any welfare concerns here. What happened to her was very sad indeed though. RIP Time For Champers
I totally agree Marlingford.
The horse was bred to race and that’s what it was doing. It’s easy to aftertime.
Ironically that was apparently due to be his last run before being retired to stud.
RIP
I didn’t know that patriot. Makes it even worse. I wish owners would just retire horses rather than give them “one last run” as it quite often seems to end badly. R.I.P. Time For Champers
I don’t understand why a horse rated in the 80s, which has failed to finish in one third of it’s races, would be interesting for breeding purposes? What is such a horse supposed to pass on to the next generations? Is this how people want to breed?
I’m not happy about her death, but such horses shouldn’t be involved in breeding at all.
Tonge, I didn’t say that they were giving him one last run, I said it was his final run which is different.
They may have decided at the start of the season that this would be his final year and that he would run four more times and this happened to be the fourth. Who knows? But I get annoyed that whenever we lose a horse people on here then say that he shouldn’t have been running.
Nonsense.
As for going to stud there are plent of horses that are used to breed who weren’t a success on the course.
There could be all manner of reasons why they wanted to breed from Time For Champers. Unless there were any specific welfare concerns, of which there is no evidence, I can’t see why anyone should be intervening to prevent her being raced or bred from.
I agree with your comments Patriot. Some of the comments on these memorial posts that seem to imply greed or a lack of care by connections must be very distressing for them to read. There are definitely welfare issues that the industry needs to address, but calling for the retirement of every horse just because they are not very good, have had a couple of bad runs, or their age has reached double figures is not the answer. Tiger Roll is a very good recent example of why this is so, and there are countless others.
Tonge, I understand what you were getting at in that when it is announced it is a horse’s last run it sometimes seems to tempt fate into a disaster happening. I’d prefer they just ran the horse as usual and announced the happy event of their retirement afterwards.
Marlingford, agree with you completely. Watching closely how “Memorials” has been going the last few months.
Had best mention it’s not me who has reported any of the previous posts for inappropriate content! Have had my say and would prefer to debate differing views
I dunno. Kinda get the points that have been made, but at the same time I think people on here really care about the horses.
Yes, often comments may not always be correct, but sometimes they will be right.
It would be wrong to say that all owners care about their horses and do the right thing by them. Some very clearly do, but some clearly, patently, do not.
I’ve sponsored a large number of ex racehorses over the years who’ve, luckily, ended up with charities because they were very badly let down by the racing industry.
I often don’t agree with comments on Memorials, but unless it’s abusive or just stupid illogical ranting, think everyone has the right to give their opinion. Is that not what a forum is all about? Whether I like the opinion or agree with it is surely irrelevant?
The forum is indeed a place for debate Bonanzaboy, which is why I wanted to emphasise it was not me who had reported any previous posts. I’m just not sure that regularly assuming the worst about connections’ motives or to want horses to be retired for the reasons I gave previously is helpful. I struggle to see how anyone could really enjoy racing if they held the sport in such poor esteem.
I know a lot of the comments that are made come from a good place, and it’s lovely to see that people care about the horses; the horses are the aspect of the sport that I am passionate about. That’s probably why I find some of the comments I see on here quite upsetting when I don’t think they are justified, and they paint the sport in such a bad light.
There are some bad owners of course, and the treatment of ex-racehorses is a huge welfare issue. However, I think that’s a bit separate from the topic of which horses should be “allowed” to race or be bred from. Also if we started disallowing horses from racing for all kinds of reasons then we would have a lot more ex-racehorses to find new careers and homes for.
Yes well said and I completely agree. I think I was just concerned that there was a risk, however small, of members being censored or banned and don’t think that should happen unless it really is justified. Don’t know if it would happen, it was just a concern.
At least poor Time for Champers has had some time spent on her in this discussion and her name kept at the top for a little longer. I didn’t know anything about this mare, but now I do.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.