Greetings Horse people around the world, especially Thoroughbred racing people. I'm a small scale breeder here in Maryland, USA tha has been breeding thoroughbreds since 1990. I've been concerned for quite a many years about the spacing between our Kentucky Derby and our Preakness Stakes for 3 y.o.'s in our Triple Crown. In your home country do you have spacing between your spring 3 y.o. major stakes of 2 weeks as it is between our Kentucky Derby and Preakness Stakes. Our Belmont Stakes is run 3 weeks after the Preakness.
Our Derby is run at 1 1/4 miles on the 1st Sat. in May, which is an 1/8 of a mile longer than any of the young 3 y.o.'s have run up to that time. The Preakness is 1 3/16 and the Belmont is 1 1/2 miles. My concern is for the safety of the young horses, although most people in charge don't want to add another week between the 2 races as it would make it easier to win the Triple Crown. Tradition they say.
We Had a wonderful winner of the K. Derby, break down shortly after the break at the Preakness 2 years ago by the Name of Barbaro. With excellent care he survived for about 5 months later, but he's gone now and the 2 weeks between those 2 races may or may not have contributed to his demise.
Please tell us how things are done in your countries. I know training methods are different in many places and maybe the legs of other horses are stronger with different breeding and training methods than ours that seem to be bred for speed these days. Please tell us how it is in your country. Thanks so much.
Charles Heath
Any non USA horsepeople out there?
Moderators: Roguelet, hpkingjr, WaveMaster
Any non USA horsepeople out there?
Charles Heath
I live in Holland (in between Great Britain, Germany and Belgium). We own only one Thoroughbred mare (for 2/3, 1/3 is owned by her trainer) and she is in training in Belgium. In our region Holland/Belgium racing is very small scale and there are not many really big races with big purses. For that we would have to race the filly (3 y-o) in Germany or France (or GB ofcourse). We are still not sure yet how good or bad she is going to be, she never raced but she will probably run her first race within one or two months. I am not sure where that will be, I think in Belgium. Only when she proves to be good we will consider traveling far with her.
http://www.turf-be.com/
http://www.turf-be.com/galop/calendargalop.htm (Belgian racing calender)
http://www.hippodromedewallonie.be/
http://www.jockey-club.be/
http://www.renbaanduindigt.nl/
http://www.ndr.nl/
www.ndr.nl/download.php?id=164 (racing calendar Holland 2008)
Map of belgium (Belgique) and surrounding countries: http://maps.google.nl/maps?f=q&hl=nl&ge ... 853516&z=6
In Holland Barbaro and Eight Belles have been discussed and people are saying that we should not be racing horses before they are three years of age. Some want to make it a law.
http://www.turf-be.com/
http://www.turf-be.com/galop/calendargalop.htm (Belgian racing calender)
http://www.hippodromedewallonie.be/
http://www.jockey-club.be/
http://www.renbaanduindigt.nl/
http://www.ndr.nl/
www.ndr.nl/download.php?id=164 (racing calendar Holland 2008)
Map of belgium (Belgique) and surrounding countries: http://maps.google.nl/maps?f=q&hl=nl&ge ... 853516&z=6
In Holland Barbaro and Eight Belles have been discussed and people are saying that we should not be racing horses before they are three years of age. Some want to make it a law.
Talk about Barbaro in Dutch: http://www.google.nl/search?hl=nl&q=paa ... eken&meta=
Talk about Eight Belles in Dutch: http://www.google.nl/search?hl=nl&q=paa ... eken&meta=
Talk about Eight Belles in Dutch: http://www.google.nl/search?hl=nl&q=paa ... eken&meta=
Any Non USA Horsepeople out there
Thanks for your thoughts from Holland. Some people over here are talking about doing away with 2 y.o. racing, but thats not a very popular idea. I personally don't think that will solve anything. Most 2 y.o.'s that race don't race more than 3 or 4 times and horses that don't race as 2 y.o.'s very seldom win our Kentucky Derby. Most all trainers in this country space their races at least 3 weeks apart before racing in the Derby and then after the hardest race of their young careers, they are asked to come back 2 weeks later and run in the Preakness. My thinking is that they need 3 weeks spacing between these races to recover fully. Thanks again Holland Horseperson!
Charlie
Charlie
Charles Heath
Watching the Melbourne Cup this past Nov. I was struck by the fact over half the field was running off 3 days (not weeks) rest. They raced in G1 on Saturday and then came back for the M Cup on Tuesday. When I posted on the board about this fast turn around a couple of posters pointed out that some of those horses would race again in a G1 on the following Saturday: 3 G1 races in 8 days. The frequency of the US triple crown races is not a problem for the horses, it is a problem for the training regimens' of the US trainers. JMHO
Dave C wrote:The frequency of the US triple crown races is not a problem for the horses, it is a problem for the training regimens' of the US trainers.
Bingo. We've lost the old school HORSEMEN who actually knew how to condition a horse to run every few weeks and run more than 6 furlongs. We don't have horsemen anymore, we have trainers who can't adapt when faced with a horse that doesn't easily fit the routine they follow.
You want some interesting reading... pull the work patterns from the horses of 30-60 years ago and compare them to the way horses are trained today.
I don't care what anyone says, 5 bullet 2 furlong works in 6 weeks does NOT set a horse properly for a run through the triple crown. It just doesn't.
And damnit, if *I* can run a mile every 3 days, a horse should be able to as well.
Sam wrote:Dave C wrote:The frequency of the US triple crown races is not a problem for the horses, it is a problem for the training regimens' of the US trainers.
Bingo. We've lost the old school HORSEMEN who actually knew how to condition a horse to run every few weeks and run more than 6 furlongs. We don't have horsemen anymore, we have trainers who can't adapt when faced with a horse that doesn't easily fit the routine they follow.
You want some interesting reading... pull the work patterns from the horses of 30-60 years ago and compare them to the way horses are trained today.
I don't care what anyone says, 5 bullet 2 furlong works in 6 weeks does NOT set a horse properly for a run through the triple crown. It just doesn't.
And damnit, if *I* can run a mile every 3 days, a horse should be able to as well.
A lot of people including myself think since most horses in the US are bred for speed, we are geting horses with thinner legs from the shoulder and especially the knee down. When I was growing up 70 years ago horses were running in a lot of marathon races and were trained by long gallops. Legs were more sturdy then than now. As an 85 y.o. I can notice the difference. And as for your running a mile every 3 days, your legs and bones are larger than a horse that has to carry a 1000 lbs at a much faster pace than you do with your 1/5 the weight.
Charles Heath
We could let our horse race on dirt or on turf and at sprints, middle distance, long distance or jumps. There are all types and kinds of races to be found in Europe.
This is her pedigree: http://www.pedigreequery.com/lunar+melody
Our horse has been maturing and developing very slowly so we have been giving her all the time she needs.
Racetracks in France, there are quite a number of racetracks.
http://www.hippodromes.fr/
http://www.corbon.eu/hippodromes.html
About Germany:
http://www.astrid-ue.de/pferde/rennen.html
Rennen means races/racing and pferd means horse.
http://www.turfcast.de/ German racing
http://www.france-galop.com/Le-calendri ... l.8.0.html French racing
http://www.britishhorseracing.com/gorac ... eeting.asp British racing
In Holland racing has been getting less and less. Gambling on horses has gotten less and less. There is hardly any breeding of Thorougbreds because purses are so small. The same is happening in Belgium but in Belgium there is more then one track, I think about five or so. Germany used to be quite substantial in racing and breeding but Parlo told that also there the same thing is happening. So I think the only place were racing is still blooming, is France.
Article about racing in Belgium from the beginning of this year:
http://www.sportwereld.be/Article/Detai ... D=C71NCO44
'Per rendag maakt een renvereniging ongeveer 5.000 euro verlies. Dat komt omdat de inkomsten uit de weddenschappen nog slechts een fractie zijn van vroeger: in 1989 werd nog 150 miljoen euro ingezet op paardenrennen in België, vorig jaar was dat nog amper 23 miljoen. Door die geslonken inkomsten is het prijzengeld op de koersen fel gezakt: de jockeys rijden nu voor hetzelfde bedrag als vijftig jaar geleden. Omdat paardenrennen niets meer opleveren, zijn er ook steeds minder fokkers: vorig jaar kwamen er nog slechts 800 nieuwe paarden bij. Vroeger was dat meer dan 2.000.'
Per raceday there is a loss of 5,000 Euros. Income from betting is only a fraction of what it was in the past. In 1989 there was betting of 150 million Euros in Belgium, in 2007 it was hardly 23 million. Because of reduced income purses have dropped sharply, jockeys are riding for the same amount as they were 50 years ago. Because horseracing does not give any gain there are less breeders, last year there were 800 new horses. In the past the number used to be 2,000.
This is her pedigree: http://www.pedigreequery.com/lunar+melody
Our horse has been maturing and developing very slowly so we have been giving her all the time she needs.
Racetracks in France, there are quite a number of racetracks.
http://www.hippodromes.fr/
http://www.corbon.eu/hippodromes.html
About Germany:
http://www.astrid-ue.de/pferde/rennen.html
Rennen means races/racing and pferd means horse.
http://www.turfcast.de/ German racing
http://www.france-galop.com/Le-calendri ... l.8.0.html French racing
http://www.britishhorseracing.com/gorac ... eeting.asp British racing
In Holland racing has been getting less and less. Gambling on horses has gotten less and less. There is hardly any breeding of Thorougbreds because purses are so small. The same is happening in Belgium but in Belgium there is more then one track, I think about five or so. Germany used to be quite substantial in racing and breeding but Parlo told that also there the same thing is happening. So I think the only place were racing is still blooming, is France.
Article about racing in Belgium from the beginning of this year:
http://www.sportwereld.be/Article/Detai ... D=C71NCO44
'Per rendag maakt een renvereniging ongeveer 5.000 euro verlies. Dat komt omdat de inkomsten uit de weddenschappen nog slechts een fractie zijn van vroeger: in 1989 werd nog 150 miljoen euro ingezet op paardenrennen in België, vorig jaar was dat nog amper 23 miljoen. Door die geslonken inkomsten is het prijzengeld op de koersen fel gezakt: de jockeys rijden nu voor hetzelfde bedrag als vijftig jaar geleden. Omdat paardenrennen niets meer opleveren, zijn er ook steeds minder fokkers: vorig jaar kwamen er nog slechts 800 nieuwe paarden bij. Vroeger was dat meer dan 2.000.'
Per raceday there is a loss of 5,000 Euros. Income from betting is only a fraction of what it was in the past. In 1989 there was betting of 150 million Euros in Belgium, in 2007 it was hardly 23 million. Because of reduced income purses have dropped sharply, jockeys are riding for the same amount as they were 50 years ago. Because horseracing does not give any gain there are less breeders, last year there were 800 new horses. In the past the number used to be 2,000.
Last edited by Elles on Tue May 13, 2008 5:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
This article by Andrew Beyer is the best i've read on the subject. The question now is how do we get out of the drug use without knocking so many horses out of racing, that we don't have enough to continue year round racing. What do yo think of his article?
By Andrew Beyer
Monday, May 12, 2008; Page E01
If people concerned about the safety of thoroughbreds had their way, the Preakness might be a race for 4-year-olds instead of 3-year-olds. It would be run on a synthetic surface instead of dirt. The jockeys would be forbidden to carry whips.
This Story
For Whom Is Eight Belles's Toll?
The 133rd Preakness Stakes
These are among the many proposals put forth since the filly Eight Belles broke down and was euthanized after the Kentucky Derby. Even with the second leg of the Triple Crown just five days away, the sport is still preoccupied with the filly's death and stung by the harsh criticism it has taken on the issue of equine safety. The industry knows it has to do something, but what?
One of the most common responses to the breakdown of Eight Belles has come from such diverse sources as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and The Washington Post's Sally Jenkins, author of "Funny Cide." It is the argument that the sport places too much stress on young, undeveloped horses by racing them at age 2 and by subjecting them to the rigors of the Triple Crown series at 3. The evidence of two fatalities in the past six Triple Crown races -- Barbaro in the 2006 Preakness and Eight Belles in the Derby -- seems to support this theory.
But top equine veterinarians insist it is a fallacy that thoroughbreds race at too young an age. Rick Arthur, equine medical director of the California Horse Racing Board, said that horses need exertion as 2-year-olds because it develops their bones. "It's beneficial for that process to occur as the horse goes through the maturation process," he said. "The 3-year-old is a mature horse in terms of his bone development."
Larry Bramlage, the vet who regularly appears on national racing telecasts, said ample statistics refute the argument that young thoroughbreds should be handled with kid gloves. "Horses that train as 2-year-olds earn more money and make more starts than horses who don't train until they're 3."
The death of Eight Belles also brought calls for more tracks to install synthetic surfaces. Preliminary evidence suggests that the rate of fatal accidents is lower on synthetic tracks than on dirt (though some trainers say that certain types of injuries have increased.)
Daily Racing Form columnist Jay Hovdey last week made a well-reasoned case for synthetics that goes beyond the statistics on breakdowns. One major reason for the fragility of American thoroughbreds is breeders' obsession with speed; they don't care about durability when they produce a racehorse. This is a seemingly insoluble problem because nobody can legislate the private decisions of breeders. However, synthetic tracks have proved to be much less speed-favoring than dirt, and in some cases they have had a distinctly anti-speed bias. If all racetracks adopted synthetic surfaces, Hovdey argued, breeders would have to produce a different type of thoroughbred.
The drawback to this vision, of course, is that horse racing might not be much of a sport if speed became a liability. The thoroughbreds who make the game exciting are the brilliant ones such as Kentucky Derby winner Big Brown -- not the plodders who often win on Polytrack.
Even if synthetic tracks do reduce the number of catastrophic injuries, it is a specious argument to suggest that dirt racing surfaces are the root cause of the safety problem. There was no perceived epidemic of breakdowns in the United States 30 years ago; dirt tracks seemed safe enough then. And the rate of breakdowns is not a serious issue in other nations where racing is conducted on dirt. In the past six years at Maronas, Uruguay, there have been only 30 fatal accidents from 46,701 starters. That is about one-third that rate of fatalities in the United States. Yet many people in the industry have hastened to blame dirt tracks for breakdowns. When a series of fatalities marred the 2006 Del Mar meeting, the California Horse Racing Board reacted by mandating that the state's tracks replace dirt surfaces with synthetic surfaces. Perhaps my view is too cynical, but I believe that the industry is focusing on this peripheral issue because it can't face up to the real one.
American horses are much less durable than they used to be, and they are less durable than their counterparts in other countries. So what makes contemporary U.S. racing different? We all know the one-word answer to that question: drugs.
In the 1970s, American racing adopted the policy of "permissive medication," legalizing drugs that are banned in the rest of the racing world. The administration of the diuretic Lasix and the painkiller Butazolidin became standard at every U.S. racetrack. Other commonly used drugs -- such as corticosteroids injected in the joints of ailing animals -- allow them to run without pain and surely contribute to breakdowns. The use of anabolic steroids puts extra muscle on horses, forcing their bones to carry more weight and absorb more of an impact when they hit the ground.
The rationale for the liberalization of drug rules in the United States was that medication would help horses cope better with the stress of year-round racing. But it didn't. The average American horse has made fewer and fewer starts per year since the 1970s, suggesting the existence of a vicious cycle: Unsound horses who succeed with the aid of medications go to stud and propagate more unsound horses.
Yet despite the evidence that the U.S. medication policy has been a failure, horsemen have regularly resisted most efforts to curb the use of medications. American racing is addicted to drugs, and American horses will never again be fueled by hay, oats and water alone. But until the industry faces the medication issue seriously, all of its efforts to address equine safety will be misguided.
By Andrew Beyer
Monday, May 12, 2008; Page E01
If people concerned about the safety of thoroughbreds had their way, the Preakness might be a race for 4-year-olds instead of 3-year-olds. It would be run on a synthetic surface instead of dirt. The jockeys would be forbidden to carry whips.
This Story
For Whom Is Eight Belles's Toll?
The 133rd Preakness Stakes
These are among the many proposals put forth since the filly Eight Belles broke down and was euthanized after the Kentucky Derby. Even with the second leg of the Triple Crown just five days away, the sport is still preoccupied with the filly's death and stung by the harsh criticism it has taken on the issue of equine safety. The industry knows it has to do something, but what?
One of the most common responses to the breakdown of Eight Belles has come from such diverse sources as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and The Washington Post's Sally Jenkins, author of "Funny Cide." It is the argument that the sport places too much stress on young, undeveloped horses by racing them at age 2 and by subjecting them to the rigors of the Triple Crown series at 3. The evidence of two fatalities in the past six Triple Crown races -- Barbaro in the 2006 Preakness and Eight Belles in the Derby -- seems to support this theory.
But top equine veterinarians insist it is a fallacy that thoroughbreds race at too young an age. Rick Arthur, equine medical director of the California Horse Racing Board, said that horses need exertion as 2-year-olds because it develops their bones. "It's beneficial for that process to occur as the horse goes through the maturation process," he said. "The 3-year-old is a mature horse in terms of his bone development."
Larry Bramlage, the vet who regularly appears on national racing telecasts, said ample statistics refute the argument that young thoroughbreds should be handled with kid gloves. "Horses that train as 2-year-olds earn more money and make more starts than horses who don't train until they're 3."
The death of Eight Belles also brought calls for more tracks to install synthetic surfaces. Preliminary evidence suggests that the rate of fatal accidents is lower on synthetic tracks than on dirt (though some trainers say that certain types of injuries have increased.)
Daily Racing Form columnist Jay Hovdey last week made a well-reasoned case for synthetics that goes beyond the statistics on breakdowns. One major reason for the fragility of American thoroughbreds is breeders' obsession with speed; they don't care about durability when they produce a racehorse. This is a seemingly insoluble problem because nobody can legislate the private decisions of breeders. However, synthetic tracks have proved to be much less speed-favoring than dirt, and in some cases they have had a distinctly anti-speed bias. If all racetracks adopted synthetic surfaces, Hovdey argued, breeders would have to produce a different type of thoroughbred.
The drawback to this vision, of course, is that horse racing might not be much of a sport if speed became a liability. The thoroughbreds who make the game exciting are the brilliant ones such as Kentucky Derby winner Big Brown -- not the plodders who often win on Polytrack.
Even if synthetic tracks do reduce the number of catastrophic injuries, it is a specious argument to suggest that dirt racing surfaces are the root cause of the safety problem. There was no perceived epidemic of breakdowns in the United States 30 years ago; dirt tracks seemed safe enough then. And the rate of breakdowns is not a serious issue in other nations where racing is conducted on dirt. In the past six years at Maronas, Uruguay, there have been only 30 fatal accidents from 46,701 starters. That is about one-third that rate of fatalities in the United States. Yet many people in the industry have hastened to blame dirt tracks for breakdowns. When a series of fatalities marred the 2006 Del Mar meeting, the California Horse Racing Board reacted by mandating that the state's tracks replace dirt surfaces with synthetic surfaces. Perhaps my view is too cynical, but I believe that the industry is focusing on this peripheral issue because it can't face up to the real one.
American horses are much less durable than they used to be, and they are less durable than their counterparts in other countries. So what makes contemporary U.S. racing different? We all know the one-word answer to that question: drugs.
In the 1970s, American racing adopted the policy of "permissive medication," legalizing drugs that are banned in the rest of the racing world. The administration of the diuretic Lasix and the painkiller Butazolidin became standard at every U.S. racetrack. Other commonly used drugs -- such as corticosteroids injected in the joints of ailing animals -- allow them to run without pain and surely contribute to breakdowns. The use of anabolic steroids puts extra muscle on horses, forcing their bones to carry more weight and absorb more of an impact when they hit the ground.
The rationale for the liberalization of drug rules in the United States was that medication would help horses cope better with the stress of year-round racing. But it didn't. The average American horse has made fewer and fewer starts per year since the 1970s, suggesting the existence of a vicious cycle: Unsound horses who succeed with the aid of medications go to stud and propagate more unsound horses.
Yet despite the evidence that the U.S. medication policy has been a failure, horsemen have regularly resisted most efforts to curb the use of medications. American racing is addicted to drugs, and American horses will never again be fueled by hay, oats and water alone. But until the industry faces the medication issue seriously, all of its efforts to address equine safety will be misguided.
Charles Heath
The conditioning is very different over here and on a variety of surfaces and with degrees of hills/inclines. This already seems an advantage to me.
Turnout. My horses are turned out every day. They aren't stuck in a stable for 23 of the 24 hours per day. Allowing muscles to be working instead of sitting around.
No horse is ever asked for any sort of blistering speed in the morning. They are conditioned for speed if needed but never in the AM. They typically breeze twice a week here instead of once with Sunday being their only day off.
Had a 2yo filly who won this year. My first homebred actually. She ran second on a Thursday and won during the same week on a Wednesday. Were we being cruel and hard on her. No don't think so. She spent the days inbetween doing light hacks and grazing outside. She is happy sound, not a pimple on her, and never wears bandages.
Drugs: None in the system is tolerated. Bute lingers in the system for 20 days so if you need it for something like a stone bruise and your 18 days from a race, you find another race. Not giving raceday medication is not enough back in the States. It's not what you use, it's how you mask it. That's why a no drugs policy in the system is the only way to go. Horses win very good races here without drugs.
I love the life my horses have over here. They get to be racehorses and normal horses at the same time. Also, our flat horses come home for 3 months at the end of the season. They are kept ticking over with light flatwork but mostly on turnout.
Terri
Turnout. My horses are turned out every day. They aren't stuck in a stable for 23 of the 24 hours per day. Allowing muscles to be working instead of sitting around.
No horse is ever asked for any sort of blistering speed in the morning. They are conditioned for speed if needed but never in the AM. They typically breeze twice a week here instead of once with Sunday being their only day off.
Had a 2yo filly who won this year. My first homebred actually. She ran second on a Thursday and won during the same week on a Wednesday. Were we being cruel and hard on her. No don't think so. She spent the days inbetween doing light hacks and grazing outside. She is happy sound, not a pimple on her, and never wears bandages.
Drugs: None in the system is tolerated. Bute lingers in the system for 20 days so if you need it for something like a stone bruise and your 18 days from a race, you find another race. Not giving raceday medication is not enough back in the States. It's not what you use, it's how you mask it. That's why a no drugs policy in the system is the only way to go. Horses win very good races here without drugs.
I love the life my horses have over here. They get to be racehorses and normal horses at the same time. Also, our flat horses come home for 3 months at the end of the season. They are kept ticking over with light flatwork but mostly on turnout.
Terri
dumont84 wrote:This article by Andrew Beyer is the best i've read on the subject.
Seriously, you guys need to start paying more attention to the announcements about this that Rogue has stickied to the top of this forum.
Rogue's law