Topic from Barbaro thread, on new thread.

[angelsprite]

Freshman,
I didn't want to take up Barbaro's thread to address the issue in more than one post. I think a lot of people will want to express their respects and condolences, and general feelings there. I don't want to clutter it up with sensitive issues. It's for the horse.
But I did want to say, my horses ALWAYS have made it ALL the way around. I've never had a suspension, because I don't dope my horses. And I've gotten 100% sound to the races.
It's not magic. It's not even hard. It's just you don't become the leading trainer if you aren't willing to kill them, or hurt them, or dope them. But, in reality, it's more the number of horses you get in training that determines your stats. In Texas, and I think most places, jockeys will ride to win for trainers who have bigger barns. They consider those trainers important because they can get more race rides out of them. Horses can run well and win without all the doping, injecting, and anabolic steroids if they have a good rider up and they're in the right spot.
But, I guess it will take more than watching our sure shot championship contenders in the same age group, dying as a result of injuries sustained in their campaigns to make owners stop saying, "Oh, well, that's just racing." But, I already know I'm wasting my time talking about it. If 2006 wasn't enough to make people start asking questions and demanding real answers, and stop saying, "Oh, sometimes they don't run all the way around," then nothing in this world will ever change this industry.
I notice the Jacksons changed trainers, though. They went with Barclay Tagg and something tells me he knows more about what's going on with his horses than most, though it would be nieve to assume he doesn't use all the same meds. He won two legs of the Triple Crown with a gelding. That tells alot right there. But at least his horses seem to finish both the Derby and the Preakness.

[geowarrior]

Angel, are you sure the Jacksons changed trainers? I was under the impression that they had horses with more than one trainer before Barbaro's accident. I checked this in the Thoroughbred Times and as of April 24th 2006, they had two horses aimed for the Derby with two different trainers, Tagg and Matz. They bred Barbaro and the other horse, Showing Up, was one which Tagg purchased for them. Although some people blame Michael Matz for Barbaro's breakdown, I don't think that's a universal opinion and there are others who believe that his methods are sound. Some believe that Barbaro was injured breaking out of the gate and I'm not sure that Matz can be held responsible for that, others believe he clipped heels with Brother Derek and I don't think Matz could be blamed for that either. There are trainers on this board who I believe are every bit as ethical and as careful as you (and I'm not trying to be sarcastic here) but have still had the misfortune to have a horse break down at the races. As far as I know, Michael Matz hasn't been suspended this year, nor has Barclay Tagg, and I think we should be careful, in the emotional time after Barbaro's death, not to malign reputations.

[geowarrior]

As an addendum to a previous post here is a clip from a Thorougbred Times article dated October 30th 2006. "La Ville Rouge produced a full brother to Barbaro in April at Mill Ridge Farm in Lexington, and her two-year-old colt Man in Havana, by Quiet American, is currently in training with Matz." This does not suggest that the Jacksons changed trainers after Barbaro's accident, in fact from what I can gather, they have had an association with both Barclay Tagg and Michael Matz for a while, and have in fact used at least one other trainer besides these two from what I could find in my brief research. Apparently the Jacksons have about 20 horses in training.

[Barbaro06]

Yes, 2006 was a very rough year. It seemed like everytime we turned around, we were losing another horse. The reasons were varied but it was overwhelming after awhile.

[nferro9925]

Matz didn't strike me as a trainer who would run his horses into the ground if they were sore or hurt.

[rascal]

Barbaro looked absolutely magnificent when he stepped off the van in his arrival at Pimlico for the Preakness. He was well-trained, so solid looking and well conditioned, a happy young horse...and then everything went to hell in a handbasket at the starting gate. From the films I've seen, I believe what was a hairline fracture in his early push-off from the gate resulted in a ghastly injury that probably would never have happened to him at age 4.

In watching the Sunshine Millions races last Sunday, I couldn't help but note the older ages of the horses running. You didn't see any breakdowns. Their bones had adequate time to develop and reach their greatest density mass. If anything was to be changed, I think it should be the hard and early campaigning of 2 and 3-year-olds. Perhaps the Triple Crown should be run at age 4. Barbaro had a late April foaling date. He was still a baby!

Just an outside observation...please forgive my rambling!
Yesterday was just too sad. We were all praying for Barbaro's recovery.
These wonderful creatures run at and for our pleasure. They deserve to have adequate maturity before being subjected to the rigors of the Triple Crown campaign at age 3. Case in point, we don't let young kids throw curveballs when starting the game of baseball and there's good reasoning behind it.

I am sad and missing Pine Island and Barbaro today.
Rascal

[Jolene]

I surely hope you aren't suggesting Michael Matz's training methods had anything to do with this, Angelsprite. His is an incredible horseman and a talented, compassionate man.

[serenarider]

Rascal on that note did anyone see this on espn?

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/horse/ ... id=2747259

I must say Pat did not hold back at all on his views. I will have to admit though i do agree with most of what he is saying. Will things ever change?

Jolene, I also agree with you on Matz's training methods. I just think we are running are babies in the ground..Literally

[geowarrior]

I particularly don't agree with the proposed shortening of distances. I think we should be doing more to encourage stamina and soundness in the breed, and I did notice that all the writer's solutions were in the arena of racing, not of breeding.

[Laurierace]

Rascal on that note did anyone see this on espn?

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/horse/ ... id=2747259

I must say Pat did not hold back at all on his views. I will have to admit though i do agree with most of what he is saying. Will things ever change?

Jolene, I also agree with you on Matz's training methods. I just think we are running are babies in the ground..Literally

I stopped reading the article as soon as I read the caption under the xrays. Its says the xrays were taken immediately FOLLOWING surgery. Hello retard, where are the screws and the plate. Why are there pieces everywhere. Yeah I would really pay attention to what this rocket scientist has to say on the subject...

[serenarider]

LOL Laurie..

He might not be a "rocket scientist " as you call him. But he did say a couple of good points.

• Safer racing surfaces. Turfway Park in northern Kentucky has gone to Polytrack, a synthetic surface, with encouraging results in terms of reduced injuries. Tradition-steeped Keeneland in Lexington is switching to Polytrack in time for its October meet. Tracks in California have been mandated to adapt to Polytrack as well.

• A change in medication controls. In recent decades thoroughbreds have become walking pharmaceutical labs, routinely running on blood-thinning medication and anti-inflammatories. There is concern that some of these drugs are used to keep horses going through infirmities and injuries -- and those are the legal drugs. (Every track backside buzzes with whispers about which trainers are a step ahead of the drug-testing posse.)

• A change in age. This is about as likely to fly as an anvil, but some thoroughbred advocates would like to see 2-year-old racing banned completely and the Triple Crown pushed back from a 3-year-old contest to 4-year-olds.

That affront to 130-plus years of tradition is based on the very reasonable belief that today's race horses are far more delicate than they were generations ago. Very few of the top 2-year-olds are still at their prime at age 3, and even today's lightly raced horses are difficult to keep sound through a Triple Crown campaign.

In fact, just getting horses to the Kentucky Derby has become a battle of attrition. Take a snapshot of the Derby starting gate the minute it opens and record it for posterity. Many of the horses in the field will never been heard from again after that race. A large number of them are cooked each year in the rigorous campaign up to the run for the roses.

Just thought in MHO he nailed a couple of points. Other then that he might be a idiot.

[Barbaro06]

Hmmm. How about these thoughts:

The Breeder's Cup has been a blessing and a curse I think to racing. Are juvies pushed far too fast in order to get to the championship day of racing? The Triple Crown seems to be pretty much an afterthought for the 3 year olds---got to get to October/November and win the Classic.

Has year round racing hurt the sport by not giving horses a bit of a break? Remember the days when only a few tracks raced in the winter and folks couldn't wait for the Florida meet to start in January?

Is it that some people want a quick return on their investments so push the 2 year olds to recoup the six figure stud fee?

What about breeding for stamina? Racehorse breeding is now focused on getting those precocious 2 year olds that can burn up the track but fail to train on as older horses. But who cares? They have the most fashionable pedigrees! I say breed for reliability not fashion!

Don't get me started on drugs...heck, if the doctor tells me that the anti-inflammatory I'm taking can and will rot my gut, what does something like that do to a horse's gut and well being?

I know I am preaching to the choir, but the horse racing industry needs NOW to take a cold hard look at itself. The new racing surfaces are a start...let's start tackling the other problems!

[angelsprite]

To everyone,
It's nice to see that everyone is willing to put in their 2 cents worth on this. To me, the conversation, the actual dialogue, is the most important thing. One never knows when someone will say something brilliant and the world will change because of it. It could happen!
I haven't gotten to read the article yet, from the link posted. Puter is slow and I'll read it as soon as I can get the darn thing to open.
Geo, I think the way I read the article about Barbaro's sibling, that Matz trained his, it got hurt, and there was no question the other horse would not be put with him. In an interview, the Jacksons were asked, and the answer was no, but they didn't go into whether any other horses would be pulled out of Matz barn. Only that the Jacksons did not plan on sending him certain other ones being asked about.
I'm not suggesting that Matz is doing anything worse than any other top trainer, or that he killed the horse. I like the amount of rest he lets his horses take between races, but I don't think Matz got where he is without using all the same meds everyone else uses. I'm not going to be in denial about it. There's no point in pretending that one trainer is a saint while everyone else in his circle is not. I've looked at various top trainers, studying their methods to learn from their experience, and everytime I think one may be doing less of the drugs and more conditioning, he gets suspended and I feel like a fool for giving him the benefit of the doubt.
I think what is most dangerous to horses are the excuses people make for the trainers who are the ultimate insurers and bear full responsibility for the horses entrusted to their care. Matz himself will tell you, he's the trainer, so he's responsible for the horses in his barn. And yes, any trainer can have a horse break down. Racing is stressful to these animals and I have always worried every time I send one out to race, but I worry more that some other trainer's taped together, injected horse will fall in front of mine and take out my good sound racehorse.
I'm not suggesting that we point the finger of blame for Barbaro's breakdown at Matz. I'm suggesting that after last year, people should be ready to ask some questions. Not just questions for one trainer, but for every owner and trainer and breeder in the industry.
Also, the articles popping up regarding steroid use in sale babies... Early research is suggesting that the GH and anabolics may predispose some of these horses to breaking down before a trainer ever gets their hands on them. Initial research points to steroid abuse as the underlying cause for the general increase in injuries in racehorses. The problem is, research takes time and larger studies haven't been done yet.
I'm very realistic about this business. I've seen it and my concern is less for the feelings of the people (who have a choice) but for the safety of the animals (who have no choice). People are important too, though, and I am also concerned about their investment of time, emotion, and money into their animals and this industry.
The headline yesterday in either Bloodhorse or some TB publication, can't remember, said that Turfway is less happy with polytrack. "The horse ambulances are running," was one sentence from the article. Now, they are blaming the breakdowns at Turfway on the cold weather effects on Polytrack. When will they finally be ready to ask, "Could it just be the methods that trainers commonly use that's causing the trouble?"
Look, let's face it, In 1893 Domino did 6 furlongs in 1:09 on a crappy surface, with questionable forelegs. The racing surfaces now are the best they've ever been. Races are further apart than they've ever been. Also, they've always had both short and long races. Short races are faster, harder, and create greater stresses on bone than long ones. There are more short races running, and that could be part of the problem, but in the 1800s they were running horses 5 furlongs to test speed. The sprints are not new.
These meds are being used in ways they were NEVER intended by their manufacturers. Anytime you deviate from the correct use of medications, you risk the health of the patient. The use of these meds came about right around the end of the 1960s. Before that, all the way from the 1940s, some trainers were probably getting their hands on them, but it wasn't pervasive. Now, it's pervasive. Once a thing becomes common practice, even if it's against the law, against the rules, and bad for the horses, it's going to be nearly impossible to get rid of it. No one is going to want to face the facts and just say, "enough is enough."
After 2006, I want to see people stop talking about surfaces and distances, and start talking about doing some large, intense studies into the effects of all the drugs on the health of the animals. Breakdowns, heart failure, cancer, are all risks associated with anabolic steroids used incorrectly. Add the risks of all the other chemicals they are running through these horses and you're going to have a recipe for distaster.

[amanda1]

Angelsprite....

I have to say that I agreee completely with a lot of what you are saying......everyone is scratching their heads wondering why all these horses are breaking down. It's the surfaces, it's the breeding, it's the training, it's the alignment of the stars, a million excuses, except the truth.

Let's take an under developed 2 y/o old, pound on them, and then drug them to get through it. What on earth could the problem be????

MEDS HIDE SMALL PROBLEMS AND LET THEM BECOME LARGE PROBLEMS!!!

To me, it's obvious. You take a horse that has come up sore, dose them with meds to get them through the next race, and you have a breakdown on your hands. Well, gee, the horse told you something was wrong. I am sure that there are occasions when some freak accident occurs (an actual bad step CAN occur), but I think more often than not, there was some clue. I have not known many horses who didn't know when they were in trouble and let you know in some way. You just have to see it. And if you do see it, you have to pay attention to it, and do something about it.

I think if there's one word that is starting to become obsolete in racing it's PATIENCE. Owners and trainers can't wait to start making money off these young horses. By the time you breed the mare, have a foal, to the time of racing you're looking at 3 years. So it's hurry and get them to the track. Has anyone considered that a horse will do better for you in the long run if you give them the time they need to mature, mentally and physically. I would much rather have a horse that I need to wait on, give it the time it needs, and run it for 4 years than have a talented 2 y/o and run the hell out of it. But then again, I also am concerned about my horses quality of life 2, 5, 10 years down the road. Every horse should have a chance at a second career after the track. But they need some of that cartilage stuff in those ankles and knees!!!

I would like to say that I have the a lot of respect for Matz as a trainer. I think the very fact that he is a former Olympic show jumper makes a world of difference. Barbaro aside, he understands the finer points of training, conditioning, and preserving the horse. In the show jumping world those horses take a real beating, but the owners and trainers respect the horse and do a great job of a delicate balancing act.

[Roguelet]

The headline yesterday in either Bloodhorse or some TB publication, can't remember, said that Turfway is less happy with polytrack. "The horse ambulances are running," was one sentence from the article. Now, they are blaming the breakdowns at Turfway on the cold weather effects on Polytrack. When will they finally be ready to ask, "Could it just be the methods that trainers commonly use that's causing the trouble?"

The breakdowns on the poly at Turfway were evident LONG before the cold weather set in. I guess everyone wants to believe that poly is the perfect solution, so they had to wait until they had something else to blame it on before anyone would discuss it...