# The Grand National



## pippainnit (Feb 20, 2009)

... this year has been described as one of the most 'distressing' in history. Some of the pictures are here, and please note, aren't pleasant: 

Grand National 2011: Ballabriggs wins in a day of drama at Aintree | Mail Online


----------



## selina20 (May 28, 2008)

Wondered when one of these threads would appear


----------



## Sarahhampson (Oct 19, 2010)

never watched it and never placed a bet never will it upsets me to much


----------



## EquineArcher (Feb 13, 2010)

And?

In racing, ANYTHING on the track which causes riders and horses to avoid a part of the course is called an obstacle.

Mid-afternoon on prime time TV, in front of hundreds of thousands of people, do you really expect the commentator to say "and the riders and horses are swerving to avoid a horse carcass after fence number (insert number here)!". 

It also makes me laugh that they have ringed the vet-screens with a red circle, as if they are torturing the poor thing, when in reality the horse is being tended by world class vets that are desperately trying to help it!!

Taken from another thread, a post I made this morning--
I used to be very anti-horseracing, and felt very sorry for the poor horses that were "forced" to run, and break their legs and necks and then get shot. That was, until I got a clue, went to work with racehorses and stopped reading all the nonsensical crap that bunny-hugging charities just love to post on the net.

Horse racing is dangerous, but not cruel or barbaric. Those horses live to run. They genuinely enjoy their jobs and in 99% of cases are treated better than your average riding school pony. And its not just because they are worth a lot, the people that own, train and care for them never like seeing them hurt.

The public know that so many racehorses die only because the racing industry is MASSIVE and very well publiscised. You'd be amazed how many horses are fatally injured at weekend showjumping competitions and events, and how many are hit by cars or slip on tarmac and break their knees out hacking. I have personally known (eg: not just read on the internet) more horses to die whilst competing at family fun shows or hacking out etc etc than I have personally known racehorses that have died *whilst* racing. (I've worked alongside some big names in the racing industry).

Eg: at college, a horse was killed when hit by a car out hacking
at my first yard, a horse was pts after shattering its leg at a fun-jumping competition
at my first yard, a horse had to be pts after running through a cattle grid on a hack
at my second yard, a horse that slipped and shattered its skull whilst being loaded onto a lorry
at my first full time stud job, a foal was pts after rearing up and breaking its skull on a gate
at my first full time stud job, a horse that died after bolting into a fencepost and piercing its heart

... and 3 colics, 2 grass-sicknesses and a case of Ragwort poisoning, plus a friend of mine from college (Elanor Brennan) and her horse that were killed at an event.

Hacking out on the road is dangerous. Showjumping can be dangerous. Eventing is dangerous. And horse racing is dangerous. They are NOT cruel or barbaric sports, they are risk sports. The death of a horse is always deeply tragic and upsetting- but accidents happen.

But hey, if we think racing is cruel, then hacking, show jumping and eventing must also be cruel, so lets ban the whole lot and send thousands of horses overseas to be someones dinner. 

Good plan. 

I would love to know how many anti-racing people have actually worked in the racing industry, personally looked after racehorses, travelled with them, loved them, been handed back their bridles after they have fallen and still know that it isn't cruel.

My bet is that most of you just read internet propaganda and don't actually make up your own minds.


----------



## pippainnit (Feb 20, 2009)

I was just surprised it hadn't been mentioned on here yet, that's all, hence why I posted that link to the DM's coverage as, maybe I'm wrong, but I can't seem to recall there being as much uproar in previous years, or there being as graphic photos released from the day.


----------



## jazzywoo (Sep 24, 2009)

i bloody hate the grand national actually i hate horse racing full stop for this reason usually its never mentioned that horses die every year but this year they cant hide it and i think its a good reason they cant because people may see that this is a cruel and pointless sport ! 
rip poor horses and i hope the jockey that was injured makes a full recovery and i can can hope that maybe people may change their views on this pointless sport :whip:


----------



## pippainnit (Feb 20, 2009)

SexyBear77 said:


> And?
> 
> In racing, ANYTHING on the track which causes riders and horses to avoid a part of the course is called an obstacle.
> 
> Mid-afternoon on prime time TV, in front of hundreds of thousands of people, do you really expect the commentator to say "and the riders and horses are swerving to avoid a horse carcass after fence number (insert number here)!".


I think it's interesting that the 'obstacle' part is forming a large section of that report. Personally, I wouldn't be offended by the commentator referring to a dead horse as an obstacle. I'm far more affected by its death in the first place. Having said that, it would be interesting to see the reaction if it had been referred to as a carcass. 

I just find the whole thing really interesting to study to be honest. When those horses were electrocuted by that freak incident not so long back there were numerous reports calling it a 'tragedy', for example, whereas horses dying during the race are, for large parts at least, accepted as part-and-parcel of the "sport." I must iterate; I'm not putting my perspective out here for dissection and debate - I just find it interesting how, within certain parts of the media at least, there is a large distinction between horses dying in regards to the context in which they die. 

Personally, I think yesterday's events were a tragedy - whether it'd been one horse, or ten horses; it's all one too many in my eyes.


----------



## pippainnit (Feb 20, 2009)

jazzywoo said:


> i bloody hate the grand national actually i hate horse racing full stop for this reason usually its never mentioned that horses die every year but this year they cant hide it and i think its a good reason they cant because people may see that this is a cruel and pointless sport !
> rip poor horses and i hope the jockey that was injured makes a full recovery and i can can hope that maybe people may change their views on this pointless sport :whip:


That's what I've been intrigued by - the fact that I can't really remember there being such vivid photos in the reports before. That one of the horse head down towards the ground is horrific, and I am by no means squeamish or not used to seeing graphic images. That poor creature.


----------



## cloggers (Mar 13, 2010)

SexyBear77 said:


> And?
> 
> In racing, ANYTHING on the track which causes riders and horses to avoid a part of the course is called an obstacle.
> 
> ...


I said that, what the hell was the guy suppose to say, and they didnt avoid it Clare Balding made an announcement almost as soon as it ended and said 'Our thoughts are with the horse's *families*' Those horses are loved!

and i agree with everything else you said, as best as i can. I've never been near a racehorse in my life, but you can see the way they fidget before the race, surely they wouldnt run if they didnt want to? though i may be wrong 




pippainnit said:


> I was just surprised it hadn't been mentioned on here yet, that's all, hence why I posted that link to the DM's coverage as, maybe I'm wrong, *but I can't seem to recall there being as much uproar in previous years,* or there being as graphic photos released from the day.


I think it's because they had to bypass two fences, and two died in the actual national though i may be wrong..


----------



## pippainnit (Feb 20, 2009)

But then - and this is me kind of playing Devil's Advocate here - surely the 'horses wouldn't run if they didn't want to' argument could be said for things like dog fighting, and cock fighting; sports that indisputably are deemed as cruel and banned in numerous countries? You see dogs yanking on their chains trying to get to their opponents. Isn't there little difference in horses fidgeting before a race? 

I'm not comparing the two 'sports' in general; simply questioning the argument that horses wouldn't run if they didn't want to. Surely a large part of it is human training and conditioning, as is the case with the other 'sports' mentioned.


----------



## x Sarah x (Nov 16, 2007)

I hate the sport, yes horses are made to run, but its not just running is it, its getting them to jump over stupidly high and dangerous fences and hedgerows, why on earth to they have to make make them that high? oh to see who can jump over them...and those that aren't capable usually fall or get injured, or in this case, die.

Its horse racing, why can't they just race..and if they need to be slowed down, why not make the jumps do-able for all horses.

So i agree, pointless if not cruel sport.


----------



## Meko (Apr 29, 2007)

they 'make them that high' because horses can jump them. They wouldn't jump them if they were too high


----------



## Rach1 (May 18, 2010)

i agreed with sexybear... what people don't realise is that horse are herd animals and as such will follow their instincts and run... these horses are bred to run... all horses love to run...
we are taking their natural instincts and simply harnessing them. as meko said..a horse will not jump a fence if i don't have to... believe me i know.. i used to own a horse who was an excellent jumper and if she felt it was too high she would refuse.

you also have to remember that these horses are huge... that thought can sometimes get lost in amonst the furor.

its sad what has happened but to be blunt all the trainers/owners etc know the risks before they enter their horses.
i too have known of several accidents involving regular everyday hack ponies that have ended in tragedy... its all part of the course so to speak!


----------



## Postcard (Aug 29, 2010)

I have to say that I think much of the problem lies with running horses which aren't really suitable to run the national and don't have much of a shot, anyway. 

I also take issue with trainers who run horses which are inconsistent jumpers e.g. likely to have a fall if they get tired.

There are always too many runners, really - but losing the race altogether would be much more of a tradgedy I think.


----------



## graeme77 (Sep 7, 2010)

i think that for every horse that dies so should the jocky


----------



## EquineArcher (Feb 13, 2010)

graeme77 said:


> i think that for every horse that dies so should the jocky


Wow, so mature.

Meko is correct, the jumps are that high because those horses can jump that high. End of. Horses fall at those jumps because of 5 (most obvious) things-

1. Carelessness
2. Mistriding the approach
3. Being hampered by another horse
4. Tiredness
5. Being brought down by another faller

If the jumps were made smaller, the likelihood is that the horses would become *more* careless and the number of falls would increase. Smaller jumps also allow for more speed, so it could be more dangerous. Bigger fences encourage a horse to back off on the approach and think more about what they are doing.

I have had 2 ex-racehorses, both of which I jumped. The bigger the jump, the more careful and concentrated they were. This made them less likely to strike a fence (and therefore less likely to stumble and fall.)

You also cannot force a horse to run. A racehorse that won't run is retired from the sport.


----------



## snake5007 (Apr 13, 2008)

Meko said:


> they 'make them that high' because horses can jump them. They wouldn't jump them if they were too high


Just because they can get over doesn't mean they're going to land safely.


----------



## feorag (Jul 31, 2007)

SexyBear77 said:


> If the jumps were made smaller, the likelihood is that the horses would become *more* careless and the number of falls would increase. Smaller jumps also allow for more speed, so it could be more dangerous. Bigger fences encourage a horse to back off on the approach and think more about what they are doing..


I tend to agree with this. 

if you look at the jumps they are just layers of what looks like Leylandii - they aren't solid and if a horse hits it, the top layer falls off. Consequently it's only the front horses that actually jump the jump at the full height - the horses behind are jumping a lower fence and in some cases a gap. 

It's very rarely the lead horses that fall over the bigger jumps, because they take the stride and jump accordingly, it tends to be the horses in the middle that are approaching the jump and see a lower height and get careless and don't put the huge effort required to get over it and come croppers - at least those ones that aren't hampered by a faller in front of them or a loose horse of course.


----------



## Meko (Apr 29, 2007)

snake5007 said:


> Just because they can get over doesn't mean they're going to land safely.



would you jump over something if you weren't sure you could get over it properly?


----------



## Meko (Apr 29, 2007)

graeme77 said:


> i think that for every horse that dies so should the jocky


because killing people is acceptible?


----------



## EquineArcher (Feb 13, 2010)

feorag said:


> I tend to agree with this.
> 
> if you look at the jumps they are just layers of what looks like Leylandii - they aren't solid and if a horse hits it, the top layer falls off. Consequently it's only the front horses that actually jump the jump at the full height - the horses behind are jumping a lower fence and in some cases a gap.
> 
> It's very rarely the lead horses that fall over the bigger jumps, because they take the stride and jump accordingly, it tends to be the horses in the middle that are approaching the jump and see a lower height and get careless and don't put the huge effort required to get over it and come croppers - at least those ones that aren't hampered by a faller in front of them or a loose horse of course.


Indeed, 100% accurate summary there! : victory:


----------



## Rach1 (May 18, 2010)

i've been to the national... (albeit in the rats enclosure LOL) and i have walked the course... the 'fences' are made of hedging and designed to come apart if hit... yes they are tall, when i stood next to one they towered over me... i'd say 6ft was the minimum but the horses are huge too so it balances out.

its too simplistic to state that the 'poor' horse is being 'made' to jump, a horse will not be forced into things!


----------



## feorag (Jul 31, 2007)

If it was the case that horses were forced to jump, then there would never be any refusals yet every year there are refusals, just as there are refusals when horses are asked to jump high fences at showjumping events, 3 days events etc etc.

Has no-one watched a Puissance??


----------



## Rach1 (May 18, 2010)

Lol the number of times i fell of my pony when she refused... i was all geared up to jump and weeee...over i'd go.


----------



## vetdebbie (Jan 4, 2008)

On the horses love to jump thing - 

When i was 10, my pony got a bit antsy with me, (windy day always got him overexcited). He bolted off with me up a hill at a flatout gallop. Now, a 14hh New forest pony is distinctly stronger than a 10 year skinny child (ahh for THOSE days to be back!). Knowing how useless pulling was, and given we were heading up a steep hill, I am aimed him at a 5 bar gate - thinking "that'll make him stop"

No

He jumped it.

Sadly he tended to drop a knee, so he missed, hit the top of the fence and did a very typical racing fall - catapulting me into the hill and breaking my jaw. He was fine. And continued to b****r off with me and jump things he shouldn't for many many years to come!


----------



## Rach1 (May 18, 2010)

LOL sounds just like me on Shandy (she was more Thellwell pony than racing supremo).
she loved jumping and was really very good at it... but as i said if sahe didn't want to jump it she would let me know...
but she could jump fences *much* higher than her...


----------



## snake5007 (Apr 13, 2008)

Meko said:


> would you jump over something if you weren't sure you could get over it properly?


Me? No. Other people? Certainly, it's been known.




> I tend to agree with this.
> 
> if you look at the jumps they are just layers of what looks like Leylandii - they aren't solid and if a horse hits it, the top layer falls off. Consequently it's only the front horses that actually jump the jump at the full height - the horses behind are jumping a lower fence and in some cases a gap.
> 
> It's very rarely the lead horses that fall over the bigger jumps, because they take the stride and jump accordingly, it tends to be the horses in the middle that are approaching the jump and see a lower height and get careless and don't put the huge effort required to get over it and come croppers - at least those ones that aren't hampered by a faller in front of them or a loose horse of course.


 
I think the horses in front and behind hamper the ones in the middle. They come up to a jump, but can't increase or decrease speed because they're tightly grouped.


----------



## EquineArcher (Feb 13, 2010)

snake5007 said:


> I think the horses in front and behind hamper the ones in the middle. They come up to a jump, but can't increase or decrease speed because they're tightly grouped.


No. If the horses in the middle were simply "carried along" by the speed of the others then why would the slow ones fall out the back of the group? They can certainly increase or decrease their speed, regardless of what the rest of the horses are doing.


----------



## Rach1 (May 18, 2010)

but in the wild horses run like this... in a tight group...
think of zebras too... they are prey animals so their instincts are to herd and tightly...so as to avoid being caught.


----------



## EquineArcher (Feb 13, 2010)

Rach1 said:


> but in the wild horses run like this... in a tight group...
> think of zebras too... they are prey animals so their instincts are to herd and tightly...so as to avoid being caught.


But if a horse needs to slow down or speed up, it is able to. : victory:


----------



## feorag (Jul 31, 2007)

feorag said:


> It's very rarely the lead horses that fall over the bigger jumps, because they take the stride and jump accordingly, it tends to be the horses in the middle that are approaching the jump and see a lower height and get careless and don't put the huge effort required to get over it and come croppers - *at least those ones that aren't hampered by a faller in front of them or a loose horse of course*.





snake5007 said:


> I think the horses in front and behind hamper the ones in the middle. They come up to a jump, but can't increase or decrease speed because they're tightly grouped.


That's what I said.

We know a lot of horses are brought down by a falling horse in front of them who would successfully clear a fence if that horse in front hadn't fallen, but there are still horses that aren't hemmed in but still fall over a jump they can clearly see, because it's smaller and appears easier to jump making them careless


----------



## Rach1 (May 18, 2010)

thank you sexy... 
people do forget that in the wild horses are prey animals...
their instincts are to flee...


----------



## feorag (Jul 31, 2007)

Yes, that's why they group and that's why they run - it's in their nature, a horse bolts it sends a message "danger" to the rest of the herd, so they all bolt with it and if there's an obstacle in the way, they'll jump it, racing is just harnessing their natural instincts.


----------



## snake5007 (Apr 13, 2008)

SexyBear77 said:


> But if a horse needs to slow down or speed up, it is able to. : victory:


In the wild they don't have men riding them, though. There isn't any pressure, unless being chased by a predator.


----------



## EquineArcher (Feb 13, 2010)

snake5007 said:


> In the wild they don't have men riding them, though. There isn't any pressure, unless being chased by a predator.


That wasn't part of the discussion though. If you notice, the jockeys don't actually do a huge amount for 3/4 of the race, just keep the horses steady and *control*their speed. They don't force them to run, and at the end its still not forced, they are just asking for the horse to keep running. 

Horses do run for fun you know.


----------



## Rach1 (May 18, 2010)

actually they are surrounded by pressure everyday... 
horses in the wild constantly monitor their surroundings... looking for potential threats.

you also have to understand that these horses have been trained to carry a human rider...
the herding instinct is the most basic of all the horses instincts and is simply being harnessed for a purpose...


----------



## snake5007 (Apr 13, 2008)

feorag said:


> That's what I said.
> 
> We know a lot of horses are brought down by a falling horse in front of them who would successfully clear a fence if that horse in front hadn't fallen, but there are still horses that aren't hemmed in but still fall over a jump they can clearly see, because it's smaller and appears easier to jump making them careless


 
I know, I was just giving my opinion on why I think it happens.


----------



## Rach1 (May 18, 2010)

the other thing to consider with regards to the tightly packed nature of horses running is that no one horse wants ot be out from the crowd. a horse that pulls ahead too much is effectivley out on its own... so will slow to let others catch up and vice versa... as sexy said the rider is there to control this and manipulate the situation if you like...


----------



## Graham Arthurton (Aug 6, 2009)

*Grand National*

I won £50 !!!:lol2::lol2::lol2:

Just trying to lighten the matter !!


----------



## snake5007 (Apr 13, 2008)

Rach1 said:


> the other thing to consider with regards to the tightly packed nature of horses running is that no one horse wants ot be out from the crowd. a horse that pulls ahead too much is effectivley out on its own... so will slow to let others catch up and vice versa... as sexy said the rider is there to control this and manipulate the situation if you like...


Do horses from different stables see each other as members of the same group when in a race together for the first time? Do they need to get to know each other before accepting each other into the herd?


----------



## Rach1 (May 18, 2010)

in the wild horses live in small groups but within a territory which has many small groups... 
so whilst there may be 'fighting' between horses there is also the collective need to flee if needed...
also, the instinct to run is still there but the circumstances of their living arrangements are different... so whilst they may be from differing stables they will still follow their urge to run...


----------



## RachaelBee (Feb 1, 2011)

Racing sickens me it really does, all riding relies on fear instincts to train a horse but I really hate racing it's just far too dangerous for the poor horses involved. It's not unknown for people involved with racehorses to say they don't actually like them, I'm not sure whether they do it for publicity but they claim they see it as a business partnership. The Grand National fences are apparently harder than other fences, with the ones at Aintree it's a lot harder for the horses to just brush through them and they can hit them with some force (this is according to Mick Fitzgerald 1996 winner). People say the horses want to run and if they didn't want to then they wouldn't but racehorses start training at quite a young age and if it's the only thing they have never known then why would they question it? Is it really that they want to run or that it's some sort of conditioning? I think there has been so many casualties not just in the Grand National but racing in general that something needs to be done. I know there are accidents in other areas of riding, I'm fortunate enough to ride where there is plenty of off road hacking, the only time I ever need to touch a road is for about 5 meters as I'm actually leaving the yard so I'm fortunate in that respect and I wouldn't want to do cross country for the same reason I wouldn't race, the risk to both horse and rider is too great. I know other disciplines aren't risk free but the risks are so much less in my eyes.

I'm going to bow out of this one before I get drawn into to much of an argument about it, I really have looked into it and tried to get my head round it and see for a pro-racing point of view but try as I might I just can't, I like horses too much.


----------



## Meko (Apr 29, 2007)

RachaelBee said:


> Racing sickens me it really does, all riding relies on fear instincts to train a horse but I really hate racing it's just far too dangerous for the poor horses involved. It's not unknown for people involved with racehorses to say they don't actually like them, I'm not sure whether they do it for publicity but they claim they see it as a business partnership. The Grand National fences are apparently harder than other fences, with the ones at Aintree it's a lot harder for the horses to just brush through them and they can hit them with some force (this is according to Mick Fitzgerald 1996 winner). People say the horses want to run and if they didn't want to then they wouldn't but racehorses start training at quite a young age and if it's the only thing they have never known then why would they question it? Is it really that they want to run or that it's some sort of conditioning? I think there has been so many casualties not just in the Grand National but racing in general that something needs to be done. I know there are accidents in other areas of riding, I'm fortunate enough to ride where there is plenty of off road hacking, the only time I ever need to touch a road is for about 5 meters as I'm actually leaving the yard so I'm fortunate in that respect and I wouldn't want to do cross country for the same reason I wouldn't race, the risk to both horse and rider is too great. I know other disciplines aren't risk free but the risks are so much less in my eyes.
> 
> I'm going to bow out of this one before I get drawn into to much of an argument about it, I really have looked into it and tried to get my head round it and see for a pro-racing point of view but try as I might I just can't, I like horses too much.


so, did you win anything?


----------



## LiamRatSnake (Jul 3, 2007)

I don't really like horses, but watching the national makes me cringe.
I keep hearing horses like to jump but why do most of them bypass the jumps when they've thrown their jockeys off?


----------



## corny girl (Aug 30, 2009)

x Sarah x said:


> I hate the sport, yes horses are made to run, but its not just running is it, its getting them to jump over stupidly high and dangerous fences and hedgerows, why on earth to they have to make make them that high? oh to see who can jump over them...and those that aren't capable usually fall or get injured, or in this case, die.
> 
> Its horse racing, why can't they just race..and if they need to be slowed down, why not make the jumps do-able for all horses.
> 
> So i agree, pointless if not cruel sport.




The fences now are actually a lot safer than in Red Rum's day :2thumb:. The height of them & the height of the landing have been altered on many of the fences in recent years (within the last 15+ years or so). This is what makes Red Rum so special, he jumped much higher & wider fences with deeper landings & won the national 3 times, why has it not been repeated when the fences are now safer & smaller :whistling2:.

Like many have said, horses love to run & jump & you can't make them jump if they don't want to (i know i have landed on many a jump as my mount refused to jump the jump!!!). I'm sad that 2 horses lost their lives but they died doing something that they enjoyed doing.


I feel the same way as the person who has worked at racing yards as i worked in a Greyhound racing kennel (now we just home retired Greyhounds). People read all sorts of lies on the internet & believe it. People like us who have been in the thick of it know the truth :2thumb:. Yes all sorts of abuse happens in all livestock keeping (just look at the amount of threads on here of rescued reptiles that have been neglected & are at deaths door :gasp, *BUT* the majority of people treat their animals well & look after them. It's just the few bad ones make it look like everyone mistreats them :devil:. When things like this happen (especially when it is shown on television) people are up in arms about it. It's a risk like there is in any sport (look at football, rugby etc...) the injuries the players receive are no different to when horses race, there is a risk of injury with any sport (even golf & darts).


----------



## miss_ferret (Feb 4, 2010)

my problem with horse racing is this: when its on telly all you see is the most successfull. im sure the horses at that standard are well looked after. my problem is the hundreds of horses that are bred for it every year and dont make that standard. the horses i see every week going for next to nothing in auction rings, or sold as meat. ex racers can make excellent riding horses, but you need a certain amount of skill and dedication to pull it off, i see so many complete novices buy ex racers because there cheap and they look good, a few months later there back on the market with a load of behaviour problems thrown in for good measure. its no life for such an intelligent animal.

a freind of mine bought 2 ex racers a few years ago. the racing syndicate that owned them had hit financial trouble, instead of trying to rehome the horses they sold them as meat. these where young horses, one of which had actually won a few races, sold for meat just because there owners wanted to cut there losses as quick as possible. she paid £50 for both of them direct from the abttoir.

my other problem is the amount of whipping that goes on. they need to make the punishments for excessive use (i forget the term they actually use) much harsher than they are in my opinion.


----------



## Meko (Apr 29, 2007)

LiamRatSnake said:


> I don't really like horses, but watching the national makes me cringe.
> I keep hearing horses like to jump but why do most of them bypass the jumps when they've thrown their jockeys off?


if you'd fallen over when jumping over a fence, would you:
A - jump the next one
B - go round it


----------



## LisaLQ (Jan 29, 2009)

corny girl said:


> I feel the same way as the person who has worked at racing yards as i worked in a Greyhound racing kennel (now we just home retired Greyhounds). People read all sorts of lies on the internet & believe it. People like us who have been in the thick of it know the truth :2thumb:. Yes all sorts of abuse happens in all livestock keeping (just look at the amount of threads on here of rescued reptiles that have been neglected & are at deaths door :gasp, *BUT* the majority of people treat their animals well & look after them. It's just the few bad ones make it look like everyone mistreats them :devil:. When things like this happen (especially when it is shown on television) people are up in arms about it. It's a risk like there is in any sport (look at football, rugby etc...) the injuries the players receive are no different to when horses race, there is a risk of injury with any sport (even golf & darts).


As a child I had some experience of helping out at a horse training stables, for racers. The horses were treat like royalty, well loved, very well cared for, wonderful and immediate treatment by vets when needed. I loved helping out there.

12 years ago, I helped out at a greyhound kennel, to help with retired dogs. The conditions they were kept in made me leave, with a dog, in order to save her from being destroyed for not being ABLE to eat as her teeth were in such bad condition.

She died 7-8 months later.

So no, horse racing does not compare to greyhound racing. There was love involved in the horse racing. There was absolutely no love for greyhounds.

You dont see people shooting horses and burying them in their yards, or skinning them and throwing them in the sea either.

Not to say I agree with horse racing, tbh I agree with the general thought that the GN is too dangerous and should be changed.


----------



## pippainnit (Feb 20, 2009)

The thing that irks me is the general justification of it as 'oh, well horses love it', okay, so the actual _racing_ part, by and large, horses may very well love. Who am I to claim otherwise? But horse racing does not begin and end at the racecourse, apart from, of course, for those unfortunate enough to be killed on the day. As miss_ferret said, there is so much more to it than the race. There're the issue of horses who do not make the grade, horses who retire, and the general day to day issues of racing in general. 

It's all well and good justifying the actual race aspect of horseracing, but, to think that that in any way negates some of the cruelty that goes on is, if you ignore the pun, incredibly blinkered. Just because it is intrinsic nature to a horse to run does not mean that that in any way is the reason why they are raced. They are raced because, fundamentally, there is a lot of money involved. It is a sport and a business and the animals are a by-product of this. While, yes, there are invariably examples of horses being well-cared for, certainly moreso than a lot of poor nags around the place, but horseracing exists first and foremost as an institution created by people, for people, so to interpret it as acting in any way in the animals' interests is, in my opinion at least, incredibly naive.


----------



## pippainnit (Feb 20, 2009)

(And that was not directed at any one post in particular, by the way)


----------



## corny girl (Aug 30, 2009)

LisaLQ said:


> As a child I had some experience of helping out at a horse training stables, for racers. The horses were treat like royalty, well loved, very well cared for, wonderful and immediate treatment by vets when needed. I loved helping out there.
> 
> 12 years ago, I helped out at a greyhound kennel, to help with retired dogs. The conditions they were kept in made me leave, with a dog, in order to save her from being destroyed for not being ABLE to eat as her teeth were in such bad condition.
> 
> ...



I know we have had this arguement many times before. Not all kennels treat their dogs badly, just because the one you worked at did doesn't mean you tar everyone with that same brush as they aren't all the same. I have worked at several kennels (ok they were racing kennels & not retirement kennels) & they all cared for the dogs in their care. My boss is very hot on keeping their teeth clean as their wet diet means the teeth will decay very quickly. The dogs in my care get their teeth done at least twice a week (how many pet dogs get this sort of care?). We take in dogs from the RGT which come in from all over the country, you should see some of these dogs teeth (within a few days with us they have nice clean teeth & any that need taking out due to decay are taken to the vet to be done). With Greyhounds there is the RGT (Retired Greyhound Trust) which is there to help home the dogs once they retire, i don't think there is anything like this for retired Thoroughbreds :gasp:. So in some ways Greyhound racing is better as it caters for the dogs in retirement :2thumb:.


----------



## starfox (Nov 21, 2010)

SexyBear77 said:


> And?
> 
> In racing, ANYTHING on the track which causes riders and horses to avoid a part of the course is called an obstacle.
> 
> ...



Wow! I couldn't agree with you any more on that one, took the words right out of my mouth.


----------



## EquineArcher (Feb 13, 2010)

miss_ferret said:


> my problem with horse racing is this: when its on telly all you see is the most successfull. im sure the horses at that standard are well looked after. my problem is the hundreds of horses that are bred for it every year and dont make that standard. the horses i see every week going for next to nothing in auction rings, or sold as meat. ex racers can make excellent riding horses, but you need a certain amount of skill and dedication to pull it off, i see so many complete novices buy ex racers because there cheap and they look good, a few months later there back on the market with a load of behaviour problems thrown in for good measure. its no life for such an intelligent animal.
> 
> a freind of mine bought 2 ex racers a few years ago. the racing syndicate that owned them had hit financial trouble, instead of trying to rehome the horses they sold them as meat. these where young horses, one of which had actually won a few races, sold for meat just because there owners wanted to cut there losses as quick as possible. she paid £50 for both of them direct from the abttoir.
> 
> my other problem is the amount of whipping that goes on. they need to make the punishments for excessive use (i forget the term they actually use) much harsher than they are in my opinion.


Yes, horses that don't make the standard often end up in abbatoirs- but as you pointed out, too many people ex-racers not knowing what they are taking on, and the poor things ends up much worse than dead. 

However, what do you think happens to all the riding-school ponies, showjumpers, eventers and dressage horses that also don't quite cut it? As with racehorses, many end up being sold cheap for meat. Its not *just* the racing industry that this occurs in. Again, its only so well known about because racing is a much bigger industry and the PETA'esque animal activists have seized on it.

As said earlier, I have had also had 2 ex-racehorses, both from a registered charity overseen by an organisation called ROR (Retraining of Racehorses). They came from a place called Greatwood, owned by a woman called Helen Yeadon. Helen and her husband, as well as all the dedicated staff look after all manner of ex-racehorses, from the downright abused to the well loved family prize winner. They really have seen it all- some of the horses they have recieved have been in a disgusting mess.

Helen and her husband also LOVE the sport of horse racing. In fact, either this year or last they bought a youngster and sold shares in it for the upcoming season. Thats right, people who deal with ex-racers day in day out actually fully support racing. 

I have also worked at HEROS, another 1 of the 5 centers overseen by the ROR. This yard had it all- stud for breeding racehorses, training for racehorses-to-be, holiday care for horses on their breaks, and a re-schooling service for ex-racers. Again, we saw it all, the good, the bad and the bloody ugly. However, I have seen horses 10x worse than some of those racers, and they weren't anything like racehorses.....

Lastly, have you ever been hit (and I mean really hit) with a racing bat? They are so padded and flexible you wouldn't believe it. If it didn't hurt me to be smacked with one, full strength, across the knuckles on a winters morning halfway up the gallops, then it won't hurt a racehorse.


----------



## LisaLQ (Jan 29, 2009)

corny girl said:


> I know we have had this arguement many times before. Not all kennels treat their dogs badly, just because the one you worked at did doesn't mean you tar everyone with that same brush as they aren't all the same. I have worked at several kennels (ok they were racing kennels & not retirement kennels) & they all cared for the dogs in their care. My boss is very hot on keeping their teeth clean as their wet diet means the teeth will decay very quickly. The dogs in my care get their teeth done at least twice a week (how many pet dogs get this sort of care?). We take in dogs from the RGT which come in from all over the country, you should see some of these dogs teeth (within a few days with us they have nice clean teeth & any that need taking out due to decay are taken to the vet to be done). With Greyhounds there is the RGT (Retired Greyhound Trust) which is there to help home the dogs once they retire, i don't think there is anything like this for retired Thoroughbreds :gasp:. So in some ways Greyhound racing is better as it caters for the dogs in retirement :2thumb:.


I agree there are kennels who are somewhat better (having seen others at the same track), but the whole sport IMO is disgusting.

As for the RGT, too little, too late - yes, it's good that they're paying towards their care, but how much is it in comparison to the money made off them? Thousands of dogs pts every year, yep homing numbers are getting higher (I've not been involved in rescue for a few years now so cant speak for currently), but more due to non-RGT rescues who rehabilitate, foster and rehome responsibly.


----------



## EquineArcher (Feb 13, 2010)

corny girl said:


> IWith Greyhounds there is the RGT (Retired Greyhound Trust) which is there to help home the dogs once they retire, *i don't think there is anything like this for retired Thoroughbreds* :gasp:. So in some ways Greyhound racing is better as it caters for the dogs in retirement :2thumb:.


Actually, there are 5 registered, dedicated re-training centres, and many many more that are unofficial.

Greatwood-
Greatwood, Charity, Racehorse, Rescue, Horse, Power, Children, Special, Educational, Needs,Home

Moorcroft-
Moorcroft Racehorse Welfare Centre | Racehorse Re-homing Charity in Slinfold, West Sussex

HEROS-
Re-homing re-training ex-racehorses; sale or loan from HEROS

and the Thoroughbred Rehab Centre-
Thoroughbred Racehorse Charity Lancaster | ex-Racehorse Rehabilitation

The Darley-
http://www.darleyrehoming.co.uk/

And this is the organisation that oversees them all-
Retraining of Racehorses

Halfway down the ROR's success stories page you will see me and my old boy (Donald).


----------



## miss_ferret (Feb 4, 2010)

SexyBear77 said:


> Yes, horses that don't make the standard often end up in abbatoirs- but as you pointed out, too many people ex-racers not knowing what they are taking on, and the poor things ends up much worse than dead.
> 
> However, what do you think happens to all the riding-school ponies, showjumpers, eventers and dressage horses that also don't quite cut it? As with racehorses, many end up being sold cheap for meat. Its not *just* the racing industry that this occurs in. Again, its only so well known about because racing is a much bigger industry and the PETA'esque animal activists have seized on it.
> 
> Lastly, have you ever been hit (and I mean really hit) with a racing bat? They are so padded and flexible you wouldn't believe it. If it didn't hurt me to be smacked with one, full strength, across the knuckles on a winters morning halfway up the gallops, then it won't hurt a racehorse.


yes other horses that dont make the grade also end up being sold as meat, but from a selling point of view (i keep my horse on a dealers yard) selling on a failed eventer, dressage horse etc is far far easier than an ex racer, simply because the market is much bigger. your everyday non-competetive rider who would like a horse thats a good jumper but isnt bothered about winning big events will be more than happy with a horse thats 'failed' at big event standard. same with a failed dressage horse. they can get some fancy moves and there happy. finding someone to buy an ex racer is far more difficult (well, if you want to sell to a good home). i can only speak from experience, and when i go to auctions, the ex racer count is far higher than almost any other type of horse (the only ones i see more of are badly bred coloured cobs). i dont know many dealers who will routinely buy any racing standard TB, a couple will buy ones from the more showjumping lines, but most view them as a too risky and too potentially expensive investment. from what iv seen the ex racer has 3 options: the lucky ones are taken on by rescues and rehomed, they can take there chance in an auction ring or private sale, or they go for meat. i only see the latter 2 possibilites, but in those cases, its the meat man who usually buys.

no i havnt had a test thwack with a racing whip, but if they dont hurt the horse then why are they penalties for there over-use? surely they must have some effect or they would be no point in there use? i wasnt aware they used different whips, so im genuinely curious about this.


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

SexyBear77 said:


> And?
> 
> In racing, ANYTHING on the track which causes riders and horses to avoid a part of the course is called an obstacle.
> 
> ...


Oh well, never mind about so many dead horses then eh? :devil:


----------



## EquineArcher (Feb 13, 2010)

Zoo-Man said:


> Oh well, never mind about so many dead horses then eh? :devil:


To be quite honest, most of what you say is totally over emotional drivel, so the very fact you can't come up with a better argument against horse racing than that really doesn't compel me to suddenly change my views.


----------



## EquineArcher (Feb 13, 2010)

miss_ferret said:


> yes other horses that dont make the grade also end up being sold as meat, but from a selling point of view (i keep my horse on a dealers yard) selling on a failed eventer, dressage horse etc is far far easier than an ex racer, simply because the market is much bigger. your everyday non-competetive rider who would like a horse thats a good jumper but isnt bothered about winning big events will be more than happy with a horse thats 'failed' at big event standard. same with a failed dressage horse. they can get some fancy moves and there happy. finding someone to buy an ex racer is far more difficult (well, if you want to sell to a good home). i can only speak from experience, and when i go to auctions, the ex racer count is far higher than almost any other type of horse (the only ones i see more of are badly bred coloured cobs). i dont know many dealers who will routinely buy any racing standard TB, a couple will buy ones from the more showjumping lines, but most view them as a too risky and too potentially expensive investment. from what iv seen the ex racer has 3 options: the lucky ones are taken on by rescues and rehomed, they can take there chance in an auction ring or private sale, or they go for meat. i only see the latter 2 possibilites, but in those cases, its the meat man who usually buys.
> 
> no i havnt had a test thwack with a racing whip, but if they dont hurt the horse then why are they penalties for there over-use? surely they must have some effect or they would be no point in there use? i wasnt aware they used different whips, so im genuinely curious about this.


I totally understand where you are coming from, I have also seen ex-racers go for meat, but I have seen many many more get rehomed and retrained. I suppose it all depends on where you live to a point too, I used to live in Lambourn (known as the valley of the racehorse) and round there everyone had either racehorses or ex-racehorses.

The penalty for the whip is to A. ensure the horses are not pressured unduly and B. to ensure that the racing is as fair as possible. I, in an ideal world, would like the horses to be raced without being hit, though it is common that the whip can be used to help guide a horse and keep it straight. 

Of course, if you *really* belt a horse it will feel it, but whips used in racing are much more flexible and cushioned than the kiddies whips available for ponies going jumping...


----------



## corny girl (Aug 30, 2009)

LisaLQ said:


> I agree there are kennels who are somewhat better (having seen others at the same track), but the whole sport IMO is disgusting.
> 
> As for the RGT, too little, too late - yes, it's good that they're paying towards their care, but how much is it in comparison to the money made off them? Thousands of dogs pts every year, yep homing numbers are getting higher (I've not been involved in rescue for a few years now so cant speak for currently), but more due to non-RGT rescues who rehabilitate, foster and rehome responsibly.



We have actually re-homed 3 dogs this week, another may be going to a home next weekend :2thumb:. We are very careful in matching the right dog to the right people (we wouldn't home a bouncy dog with a family with very young children as the children will get knocked over, we'd offer a quiet dog to them). We home our dogs responsibly (all homes are checked out, questions are asked etc..), we test them with cats & small & medium sized dogs to check suitability as we often get people wanting a Greyhound who already have another dog. There are centres out there who just want their homing figures to look good & will get the dogs out as soon as possible without making sure the dogs are suitable :devil:. All i know is what we do & how happy people are with their dogs from us (many come back time after time for another Greyhound when their dogs go over the bridge). We play with the dogs in the paddocks (we have large paddocks so they have room to run & play in them).


----------



## naja-naja (Aug 26, 2009)

i was soo upset after watching it as well... i had money on santas son who was winning on 200/1 odds before getting pulled up 3rd jump from the end....


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

SexyBear77 said:


> To be quite honest, most of what you say is totally over emotional drivel, so the very fact you can't come up with a better argument against horse racing than that really doesn't compel me to suddenly change my views.


'over emotional drivel'? I care! Don't you care?


----------



## Phasmid_Phriend (Nov 20, 2010)

SexyBear77 said:


> And?
> 
> In racing, ANYTHING on the track which causes riders and horses to avoid a part of the course is called an obstacle.
> 
> ...


A strong and well written argument. Makes a nice change for this thread, from what I've seen thus far; mainly from the "ban everything!!" sheep. Baaa.


----------



## Phasmid_Phriend (Nov 20, 2010)

"I think they should ban horse-racing!! Ban it!! Make everyone involved unemployed over-night, (that'll be great for the economy), and free the horses to live long and prosperous lives surrounded in bubble-wrap on pre-cleaned fields where they can eat the finest quality crops to their heart's content and benefit from the finest veterinary care that money can buy.......except it'll be free for every horse, of course."

Unrealistic? Surely not...


----------



## Meko (Apr 29, 2007)

they should ban it and kill all the horses that aren't rehomed.


----------



## miss_ferret (Feb 4, 2010)

SexyBear77 said:


> I totally understand where you are coming from, I have also seen ex-racers go for meat, but I have seen many many more get rehomed and retrained. I suppose it all depends on where you live to a point too, I used to live in Lambourn (known as the valley of the racehorse) and round there everyone had either racehorses or ex-racehorses.


that may be the case, there are only a few horse rescues near me, none of which are race horse specific (if that makes sense), most are just doing what they can for severly abused horses, not taking in horses that are perfectly healthy, just unwanted for whatever reason. we tend to see the rejects from the trainers, for some reason sending them up north to try and sell seems to be a popular tactic, despite what goes on in the auction ring, they just dont want to take them back.


----------



## Phasmid_Phriend (Nov 20, 2010)

Meko said:


> they should ban it and kill all the horses that aren't rehomed.


Meko, that's precisely what would happen were they to ban it. Unless, of course, all of the baa-baa banners out there could offer a home for all the animals that would be affected by a blanket banning of the sport...? I mean, that would be the most obvious option surely? Or would that be too much to ask...?


----------



## feorag (Jul 31, 2007)

RachaelBee said:


> Racing sickens me it really does, all riding relies on fear instincts to train a horse but I really hate racing it's just far too dangerous for the poor horses involved. It's not unknown for people involved with racehorses to say they don't actually like them, I'm not sure whether they do it for publicity but they claim they see it as a business partnership. The Grand National fences are apparently harder than other fences, with the ones at Aintree it's a lot harder for the horses to just brush through them and they can hit them with some force (this is according to Mick Fitzgerald 1996 winner). People say the horses want to run and if they didn't want to then they wouldn't but racehorses start training at quite a young age and if it's the only thing they have never known then why would they question it? Is it really that they want to run or that it's some sort of conditioning? I think there has been so many casualties not just in the Grand National but racing in general that something needs to be done. I know there are accidents in other areas of riding, I'm fortunate enough to ride where there is plenty of off road hacking, the only time I ever need to touch a road is for about 5 meters as I'm actually leaving the yard so I'm fortunate in that respect and I wouldn't want to do cross country for the same reason I wouldn't race, the risk to both horse and rider is too great. I know other disciplines aren't risk free but the risks are so much less in my eyes..


But surely everything you have said there can apply to Eventing. Some of the jumps event horses have to jump and negotiate are far more difficult, awkward and solid than a soft 'tree cuttings' fence at the National. 

Most of the fences at the National are 4' 6" to 5' in height - the tallest fence, The Chair, is 5' 2" in height - Becher's Brook is 5'. 

Some of the fences at Badminton Horse Trials for instance are 4' in height, but some are solid wooden rails and the horse is jumping down hills, up hills and into water negotiating those fences!



LiamRatSnake said:


> I don't really like horses, but watching the national makes me cringe.
> I keep hearing horses like to jump but why do most of them bypass the jumps when they've thrown their jockeys off?


Have you not seen how many loose horses carry on in the race and continue to jump the jumps for most of the course and some right to the end???



LisaLQ said:


> 12 years ago, I helped out at a greyhound kennel, to help with retired dogs. The conditions they were kept in made me leave, with a dog, in order to save her from being destroyed for not being ABLE to eat as her teeth were in such bad condition.


Some friends of mine have just rescued a racing greyhound. When I went round to see him last week I checked him over for them and his teeth are absolutely rotten!! They are black with tartar and I could see rotten ones quite easily. He's going to need a major dental and he's only 5!!!


----------



## corny girl (Aug 30, 2009)

feorag said:


> Some friends of mine have just rescued a racing greyhound. When I went round to see him last week I checked him over for them and his teeth are absolutely rotten!! They are black with tartar and I could see rotten ones quite easily. He's going to need a major dental and he's only 5!!!



Most kennels don't bother with their teeth, we have taken in dogs from the RGT that are like 4-5 years old yet have half a dozen teeth left in their mouths :devil:. Like i said in a previous post, my boss is very hot on keeping teeth cleaned so i do the ones i look after at least twice a week (scraping any plaque build up off & then brushing them). If any new dogs come in on my day off then the next day i'm in i get stuck in with cleaning their teeth :2thumb:. Most don't even know what a bone is (we give them a bone first to take most of the plaque off, then finish off with the scraper & then brush them).


----------



## Phasmid_Phriend (Nov 20, 2010)

Zoo-Man said:


> 'over emotional drivel'? I care! Don't you care?


So... To what address should the ex-racer be sent....? I feel it only fair to warn you though, that you may have to leave your comfy chair once in a while in order to care for the animal. 
Or does your compassion only stretch as far as the finger which presses the Enter button on your keyboard?

Actually, it's only been a day since the National; give it a week and you'll probably find something else to be outraged about, or another good cause to "champion" for a weekend. 

See you next year; same time, same place, same usage of an exclamation mark.


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

Phasmid_Phriend said:


> So... To what address should the ex-racer be sent....? I feel it only fair to warn you though, that you may have to leave your comfy chair once in a while in order to care for the animal.
> Or does your compassion only stretch as far as the finger which presses the Enter button on your keyboard?
> 
> Actually, it's only been a day since the National; give it a week and you'll probably find something else to be outraged about, or another good cause to "champion" for a weekend.
> ...


Trust me, I do more for animal welfare than just voice my opinions on an internet forum. And of course I will see something else to be outraged about! Why shouldn't I? It doesn't mean I have forgotten about the cruelties of the Grand National does it? But of course, you've probably seen about 3 posts by me & made a judgement haven't you....?


----------



## Phasmid_Phriend (Nov 20, 2010)

Zoo-Man said:


> Trust me, I do more for animal welfare than just voice my opinions on an internet forum. And of course I will see something else to be outraged about! Why shouldn't I? It doesn't mean I have forgotten about the cruelties of the Grand National does it? But of course, you've probably seen about 3 posts by me & made a judgement haven't you....?


Do you think I care that much that I would scrutinize each and every word you've written in this thread in order to make a considered opinion on the type of person I believe you to be...?
In all honesty, I couldn't care less.


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

Phasmid_Phriend said:


> Do you think I care that much that I would scrutinize each and every word you've written in this thread in order to make a considered opinion on the type of person I believe you to be...?
> In all honesty, I couldn't care less.


.................................ok then : victory:


----------



## LiamRatSnake (Jul 3, 2007)

Meh, in my humble opinion anyone who supports a sport in which such a high percentage of the animal participants, willing or unwilling, ultimately die through human selfishness - should have nothing to do with horses.


----------



## xx-SAVANNAH-xx (Jan 9, 2010)

pippainnit said:


> ... this year has been described as one of the most 'distressing' in history. Some of the pictures are here, and please note, aren't pleasant:
> 
> Grand National 2011: Ballabriggs wins in a day of drama at Aintree | Mail Online


Poor horses it is wrong but cant help laughing seeing a little irishman getting trampled on classic!!


----------



## LiamRatSnake (Jul 3, 2007)

xx-SAVANNAH-xx said:


> Poor horses it is wrong but cant help laughing seeing a little irishman getting trampled on classic!!


The jockeys know the dangers. The horses are probably unaware of the risk of having their neck snapped whilst another 30-odd horses land on them.


----------



## miss_ferret (Feb 4, 2010)

Phasmid_Phriend said:


> Meko, that's precisely what would happen were they to ban it. Unless, of course, all of the baa-baa banners out there could offer a home for all the animals that would be affected by a blanket banning of the sport...? I mean, that would be the most obvious option surely? Or would that be too much to ask...?


as im against the racing industry i assume that im included as a baa-baa banner? i may be against racing but im also a realist, sports like racing (of dogs or horses) will never be banned, they make too much money. what im against is the needless waste of life.

animals are bred for racing, if there well looked after for the whole of there life then thats fine. i have the upmost respect for the breeders/trainers who ensure there not up to standard animals have a good home, but in my life, there just not the people i have contact with. i have issues when young horses are sold on to whatever fate awaits them in an auction ring just because there not fast enough and the owner dosent want the cost of keeping them. if there lucky they go to a good home, if there unlucky, a bad home or a bullet through the head.

answer me this: have you ever been to a horse auction? have you ever watched a 3 year old horse being sold for a few pounds to a meat man because nobody wants it, its owner or breeder included? and before you come back with: well why dont you save it if it bothers you so much? if i could rehome them i would, if i ever have the money to i will. TBs can cost a lot to keep so to take one on requires a lot of thought not an impulse decision.

i would rather a horse went for meat than to be bought by someone who cant care for it proporly where it would have a miserable life, but that dosent make watching it happen any easier.


----------



## Phasmid_Phriend (Nov 20, 2010)

Bring back Points Of View; that's what I say. There appears to be a great deal of televisually instigated arm-chair aggression in the U.K. which is in need of a regularly scheduled venting, and I for one would like to hear it voiced by a slightly effeminate sounding sixty-something Geordie male with a lisp.


----------



## Phasmid_Phriend (Nov 20, 2010)

miss_ferret said:


> answer me this: have you ever been to a horse auction? have you ever watched a 3 year old horse being sold for a few pounds to a meat man because nobody wants it, its owner or breeder included?QUOTE]
> 
> Yes, I have been to a horse auction. Yes, I have witnessed horses being sold for a pittance. No, I have never known an owner or breeder to be sold to an abbatoir as a package deal with the horse; and I find the very notion barbaric.
> 
> I also shudder to think how many flat caps and tweed jackets I've fed my dogs this evening... No wonder my lurcher is rubbing her arse on the carpet; poor thing.


----------



## Phasmid_Phriend (Nov 20, 2010)

LiamRatSnake said:


> Meh, in my humble opinion anyone who supports a sport in which such a high percentage of the animal participants, willing or unwilling, ultimately die through human selfishness - should have nothing to do with horses.


So writes the man who keeps animals for his own, some might argue selfish, enjoyment in a hobby where animals are kept in unnatural conditions, (when compared to their wild counterparts), and which often die prematurely as a result. 
Or does a species not count if it doesn't have eye-lashes and a toothy grin...?


----------



## Phasmid_Phriend (Nov 20, 2010)

LiamRatSnake said:


> The jockeys know the dangers. The horses are probably unaware of the risk of having their neck snapped whilst another 30-odd horses land on them.


The amateur herpetologists know the dangers. The snakes are probably blissfully unaware of what can happen in the confines of an 18 litre Really Useful Box when the thermostat breaks.


----------



## starfox (Nov 21, 2010)

I am for racing.. mainly due to most of the reasons already mentioned by sexy so i won't repeat haha.

I'd just like to add, i had an Anglo Arab pony (arab X TB), his mum was an ex racehorse and was retrained as a 'school master' riding club horse, then retired as a broodmare, still being worked though .. Needless to say, my boy (Swallow) loved to run! He was very very very quick, i did a lot of unaff show jumping and my week went like this..
Mon: Rest
Tues: Unaff SJ local competition
Wed: Unaff SJ Muirmill
Thurs: Unaff SJ Rowallan
Fri: Small 'fun' competition at the yard i bought him from
Sat: Hard lesson, then some fun light hacking in the country
Sun: Back at home, some full pelt racing in the field

He was a very fit and able little dude, schooled him and had lessons.. 1.30m. And competed 1.05m competitions, was going to affiliate the next year and go straight into newcomers but due to moving to Orkney, they didn't do BSJA..

Anyhooo..

On the horses are made to jump agenda.. 
I know (as i'm sure many others experienced with horses/jumping) that you cannot make a horse jump.. its quite impossible.
I was at home, schooling when my dad decided to see how high Swallow could jump. We put up a treble bar at about 1.20.. it went up and up.. then it reached 1.55m. Swallow was clearing them like mad,.. then at 1.55m we went for it, and he stopped. His stride was out and he stopped. Fortunately, he was a 'good' stopper, and kept his shoulders back so i didn't fall off. I reassured him and we tried once more.. he cleared it 6 times. I have pictures on my facebook should anyone want a look .. If he had refused it a second time (i stress that i didn't push him at all) i would have put the jump lower, and jumped that before finishing.

I also used to race him up the fields to help develop stamina, speed and muscle for jumping.. He LOVED it!! Whenever i walked him up to the 'race field' gate, he would go nuts (in a good way lol), very excited and couldn't stand still.. similar to the racehorses on TV. As soon as i let go of the reins, he would do a mini rear and go straight into gallop.. i didn't need to encourage him at all, it was all on his own accord..

Ex racehorses are amazing if retrained in the right hands, many of them go on to become very successful in another field.. Personally, i love the TB breed and when the time is right i wouldn't hesitate taking on an ex racer


----------



## pippainnit (Feb 20, 2009)

Phasmid_Phriend said:


> Meko, that's precisely what would happen were they to ban it. Unless, of course, all of the baa-baa banners out there could offer a home for all the animals that would be affected by a blanket banning of the sport...? I mean, that would be the most obvious option surely? Or would that be too much to ask...?


But, considering this on a more general level, _anything_ that is banned will result in a similar situation, but does that justify its continuation if that sport in question, for example, is indisputably cruel? I'm not for any moment saying that horse racing can be understood to be cruel in this respect, but what about something like dog fighting, cock fighting, or even bull fighting? 'Sports' that are incredibly hard to justify and warrant from an objective perspective. 

Is there justification in continuing anything like that simply because hundreds or thousands of animals have been bred for that purpose? Surely, in instances like the above, it is a means to an end.


----------



## feorag (Jul 31, 2007)

Phasmid_Phriend said:


> Bring back Points Of View; that's what I say. There appears to be a great deal of televisually instigated arm-chair aggression in the U.K. which is in need of a regularly scheduled venting, and I for one would like to hear it voiced by a slightly effeminate sounding sixty-something Geordie male with a lisp.


Points of View hasn't gone - it's still on TV, so I suggest you go there and vent your aggression, because it appears to me that you've just joined in this thread to irritate and annoy everyone, like a flea on a dog's back!


----------



## snake5007 (Apr 13, 2008)

Phasmid_Phriend said:


> The amateur herpetologists know the dangers. The snakes are probably blissfully unaware of what can happen in the confines of an 18 litre Really Useful Box when the thermostat breaks.


 
I'm on the fence about racing, but I think your example is a bad one. A thermostat breaking is a once in a blue moon occurrence, a racing horse gets put at risk in every race. I've never had a thermostat pack up on me. I've seen plenty of horses fall in that time, however.


----------



## snake5007 (Apr 13, 2008)

feorag said:


> Points of View hasn't gone - it's still on TV, so I suggest you go there and vent your aggression, because it appears to me that you've just joined in this thread to irritate and annoy everyone, like a flea on a dog's back!


 
I got the same impression, I must say.


----------



## EquineArcher (Feb 13, 2010)

LiamRatSnake said:


> Meh, in my humble opinion anyone who supports a sport in which such a high percentage of the animal participants, willing or unwilling, ultimately die through human selfishness - should have nothing to do with horses.


Guess *all *professional horse people should up and quit then.... 

No, hang on, that wouldn't work at all.


----------



## Daisy_ (Feb 16, 2011)

i dont like getting in to arguments, i dont know much about horse racing as a subject and i tend to avoid watching it on the t.v but after looking at them pictures im saddened in my heart


----------



## giant snail (Oct 25, 2009)

SexyBear77 said:


> And?
> 
> In racing, ANYTHING on the track which causes riders and horses to avoid a part of the course is called an obstacle.
> 
> ...



i agree! its no different to show jumping and cross country. its only because its published more as massive bets are placed all over the country(world?)
iv never placed a bet. i worked at a racing yard for 8 months. i enjoyed it and the horses where looked after better any any animal or human iv seen! the thousands they spend on care its amazing. not to mention the training. its not like the have picked a horse from a field and decided to race it. they have been trained for it. and they love it, its all the know.


----------



## Rach1 (May 18, 2010)

as usual the argument has lost track...
the original discussion was about the grand national not greyhounds/rescue centres etc etc.

what are we to do with all the racing horses left over when we ban hunting may i ask... put them in cosy fields with little fleece blankets and the archers on the radio?
no...they would be down right miserable... (as anyone would listening to the archers! LOL) but in all seriousness they would be miserable...not being able to run.


----------



## LisaLQ (Jan 29, 2009)

feorag said:


> Some friends of mine have just rescued a racing greyhound. When I went round to see him last week I checked him over for them and his teeth are absolutely rotten!! They are black with tartar and I could see rotten ones quite easily. He's going to need a major dental and he's only 5!!!





corny girl said:


> Most kennels don't bother with their teeth, we have taken in dogs from the RGT that are like 4-5 years old yet have half a dozen teeth left in their mouths :devil:. Like i said in a previous post, my boss is very hot on keeping teeth cleaned so i do the ones i look after at least twice a week (scraping any plaque build up off & then brushing them). If any new dogs come in on my day off then the next day i'm in i get stuck in with cleaning their teeth :2thumb:. Most don't even know what a bone is (we give them a bone first to take most of the plaque off, then finish off with the scraper & then brush them).


She was 5 too. When she had to be pts. She was about 28kg when I adopted her, shared pics before to show how skeletal she was, at her healthy weight a few months later (after a dental and the start of arthritis treatment - yes, arthritis at 5 years old!) she was 40kg. All she'd needed was pain relief and a dental. Sadly there were more problems than that, she ended up dragging her back legs. Vets thought she'd been given steroids to make her as big as she was (biggest b*tch they'd had at the tracks) and that her records were fake. Either way, at least she had some love before she died, and 8 months of life in a family home instead of pts in a rotting damp kennel.



Phasmid_Phriend said:


> So writes the man who keeps animals for his own, some might argue selfish, enjoyment in a hobby where animals are kept in unnatural conditions, (when compared to their wild counterparts), and which often die prematurely as a result.
> Or does a species not count if it doesn't have eye-lashes and a toothy grin...?


I get the feeling you think two wrongs make a right?



Rach1 said:


> as usual the argument has lost track...
> the original discussion was about the grand national not greyhounds/rescue centres etc etc.
> 
> what are we to do with all the racing horses left over when we ban hunting may i ask... put them in cosy fields with little fleece blankets and the archers on the radio?
> no...they would be down right miserable... (as anyone would listening to the archers! LOL) but in all seriousness they would be miserable...not being able to run.


Why is greyhound racing off track (pardon pun)? It's exactly the same industry, with the same problems (dying animals, horrific injuries)...just a different animal. Is it ok to do this to dogs, but not horses, or vice versa?


----------



## Rach1 (May 18, 2010)

pun pardoned..LOL
no i'm not saying its ok for anything i'm just stating a point.
i agree with horse racing anywho and dog racing (although i do agree that the treatment of some of the aninals is questionable) i was mearly trying to say that perhaps discussions re fostering new dogs etc whilst lnked is not what the thread is about but i suppose thats the naural line of discussions.


----------



## pippainnit (Feb 20, 2009)

See this is the thing, the thread of this thread seems to be pointing towards the issue of animals who are already bred for a particular purpose (such as greyhounds, race horses, etc) and the issues hereafter being their rehabilitation if they either a) retire, or b) are faced with the unlikely event of a sport such as dog/horse racing being banned. 

My point still stands; just because there are animals that are being bred to participate in such sports that are already existing, does not mean that that can wholly justify the continuation of the sport as to ban it would mean the execution of the animals that are already around. This is a very naive perspective when adapted to other 'sports' like I said earlier. Do people honestly believe that if faced with the option of either: 

a) banning a 'sport' that is indefensibly cruel (such as dog fighting, cock fighting, etc) which will mean having to either have the dogs that are bred for this purpose and who cannot be re-homed put to sleep (in the line of pretty much every episode of Animal Cops Detroit/Houston/Miami that raids a Pitbull breeder!) 

or 

b) allowing that sport to continue indefinitely for the sake of not having to deal with the current animals that exist for its purpose now? 

I know I'm repeating myself but I think it's an important thing to consider. While I'm not saying that horse racing is comparable to dog fighting in its fundamentals, I am saying that the age-old argument of 'oh what's going to happen to all the race horses around at the moment?' is pretty moot when you adapt that argument to any other scenario. And it's an argument that exists for so, so many different issues.


----------



## annsimpson1 (Mar 23, 2008)

I've only skimmied over the thread so if anyone has said this before sorry, had the race been postponed because of the hot day and fast going then maybe the horses would have been able to cope a lot better. The national usually has much cooler/damper weather and the going made the race much faster and therefore more risky, it was very sad to see the horses so distressed from the heat, maybe the course could have been shorter if not postponed, I think I'm right in saying most big eventing comps are held in the spring or autumm because its a bit cooler and the ground not so hard.


----------



## Meko (Apr 29, 2007)

It's always refreshing to see that people only give a shit about animals. 'ohh poor horsey, poor horse making it run faster and faster'; yet not one of them cares enough at the sport being dangerous enough to mention Peter Toole.

Peter Toole is in a medically induced coma due to injuries suffered at Aintree yet nobody mentions him; but race a horse and you're Satan's evil side kick.


----------



## pippainnit (Feb 20, 2009)

To be fair, this is a very much animal-related forum; it's only natural that certain threads are going to be concentrated on the issues concerning _animals_. And I'm sure I recall seeing people mentioning jockeys earlier and it simply inciting the 'well they have a _choice_ over participating in the sport' debate. 

The same could be said for so many other threads on here.


----------



## Meko (Apr 29, 2007)

pippainnit said:


> To be fair, this is a very much animal-related forum; it's only natural that certain threads are going to be concentrated on the issues concerning _animals_. And I'm sure I recall seeing people mentioning jockeys earlier and it simply inciting the 'well they have a _choice_ over participating in the sport' debate.
> 
> The same could be said for so many other threads on here.




To be fair.. this thread is about 'The Grand National' you should know, you started it


----------



## pippainnit (Feb 20, 2009)

Did I? 

(As soon as I wrote that thread title I anticipated creating a monster.)


----------



## EquineArcher (Feb 13, 2010)

pippainnit said:


> See this is the thing, the thread of this thread seems to be pointing towards the issue of animals who are already bred for a particular purpose (such as greyhounds, race horses, etc) and the issues hereafter being their rehabilitation if they either a) retire, or b) are faced with the unlikely event of a sport such as dog/horse racing being banned.
> 
> My point still stands; just because there are animals that are being bred to participate in such sports that are already existing, does not mean that that can wholly justify the continuation of the sport as to ban it would mean the execution of the animals that are already around. This is a very naive perspective when adapted to other 'sports' like I said earlier. Do people honestly believe that if faced with the option of either:
> 
> ...


Banning horse racing would be the tip of the iceberg for organisations such as PETA who would then have cause to pursue the next worst sport, and the next, and the next after that. As I mentioned earlier, eventing kills horses, showjumping kills horses, hacking out kills horses- hell, even turning your horse out in a field can kill them. My horse raced 146 times during a career spanning 8 years, yet is was an injury sustained whilst playing in the field that led to his death. 

As said, banning horse racing would also lead to a massive welfare problem for all those horses that would then be out of a job. I cannot understand why people who love horses would see the sport banned, when thousands of horses would then end up dead, or worse. 

Mark my words, horse racing will only be the start of welfare-induced bans on equine sports.

We have already lost horses from transport, agriculture and warfare in this country, having been replaced with machines. Horses now exist in the UK purely as pleasure and sport animals. If horse sports are then banned, where does that leave the horse?

Oh, for anyone that is interested, this article gives the reason for the deaths (heat and pace) and also praises the jockeys for the *compassion and care* they showed towards the equine athletes after the race was finished-
Pace of National caused horse deaths say trainers - Horse Racing News | Racing Post


----------



## selina20 (May 28, 2008)

Sorry but i dont agree with this whole racing is cruel.

Its their natural instinct to run like that as a herd. Horses can get these injuries easily in a field without running like these horses do.

The one thing i dont like the sport for is the fact the horses are seen as a way to make money and not animals. However majority of the training yards are immaculate and these horses live a life of luxury.


----------



## pippainnit (Feb 20, 2009)

Re: the link - Charlie Longsdon, hello! 

No, all in all sincerity, I genuinely do see where you're coming from, and like I said earlier, I'm by no means comparing the fundamentals of horse racing to something like dog fighting in forms of cruelty. Rather, I am playing devil's advocate to the argument that simply because animals exist for a reason, if that reason is then found to be immeasurably cruel and indefensible, should those animals - and that reason - remain, or should they be sacrificed for the sake of any others born and bred for that sole purpose. To many this could be a tenuous link, but I think it is relevant, not just for the debates surrounding horse racing, but for _any_ sport or area that breeds or supplies animals for a specific purpose. 

It's difficult, and I believe it goes far beyond any of the reasons or justifications posted in this thread. From a very personal perspective it raises numerous questions in regards to my lifestyle, for example. I don't eat meat, or any products that have come from animals. I don't like to label myself a 'vegan', as I personally hate any form of contrived labelling surrounding what is essentially what I choose to put in my stomach. What I do consider though, is the age-old debate that while I, personally, do not contribute (first-hand, at least) to the continual breeding and supply of animals for my consumption, what would happen if everyone were to suddenly do the same? The sheer lack of demand would result in an obliteration of any supply, in which case would these animals then simply cease to exist? 

Like I said, these are things that I ponder and which I think are genuinely interesting in relation to any of these debates, but I still stand by my previous point that if it were to emerge, for example, that horse racing was suddenly hideously cruel beyond belief and warranted banning, then the demise of horses now for the sake of future continual suffering would be, in my opinion at least, far more justifiable than a sport's survival for the sake of a survival of a species.


----------



## pippainnit (Feb 20, 2009)

selina20 said:


> The one thing i dont like the sport for is the fact the horses are seen as a way to make money and not animals. However majority of the training yards are immaculate and these horses live a life of luxury.


I think that that is one of my major bugbears too. I don't dispute that many racers and people involved with the sport and other aspects of it have respect and love for their animals. I don't dispute that many racehorses are kept in far better conditions than the majority of horses around the country. I do dispute, however, the general belief among a lot of people that horseracing is first and foremost about the condition, care, and career of the 'fortunate' horses that exist within the sport. 

It is first and foremost about money and people. Anything else is secondary to that.


----------



## Rach1 (May 18, 2010)

would you use the same argument then against dog showing?
if your saying that horse trainers etc do it mainly for the money then why not say all dog breeders and show people do it for the money...
just a thought...not necessarily what i think...


----------



## LisaLQ (Jan 29, 2009)

I dont think that most dog breeders do it (show?) for the money. They do it to get feedback on their breeding.

That's the whole point of showing. Whether or not they make money is just a bonus (in many other species fancies, there is no prize money).


----------



## Shell195 (May 31, 2007)

There is no money to be made in dog showing!


----------



## Rach1 (May 18, 2010)

like i said, just a thought...


----------



## LiamRatSnake (Jul 3, 2007)

Dogs that don't make show standards generally aren't eaten by the French.


----------



## pippainnit (Feb 20, 2009)

Was just reading that Italy slaughters more than double the amount of horses than France does apparently. Interesting fact.


----------



## Meko (Apr 29, 2007)

LiamRatSnake said:


> Dogs that don't make show standards generally aren't eaten by the French.



waste not want not.


----------



## LiamRatSnake (Jul 3, 2007)

Meko said:


> waste not want not.


Can't agree more. Meat is meat. I hate waste.
And Pippa, I read that too. Also the Spanish and Mexicans eat it too. When we were kids the butcher used to sell great big lumps of horse meat, dirt cheap for dogs.


----------



## Rach1 (May 18, 2010)

Meko said:


> waste not want not.


not sure why but this made me laugh a lot...


----------



## pippainnit (Feb 20, 2009)

Fair enough if you ask me. If I ate meat I wouldn't discriminate as to what animal passed my lips. No one animal's life is any more insignificant than another's.


----------

